Abstract
No one who has followed the development of the theory of beta decay could fail to be impressed with the way that beta decay, from its first, very confused appearance, gradually developed into a consistent picture and finally assumed a role of great importance in particle interactions. As is well known, beta decay is full of surprises and subtleties. Its apparent perversities have threatened us not once but twice with the abandonment of some of our cherished conservation laws. However, it seems quite clear now that the first riddle of the continuous beta spectra was just a coded clue which nature had chosen as a medium to reveal the secret of the existence of an elusive elementary particle (neutrino). Otherwise, how would this elusive, undetectable particle ever have been discovered directly? In the second crisis, when the laws of parity and charge conjugation were found separately violated in beta decay, the world of physics was shocked and puzzled. Then it again turned out that by removing these restrictions, gates were opened wide for a much better understanding of beta decay. A great advance in the theory of the neutrino (two components) immediately followed, and the possibility of a broader and deeper symmetry connecting space and electricity (CP combined inversion) thus emerged. We were all pleasantly surprised.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Rutherford, Phil. Mag. 28, 305 (1914). In this paper he considered the continuous spectra as due to the statistical nature of energy losses in collisions between the disintegration electrons and the outer electrons of the atom.
Harkins, Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 42, 1956 (1920);
Meitner, Zeit. f. Phys. 4, 146 (1921);
Rutherford, Phil. Mag. 4, 580 (1927). They proposed that electrons do not exist in the free states in the nucleus, but α’ particles of nuclear dimensions are formed out of close combinations between two electrons and an oc particle. An α’ particle breaks up by first emitting one of its electrons and then the other. The spread of the continuous distribution is due to the difference in the energies of the stationary states occupied by the α’ particle before and after the departure of one of its electrons.
Von Baeyer and Hahn, Phys. Zeit. 11, 488 (1910).
Von Baeyer, Hahn and Meitner, Phys. Zeit. 12, 273, 378 (1911);
Von Baeyer, Hahn and Meitner, Phys. Zeit. 13, 264 (1912).
Rutherford, Robinson and Rawlinson, Phil. Mag. 28, 281 (1914).
Ellis, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 99, 261 (1921);
Ellis, Proc. Roy. Soc. 101, 1 (1922).
Meitner, Zeit. f. Phys. 9, 131, 145 (1922).
Hahn and Meitner, Zeit. f. Phys. 2, 60 (1920).
Meitner, Zeit. f. Phys. 34, 807 (1925).
Ellis and Wooster, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 22, 844 (1926).
Chadwick, Verh. d. D. Phys. Ges. 16, 383 (1914).
Chadwick and Ellis, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 21, 274 (1922).
Chadwick and Ellis, Pohlmeyer, Zeit. f. Phys. 28, 216 (1924).
Ellis and Wooster, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 22, 859 (1925).
Aston, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 22, 935 (1927).
Ellis and Wooster, Proc. Roy. Soc. A117, 109 (1927).
Meitner and Orthmann, Zeit f. Phys. 60, 143 (1930).
Ehrenfest and Oppenheimer, Phys. Rev. 37, 333 (1931).
Heitler and Herzberg, Naturwiss. 17, 673 (1929).
Rasetti, Z. Physik 61, 598 (1930).
Chadwick, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 136, 692 (1932).
Heisenberg, Z. Physik 77, 1 (1932).
Proceedings of Solvay Congress, Brussels, 1933, page 324.
Fermi, Z. Physik 88, 161 (1934).
Perrin, Compt. rend. 197, 1625 (1933).
Gamow and Teller, Phys. Rev. 49, 895 (1936).
Konopinski and Uhlenbeck, Phys. Rev. 60, 308 (1941).
Crane and Halpern, Phys. Rev. 53, 789 (1938);
Crane and Halpern, Phys. Rev. 56, 232 (1939).
Christy et al., Phys. Rev. 72, 698 (1947).
R. Davis, Jr., Phys. Rev. 86, 976 (1952).
Cowan, Reines et al., Science 124, 103 (1956).
Wu and Albert, Phys. Rev. 75, 315 (1949).
Langer, Moffat and Price, Phys. Rev. 76, 1725 (1949).
Owen and Cook, Phys. Rev. 76, 1726 (1949).
Langer and Price, Phys. Rev. 75, 1109 (1949).
Also see Wu, Revs. Mod. Phys. 22, 386 (1950), and Beta and Gamma Spectroscopy, North Holland Publishing Company.
Feldman and Wu, Phys. Rev. 76, 698 (1949);
Feldman and Wu, Phys. Rev. 78, 318 (1950).
Bell and Cassidy, Phys. Rev. 76, 183 (1949);
Bell and Cassidy, Phys. Rev. 77, 301 (1950).
Fulbright and Milton, Phys. Rev. 76, 1271 (1949).
Alburger, Hughes and Eggler, Phys. Rev. 78, 318 (1950).
Feldman and Wu, Phys. Rev. 76, 697 (1949);
Feldman and Wu, Phys. Rev. 87, 1091 (1952).
Bell, Weaver and Cassidy, Phys. Rev. 77, 399 (1950).
Alburger, Phys. Rev. 79, 236 (1950).
Marshak, Phys. Rev. 75, 513 (1949);
Marshak, Phys. Rev. 70, 980 (1946).
Sherr and Gerhart, Phys. Rev. 91, 909 (1953).
Arber and Stähelin, Helv. Phys. Acta 26, 433 (1953).
Kofoed-Hansen and Winther, Phys. Rev. 86, 428 (1952);
Kofoed-Hansen and Winther, Dan. Mat. Fys. Medd. 27, no. 14 (1953).
Mahmoud and Konopinski, Phys. Rev. 88, 1266 (1952).
Mahmoud and Konopinski, Davidson and Peaslee, Phys. Rev. 91, 1232 (1953).
Rustad and Ruby, Phys. Rev. 97, 991 (1955).
Lee and Yang, Phys. Rev. 104, 254 (1956).
Wij, Ambler, Hayward, Hoppes and Hudson, Phys. Rev. 105, 1413 (1957).
Garwin, Lederman and Weinrich, Phys. Rev. 105, 1415 (1957).
Friedman and Telegdi, Phys. Rev. 105, 1681 (1957).
Lee and Yang, Phys. Rev. 105, 1671 (1957).
Landon, Nuclear Physics 3, 127 (1957).
Salam, Nuovo Cimento 5, 299 (1957).
Curran et al., Phil. Mag. 40, 36 and 53 (1949).
Hanna and Pontecorvo. Phys. Rev. 75, 983 (1949).
Hamilton et al., Phys. Rsv. 83, 215 (1951).
Langer and Moffat, Phys. Rev. 88, 689 (1952).
The possibility of a two component relativistic theory of a spin ½ particle was first discussed by H. Weyl, Z. Physik 56, 330 (1929). It was rejected on the ground of parity violation.
See W. Pauli, Handbuch der Physik, Verlag Julius Springer, Berlin, 1933, vol. 24, pp. 226—7
The concept of a possible conservation law of leptons was first proposed by E. Konopinski and H. M. Mahmoud, Phys. Rev. 92, 1045 (1953).
See also T. D. Lee and C. N. Yang, Phys. Rev. 105, 1671 (1957).
A summary of the ß-γ (circular) correlation and the polarization of ß± can be found in Proceedings of Rehovoth Conference on Nuclear Structure, 1957, published by North Holland Publishing Company.
Bremsstrahlung and annihilation method, Möller scattering method. See above Proceedings.
Wu and Schwarzschild, Columbia University Report CU-173.
Herrmannsfelt, Maxson, Stähelin and Allen, Phys. Rev. 107, 641 (1957).
Herrmannsfelt, Btjrman, Stähelin, Allen and Braid, Phys. Rev. Letters 1, 61 (1958).
Goldhaber, Grodzins and Sunyar, Phys. Rev. 109, 1015 (1958).
Burgy, Krohn, Novy, Ringo and Telegdi, Phys. Rev. 110, 1214 (1958).
Culligan, Frank, Holt, Kluyver and Massam, Nature 80, 751 (1957).
K. Crowe, Washington Meeting, American Physical Society, 1958.
H. Anderson, Proceedings of the CERN Conference on High Energy Physics, 1958.
Coombes et al., Phys. Rev. 108, 1348 (1957).
Feynmann and Gell-Mann, Phys. Rev. 109, 193 (1958).
Sud Arsman and Marshak, Phys. Rev. 109, 1860 (1958).
Sakurai, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. Ser. II, 3, 10 (1958).
Nuovo Cimento 8, 649 (1958).
Crawford et al., Phys. Rev. 108 1102 (1957).
Eisler et al., Phys. Rev. 108, 1353 (1957).
Burgy et al., Proceedings of the Second Atoms for Peace Conference, September, 1958, reported 180°±8°.
Alikhanov et al. reported Δv ± 4,5° by measuring electron polarization from RaE (private communication).
N. Bohr, Proceedings of Solvay Congress, Brussels, 1933, page 327.
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1959 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wu, C.S. (1959). History of Beta Decay. In: Frisch, O.R., Paneth, F.A., Laves, F., Rosbaud, P. (eds) Beiträge zur Physik und Chemie des 20. Jahrhunderts. Vieweg+Teubner Verlag, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-20204-2_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-20204-2_5
Publisher Name: Vieweg+Teubner Verlag, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-663-19866-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-663-20204-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive