A famous account of Lamb and Retherford's circa 1946 discoveries about

  • Thread starter Thread starter selfAdjoint
  • Start date Start date
selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
6,843
Reaction score
11
A famous account of Lamb and Retherford's circa 1946 discoveries about the Hydrogen spectrum which led to the development if QED is that they "used microwave techniques delveloped in the Radar research of WWII."

What I am looking for is some nitty-gritty description of their actual equipent and practice. I am especially interested in their detector setup and whether and how they use microwave bolometers in that early day. Anybody know?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am assuming that the original papers are sparse with details on the equipment used?
The 1947 paper in Phys. Rev. has a very brief description but absolutely no detail.

The subsequent paper in 1950 seems to say that they did not use the microwave radiation technique ([1], beginning of section 4, top of page 552), but while considering it, they came up with the technique they did use. They devoted the Appendix I to an order of magnitude calculation using a Woods chamber.

They make reference to two German papers (ref. 17,18 in [1]) that may be of interest. I don't know German, so I cannot help you there.

I don't have time to look into the Phys. Rev. papers in detail, but maybe later tonight I can stomp around the library and the internet to churn up some information.

Cheers and good luck,
Ryan

[1] Phys. Rev. 79, 549–572 (1950)
 
Thanks for this nice effort Ryan. As you say their original paper which I have seen a reprint of, does not give any detail. My interest was in whether a homebuilt reproduction of their equipment - not a modern version with solid state detectors, etc. would be possible. And if so whether their measurements could be repeated with it. Sort of the physics equivalence of recreating Civil War battles and equipment.
 
This probably won't be of much help, but I think what you want may be in the library of Columbia University.

From https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0691033277/?tag=pfamazon01-20 by Silvan Schweber:

The history of their joint enterprise is chronicled in the Columbia Radiation Laboratory Reports from October 1946 to March 1948.

The above book does give a few of the details of the experiments, but not in as much depth as you appear to want.

In any case, this is a book that I think you would enjoy greatly. It gives interesting biographical material that includes the mathematics, and also talks about the contibutions of Bethe, Dirac, Lamb, Oppenheimer, Pauli, Weisskopf, etc.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you George. In fact I do have chweber's book and have read it, although I last dipped into it several years ago. Thanks for the suggestion though.

It's amazing to me that the details of a Nobel Prize winning experiment should have just fallen into the bit bucket. A warning to us all, document! Document! And make sure others know where you put the documentation.
 
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top