JJ Thomson Discovery of the Electron

In summary, the deflection of light by a magnetic field provided strong evidence for the existence of particles in the early days of the photoelectric effect and the electron.
  • #1
Teclis
25
2
pg. 243 Falconer, I. (1987) Corpuscles, Electrons and Cathode Rays: J.J. Thomson and the Discovery of the Electron. The British Journal for the History of Science (BJHS, 1987,20,241-276). "One of their most important properties is that they are deflected by a magnetic field. This provided strong support for a particle theory" pg. 243

Why would deflection by a magnetic field be evidence for particles as Thomson was before the discovery of the photoelectric effect and Einstein?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Teclis said:
pg. 243 Falconer, I. (1987) Corpuscles, Electrons and Cathode Rays: J.J. Thomson and the Discovery of the Electron. The British Journal for the History of Science (BJHS, 1987,20,241-276). "One of their most important properties is that they are deflected by a magnetic field. This provided strong support for a particle theory" pg. 243

Why would deflection by a magnetic field be evidence for particles as Thomson was before the discovery of the phone electric effect and Einstein?

And electromagnetic wave is not deflected by such magnetic field. So this rules out the "rays" as being EM radiation. Since at that time one of the description of the cathode rays is that it might be EM radiation, while the other is that it is composed of particles, this evidence then points to the particle picture.

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
  • #3
Furthermore, it points to something with a constant charge per unit mass. That's easy to explain in a particle model, and hard to explain any other way.
 
  • Like
Likes Ibix
  • #4
Well, in the case of the electron, it was by chance that it was discovered as "a particle". It's due to the experimental setup of cathode ray tubes that Thomson discovered the particle aspects first. Due to the rest gas you even can literally see "particle trajectories".

For light it's more or less inevitable to discover the wave aspects first. The reason is that it is very hard to prepare single-photon states, and this has become routine only from the mid 1980ies on.
 
  • #5
ZapperZ said:
And electromagnetic wave is not deflected by such magnetic field. So this rules out the "rays" as being EM radiation. Since at that time one of the description of the cathode rays is that it might be EM radiation, while the other is that it is composed of particles, this evidence then points to the particle picture.

Zz.
However, Michael Faraday previously found that a beam of light could be altered by a magnet. But he did not take this as evidence for particles, just saying that he thought light was magnetic.
 
  • #6
tech99 said:
However, Michael Faraday previously found that a beam of light could be altered by a magnet..

Please cite this experiment.

Zz.
 
  • #7
tech99 said:
However, Michael Faraday previously found that a beam of light could be altered by a magnet. But he did not take this as evidence for particles, just saying that he thought light was magnetic.
That effect is not a deflection of the beam and can be explained with wave theory only:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_effect.

--
lightarrow
 
  • #8
lightarrow said:
That effect is not a deflection of the beam and can be explained with wave theory only:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_effect.
lightarrow
I do agree with you, but nevertheless, we can say that EM waves are affected by magnetism.
You will have seen that Wiki quote the paper as from Faraday's notebook:-
Faraday's Diary. Volume IV, Nov. 12, 1839 - June 26, 1847 (Thomas Martin ed.). London: George Bell and Sons, Ltd. ISBN 0-7503-0570-3. The diary is indexed by Faraday's original running paragraph numbers, not by page. For this discovery see #7504, 13 Sept. 1845 to #7718, 30 Sept. 1845. The complete seven volume diary is now in print again.
 
  • #9
tech99 said:
I do agree with you, but nevertheless, we can say that EM waves are affected by magnetism.
You will have seen that Wiki quote the paper as from Faraday's notebook:-
Faraday's Diary. Volume IV, Nov. 12, 1839 - June 26, 1847 (Thomas Martin ed.). London: George Bell and Sons, Ltd. ISBN 0-7503-0570-3. The diary is indexed by Faraday's original running paragraph numbers, not by page. For this discovery see #7504, 13 Sept. 1845 to #7718, 30 Sept. 1845. The complete seven volume diary is now in print again.

If this is what you are using, then it is irrelevant to what I stated, which was that light is "... not deflected..." by magnetic field. There is no deflection here. And in fact, the Faraday rotation effect is more of an evidence of the wave nature of light, not particle, i.e. light consisting of electromagnetic wave.

And please note that the scenario asked by the OP is all in vacuum, not in a medium. A zoo of effects and phenomena can be created and found in a medium that you can't do in vacuum (magnetic monopole, anyone?).

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #10
True. Magnetic monopoles have been observed as quasiparticles in condensed matter theory observing an exotic material named "spin ice". Quasiparticles are of course no elementary particles but quanta of collective excitations of this material. Today no elementary magnetic monopoles have been observed, i.e., as far as we know given this empirical status, the Maxwell equation ##\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{B}=0## still exactly holds.

As far as I know the also the deflection of light by a magnetic (or electric) field in the vacuum has not been observed in a real experiment today. This is easily explained by the fact that this is a quantum radiative correction of order ##\alpha_{\text{em}}^4##. The related effect (i.e., described to leading-order by the same QED box diagram) of Delbrück scattering of (quasi-)real photons ##\gamma + \gamma \rightarrow \gamma + \gamma## has been recently observed by the ATLAS collaboration in ultraperipheral Pb-Pb collisions at the LHC.
 

1. Who is JJ Thomson and what is his contribution to science?

JJ Thomson was a British physicist who is best known for his discovery of the electron. He conducted experiments using cathode ray tubes and observed the presence of negatively charged particles, which he named electrons.

2. When did JJ Thomson make his discovery of the electron?

Thomson made his discovery of the electron in 1897 while conducting experiments with cathode ray tubes at the Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge, England.

3. How did JJ Thomson prove the existence of the electron?

Thomson used a cathode ray tube, which is a sealed glass tube containing a vacuum. He applied a high voltage between two electrodes and observed a greenish beam of light, known as a cathode ray, moving from the negative electrode to the positive electrode. He then concluded that the cathode rays were made up of negatively charged particles, which he called electrons.

4. What was the significance of JJ Thomson's discovery of the electron?

Thomson's discovery of the electron revolutionized the understanding of atomic structure. It provided evidence that atoms were made up of smaller subatomic particles and that they were not indivisible, as previously thought. This discovery also led to the development of the electron as a fundamental unit in chemistry and physics.

5. How did JJ Thomson's discovery of the electron impact future scientific research?

Thomson's discovery of the electron paved the way for further research and discoveries in the field of atomic and subatomic particles. It also led to the development of new technologies, such as televisions and computer screens, which use cathode ray tubes. His work also laid the foundation for later discoveries, such as the atomic nucleus and the existence of protons and neutrons.

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
4K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
814
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Electromagnetism
2
Replies
48
Views
4K
  • General Engineering
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
12
Views
6K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top