Was Pauli Aware of Angular Momentum Violation in Beta Decay?

  • Thread starter Thread starter americanforest
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Neutrino
AI Thread Summary
Pauli proposed the neutrino in 1930 to address the continuous energy distribution observed in beta decay, which raised questions about angular momentum conservation. He suggested that a neutral particle carried away the missing energy, leading to the eventual naming of the particle as the "neutrino" by Enrico Fermi in 1933. The challenge of detecting neutrinos stemmed from their ability to penetrate vast amounts of matter without interaction. In 1951, Fred Reines and Clyde Cowan initiated efforts to detect neutrinos, successfully using a detector near a nuclear reactor in 1955. Their work confirmed the existence of neutrinos through the inverse-beta decay reaction, marking a significant advancement in particle physics.
americanforest
Messages
220
Reaction score
0
A historical question:

The neutrino was proposed by Pauli in 1930/31 to solve the crisis caused by the continuous energy distribution of the beta rays (electrons). The neutron was not discovered until 1932. Was Pauli aware, or did he even suspect, at the time of his proposal, the violation of angular momentum presented by beta decay without his neutrino? Please, if you find any sources, let me know.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In 1930 Wolfgang Pauli proposed a solution to the missing energy in nuclear beta decays, namely that it was carried by a neutral particle This was in a letter to the Tubingen congress. Enrico Fermi in 1933 named the particle the "neutrino" (meaning "small neutron", which it is not) and formulated a theory for calculating the simultaneous emission of an electron with a neutrino. Pauli received the Nobel Prize in 1945 and Fermi in 1938. The problem in detection was that the neutrinos could penetrate several light years depth of ordinary matter before they would be stopped.

In 1951 Fred Reines at Los Alamos thought about doing some real challenging physics problem. In a conversation with Clyde Cowan they decided to work on detecting the neutrino. Their neutrino detector was placed near the new Savannah River nuclear reactor in 1955. The detection of the (anti) neutrino was as the initiator of the inverse-beta decay reaction of:

anti-neutrino + proton -> neutron + positron.

Their target was water with CdCl_2 dissolved in it.
 
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...
Back
Top