DOCSLIB.ORG

MORRIS LOW* Science and Civil Society in Japan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
MORRIS LOW* Science and Civil Society in Japan MORRIS LOW* Science and civil society in Japan: Physicists as public men and policymakers BEGINNING OVER FIFTY years ago, with the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japanese physicists struggled to establish a type of civil society. They turned to science as a form of world culture, a way to transcend nationalism and bond with colleagues abroad. Many were to prove influential as public men and policymakers. They became engrossed in rebuilding theircountry, acting as social men spokespersons, experts, technocrats, and international of science. Foremost in their thoughtswere the desire for professional autonomy, the commitment to democratic representation, and the notion that science would solve the nation's ills. But others, notably politicians, bureaucrats, and business leaders, had plans . for Japan as well, which often differed from the scientists' This paper outlines the interrelationshipand conflict among physicists and these groups in theirattempt to direct science for the "public good." Now with the end of theCold War and in creasing globalization, political change is occurring throughoutEast Asia and ob jectives of the Japanese physicists are becoming a reality. Introduction In the late 1990s, Japan's failure to separate its business community, its bu reaucracy, and the political systemwas considered by many to be at the heart of the country's economic problems. It is only now, at the end of the twentieth cen tury, that changes are being made in new legislation and reorganization of the bureaucracy.1 Non-governmental organizations have become increasingly impor *Asian Languages and Studies, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia. The following abbreviations are used: ESS, Economic and Scientific Section; GHQ, General Headquarters; JAEC, Japan Atomic Energy Commission; JAERI, Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute; JAPCO, Japan Atomic Power Company; JASL, Japan Associa tionfor Scientific Liaison; JSC, Science Council of Japan;KEK, K6 Enerugi Butsurigaku Kenkyujo; LDP, Liberal Democratic Party; NGO, non-governmental organization; RIFP, Research Institute for Fundamental Physics; SCAP, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers; SCNR, Special Committee for Nuclear Research; UNESCO, United Nations Edu cational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. 1. For details see Morris Low, Shigeru Nakayama, and Hitoshi Yoshioka, Science, technol ogy and society in contemporary Japan (Cambridge, U.K., 1999). HSPS, 30:1 (1999) This content downloaded from 130.102.42.98 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 04:42:07 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 194 LOW tant inhelping to bring about social change. But these voices of civil society have only had a short history.2 In the period immediately afterWorld War II, itwas arguably scientists, especially physicists, who provided new and contentious ideas, calling for change and greater public participation in policymaking. They assisted Japan in re-entering the international community through theworld of science and inmaking the transition to a civil society. Despite the fact that almost all were employed by the state, thephysicists considered their status as being closer to that of non-state actors, and theybelieved that they could provide independent, objec tive advice to the public. Itwas theywho, through theirhigh profile, helped de velop and circulate these ideas in the broader society. They were clearly men before their time. Shin'ichi Yoshida interpretscivil society as "a spontaneous, concerned group of citizens who interact independently of government,while collaborating with it at certain times and opposing it at others."3 Likewise ifwe define the term as David Holloway has, in the self-organization of autonomous groups to balance the power of the state, physicists were a major force in Japan in the struggle for civil society and themaintenance of a public sphere.4What prompted Japanese physi cists as individuals and as a group to speak out and seek a better society? It is difficult to pinpoint any one common feature apart from their science. Nonethe less, while theirexperiences, attitudes, and beliefs varied, their interest in science policy tended to lie in basic rather than applied research, in the regulation rather than thepromotion of the commercialization of science, and in science as a vehicle for a more international Japan.United by class, education, and mental ability, they articulated theirambitions to direct Japan's research effortby speaking of theben efits of science, democracy, internationalism, and the public good. A measure of their success can be seen in themany research institutesestablished through the Science Council and in scientists' participation in various policymaking bodies. The complex decision-making structurethat emerged reflects the effortsof physi cists to assert theirprofessional expertise and social responsibility against the po litical authority of the governing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), the bureau cracy, and big business. In order to gain some sense of how Japanese physicists were active as public men and policymakers, thispaper outlines the lives of seven of Japan's most prominent physicists: Yoshio Nishina, Shoichi Sakata, Mituo Taketani, Hideki Yukawa, Sin-itiro Tomonaga, Ryokichi Sagane, and Satio 2. CliffordChanin, "Voice of thepeople: The developmentof NGOs in Japan,"paper presented at "Civil society in Japan (andAmerica): Coping with change" (Washington, D.C., 1998). 3. Shin'ichiYoshida, "Rethinkingthe public interestin Japan: Civil societyin themaking," in Tadashi Yamamoto, ed., Deciding the public good: Governance and civil society in Ja pan (Tokyo, 1999), 13-49, esp. 14. 4. David Holloway, "Physics, the state, and civil society in the Soviet Union," in this volume. This content downloaded from 130.102.42.98 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 04:42:07 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions JAPANESEPHYSICISTS 195 Hayakawa. Brief biographies will be interwovenwith accounts of theirdifferent approaches to science, and the institutionswith which theywere involved. The emergence of physics in Japan Educated people took up science innineteenth-century Japan in a manner remi niscent of the samurai pursuit of learning, serving to bond science with thepublic sphere and to establish the notion of science in service to the state. The Japanese created the institutional structures necessary for transmittingscience before the scholars and studentswere in place. Bartholomew suggests that in the seventeenth century commoners mainly accounted for the activity in the physical sciences, such as astronomy and calendrical studies, while by themid-eighteenth century samurai had become the dominant group. He argues that theremight well have been a scientific revolution in Japan, had it not been for the social division of knowledge thatprevented a late eighteenth-centurymarriage ofmathematical skills (the domain of relatively lower status groups) with themore prestigious physics and astronomy (inwhich samurai were taking an interest).5Andrew Barshay has furtherwritten of the emergence of a "public" sphere in theMeiji period (1868 1912), which produced the intellectuals he refers to as "public men." This public sphere went beyond official and private activities.While "publicness" related to public activity, "insiders" (with links to large organizations) were viewed more highly than "outsiders" (dissidents and independents). "Public" thus came to be viewed as being associated with the state, and the intellectual elite of both persua sions derived their status from their position as experts in their chosen areas of importedknowledge.6 Both Bartholomew7 and Nakayama8 have examined how Germany was pro moted as an academic model at this time, one of themany organizational models that Japan introduced during theMeiji period.9 Interest inGerman scholarship intensified in the 1880s; Japanese scientists studying inEurope gravitated towards Germany and governmentministers looked toGerman higher education as amodel. It would only be afterWorld War II that theAmerican style of graduate school education would have an impact.10 was 5. James R. Bartholomew, "Why there no scientific revolution in Tokugawa Japan?," Japanese studies in the history of science, 15 (1976), 111-125. 6. Andrew E. Barshay, State and intellectual in imperial Japan: The public man in crisis (Berkeley,1988), xiii, 24. 7. James R. Bartholomew, The formation of science in Japan: Building a research tradition (NewHaven, 1989), 133. 8. Shigeru Nakayama, Teikoku daigaku no tanjo (The birth of imperial universities) (To kyo, 1978), esp. 34-71. 9. For details of this process, see D.E. Westney, Imitation and innovation: The transfer of Western organizational patterns toMeiji Japan (Cambridge, 1987). 10. Shigeru Nakayama, trans. JerryDusenbury, Academic and scientific traditions in China, Japan and theWest (Tokyo, 1984), 219-220. This content downloaded from 130.102.42.98 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 04:42:07 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 196 LOW Bartholomew has also remarked on how education and research in the physi cal sciences in theMeiji (1868-1912) and Taisho (1912-1926) periods were reliant on the public sector. Scientists, as a result,were considered government officials. Most physicists tended to have a samurai background, and almost all went on to become professors. Confucian-trained officials had greater access than other Japa nese to the physical sciences, activity in the field focused on Tokyo, and Japanese physicists were likely to take up positions as university
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Growth of Scientific Communities in Japan^
    The Growth of Scientific Communities in Japan^ Mitsutomo Yuasa** 1. Introdution The first university in Japan on the European system was Tokyo Imperial University, established in 1877. Twenty years later, Kyoto Imperial University was founded in 1897. Among the graduates from the latter university can be found two post World War II Nobel Prize winners in physics, namely, Hideki Yukawa (in 1949), and Shinichiro Tomonaga (in 1965). We may say that Japan attained her scientific maturity nearly a century after the arrival of Commodore Perry in 1853 for the purpose of opening her ports. Incidentally, two scientists in the U.S.A. were awarded the Nobel Prize before 1920, namely, A. A. Michelson (physics in 1907), and T. W. Richard (chemistry in 1914). On this point, Japan lagged about fifty years behind the U.S.A. Japanese scientists began to achieve international recognition in the 1890's. This period conincides with the dates of the establishment of the Cabinet System, the promulgation of the Constitution of the Japanese Empire and the opening of the Imperial Diet, 1885, 1889, and 1890 respectively. Shibasaburo Kitazato (1852-1931), discovered the serum treatment for tetanus in 1890, Jiro ICitao (1853- 1907), made public his theories on the movement of atomospheric currents and typhoons in 1887, and Hantaro Nagaoka (1865-1950), published his research on the distortion of magnetism in 1889, and his idea on the structure of the atom in 1903. These three representative scientists were all closely related to Tokyo Imperial University, as graduates and latter, as professors. But we cannot forget to men tion that the main studies of Kitazato and Kitao were made, not in Japan, but in Germany, under the guidance of great scientists of that country, R.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Mechanics Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD)
    Quantum Mechanics_quantum chromodynamics (QCD) In theoretical physics, quantum chromodynamics (QCD) is a theory ofstrong interactions, a fundamental forcedescribing the interactions between quarksand gluons which make up hadrons such as the proton, neutron and pion. QCD is a type of Quantum field theory called a non- abelian gauge theory with symmetry group SU(3). The QCD analog of electric charge is a property called 'color'. Gluons are the force carrier of the theory, like photons are for the electromagnetic force in quantum electrodynamics. The theory is an important part of the Standard Model of Particle physics. A huge body of experimental evidence for QCD has been gathered over the years. QCD enjoys two peculiar properties: Confinement, which means that the force between quarks does not diminish as they are separated. Because of this, when you do split the quark the energy is enough to create another quark thus creating another quark pair; they are forever bound into hadrons such as theproton and the neutron or the pion and kaon. Although analytically unproven, confinement is widely believed to be true because it explains the consistent failure of free quark searches, and it is easy to demonstrate in lattice QCD. Asymptotic freedom, which means that in very high-energy reactions, quarks and gluons interact very weakly creating a quark–gluon plasma. This prediction of QCD was first discovered in the early 1970s by David Politzer and by Frank Wilczek and David Gross. For this work they were awarded the 2004 Nobel Prize in Physics. There is no known phase-transition line separating these two properties; confinement is dominant in low-energy scales but, as energy increases, asymptotic freedom becomes dominant.
    [Show full text]
  • Scaling Laws in Particle Physics and Astrophysics
    SCALING LAWS IN PARTICLE PHYSICS AND ASTROPHYSICS RUDOLF MURADYAN Dedicated to the Golden Jubilee (1961-2011) of publication of the article by Geoffrey Chew and Steven Frautschi in Phys. Rev. Lett. 7, 394, 1961, where a celebrated scaling law J m2 has been conjectured for spin/mass dependence of hadrons. G. Chew S. Frautschi 1. INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS SCALING? Any polynomial power law f() x c xn , where constant c has a dimension dim f dimc (dimx )n exhibits the property of scaling or scale invariance. Usually n is called scaling exponent. The word scaling express the fact that function f is shape-invariant with respect to the dilatation transformation x x f ( x) c ( x)n n f() x and this transformation preserves the shape of function f . We say, following Leonhard Euler, that f is homogeneous of degree “n” if for any value of parameter f ( x) n f() x . Differentiating this relation with respect to and putting 1we obtain simple differential equation x f() x n f() x solution of which brings back to the polynomial power scaling law. There are tremendously many different scaling laws in Nature. The most important of them can be revealed by Google search of scaling site:nobelprize.org in the official site of Nobel Foundation, where nearly 100 results appears. Ten of them are shown below: 1. Jerome I. Friedman - Nobel Lecture 2. Daniel C. Tsui - Nobel Lecture 3. Gerardus 't Hooft - Nobel Lecture 4. Henry W. Kendall - Nobel Lecture 5. Pierre-Gilles de Gennes - Nobel Lecture 6. Jack Steinberger - Nobel Lecture 7.
    [Show full text]
  • The Twenty-First Century Paradigm and the Role of Information Technology
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Springer - Publisher Connector Chapter 2 The Twenty-First Century Paradigm and the Role of Information Technology In Chap. 1 , we considered demand by roughly classifying it into two types: “diffusive demand” and “creative demand.” The “paradigm of the twentieth century and before” was characterized by diffu- sive demand. The paradigm was constituted by a material desire to satisfy needs for food, clothing, and shelter, as well as transportation, and social mobility. Many of the industries that came into being in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries were intended to satisfy such desires. I describe those material desires as diffusive demand leading to a “saturation of man-made objects .” It follows that new demand in the twenty-fi rst century will be generated by a new paradigm. Thus, in this chapter fi rst describes what the paradigms of the twenty-fi rst century are and then refl ects on the role played by the knowledge explosion, one of those paradigms, and the role played by information technology, which looks as if it came into being to solve problems created by the knowledge explosion. Exploding Knowledge, Limited Earth, and Aging Society What are the paradigms of the twenty-fi rst century? I believe there are three, which I classify as “exploding knowledge ,” “limited earth,” and “aging society” (Fig. 2.1 ). These three paradigms do not represent anything that is either good or bad for humanity. Each constitutes a basic framework containing both light and shadow. For instance, there has been an explosive increase in knowledge .
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix E Nobel Prizes in Nuclear Science
    Nuclear Science—A Guide to the Nuclear Science Wall Chart ©2018 Contemporary Physics Education Project (CPEP) Appendix E Nobel Prizes in Nuclear Science Many Nobel Prizes have been awarded for nuclear research and instrumentation. The field has spun off: particle physics, nuclear astrophysics, nuclear power reactors, nuclear medicine, and nuclear weapons. Understanding how the nucleus works and applying that knowledge to technology has been one of the most significant accomplishments of twentieth century scientific research. Each prize was awarded for physics unless otherwise noted. Name(s) Discovery Year Henri Becquerel, Pierre Discovered spontaneous radioactivity 1903 Curie, and Marie Curie Ernest Rutherford Work on the disintegration of the elements and 1908 chemistry of radioactive elements (chem) Marie Curie Discovery of radium and polonium 1911 (chem) Frederick Soddy Work on chemistry of radioactive substances 1921 including the origin and nature of radioactive (chem) isotopes Francis Aston Discovery of isotopes in many non-radioactive 1922 elements, also enunciated the whole-number rule of (chem) atomic masses Charles Wilson Development of the cloud chamber for detecting 1927 charged particles Harold Urey Discovery of heavy hydrogen (deuterium) 1934 (chem) Frederic Joliot and Synthesis of several new radioactive elements 1935 Irene Joliot-Curie (chem) James Chadwick Discovery of the neutron 1935 Carl David Anderson Discovery of the positron 1936 Enrico Fermi New radioactive elements produced by neutron 1938 irradiation Ernest Lawrence
    [Show full text]
  • Research Group of the Committee for the Publication of Hantaro Nagaoka's Biography
    Research Group of the Committee for the Publication of Hantaro Nagaoka's Biography Eri Yagi* The Research Group, whose members are Dr. Kiyonobu Itakura of the Na tional Institute for Education Research, Mr. Tosaku Kimura of the National Science Museum, and myself, has completed a biography of Hantaro Nagaoka, which will be published soon (in Japanese) by the Asahi Newspaper Publisher in Tokyo. The Research Group was organized by the Committee in 1963. It was just after the special exhibition of Nagaoka's science activities, held at the National Science Museum in Tokyo by the support of the History of Science Society of Japan. The Committee has been directed by Professor Yoshio Fujioka, who had learned physics under Nagaoka. Unpublished materials, e.g., Nagaoka's notebooks, diaries, corespondences, photos were generosly donated to the National Science Museum by the family of Nagaoka. In addition, those who had been in contact with Nagaoka kindly con tributed informations to the Research Group. The above materials and informations have been arranged, cataloged, and examined by the Research Group. Hantaro Nagaoka was bom at Nagasaki prefecture in the southern part of Japan in 1865 and died in Tokyo in 1950. He was primarily responsible for pro moting the advancement of physics in Japan, between 1900 and 1925, as a professor at the Department of Physics, the University of Tokyo. In the earlier period before Nagaoka started his researches, such local studies as the properties of Japanese magic mirrors, earthquakes, and geomagnetism had dominated by the influence of foreign teachers in Japan. In addition to the study of atomic structure, Nagaoka covered varied fields in physics as magnetostriction, geophysics, mathematical physics, spectroscopy, and radio waves.
    [Show full text]
  • Geometric Approaches to Quantum Field Theory
    GEOMETRIC APPROACHES TO QUANTUM FIELD THEORY A thesis submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Science and Engineering 2020 Kieran T. O. Finn School of Physics and Astronomy Supervised by Professor Apostolos Pilaftsis BLANK PAGE 2 Contents Abstract 7 Declaration 9 Copyright 11 Acknowledgements 13 Publications by the Author 15 1 Introduction 19 1.1 Unit Independence . 20 1.2 Reparametrisation Invariance in Quantum Field Theories . 24 1.3 Example: Complex Scalar Field . 25 1.4 Outline . 31 1.5 Conventions . 34 2 Field Space Covariance 35 2.1 Riemannian Geometry . 35 2.1.1 Manifolds . 35 2.1.2 Tensors . 36 2.1.3 Connections and the Covariant Derivative . 37 2.1.4 Distances on the Manifold . 38 2.1.5 Curvature of a Manifold . 39 2.1.6 Local Normal Coordinates and the Vielbein Formalism 41 2.1.7 Submanifolds and Induced Metrics . 42 2.1.8 The Geodesic Equation . 42 2.1.9 Isometries . 43 2.2 The Field Space . 44 2.2.1 Interpretation of the Field Space . 48 3 2.3 The Configuration Space . 50 2.4 Parametrisation Dependence of Standard Approaches to Quan- tum Field Theory . 52 2.4.1 Feynman Diagrams . 53 2.4.2 The Effective Action . 56 2.5 Covariant Approaches to Quantum Field Theory . 59 2.5.1 Covariant Feynman Diagrams . 59 2.5.2 The Vilkovisky–DeWitt Effective Action . 62 2.6 Example: Complex Scalar Field . 66 3 Frame Covariance in Quantum Gravity 69 3.1 The Cosmological Frame Problem .
    [Show full text]
  • Nobel Lectures™ 2001-2005
    World Scientific Connecting Great Minds 逾10 0 种 诺贝尔奖得主著作 及 诺贝尔奖相关图书 我们非常荣幸得以出版超过100种诺贝尔奖得主著作 以及诺贝尔奖相关图书。 我们自1980年代开始与诺贝尔奖得主合作出版高品质 畅销书。一些得主担任我们的编辑顾问、丛书编辑， 并于我们期刊发表综述文章与学术论文。 世界科技与帝国理工学院出版社还邀得其中多位作了公 开演讲。 Philip W Anderson Sir Derek H R Barton Aage Niels Bohr Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Murray Gell-Mann Georges Charpak Nicolaas Bloembergen Baruch S Blumberg Hans A Bethe Aaron J Ciechanover Claude Steven Chu Cohen-Tannoudji Leon N Cooper Pierre-Gilles de Gennes Niels K Jerne Richard Feynman Kenichi Fukui Lawrence R Klein Herbert Kroemer Vitaly L Ginzburg David Gross H Gobind Khorana Rita Levi-Montalcini Harry M Markowitz Karl Alex Müller Sir Nevill F Mott Ben Roy Mottelson 诺贝尔奖相关图书 THE PERIODIC TABLE AND A MISSED NOBEL PRIZES THAT CHANGED MEDICINE NOBEL PRIZE edited by Gilbert Thompson (Imperial College London) by Ulf Lagerkvist & edited by Erling Norrby (The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences) This book brings together in one volume fifteen Nobel Prize- winning discoveries that have had the greatest impact upon medical science and the practice of medicine during the 20th “This is a fascinating account of how century and up to the present time. Its overall aim is to groundbreaking scientists think and enlighten, entertain and stimulate. work. This is the insider’s view of the process and demands made on the Contents: The Discovery of Insulin (Robert Tattersall) • The experts of the Nobel Foundation who Discovery of the Cure for Pernicious Anaemia, Vitamin B12 assess the originality and significance (A Victor Hoffbrand) • The Discovery of
    [Show full text]
  • Nobel Lecture by Toshihide Maskawa
    WHAT DOES CP VIOLATION TELL US? Nobel Lecture, December 8, 2008 by Toshihide Maskawa Kyoto Sangyo University, Kyoto 603-8555, Japan. I would first like to thank the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences and the Nobel Foundation for awarding me this honour, of which I had never even dreamt. I was born in 1940, the son of a furniture craftsman in the city of Nagoya, in Japan. My father wanted to change his job and was taking a correspondence course to become an electrical engineer, while he was a trainee furniture craftsman. However, he told me that he could not really understand sine and cosine, since he had not received a basic education. Eventually, though, he did manage a small furniture factory employing a few craftsmen and worked there himself. But this came to nothing because of the War, that reckless and miserable war which our country caused. After the War, he displayed in front of his house the door hinges, wood screws and other pieces of furniture, which remained at hand. They sold quite well. Getting a taste for selling, he became a merchant dealing with sugar as an ingredient for cakes. He still wanted to boast of his knowledge of electricity, but he could not find anyone suitable to explain it to. One day, though, he found a good tar- get: his son. In those poor days after the war, almost all the houses were without bath- rooms and so people went to the public bath. On his way to and from the public bath, he boasted of his knowledge: Why do three-phase current mo- tors rotate? Why don’t the solar and lunar eclipses occur every month? He explained proudly that it was because of the revolution planes of the earth around the sun, and of the moon around the earth, which are tilted at an angle of 5 degrees.
    [Show full text]
  • The Early History of the Niels Bohr Institute
    CHAPTER 4.1 Birthplace of a new physics - the early history of the Niels Bohr Institute Peter Robertson* Abstract SCI.DAN.M. The foundation in 1921 of the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen was to prove an important event in the I birth of modern physics. From its modest beginnings as • ONE a small three-storey building and a handful of physicists, HUNDRED the Institute underwent a rapid expansion over the fol­ lowing years. Under Bohr’s leadership, the Institute provided the principal centre for the emergence of quan­ YEARS tum mechanics and a new understanding of Nature at OF the atomic level. Over sixty physicists from 17 countries THE came to collaborate with the Danish physicists at the In­ BOHR stitute during its first decade. The Bohr Institute was the ATOM: first truly international centre in physics and, indeed, one of the first in any area of science. The Institute pro­ PROCEEDINGS vided a striking demonstration of the value of interna­ tional cooperation in science and it inspired the later development of similar centres elsewhere in Europe and FROM the United States. In this article I will discuss the origins and early development of the Institute and examine the A CONFERENCE reasons why it became such an important centre in the development of modern physics. Keywords: Niels Bohr Institute; development of quan­ tum mechanics; international cooperation in science. * School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Vic. 3010, Australia. Email: [email protected]. 481 PETER ROBERTSON SCI.DAN.M. I 1. Planning and construction of the Institute In 1916 Niels Bohr returned home to Copenhagen over four years since his first visit to Cambridge, England, and two years after a second visit to Manchester, working in the group led by Ernest Ru­ therford.
    [Show full text]
  • Models of the Atom
    David Sang Models of the atom Today we are very familiar with the picture of the atom as a particle with a tiny nucleus at its centre and a cloud of electrons orbiting around the nucleus. But where did this model come from? What were scientists trying to explain using their models of the atom? To find out, we have to go back to the early years of the twentieth century. A model of the atom. But does the nucleus glow like this? No. And are electrons blue? No. Discovering radioactivity and the electron By the 1890s, most physicists were convinced that matter was made up of atoms. The idea of vast In this photo, an electron beam is bent along a circular path by a magnetic field. numbers of tiny, moving particles could explain The beam is produced at the bottom in an ‘electron gun’ and follows a clockwise many things, including the behaviour of gases and path inside the evacuated tube. A small amount of gas has been left in the tube; the differences between the chemical elements. this glows to show up the path of the beam. Then, in 1896, Henri Becquerel discovered radioactivity. He was investigating uranium salts, The importance of these two discoveries was that many of which glow in the dark. To his surprise, he they suggested that atoms were not indestructible. Key words Atoms are tiny but they are made of still smaller found that all the uranium-containing substances model that he tested produced invisible radiation that particles. could blacken photographic paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Otto Stern Annalen 4.11.11
    (To be published by Annalen der Physik in December 2011) Otto Stern (1888-1969): The founding father of experimental atomic physics J. Peter Toennies,1 Horst Schmidt-Böcking,2 Bretislav Friedrich,3 Julian C.A. Lower2 1Max-Planck-Institut für Dynamik und Selbstorganisation Bunsenstrasse 10, 37073 Göttingen 2Institut für Kernphysik, Goethe Universität Frankfurt Max-von-Laue-Strasse 1, 60438 Frankfurt 3Fritz-Haber-Institut der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Faradayweg 4-6, 14195 Berlin Keywords History of Science, Atomic Physics, Quantum Physics, Stern- Gerlach experiment, molecular beams, space quantization, magnetic dipole moments of nucleons, diffraction of matter waves, Nobel Prizes, University of Zurich, University of Frankfurt, University of Rostock, University of Hamburg, Carnegie Institute. We review the work and life of Otto Stern who developed the molecular beam technique and with its aid laid the foundations of experimental atomic physics. Among the key results of his research are: the experimental test of the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution of molecular velocities (1920), experimental demonstration of space quantization of angular momentum (1922), diffraction of matter waves comprised of atoms and molecules by crystals (1931) and the determination of the magnetic dipole moments of the proton and deuteron (1933). 1 Introduction Short lists of the pioneers of quantum mechanics featured in textbooks and historical accounts alike typically include the names of Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Arnold Sommerfeld, Niels Bohr, Max von Laue, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, Paul Dirac, Max Born, and Wolfgang Pauli on the theory side, and of Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen, Ernest Rutherford, Arthur Compton, and James Franck on the experimental side. However, the records in the Archive of the Nobel Foundation as well as scientific correspondence, oral-history accounts and scientometric evidence suggest that at least one more name should be added to the list: that of the “experimenting theorist” Otto Stern.
    [Show full text]