DOCSLIB.ORG

The Investigation of Fundamental Interactions with Cold Neutrons

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

A11102 14AL4A2A National Bureau o NBS Special Publication 711 The Investigation of Fundamental Interactions with Cold Neutrons G.L. Greene, Editor . TM he National Bureau of Standards' was established by an act of Congress on March 3, 1901. The Jf Bureau's overall goal is to strengthen and advance the nation's science and technology and facilitate their effective application for public benefit. To this end, the Bureau conducts research and provides: (1) a basis for the nation's physical measurement system, (2) scientific and technological services for industry and government, (3) a technical basis for equity in trade, and (4) technical services to promote public safety. The Bureau's technical work is performed by the National Measurement Laboratory, the National Engineering Laboratory, the Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology, and the Institute for Materials Science and Engineering The National Measurement Laboratory 2 Provides the national system of physical and chemical measurement; • Basic Standards coordinates the system with measurement systems of other nations and • Radiation Research furnishes essential services leading to accurate and uniform physical and • Chemical Physics chemical measurement throughout the Nation's scientific community, in- • Analytical Chemistry dustry, and commerce; provides advisory and research services to other Government agencies; conducts physical and chemical research; develops, produces, and distributes Standard Reference Materials; and provides calibration services. The Laboratory consists of the following centers: The National Engineering Laboratory Provides technology and technical services to the public and private sectors to Applied Mathematics address national needs and to solve national problems; conducts research in Electronics and Electrical 2 engineering and applied science in support of these efforts; builds and main- Engineering tains competence in the necessary disciplines required to carry out this Manufacturing Engineering research and technical service; develops engineering data and measurement Building Technology capabilities; provides engineering measurement traceability services; develops Fire Research 2 test methods and proposes engineering standards and code changes; develops Chemical Engineering and proposes new engineering practices; and develops and improves mechanisms to transfer results of its research to the ultimate user. The Laboratory consists of the following centers: The Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology Conducts research and provides scientific and technical services to aid Programming Science and Federal agencies in the selection, acquisition, application, and use of com- Technology puter technology to improve effectiveness and economy in Government Computer Systems operations in accordance with Public Law 89-306 (40 U.S.C. 759), relevant Engineering Executive Orders, and other directives; carries out this mission by managing the Federal Information Processing Standards Program, developing Federal ADP standards guidelines, and managing Federal participation in ADP voluntary standardization activities; provides scientific and technological ad- visory services and assistance to Federal agencies; and provides the technical foundation for computer-related policies of the Federal Government. The In- stitute consists of the following centers: The Institute for Materials Science and Engineering Conducts research and provides measurements, data, standards, reference Ceramics materials, quantitative understanding and other technical information funda- Fracture and Deformation 3 mental to the processing, structure, properties and performance of materials; Polymers addresses the scientific basis for new advanced materials technologies; plans Metallurgy research around cross-country scientific themes such as nondestructive Reactor Radiation evaluation and phase diagram development; oversees Bureau-wide technical programs in nuclear reactor radiation research and nondestructive evalua- tion; and broadly disseminates generic technical information resulting from its programs. The Institute consists of the following Divisions: 'Headquarters and Laboratories at Gaithersburg, Ml), unless otherwise noted; mailing address Gaithersburg, MD 20899. 2 Some divisions within the center are located at Boulder, CO 80303. 'Located at Boulder, CO, with some elements at Gaithersburg, MD. — NBS Special Publication 711 1 . fcui , i— — —~~ — ~—. The Investigation of Fundamental Interactions with Cold Neutrons Proceedings of a Workshop G.L. Greene, Editor Center for Basic Standards National Measurement Laboratory National Bureau of Standards Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Workshop Sponsors: Department of Energy National Bureau of Standards Issued February 1986 U.S. Department of Commerce Malcolm Baldrige, Secretary National Bureau of Standards Ernest Ambler, Director Library of Congress U.S. Government Printing Office For sale by the Superintendent Catalog Card Number: 86-600501 Washington: 1986 of Documents, National Bureau of Standards U.S. Government Printing Office, Special Publication 711 Washington, DC 20402 Natl. Bur. Stand. (U.S.), Spec. Publ. 711 164 pages (Feb. 1986) CODEN: XNBSAV Table of Contents The Particle Properties of the Neutron Norman F. Ramsey The NBS Cold Neutron Facility J.M. Rowe Cold and Ultra Cold Neutron Beams for P. Ageron and Fundamental Physics Research at the W. Mampe Institut Laue Langevin The Implications of Neutron Beta-Decay J. Byrne Review of the Measurements of the Neutron J.M. Robson Lifetime Absolute Neutron Flux Determination - D.M. Gilliam A Problem for the Measurement of t n and G.P. Lamaze The Determination of the Neutron Lifetime J.F. Wilkerson Using e-p Coincidence Determination of the Neutron Lifetime by J. Byrne, P. Counting Trapped Protons Dawber, R.D. Scott, J.M. Robson, and G.L. Greene In-Beam Neutron Lifetime Measurements at the D. Dubbers Institut Laue Langevin Neutron Lifetime Measurements with Bottled W. Mampe Neutrons at ILL Correlation Coefficients in Polarized Neutron S.J. Freedman Decay-Experiments with PERKEO Time Reversal Invariance in Polarized Neutron Thomas J. Beta Decay Bowles The Nucleon-Nucleon Weak Interaction E. G. Adelberger Tests of T-Invariance with Slow Neutrons P.K. Kabir Parity Violation in Capture of Polarized R. Wilson, M. Neutrons Avenier, G. Bagieu, R. Hart D.H. Koang, M.A. Idrissie, B. Vignon PNC and TNC Rotations of the Neutron Spin Blayne Heckel - Neutron Interf erometry : Present Status S.A. Werner and 95 Future Prospects H. Kaiser Perfect Crystal Systems for Advanced H. Rauch 106 Interferometer and Resonator Devices Long Wavelength Neutron Interf erometry Anton Zeilinger 112 Long Baseline Neutron Interf erometry R.D. Deslattes 118 An Effective Vibration Isolation System J. Arthur 124 for Perfect-Crystal Neutron Interf erometry Cold Neutrons and Neutron Oscillations Milla Baldo- 130 Ceolin Ultracold Neutrons and the Search for the J.M. Pendlebury 137 Electric Dipole Moment of the Neutron and K. Smith Superthermal Sources of Ultra-Cold Neutrons R. Golub 143 (UNO The Production of Slow Neutrons Using Doppler Thomas Dombeck 149 Shifting from a High-Speed Rotor and Their Applications in Fundamental Research. iv Preface The National Bureau of Standards currently operates a 20 MW research reactor on its campus in Gaithersburg, Maryland. By early 1986 a cryogenic moderator will be installed in the reactor core providing cold neutron fluxes which will be comparable to the most intense sources in the world. In order to fully benefit from this source, the National Bureau of Standards plans to establish, at this reactor, a National Cold Neutron Facility. This facility will consist of a large neutron guide hall as well as a wide variety of specialized instrumentation. The major thrust of the scientific effort at this facility will be in the area of materials research and condensed matter studies. However, as has been amply demonstrated at the only existing large cold neutron facility, the Institut Max von Laue-Paul Langevin in Grenoble, France, the research at such a facility is by no means limited to such areas. In the last decade a rather rich interdisciplinary effort has developed in which cold neutron beams have been used as tools in the investigation of fundamental interactions. This work draws on the techniques of particle physics, nuclear physics, atomic physics and optics. The results of such work have implications in the theory of the weak interaction, nuclear theory, and astrophysics as well as shedding light on the nature (and violation) of a variety of invariance laws and symmetry principles. In order to provide guidance in the development of such a research effort at the new National Cold Neutron Facility, the Department of Energy and the National Bureau of Standards sponsored, on 14-15 November 1985, a workshop on "The Investigation of Fundamental Interactions with Cold Neutrons". This workshop brought together more than 50 participants from 23 institutions in the U.S., Canada and Europe. The twenty-five papers that were presented comprise these proceedings. These contributions not only provide a review of recent work in this field but also describe a variety of future experiments in varying states of preparation. Taken together these papers describe a vital, exciting scientific endeavor which can be expected to provide significant results for many years to come. The organization of this workshop would not have been possible without the efforts of many individuals. In particular, Dr. Richard
Recommended publications
  • Michelson–Morley Experiment

    Michelson–Morley Experiment

    Michelson–Morley experiment Figure 1. Michelson and Morley's interferometric setup, mounted on a stone slab that floats in an annular trough of mercury The Michelson–Morley experiment was an attempt to detect the existence of the luminiferous aether, a supposed medium permeating space that was thought to be the carrier of light waves. The experiment was performed between April and July 1887 by Albert A. Michelson and Edward W. Morley at what is now Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, and published in November of the same year.[1] It compared the speed of light in perpendicular directions in an attempt to detect the relative motion of matter through the stationary luminiferous aether ("aether wind"). The result was negative, in that Michelson and Morley found no significant difference between the speed of light in the direction of movement through the presumed aether, and the speed at right angles. This result is generally considered to be the first strong evidence against the then-prevalent aether theory, and initiated a line of research that eventually led to special relativity, which rules out a stationary aether.[A 1] Of this experiment, Einstein wrote, "If the Michelson–Morley experiment had not brought us into serious embarrassment, no one would have regarded the relativity theory as a (halfway) redemption."[A 2]:219 Michelson–Morley type experiments have been repeated many times with steadily increasing sensitivity. These include experiments from 1902 to 1905, and a series of experiments in the 1920s. More recent optical
  • Implementation of the Fizeau Aether Drag Experiment for An

    Implementation of the Fizeau Aether Drag Experiment for An

    Implementation of the Fizeau Aether Drag Experiment for an Undergraduate Physics Laboratory by Bahrudin Trbalic Submitted to the Department of Physics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in Physics at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY May 2020 c Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2020. All rights reserved. ○ Author................................................................ Department of Physics May 8, 2020 Certified by. Sean P. Robinson Lecturer of Physics Thesis Supervisor Certified by. Joseph A. Formaggio Professor of Physics Thesis Supervisor Accepted by . Nergis Mavalvala Associate Department Head, Department of Physics 2 Implementation of the Fizeau Aether Drag Experiment for an Undergraduate Physics Laboratory by Bahrudin Trbalic Submitted to the Department of Physics on May 8, 2020, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in Physics Abstract This work presents the description and implementation of the historically significant Fizeau aether drag experiment in an undergraduate physics laboratory setting. The implementation is optimized to be inexpensive and reproducible in laboratories that aim to educate students in experimental physics. A detailed list of materials, experi- mental setup, and procedures is given. Additionally, a laboratory manual, preparatory materials, and solutions are included. Thesis Supervisor: Sean P. Robinson Title: Lecturer of Physics Thesis Supervisor: Joseph A. Formaggio Title: Professor of Physics 3 4 Acknowledgments I gratefully acknowledge the instrumental help of Prof. Joseph Formaggio and Dr. Sean P. Robinson for the guidance in this thesis work and in my academic life. The Experimental Physics Lab (J-Lab) has been the pinnacle of my MIT experience and I’m thankful for the time spent there.
  • Michou Interferometer

    Michou Interferometer

    July 21st 2016 Michou interferometer Costel Munteanu Montreal, QC, Canada [email protected] Abstract: The speed of light c defined as a constant of nature is in fact the “two­way speed of light” ​ ​ calculated from the measured time of travel of light from a light source to a reflector and back to a detector situated next to the source. In a “two­way” experiment (like Fizeau­Foucault apparatus) the constant c is the harmonic mean of “forward” and “backward” speeds [13]. A simple ​ ​ ​ ​ Michelson­Morley interferometer with equal length arms detects a difference between the time of travel of light along its two perpendicular arms in certain frames of reference in motion or in gravitational field and this is interpreted as Lorentz–FitzGerald contraction of length in the direction of motion or along the gradient of gravitational field [5]. While no experiment seemed to allow the ​ ​ precise “one­way” measurement of speed of light, Lorentz­FitzGerald length contraction interpretation is preferred. In this article I present an interferometer that determines the difference between “forward” and “backward” speed of light in certain frames of reference ­ the anisotropy of speed of light along one direction ­ showing a flow of electromagnetic medium through the frame of reference of the device contradicting the Lorentz­FitzGerald length contraction hypothesis and bring proof for the first time of (local) preferred frame effects. The device determines the direction of the flow and allows to calculate the velocity of that flow using the measured (or calculated) value of canonical “two­way” speed of light c in that particular frame of reference and the anisotropy measured by the ​ ​ device presented herein.
  • Search for the Process E+E−→Η′(958) with the CMD-3 Detector

    Search for the Process E+E−→Η′(958) with the CMD-3 Detector

    Physics Letters B 740 (2015) 273–277 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Physics Letters B www.elsevier.com/locate/physletb + − Search for the process e e → η (958) with the CMD-3 detector R.R. Akhmetshin a,b, A.V. Anisenkov a,b, V.M. Aulchenko a,b, V.Sh. Banzarov a, N.S. Bashtovoy a, D.E. Berkaev a,b, A.E. Bondar a,b, A.V. Bragin a, S.I. Eidelman a,b, D.A. Epifanov a,e, L.B. Epshteyn a,c, A.L. Erofeev a, G.V. Fedotovich a,b, S.E. Gayazov a,b, A.A. Grebenuk a,b, D.N. Grigoriev a,b,c, E.N. Gromov a, F.V. Ignatov a,b, S.V. Karpov a, V.F. Kazanin a,b, B.I. Khazin a,b,1, I.A. Koop a,b, O.A. Kovalenko a,b, A.N. Kozyrev a, E.A. Kozyrev a,b, P.P. Krokovny a,b, A.E. Kuzmenko a,b, A.S. Kuzmin a,b, I.B. Logashenko a,b, P.A. Lukin a,b, K.Yu. Mikhailov a, N.Yu. Muchnoi a,b, V.S. Okhapkin a, Yu.N. Pestov a, E.A. Perevedentsev a,b, A.S. Popov a,b, G.P. Razuvaev a,b, Yu.A. Rogovsky a, A.L. Romanov a, A.A. Ruban a, N.M. Ryskulov a, A.E. Ryzhenenkov a,b, V.E. Shebalin a,b, D.N. Shemyakin a,b, B.A. Shwartz a,b, D.B. Shwartz a,b, A.L. Sibidanov a,d, P.Yu. Shatunov a, Yu.M.
  • The Fizeau Experiment – the Experiment That Led Physics the Wrong Path for One Century

    The Fizeau Experiment – the Experiment That Led Physics the Wrong Path for One Century

    The Fizeau Experiment – the Experiment that Led Physics the Wrong Path for One Century Henok Tadesse, Electrical Engineer, BSc. Ethiopia, Debrezeit, P.O Box 412 Mobile: +251 910 751339; email: [email protected] or [email protected] 01December 2017 Abstract Although Fresnel's ether drag coefficient was ad hoc, its curious confirmation by the Fizeau experiment forced physicists to accept and adopt it as the main guide in the development of theories of the speed of light. Lorentz's 'local-time' , which evolved into the Lorentz transformations, was developed to explain the Fizeau experiment and stellar aberration. Given the logical, theoretical and experimental counter- evidences against the theory of relativity today, it turns out that the Fresnel's drag coefficient may not exist at all. The Fizeau experiment and the phenomenon of stellar aberration have no common physical basis. The result of the Fizeau experiment can be explained in a simple, classical way. It is as if nature conspired to lead physicists astray for more than one century. Alternative theories and interpretations for the ether drift experiments and invariance of Maxwell's equations will be proposed. Physicists rightly assumed the invariance of Maxwell's equations, but their deeply flawed conception of light as ordinary local phenomenon led them unnecessarily to seek an 'explanation' for this invariance, which was the Lorentz transformation. Einstein went down the wrong path when he sought an 'explanation' for the light postulate, when none was needed. The invariance of Maxwell's equations for light is a direct consequence of non-existence of the ether and there is no explanation for it for the same reason that there is no explanation for light being a wave when there is no medium for its propagation.
  • Summary of the Second Workshop on Liquid Argon Time Projection Chamber Research and Development in the United States

    Summary of the Second Workshop on Liquid Argon Time Projection Chamber Research and Development in the United States

    FERMILAB-CONF-15-149-ND Preprint typeset in JINST style - HYPER VERSION Summary of the Second Workshop on Liquid Argon Time Projection Chamber Research and Development in the United States R. Acciarria, M. Adamowskia, D. Artripb, B. Ballera, C. Brombergc, F. Cavannaa;d, B. Carlsa, H. Chene, G. Deptucha, L. Epprecht f , R. Dharmapalang W. Foremanh A. Hahna, M. Johnsona, B. J. P. Jones i, T. Junka, K. Lang j, S. Lockwitza, A. Marchionnia, C. Maugerk, C. Montanaril, S. Mufsonm, M. Nessin, H. Olling Backo, G. Petrillop, S. Pordesa, J. Raafa, B. Rebela, G. Sininsk, M. Soderberga;q, N. Spoonerr, M. Stancaria, T. Strausss, K. Teraot , C. Thorne, T. Topea, M. Toupsi, J. Urheimm, R. Van de Waterk, H. Wangu, R. Wassermanv, M. Webers, D. Whittingtonm, T. Yanga aFermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL 60510, USA bResearch Catalytics, USA cMichigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA dYale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA eBrookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973, USA f ETH Zürich, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland gArgonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL, 60439, USA hUniversity of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA iMassachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA jUniversity of Texas at Austin, TX 78712, USA kLos Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA lIstituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Pavia 6-27100, Italy mIndiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA nCERN, 1217 Meyrin, Switzerland oPrinceton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA pUniversity of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627, USA qSyracuse University, NY 13210, USA rUniversity of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire S10 2TN, UK sUniversity of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland t Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USA uUniversity of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA vColorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA – 1 – Operated by Fermi Research Alliance, LLC under Contract No.
  • Iw F'tf- 1 -I ÛG 0 Zi

    Iw F'tf- 1 -I ÛG 0 Zi

    w^. m.-m?^iw f'tf- 1 -I ÛG 0 Zi Tt;: ANOMALOUS KAGNETiC i-'.OMEKT OF THE MUOM : A REVIEW DF THE THEORETICAL CONTRIBUTIONS j. CUV.ET*, S. NARISON**, H. PERROTTET* and E. de RAFAEL14 ABSTRACT : we review the possible contributions to the muon g-factor anomaly, o^ = — t^ -Z) which arc potentially significant for a comparison between theory .^nd experiment at present. This includes purely ÇF.D perturbation theory effects up to eighth-order ; hadronic effects at fourth end sixth-order ; and weak interaction effects. From these sources we'get a total theoretical contribution O-.JTheory) = (1 155 920.6 ± 12.9) x 10"9 , to be cc.'pared with the latest CERK expc-rinental result £l] , a- (Experiment) <= (1 !G5 895 ± 27) x 10"9 . J'JNE 1«6 76/P.333 K Zïr.*.rz de Pnysique Théorique, CNRS Marseille. *" Boursier de la CEE (Coir.r.unautè Economique Européenne) Postal Address : Centre de r'nysique Théorique - uiRS 31, C'.OT.ir, -'cseph Aiguicr P-Wfc- i - INTRODUCTION The latest published value of the anomalous magnetic cornent of the rcuon ir&ccured by the CCRN \-\uor. Storage Ring Collaboration [ll is The accuracy of this rce a s urcr.G nt represents an improvement by an order of magnitude with respect to tne previous result '. Since then, the Ci'\\ tfuon Storage Ring has been in operation for a certain time and o still further improvement in the accuracy is soon expected. At this level of precision there are contributions to <*• ^ , other than those gevernce uy the quantum electrodynamics of nuons ar.d electrons (Gr-D), like hadronic effects and possibly weak interaction effects, 21 which play an important role '.
  • Neutron-Deuteron Scattering and Three-Body Interactions

    Neutron-Deuteron Scattering and Three-Body Interactions

    Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 163 Neutron-Deuteron Scattering and Three-Body Interactions PHILIPPE MERMOD ACTA UNIVERSITATIS UPSALIENSIS ISSN 1651-6214 UPPSALA ISBN 91-554-6514-5 2006 urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-6739 ! " #$ #%%& '( ) * * * + , - . / , " +, #%%&, 0 1 2 -13 4 , 50 1 -6 6 7, 8 , &', 9 $# , , 4230 : 1))$1&) $1), 1 ** * 1 :) "; , - 1 ** . * . < * 1 , -. 1 . "//= 2>808 * - 2 , - ** * * . * , - * * . "//= . , 4 1 . 6. 2>808 . ?, @ . * . 2>808 . ? . . . 1 6 , / * 1 . * ** . * ** . ** < * , - . @ 1 . 1 , - ** * 1 * ** '%A * , - . * 1 * ** , 1 * @ ? ! " # $" % & '('" " )*+',(- " B + " #%%& 4220 &) 1&# $ 4230 : 1))$1&) $1) ( ((( 1&C': 5 (DD ,6,D E F ( ((( 1&C':7 To Kristina List of Papers This thesis is based on the following papers, which are referred to in the text by their Roman numerals. I J. Klug, J. Blomgren, A. Ataç, B. Bergenwall, A. Hildebrand, C. Johansson, P. Mermod, L. Nilsson, S. Pomp, U. Tippawan, K. Elmgren, N. Olsson, O. Jonsson, A.V. Prokofiev, P.-U. Renberg, P. Nadel-Turonski,
  • Critique of Special Relativity (Prp-1)

    Critique of Special Relativity (Prp-1)

    CRITIQUE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY (PRP-1) INTRODUCTION In 1887 Michelson and Morley attempted to measure the ether drift caused by the motion of the earth (at 30 km/s) in its orbit around the sun. The null result surprised everybody and for 18 years physicists tried unsuccessfully to explain the enigma. Finally, in 1905, Einstein published his revolutionary Special Theory of Relativity (STR) which rejected the ether and was quite controversial. It survived because a better solution has never been found. This may now gradually be changing. The present “Critique of Special Relativity” (PRP-1) is the first in a series of papers about “Post-Relativity Physics” (PRP). It is organized in 3 parts: Part I discusses alternative solutions in PRP for experiments and observation explained by STR. Part II discusses false arguments in favor of Special Relativity. It shows how the Sagnac effect and the GPS system have a natural explanation in classical physics, thus eliminating the need for alternative explanations in Relativity. In addition it shows that the proposed alternatives cannot work due to a fundamental flaw in Special Relativity so that the Sagnac effect and the GPS system actually disprove Relativity. Part III discusses experiments and observations which clearly disprove Special Relativity. PART I - ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS IN PRP FOR EXPERIMENTS EXPLAINED IN STR 1. THE ASSUMPTION OF ATOMIC RESONANCE CONTRACTION (ARC) Atomic Resonance Contraction (ARC) is a surprisingly simple alternative to STR’s kinematics. If we assume that atoms and therefore all solid objects contract by a factor 1/γ 2 in the direction of motion through the ether and by a factor 1/γ perpendicular to that motion (where γ = 1/(1-β2)1/2 with β = vc/ ) most ether drift experiments can easily be explained in classical physics.
  • Chapter 15 Β Decay

    Chapter 15 Β Decay

    Chapter 15 β Decay Note to students and other readers: This Chapter is intended to supplement Chapter 9 of Krane’s excellent book, ”Introductory Nuclear Physics”. Kindly read the relevant sections in Krane’s book first. This reading is supplementary to that, and the subsection ordering will mirror that of Krane’s, at least until further notice. β-particle’s are either electrons1 or positrons that are emitted through a certain class of nuclear decay associated with the “weak interaction”. The discoverer of electrons was Henri Becquerel, who noticed that photographic plates, covered in black paper, stored near ra- dioactive sources, became fogged. The black paper (meant to keep the plates unexposed) was thick enough to stop α-particles, and Becquerel concluded that fogging was caused by a new form of radiation, one more penetrating than α-particles. The name “β”, followed naturally as the next letter in the Greek alphabet after α, α-particles having already been discovered and named by Rutherford. Since that discovery, we have learned that β-particles are about 100 times more penetrating 1 than α-particles, and are spin- 2 fermions. Associated with the electrons is a conserved quantity, expressed as the quantum number known as the lepton number. The lepton number of the negatron is, by convention +1. The lepton number of the positron, also the anti- particle of the negatron, is -1. Thus, in a negatron-positron annihilation event, the next lepton number is zero. Only leptons can carry lepton number. (More on this soon.) Recall, from Chapter 13 (Chapter 6 in Krane), our discussion of the various decay modes that are associated with β decay: 1Technically, the word “electron” can represent either a negatron (a fancy word for e−) or a positron (e+).
  • Abstract ANGULAR CORRELATIONS in FREE NEUTRON DECAY Jiirgen

    Abstract ANGULAR CORRELATIONS in FREE NEUTRON DECAY Jiirgen

    365 ANGULAR CORRELATIONS IN FREE NEUTRON DECAY Jiirgen Last Institut Laue-Langevin 156 X 38042 Grenoble Cedex France Abstract The study of particle angular correlations in freeneutron decay provides important information about �-decay coupling constants, the structure of the hadronic weak current and possible extensions to the Standard Model. New experiments are expected to substantially reduce the uncertainty in the parity violating �-asymmetry A. The value of Yuct, which is currently derived from �-transition life times, might soon become available directly from neutron data. J7t=O+ An experiment which looks for time reversal violation in internal pair creation following polarized neutron captureon is briefly discussed. 366 NEIUTRON DECAY AND FUNDAMENTAL PHYSICS The term 'fundamental interaction' suggests that the physical system under study is elementary and prototypical for a whole class of similar processes. In this sense the weak decay of the neutron is clearly fundamental. Although the neutron possesses a complex internal structure, its quark contents is udd, it is the simplest baryonic system which undergoes semileptonic 13- decay. A neutron decays into a proton, an electron and an anti-neutrino. During this process one of the down-quarks is changed into an up-quark, emitting a W-boson which itsself decays into a pair of leptons. Since free quarks have not been observed in an experiment, neutron 13-decay is a very important source of information about the structure of the hadronic weak current and the weak coupling constants gA and gy. Their numerical values serve as input to nuclear astrop hysics problems, Big Bang cosmology, neutrino reactions and many other nuclear physics processes!.
  • Albert Einstein and the Fizeau 1851 Water Tube Experiment

    Albert Einstein and the Fizeau 1851 Water Tube Experiment

    Albert Einstein and the Fizeau 1851 Water Tube Experiment Galina Weinstein In 1895 Hendrik Antoon Lorentz derived the Fresnel dragging coefficient in his theory of immobile ether and electrons. This derivation did not explicitly involve electromagnetic theory at all. According to the 1922 Kyoto lecture notes, before 1905 Einstein tried to discuss Fizeau's experiment "as originally discussed by Lorentz" (in 1895). At this time he was still under the impression that the ordinary Newtonian law of addition of velocities was unproblematic. In 1907 Max Laue showed that the Fresnel dragging coefficient would follow from a straightforward application of the relativistic addition theorem of velocities. This derivation is mathematically equivalent to Lorentz's derivation of 1895. From 1907 onwards Einstein adopted Laue's derivation. When Robert Shankland asked Einstein how he had learned of the Michelson-Morley experiment, Einstein told him that he had become aware of it through the writings of Lorentz, but only after 1905 had it come to his attention. "Otherwise", he said, "I would have mentioned it in my paper". He continued to say that the experimental results which had influenced him most were stellar aberration and Fizeau's water tube experiment. "They were enough". Indeed the famous Michelson-Morley experiment is not mentioned in the 1905 relativity paper; but curiously Einstein did not mention Fizeau's experimental result either, and this is puzzling in light of the importance of the experiment in Einstein's pathway to his theory. In this paper I try to discuss this question. 1. Fizeau's Water Tube Experiment of 1851 In 1818 Augustin Fresnel explained that the motion of the earth does not have any influence on the laws of refraction because the ether is partially carried along by the earth and light waves inside the optical medium are partially dragged along with the ether.