DOCSLIB.ORG

Davisson – Germer Experiment Announcements: • Homework Set 5 Is Today

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Davisson – Germer Experiment Announcements: • Homework Set 5 Is Today Davisson – Germer experiment Announcements: • Homework set 5 is today. • Homework set 6 will be posted later today. • Made a good guess about the Nobel Prize for 2013 Clinton Davisson and Lester Germer. Davisson won Nobel Prize in 1937. Germer didn’t! – No dynamite money! Today we will go over the Davisson-Germer experiment. http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 1 Lester Germer • Born on October 10, 1896, graduated from Cornell University in 1917. After graduation he joined Bell Labs and then served in World War I as a fighter pilot, earning a citation from General Pershing. After the war he returned to Bell Labs and finished his Ph.D. at Columbia University in 1927. • At Bell Labs, Germer initially worked as an assistant to Clinton Davisson. In April of 1925 Davisson and Germer began working on an experiment studying the diffraction of electrons off of a nickel surface. At first their results were similar to results obtained four years earlier. Then suddenly the results changed. http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 2 Germer cont. • They performed a similar experiment in 1927, after Davisson had attended a conference where DeBroglie's hypothesis about the wave nature of matter was presented. When electrons of known velocity were used to bombard the nickel surface at a 45 degree angle they observed that the diffraction of the electrons obeyed Bragg's Law. This was the first proof of DeBroglie's particle wave hypothesis. • After this experiment Germer continued working at Bell Labs, studying the use of this technique to determine the structure of surfaces, work that eventually led to the development of the electron microscope. http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 3 Particles with mass can also have a wavelength For photons we know how to relate momentum and wavelength Combined (and proven by Compton effect): de Broglie proposed the same relationship for massive particles The de Broglie wavelength: Supposing the hydrogen atom electron is a standing wave with this wavelength leads to quantization of angular momentum and energy in agreement with the Bohr model. But we want more proof that an electron is a wave. http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 4 Consider the difficulty Take a small dust particle with radius, r = 10-6m, with a density, ρ, of 10 g/cm3, and moving with a velocity of of v = 10-2 m/s. Since v is much, much less than c, We can write p = mv = 4/3 π r3 ρ v ≈ 4 x 10-16 kg m/s de Broglie wavelength is: λ= h/p = 6.63 x 10-34 J s/ 4 x 10-16 kg m/s = 1.6 x 10-18 m This is extremely small compared to the dimensions of any physical system. Electron’s mass is really small and that helps in increasing the wavelength. http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 5 Two slit interference with light Huygen’s Principle: waves spread as spherical waves. http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 6 Double-slit experiment L bright r1 H r2 bright 0.5 mm =d θ Δr = r2-r1 Δr = mλ (where m=1,2,3…) θ1 bright d θ θ2 H = L sinθ = Lθ Δr = d sinθ = dθ = mλ H = mLλ Screen far away so θ ~θ ~θ & small angle approx: sinθ=θ 1 2 d http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 7 Double-slit experiment L r1 H r2 5 x10-4m = d θ Δr = r2-r1 Δr = mλ (where m=1,2,3…) Δr = mλ = d sinθ = dθ = mλ Calculating the pattern for light m = 1, λ = 500 nm, so angle to first bright H = Lθ θ = λ/d = 500 x 10-9/(5 x 10-4) = 0.001 rad if L = 3 m, then H = 3 m x 0.001 = 3 mm. So what will the pattern look like with electrons? http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 8 Energy and momentum relationships Massless particles (photons): Visible light photons: Massive particles (electrons): Low energy electrons: http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 9 Clicker question 1 Set frequency to AD The lowest energy (useful) electrons are around 25 eV. We just found these electrons have a wavelength of 0.25 nm. If we use the same two slits as for visible light (d = 0.5 mm), how far apart are the m=0 and m=1 maxima on a screen 3 m away? A. 3 mm Δr = mλ = d sinθ = dθ = mλ H = L sinθ = Lθ B. 1.5 mm C. 3 µm D. 1.5 µm E. 3 nm http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 10 Clicker question 1 Set frequency to AD The lowest energy (useful) electrons are around 25 eV. We just found these electrons have a wavelength of 0.25 nm. If we use the same two slits as for visible light (d = 0.5 mm), how far apart are the m=0 and m=1 maxima on a screen 3 m away? A. 3 mm Δr = mλ = d sinθ = dθ = mλ H = L sinθ = Lθ B. 1.5 mm C. 3 µm D. 1.5 µm E. 3 nm The wavelength of these electrons (0.25 nm) is 2000 times smaller than visible light (500 nm) so the angle and interference spacing is 2000 times smaller for the same slit spacing. This is too small to see. Need slits that are much closer. Clue comes from X-ray diffraction… http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 11 Using atoms for slits Brilliant idea: Two slits are just two sources. Hard to get two sources the size of an atom. Easy to get two objects that scatter electrons that are the size of an atom! http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 12 Using atoms for slits It is difficult to get just two atoms next to each other. But multiple equally separated atoms are easy (crystal lattice) and work even better. Just like reflection diffraction grating discussed for X-ray diffraction. http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 13 Davison Germer Apparatus Region traversed by electrons is evacuated! http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 14 Davison-Germer Result http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 15 Davisson – Germer experiment Interference from electron scattering off very clean nickel surface. e e e det. e e e electrons scatter off nickel atoms e e e e e e move detector around and see what angle electrons come off Ni http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 16 Davisson – Germer results e Plot the results for number of e electrons versus scattering angle e e e e det. e and find… A peak! e e # e’s Ni 0 500 scatt. angle θ So the probability of finding an electron at a particular angle is determined by the interference of de Broglie waves! It is an interference between waves, associated with a single electron, that have been scattered from various parts of the crystal. http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 17 Clicker question 2 Set frequency to AD To further prove the de Broglie wave hypothesis, they increased the electron energy. If de Broglie’s # e’s theory is correct, what will happen? A. The peak will get larger 0 500 B. The peak will get smaller scatt. angle θ C. The peak will shift to smaller angle D. The peak will shift to larger angle E. Nothing will happen. http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 18 Clicker question 2 Set frequency to AD To further prove the de Broglie wave hypothesis, they increased the electron energy. If de Broglie’s # e’s theory is correct, what will happen? A. The peak will get larger 0 500 B. The peak will get smaller scatt. angle θ C. The peak will shift to smaller angle D. The peak will shift to larger angle E. Nothing will happen. Increasing energy increases momentum which decreases the angle θ Davisson – Germer tried this as well and it worked. 1/p http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 19 More on matter waves Two slit interference has been seen with electrons, protons, neutrons, and atoms. Electron diffraction, like X-ray diffraction can be used to determine the crystal structure of solids Points come from a regular crystal. Rings come from many crystals randomly arranged. http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 20 Electron microscope Microscopes limited by the wavelength of light so visible light microscopes cannot resolve objects < 500nm. Electrons have much smaller wavelengths so get better resolution from electron microscopes. Scanning electron microscope reflects off the surface (for example of snow flakes) A Transmission electron microscope sends electrons through thin samples http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 21 Different Probes Many different microscopes used in laboratories to investigate material properties. Ordinary light not very good below 1 micron. Low energy electrons used to study surface effects – called LEED – Low energy electron diffraction. X-rays good for electronic structure – light sources Neutrons – used to study crystals containing hydrogen http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys2170/ Physics 2170 – Fall 2013 22 Waves and Wave-Function We will start talking about waves and a particle’s wavefunction – on Friday. Should read about it In the book – 6.4 – 6.8.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wave Nature of Matter: Made Easy (Lesson 3) Matter Behaving As a Wave? Ridiculous!
    Wave Nature of Matter: Made Easy (Lesson 3) Matter behaving as a wave? Ridiculous! Compiled by Dr. SuchandraChatterjee Associate Professor Department of Chemistry Surendranath College Remember? I showed you earlier how Einstein (in 1905) showed that the photoelectric effect could be understood if light were thought of as a stream of particles (photons) with energy equal to hν. I got my Nobel prize for that. Louis de Broglie (in 1923) If light can behave both as a wave and a particle, I wonder if a particle can also behave as a wave? Louis de Broglie I’ll try messing around with some of Einstein’s formulae and see what I can come up with. I can imagine a photon of light. If it had a “mass” of mp, then its momentum would be given by p = mpc where c is the speed of light. Now Einstein has a lovely formula that he discovered linking mass with energy (E = mc2) and he also used Planck’s formula E = hf. What if I put them equal to each other? mc2 = hf mc2 = hf So for my photon 2 mp = hfhf/c/c So if p = mpc = hfhf/c/c p = mpc = hf/chf/c Now using the wave equation, c = fλ (f = c/λ) So mpc = hc /λc /λc= h/λ λ = hp So you’re saying that a particle of momentum p has a wavelength equal to Planck’s constant divided by p?! Yes! λ = h/p It will be known as the de Broglie wavelength of the particle Confirmation of de Broglie’s ideas De Broglie didn’t have to wait long for his idea to be shown to be correct.
    [Show full text]
  • Famous Physicists Himansu Sekhar Fatesingh
    Fun Quiz FAMOUS PHYSICISTS HIMANSU SEKHAR FATESINGH 1. The first woman to 6. He first succeeded in receive the Nobel Prize in producing the nuclear physics was chain reaction. a. Maria G. Mayer a. Otto Hahn b. Irene Curie b. Fritz Strassmann c. Marie Curie c. Robert Oppenheimer d. Lise Meitner d. Enrico Fermi 2. Who first suggested electron 7. The credit for discovering shells around the nucleus? electron microscope is often a. Ernest Rutherford attributed to b. Neils Bohr a. H. Germer c. Erwin Schrödinger b. Ernst Ruska d. Wolfgang Pauli c. George P. Thomson d. Clinton J. Davisson 8. The wave theory of light was 3. He first measured negative first proposed by charge on an electron. a. Christiaan Huygens a. J. J. Thomson b. Isaac Newton b. Clinton Davisson c. Hermann Helmholtz c. Louis de Broglie d. Augustin Fresnel d. Robert A. Millikan 9. He was the first scientist 4. The existence of quarks was to find proof of Einstein’s first suggested by theory of relativity a. Max Planck a. Edwin Hubble b. Sheldon Glasgow b. George Gamow c. Murray Gell-Mann c. S. Chandrasekhar d. Albert Einstein d. Arthur Eddington 10. The credit for development of the cyclotron 5. The phenomenon of goes to: superconductivity was a. Carl Anderson b. Donald Glaser discovered by c. Ernest O. Lawrence d. Charles Wilson a. Heike Kamerlingh Onnes b. Alex Muller c. Brian D. Josephson 11. Who first proposed the use of absolute scale d. John Bardeen of Temperature? a. Anders Celsius b. Lord Kelvin c. Rudolf Clausius d.
    [Show full text]
  • Physics Here at Uva from 1947-49
    PHYS 202 Lecture 22 Professor Stephen Thornton April 18, 2005 Reading Quiz Which of the following is most correct? 1) Electrons act only as particles. 2) Electrons act only as waves. 3) Electrons act as particles sometimes and as waves other times. 4) It is not possible by any experiment to determine whether an electron acts as a particle or a wave. Answer: 3 In some cases we explain electron phenomena as a particle –for example, an electron hitting a TV screen. In other cases we explain it as a wave – in the case of a two slit diffraction experiment showing interference. Exam III Wednesday, April 20 Chapters 25-28 20 questions, bring single sheet of paper with anything written on it. Number of questions for each chapter will be proportional to lecture time spent on chapter. Last time Blackbody radiation Max Planck and his hypothesis Photoelectric effect Photons Photon momentum Compton effect Worked Exam 3 problems Today de Broglie wavelengths Particles have wavelike properties Wave-particle duality Heisenberg uncertainty principle Tunneling Models of atoms Emission spectra Work problems Finish last year’s exam problems de Broglie wavelength We saw that light, which we think of as a wave, can have particle properties. Can particles also have wavelike properties? A rule of nature says that if something is not forbidden, then it will probably happen. h λ = all objects p How can we demonstrate these wavelike properties? Typical wavelengths Tennis ball, m = 57 g, v = 60 mph; λ ~ 10-34 m. NOT POSSIBLE to detect!! 50 eV electron; λ ~ 0.2 x 10-9 m or 0.2 nm We need slits of the order of atomic dimensions.
    [Show full text]
  • Electron Diffraction V2.1
    Electron Diffraction v2.1 Background. This experiment demonstrates the wave-like nature of an electron as first postulated by Louis de Brogile in 1924. All particles including electrons have a wavelength inversely related to momentum: l = h/p. (1) It was well known at the time that the light could be diffracted by a periodic grating, where the grating period is of the order of the electromagnetic wavelength. If an electron has wave properties, then there might be a suitable physical grating to diffract it. Max von Laue had first suggested that periodic planes of atoms in a solid could serve as a grating. X- ray reflection experiments of Lawrence Bragg confirmed this and gave an estimate of the inter- Davisson and Germer in 1927 atomic spacing. Planes of atoms in a solid can also provide the appropriate grating spacing to cause electron diffraction. In a Nobel Prize winning experiment at Bell Labs in New Jersey, Clinton Davisson and Lester Germer used crystalline nickel to diffract electrons and prove their existence as waves. An independent experiment was done around the same time by George Thomson in Scotland. This was foundational work for the transmission electron microscope (TEM). The present experiment uses an ultra-thin polycrystalline graphite layer in place of nickel as the diffraction grating. Graphite forms as single planes of carbon atoms in a hexagonal arrangement shown in Figure 1. Vertical planes are not chemically bonded to adjacent planes. Instead they are more loosely held by the electrostatic van der Waals force but the atoms are remain aligned vertically.
    [Show full text]
  • Nobel Prizes Social Network
    Nobel prizes social network Marie Skłodowska Curie (Phys.1903, Chem.1911) Nobel prizes social network Henri Becquerel (Phys.1903) Pierre Curie (Phys.1903) = Marie Skłodowska Curie (Phys.1903, Chem.1911) Nobel prizes social network Henri Becquerel (Phys.1903) Pierre Curie (Phys.1903) = Marie Skłodowska Curie (Phys.1903, Chem.1911) Irène Joliot-Curie (Chem.1935) Nobel prizes social network Henri Becquerel (Phys.1903) Pierre Curie (Phys.1903) = Marie Skłodowska Curie (Phys.1903, Chem.1911) Irène Joliot-Curie (Chem.1935) = Frédéric Joliot-Curie (Chem.1935) Nobel prizes social network Henri Becquerel (Phys.1903) Pierre Curie (Phys.1903) = Marie Skłodowska Curie (Phys.1903, Chem.1911) Paul Langevin Irène Joliot-Curie (Chem.1935) = Frédéric Joliot-Curie (Chem.1935) Nobel prizes social network Henri Becquerel (Phys.1903) Pierre Curie (Phys.1903) = Marie Skłodowska Curie (Phys.1903, Chem.1911) Paul Langevin Maurice de Broglie Louis de Broglie (Phys.1929) Irène Joliot-Curie (Chem.1935) = Frédéric Joliot-Curie (Chem.1935) Nobel prizes social network Sir J. J. Thomson (Phys.1906) Henri Becquerel (Phys.1903) Pierre Curie (Phys.1903) = Marie Skłodowska Curie (Phys.1903, Chem.1911) Paul Langevin Maurice de Broglie Louis de Broglie (Phys.1929) Irène Joliot-Curie (Chem.1935) = Frédéric Joliot-Curie (Chem.1935) Nobel prizes social network (more) Sir J. J. Thomson (Phys.1906) Nobel prizes social network (more) Sir J. J. Thomson (Phys.1906) Owen Richardson (Phys.1928) Nobel prizes social network (more) Sir J. J. Thomson (Phys.1906) Owen Richardson (Phys.1928) Clinton Davisson (Phys.1937) Nobel prizes social network (more) Sir J. J. Thomson (Phys.1906) Owen Richardson (Phys.1928) Charlotte Richardson = Clinton Davisson (Phys.1937) Nobel prizes social network (more) Sir J.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Principle of Wave–Particle Duality: an Overview
    3 1 The Principle of Wave–Particle Duality: An Overview 1.1 Introduction In the year 1900, physics entered a period of deep crisis as a number of peculiar phenomena, for which no classical explanation was possible, began to appear one after the other, starting with the famous problem of blackbody radiation. By 1923, when the “dust had settled,” it became apparent that these peculiarities had a common explanation. They revealed a novel fundamental principle of nature that wascompletelyatoddswiththeframeworkofclassicalphysics:thecelebrated principle of wave–particle duality, which can be phrased as follows. The principle of wave–particle duality: All physical entities have a dual character; they are waves and particles at the same time. Everything we used to regard as being exclusively a wave has, at the same time, a corpuscular character, while everything we thought of as strictly a particle behaves also as a wave. The relations between these two classically irreconcilable points of view—particle versus wave—are , h, E = hf p = (1.1) or, equivalently, E h f = ,= . (1.2) h p In expressions (1.1) we start off with what we traditionally considered to be solely a wave—an electromagnetic (EM) wave, for example—and we associate its wave characteristics f and (frequency and wavelength) with the corpuscular charac- teristics E and p (energy and momentum) of the corresponding particle. Conversely, in expressions (1.2), we begin with what we once regarded as purely a particle—say, an electron—and we associate its corpuscular characteristics E and p with the wave characteristics f and of the corresponding wave.
    [Show full text]
  • INDUSTRIAL STRENGTH by MICHAEL RIORDAN
    THE INDUSTRIAL STRENGTH by MICHAEL RIORDAN ORE THAN A DECADE before J. J. Thomson discovered the elec- tron, Thomas Edison stumbled across a curious effect, patented Mit, and quickly forgot about it. Testing various carbon filaments for electric light bulbs in 1883, he noticed a tiny current trickling in a single di- rection across a partially evacuated tube into which he had inserted a metal plate. Two decades later, British entrepreneur John Ambrose Fleming applied this effect to invent the “oscillation valve,” or vacuum diode—a two-termi- nal device that converts alternating current into direct. In the early 1900s such rectifiers served as critical elements in radio receivers, converting radio waves into the direct current signals needed to drive earphones. In 1906 the American inventor Lee de Forest happened to insert another elec- trode into one of these valves. To his delight, he discovered he could influ- ence the current flowing through this contraption by changing the voltage on this third electrode. The first vacuum-tube amplifier, it served initially as an improved rectifier. De Forest promptly dubbed his triode the audion and ap- plied for a patent. Much of the rest of his life would be spent in forming a se- ries of shaky companies to exploit this invention—and in an endless series of legal disputes over the rights to its use. These pioneers of electronics understood only vaguely—if at all—that individual subatomic particles were streaming through their devices. For them, electricity was still the fluid (or fluids) that the classical electrodynamicists of the nineteenth century thought to be related to stresses and disturbances in the luminiferous æther.
    [Show full text]
  • (Owen Willans) Richardson
    O. W. (Owen Willans) Richardson: An Inventory of His Papers at the Harry Ransom Center Descriptive Summary Creator: Richardson, O. W. (Owen Willans), 1879-1959 Title: O. W. (Owen Willans) Richardson Papers Dates: 1898-1958 (bulk 1920-1940) Extent: 112 document boxes, 2 oversize boxes (49.04 linear feet), 1 oversize folder (osf), 5 galley folders (gf) Abstract: The papers of Sir O. W. (Owen Willans) Richardson, the Nobel Prize-winning British physicist who pioneered the field of thermionics, contain research materials and drafts of his writings, correspondence, as well as letters and writings from numerous distinguished fellow scientists. Call Number: MS-3522 Language: Primarily English; some works and correspondence written in French, German, or Italian . Note: The Ransom Center gratefully acknowledges the assistance of the Center for History of Physics, American Institute of Physics, which provided funds to support the processing and cataloging of this collection. Access: Open for research Administrative Information Additional The Richardson Papers were microfilmed and are available on 76 Physical Format reels. Each item has a unique identifying number (W-xxxx, L-xxxx, Available: R-xxxx, or M-xxxx) that corresponds to the microfilm. This number was recorded on the file folders housing the papers and can also be found on catalog slips present with each item. Acquisition: Purchase, 1961 (R43, R44) and Gift, 2005 Processed by: Tessa Klink and Joan Sibley, 2014 Repository: The University of Texas at Austin, Harry Ransom Center Richardson, O. W. (Owen Willans), 1879-1959 MS-3522 2 Richardson, O. W. (Owen Willans), 1879-1959 MS-3522 Biographical Sketch The English physicist Owen Willans Richardson, who pioneered the field of thermionics, was also known for his work on photoelectricity, spectroscopy, ultraviolet and X-ray radiation, the electron theory, and quantum theory.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Interference of Molecules--Probing the Wave Nature of Matter
    Anu Venugopalan is on the faculty of the School of Basic and Applied Sciences, GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi. Her primary research interests are in the areas of Foundations of Quantum mechanics, Quantum Optics and Quantum Information. Address for Correspondence: University School of Basic and Applied Sciences, GGS Indraprastha University Kashmere Gate, Delhi - 11 0 453 e-mail: [email protected] arXiv:1211.3493v1 [physics.pop-ph] 15 Nov 2012 1 Quantum Interference of Molecules - Probing the Wave Nature of Matter Anu Venugopalan November 16, 2012 Abstract The double slit interference experiment has been famously described by Richard Feynman as containing the ”only mystery of quantum mechanics”. The history of quantum mechanics is intimately linked with the discovery of the dual nature of matter and radiation. While the double slit experiment for light is easily undert- sood in terms of its wave nature, the very same experiment for particles like the electron is somewhat more difficult to comprehend. By the 1920s it was firmly established that electrons have a wave nature. However, for a very long time, most discussions pertaining to interference experiments for particles were merely gedanken experiments. It took almost six decades after the establishment of its wave nature to carry out a ’double slit interference’ experiment for electrons. This set the stage for interference experiments with larger particles. In the last decade there has been spectacular progress in matter-wave interefernce experiments. To- day, molecules with over a hundred atoms can be made to interfere. In the following we discuss some of these exciting developments which probe new regimes of Nature, bringing us closer to the heart of quantum mechanics and its hidden mysteries.
    [Show full text]
  • Diffraction of Light Prelab by Dr
    Diffraction of Light Prelab by Dr. Christine P. Cheney, Department of Physics and Astronomy, 401 Nielsen Physics Building, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996-1200 © 2018 by Christine P. Cheney* *All rights are reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without the permission in writing from the author. Read the introduction to Diffraction in your lab manual.1 Light is very interesting because it can behave as a wave or as a particle. You will observe both types of properties in the Diffraction of Light lab but will focus on the wave-like properties. (The particle-like properties come from the two light sources, a helium-neon laser and a mercury discharge lamp. The colors of light that these sources emit are discrete colors that have energy E=hn where E is the energy of the light, h is Planck’s constant, and n is the frequency of the light. Each photon of light has energy hn. This aspect of light is particle-like, and you will learn more about the particle-like behavior of light next week in the Photoelectric Effect lab.) Diffraction is used to study materials. The lattice spacing in crystalline materials is very small. For example the lattice spacing of a NaCl crystal is 5.64 Å.2 This small spacing can be used as a diffraction grating for x-rays. X-rays have a wavelength range of 0.01- 10 nm.
    [Show full text]
  • Report and Opinion 2016;8(6) 1
    Report and Opinion 2016;8(6) http://www.sciencepub.net/report Beyond Einstein and Newton: A Scientific Odyssey Through Creation, Higher Dimensions, And The Cosmos Manjunath R Independent Researcher #16/1, 8 Th Main Road, Shivanagar, Rajajinagar, Bangalore: 560010, Karnataka, India [email protected], [email protected] “There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement.” : Lord Kelvin Abstract: General public regards science as a beautiful truth. But it is absolutely-absolutely false. Science has fatal limitations. The whole the scientific community is ignorant about it. It is strange that scientists are not raising the issues. Science means truth, and scientists are proponents of the truth. But they are teaching incorrect ideas to children (upcoming scientists) in schools /colleges etc. One who will raise the issue will face unprecedented initial criticism. Anyone can read the book and find out the truth. It is open to everyone. [Manjunath R. Beyond Einstein and Newton: A Scientific Odyssey Through Creation, Higher Dimensions, And The Cosmos. Rep Opinion 2016;8(6):1-81]. ISSN 1553-9873 (print); ISSN 2375-7205 (online). http://www.sciencepub.net/report. 1. doi:10.7537/marsroj08061601. Keywords: Science; Cosmos; Equations; Dimensions; Creation; Big Bang. “But the creative principle resides in Subaltern notable – built on the work of the great mathematics. In a certain sense, therefore, I hold it astronomers Galileo Galilei, Nicolaus Copernicus true that pure thought can
    [Show full text]
  • From the Executive Director Kathryn Sullivan to Receive Sigma Xi's Mcgovern Award
    May-June 2011 · Volume 20, Number 3 Kathryn Sullivan to From the Executive Director Receive Sigma Xi’s McGovern Award Annual Report In my report last year I challenged the membership to consider ormer astronaut the characteristics of successful associations. I suggested that we Kathryn D. emulate what successful associations do that others do not. This FSullivan, the first year as I reflect back on the previous fiscal year, I suggest that we need to go even further. U.S. woman to walk We have intangible assets that could, if converted to tangible outcomes, add to the in space, will receive value of active membership in Sigma Xi. I believe that standing up for high ethical Sigma Xi’s 2011 John standards, encouraging the earlier career scientist and networking with colleagues of diverse disciplines is still very relevant to our professional lives. Membership in Sigma P. McGovern Science Xi still represents recognition for scientific achievements, but the value comes from and Society Award. sharing with companions in zealous research. Since 1984, a highlight of Sigma Xi’s Stronger retention of members through better local programs would benefit the annual meeting has been the McGovern Society in many ways. It appears that we have continued to initiate new members in Lecture, which is made by the recipient of numbers similar to past years but retention has declined significantly. In addition, the the McGovern Medal. Recent recipients source of the new members is moving more and more to the “At-large” category and less and less through the Research/Doctoral chapters. have included oceanographer Sylvia Earle and Nobel laureates Norman Borlaug, Mario While Sigma Xi calls itself a “chapter-based” Society, we have found that only about half of our “active” members are affiliated with chapters in “good standing.” As long Molina and Roald Hoffmann.
    [Show full text]