David Cassidy's Biography of Werner Heisenberg
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Bringing out the Dead Alison Abbott Reviews the Story of How a DNA Forensics Team Cracked a Grisly Puzzle
BOOKS & ARTS COMMENT DADO RUVIC/REUTERS/CORBIS DADO A forensics specialist from the International Commission on Missing Persons examines human remains from a mass grave in Tomašica, Bosnia and Herzegovina. FORENSIC SCIENCE Bringing out the dead Alison Abbott reviews the story of how a DNA forensics team cracked a grisly puzzle. uring nine sweltering days in July Bosnia’s Million Bones tells the story of how locating, storing, pre- 1995, Bosnian Serb soldiers slaugh- innovative DNA forensic science solved the paring and analysing tered about 7,000 Muslim men and grisly conundrum of identifying each bone the million or more Dboys from Srebrenica in Bosnia. They took so that grieving families might find some bones. It was in large them to several different locations and shot closure. part possible because them, or blew them up with hand grenades. This is an important book: it illustrates the during those fate- They then scooped up the bodies with bull- unspeakable horrors of a complex war whose ful days in July 1995, dozers and heavy earth-moving equipment, causes have always been hard for outsiders to aerial reconnais- and dumped them into mass graves. comprehend. The author, a British journalist, sance missions by the Bosnia’s Million It was the single most inhuman massacre has the advantage of on-the-ground knowl- Bones: Solving the United States and the of the Bosnian war, which erupted after the edge of the war and of the International World’s Greatest North Atlantic Treaty break-up of Yugoslavia and lasted from 1992 Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP), an Forensic Puzzle Organization had to 1995, leaving some 100,000 dead. -
Nobel Prize Physicists Meet at Lindau
From 28 June to 2 July 1971 the German island town of Lindau in Nobel Prize Physicists Lake Constance close to the Austrian and Swiss borders was host to a gathering of illustrious men of meet at Lindau science when, for the 21st time, Nobel Laureates held their reunion there. The success of the first Lindau reunion (1951) of Nobel Prize win ners in medicine had inspired the organizers to invite the chemists and W. S. Newman the physicists in turn in subsequent years. After the first three-year cycle the United Kingdom, and an audience the dates of historical events. These it was decided to let students and of more than 500 from 8 countries deviations in the radiocarbon time young scientists also attend the daily filled the elegant Stadttheater. scale are due to changes in incident meetings so they could encounter The programme consisted of a num cosmic radiation (producing the these eminent men on an informal ber of lectures in the mornings, two carbon isotopes) brought about by and personal level. For the Nobel social functions, a platform dis variations in the geomagnetic field. Laureates too the Lindau gatherings cussion, an informal reunion between Thus chemistry may reveal man soon became an agreeable occasion students and Nobel Laureates and, kind’s remote past whereas its long for making or renewing acquain on the last day, the traditional term future could well be shaped by tances with their contemporaries, un steamer excursion on Lake Cons the developments mentioned by trammelled by the formalities of the tance to the island of Mainau belong Mössbauer, viz. -
Complementary & the Copenhagen Interpretation
Complementarity and the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics Click here to go to the UPSCALE home page. Click here to go to the Physics Virtual Bookshelf home page. Introduction Neils Bohr (1885 - 1962) was one of the giants in the development of Quantum Mechanics. He is best known for: 1. The development of the Bohr Model of the Atom in 1913. A small document on this topic is available here. 2. The principle of Complementarity, the "heart" of Bohr's search for the significance of the quantum idea. This principle led him to: 3. The Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. In this document we discuss Complementarity and then the Copenhagen Interpretation. But first we shall briefly discuss the general issue of interpretations of Quantum Mechanics, and briefly describe two interpretations. The discussion assumes some knowledge of the Feynman Double Slit, such as is discussed here; it also assumes some knowledge of Schrödinger's Cat, such as is discussed here. Finally, further discussion of interpretations of Quantum Mechanics can be meaningfully given with some knowledge of Bell's Theorem; a document on that topic is here. The level of discussion in what follows is based on an upper-year liberal arts course in modern physics without mathematics given at the University of Toronto. In that context, the discussion of Bell's Theorem mentioned in the previous paragraph is deferred until later. A recommended reference on the material discussed below is: F. David Peat, Einstein's Moon (Contemporary Books, 1990), ISBN 0-8092-4512-4 (cloth), 0-8092-3965-5 (paper). Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics Although the basic mathematical formalism of Quantum Mechanics was developed independently by Heisenberg and Schrödinger in 1926, a full and accepted interpretation of what that mathematics means still eludes us. -
Heisenberg's Visit to Niels Bohr in 1941 and the Bohr Letters
Klaus Gottstein Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut) Föhringer Ring 6 D-80805 Munich, Germany 26 February, 2002 New insights? Heisenberg’s visit to Niels Bohr in 1941 and the Bohr letters1 The documents recently released by the Niels Bohr Archive do not, in an unambiguous way, solve the enigma of what happened during the critical brief discussion between Bohr and Heisenberg in 1941 which so upset Bohr and made Heisenberg so desperate. But they are interesting, they show what Bohr remembered 15 years later. What Heisenberg remembered was already described by him in his memoirs “Der Teil und das Ganze”. The two descriptions are complementary, they are not incompatible. The two famous physicists, as Hans Bethe called it recently, just talked past each other, starting from different assumptions. They did not finish their conversation. Bohr broke it off before Heisenberg had a chance to complete his intended mission. Heisenberg and Bohr had not seen each other since the beginning of the war in 1939. In the meantime, Heisenberg and some other German physicists had been drafted by Army Ordnance to explore the feasibility of a nuclear bomb which, after the discovery of fission and of the chain reaction, could not be ruled out. How real was this theoretical possibility? By 1941 Heisenberg, after two years of intense theoretical and experimental investigations by the drafted group known as the “Uranium Club”, had reached the conclusion that the construction of a nuclear bomb would be feasible in principle, but technically and economically very difficult. He knew in principle how it could be done, by Uranium isotope separation or by Plutonium production in reactors, but both ways would take many years and would be beyond the means of Germany in time of war, and probably also beyond the means of Germany’s adversaries. -
Heisenberg and the Nazi Atomic Bomb Project, 1939-1945: a Study in German Culture
Heisenberg and the Nazi Atomic Bomb Project http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=ft838nb56t&chunk.id=0&doc.v... Preferred Citation: Rose, Paul Lawrence. Heisenberg and the Nazi Atomic Bomb Project, 1939-1945: A Study in German Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press, c1998 1998. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft838nb56t/ Heisenberg and the Nazi Atomic Bomb Project A Study in German Culture Paul Lawrence Rose UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS Berkeley · Los Angeles · Oxford © 1998 The Regents of the University of California In affectionate memory of Brian Dalton (1924–1996), Scholar, gentleman, leader, friend And in honor of my father's 80th birthday Preferred Citation: Rose, Paul Lawrence. Heisenberg and the Nazi Atomic Bomb Project, 1939-1945: A Study in German Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press, c1998 1998. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft838nb56t/ In affectionate memory of Brian Dalton (1924–1996), Scholar, gentleman, leader, friend And in honor of my father's 80th birthday ― ix ― ACKNOWLEDGMENTS For hospitality during various phases of work on this book I am grateful to Aryeh Dvoretzky, Director of the Institute of Advanced Studies of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, whose invitation there allowed me to begin work on the book while on sabbatical leave from James Cook University of North Queensland, Australia, in 1983; and to those colleagues whose good offices made it possible for me to resume research on the subject while a visiting professor at York University and the University of Toronto, Canada, in 1990–92. Grants from the College of the Liberal Arts and the Institute for the Arts and Humanistic Studies of The Pennsylvania State University enabled me to complete the research and writing of the book. -
Some Famous Physicists Ing Weyl’S Book Space, Time, Matter, the Same Book That Heisenberg Had Read As a Young Man
Heisenberg’s first graduate student was Felix Bloch. One day, while walking together, they started to discuss the concepts of space and time. Bloch had just finished read- Some Famous Physicists ing Weyl’s book Space, Time, Matter, the same book that Heisenberg had read as a young man. Still very much Anton Z. Capri† under the influence of this scholarly work, Bloch declared that he now understood that space was simply the field of Sometimes we are influenced by teachers in ways that, affine transformations. Heisenberg paused, looked at him, although negative, lead to positive results. This happened and replied, “Nonsense, space is blue and birds fly through to Werner Heisenberg1 and Max Born,2 both of whom it.” started out to be mathematicians, but switched to physics There is another version of why Heisenberg switched to due to encounters with professors. physics. At an age of 19, Heisenberg went to the University As a young student at the University of Munich, Heisen- of G¨ottingen to hear lectures by Niels Bohr.4 These lec- berg wanted to attend the seminar of Professor F. von tures were attended by physicists and their students from Lindemann,3 famous for solving the ancient problem of various universities and were jokingly referred to as “the squaring the circle. Heisenberg had Bohr festival season.” Here, Bohr expounded on his latest read Weyl’s book Space, Time, Matter theories of atomic structure. The young Heisenberg in the and, both excited and disturbed by the audience did not hesitate to ask questions when Bohr’s abstract mathematical arguments, had explanations were less than clear. -
Bohr's Complementarity and Kant's Epistemology
Bohr, 1913-2013, S´eminairePoincar´eXVII (2013) 145 { 166 S´eminairePoincar´e Bohr's Complementarity and Kant's Epistemology Michel Bitbol Archives Husserl ENS - CNRS 45, rue d'Ulm 75005 Paris, France Stefano Osnaghi ICI - Berlin Christinenstraße 18-19 10119, Berlin, Germany Abstract. We point out and analyze some striking analogies between Kant's transcendental method in philosophy and Bohr's approach of the fundamental issues raised by quantum mechanics. We argue in particular that some of the most controversial aspects of Bohr's views, as well as the philosophical concerns that led him to endorse such views, can naturally be understood along the lines of Kant's celebrated `Copernican' revolution in epistemology. 1 Introduction Contrary to received wisdom, Bohr's views on quantum mechanics did not gain uni- versal acceptance among physicists, even during the heyday of the so-called `Copen- hagen interpretation' (spanning approximately between 1927 and 1952). The `ortho- dox' approach, generally referred to as `the Copenhagen interpretation', was in fact a mixture of elements borrowed from Heisenberg, Dirac, and von Neumann, with a few words quoted from Bohr and due reverence for his pioneering work, but with no unconditional allegiance to his ideas [Howard2004][Camilleri2009]. Bohr's physical insight was, of course, never overtly put into question. Yet many of his colleagues found his reflections about the epistemological status of theoretical schemes, as well as his considerations on the limits of the representations employed by science, ob- scure and of little practical moment { in a word: too philosophical.1 In addition, it proved somehow uneasy to reach definite conclusions as to the true nature of this philosophy. -
Presentation Slides
How Did We Find Out About Quantum Mechanics? Dan Styer Department of Physics and Astronomy Oberlin College Max Planck (age 42 in 1900) Albert Einstein (age 26 in 1905) Einstein’s four 1905 papers: Quantum mechanics of light (heuristic photoelectric effect) Brownian motion (atoms exist!) On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies Does the Inertia of a Body Depend on its Energy Content? (E = mc2) Einstein’s four 1905 papers: Quantum mechanics of light (heuristic photoelectric effect) “is very revolutionary” Brownian motion (atoms exist!) On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies “a modification of the theory of space and time” Does the Inertia of a Body Depend on its Energy Content? (E = mc2) Niels Bohr (age 28 in 1913) Werner Heisenberg (age 24 in 1925) Werner Heisenberg (age 24 in 1925) Helgoland Göttingen Wolfgang Pauli (age 25 in 1925) Louise de Broglie (age 31 in 1923) Louise de Broglie Erwin Schrödinger (age 38 in 1925) Arosa, Switzerland Arosa, Switzerland Arosa, Switzerland Erwin Schrödinger (age 38 in 1925) Erwin Schrödinger Crater Schrödinger Matrix Mechanics (Heisenberg, Born) versus Wave Mechanics (Schrödinger) Matrix and Wave Mechanics proven equivalent in 1926 by Schrödinger, Pauli, and Carl Eckert (age 24) Carl Eckert (photo 1948) Paul A. M. Dirac (age 24 in 1926) Paul A. M. Dirac Satyendra Bose 1924-25: quantum mechanics applied to large number of particles (with A. Einstein) (age 31 in 1925) Satyendra Bose 1925: predicted a new phase of matter – solid, liquid, gas, and “Bose condensate” Michael Fisher 1970s: extended this work Experimental verification! 1995 Experimental verification! 1995 by Carl Wieman and Eric Cornell Experimental verification! extended to “fermionic condensate” by Deborah Jin in 2003 Linus Pauling (age 30 in 1931) Linus Pauling and family Linus Pauling Linus Pauling gave his name to Linus Torvalds who gave his name to Linux Maria Goeppert Mayer nuclear shell theory, 1950 Crater Goeppert Mayer on Venus Maria Goeppert Mayer 1950: nuclear shell theory 1960: appointed professor at U. -
Werner Heisenberg | E&S Magazine 5 |E&S Werner Heisenberg in 1926
One of the less appealing parts of Heisenberg’s career was his work on the German atomic program during World War II. Although he was criticized for not being loyal enough to the Nazi regime, he found himself working for them, in direct opposition to the Manhattan project, on a bomb. He was unsuccessful, mainly due to factors outside of his control. Some attribute this failure to sheer incompetence on his part and others to outright sabotage against the fascist powers. Either way, the Germans lacked the degree of success achieved by the Manhattan project. Heisenberg’s Theory had major implications on both physics HISTORICAL BIO HISTORICAL and the way that life can be viewed in general. Obviously, this presented some troubling challenges to thinkers at the time. When Heisenberg dared to challenge the worldview of others, he made some enemies along the way. Among the opponents of his theories was Albert Einstein. Einstein was quoted as saying, “God does not play dice with the universe.” He was so troubled by this idea that he dedicated the last few years of his life to disproving the superposition theory. All this work was in vain though because his thought experiments only proved to strengthen the theory he sought to disprove. The universe is not as civilized as society would suggest. Werner Heisenberg in 1926. It is not objective and measurable but is chaotic and unpredictable. It cannot be said with certainty where an electron is: The electron’s location can only be predicted. Werner Heisenberg Maybe there are secrets not meant to be witnessed by By Jacob Christ, Chemical Engineering Sophomore mortal eyes. -
Overhearing Heisenberg
COMMENT BOOKS & ARTS former Yugoslavia — began excavat- ing the burial sites. They pieced together some evidence of when and how the mass killings had taken place from clues such as the bodies’ states of decay, the times and dates on their self-winding watches, INTERFOTO/AKG-IMAGES and the characteristic patterns of damage caused to skulls by bullets. Analysis of the colours and textures of soils pointed to where some of the bones had first been dumped. For example, chips of glass indicated burial near a glass factory in the area. The task of identifying the bones was exquisitely difficult. The bulldozers had broken up the bodies, and the pieces had been mixed up in the dumper trucks transporting them to new burial sites. DNA analysis of each bone was the only possible method of conclusive identifica- tion, so the ICMP set up its lab. Left to right: Werner Heisenberg, Max von Laue and Otto Hahn in Göttingen, Germany, in 1946. At first, this remarkable operation ran on a shoestring. Members invented PHYSICS cheap alternatives for equipment, such as adapting a chicken rotisserie from the local market to stir DNA solutions. All of these staff (many of them “massively Overhearing Heisenberg adaptable” graduates, Jennings writes) were locals, who could easily commu- Ann Finkbeiner ponders a script inspired by the 1945 nicate with the traumatized relatives of internment of eminent German physicists in England. the missing. This helped them to collect the blood samples for the DNA analysis needed for comparison with DNA from y July 1945, the Allies and Germans had Farm Hall the Germans came to the bones. -
A Tribute to Enrico Fermi
A TriBuTE To ENriCo FErMi * henk Kubbinga * University of Groningen (The Netherlands) * DOI: 10.1051/ epn /2009803 In the history of physics, Italy has a place of its own. The hightimes of Galileo and Torricelli were followed by those of Galvani and Volta. But not much happened after 1830. Early in the 20 th century, though, the spirit of Galileo seemed to be reincarnated in Enrico Fermi (1901-1954). s a youngster, Fermi attended the public Einstein, Kronig and Goudsmit. At the time the quanti - schools of Rome, learned Latin and Greek, zation of a ‘gas’ of equal particles had his particular and had no trouble in reciting poems [1]. attention. In 1926 this research gave way to his first AAer the baccalaureat he enrolled at the major contribution to theoretical physics; it was on the Scuola Normale Superiore, at Pisa, to study mathematics ‘Quantization of the ideal monoatomic gas’. e leading and the language of science, i.e. German. e charming idea was to treat the translation of molecules between lad soon taught his teachers: as a second year’s student he the parallel walls of a container as a periodic, and there - lectured on the quantum theory and the Bohr-Som - fore quantizable, phenomenon. Instead of the container merfeld atom. Fermi’s first post-doc trip abroad was to Fermi, next, posited a radial potential field around a cen - Göttingen, the contemporary Mecca of theoretical phy - tral point – say, the origin of a Cartesian system of sics. ere he worked with Max Born and the latter’s axes –, much like the Bohr-Sommerfeld atom. -
The Beginning of the Nuclear Age
The Beginning of the Nuclear Age M. SHIFMAN 1 Theoretical Physics Institute, University of Minnesota 1 Introduction A few years ago I delivered a lecture course for pre-med freshmen students. It was a required calculus-based introductory course, with a huge class of nearly 200. The problem was that the majority of students had a limited exposure to physics, and, what was even worse, low interest in this subject. They had an impression that a physics course was a formal requirement and they would never need physics in their future lives. Besides, by the end of the week they were apparently tired. To remedy this problem I decided that each Friday I would break the standard succession of topics, and tell them of something physics-related but { simultaneously { entertaining. Three or four Friday lectures were devoted to why certain Hollywood movies contradict laws of Nature. After looking through fragments we discussed which particular laws were grossly violated and why. I remember that during one Friday lecture I captivated students with TV sci-fi miniseries on a catastrophic earthquake entitled 10.5, and then we talked about real-life earthquakes. Humans have been recording earthquakes for nearly 4,000 years. The deadliest one happened in China in 1556 A.D. On January 23 of that year, a powerful quake killed an estimated 830,000 people. By today's estimate its Richter scale magnitude was about 8.3. The strongest earthquake ever recorded was the 9.5-magnitude Valdivia earthquake in Chile which occurred in 1960. My remark that in passing from 9.5.