Bulletin of the American Physical Society
2007 APS April Meeting
Volume 52, Number 3
Saturday–Tuesday, April 14–17, 2007; Jacksonville, Florida
Session E10: History of Physics I |
Hide Abstracts |
Sponsoring Units: FHP Chair: Paul Halpern, University of the Sciences in Philadelphia Room: Hyatt Regency Jacksonville Riverfront City Terrace 6 |
Saturday, April 14, 2007 3:30PM - 3:54PM |
E10.00001: Toward the Standard Model: The Transformation of Particle Physics Experiments, 1964-1979 Michael Riordan During the 1970s, particle physics experienced a major transformation in the way experiments were performed. At the outset fixed-target experiments employing bubble chambers as detectors dominated, and a plethora of new mesons and baryons were discovered using this approach. By the late 1970s, bubble-chamber experiments were in deep decline. The dominant form of experimentation became the collider experiment, using a large electronic detector encompassing most of the solid angle surrounding the point of collision between two particle beams. Collider experiments soon began to involve hundreds of physicists and were especially well suited to examining phenomena at the level of leptons, quarks and gauge bosons --- the fundamental elements of the emerging Standard Model of particle physics. I will discuss how this subtle but important transformation in particle physics occurred, focusing on three pivotal experiments involved in the discovery of quarks: the MIT-SLAC deep-inelastic electron-scattering experiment on the SLAC linac; the CERN-Columbia-Rochester proton-proton scattering experiment on the CERN ISR; and the SLAC-LBL electron-positron scattering experiment on the SPEAR collider. [Preview Abstract] |
Saturday, April 14, 2007 3:54PM - 4:06PM |
E10.00002: H. J. Bhabha and the birth of the second family of elementary particles Ramanath Cowsik Homi Jehangir Bhabha was one of the great pioneers of theoretical high energy physics, known to present day physicists through extensive eponymous citations to Bhabha scattering. Perhaps because of this, much of his other superlative contributions have been well nigh forgotten. In this presentation, we provide an overview of a sequence of papers written by Bhabha during an 11-month period between December 1936 and October 1937 that argue in a compelling way for the presence of a massive charged particle very similar to the electron in every way, except for its mass, which he estimated to be in excess of 100 m$_{e}$. This particle is called a muon and today it is classified as a member of the second family of elementary constituents of matter, along with the muon-neutrino, charmed and strange quarks. These three new members of the family were discovered after a gap of nearly 25 years; in the decade of the 1960's. [Preview Abstract] |
Saturday, April 14, 2007 4:06PM - 4:18PM |
E10.00003: History of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Relation Dan Maronde, Costas Efthimiou The Heisenberg uncertainty relation is probably the most widely recognized expression used in Quantum Mechanics. The concept it represents captures the essence of the break modern physics made with classical Newtonian physics early in the 20$^{th}$ century. Here we give a brief history of the motivation for, inspiration leading to, and development of this famous inequality. [Preview Abstract] |
Saturday, April 14, 2007 4:18PM - 4:30PM |
E10.00004: Heisenberg: Paralleling Scientific and Historical Methods Calla Cofield Werner Heisenberg is an important historical subject within the physics community partly because his actions as a human being are discussed nearly as often as his work as a physicist. But does the scientific community establish it's historical ideas with the same methods and standards as it's scientific conclusions? I interviewed Heisenberg's son, Jochen Heisenberg, a professor of physics at UNH. Despite a great amount of literature on Werner Heisenberg, only one historian has interviewed Jochen about his father and few have interviewed Werner's wife. Nature is mysterious and unpredictable, but it doesn't lie or distort like humans, and we believe it can give ``honest'' results. But are we keeping the same standards with history that we do with science? Are we holding historians to these standards and if not, is it up to scientists to not only be keepers of scientific understanding, but historical understanding as well? Shouldn't we record history by using the scientific method, by weighing the best sources of data differently than the less reliable, and are we right to be as stubborn about changing our views on history as we are about changing our views on nature? [Preview Abstract] |
Saturday, April 14, 2007 4:30PM - 4:42PM |
E10.00005: Early Photons from the Early Universe Virginia Trimble The fame of the 3K cosmic, microwave, background, black body, relict, isotropic, thermal radiation has eclipsed that of all its rivals. But the universe is actually pervaded by backgrounds of electromagnetic radiation at all wavelengths, not to mention particles, neutrinos, magnetic fields, and gravitational radiation. The talk will explore the history of predictions and discoveries of some of these as well as the, at least six, prediscoveries and near misses of the CMB itself. [Preview Abstract] |
Saturday, April 14, 2007 4:42PM - 4:54PM |
E10.00006: ABSTRACT WITHDRAWN |
Saturday, April 14, 2007 4:54PM - 5:06PM |
E10.00007: From Spectrum Analysis to Spectrochemical Analysis: Redefining the Boundary of Spectroscopy Mina Park In 1930s-1940s, there were attempts to redefine the boundary of spectroscopy. First, spectroscopists who had been mainly trained as physicists tried to extend an area of spectroscopy beyond physics and physical astronomy by providing diverse examples of how to use spectroscopy in many fields of sciences and industry. Second, some spectroscopists attempted to redefine their professional identity within physics by organizing a new society for applied spectroscopy and trying to separate from optical society. Third, instrument makers helped to decrease resistance for spectroscopy to enter new fields by making more usable spectroscopes for who didn't have expertise in spectroscopy. Why did spectroscopists try these attempts in 1930s-1940s? Why did spectroscopy try to change its boundary within physics and beyond physics? In 1930s, spectroscopists should find out new sets of problems as the golden age of spectroscopy which was brought by quantum mechanics had been over. They found new opportunities in spectrochemical analysis which analyzed materials by spectrum and as spectrochemical analysis was more effective in chemistry, biology and metallurgy rather than in physics, they tried to redefine spectroscopy's boundary and their professional identity. In addition, instrument makers' interests to extend a spectroscopes market also contributed for this change. [Preview Abstract] |
Saturday, April 14, 2007 5:06PM - 5:18PM |
E10.00008: Who First Discovered the Mass Limit of a Degenerate Star? Michael Nauenberg The discovery of a limit for the mass of white dwarfs is attributed solely to S. Chandrasekhar, whose name is attached to this limit. But as it is often the case, the history of this discovery is more nuanced. Actually, Chandrasekhar was anticipated by E.C. Stoner, a physicist at Leeds, who also played a crucial role in Pauli's discovery of the exclusion principle. Evidently Stoner's interest in degenerate stars came from Fowler's application of the the exclusion principle to the solution of the puzzle concerning the extremely high density of white dwarfs which could not be explained by classical physics. Although Stoner wrote several brilliant papers on the subject, and Chandrasekhar used Stoner's relativistic equation of state for his later calculation, Stoner's contribution have been forgotten now. [Preview Abstract] |
Follow Us |
Engage
Become an APS Member |
My APS
Renew Membership |
Information for |
About APSThe American Physical Society (APS) is a non-profit membership organization working to advance the knowledge of physics. |
© 2024 American Physical Society
| All rights reserved | Terms of Use
| Contact Us
Headquarters
1 Physics Ellipse, College Park, MD 20740-3844
(301) 209-3200
Editorial Office
100 Motor Pkwy, Suite 110, Hauppauge, NY 11788
(631) 591-4000
Office of Public Affairs
529 14th St NW, Suite 1050, Washington, D.C. 20045-2001
(202) 662-8700