...
首页> 外文期刊>The Physics Teacher >A Century-Old Question: Doesa Crookes Paddle Wheel Cathode Ray Tube Demonstrate that Electrons Carry Momentum?
【24h】

A Century-Old Question: Doesa Crookes Paddle Wheel Cathode Ray Tube Demonstrate that Electrons Carry Momentum?

机译:一个古老的问题:克鲁克斯桨轮阴极射线管是否证明电子具有动量?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In 1879,in the midst of the debate between English and continental scientists about the nature of cathode rays, William Crookes conducted an experiment in which a small mill or "paddle wheel" was pushed along tracks inside a cathode ray tube (CRT) (similar to that shown in Fig. 1) when connected to a high-voltage induction coil. Crookes attributed the motion of the wheel to momentum transfer from the cathode rays (electrons) to the wheel,~1 and interpreted the experiment as providing evidence that cathode rays were particles. In 1903 Thomson discounted Crookes' interpretation by calculating that the rate of momentum transfer (which he estimated at no more than 2 × 10~(-3) dyn, equivalent to 2×10~(-8) N) would be far too small to account for the observed motion of the wheel,~2 instead attributing the motion to the radiometric effect. The misconception was not laid to rest, however, and despite an effort in 1961 to draw attention to Thomsons original work and so remove the error from textbooks,~3 the notion that a Crookes paddle wheel CRT demonstrates that electrons carry momentum continues to be taught in high school physics courses~4 and wheel. We then measured the actual acceleration of the wheel in the CRT by video analysis of its motion and determined the moment of inertia of the wheel along with its mass and dimensions. We could then compare the force, which really acts on the wheel to produce the observed motion to the maximum impulsive force that is supplied by the electrons. Our measurements yield a maximum impulsive force due to the electrons [F_(el) = (1.1± 0.3)×10~(-8) N], which is within a factor of two of Thomsons estimate, and which is more than two orders of magnitude smaller than the force that is responsible for the observed acceleration of the paddle wheel [F_w = (6 ± 2)×10~(-6) N]. This means that the rotation of the wheel is certainly not due to transferred momentum from the electron beam, and the results of the experiment should not be taught to students as proof that electrons are particles with mass that carry momentum.
机译:1879年,在英国和大陆科学家之间就阴极射线的性质展开的辩论中,威廉·克鲁克斯(William Crookes)进行了一项实验,其中沿着阴极射线管(CRT)内的轨道推动小型研磨机或“桨轮”(类似当连接到高压感应线圈时,其最大电流为图1中所示的电压)。克鲁克斯将车轮的运动归因于从阴极射线(电子)到车轮的动量传递,〜1并将实验解释为提供了阴极射线是粒子的证据。 1903年,汤姆森通过计算动量传递速率(他估计不超过2×10〜(-3)dyn,相当于2×10〜(-8)N)来推翻克鲁克斯的解释,这太小了为了说明所观察到的车轮运动,〜2而是将运动归因于辐射度效应。然而,尽管人们在1961年做出了努力吸引汤姆森的原创作品,并因此消除了教科书中的错误,但误解并未消除,〜3克鲁斯桨轮CRT证明电子携带动量的观点仍在继续在高中物理课程中学习〜4和车轮。然后,我们通过视频分析CRT的运动来测量CRT中车轮的实际加速度,并确定车轮的惯性矩及其质量和尺寸。然后,我们可以将实际作用在车轮上以产生观察到的运动的力与电子提供的最大脉冲力进行比较。我们的测量由于电子[F_(el)=(1.1±0.3)×10〜(-8)N]而产生最大脉冲力,该力在汤姆森估计的两倍之内,并且超过两个数量级其大小小于观察到的桨轮加速度的力[F_w =(6±2)×10〜(-6)N]。这意味着车轮的旋转当然不是由于电子束传递的动量引起的,并且不应向学生传授实验结果,以证明电子是具有动量质量的粒子。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号