FROM ALPHA PARTICLE TO BOSONS WHY SO MANY QUARKS AND E = mc2

By V. Laxmanan, Sc. D. ABSTRACT

A brief overview of developments in nuclear physics from the discovery of radioactivity, the electron, and the conception of particles called the bosons is presented here. The Planck and Bose methods of deriving the blackbody radiation law are highlighted along with the interesting puzzle of too many quarks in the alpha particle. It is suggested that the -decay process can be coaxed to yield a new source of energy, akin to nuclear fission, if the extra quarks, not needed for electric charge conservation, can be shed. Perhaps, the new International Linear Collider (ILC) to be built just outside Tokyo, Japan, can be used to test this proposal.

The International Linear Collider (ILC), a 30 km long next generation collider that Japan has agreed to construct on the outskirts of Tokyo. Courtesy: http://talkmag.in/cms/images/50/1.jpg
________________________________________________________________________ Email address: vlaxmanan@hotmail.com The author is a retired research professional, with advanced degrees in Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science and Engineering who has spent his entire professional career in leading US research institutions, in academia ( MIT and CWRU), in government (NASA), and in corporate research labs (Allied Chemical Corporate R & D, now part of Honeywell, and the General Motors Research Labs). He has also published many widely cited scientific articles in Page 1 of 23

leading peer-reviewed international journals in both physics and the materials sciences. His current research interests include the study of business, financial, and economic data using methods commonly used in physics and the hard sciences. This has led him to propose a broad generalization of the Planck-Einstein ideas from quantum physics and their application to financial, economic, business, social, and political, sports and other systems. He has also recently been active in the analysis of the climate data, especially global average temperature data using similar methods (a new physics of global warming) and as recently created a Facebook group called Global Warming for the Layman; see https://www.facebook.com/groups/GWforlayman/, on January 5, 2014, aimed at discussing global warming data in an easy-to-understand manner, with short posts; see also https://www.facebook.com/groups/physicseconomicsandrealworld/

____________________________________________________________

Introduction
I have provided here a brief overview of some of the developments in nuclear physics, as I understand it, that led to the modern conception of a broad class of elementary particles called bosons [1, 2], with the Higgs boson, the subject of the 2013 Nobel Prize in physics [3-9] being the most famous of bosons. Many other particles which are classified as bosons are noted by the molecular biologist, Delbrck [10], in an article on the discovery of the BoseEinstein statistics. Delbrck received the Nobel Prize in Medicine, in 1969; see also some related articles [11-14] that provided the impetus for this proposal.

Image reproduced from article by Max Delbrck, a molecular biologist, who received the Nobel Prize in Medicine, in 1969. There is a minor graphical error in Figure 3 of Delbrcks article. Tom is missing in one of the sketches; see later in this article.
http://users.physik.fu-berlin.de/~pelster/Vorlesungen/WS1213/delbrueck.pdf
Page 2 of 23

This is then followed by some comments about the alpha particle (which is classified as a boson) and the well-known nuclear reaction known as beta decay, as interpreted using modern quark theory and/or the Standard Model for matter [15]. It is shown that controlling this reaction, to shed some quarks not needed for electric charge conservation, can yield a new source of energy.

From Radioactivity to bosons

Antonie Henrie Becquerel is generally credited with the discovery of radioactivity [16], in 1896, during the course of his experiments with uranium salts. He subsequently shared the Nobel Prize, in 1903, with two of his doctoral students Madame Curie and her husband Pierre Curie. This famous couple discovered other radioactive elements, notably thorium, radium and polonium [17-19]. The first elementary particle, known as the electron, was discovered by J. J. Thomson [20, 21], in his famous cathode ray experiments, a year later, in 1897. Subsequently, investigations by Rutherford and others [16, 22] revealed that naturally radioactive elements emit three types of rays: the alpha rays, or alpha () particles, which are essentially helium nuclei (made up of two protons and two neutrons), beta () rays, which are the same as the negatively charged electrons discovered by J. J. Thomson, and the powerful and the highly penetrating gamma () rays, akin to X-rays, discovered earlier by Roentgen [23] in 1895. Roentgen was the first recipient of the Nobel Prize [24] in physics, in 1901. These discoveries, as the 19th century was coming to an end, also led to the widespread acceptance of the atomic view of matter by physicists, a view that was promoted by Boltzmann but which was widely resisted by his influential contemporaries such as Ernst Mach and Wilhelm Ostwald [25]. Planck [26-31] did not like Boltzmanns probabilistic interpretations. Indeed, the equation for entropy S = k ln W of a system of N particles, the corner stone of modern quantum physics, is engraved on Boltzmanns tombstone in Vienna [25]. Here k is the Boltzmann constant and the symbol W is derived from the German word Wahrscheinlichkeit meaning the frequency of occurrence of a macrostate, deduced using the theory of permutations and combinations.
Page 3 of 23

W = N! / (k N1! N2! N3! .. )

..(1)

Here W denotes the number of permutations of N things with repeated or identical elements Nk. In Boltzmanns conception, W denotes the number of possible microstates that yield the same macrostate of the system (with certain measurable thermodynamic properties), k denotes the product of all the factorials over all k and N = Nk is the summation over all particles (or, more generally, the microentities of any complex system). This is the formula used, for example, to determine the number of permutations of the word MISSISSIPPI with a total of 11 letters, with the repeated elements M = 1, I = 4, S = 4, and P = 2. The total permutations is therefore given by W = 11!/(4! 4! 2!) = 34,650; see Ref. [32]. The formula for W given here was also used by Bose [11-14, 33, 34], whose name is enshrined in physics with the particles called bosons, with the Higgs boson being the most famous of all, and with the Bose-Einstein Condensate (BEC). These were the subject of the Nobel Prizes in 2013 and 2001. With equation 1, the formula for permutations with repetitions, Bose was able to re-derive Plancks radiation law, without invoking any classical arguments, see Refs. [11, 33, 34] and led to what is known as Bose-Einstein statistics, and the conception of two broad classes of elementary particles, called fermions and bosons, by Paul Dirac [2, 10]. Planck, on the other hand, uses the formula for combinations with repetitions [35-37], and writes the entropy as SN = k ln R = k ln [(N + P 1)!/P! (N 1)!] ..(2)

As noted by Kragh [29], Planck uses equation 2 without attaching any probabilistic interpretations. He simply notes that the total energy of the system of N particles can be written in two different ways as, UN = NU = P. The product NU is the familiar way of looking at the total energy with U being the average energy of the system of N particles. The total energy can also be written as the product P times where P is a very large integer and is some elementary measure of energy, or what is now called the energy quantum. Thus, R represents the number of ways of distributing the P energy elements
Page 4 of 23

among the N particles, giving rise to the property called entropy. After introducing T = dU/dS, or equivalently 1/T = dS/dU, the combined statement of the first and the second laws of thermodynamics, see Ref. [11], Planck arrives at the expression for the average energy U, which is given as: U = h /(eh/kT 1) ..(3)

Bose writes the entropy as SN = k ln W. This is then maximized subject to the constraints of total number of particles being equal to N and the total energy of the system being equal to the summation of the energies of various particles in the different microstates characterized by the elementary energy hs where s goes from 0 to ; see Refs. [33, 34]. This leads Bose to the full expression for Plancks law, without the need for any classical arguments. = (82/c3) [h /(eh/kT 1)] = AB = (82/c3)U ..(4)

Here is the frequency, c the speed of light, h the Planck constant, k the Boltzmann constant, T the temperature of the system and is the energy density, also called the spectral energy density since it relates to a specific frequency range. This can be written as the product AB where A = 82/c3 and B = U is the average energy of the system of N particles (referred to as oscillators, or resonators, by Planck, and as quanta by Bose). Only the factor B was determined by Planck using the new quantum arguments. The factor A was left undetermined and the classical result for A is used to and arrive at the final expression for the spectral energy density. Bose, on the other hand, is able to arrive at the product AB in its entirety, using a different expression for the entropy, and thus avoids the need for any classical arguments, see a more detailed discussion in Refs. [11-14]. With some reflection, it becomes obvious that Delbrcks criticism (see Figures 1 to 3 in his article) of the method of counting by Bose can be seen as fundamentally due to the difference between a permutation and a combination. Are we dealing with permutations or combinations in quantum physics, and what makes the particles or microstates, identical or indistinguishable? Delbrck, a molecular biologist, seems to view the problem as one of permutations, as indicated by the example of three people
Page 5 of 23

named Tom, Dick, and Harry being distributed between two rooms. He notes that Boses minds seems to get foggy when he begins to count the particles and that the latter is looking at the problem as one of finding how many (identical) people are present in the two rooms. Even Einstein seems to have gone along with this mistake since it obviously led to physically meaningful results the bosons as we observe in nature; see also the discussion of the Tom, Dick, Harry problem in Refs. [11-14].

Tom and Dick in living room Harry in kitchen

Bose seems to thinking about the quanta in this way, according to Delbrck, like identical men.

Figure 1: Delbrcks discussion of the mistake made by Bose in his counting of particles. The difference in viewpoints is the same as the difference between permutations and combinations.

Harry, Dick, and Tom, alone in kitchen and the other two in the living room.

Page 6 of 23

Why so many quarks?

The non-physicist thinks of matter as being made up of atoms and molecules (and some even think of it all as just stuff or junk) and some of us have progressed to the level of thinking of atoms as being made up of a nucleus which has positively charged particles, called protons, and electrically neutral particles, called neutrons, with the negatively charged electrons orbiting the nucleus. The total positive charge on the protons is exactly balanced by the total negative charge on the electrons. The existence of negatively charged particles called the electrons was discovered by Sir J. J. Thomson, in his famous cathode ray experiments. Thomsons Nobel lecture [21] is actually a beautiful exposition of how he arrived at this point of view and the charge/mass (e/m) ratio of the particles that we call the electron. The rays, which travel is straight lines, and also cast shadows, could be deflected by applying an electric field and also a magnetic field. The emanation of the rays, from an electrically heated filament, was inferred by the appearance of a bright spot on a screen coated with a fluorescent material. This spot moves with the application of the electric and magnetic forces. And, with the simultaneous application of both an electric and the magnetic field, the deflection from the straight line path was nullified. However, these experiments, only yielded the ratio e/m. The absolute magnitude of the electrical charge e on the electron was determined later by Millikan in his famous oil drop experiments [38-42]. Rutherfords gold foil experiments (positively charged alpha particles were used as projectiles and hurled at a thin gold foil) led to the conclusion that within the atom must exist a highly concentrated region, called the nucleus, which carries the positive charge. This led to the view of the atom as a miniature solar system, with electric forces replacing gravitational forces, as seen in the Bohrs model for the hydrogen atom, the simplest of all atoms with a single proton and a single electron. Then, in the 1950s, a virtual zoo of more than 100 particles had been discovered [43-46], some found in cosmic rays (such as the meson) and some in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, where physicists had started
Page 7 of 23

using accelerated proton beams (instead of positively charged alpha particles from radioactive nuclei) as the high energy source to bombard a target. Just ram the high energy proton beams into a target and watch what happens! From linear accelerators, to colliders, each new generation of such machines yielded higher and higher energy proton beams. The CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC), which has led to the discovery of the Higgs boson, is just the latest of these high energy machines. And, new, precision, colliders are still being conceived [47-51]. Such studies led to the modern view of matter, or what is called the Standard Model according to which six quarks (up and down, strange and charm, top and bottom) are now believed to be the fundamental constituents of matter [15, 45, 52]. Here we will consider the simplest of the quarks, called the Up (u) and the Down (d) quark. These quarks, conceived by Murray Gell-Mann [45], have fractional charges, as indicated in the schematic diagram of Figure 2.

U (+2/3 e)

d (-1/3 e)

Figure 2: The up quark (u) with an electric charge of + e and the down quark (d) with an electric charge of -e where e the electrical charge on the electron.

This leads us to the modern view of what a proton and the neutron look like. These elementary particles are now believed to be made up of three quarks, as indicated in Figure 3. This also leads us to the modern view of the fundamental process known as beta decay, or the production of beta rays from radioactive elements [53, 54]. Rutherford and others showed that beta rays were the negatively charged electrons discovered by J. J. Thomson.

Page 8 of 23

U d

Neutron Proton

U d

Figure 3: The neutron (n), on the left, is made up of one up quark (U) with an electric charge of + e and two down quarks (d) with an electric charge of -e each for a total charge of 0. The proton, on the right, is made up two up quarks (U) with an electric charge of +e each and one down quark (d) with an electric charge of -e for a total charge of +1e, the elementary electrical charge on the electron, the absolute magnitude of which was determined by Millikan in his famous oil drop experiments. When the neutron turns into a proton (as in beta decay), a down quark turns into an up quark. The neutron becomes a proton, p, and emits an electron, e-, along with a tiny particle called the neutrino. It is now called the electron anti-neutrino, e. n p + e- + e This viewpoint is easy to reconcile. Harder to reconcile, however, is the viewpoint that emerges from the quark model. According to the latter model, one of down quarks transforms into an up quark and emits a virtual W- boson which then decays into the electron and the electron anti-neutrino; see Feynman diagram for this process in Ref. [15] and in the Physics Hypertextbook [ 52, 54]. Heres how Gell-Mann describes the modern view in 2009, years after he had conceived the idea of quarks; see Ref. [45].
Page 9 of 23

But when you predicted the quark in 1964, you realized it was not just another cousin particle, right? Thats right. Looking at the table of known particles and the experimental data, it was clear that the neutron and proton could be made up of three particles with fractional charges, which I called quarks. [Until then all known particles had charges that were a whole multiple of the charge in a proton.] Quarks were permanently confined in the neutron and proton, so you couldnt pull them out to examine them singly. The neutron and proton were no longer to be considered elementary. It was not a difficult thing to deduce. What was difficult was believing it, because nobody had ever heard of making the neutron and proton composite. Nobody had ever heard of these fractional charges. Nobody had ever heard of particles being confined permanently inside observable things and not directly attainable. Against this background, lets now consider the alpha particle [55] produced naturally in radioactive decay processes. This particle is the nucleus of the helium atom and therefore has two protons and two neutrons. Let us consider the two protons first.

U d

U d

Figure 4: Two protons with four u-quarks and two d-quarks. If we take just three up (u) quarks we get the charge of 3 (+ ) = +2e. That is all the charge that an alpha particle needs.

Page 10 of 23

+2e needed U U U U d d

charge zero

Figure 5: Schematic illustration of the extra quarks in the -particle beyond the three uuu quarks needed for an electric charge of +2e.

There are six quarks (uud uud) in the two protons that make up the helium nucleus. Of these, only three (uuu) are needed to make up the charge of +2e. What are the extra udd quarks doing? These three quarks constitute a neutron with zero charge. Why do we need these extra quarks in the -particle? The need to conserve mass did NOT escape my attention. But, why is mass conservation paramount, if the nucleus emits the -particle? The nucleus is already reducing its mass (and charge). Perhaps, the system can be forced to shed some more of its mass, while conserving charge and become an energy source! We also have to account for the two neutrons in the alpha particle. Taken together, a total 12 quarks (uud uud) and (udd udd) are present in the particle. These can be re-arranged to yield the composite of (uuu udd) and (udd udd). Clearly, it seems that the -particle can be coaxed to shed some of its mass in the form of these extra quarks. Can we peel the quarks out of the two protons in the alpha particle and force it to shed the three udd quarks? As noted by none other than the discoverer of quarks, Gell-Mann [45], the quarks are permanently confined.

Page 11 of 23

PProtons

If quarks are like waves, heres a wave view of up and down quarks with +2/3e and -1/3e charges

The proton with wave like quarks

PProtons

The neutron with wave like quarks

PProtons

PProtons

The two protons of the alpha particle; lets get the udd quarks out of this proton doublet

Page 12 of 23

APPENDIX: ENERGY YIELD FROM NEUTRON DECAY

The following is reproduced in its entirety from http://hyperphysics.phyastr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/proton.html to illustrate that there is indeed an energy yield from neutron decay. Shedding quarks during -decay, the process envisioned in the present article, should result in much higher energy yields because of the significant reduction of mass.

Neutron
Along with protons, neutrons make up the nucleus, held together by the strong force. The neutron is a baryon and is considered to be composed of two down quarks and one up quark. A free neutron will decay with a half-life of about 10.3 minutes but it is stable if combined into a nucleus. The decay of the neutron involves the weak interaction as indicated in the Feynman diagram to the right. This fact is important in models of the early universe. The neutron is about 0.2% more massive than a proton, which translates to an energy difference of 1.29 MeV.
Index Particle concepts

The decay of the neutron is associated with a quark transformation in which a down quark is converted to an up by the weak interaction . The average lifetime of 10.3 min/0.693 = 14.9 minutes is surprisingly long for a particle decay that yields 1.29 MeV of energy. You could say that this decay is steeply "downhill" in energy and would be expected to proceed rapidly. It is possible for a proton to be transformed into a neutron, but you have to supply 1.29 MeV of energy to reach the threshold for that transformation. In the very early stages of the big bang when the thermal energy was much greater than 1.29 MeV, we surmise that the transformation between protons and neutrons was proceeding freely in both directions so that there was an essentially equal population of protons and neutrons.

Page 13 of 23

Decay of the Neutron

A free neutron will decay with a half-life of about 10.3 minutes but it is stable if combined into a nucleus. This decay is an example of beta decay with the emission of an electron and an electron antineutrino. The decay of the neutron involves the weak interaction as indicated in the Feynman diagram to the right.

A more detailed diagram of the neutron's decay identifies it as the transformation of one of the neutron's down quarks into an up quark. It is an example of the kind of quark transformations that are involved in many nuclear processes, including beta decay.

The decay of the neutron is a good example of the observations which led to the discovery of the neutrino. An analysis of the energetics of the decay can be used to illustrate the dilemmas which faced early investigators of this process. Using the concept of binding energy, and representing the masses of the particles by their rest mass energies, the energy yield from neutron decay can be calculated from the particle masses. The energy yield is traditionally represented by the symbol Q. Because energy and momentum must be conserved in the decay, it will be shown that the lighter electron will carry away most of the kinetic energy. With a kinetic energy of this magnitude, the relativistic kinetic energy expression must be used.
Page 14 of 23

For the moment we presume (incorrectly) that the decay involves just the proton and electron as products. The energy yield Q would then be divided between the proton and electron. The electron will get most of the kinetic energy and will be relativistic, but the proton is non-relativistic. The energy balance is then

In the rest frame of the neutron, conservation of momentum requires

pcelectron = - pcproton
and pcelectron can be expressed in terms of the electron kinetic energy
Show

The energy balance then becomes

When you substitute the numbers for this value of Q, you see that the KEe2 term is negligible, so the required kinetic energy of the electron can be calculated.The required electron kinetic energy for this two-particle decay scheme is

Likewise, the momentum of the electron for this two particle decay is constrained to be

Momentum and energy for the two-particle decay are constrained to these values, but this is not the way nature behaves. The observed momentum and energy distributions for the electron are as shown below.

Page 15 of 23

The fact that the electrons produced from the neutron decay had continuous distributions of energy and momentum was a clear indication that there was another particle emitted along with the electron and proton. It had to be a neutral particle and in certain decays carried almost all the energy and momentum of the decay. This would not have been so extraordinary except for the fact that when the electron had its maximum kinetic energy, it accounted for all the energy Q available for the decay. So there was no energy left over to account for the mass energy of the other emitted particle. The early experimenters were faced with the dilemma of a particle which could carry nearly all the energy and momentum of the decay but which had no charge and apparently no mass! The mysterious particle was called a neutrino, but it was twenty five years before unambiguous experimental observation of the neutrino was made by Cowan and Reines. The present understanding of the decay of the neutron is

This decay illustrates some of the conservation laws which govern particle decays. The proton in the product satisfies the conservation of baryon number, but the emergence of the electron unaccompanied would violate conservation of lepton number. The third particle must be an electron antineutrino to allow the decay to satisfy lepton number conservation. The electron has lepton number 1, and the antineutrino has lepton number -1.

Page 16 of 23

REFERENCES
[1] [2] Bosons, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boson Dirac, P. A. M., Theory of electrons and positrons, Nobel lecture delivered on December 12, 1933, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1933/diraclecture.pdf , Notes on Dirac's lecture Developments in Atomic Theory at Le Palais de la Dcouverte, 6 December 1945, UKNATARCHI Dirac Papers BW83/2/257889. See note 64 to p. 331 in "The Strangest Man" by Graham Farmelo
From the introductory remarks of the Nobel lecture. Thus if a particle is observed to come out from another particle, one can no longer be sure that the latter is composite. The former may have been created. The distinction between elementary particles and composite particles now becomes a matter of convenience. This reason alone is sufficient to compel one to give up the attractive philosophical idea that all matter is made up of one kind, or perhaps two kinds of bricks. I should like here to discuss the simpler kinds of particles and to consider what can be inferred about them from purely theoretical arguments. The simpler kinds of particle are: (i) the photons or light-quanta, of which light is composed; (ii) the electrons, and the recently discovered positrons (which appear to be a sort of mirror image of the electrons, differing from them only in the sign of their electric charge) ; (iii) the heavier particles - protons and neutrons.

[3]

OLuanaigh, C., CERN congratulates Englert and Higgs on Nobel in physics, October 8, 2013, http://home.web.cern.ch/about/updates/2013/10/CERN-congratulatesEnglert-and-Higgs-on-Nobel-in-physics

Page 17 of 23

[4]

OLuanaigh, C., A Nobel laureates formula for the universe, http://home.web.cern.ch/about/updates/2014/02/nobel-laureatesformula-universe

[5] [6]

Higgs, P. Nobel lecture, December 2013, Evading the Goldstone Theorem,

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2013/higgs-lecture.pdf

Englert, F., The BEH Mechanism and its Scalar Boson, Lecture Slides, http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2013/englert -lecture-slides.pdf [7] F. Englert and R. Brout Phys.Rev.Lett. 13 321 (1964). [8] P. W. Higgs Physics Letters 12 132 (1964). P. W. Higgs Phys.Rev.Lett. 13 508 (1964). [9] Guralnik, G.; Hagen, C.; Kibble, T. (1964). "Global Conservation Laws and Massless Particles". Physical Review Letters 13 (20): 585. Bibcode:1964PhRvL..13..585G. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.13.585. [10] Delbrck, M., Was Bose-Einstein Statistics arrived at by Serendipity? J. Chem. Education, vol. 57, No. 7, July 1980, pp. 467-470,
http://users.physik.fu-berlin.de/~pelster/Vorlesungen/WS1213/delbrueck.pdf This paper also provide an interesting critique the method of counting used by Bose

Page 18 of 23

in his 1924 paper; see discussion of Figures 1 to 3 and how three people Tom, Dick, and Harry can be distributed over two rooms.

[11] Laxmanan, V., Permutations and Combinations: Towards a Generalization of the Planck-Einstein-Bose Ideas to Problems outside physics, Published March 26, 2014, http://www.scribd.com/doc/214660162/PermutationsCombinations-Towards-a-Generalization-of-the-Planck-Einstein-BoseIdeas-to-Problems-Beyond-Physics [12] Laxmanan, V., Why Bose of the Higgs Boson Deserved the Nobel Alongside the Likes of Louis de Broglie. Published March 28, 2014,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/215010055/Why-Bose-of-the-Higgs-Boson-Deservedthe-Nobel-Prize-Alongside-Others-Like-Louis-de-Broglie

[13] Laxmanan, V., Light Quanta and the Frequency of Light: Is there a Universal Energy Quantum?, Published March 17, 2014,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/212874919/Light-Quanta-and-the-Frequency-of-Light-Isthere-a-Universal-value-for-the-Elementary-Energy-Quantum

[14] Laxmanan, V., Special Relativity, Light Quanta and the Frequency of Light, Published March 22, 2014, http://www.scribd.com/doc/213846352/SpecialRelativity-Light-Quanta-and-the-Frequency-of-Light

[15] Quarks, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark

[16] Discovery of Radioactivity, http://www.lbl.gov/abc/wallchart/chapters/03/4.html [17] Becquerel, H., Natural Radioactivity, in Great Experiments in Physics, Edited by Morris H. Shamos, Dover Publications (1959), pp. 210-215. [18] Becquerel, H., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Becquerel

Page 19 of 23

[19] The Nobel Prize in Physics 1903. Nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB 2013. Web. 29 Mar 2014. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1903/ [20] Thomson, J. J., The Electron, in Great Experiments in Physics, Edited by Morris H. Shamos, Dover Publications (1959), pp. 216-231. [21] Thomson, J. J. Carriers of Negative Electricity, Nobel lecture, Dec 11, 1906,
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1906/thomson-lecture.pdf

[22] Rutherford, E., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Rutherford [23] Roentgen, W., X-Rays, in Great Experiments in Physics, Edited by Morris H. Shamos, Dover Publications (1959), pp. 198-209. [24] Rntgen, W. C, The Nobel Prize in Physics 1901. Nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB 2013. Web. 30 Mar 2014. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1901/ [25] Ludwig Boltzmann, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Boltzmann [26] Planck, M. The Quantum Hypothesis, in Great Experiments in Physics, Morris H. Shamos (Ed.), Dover Publications (1959) pp. 301-314; see also
http://books.google.com/books?id=J0fCAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA305&lpg=PA305&dq=planc k+1900+paper+shamos&source=bl&ots=Owm0_Jb87k&sig=t14iP41AcHLWMd4sCI6YX KILj6E&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yaUmU4SmGLOQ0QH19oCgCQ&ved=0CFUQ6AEwBg#v=onep age&q=planck%201900%20paper%20shamos&f=false .

[27] Planck, M, Nobel Lecture: The Genesis and Present State of Development of the Quantum Theory". Nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB 2013. Web. 23 Feb 2014. < http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1918/plancklecture.html >

[28] Planck, M., On the Law of Distribution of Energy in the Normal Spectrum, Annalen der Physik, vol. 4, p. 553 (1901). http://people.isy.liu.se/jalar/kurser/QF/references/Planck1901.pdf [29] Kragh, H., Max Planck the reluctant revolutionary, Physics World, December 2000, pp. 31-35,
http://www.math.lsa.umich.edu/~krasny/math156_article_planck.pdf

[30] C. A. Gearhart, Planck, the Quantum, and Historians, Phys. Perspect. 4 (2002) 170215 http://employees.csbsju.edu/cgearhart/Planck/PQH.pdf [31] Badino, M., The Odd Couple: Boltzmann, Planck and the application of statistics to physics (1900-1913), pp. 17 to 27 (30 to 40 of 374) in Conference on History of Quantum Physics, Preprint 350 (2008). Excellent
discussion of Boltzmann's 1877 paper, Planck's 1900 and subsequent papers, and also
Page 20 of 23

the Ehrenfest and Kammerlingh Ones (1915) arguments to explain the meaning of Plancks R in the expression for S.

[32] Permutations with repeats, http://www.mathwarehouse.com/probability/permutations-repeateditems.php see MISSISSIPPI problem with answer. [33] Bose, S. N., Planck Law and Light Quantum Hypothesis, ZP (1924), 26, 178, http://master-mc.u-strasbg.fr/IMG/pdf/Bose_statistique.pdf Bose points out
the logical flaw in the prior derivations of Plancks radiation law. They has all relied on classical physics for to deduce the term (82/c3) which is then multiplied by Plancks value for the average energy U, see Boses equation 1. (The law derived using classical physics is called Rayleigh-Jeans law with kT replacing Plancks average U; see unnumbered equation given by Bose, following the first paragraph, also Delbrcks discussion.) Boses re-derivation of the law shows that the entire radiation formula can be deduced without resorting to the classical theory.

[34] Theimer, O., and Ram, B., The beginning of quantum statistics, Am. J. Phys., vol. 44, No. 11, pp. 1056-57, http://hermes.ffn.ub.es/luisnavarro/nuevo_maletin/Bose_1924.pdf [35] Generalized Permutations and Combinations, (click here) http://www.math.northwestern.edu/~mlerma/courses/cs31005s/notes/dm-gcomb Bose uses formula 5.3.1 for Permutations with repeated elements, while Plank uses formula 5.3.2 for combinations with repetitions. [36] Combinations and Permutations, Math is Fun, 3 scoops of 5 ice-cream flavors http://www.mathsisfun.com/combinatorics/combinations-permutations.html This is the formula used by Planck. [37] Combinations with Repetitions, 15 soda cans 5 drink types http://www.csee.umbc.edu/~stephens/203/PDF/6-5.pdf [38] Millikan, R. A., Phys. Rev. 32, pp. 349-398 (1911); [39] Millikan, R. A., On the Elementary Electric charge and the Avogadro Constant, Phys. Rev. vol. II, No. 2, pp. 109-143 (1913); see https://www.aip.org/history/gap/PDF/millikan.pdf [40] Shamos, M. H., Great Experiments in Physics, The Elementary Electrical Charge, pp. 238-249, Dover Publications (1959); link for online version
http://books.google.com/books?id=J0fCAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA240&lpg=PA240&dq=millik an+oil+drop+experiment+1911+paper&source=bl&ots=Owm0_Lc56f&sig=2u1Brt5vHE Pe8mMFw8PB2VWpe0M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lfYmUPage 21 of 23

[41] Goodstein, D., In the Case of Robert Andrew Millikan, American Scientist, Jan-Feb 2001, http://www.its.caltech.edu/~dg/MillikanII.pdf [42] Sciences 10 Most Beautiful Experiments, http://physicsanimations.com/Physics/English/top10.htm [43] Quantum Chromodynamics, The Physics Hyper Textbook, http://physics.info/qcd/ [44] Murray Gell-Mann - Biographical. Nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB 2013. Web. 31 Mar 2014. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1969/gellmann-bio.html [45] Kruglinski, S., The Man who found Quarks and Made Sense of the Universe, March 17, 2009, http://discovermagazine.com/2009/apr/17-man-whofound-quarks-made-sense-of-universe Read here about quarks in GellManns own words, years after they were first conceived. [46] Enter Quarks, the Eight-fold Way, http://fafnir.phyast.pitt.edu/particles/conuni6.html [47] Nair, Malini, The Higgs hunt is over, but a new journey has begun, July 7, 2012, http://www.timescrest.com/society/the-higgs-hunt-is-over-but-anew-journey-has-begun-8258 Interview with Prof. Rohini Godbole of the Center for High Energy Physics, IISc, Bangalore. [48] Godbole, R. M., We have found a new boson; what next? December 10, 2012, http://imsc50.imsc.res.in/sites/default/files/godbole.pdf [49] Implications of the 126 GeV Higgs, Rohini M. Godbole, August 13, 2013, http://vietnam.in2p3.fr/2013/Inauguration/transparencies/Godbole.pdf see also http://www.insaindia.org/detail.php?id=P03-1334 and also http://www.iitb.ac.in/archive/fd2004/profile.htm Participant and a key international organizer in the effort for envisioning the next generation of collider experiments, crucial for establishing several missing links in our understanding of the fundamental forces of nature. http://www.iitb.ac.in/archive/fd2004/profile.htm [50] Large Hadron Collider, Science & Technology Facilities Council, http://www.stfc.ac.uk/646.aspx
Page 22 of 23

XHOofh0gH__oHgBQ&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=millikan%20oil%20drop %20experiment%201911%20paper&f=false

[51]

International Linear Collider, Talk, July 26, 2013, A 30 km collider being built outside Tokyo, Japan, http://talkmag.in/cms/news/science-tech/item/1777-indiais-set-for-the-next-big-act-in-physics-after-the-cern-experiment

[52] [53]

[54] [55]

Quarks, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark The Standard Model, The Physics Hyper Textbook http://physics.info/standard/; see also http://physics.info/qcd/ for how the name quark was chosen. Neutron, http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/quark.html Click on
neutron to get the Feynman diagram for the decay into proton. http://hyperphysics.phy- astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/proton.html#c3

Alpha Particle, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_particle

Page 23 of 23