Principles of Modern PhysicsINTERNATIONAL SERIES IN PURE AND APPLIED PHYSICS LEONARD I SCHIFF, CONSULTING EDITOR and Schiffer Introduction to General Relativity ‘Thermodynamics and Statistieal Mechanies Becker Introduction to Theoretical Mechanics Bjorken and Drell Relativistic Quantum Fields Bjorken and Drell Relativistic Quantum Mechanics Chodorow and Susskind Fundamentals of Microwave Electronics Clark Applied X-rays Collin Field Theory of Guided Waves Evans The Atomic Nucleus Feynman and Hibbs Quantum Mechanies and Path Integrals Ginston Microwave Measurements Gurney Introduction to Statistical Mechanics Hall Introduction to Blectron Microscopy. Hardy and Perrin. The Principles of Opties Harnwell Electricity and Blectromagnetism Harnwell and Livingood Experimental Atomic Physics Henley and Thirring Elementary Quantum Field Theory Houston Principles of Mathematical Physics Jammer The Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechanics Kennard Kinetic Theory of Gases Leighton Principles of Modern Physics Lindsay Mechanical Radiation Livingston and Blewett Particle Accelerators Middleton An Introduction to Statistical Communication Theory Morse Vibration and Sound Morse and Feshbach Methods of Theoretical Physics Morse and Ingard Theoretical Acoustics Muskat Physical Principles of Oil Production Newton Seattering Thoory of Waves and Particles Present Kinetic Theory of Gases Read Dislocations in Crystals Richtmyer, Kennard, and Lauritsen Introduction to Modern Physics Schif’ Quantum Mechanics Schtearts Introduction to Special Relativity Seitz ‘The Modern Theory of Solids Slater Introduction to Chemical Physics Slater Quantum Thoory of Atomie Structure, Vol. 1 ‘Slater Quantum Theory of Atomic Structure, Vol. I Slater Quantum Theory of Matter Slater Blectronie Structure of Molecules: Quantum Theory of Molecules and Solids, Vol. 1 Slater Symmetry and Energy Bands in Crystals: Quantum ‘Theory of Molecules and Solids, Vol. 2 Slater Insulators, Semiconductors, and Metals: Quantum ‘Theory of Molecules and Solids, Vol. 3 Slater and Frank Wlectromagnetism Slater and Frank Introduction to Theoretical Physics Slater and Frank Mechat Smythe Static and Dynamic Electricity Stratton Electromagnetic Theory Tinkham Group Theory and Quantum Mechanics Townes and Schawlow Microwave Spectroscopy Wang Solid-State Hlectronies White Tntroduetion to Atomie Spoetra ‘The late F. K. Richtmyer was Consulting Editor of the series from its inception in 1920 to his death in 1939, Lee A. DuBridge was Consulting Editor from 1939 to 1946; and G. P, Harnwell from 1947 to 1954.Principles of Modern Physics ROBERT B. LEIGHTON Professor of Physics California Institute of Technology McGRAW-HILL BOOK COMPANY NEW YORK TORONTO LONDON 1959eS2037 ss PRINCIPLES OF MODERN PHYSICS 1617 1819 20-MAMM-798, 37130 Copyright © 1959 by the MeGraw-Hill Book Company, Ino. Printed in. the United States of America, All rights reserved. ‘This book, oF parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form without permission fof the publishers. Library of Congress Catalog Cord Number 58-8847Preface For many years the undergraduate curriculum in physics at the Cali- fornia Institute of Technology has included a course in atomic and nuclear physics in the fourth (senior) year. In recent years this course has been taken not only by all fourth-year physics majors and many mathematics and astronomy majors but, to an increasing extent, also by first-year graduate students in physics whose preparation in one or more of the fields of modern physics has been weak and by advanced graduate stu- dents who are majoring in other fields of science or engineering. The objectives of this course have thus become threefold: to provide gradu- ating physics majors who do not plan to pursue graduate work with a sound basis in modem physics for careers in applied physies; to give those who do go on for advanced degrees a coherent working familiarity with many fields, some of which they will study more deeply in their grad- uate work; to offer nonphysies graduate students a useful over-all view of modern physies which will provide a convenient point of departure for advanced study of special topics needed in their particular fields of specialization. In this book I’ have attempted to meet some of the rather severe and often conflicting requirements that such a course places upon a textbook: It should cover a quite broad range of subjects, but at sufficient depth to leave the student with more than a mere “survey” view of modern physics. ‘The various topics must not be oversimplified to the point where their physical essence is lost, but neither should the physics be hidden in an overrigorous or too general treatment. ‘The mathematical and physical background of the student should be freely drawn upon, but material new to him should be presented in considerable detail. Unfor- tunately, these requirements and many others not only fight among themselves but also mean different things to different people. I can only hope that my aim has been reasonably accurate. ‘The general plan of treatment is to concentrate first on the broadvi PREFACE fundamental principles which underlie most of modern physics as we know it, and then to see how these fundamental principles operate to yield the observed complex behavior of matter. ‘The approach is largely expository and analytical rather than historical and discursive. Such historical features as are included are limited to brief introductory para- graphs to provide a general orientation for a given topic. I have tried to keep the level of the treatment uniform, but of course the material on ‘nuclear physics is necessarily rather more qualitative than that on atomic physics, if only because no correct basic theory corresponding to the non- relativistic quantum mechanics is yet available in this field. To a certain extent it has been possible to begin a topic at a relatively elementary jevel and then work up gradually to its more complex aspects; this should make the book a suitable text for a fourth-, fifth-, or perhaps even a sixth-year course if certain topics are pursued in the literature beyond the level attained in the text ‘Although this volume was undertaken with » one-year course for fourth-year physics majors uppermost in mind, it seemed desirable at several points to extend the range of subject matter and also the depth ‘of treatment beyond the limits which one might ordinarily consider appropriate for the fourth year, with the result that the book is distinetly too long to cover completely in a one-year course. ‘This was done to provide a more complete treatment of an important field, to allow some latitude of choice on the part of the instructor of what material to include, to make the book better suited to the needs of a first-year graduate course, or to make it more valuable for later reference use. Even $0, it was necessary to omit whole fields of great importance, and to abridge considerably the treatment of other fields, simply for lack of space. Tt will hardly be necessary to point out to an expert in any field that his specialty is either entirely omitted or, if included, is not treated exhaust- ively, authoritatively, or, in some cases, even adequately. I have, how- ever, striven to make the treatment correct as far as it goes and to avoid outright errors or falsehoods; I shall be grateful to receive any construc- tive criticism in this regard. For the benefit of those who may contemplate using this book, it may be well to list as clearly as possible the preparatory material that is (per- haps optimistically) assumed. Briefly, this comprises classical mechan- ies, through Lagrange’s equations, and rigid-body dynamics, including the tensor of inertia; electromagnetism through Maxwell's equations, including the radiation from an oscillating electric dipole and preferably oscillating cavities; and mathematics through ordinary differential equations (including power-series solutions), some partial differential equations (including separation of variables), orthogonal functions, vector analysis, and some tensor analysis. In addition it should ordinarily bePREFACE expected that a student will have had at least a little contact with the facts of modern physics: the atomic theory of matter, atomic line spectra, heat radiation, kinetic theory, and other topies—perhaps at the level of a second-year physies or chemistry course. This is not to say that a stu- dent who is lacking one or more of these items eannot successfully attack the present material, since many of the essential mathematical techniques are presented in detail in the text. However, he may well find himself doing considerable outside reading. The exercises that will be found distributed throughout the book are of two general types: those which involve filling in steps that are some- times left out of the text or verifying some stated conclusion, and those in which the material being diseussed is to be extended or applied to a physical problem. Of these, the former serve the purpose of saving precious space in deriving results in the text, while at the same time offering the reader an opportunity to test his mastery of the material; the latter broaden his experience or physical insight, and should also provide valuable experience with the numerical magnitudes of atomic and nuclear phenomena, ‘The exercises are decidedly not of uniform difficulty, nor is it essential that they all be worked. Some of them can be done almost by inspection, while others will require considerable effort of even a good student. In any case, I am firmly of the opinion that a student’s grasp of material of this kind is not adequately measured by “memory” or “discussion” questions or “plug-in” exercises, but is best attained and retained by an intensive contact with problems which require analytical thought, rather than the mere application of a formula, for their solution. Concerning the incidental but important matter of symbols, units, and nomenclature: Rationalized MKSA units are used officially throughout the text, but in many instances where a result is more familiar in some other system of units, the more familiar form is also quoted. ‘The exercises do not adhere to any single system of units, but rather tend to be phrased in familiar terms and be capable of solution by the use of what- ever system of units is most comfortable for the student. Wherever possible, the symbols and nomenclature recommended in Documents 6 and 7 of the SUN commission of the IUPAP have been adopted, although not without some possibility of inconsistencies resulting from proofreading blindnoss due to contrary habits of long standing, Finally, T should like to express my sincere thanks to the many teachers, colleagues, students, and secretaries whose help and encouragement have been indispensable to the completion of a rather formidable task. Robert B. Leighton 1 Physics Today, 9(11), 28 (1956); 10(3), 30 (1957).Contents Preface Symbols and Abbreviations 1. THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY 1-1 Tho Galilean Transformation; the Principle of Relativity, 1. 1-2 ‘The Postu- lates of Special Relativity, 6. 1-3 The Lorentz Transformation, 8. 1-4 Relati- ‘istic Kinematies, 9. 1-5 Review of Tensor Analysis, 15. 1-6 ‘The d-vector Sys- tom of Space Time, 27. 1-7 Relativistic Mechanics, $0. 1-8 Relativistic Electro- dynamics, 40. 1-9 Energy Units, 48. 1-10 The Classical lectron, 60. 1-11 The General Theory of Relativity, 52. 2. QUANTUM MECHANICS 21 Introductory Background, 48. 22 Primary Requisites of Quantum Mechanies, 80. 2-3 Postulatory Basis of Quantum Mechanies, 91. 2-4 Some Elementary Properties of Quantum Mechanies, 104. 2-8 Some Useful General Theorems, 114. 2-6 Conclusion, 126. 3, THE ONE-DIMENSIONAL HARMONIC OSCILLATOR 8:1 The Hamiltonian Function; the Schroodinger Equation, 128. 8-2 Solution of the Schroedinger Equation, 180. 3-3 The Energy Levels and Wave Fune- tions, 183. 3-4 Parity, 138 4, THE FREE PARTICLE 41 The Schrodinger Hquation—One Dimension, 141. 4-2 Boundary Condi- tions and Normalization, 142. 4-8 Superposition of Wave Trains, 143, 4-4 Wave Packets; Motion of a Freo Particle, 144. 4-5 Higenvalues of Energy and Momen- tum fora Free Particle, 447. 4-6 ‘Transmission and Reflection at a Barrier, 148. 47 The Rectangular Potential Well, 152. 4-8 ‘Transmission through a Barrier, 166. 4.9 The Freo Particle in Three Dimensions, 157. 4-10 Tho Particle in a Box; Periodic Boundary Condition, 159. 6, THE ONE-ELECTRON ATOM 5-1 Hamiltonian Funetion and Operator for the Simple Model, 164. 5-2 The Schroodinger Equation, 165. 5-3 Solution of Time-independent Schroedinger Equation, 100. 5-4 Some Properties of the One-clectron-utom Wave Functions, 178. 5-5 Bleotron Spin, 184. 5-6 Spin-Orbit Forces, 191. 5-7 The Quantization of Angular Momentum, 196. 5-8 Spin-Orbit Fine Structure, 199. 5.9 Rela- tivistie Corrections, 200. 5-10 Hydrogen Fine Structure, £01. 5-11 Spectro~ scopic Term Classification; Selection Rules, 204. 5-12 Nuclear Spin; Hyperfine Structure, 206, or 128 sat 1634 conrENTs 6. RADIATION AND RADIATIVE TRANSITIONS 6-1 Normal Coordinates and Hamiltonian Representation of a Continuous Elastic System, 212. 6-2 Energy Higenfunctions for Normal Coordinates, 214, 6-3 Quantization of the Radiation Field, 2/4. 6-4 Selection Rules and Transition Probabilities for Harmonic Oscillator with a Linear Perturbation, 218. 6-5 Some General Properties of Radiative Transitions, 224. 6-6 Electrielipole Selection Rules for a One-eleetron Atom, 229. 6-7 Summary of the Properties of Radiative Transitions, 287. 4, THE PAULI PRINCIPLE, ATOMIC SHELL STRUCTURE, AND THE PERIODIC SYSTEM 7-1 Introductory Sketch, 239. 7-2 Exchange Symmetry of Wave Function 236, 7-8 The Many-electron Atom in the Sehrocdinger Theory, 246. 7-1 Con- clusion, 262. 8. ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY 81 General Considerations, 255. 8-2 ‘The Hamiltonian Funetion of a Compli- ated Atom, 256, 83 Russell-Saunders, or LS, Coupling, 259. 8-4 j-j Coupling, 268. 8-5 Selection Rules, 270. 8-6 Energy-level Diagrams for Complex Atoms, 272. 87 Regularities in’ Complex Spectra, 274. $8 The Zeeman Effect, 276, 8.9 The Excitation of Atoms, 280. 8-10 The Breadth of Spectral Lines, 282. 8-11 Conclusion, 285, 9, MOLECULAR BINDING AND MOLECULAR SPECTRA 9-1 The Hydrogen Molecule Ton, 288. 9-2 The Neutral Hydrogen Molecule, 1294. 9-3 Further Properties of Chemical Binding, 295.9-4 Energy States of Dia- tomie Molecules, 298. 9-5 Spectroscopy of Diatomie Molecules, 305. 9-0 Effects of Nuclear Spin} Ortho- and Para-Hydrogen, 318. 9-7 Van der Waals! Foreos, 328. 9-8 Conclusion, $25, 10. QUANTUM STATISTICS 10-1 Derivation of the Three Quantum Distribution Laws, 328. 10-2 Applica tions of the Quantum Distribution Laws: General Considerations, 339. 10-3 Applications of the Maxwell-Boltzmann Distribution Lave, 345. 10-4 Applica tions of the Fermi-Dirae Distribution Law, 340. 10-5 Applications of the Einstein-Bose Distribution Law, 365. 11. THE BAND THEORY OF SOLIDS 11-1 The Band Structure of the Electronic Energy States of a Crystal, $78. 11-2 Periodicity Properties of Hlectronie Wave Functions, $91. 12, X-RAYS 12-1 Historical Introduetion, 405. 12-2 Tho Production of X-rays, 408. 12-3 ‘The Interactions of X-rays with Matter, 421. 12-4 X-ray Diffraction, 435. 12.5 Atomic and Crystal Structure Factors, 451. 12-6 Refraction and Reflection of X-rays, 454 18. BASIC PROPERTIES OF NUCLEI 18-1 Charge and Mass, 463. 13-2 Nuclear Angular Momentum, 467. 13-3 Ms netie Moments of Nuclei; Nuclear Magnetic Resonance, 468. 13-4 Electric- quadripole Moments, 470. 13-5 Radioactivity, 476. 13-6 ‘The Constituents of Nuclei; 476. 13-7 Symbols and Nomenclature for Nuclear Structure, 478. 18-8 Excited States of Nuclei; Nuclear Reactions, 479. 13-0 Particles, 488. 18:10 Conclusion, 483. mt 223 264 327 srt 405 458,4 CONTENTS 14. PARTICLE SCATTERING 485 14-1 The Classical Theory of Rutherford Scattering, 485. 14-2 Transformation from CM to Laboratory Coordinates, 492. 14-3 Multiple Coulomb Seattering and Energy Loss by Ionization, 424. 14-4 Primary and Secondary Ionization; Knock-on Blectrons; Delta Rays, 501. 14-5 Rango; Straggling, 601. 14-6 Some General Properties of Particle Scattering, 504. 16. RADIOACTIVITY o12 15-1 ‘The Four Radioactive Series, 512. 15-2 The Growth and Decay of Radio- activity, 513. 15-8 The Ages of Minerals and of the Earth, 520. 15-4 Other Naturally Occurring Radionuclides, 623, 16-5 Artificial Radioactivity, 029, 15.6 Elementary Thoory of particle Decay, 584. 15-7 Beta Decay; the Neutrino Hypothesis, 529, 158 Elementary ‘Theory of @lecay, 532. 15:9 Electron Capture, 544. 16, SYSTEMATICS OF NUCLEAR STABILITY 546 16-1 Binding Energy of Nuclei, 547. 16-2 The Sizes of Nuclei, 549. 16-3 The Semiempirieal Mass Formula of Weizsacker, 551. 16-4 Tho Stability of Nuclei Stability Rules, 654 47. DYNAMICS OF NUCLEAR REACTIONS. 502 17-1 Kinds of Nuclear Reactions, 562, 17-2 Common Modes of Formation of Excited Nuclei, 565. 17-8 Conservation Laws, 567. 17-4 Cross Section, 577. 17-5 Some Properties of Specific Types of Nuclear Reactions, 683, 17-6 Experi ‘mentally Observed Properties of Nuclear Excited States, 589. 48. NUCLEAR MODELS 505, 18-1 The eparticle Model, 596. 18-2 The Liquid-drop Model; Fission, 597. 183 The Fermi Gas Model, 599. 18-4 The Shell Model, 600. 18-5 ‘The Liquid rotator Model, 607. 18-6 The Complex-potential Model, 608. 18-7 Conclusion, 610. 19. NUCLEAR FORCES oat 19-1 Bound States of the Two-nucleon System, 6/1. 19-2 Seattering Experi- ments, 614. 19-3 The Meson Theory of Nuclear Forces, €18. 20, PARTICLES 623 20-1 Electrons and Positrons, 624. 20-2 Photons, 627. 20-8 Protons, 627. 20-4 Neutrons, 628. 20-5 Neutrinos, 30. 20-6 y-mesons (Muons), 633. 20-7 ‘mesons (Pions), 638 20-8 K-mesons (Thetons and Tauons), #41. 20-9 Hyperons, 849. 20-10 Theoretical Interpretation of Particle Properties, 651. 20-11 The Dirac Theory of the Blectron, 66/. 20-12 Quantum Electrodynam- ies, 669. 21. MODERN PHYSICS IN NATURE 680 21-1 Cosmic Rays, 480. 21-2 Stellar Energy, 708, 21-8 The Formation of the Elements, 720. APPENDIXES ma A. A Table of Physical Constants, 721, B. Black-body Distribution Function (Graph), 724. C. Some Blectronie Properties of Atoms, 727. D. Constants of Some Diatomic Molecules, 730. E. Some Properties of the Atmosphere (Lati- tude 45°), 732. F. Plots of Range versus Energy and Momentum, 783. G. ‘Table of Nuclear Species, 738. Index 785Symbols and Abbreviations for Units of Physical Quantities [As recommended in Document 6 of SUN commission of IUPAP, Physics Today, 9 (11), 23 (1956).) MKSA units Other quantities meter m micron » second 5 angstrom, A Kilogram kg a 1 newton N minute min joule J hour h watt Ww day a ampere A atmosphere atm coulomb c calorie cal volt v kilocalorie keal farad F steradian st ohm 2 electron volt ev henry H dOeneee keV weber Wb Ota MeV oe « Geve atomic mass unit amu 10-* amu mmu ces units electromagnetic units | emu a ae electrostatic units esu centimeter om second 5 gram ¢ Prefixes dyne dyn = erg erg giga (10°) G degree Kelvin °K mega (10°) M degree Celsius °c kilo (103) k oersted Oe centi (10-2) c gauss G milli (10-*) m maxwell Mx micro (10-*) # * In the American literature, BeV is used to denote 10° eV.The Theory of Relativity We begin our study of modern physics with a brief treatment of the theory of relativity. This is a fitting starting place for several reasone. ‘The theory of relativity was the first branch of modern physies to become firmly established in essentially its present form and has had far-reaching effects upon our concept of the basic framework of all physical measure- ment, space and time, Many of its results can be easily deduced by using only elementary algebra and differential calculus, and most physical laws exhibit a striking and deeply significant symmetry with respect to space and time when expressed in the “language” of relativity. And finally, since we shall need many of the results of special relativity in our later work, it is well to treat the subject comprehensively at the beginning rather than piecemeal as the need arises. ‘The theory of relativity deals with the way in which observers who are in a state of motion relative to one another describe physical phenomena. In this chapter we shall consider the theory of relativity as it applies to the simplest case, in which two observers are in relative motion in a straight line at constant speed. This restricted case is commonly called the special theory of relativity. ‘The general theory of relativity, which applies to the ease of arbitrary relative motion, will be mentioned only briefly, 1-1. The Galilean Transformation; the Principle of Relativity It has long been accepted that there is no meaning to absolute trans- lational motion through space. This idea is supported by our everyday experience with the laws of mechanics as they apply inside a uniformly moving automobile, train, or airplane; for in such a “moving” reference 1a PRINCIPLES OF MODERN PHYSICS [ouap. 1 Sspstem S'gystem Fra, 1-1. Tlusteating the uniform relative motion of two coordinate systems along their common z-axes. The system 2, , 2” is called the S’-system and is said to be moving at constant speed V along the positive a-direction with respeet to the 2, v2 system, or S-eystom. frame these dynamical laws appear the same as in a laboratory “at rest” on the earth. One ean deseribe the situation analytically by saying that the laws of motion are covariant—i.e., they retain the same form—with respect to a transformation of coordinates to a uniformly moving system. If the relative motion of the two systems is directed along their common s-axes, as shown in Fig. 1-1, the transformation to be considered is the so-called Galilean transformation: wez-Vt way ¢=2 fat w If one makes the plausible assumption that the mechanical force is the same for all observers, this transformation leaves Newton's laws in the same form for all observers. Since d¥x'/dt’? = dix/dt?, a given force produces the same acceleration, independently of whatever uniform trans- lational velocity the coordinate system used as a roference frame may possess, and it therefore seems impossible to detect absolute motion of an object through space on the basis of its response to impressed forces. This property of the laws of mechanics leads naturally to the supposition that the universe may be so constituted that it is impossible by any kind of experiment whatever to detect absolute motion through space. This hypothesis is called the principle of relativity. ‘The principle of relativity was an accepted theory of physies for over two centuries. But when Maxwell, in 1865, formulated his dynamical theory of the electromagnetic field, it appeared that absolute motion through space might. he detectable by optical means. For out of Max- well’s equations there emerged the new and surprising result that electro-see. 1-1] ‘THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY 3 magnetic waves ought to exist in empty space. Maxwell found the speed of propagation of these waves to be equal to the ratio of the electromagnetic to the electrostatic units of charge. ‘This ratio was so nearly equal to the measured speed of light that he concluded that light must itself be an electromagnetic disturbance of the type deseribed by his equations. Now, all wave motion with which we are familiar possesses a medium for its propagation. This medium must ordinarily possess both inertia, and elasticity if the speed of propagation is to be other than zero or infinity. ‘The speed of light is far greater than that of any other known wave motion, so that the inertia-like property of space must be very tiny and its “elastic” shear rigidity correspondingly very great. The idea that all space is filled with an electrically rigid medium called the luminiferous ether whose ordinary mechanical density and viscosity are so small that the planets and even much smaller bodies can move through it without hindrance gained universal acceptance through Maxwell's work. It seems quite clear that, if space is not really empty, but filled with a rigid medium, there might be some meaning to absolute motion after all. And it even appears possible that our speed through this medium might in phase DF Fra, 1-2. Schematic diagram of the apparatus used in the Michelson-Morley expen- ment. ‘The optical path lengths ABCBD and ABEBF may be assumed equal when the instrument is “at rest”” in the ether. If itis then wet in motion toward the right with speed V, light takes a longer time to traverse the path BEB" than the correspond- ing path BC'B', and a phase difference is thereby introduced into the interference pat ter of the two beams at D’,¥”. In the actual experiment, the fringe pattern at DF” was measured as a function of the azimuthal orientation of the entire instrument, which was mounted on a stone slab snd floated in mercury.4 PRINCIPLES OF MODERN PHYSICS [ouap. 1 be measured by comparing the speed of light in different directions. Such an experiment was carried out by Michelson (1881) and by Michel- son and Morley (1887). In the latter famous experiment! the times of traversal of a light ray through equal paths parallel and perpendicular to a supposed direction of motion through the ether were compared by measuring the phase difference of a “‘split” monochromatic light beam in traversing an interferometer, as shown in Fig. 1-2. ‘This experiment was sufficiently sensitive that a speed of about 10 km s~! should have been detectable; yet, in spite of the fact that the earth’s orbital speed around PoP Fro, 1-3, Tlustrat- ing ‘the phenome- non of the aberra- tion of starlight. Because of the transverse motion of the observer, the light received from a star P ap- pears to come from fa direetion P'P” at fan angle 6 = V/e ‘away from the true direction PP. The orbital speed of the earth around the sun introduces an angle 8 of 20/5. the sun alone amounts to 30 km s~!, no effect was observed. Many attempts were made to explain the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment with- out wholly giving up the idea of an ether: 1. It was suggested that bodies moving through space might drag the ether along locally, so that the ether immediately surrounding the body would be at rest with respect to it. ‘The speed of light would then be locally isotropic. ‘This explanation isunsat- isfactory because light approaching the body from a distance would be affected differently than was found to be the case in the observed aberration of starlight due to the earth’s orbital motion about the sun (Fig. 1-3). 2. The possibility that the velocity of light adds vec- torially to that of the source was also considered. If this were the case, the Michelson-Morley experi- ment would be explained, but other difficulties would appear. Light arriving from distant binary star systems would exhibit certain effects because of the difference in radial velocity of the two components of the binary system. One such effect would be a spurious eccentricity in the apparent orbits of double stars, which would be detectable statistically. In addition, the basic idea of an ether is vontradicted by such an assumption, since a wave propagates at a speed determined by the medium and not by the source. 3. The most serious proposal advanced was that bodies which move through the ether suffer a change of shape just sufficient to make the speed of light appear to be the same in various directions. * Michelson and Morley, Silliman J., 84, 333, 427 (1887).ec. 1-2] ‘THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY 5 ‘The change that is needed is a contraction in the direction of motion of the body, such that a body of length Lo at rest is shrunk to a length Lo(1 — V2/et)* when in motion at speed V parallel to its length. ‘This effect, called the Lorentz-FitzGerald contraction, was supposed to follow from Maxwell’s equations; no one was suecessful in proving that it actually did, however. Furthermore, later experiments! have shown that a simple length contraction is not alone sufficient; atime-dilation effect is also necessary. ‘This would be most difficult for ‘Maxwell’s equations to provide, but follows naturally from Einstein's theory. Einstein’ finally proposed a radically different approach to the problem posed by the Michelson-Morley experiment, He explained its null result simply by returning to the principle of relativity, which directly asserts the impossibility of detecting absolute motion through space. He found, however, that this requires that our notions of space and time as inde- pendent, universal quantities must be fundamentally modified, and that time must in fact be treated on an equal basis with the three length dimen- sions of space, instead of as an independent universal scalar parameter. These new properties of space and time lead in turn to radically different results in kinematics and in dynamics, and several totally new and unexpected fundamental relationships which connect familiar physical quantities with one another appear. Many of these relationships have been of such a striking nature that their direct confirmation by experi- ment has served to establish beyond any doubt that Einstein’s theory penetrates deeply indeed into the basic structure of our universe. EXERCISE 1-1, Assume that monochromatic light of wavelength ) is used in the Michelson interferometer of Fig, 1-2, and that the apparatus is moving to the right at speed V through a fixed ether. Find the phase difference between the two beams arriving at D', F’. Ans: 2ne At/d = 2nLV2/re*. 1-2, The Postulates of Special Relativity ‘The special theory of relativity may be built up from the following two fundamental postulates: 1, A properly formulated description of a physical phenomenon can con- tain no reference, cither explicit or implicit, to an absolute speed of translational motion of the coordinate frame in which the phenomenon is deseribed. Kennedy and Thorndike, Phys. Rev., 42, 400 (1982). * Ann. Physik, 17, 801 (1908)6 PRINCIPLES OF MODERN PHYSICS [ouar. 1 2. The speed of light is the same for any two observers who are in uniform rectilinear relative motion, and is independent of the motion of the source. ‘The first of these postulates may be regarded as requiring that a correctly formulated physical law be expressible in the same form in any two coordinate systems which are in uniform relative translational motion, since, if this were not possible, the difference in the form of the physical law as a function of what reference frame is used could constitute ‘a basis for selecting a “preferred” reference frame. An expression which retains the same appearance in different coordinate systems is said to be covariant with respect to the coordinate transformation which earries ‘one system into the other. We may thus test the correctness of a physical law by examining its transformation properties between systemsin uniform relative motion. ‘This of course assumes that the transformation law for the coordinates is itself correctly known. If we proceed to test the covariance of the laws of physics as suggested above, we find that Newton's laws are covariant with respect to the Galilean transformation, but that Maxwell's equations are not. ‘The truth of the latter statement is relatively easy to demonstrate for the equation veD . Oo) in the absence of polarizable matter: First, the operator ¥- means that certain derivatives of a vector field are to be taken at a given instant of time. Since f= 4, this is then equivalent to taking the divergence jn the S’ system at each corresponding point at the same instant. Thus we have the equality veD=W-D @) Next, we observe that a charge must have the same magnitude for all observers, since it could be measured by each observer by measuring the force it exerts upon an equal charge. (If the charge took on a different value for different observers, this could be used as a basis for defining the absolute speed of a system.) We therefore must have At ? = Aa By! Ae! ~ Ax Ay Ae ° ® since Az’ Ay’ Ae! = Ax Ay Az at any fixed time Finally, the force equations f= q(E + v x B) = q(B’ + vx B’) require that, E=E'-VxB' @ where V = v — v’ is the veetor relative velocity of 8’ with respect to 8,see. 1-2] ‘HD THEORY OF RELATIVITY 7 ‘We thus find that D=D'— Wx B in a region where P = P’ = 0. ‘Therefore, in terms of quantities measured only in S", VD! =p + av VX B © ‘The extra term on the right is not in general equal to zero, and since it depends upon V, this provides a means of defining a special reference system. One could, for example, assert with considerable philosophical justification that the system of reference for which Maxwell’s equations have their simplest form is a system in a state of absolute rest. ‘This is in effect the basis of the ether hypothesi One might next wonder whether the above conflict with the principle of relativity could be caused by Maxwell’s equations themselves being in error. Perhaps there is some other set of equations, to which Maxwell’s equations are a close approximation, which can be written in covariant form. That this is not a possible solution to the problem within the framework of Einstein's postulates ean be shown by considering a very simple physical experiment, the description of whieh by observers O and O will be shown to require the abandonment of the Galilean transforma- tion, rather than of Maxwell’s equations. Let systems 8 and §” be in uniform relative motion such that at some time the two origins coincide. At this instant, which the observers will define as t=’ = 0, let-a short light pulse be emitted from the origin and let us imagine that O and 0’ have each set up photoelectric cells and time recorders at various points fixed in their respective systems in order to be able to follow the progress of the wave pulse as it expands in all directions from the source. From the two postulates of special relativity, the two observers must find the same form for the equation of the wavefront in his system. That is, O will say that ety tee =0 @) is the equation of the wavefront, while 0’ must find it to be at yt tat — ct =0 @ Now, direct substitution reveals that the Galilean transformation 1-1(1) cannot be reconciled with the above description of this physical experi ment. It is easy to see why this is so; Eqs. (6) and (7) simply assert that each observer will find, at any instant, that the shape of the wave- front is a sphere of radius ct and ct’, respectively, with its center fixed at his own origin of coordinates. Clearly, the Galilean transformation says that the wave pulse always has a spherical wavefront, but also that,8 PRINCIPLES OF MODERN PHYSICS [onap. 1 if the center of the expanding sphere remains at fixed point in one system, it must move at speed V in the other. 1-8, The Lorentz Transformation From the preceding discussion, we conclude that we must either give up the two postulates we have set down or abandon the Galilean transformation. If we abandon the postulates, we must face the many problems posed by the Michelson-Morley experiment, the measurements of the aberration of starlight, and other puzzling experimental results. On the other hand, to abandon the Galilean transformation, which appeals so strongly to our sense of what is “right,” seems even less pal- atable. The difficulty is that our sense of what is “right” is based upon countless centuries of experience with nature at a level where a “feeling” for rigid-body dynamics has carried with it great survival value—but all we can really expect of nature is that what she has taught us in this way is nearly “right.” Let us therefore try to replace the Galilean trans- formation with a new relationship between the two reference frames which will satisfy the requirements of Eqs. 1-2(6) and (7) and which is in agree- ment with the Galilean transformation if the two systems are moving very slowly with respect to each other. Inspection of Eqs. 1-2(6) and (7) and the Galilean transformation 1-1(1) reveals that y and z give no trouble, but that there are some terms involving x and ¢ that must somehow be made to disappear. ‘This must of course be done without disturbing the combination + — V¢ in the trans- formation, since the speed of one system with respect to the other must mean the rate at which a point, fixed in one system, appears to move past the other system. If we also require that straight lines in one system transform into straight lines in the other, we can at most modify the first equation by a constant factor. ‘Thus we shall try to retain the x trans- formation in the relatively simple form w= ya — Vb) @ where + isa factor which is very nearly equal to unity under the conditions of everyday experience. Further thought reveals that the equation f = ¢ cannot be correct, since no rearrangement of space coordinates alone can give wave pulses that are simultaneously concentric spheres in both systems. The simplest modification of the time transformation is one which contains only « and ¢ linearly: v= Att Be @) where A should be nearly unity and B nearly zero under ordinary familiar