Four isomers of In2H2: a careful comparison between theory and experiment

Author(s):  
Henry F. Mull ◽  
Peter R. Franke ◽  
Caroline Sargent ◽  
Gary E. Douberly ◽  
Justin M. Turney ◽  
...  

A careful comparison of theory with experiment as regards the intensity of reflection would seem to suggest itself naturally as a crucial test of the validity of any optical theory. In spite of this, it was not till late in the last century that the problem was seriously undertaken by experimentalists. In 1870 Rood turned his attention to. the subject with the view of testing Fresnel’s laws, and concluded from his experiments “that the reflecting power of glass conforms, in the closest manner, to the predictions of theory.” However, in 1886, this conclusion was shown to be untenable by Lord Rayleigh. The difficulties of measuring the intensity of the reflected light accurately are very considerable, and Rood had contented himself with estimating the transmitted light and deducing the amount that was reflected. Rayleigh showed that when this fact was considered the difference between Fresnel’s formula and Rood’s experimental results might amount to 7 per cent, of the reflected light, a difference much too great to be regarded as insignificant. Rayleigh found from his own experiments that recently polished glass has a reflecting power differing not more than 1 or 2 per cent, from Fresnel’s formula; but that after some months or years the reflection may fall off 10 per cent, or more, and that without any apparent tarnish. About the same time Sir John Conroy carried out a lengthy series of experiments on the same subject. His results were published in the ‘Phil. Trans.,’ 1888, and confirmed those of Lord Rayleigh. There can thus be no doubt of a decided departure from Fresnel’s formula under certain circumstances. The difference is too great to be put down to experimental errors, and there is no evidence of such errors, seeing that the results of experiment are fairly consistent. Nor can there be very much doubt as to the direction in which to look for an explanation of the apparent divergence between theory and experiment. Everything points to a changing condition of the reflecting surface, and this suggests that a consideration of the layer of transition will show how Fresnel’s laws are departed from in this as in some other directions. The object of the present paper is to investigate this matter rather more systematically than appears to have been done hitherto.


Author(s):  
Gertrude F. Rempfer

I became involved in electron optics in early 1945, when my husband Robert and I were hired by the Farrand Optical Company. My husband had a mathematics Ph.D.; my degree was in physics. My main responsibilities were connected with the development of an electrostatic electron microscope. Fortunately, my thesis research on thermionic and field emission, in the late 1930s under the direction of Professor Joseph E. Henderson at the University of Washington, provided a foundation for dealing with electron beams, high vacuum, and high voltage.At the Farrand Company my co-workers and I used an electron-optical bench to carry out an extensive series of tests on three-electrode electrostatic lenses, as a function of geometrical and voltage parameters. Our studies enabled us to select optimum designs for the lenses in the electron microscope. We early on discovered that, in general, electron lenses are not “thin” lenses, and that aberrations of focal point and aberrations of focal length are not the same. I found electron optics to be an intriguing blend of theory and experiment. A laboratory version of the electron microscope was built and tested, and a report was given at the December 1947 EMSA meeting. The micrograph in fig. 1 is one of several which were presented at the meeting. This micrograph also appeared on the cover of the January 1949 issue of Journal of Applied Physics. These were exciting times in electron microscopy; it seemed that almost everything that happened was new. Our opportunities to publish were limited to patents because Mr. Farrand envisaged a commercial instrument. Regrettably, a commercial version of our laboratory microscope was not produced.


1978 ◽  
Vol 39 (12) ◽  
pp. 1355-1363 ◽  
Author(s):  
L.G. Caron ◽  
M. Miljak ◽  
D. Jerome

1986 ◽  
Vol 150 (10) ◽  
pp. 321
Author(s):  
V.L. Dunin-Barkovskii

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshiji Kawagoe ◽  
Taisuke Matsubae ◽  
Hirokazu Takizawa ◽  
Tetsuo Yamamori

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document