This is a file in the archives of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. |
Sommerfeld's theory also acted as an enabling theory for the experiment. It provided an estimate of the size of the magnetic moment of the atoms so that Stern could begin calculations to see if the experiment was feasible. Stern calculated, for example, that a magnetic field gradient of 104 Gauss per centimeter would be sufficient to produce deflections that would give detectable separations of the beam components. He asked Gerlach if he could produce such a gradient. Gerlach responded affirmatively, and said he could do even better. The experiment seemed feasible. A sketch of the apparatus is shown in Figure 12. The silver atoms pass through the inhomogeneous magnetic field. If the beam is spatially quantized, as Sommerfeld predicted, two spots should be observed on the screen. (The sketch shows the beam splitting into three components, which would be expected in modern quantum theory for an atom with angular momentum equal to one). I note that Sommerfeld's theory was incorrect, illustrating the point that an enabling theory need not be correct to be useful.
A preliminary result reported by Stern and Gerlach did not show
splitting of the beam into components. It did, however, show a
broadened beam spot. They concluded that although they had not
demonstrated spatial quantization, they had provided "evidence that
the silver atom possesses a magnetic moment." Stern and Gerlach made
improvements in the apparatus, particularly in replacing a round beam
slit by a rectangular one that gave a much higher intensity. The
results are shown in Figure 13 (Gerlach
and Stern 1922a). There is an intensity minimum in the center of the
pattern, and the separation of the beam into two components is clearly
seen. This result seemed to confirm Sommerfeld's quantum-theoretical
prediction of spatial quantization. Pauli, a notoriously skeptical
physicist, remarked, "Hopefully now even the incredulous Stern will be
convinced about directional quantization" (in a letter from Pauli to
Gerlach 17 February 1922). Pauli's view was shared by the physics
community. Nevertheless the Stern-Gerlach result posed a problem for
the Bohr-Sommerfeld theory of the atom. Stern and Gerlach had assumed
that the silver atoms were in an angular momentum state with angular
momentum equal to one (L = 1). In fact, the atoms are in an L = 0
state, for which no splitting of the beam would be expected in either
the classical or the quantum theory. Stern and Gerlach had not
considered this possibility. Had they done so they might not have
done the experiment. The later, or new, quantum theory developed by
Heisenberg, Schrodinger, and others, predicted that for an L = 1 state
the beam should split into three components as shown in
Figure 12. The magnetic moment of the
atom would be either 0 or ± eh/(4 x m). Thus,
if the silver atoms were in an L = 1 state as Stern and Gerlach had
assumed, their result, showing two beam components, also posed a
problem for the new quantum theory. This was solved when Uhlenbeck and
Goudsmit (1925, 1926) proposed that the electron had an intrinsic
angular momentum or spin equal to h/4
. This is
analogous to the earth having orbital angular momentum about the sun
and also an intrinsic angular momentum due to its rotation on its own
axis. In an atom the electron will have a total angular momentum
J = L + S, where L
is the orbital angular momentum and S is the spin of
the electron. For silver atoms in an L = 0 state the electron would
have only its spin angular momentum and one would expect the beam to
split into two components. Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck suggested the idea
of electron spin to explain features in atomic spectra such as the
anomalous Zeeman effect, the splitting of spectral lines in a magnetic
field into more components than could be accommodated by the
Bohr-Sommerfeld theory of the atom. Although the Stern-Gerlach results
were known, and would certainly have provided strong support for the
idea of electron spin, Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck made no mention of the
result.
The Stern-Gerlach experiment was initially regarded as a crucial test between the classical theory of the atom and the Bohr-Sommerfeld theory. In a sense it was, because it showed clearly that spatial quantization existed, a phenomenon that could be accommodated only within a quantum mechanical theory. It decided between the two classes of theories, the classical and the quantum mechanical. With respect to the particular quantum theory of Bohr and Sommerfeld, however, it wasn't crucial, although it was regarded as such at the time, because that theory predicted no splitting for a beam of silver atoms in the ground state (L = 0). The theory had been wrongly applied. The two-component result was also problematic for the new quantum theory, which also predicts no splitting for an angular momentum zero state and three components for an L = 1 state. Only after the suggestion of electron spin did the Stern-Gerlach result confirm the new theory.
Although the interpretation of the experimental result was incorrect for a time, the result itself remained quite robust through the theory change from the old to the new quantum theory. It is important to remember that experimental results do not change when accepted theory changes, although certainly, as we have seen, their interpretation may change. Gerlach and Stern emphasized this point themselves.
Apart from any theory, it can be stated, as a pure result of the experiment, and as far as the exactitude of our experiments allows us to say so, that silver atoms in a magnetic field have only two discrete values of the component of the magnetic moment in the direction of the field strength; both have the same absolute value with each half of the atoms having a positive and a negative sign respectively (Gerlach and Stern 1924, pp. 690-691, FW)
Experimental results, as well as experiments, also have a life of their own, independent of theory.
Return to Experiment in Physics
Allan Franklin allan.franklin@colorado.edu |