Abstract The new wave mechanics has been eminently successful in correlating and accounting for the large amount of experimental data on the periodic properties of the atom. The applications of the new theory to aperiodic phenomena, though not nearly so numerous, have been attended with no less success; indeed, it is in these experiments on free electrons, in which diffraction patterns similar to those produced by beams of X-rays and light are obtained, that the wave nature of electrons is so clearly and objectively demonstrated. Such diffraction effects have been obtained by a number of investigators by scattering beams of homogeneous electrons in crystals, thin films and by a ruled grating. Similar effects are obtained when electrons are scattered by complex molecules, owing to the symmetrically situated nuclei in the molecular structure, and when α-particles are scattered by helium owing to interference between the waves of the scattered incident particles and recoiling helium nuclei.
Abstract The new wave mechanics has been eminently successful in correlating and accounting for the large amount of experimental data on the periodic properties of the atom. The applications of the new theory to aperiodic phenomena, though not nearly so numerous, have been attended with no less success; indeed, it is in these experiments on free electrons, in which diffraction patterns similar to those produced by beams of X-rays and light are obtained, that the wave nature of electrons is so clearly and objectively demonstrated. Such diffraction effects have been obtained by a number of investigators by scattering beams of homogeneous electrons in crystals, thin films and by a ruled grating. Similar effects are obtained when electrons are scattered by complex molecules, owing to the symmetrically situated nuclei in the molecular structure, and when α-particles are scattered by helium owing to interference between the waves of the scattered incident particles and recoiling helium nuclei.
Abstract The work about to be described is a continuation of an investigation begun by one of us at Princeton, New Jersey, on the scattering of electrons by gas atoms. The conditions there were so chosen that only single collisions were taken into account, and it was possible to investigate not only the energy loss on collision, as in the Franck and Hertz experiments, but also the direction of the path of the electron after collision. By employing a magnetic analysis of the velocity of the electron after impact it was found possible to obtain information as to the probability of excitation of various stationary states of the atom considered, on collision with electrons of much higher velocities than could previously be used. The curves relating scattered intensity with angle of scattering were found to have sharp maxima, which were strongly suggestive of diffraction maxima, as might be expected if the motion of electrons is governed by the wave mechanics. But whereas the wave mechanics has been eminently successful in explaining the scattering results of Davisson and Germer with single metal crystals, and of Thomson and Rupp with thin metal foils the results of Dymond have been inexplicable on this basis. It may be said at once that we have been unable to find any trace of the sharp maxima found by him in I, which were apparently due to a secondary cause. Indeed, as has recently been pointed out by Elsasser, no interference effects can be expected, when the electron loses energy on collision, the case in which Dymond found maxima, for the frequencies of the electron before and after interaction with the atom are different and there can consequently be no coherence of the scattered waves.
Abstract The interference of electrons is now a well established fact. It has been shown that when a homogeneous beam of electrons falls upon a regular arrangement of scattering centres, such as a crystal, a ruled grating, or a complex gaseous molecule, the angular distribution of the scattered electrons shows interference maxima and minima. The analagous, though distinct, phenomonon of the diffraction of electrons has, however, only recently been demonstrated. Evidence of the diffraction of electrons was first obtained about two years ago by Bullard and Massey, and the author. While investigating the angular distribution of elastically scattered electrons in mercury vapour I found well-marked maxima and minima. In this case the scattering was produced, not by an ordered arrangement of scattering centres, but by a random distribution of atoms. It has been shown theoretically that the results obtained can be satisfactorily explained on the assumption of scattering by a single centre, and consequently they represent a true diffraction effect.
Among the secondary effects produced in an X-ray, or cathode ray tube, there is one which is of special interest to physicists because it seems to throw some light on the question as to the nature of an electron. It appears that when a pencil of cathode rays falls upon the surface of a metal crystal, some of the rays are reflected, or “scattered,” and that the intensity of the scattered rays is greatest in certain directions, so that on a photographic plate placed to receive them, a diffraction pattern is produced as with X rays. The experiment proves that electrons, which were till recently supposed to be merely “particles,” really consist (like X rays), of waves, or at any rate have waves associated with them. It is to these waves associated with electrons, or “electron waves” as they are called, that I propose to devote my remarks this evening. The effect was first observed experimentally in 1927, by Davisson and Germer, who reflected cathode rays from a nickel crystal and, using an electrical method of detection, found maxima of intensity in certain directions. From the positions of the maxima and the known spacing constants of nickel they were able to deduce the wave-length of the electron waves. Later in the same year Professor G. P. Thomson obtained similar effects by transmitting cathode rays through thin metal films and receiving them on a photographic plate.
At the atomic scale, the distinction between particles and waves breaks down. The realization, early in the twentieth century, that light consists of discrete packages, or “photons,” prompted the converse suggestion that particles could behave like waves. Confirmation of this idea came in 1927, from an experiment involving the scattering of electrons from a crystal. Today, “wave-particle duality” is central to quantum mechanics, and the wave properties of subatomic particles are widely used in microscopy and crystallography. Electron diffraction techniques are widely used to characterize atomic arrangements on solid surfaces and inside thin films, and to investigate the structures of molecules in gases. The dual nature of waves and particles is part of the “spookiness” of quantum mechanics, which cannot be explained in any classical way. It used to be that one could only imagine an experiment that would simultaneously demonstrate the particle and wave nature of electrons.
The years of the third decade of the present century were heady times. Old social orders were being swept away, monarchies becoming republics and the United States of America was emerging as a world power. In physics too, revolutions were taking place, none more potent than that which resulted in the emergence of quantum mechanics as a model for the behaviour of sub-atomic particles. It was Newton who first suggested that light was particulate but during the nineteenth century this view had fallen into neglect. Indeed a number of experiments, for example the classic Young's slits experiment, demonstrated quite conclusively that light was a wave motion. How else could interference fringes occur? However, the experiments on the photoelectric effect demonstrated just as conclusively that light energy was carried in packets, or quanta, and that a continuous wave description was not applicable. This ‘wave or particle’ dilemma was not unique to the behaviour of light. J. J. Thompson showed that cathode rays were charged, had a well defined mass and had all the properties expected of a beam of particles. Nevertheless, Davisson and Germer showed that diffraction of electrons could take place, an effect made visually much more dramatic by G. P. Thompson's transmission electron diffraction patterns. Nowadays, electron diffraction is used as a routine analytical tool in all advanced metallurgical and materials science laboratories (Fig. 2.1). Clearly new axioms were required.
A primary electron beam of a transmission electron microscope is scattered into secondary beams by the planes of atoms of a single crystal. These secondary beams are focused to form a diffraction pattern on the final screen. This experiment is similar to the Thompson one which, independently by Davisson and Germer, demonstrated the de Broglie hypothesis of the existence of electron waves. Without changing the experimental apparatus, it is possible to realize an interference experiment with electrons coming from two spatially separated sources in analogy with the optical Young set-up. Both experiments are clear evidence of the electron wave-like behaviour. By varying the conditions of illumination, changes of the fringe visibility which reveal the spatial coherence properties of the electron beam, are displayed.