R. A. Millikan's Struggle with the Meaning of Planck's Constant

Physics in Perspective

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 231-237

  Holton, Gerald ^a  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Millikan; Photoelectric effect; Planck's constant; Quantum theory of light

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347506633     PISSN: 14226944     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s000160050020     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Physical Review 7 (March 1916), 355-388. An abstract of his paper, and early results, had been published by Millikan in Physical Review 4 (1914), 73 and 6 (1915), 55. A much abbreviated version of part of this essay was published (electronically only) in Physical Review Focus 3, Story 23 (April 22, 1999).
2. Physical Review 7 (March 1916), 355-388. An abstract of his paper, and early results, had been published by Millikan in Physical Review 4 (1914), 73 and 6 (1915), 55. A much abbreviated version of part of this essay was published (electronically only) in Physical Review Focus 3, Story 23 (April 22, 1999).
3. Physical Review 7 (March 1916), 355-388. An abstract of his paper, and early results, had been published by Millikan in Physical Review 4 (1914), 73 and 6 (1915), 55. A much abbreviated version of part of this essay was published (electronically only) in Physical Review Focus 3, Story 23 (April 22, 1999).
4. Physical Review 7 (March 1916), 355-388. An abstract of his paper, and early results, had been published by Millikan in Physical Review 4 (1914), 73 and 6 (1915), 55. A much abbreviated version of part of this essay was published (electronically only) in Physical Review Focus 3, Story 23 (April 22, 1999).
5. A. Einstein, "Über einen die Erzeugung und Verwandlung des Lichtes betreffenden heuristischen Gesichtspunkt," Annalen der Physik 17 (1905), 132-148.
6. "On the Elementary Electric Charge and the Avogadro Constant," Physical Review 2 (1913), 109-143. The story of, and behind, the determination of e is the subject of chapter 2, "Subelectrons, Presuppositions, and the Millikan-Ehrenhaft Dispute," in G. Holton, The Scientific Imagination (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, revised edition of 1998).
7. "On the Elementary Electric Charge and the Avogadro Constant," Physical Review 2 (1913), 109-143. The story of, and behind, the determination of e is the subject of chapter 2, "Subelectrons, Presuppositions, and the Millikan-Ehrenhaft Dispute," in G. Holton, The Scientific Imagination (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, revised edition of 1998).
8. R A. Millikan, "Einstein's Photoelectric Equation and Contact Electromotive Force," Physical Review 7 (1916), 18-32.
9. A. Einstein to Conrad Habicht, in The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, v. 5 (Princeton University Press, 1993), p. 31.
10. Published by Millikan as "Atomic Theories of Radiation," Science 37 (January 24, 1913), 119-133.
11. R. A. Millikan, "The Electron and the Light-Quant from the Experimental Point of View," Les Prix Nobel 1921-1923 (Stockholm). Millikan had asked to be allowed to delay his acceptance of the Prize because when he was first informed of the award, he was then not ready to drop his work and studies and start the long trans-Atlantic voyage.
12. The Autobiography of Robert A. Millikan (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1950).
13. In his lecture "History as Myth and Muse" (given at the University of Amsterdam, November 11, 1998), Roger H. Stuewer concluded, concerning this change of the historic record, that "even an experimental physicist as great as Millikan could be dead wrong in his theoretical views - and then also was human enough to try to hide his error much later by giving a patently false account in his autobiography" (p. 17).
14. Tudor Wyatt Johnston, private communication, May 6, 1999.
15. Another typical case is the rejection by William Duane - of the "Duane-Hunt Law" for x-rays -as well as by Rutherford, of the theory, later proven to be correct, on which the experimentally derived Duane-Hunt Law rests. See Roger H. Stuewer, The Compton Effect (New York, NY: Science History Publications, 1975), p. 78.
16. Another typical case is the rejection by William Duane - of the "Duane-Hunt Law" for x-rays - as well as by Rutherford, of the theory, later proven to be correct, on which the experimentally derived Duane-Hunt Law rests. See Roger H. Stuewer, The Compton Effect (New York, NY: Science History Publications, 1975), p. 78.
17. For a brief account of that struggle, see G. Holton, Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought (Harvard University Press, 1988), pp. 156-159.