Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-tdptf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-26T15:23:05.470Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Primary ionization in helium and hydrogen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

E. J. Williams
E. J. Williams
Affiliation:
Gonville and Caius College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

According to recent experiments by Cosyns(1), in which the probability that a cosmic-ray electron actuates a Geiger-Müller Counter is observed, the rate of production of primary ions is practically the same in helium as in hydrogen. The value obtained for hydrogen (which agrees very closely with that previously obtained by Danforth and Ramsey (2) using the same method) is moreover little different from that found for fast β-particles in expansion-chamber experiments.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , March 1937 , pp. 179 - 182
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Philosophical Society 1937

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

(1)Cosyns, , Nature, 138 (1936), 284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2)Danforth, and Ramsey, , Phys. Rev. 49 (1936), 854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(3)Bethe, , Ann. d. Phys. 5 (1930), 325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Wheeler, , Phys. Rev. 43 (1933), 258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(5)Williams, , Proc. Danish Acad. 13 (1935), 4.Google Scholar
(6)Gurney, , Proc. Roy. Soc. 107 (1925), 340.Google Scholar
(7)Williams, and Terroux, , Proc. Roy. Soc. 126 (1930), 289.Google Scholar
(8)Williams, , Proc. Roy. Soc. 135 (1932), 108.Google Scholar
(9)Williams, , Phys. Rev. 45 (1934), 129; Proc. Physics Conf. at Zürich (1936).Google Scholar
(10)White, and Millington, , Proc. Roy. Soc. 120 (1928), 701. Williams, Proc. Roy. Soc. 135 (1932), 108.Google Scholar