Physics

views updated Jun 08 2018

Physics

3151 ■ AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICS TEACHERS

Attn: Scholarship Committee
One Physics Ellipse
College Park, MD 20740
Tel: (301)209-3344
Fax: (301)209-0845
E-mail: aapt-prog@aapt.org
Web Site: http://www.aapt.org/Grants/lotze.cfm
To provide financial assistance to high school seniors or currently-enrolled college students interested in preparing for a career as a high school physics teacher.
Title of Award: Barbara Lotze Scholarship for Future Teachers Area, Field, or Subject: Education; Education, Secondary; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Generally, 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $2,000 per year. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed for up to 3 additional years.
Eligibility Requirements: Eligible to apply are high school seniors, high school graduates, and currently-enrolled undergraduate students in or planning to enter a physics teacher preparation program. All applicants must be U.S. citizens. All other considerations being equal, applicants from Allegheny College are given preference. Deadline for Receipt: Applications may be submitted at any time.

3152 ■ AMERICAN COUNCIL OF THE BLIND

Attn: Coordinator, Scholarship Program
1155 15th Street, N.W., Suite 1004
Washington, DC 20005
Tel: (202)467-5081
Free: 800-424-8666
Fax: (202)467-5085
E-mail: info@acb.org
Web Site: http://www.acb.org
To provide financial assistance to blind students who are working on an undergraduate or graduate degree in science at an accredited college or university.
Title of Award: Dr. S. Bradley Burson Memorial Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Engineering; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Graduate, Undergraduate Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $1,000. In addition, the winner receives a Kurzweil-1000 Reading System. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to legally blind undergraduate or graduate students majoring in the "hard" sciences (i.e., biology, chemistry, physics, and engineering, but not computer science) in college. They must be U.S. citizens. In addition to letters of recommendation and copies of academic transcripts, applications must include an autobiographical sketch. A cumulative GPA of 3.3 or higher is generally required. Selection is based on demonstrated academic record, involvement in extracurricular and civic activities, and academic objectives. The severity of the applicant's visual impairment and his/her study methods are also taken into account. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year. Additional Information: Scholarship winners are expected to be present at the council's annual conference; the council will cover all reasonable expenses connected with convention attendance.

3153 ■ AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY

Attn: Apker Award Committee
One Physics Ellipse
College Park, MD 20740-3844
Tel: (301)209-3233
Fax: (301)209-0865
E-mail: chodos@aps.org
Web Site: http://www.aps.org/praw/apker/index.cfm
To recognize and reward undergraduate students for outstanding work in physics.
Title of Award: Leroy Apker Award Area, Field, or Subject: Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: 2 recipients each year: 1 to a student at a Ph.D. granting institution and 1 at a non-Ph.D. granting institution. Funds Available: The award consists of a $5,000 honorarium for the student, a certificate citing the work and school of the recipient, and an allowance for travel expenses to the meeting of the American Physical Society (APS) at which the prize is presented. Each of the finalists receives an honorarium of $2,000 and a certificate. Each of the physics departments whose nominees are selected as recipients and finalists receives a certificate and an award; the departmental award is $5,000 for recipients and $1,000 for finalists. Duration: The award is presented annually.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to undergraduate students at colleges and universities in the United States. Nominees should have completed or be completing the requirements for an undergraduate degree with an excellent academic record and should have demonstrated exceptional potential for scientific research by making an original contribution to physics. Each department of physics in the United States may nominate only 1 student. Each nomination packet should include the student's academic transcript, a description of the original contribution written by the student (such as a manuscript or reprint of a research publication or senior thesis), a 1,000-word summary, and 2 letters of recommendation. Deadline for Receipt: June of each year. Additional Information: This award was established in 1978.

3154 ■ AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY

Attn: Committee on Minorities
One Physics Ellipse
College Park, MD 20740-3844
Tel: (301)209-3232
Fax: (301)209-0865
Web Site: http://www.aps.org/educ/com/scholars/index.cfm
To provide financial assistance to underrepresented minority students interested in studying physics on the undergraduate level.
Title of Award: APS Scholarships for Minority Undergraduate Students Who Major in Physics Area, Field, or Subject: Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Usually, 20 to 25 of these scholarships are awarded each year. Funds Available: Stipends are $2,000 per year in the first year or $3,000 in the second year; funds must be used for tuition, room, and board. In addition, $500 is awarded to the host department. Duration: 1 year; renewable for 1 additional year with the approval of the APS selection committee.
Eligibility Requirements: Any African American, Hispanic American, or Native American who plans to major in physics and who is a high school senior or college freshman or sophomore may apply. U.S. citizenship or permanent resident status is required. The selection committee especially encourages applications from students who are attending or planning to attend institutions with historically or predominantly Black, Hispanic, or Native American enrollment. Selection is based on commitment to the study of physics and plans to work on a physics baccalaureate degree. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year. Additional Information: APS conducts this program, which began in 1980 as the Corporate-Sponsored Scholarships for Minority Undergraduate Students Who Major in Physics, in conjunction with the Corporate Associates of the American Institute of Physics. Each scholarship is sponsored by a corporation, which is normally designated as the sponsor. A corporation generally sponsors from 1 to 10 scholarships, depending upon its size and utilization of physics in the business.

3155 ■ AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR ENGINEERING EDUCATION

Attn: SMART Defense Scholarship Program
1818 N Street, N.W., Suite 600
Washington, DC 20036-2479
Tel: (202)331-3516
Fax: (202)265-8504
E-mail: smart@asee.org
Web Site: http://www.asee.org/resources/fellowships/smart/index.cfm
To provide scholarship/loans to upper-division and graduate students in areas of science, mathematics, and engineering that are of interest to the U.S. Department of Defense.
Title of Award: Science, Mathematics, and Research for Transformation (SMART) Defense Scholarship Program Area, Field, or Subject: Architecture, Naval; Behavioral sciences; Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Earth sciences; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Engineering, Ocean; Geosciences; Materials research/science; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Oceanography; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College, Graduate Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, 36 of these scholarships were awarded. Funds Available: The program provides full payment of tuition, fees, room, board, and other normal educational expenses at the recipient's institution. A book allowance of $1,000 per year is also provided. This is a scholarship/loan program; recipients must agree to serve as a civilian employee of the Department of Defense in a science and engineering position. If they fail to fulfill that service obligation, they must reimburse the federal government for all funds they received. Duration: Up to 24 months.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to upper-division and graduate students working on an undergraduate or graduate degree in any of the following fields: aeronautical and astronautical engineering; biosciences; chemical engineering; chemistry; civil engineering; cognitive, neural, and behavioral sciences; computer and computational sciences; electrical engineering; geosciences, including terrain, water, and air; materials science and engineering; mathematics; mechanical engineering; naval architecture and ocean engineering; oceanography; or physics. Applicants must be U.S. citizens who have a GPA of 3.0 or higher. Selection is based on academic records, personal statements, letters of recommendation, and GRE scores. Deadline for Receipt: March of each year. Additional Information: This program, established in 2005, is sponsored by the Army Research Laboratory, the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, the Office of Naval Research, the Air Force Research Laboratory, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Defense Information Systems Agency, and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

3156 ■ ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION

Attn: Financial Aid Division
114 East Capitol Avenue
Little Rock, AR 72201-3818
Tel: (501)371-2050
Free: 800-54-STUDY
Fax: (501)371-2001
E-mail: finaid@adhe.arknet.edu
Web Site: http://www.starark.com
To provide scholarship/loans to college students in Arkansas who are interested in preparing for a teaching career in an approved subject or geographic shortage area.
Title of Award: Arkansas State Teacher Assistance Resource (STAR) Program Area, Field, or Subject: Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Earth sciences; Education; Education, Secondary; Education, Special; Geosciences; Linguistics; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Master's, Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, 42 of these scholarship/loans were approved. Funds Available: The award is $3,000 per year for students who agree to teach in either a geographic teacher shortage area or a subject teacher shortage area. For students who agree to teach in both a geographic shortage area and a subject shortage area, the award is $6,000 per year. This is a scholarship/loan program. Recipients must teach in an Arkansas geographic or subject shortage area for 1 year for each year of support they receive. If they fail to complete that teaching obligation, they must repay all funds received. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed for 1 additional year if the recipient is enrolled in a 4-year teacher education program or 2 additional years if enrolled in a 5-year teacher education program. Renewal requires that the recipient maintain a GPA of 2.75 or higher and complete 24 semester hours as an undergraduate or 18 semester hours as a graduate student.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to Arkansas residents who are full-time students enrolled 1) at a 4-year public or private college or university in the state with an approved teacher education program; 2) in an associate of arts in teaching program; or 3) in an master of arts in teaching program. Applicants must have a GPA of 2.75 or higher and be entering their sophomore, junior, or senior year (or be in a master's degree program). They must be willing to teach in a public school located in a geographic area of Arkansas designated as having a critical shortage of teachers or in a subject matter area designated as having a critical shortage of teachers. Applicants must have completed their freshman year at an accredited Arkansas public or private college or university in a major field of study leading to secondary teacher certification in 1 of the shortage areas. U.S. citizenship is required. Deadline for Receipt: May of each year. Additional Information: This program was established in 2004 as a replacement for the former Arkansas Emergency Secondary Education Loan Program. Recently, the subject areas designated as having a critical shortage of teachers were foreign language, mathematics, chemistry, physics, biology, physical science, earth science, and special education. For a list of geographic areas of Arkansas that are designated as having a critical shortage of teachers, contact the Department of Higher Education. The State Teacher Assistance Resource (STAR) program also provides that teachers who received federal student loans may have those loans repaid 1) at the rate of $3,000 per year if they teach a subject area in Arkansas that is designated as a shortage area or if they teach in a geographic area of the state with a shortage of teachers, or 2) at the rate of $6,000 per year if they teach a shortage subject area in a shortage geographic area. Students may not, however, participate in both the scholarship/loan program and the federal loan repayment program.

3157 ■ ARMED FORCES COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS ASSOCIATION

Attn: AFCEA Educational Foundation
4400 Fair Lakes Court
Fairfax, VA 22033-3899
Tel: (703)631-6149
Free: 800-336-4583
Fax: (703)631-4693
E-mail: scholarship@afcea.org
Web Site: http://www.afcea.org/education/scholarships/undergraduate/pub1.asp
To provide financial assistance to undergraduate students who are working full time on a degree by means of a distance-learning or on-line program.
Title of Award: AFCEA Distance-Learning/On-Line Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Systems engineering Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $1,000. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to U.S. citizens working full time on a bachelor's degree by means of a distance-learning or on-line program affiliated with a major, accredited 4-year college or university in the United States. Applicants must have completed at least 1 year of course work based on a 30-semester hour equivalent; classes in progress at the time of application cannot be used towards the 1-year minimum completion requirement. Completed courses must include at least 2 semesters of calculus (not pre-calculus). Majors are limited to the fields of engineering (chemical, computer, electrical, or systems), mathematics, physics, or computer science. Selection is based primarily on academic excellence. Deadline for Receipt: July of each year.

3158 ■ ARMED FORCES COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS ASSOCIATION

Attn: AFCEA Educational Foundation
4400 Fair Lakes Court
Fairfax, VA 22033-3899
Tel: (703)631-6149
Free: 800-336-4583
Fax: (703)631-4693
E-mail: scholarship@afcea.org
Web Site: http://www.afcea.org/education/scholarships/rotc/rotc1.asp
To provide financial assistance to ROTC cadets who are majoring in fields related to communications and electronics.
Title of Award: AFCEA ROTC Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Computer and information sciences; Electronics; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Systems engineering Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: 36 each year, divided equally among Army, Navy/Marine Corps, and Air Force ROTC programs; for each service, 6 are awarded to rising juniors, 6 to rising seniors. Funds Available: The stipend is $2,000. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to ROTC cadets majoring in electronics, engineering (aerospace, chemical, computer, electrical, or systems), mathematics, physics, or computer science. Applicants must be nominated by their ROTC professor, be entering their junior or senior year, be U.S. citizens, be of good moral character, have demonstrated academic excellence, be motivated to complete a college education and serve as officers in the U.S. armed forces, and be able to demonstrate financial need. Deadline for Receipt: March of each year.

3159 ■ ARMED FORCES COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS ASSOCIATION

Attn: AFCEA Educational Foundation
4400 Fair Lakes Court
Fairfax, VA 22033-3899
Tel: (703)631-6149
Free: 800-336-4583
Fax: (703)631-4693
E-mail: scholarship@afcea.org
Web Site: http://www.afcea.org/education/scholarships/workingstudents/ws1.asp
To provide financial assistance to undergraduate students who are working part time on a degree in engineering or the sciences while already employed.
Title of Award: AFCEA Scholarship for Working Professionals Area, Field, or Subject: Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Electrical; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Systems engineering Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $1,500. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to part-time students entering their sophomore, junior, or senior year at an accredited 2-year or 4-year college or university in the United States while already employed in a science or technology field. Applicants must be U.S. citizens working toward a degree in engineering (aerospace, chemical, electrical, or systems), mathematics, physics, or computer science with a GPA of 3.4 or higher. They must be able to demonstrate academic achievement, patriotism, and potential to contribute to the American work force. Deadline for Receipt: September of each year. Additional Information: This program was established in 2002.

3160 ■ ARMED FORCES COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS ASSOCIATION

Attn: AFCEA Educational Foundation
4400 Fair Lakes Court
Fairfax, VA 22033-3899
Tel: (703)631-6149
Free: 800-336-4583
Fax: (703)631-4693
E-mail: scholarship@afcea.org
Web Site: http://www.afcea.org/education/scholarships/undergraduate/genemm.asp
To provide funding to veterans, military personnel, and their family members who are majoring in specified scientific fields in college.
Title of Award: General Emmett Paige Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, 11 of these scholarships were awarded. Funds Available: The stipend is $2,000. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to veterans, persons on active duty in the uniformed military services, and their spouses or dependents who are currently enrolled full time in an accredited 4-year college or university in the United States. Graduating high school seniors are not eligible, but veterans entering college as freshmen may apply. Spouses or dependents must be sophomores or juniors. Applicants must be U.S. citizens, be of good moral character, have demonstrated academic excellence, be motivated to complete a college education, and be working toward a degree in engineering (aerospace, chemical, computer, or electrical), mathematics, physics, or computer science with a GPA of 3.4 or higher. They must provide a copy of Discharge Form DD214, Certificate of Service, or facsimile of their current Department of Defense or Coast Guard Identification Card. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year.

3161 ■ ARMED FORCES COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS ASSOCIATION

Attn: AFCEA Educational Foundation
4400 Fair Lakes Court
Fairfax, VA 22033-3899
Tel: (703)631-6149
Free: 800-336-4583
Fax: (703)631-4693
E-mail: scholarship@afcea.org
Web Site: http://www.afcea.org/education/scholarships/undergraduate/veteran.asp
To provide financial assistance to veterans and military personnel who served in Afghanistan or Iraq and are working on an undergraduate degree in fields related to the support of U.S. intelligence enterprises.
Title of Award: Veterans of Enduring Freedom-Afghanistan and Iraqi Freedom Combat Operations Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Computer and information sciences; Engineering; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Systems engineering Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 1 or more each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $2,000. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to active-duty and honorably discharged U.S. military veterans, Reservists, and National Guard personnel who served in combat operations of Enduring Freedom-Afghanistan or Iraqi Freedom. Applicants must be enrolled at a 2-or 4-year institution in the United States and working on an undergraduate degree in computer engineering technology, computer information systems, electronics engineering technology, engineering (aerospace, computer, electrical, or systems), mathematics, physics, or computer science. Along with their application, they must submit an essay that includes a brief synopsis of relevant work experience (including military assignments), a brief statement of career goals after graduation, and a explanation of how their academic and career goals will contribute to the areas related to communications, intelligence and/or information systems, and the mission of the Armed Forces Communications and Electronics Association (AFCEA). Financial need is also considered in the selection process. Deadline for Receipt: October of each year. Additional Information: This scholarship was first offered in 2005.

3162 ■ ARMED FORCES COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS ASSOCIATION

3163 ■ ARMED FORCES COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS ASSOCIATION

Attn: AFCEA Educational Foundation
4400 Fair Lakes Court
Fairfax, VA 22033-3899
Tel: (703)631-6149
Free: 800-336-4583
Fax: (703)631-4693
E-mail: scholarship@afcea.org
Web Site: http://www.afcea.org/education/scholarships/undergraduate/sgtjean.asp
To provide funding to members and veterans of the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) who are majoring in specified fields in college.
Title of Award: Marine Sgt. Jeannette L. Winters Memorial Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Systems engineering Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $2,000. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to USMC personnel currently on active duty, in the Reserves, or honorably-discharged veterans who are enrolled full or part time in an accredited college or university in the United States. Applicants must be U.S. citizens, be of good moral character, have demonstrated academic excellence, be motivated to complete a college education, and be working on a degree in engineering (aerospace, computer, electrical, or systems), mathematics, physics, or computer science with a GPA of 3.0 or higher. They must provide a copy of Discharge Form DD214, Certificate of Service, or facsimile of their current Department of Defense Identification Card. Deadline for Receipt: September of each year. Additional Information: This program was established in 2002 to honor a Marine who died when her KC-130 aircraft crashed in Pakistan.

3164 ■ ASSOCIATION FOR IRON & STEEL TECHNOLOGY

Attn: AIST Foundation
186 Thorn Hill Road
Warrendale, PA 15086-7528
Tel: (724)776-6040
Fax: (724)776-1880
E-mail: lwharrey@aist.org
Web Site: http://www.aist.org/foundation/scholarships.htm
To provide financial assistance for college study of engineering to Canadians who are children of members of the Association for Iron & Steel Technology (AIST).
Title of Award: David H. Samson Canadian Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering; Geology; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $US2,000. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed for up to 3 additional years.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to the children (natural, adopted, or ward) of Canadian citizens and landed immigrants who are members of the association. Applicants must have been accepted in an eligible full-time course of study of engineering at an accredited Canadian university. If no engineering student applies, the award may be made to an eligible student planning to major in chemistry, geology, mathematics, or physics. The scholarship may also be awarded to a student entering a community college if there is no eligible applicant entering an accredited university. The committee may also award the scholarship to a previous applicant entering the second or third year at a Canadian university or community college if there is no eligible applicant entering the first year. Selection is based on academic achievements, extracurricular activities, and the student's written statements; financial need is not considered. Deadline for Receipt: June of each year. Additional Information: The AIST was formed in 2004 by the merger of the Iron and Steel Society (ISS) and the Association of Iron and Steel Engineers (AISE). Information is also available from Robert Kneale, AIST Northern Member Chapter, P.O. Box 1734, Cambridge, Ontario N1R 7G8, Canada.

3165 ■ ASSOCIATION FOR IRON & STEEL TECHNOLOGY-NORTHWEST CHAPTER

c/o Gerardo L. Giraldo, Secretary-Treasurer
Nucor Steel Seattle, Inc.
Washington Steel Division
2424 S.W. Andover Street
Seattle, WA 98106-1100
Tel: (206)933-2245
Fax: (206)933-2207
E-mail: gerry.giraldo@nucor-seattle.com
Web Site: http://www.aist.org/chapters/mc_pittsburgh_scholar_guidelines.htm
To provide financial assistance to family of members of the Northwest Chapter of the Association for Iron & Steel Technology (AIST) who are interested in studying engineering in college.
Title of Award: Northwest Chapter AIST Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Business; Chemistry; Engineering; Manufacturing; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Metallurgy; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: 2 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $1,000. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to children, grandchildren, spouses, or nieces/nephews of chapter members who are high school seniors planning to attend an accredited 4-year college or university. Applicants must intend to study engineering; if there are no applicants in engineering, the award may be given to a student majoring in chemistry, mathematics, metallurgy, or physics, or to a student showing an interest in preparing for a career in the iron and steel industry. Along with their application, they must submit a 500-word essay on 1 of the following topics: 1) an accomplishment they have achieved while they have been a student, why they were successful, and how their success will influence their future plans as an engineer or an engineer in the steel industry; 2) their strengths and interests and how they will apply their skills to a career in the steel industry or as an engineer; or 3) the challenges that face the steel industry and the opportunities for graduates to improve the success of companies within the industry. Financial need is not considered in the selection process. Deadline for Receipt: June of each year. Additional Information: The AIST was formed in 2004 by the merger of the Iron and Steel Society (ISS) and the Association of Iron and Steel Engineers (AISE). The Northwest Chapter serves Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming.

3166 ■ ASSOCIATION FOR IRON & STEEL TECHNOLOGY-OHIO VALLEY CHAPTER

c/o Jeff McKain, Scholarship Chair
Xtek, Inc.
11451 Reading Road
Cincinnati, OH 45241
Tel: (513)733-7843; (999)332-XTEK
Fax: (513)733-7939
E-mail: jeff.mckain@xtek.com
Web Site: http://www.aist.org/chapters/ohiovalley_scholarship.htm
To provide financial assistance for college to student members and children of members of the Ohio Valley Chapter of the Association for Iron & Steel Technology (AIST).
Title of Award: Ohio Valley Chapter AIST Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Earth sciences; Engineering; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Mechanical; Environmental conservation; Environmental science; Geosciences; Information science and technology; Metallurgy; Physical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Up to 2 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $1,000 per year. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed up to 3 additional years provided the recipient remains enrolled full time and maintains a GPA of 3.0 or higher.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to high school seniors and college students who are either 1) children of Ohio Valley Chapter AIST members, or 2) student AIST members. Applicants must be accepted at, planning to attend, or currently enrolled at an accredited college or university with a major in biology, chemistry, computer programming, computer technology, electrical engineering, engineering, engineering technology, environmental engineering, environmental science, information systems technology, mechanical engineering, metallurgy, microbiology, physical science, physics, or other field approved by the scholarship committee. Along with their application, they must submit a 500-word essay on the reasons for their interests and reasons for working on a degree in their field of study, career goals and objectives, and extracurricular activities and their benefits. Selection is based on overall academic achievement (especially in mathematics and science), the essay, and extracurricular activities. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year. Additional Information: The AIST was formed in 2004 by the merger of the Iron and Steel Society (ISS) and the Association of Iron and Steel Engineers (AISE). This program was established by the former Ohio Valley District Section of AISE. The Ohio Valley Chapter covers Indiana (except for the northwestern portion), all of Kentucky, western Tennessee, and portions of southern Ohio.

3167 ■ ASSOCIATION OF OLD CROWS

Attn: AOC Educational Foundation
1000 North Payne Street
Alexandria, VA 22314-1652
Tel: (703)549-1600
Fax: (703)549-2589
Web Site: http://www.crows.org
To provide financial assistance to military enlisted personnel who are pursuing off-duty college-level education programs in fields related to electronics.
Title of Award: Association of Old Crows Enlisted Tuition Grants Area, Field, or Subject: Electronics; Engineering, Electrical; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, a total of $160,000 per year was available for this program. Funds Available: Support is provided to supplement the funding available through the tuition assistance programs. Duration: 1 semester; may be renewed.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to military enlisted personnel (rank of E-4 and above) who are utilizing the tuition assistance programs of the services to study electrical engineering, physics, mathematics, and related areas during their off-duty hours. Selection is based on academic excellence and financial need. Additional Information: Funding is provided by local chapters of this organization, which was founded by World War II veterans who had engaged in electronic warfare to disrupt enemy communications and radars. The program was code-named "Raven" and its operators became known as Old Crows. For information on a chapter in your area, contact the AOC Educational Foundation.

3168 ■ ASSOCIATION FOR WOMEN IN SCIENCE-SEATTLE CHAPTER

c/o Fran Solomon, Scholarship
Committee Chair
5805 16th Avenue, N.E. Seattle, WA 98105
Tel: (206)522-6441
E-mail: fran.solomon@metrokc.gov
Web Site: http://www.scn.org/awis/undergraduate_scholarship.htm
To provide financial assistance to women undergraduates from any state majoring in science, mathematics, or engineering at colleges and universities in western Washington.
Title of Award: AWIS Seattle Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Biochemistry; Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Engineering; Environmental conservation; Environmental science; Geology; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Pharmaceutical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, 11 of these scholarships were awarded. Funds Available: Stipends range from $1,000 to $1,500. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to women from any state entering their junior or senior year at a 4-year college or university in western Washington. Applicants must have a declared major in science (e.g., biological sciences, environmental science, biochemistry, chemistry, pharmacy, geology, computer science, physics), mathematics, or engineering. Along with their application, they must submit essays on the events that led to their choice of a major, their current career plans and long-term goals, and their volunteer and community activities. Financial need is considered in the selection process. At least 1 scholarship is reserved for a woman from a group that is underrepresented in science, mathematics, and engineering careers, including Native American Indians and Alaska Natives, Black/African Americans, Mexican Americans/Chicanas/Latinas, Native Pacific Islanders (Polynesians, Melanesians, and Micronesians), and women with disabilities. Deadline for Receipt: March of each year. Additional Information: This program includes the following named awards: the Virginia Badger Scholarship, the Angela Paez Memorial Scholarship, and the Fran Solomon Scholarship. Support for the program is provided by several sponsors, including the American Chemical Society, Iota Sigma Pi, Rosetta Inpharmatics, and ZymoGenetics, Inc.

3169 ■ BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL WOMEN OF VIRGINIA

Attn: Virginia BPW Foundation
P.O. Box 4842
McLean, VA 22103-4842
Web Site: http://www.bpwva.org/Foundation.shtml
To provide financial assistance to women in Virginia who are interested in working on a bachelor's or advanced degree in science or technology.
Title of Award: Women in Science and Technology Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Actuarial science; Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Dentistry; Engineering; Engineering, Biomedical; Insurance and insurance-related fields; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Medicine; Physics; Science; Technology Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Graduate, Undergraduate Number Awarded: At least 1 each year. Funds Available: Stipends range from $500 to $1,000 per year, depending on the need of the recipient; funds may be used for tuition, fees, books, transportation, living expenses, and dependent care. Duration: 1 year; recipients may reapply (but prior recipients are not given priority).
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to women who are at least 18 years of age, U.S. citizens, Virginia residents, accepted at or currently studying at a Virginia college or university, and working on a bachelor's, master's, or doctoral degree in 1 of the following fields: actuarial science, biology, bioengineering, chemistry, computer science, dentistry, engineering, mathematics, medicine, physics, or a similar scientific or technical field. Applicants must have a definite plan to use their education in a scientific or technical profession. They must be able to demonstrate financial need. Deadline for Receipt: March of each year. Additional Information: Recipients must complete their studies within 2 years.

3170 ■ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration
Attn: National Highway Institute, HNHI-20
4600 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 800
Arlington, VA 22203-1553
Tel: (703)235-0538
Fax: (703)235-0593
E-mail: transportationedu@fhwa.dot.gov
Web Site: http://www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov/ddetfp.asp
To enable students to participate in research activities at facilities of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Federal Highway Administration in the Washington, D.C. area.
Title of Award: Eisenhower Grants for Research Fellowships Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Economics; Engineering; Engineering, Civil; Geography; Information science and technology; Materials research/science; Operations research; Physics; Public administration; Statistics; Technology; Transportation; Urban affairs/design/planning Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College, Graduate Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, 9 students participated in this program. Funds Available: Fellows receive full tuition and fees that relate to the academic credits for the approved research project and a monthly stipend of $1,450 for college seniors, $1,700 for master's students, or $2,000 for doctoral students. An allowance for travel to and from the DOT facility where the research is conducted is also provided, but selectees are responsible for their own housing accommodations. Faculty advisors are allowed 1 site review on projects over 6 months and 2 site reviews on projects over 9 months; travel and per diem are provided for those site reviews. Duration: Tenure is normally 3, 6, 9, or 12 months.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to 1) students in their junior year of a baccalaureate program who will complete their junior year before being awarded a fellowship; 2) students in their senior year of a baccalaureate program; and 3) students who have completed their baccalaureate degree and are enrolled in a program leading to a master's, Ph.D., or equivalent degree. Applicants must be U.S. citizens enrolled in an accredited U.S. institution of higher education working on a degree full time and planning to enter the transportation profession after completing their higher education. They select 1 or more projects from a current list of research projects underway at various DOT facilities; the research will be conducted with academic supervision provided by a faculty advisor from their home university (which grants academic credit for the research project) and with technical direction provided by the DOT staff. Specific requirements for the target projects vary; most require engineering backgrounds, but others involve transportation planning, information management, public administration, physics, materials science, statistical analysis, operations research, chemistry, economics, technology transfer, urban studies, geography, and urban and regional planning. The DOT encourages students at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) to apply for these grants. Selection is based on match of the student's qualifications with the proposed research project (including the student's ability to accomplish the project in the available time), recommendation letters regarding the nominee's qualifications to conduct the research, academic records (including class standing, GPA, and transcripts), and transportation work experience (if any) including the employer's endorsement. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year.

3171 ■ FOUNDATION FOR THE CAROLINAS

Attn: Senior Vice President, Scholarships
217 South Tryon Street
P.O. Box 34769
Charlotte, NC 28234-4769
Tel: (704)973-4535
Free: 800-973-7244
Fax: (704)973-4935
E-mail: jseymour@fftc.org
Web Site: http://www.fftc.org/scholarships
To provide financial assistance to college students in North and South Carolina who are preparing for a career in the plastics industry.
Title of Award: Richard Goolsby Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Business administration; Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 1 or more each year. Funds Available: Stipends range up to $4,000 per year; Funds are paid directly to the recipient's school to be used for tuition, required fees, books, and supplies. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to residents of South Carolina, central North Carolina, or western North Carolina. Applicants must be entering their sophomore, junior, or senior year at a college or university in North or South Carolina and be majoring in a subject that will prepare them for a career in the plastics industry (e.g., chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, industrial engineering, business administration). They must be enrolled full time. Along with their application, they must submit a 1-to 2-page statement explaining why they are applying for the scholarship, their qualifications, and their educational and career goals in the plastics industry. Selection is based on academic performance, demonstrated interest in the plastics industry, financial need, school and community involvement, and personal achievements. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year.

3172 ■ HAWAI'I COMMUNITY FOUNDATION

Attn: Scholarship Department
1164 Bishop Street, Suite 800
Honolulu, HI 96813
Tel: (808)566-5570; 888-731-3863
Fax: (808)521-6286
E-mail: scholarships@hcf-hawaii.org
Web Site: http://www.hawaiicommunityfoundation.org/scholar/scholar.php
To provide financial assistance for college to Hawaii residents who are interested in majoring in a scientific field.
Title of Award: Shuichi, Katsu and Itsuyo Suga Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Science; Technology Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Graduate, Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, 9 of these scholarships were awarded. Funds Available: The amounts of the awards depend on the availability of funds and the need of the recipient; recently, stipends averaged $1,000. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to Hawaii residents who plan to attend an accredited 2-or 4-year college or university as a full-time undergraduate or graduate student. Applicants must be planning to study mathematics, physics, science, or technology. They must be able to demonstrate academic achievement (GPA of 3.0 or higher), good moral character, and financial need. Along with their application, they must submit a short statement indicating their reasons for attending college, planned course of study, and career goals. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year. Additional Information: Recipients may attend college in Hawaii or on the mainland.

3173 ■ HISPANIC ENGINEER NATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS CONFERENCE

3900 Whiteside Street
Los Angeles, CA 90063
Tel: (323)262-0997
Fax: (323)262-0946
E-mail: info@henaac.org
Web Site: http://www.henaac.org/scholarships
To provide financial assistance to Hispanic undergraduate students majoring in engineering and related fields.
Title of Award: Northrop Grumman/HENAAC Scholars Program Area, Field, or Subject: Architecture, Naval; Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Mechanical; Engineering, Ocean; Information science and technology; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 5 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $5,000. Duration: 1 year; recipients may reapply.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to Hispanic undergraduate students who are enrolled full time in the following engineering fields: aerospace, chemical, civil, computer, electrical, industrial, manufacturing, marine, mechanical, ocean, or structural. Students majoring in computer science, information science, mathematics, naval architecture, and physics are also eligible. Applicants must be U.S. citizens and have a GPA of 3.0 or higher. Academic achievement and campus community activities are considered in the selection process. Deadline for Receipt: April of each year. Additional Information: This program is sponsored by Northrop Grumman as part of its effort to support the mission of the Hispanic Engineer National Achievement Awards Conference (HENAAC) to promote technical excellence and leadership in the Hispanic community.

3174 ■ HISPANIC SCHOLARSHIP FUND INSTITUTE

1001 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 632
Washington, DC 20036
Tel: (202)296-0009
Fax: (202)296-3633
E-mail: info@hsfi.org
Web Site: http://www.hsfi.org/scholarships/energy.asp
To provide financial assistance to Hispanic undergraduate students majoring in designated business, engineering, and science fields related to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) goals of environmental restoration and waste management.
Title of Award: Environmental Management Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Business administration; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Agricultural; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Mechanical; Engineering, Metallurgical; Engineering, Petroleum; Environmental science; Epidemiology; Geology; Hydrology; Management; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Radiology; Toxicology Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $3,000 per year for 4-year university students or $2,000 per year for community college students. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to U.S. citizens and permanent residents of Hispanic background who have completed at least 12 undergraduate credits with a GPA of 3.0 or higher. Applicants must be interested in preparing for a career supportive of the DOE goals of environmental restoration and waste management. Eligible academic majors are in the fields of business (management and system analysis), engineering (agricultural, chemical, civil, electrical, environmental, industrial, mechanical, metallurgical, nuclear, and petroleum), and science (applied math/physics, chemistry, computer science, ecology, environmental, epidemiology, geology, health physics, hydrology, radiochemistry, radio-ecology, and toxicology). Along with their application, they must submit a 2-page essay on 1) how their academic major, interests, and career goals correspond to environmental restoration and waste management issues; and 2) how their Hispanic background and family upbringing have influenced their academic and personal goals. Selection is based on the essay, academic record, academic plans and career goals, financial need, commitment to DOE's goal of environmental restoration and waste management, and a letter of recommendation. Deadline for Receipt: March of each year. Additional Information: This program, which began in 1990, is sponsored by DOE's Office of Environmental Management. Recipients must enroll full time at a college or university in the United States.

3175 ■ HISPANIC SCHOLARSHIP FUND INSTITUTE

1001 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 632
Washington, DC 20036
Tel: (202)296-0009
Fax: (202)296-3633
E-mail: info@hsfi.org
Web Site: http://www.hsfi.org/scholarships/generation.asp
To provide financial assistance to Hispanic and other students majoring in designated business, engineering, social science, and science fields who are interested in employment with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).
Title of Award: Next Generation of Public Servants Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Accounting; Biological and clinical sciences; Business administration; Computer and information sciences; Engineering; Environmental science; Finance; Geology; Information science and technology; Management; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Political science; Psychology; Sociology Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $3,000 per year. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed up to 2 additional years if the recipient maintains full-time enrollment and a GPA of 2.8 or higher.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to U.S. citizens enrolled full time as sophomores with a GPA of 2.8 or higher. Applicants must be interested in preparing for a career with the DOE in an energy-related field. Eligible academic majors are in the fields of business (accounting, business administration, finance, and management), engineering (biomedical, chemical, civil, computer, electrical, environmental, industrial, materials, mechanical, metallurgical, nuclear, and petroleum), social science (economics, organizational psychology, political science, and sociology), and science (biological sciences, computer science, geology, information technology, mathematics, microbiology, and physics). They must be willing to participate in co-ops with the DOE. Along with their application, they must submit a 2-page essay on why a career in public service interests them, how their academic major connects with their stated DOE career goal, why the DOE should invest in them through this program, and how they believe the DOE will benefit from this investment. Selection is based on academic achievement, financial need, demonstrated commitment to public service, and interest in federal employment with the DOE. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year. Additional Information: This program, sponsored by DOE's Office of Economic Impact and Diversity, is administered by the Hispanic Scholarship Fund Institute as part of its effort to increase Hispanic participation in federal service.

3176 ■ INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION

Attn: Lucent Global Science Scholars Program
809 United Nations Plaza
New York, NY 10017-3580
Tel: (212)984-5419
Fax: (212)984-5452
E-mail: sciencescholars@iie.org
Web Site: http://www.iie.org/programs/lucent
To provide financial assistance for college to high school students in the United States and university students in other designated countries who are interested in preparing for careers in information technology.
Title of Award: Lucent Global Science Scholars Program Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering; Information science and technology; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year. Recently, 32 students from foreign countries (5 from China, 1 from Hong Kong, and 2 from each of the other countries) and 28 from the United States received these scholarships. Funds Available: The stipend is $5,000 per year. Duration: 1 year; nonrenewable.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to high school seniors in the United States and first-year university students in Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Korea, Mexico, the Netherlands, Philippines, Poland, Russia, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Students from the United States must have a GPA of 3.6 or higher. Eligible majors include applied physics, chemistry, computer science, engineering, information science and technology, mathematics and applied mathematics, and physics. Selection is based on a demonstrated record of distinction in science and mathematics and a desire to prepare for a career in information technology. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year for students from the United States; March of each year for students from other countries. Additional Information: This program, established in 1999, is funded by Lucent Technologies. Students are offered internships at Lucent's research and development and manufacturing facilities in their own countries during the summer following their freshman year in the United States or the sophomore year in other countries.

3177 ■ CLARE BOOTHE LUCE FUND

c/o Henry Luce Foundation, Inc.
111 West 50th Street, Suite 4601
New York, NY 10020
Tel: (212)489-7700
Fax: (212)581-9541
E-mail: jdaniels@hluce.org
Web Site: http://www.hluce.org
To provide funding to women interested in studying science or engineering at the undergraduate level at designated universities.
Title of Award: Clare Boothe Luce Scholarships in Science and Engineering Area, Field, or Subject: Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Mechanical; Engineering, Nuclear; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Meteorology; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies; since the program began, more than 800 of these scholarships have been awarded. Funds Available: The amount awarded is established individually by each of the participating institutions. The stipends are intended to augment rather than replace any existing institutional support in these fields. Each stipend is calculated to include the cost of room and board as well as tuition and other fees or expenses. Duration: 2 years; in certain special circumstances, awards for the full 4 years of undergraduate study may be offered.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to female undergraduate students (particularly juniors and seniors) majoring in biology, chemistry, computer science, engineering (aeronautical, civil, electrical, mechanical, nuclear, and others), mathematics, meteorology, and physics. Applicants must be U.S. citizens attending 1 of the 12 designated colleges and universities affiliated with this program; periodically, other institutions are invited to participate. Premedical science majors are ineligible for this competition. The participating institutions select the recipients without regard to race, age, religion, ethnic background, or need. All awards are made on the basis of merit. Deadline for Receipt: Varies; check with the participating institutions for their current schedule. Additional Information: The participating institutions are Boston University, Colby College, Creighton University, Fordham University, Georgetown University, Marymount University, Mount Holyoke College, St. John's University, Santa Clara University, Seton Hall University, Trinity College, and University of Notre Dame.

3178 ■ MARYLAND HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION

Attn: Office of Student Financial Assistance
839 Bestgate Road, Suite 400
Annapolis, MD 21401-3013
Tel: (410)260-4545
Free: 800-974-1024
Fax: (410)974-5376
E-mail: osfamail@mhec.state.md.us
Web Site: http://www.mhec.state.md.us/financialAid/ProgramDescriptions/prog_scm.asp
To provide scholarship/loans to Maryland residents who wish to prepare for a teaching career.
Title of Award: Sharon Christa McAuliffe Memorial Teacher Education Award Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Classical studies; Computer and information sciences; Earth sciences; Education; Education, English as a second language; Education, Special; Education, Vocational-technical; Foreign languages; Geosciences; Health care services; Hearing and deafness; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physical sciences; Physics; Space and planetary sciences; Visual impairment Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Master's, Professional, Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year. Funds Available: The amount of the award is based on the recipient's enrollment and housing status, to a maximum of $17,000 per year. The total amount of all state awards may not exceed the cost of attendance as determined by the school's financial aid office or $17,800, whichever is less. Following graduation, recipients must teach at a Maryland public school for 1 year for each year of financial aid received under this program. If they fail to meet that service obligation, they must repay all funds they received with interest. They must begin the service obligation within 12 months of graduation. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed for 1 additional year if the recipient maintains satisfactory academic progress with a cumulative GPA of 3.0 or higher and enrollment at a 2-year or 4-year Maryland college or university in an approved teacher education program.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to Maryland residents who are college students with at least 60 semester credit hours completed, college graduates, and teachers in a non-critical shortage area. Applicants must have a GPA of 3.0 or higher and plan to teach in a field identified as a critical shortage area. Selection is based on cumulative GPA, applicable work or volunteer experience, quality of academic background in certification field, and a writing sample. Deadline for Receipt: December of each year. Additional Information: Recently, the eligible critical shortage areas were business education, chemistry, computer science, earth and space science, English for speakers of other languages, family and consumer sciences, German, health occupations, Latin, mathematics, physical science, physics, Spanish, special education (generic infant-grade 3, generic grades 1-8, generic grades 6-adult, hearing impaired, severely and profoundly handicapped, visually impaired), and technology education.

3179 ■ MARYLAND SPACE GRANT CONSORTIUM

c/o Johns Hopkins University
203 Bloomberg Center for Physics and Astronomy
3400 North Charles Street
Baltimore, MD 21218-2686
Tel: (410)516-7351
Fax: (410)516-4109
E-mail: info@mdspacegrant.org
Web Site: http://www.mdspacegrant.org/scholars_about.html
To provide financial assistance to undergraduates who are interested in studying space-related fields at selected universities in Maryland that are members of the Maryland Space Grant Consortium.
Title of Award: Maryland Space Scholars Program Area, Field, or Subject: Aerospace sciences; Astronomy and astronomical sciences; Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering; Geology; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Space and planetary sciences Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently 16 of these scholarships were awarded (2 at Johns Hopkins University, 5 at Morgan State University, 2 at Hagerstown Community College, 2 at Towson University, and 5 at the University of Maryland at College Park). Funds Available: Scholars receive partial payment of tuition at the participating university they attend. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed if the recipient maintains a GPA of 3.0 or higher.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to residents of Maryland and graduates of Maryland high schools who are enrolled full time at a member institution. Applicants must be interested in preparing for a career in mathematics, science, engineering, technology, or a space-related field. They must be majoring in a relevant field, including (but not limited to) astronomy, the biological and life sciences, chemistry, computer science, engineering, geological sciences, or physics. U.S. citizenship is required. Along with their application, they must submit an essay of 200 to 500 words on how this scholarship will help them meet their educational and financial goals. This program is a component of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Space Grant program, which encourages participation by women, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities. Deadline for Receipt: August of each year. Additional Information: The participating universities are Hagerstown Community College, Johns Hopkins University, Morgan State University, Towson University, the University of Maryland at College Park, and Washington College. Funding for this program is provided by NASA.

3180 ■ MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC.

Attn: Micron Technology Foundation
8000 South Federal Way
P.O. Box 6
Boise, ID 83707-0006
Tel: (208)368-3675
Web Site: http://www.micron.com/about/giving/foundation/scholarships.html
To provide financial assistance to high school seniors in selected states who are interested in majoring in the physical sciences.
Title of Award: Micron Science and Technology Scholars Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Mechanical; Materials research/science; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 13 each year: 1 at $55,000 and 12 at $16,500; 2 are awarded to students from each of 5 participating states, plus 3 floating scholarships are awarded within those states. Funds Available: Stipends are either $55,000 or $16,500. A cash grant of $1,000 is awarded to the high school of each winner.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to high school seniors who reside in and attend public or private schools in Colorado, Idaho, Texas, Utah, or Virginia. Applicants must have a combined SAT score of at least 1350 or a composite ACT score of at least 30; have at least a 3.5 GPA; have demonstrated leadership in school, work, and extracurricular activities; and plan to major in engineering (electrical, computer, chemical, or mechanical), computer science, chemistry, material sciences, or physics. Selection is based on merit (in academics and leadership). Deadline for Receipt: January of each year. Additional Information: This program began in 2000. Information is also available from Scholarship Management Services of Scholarship America, One Scholarship Way, P.O. Box 297, St. Peter, MN 56082, (507) 931-1682, (800) 537-4180, Fax:(507) 931-9168.

3181 ■ MICROSOFT CORPORATION

Attn: National Minority Technical Scholarship
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052-8303
Tel: (425)882-8080
E-mail: scholars@microsoft.com
Web Site: http://www.microsoft.com/college/ss_overview.mspx
To provide financial assistance and summer work experience to undergraduate students, especially members of underrepresented groups, interested in preparing for a career in computer science or other related technical fields.
Title of Award: Microsoft National Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Technology Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies. A total of $540,000 is available for this program each year. Funds Available: Scholarships cover 100% of the tuition as posted by the financial aid office of the university or college the recipient designates. Scholarships are made through that school and are not transferable to other academic institutions. Funds may be used for tuition only and may not be used for other costs on the recipient's bursar bill, such as room and board. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to students who are enrolled full time and making satisfactory progress toward an undergraduate degree in computer science, computer engineering, or a related technical discipline (such as electrical engineering, mathematics, or physics) with a demonstrated interest in computer science. Applicants must be enrolled at a 4-year college or university in the United States, Canada, or Mexico. They must have a GPA of 3.0 or higher. Although all students who meet the eligibility criteria may apply, a large majority of scholarships are awarded to women, underrepresented minorities (African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans), and students with disabilities. Along with their application, students must submit an essay that describes the following 4 items: 1) how they demonstrate their passion for technology outside the classroom; 2) the toughest technical problem they have worked on, how they addressed the problem, their role in reaching the outcome if it was team-based, and the final outcome; 3) a situation that demonstrates initiative and their willingness to go above and beyond; and 4) how they are currently funding their college education. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year. Additional Information: Selected recipients are offered a paid summer internship where they will have a chance to develop Microsoft products.

3182 ■ MONTANA SPACE GRANT CONSORTIUM

c/o Montana State University
416 Cobleigh Hall
P.O. Box 173835
Bozeman, MT 59717-3835
Tel: (406)994-4223
Fax: (406)994-4452
E-mail: msgc@montana.edu
Web Site: http://spacegrant.montana.edu/Text/ScholarProgram.html
To provide financial assistance to students in Montana who are interested in working on an undergraduate degree in the space sciences and/or engineering.
Title of Award: Montana Space Grant Consortium Undergraduate Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Aerospace sciences; Astronomy and astronomical sciences; Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Mechanical; Geology; Physics; Space and planetary sciences Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, 23 of these scholarships were awarded. Funds Available: The stipend is $1,000 per year. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time undergraduate students at member institutions of the Montana Space Grant Consortium (MSGC) majoring in fields related to space sciences and engineering. Those fields include, but are not limited to, astronomy, biological and life sciences, chemical engineering, chemistry, civil engineering, computer sciences, electrical engineering, geological sciences, mathematics, mechanical engineering, and physics. Priority is given to students who have been involved in aerospace-related research. U.S. citizenship is required. The MSGC is a component of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Space Grant program, which encourages participation by women, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities. Deadline for Receipt: March of each year. Additional Information: The MSGC member institutions are Blackfeet Community College, Carroll College, Chief Dull Knife College, Fort Belknap College, Fort Peck Community College, Little Big Horn College, Montana State University at Billings, Montana State University at Bozeman, Montana State University Northern, Montana Tech, Rocky Mountain College, Salish Kootenai College, Stone Child College, University of Great Falls, University of Montana, and University of Montana Western. Funding for this program is provided by NASA.

3183 ■ NATIONAL CONSORTIUM FOR GRADUATE DEGREES FOR MINORITIES IN ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE (GEM)

P.O. Box 537
Notre Dame, IN 46556
Tel: (574)631-7771
Fax: (574)287-1486
E-mail: gem.1@nd.edu
Web Site: http://www.gemfellowship.org
To provide financial assistance and summer work experience to underrepresented minority students interested in obtaining a Ph.D. degree in the life sciences, mathematics, or physical sciences.
Title of Award: GEM Ph.D. Science Fellowship Program Area, Field, or Subject: Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Earth sciences; Geosciences; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Natural sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College, Doctorate Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, 40 of these fellowships were awarded. Funds Available: The stipend is $14,000 per year, plus tuition and fees. In addition, there is a summer internship program that provides a salary and reimbursement for travel expenses to and from the summer work site. The total value of the award is between $60,000 and $100,000, depending upon academic status at the time of application, summer employer, and graduate school attended. Duration: 3 to 5 years for the fellowship; 12 weeks during at least 1 summer for the internship. Fellows selected as juniors or seniors intern each summer until entrance to graduate school; fellows selected after college graduation intern at least 1 summer.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to U.S. citizens who are members of ethnic groups underrepresented in the natural sciences: Native Americans, African Americans, Latinos, Puerto Ricans, and other Hispanic Americans. Applicants must be juniors, seniors, or recent baccalaureate graduates in the life sciences, mathematics, or physical sciences (chemistry, computer science, earth sciences, and physics) with an academic record that indicates the ability to pursue doctoral studies (including a GPA of 3.0 or higher). Deadline for Receipt: October of each year. Additional Information: This program is valid only at 1 of 95 participating GEM member universities; write to GEM for a list. The fellowship award is designed to support the student in the first year of the doctoral program without working. Subsequent years are subsidized by the respective university and will usually include either a teaching or research assistantship. Recipients must participate in the GEM summer internship; failure to agree to accept the internship cancels the fellowship. Recipients must enroll in the same scientific discipline as their undergraduate major.

3184 ■ NATIONAL INVENTORS HALL OF FAME

Attn: Collegiate Inventors Competition
221 South Broadway Street
Akron, OH 44308-1595
Tel: (330)849-6887
E-mail: collegiate@invent.org
Web Site: http://www.invent.org/collegiate
To recognize and reward outstanding inventions by college or university students in the fields of science, engineering, and technology.
Title of Award: Collegiate Inventors Competition Area, Field, or Subject: Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering; Environmental conservation; Environmental science; Inventors; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Medicine; Physics; Science; Technology; Veterinary science and medicine Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Graduate, Postdoctoral, Undergraduate Number Awarded: 15 semifinalists are selected each year; of those, 3 individuals or teams win prizes. Funds Available: Finalists receive an all-expense paid trip to Washington, D.C. to participate in a final round of judging and in the awards dinner and presentation. The Grand Prize winner or team receives $25,000. Other prizes are $10,000 for an undergraduate winner or team and $15,000 for a graduate winner or team. Academic advisors of the winning entries each receive a $3,000 cash prize. Awards are unrestricted cash gifts, not scholarships or grants. Duration: The competition is held annually.
Eligibility Requirements: This competition is open to undergraduate and graduate students who are (or have been) enrolled full time at least part of the 12-month period prior to entry in a college or university in the United States. Entries may also be submitted by teams, up to 4 members, of whom at least 1 must meet the full-time requirement and all others must have been enrolled at least half time sometime during the preceding 24-month period. Applicants must submit a description of their invention, including a patent search and summary of current literature that describes the state of the art and identifies the originality of the invention; test data demonstrating that the idea, invention, or design is workable; the societal, economic, and environmental benefits of the invention; and supplemental material that may include photos, slides, disks, videotapes, and even samples. Entries must be original ideas and the work of a student or team and a university advisor; the invention should be reproducible and may not have been 1) made available to the public as a commercial product or process, or 2) patented or published more than 1 year prior to the date of submission for this competition. Entries are first reviewed by a committee of judges that selects the finalists. The committee is comprised of mathematicians, engineers, biologists, chemists, environmentalists, physicists, computer specialists, members of the medical and veterinary profession, and specialists in invention and development of technology. Entries are judged on the basis of originality, inventiveness, potential value to society (socially, environmentally, and economically), and range or scope of use. Deadline for Receipt: May of each year. Additional Information: This program is co-sponsored by Abbott Laboratories and the United States Patent and Trademark Office. It was established in 1990 as the BFGoodrich Collegiate Inventors Program.

3185 ■ NATIONAL SOCIETY OF BLACK ENGINEERS

Attn: Programs Department
1454 Duke Street Alexandria, VA 22314
Tel: (703)549-2207
Fax: (703)683-5312
E-mail: scholarships@nsbe.org
Web Site: http://www.nsbe.org/programs/schol_micro.php
To provide financial assistance to members of the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE) who are majoring in computer science or engineering.
Title of Award: Microsoft Corporation NSBE Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Computer; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 3 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $5,000. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to members of the society who are undergraduate students majoring in computer engineering, computer science, or mathematics/physics with a demonstrated interest in computer science. Applicants must have a GPA of 3.0 or higher. They must submit a 300-word essay on their "passion for technology" outside of the classroom. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year. Additional Information: This program is supported by Microsoft Corporation.

3186 ■ NATIONAL SOCIETY OF BLACK ENGINEERS

Attn: Programs Department
1454 Duke Street Alexandria, VA 22314
Tel: (703)549-2207
Fax: (703)683-5312
E-mail: scholarships@nsbe.org
Web Site: http://www.nsbe.org/programs/schol_ng.php
To provide financial assistance to members of the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE) who are working on an undergraduate degree in designated science and engineering fields.
Title of Award: Northrop Grumman NSBE Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Architecture, Naval; Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Mechanical; Engineering, Ocean; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 5 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $5,000. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to members of the society who are U.S. citizens currently enrolled in college. Applicants must be majoring in computer science, information science, mathematics, naval architecture, physics, or the following engineering fields: aerospace, chemical, civil (structural), computer, electrical, industrial, manufacturing, marine, mechanical, or ocean. They must have a GPA of 3.0 or higher and demonstrate an interest in employment with Northrop Grumman Corporation. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year.

3187 ■ NEBRASKA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

c/o University of Nebraska
302 Morrill Hall
14th and U Streets
P.O. Box 880339
Lincoln, NE 68588-0339
Tel: (402)472-2644
E-mail: nebacad@unl.edu
Web Site: http://www.neacadsci.org/Info/coll_scholarship.htm
To provide financial assistance to upper-division students majoring in science at colleges and universities in Nebraska.
Title of Award: C. Bertrand and Marian Othmer Scultz Collegiate Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Geology; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $3,000 per year. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed 1 additional year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to student entering their junior or senior year at 4-year colleges and universities in Nebraska. Applicants must have a declared major in a natural science discipline (chemistry, physics, biology, or geology). They must be preparing for a career in a science-related industry, science teaching, or scientific research. A member of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences must provide a letter of nomination. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year. Additional Information: This scholarship was first awarded in 2006.

3188 ■ NEW HAMPSHIRE POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION COMMISSION

3 Barrell Court, Suite 300
Concord, NH 03301-8543
Tel: (603)271-2555
Fax: (603)271-2696
E-mail: pedes@pec.state.nh.us
Web Site: http://www.state.nh.us/postsecondary/finwork.html
To provide scholarship/loans to New Hampshire residents who are interested in attending college to prepare for careers in designated professions.
Title of Award: New Hampshire Workforce Incentive Program Forgivable Loans Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Education; Education, Special; Linguistics; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Nursing; Physical sciences; Physics; Science Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Graduate, Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $500 per semester ($1,000 per year). This is a scholarship/loan program; recipients must agree to pursue, within New Hampshire, the professional career for which they receive training. Recipients of loans for 1 year have their notes cancelled upon completion of 1 year of full-time service; repayment by service must be completed within 3 years from the date of licensure, certification, or completion of the program. Recipients of loans for more than 1 year have their notes cancelled upon completion of 2 years of full-time service; repayment by service must be completed within 5 years from the date of licensure, certification, or completion of the program. If the note is not cancelled because of service, the recipient must repay the loan within 2 years. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to residents of New Hampshire who wish to prepare for careers in fields designated by the commission as shortage areas. Currently, the career shortage areas are chemistry, general science, mathematics, physical sciences, physics, special education, world languages, and nursing (L.P.N. through graduate). Applicants must be enrolled as a junior, senior, or graduate student at a college in New Hampshire and must be able to demonstrate financial need. Deadline for Receipt: May of each year for fall semester; December of each year for spring semester. Additional Information: The time for repayment of the loan, either in cash or through professional service, is extended while the recipient is 1) engaged in a course of study, at least on a half-time basis, at an institution of higher education; 2) serving on active duty as a member of the armed forces of the United States, or as a member of VISTA, the Peace Corps, or AmeriCorps, for a period up to 3 years; 3) temporarily totally disabled for a period up to 3 years; or 4) unable to secure employment because of the need to care for a disabled spouse, child, or parent for a period up to 12 months. The repayment obligation is cancelled if the recipient is unable to work because of a permanent total disability, receives relief under federal bankruptcy laws, or dies. This program went into effect in 1999.

3189 ■ NEW HAMPSHIRE SPACE GRANT CONSORTIUM

c/o University of New Hampshire
Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans, and Space
Morse Hall
39 College Road
Durham, NH 03824-3525
Tel: (603)862-0094
Fax: (603)862-1915
E-mail: nhspacegrant@unh.edu
Web Site: http://www.nhsgc.sr.unh.edu
To provide financial assistance to students at member institutions of the New Hampshire Space Grant Consortium (NHSGC) who are interested in participating in space-related activities.
Title of Award: New Hampshire Space Grant Consortium Project Support Area, Field, or Subject: Aerospace sciences; Astronomy and astronomical sciences; Atmospheric science; Biological and clinical sciences; Computer and information sciences; Earth sciences; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Geosciences; Oceanography; Physics; Space and planetary sciences Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Graduate, Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year. Funds Available: The amount of the award depends on the nature of the project. Duration: From 1 quarter to 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to students at member institutions of the NHSGC. Applicants must be studying space physics, astrophysics, astronomy, or aspects of computer science, engineering, earth sciences, ocean sciences, atmospheric sciences, or life sciences that utilize space technology and/or adopt a planetary view of the global environment. U.S. citizenship is required. The New Hampshire Space Grant Consortium is a component of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Space Grant program, which encourages participation by women, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities. Deadline for Receipt: Each participating college or university sets its own deadline. Additional Information: This program is funded by NASA. Currently, projects operating through this program include space grant fellowships at the University of New Hampshire, Agnes M. Lindsay Trust/NASA Challenge Scholars Initiative at the New Hampshire Community Technical College System, Presidential Scholars Research Assistantships at Dartmouth College, and Women in Science Internships at Dartmouth.

3190 ■ OAK RIDGE INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND EDUCATION

Attn: Science and Engineering Education
P.O. Box 117
Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0117
Tel: (865)576-9279
Fax: (865)241-5220
E-mail: coxre@orau.gov
Web Site: http://www.orau.gov/orise.htm
To provide financial assistance and research experience to undergraduate students at minority serving institutions who are majoring in scientific fields of interest to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Title of Award: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Educational Partnership Program with Minority Serving Institutions Undergraduate Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Atmospheric science; Biological and clinical sciences; Cartography/Surveying; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering; Environmental conservation; Environmental science; Geography; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Meteorology; Photogrammetry; Physical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: 10 each year. Funds Available: This program provides payment of tuition and fees (to a maximum of $4,000 per year) and a stipend during the internship of $650 per week. Duration: 1 academic year and 2 summers.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to juniors and seniors at minority serving institutions, including Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs), Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), and Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs). Applicants must be majoring in atmospheric science, biology, cartography, chemistry, computer science, engineering, environmental science, geodesy, geography, marine science, mathematics, meteorology, photogrammetry, physical science, physics, or remote sensing. They must also be interested in participating in a research internship at a NOAA site. U.S. citizenship is required. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year. Additional Information: This program is funded by NOAA through an interagency agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy and administered by Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE).

3191 ■ OHIO SPACE GRANT CONSORTIUM

c/o Ohio Aerospace Institute
22800 Cedar Point Road
Cleveland, OH 44142
Tel: (440)962-3032
Free: 800-828-OSGC
Fax: (440)962-3057
E-mail: osgc@oai.org
Web Site: http://www.osgc.org/Scholarship.html
To provide financial assistance to students in their junior year at selected universities in Ohio who wish to working on a bachelor's degree in an aerospace-related field.
Title of Award: Ohio Space Grant Consortium Junior Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Astronomy and astronomical sciences; Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Engineering, Petroleum; Geography; Geology; Materials research/science; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Space and planetary sciences Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, 20 of these scholarships were awarded. Funds Available: The stipend is $2,000. Duration: 1 year; recipients may apply for a senior scholarship if they maintain satisfactory academic performance and good progress on their research project.
Eligibility Requirements: These scholarships are available to U.S. citizens who expect to complete within 2 years the requirements for a bachelor of science degree in an aerospace-related discipline (aeronautical engineering, aerospace engineering, astronomy, biology, chemical engineering, chemistry, civil engineering, computer engineering and science, control engineering, electrical engineering, engineering mechanics, geography, geology, industrial engineering, manufacturing engineering, materials science and engineering, mathematics, mechanical engineering, petroleum engineering, physics, and systems engineering). Applicants must be attending a member university of the Ohio Space Grant Consortium (OSGC) or another participating university. They must propose and initiate a research project on campus under the guidance of a faculty member. Along with their application, they must submit a 1-page personal objective statement that discusses their career goals and anticipated benefits to be derived from this program. Women, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities are particularly encouraged to apply. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year. Additional Information: These scholarships are funded through the National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program administered by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), with matching funds provided by the member universities, the Ohio Aerospace Institute, and private industry. The OSGC member universities include the University of Akron, Case Western Reserve University, Central State University, University of Cincinnati, Cleveland State University, University of Dayton, Ohio State University, Ohio University, University of Toledo, Wilberforce University, and Wright State University. Other participating universities are Cedarville University, Marietta College (petroleum engineering), Miami University (manufacturing engineering), Ohio Northern University (mechanical engineering), and Youngstown State University (mechanical and industrial engineering). Recipients are required to attend the annual spring research symposium sponsored by the OSGC and present a poster on their research project.

3192 ■ OREGON UNIVERSITY SYSTEM

Attn: Chancellor's Office, Industry Affairs Division
Capital Center, Suite 1065
18640 N.W. Walker Road
Beaverton, OR 97006-8966
Tel: (503)725-2918
Fax: (503)775-2921
E-mail: aeaschol@ous.edu
Web Site: http://www.ous.edu/ecs/scholarships.html
To provide financial assistance to Oregon high school seniors interested in studying designated computer and engineering fields at selected public universities in the state.
Title of Award: AeA Technology Scholarship Program Area, Field, or Subject: Biochemistry; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Mechanical; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, this program awarded 25 new scholarships. Funds Available: The stipend is $2,500 per year. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed up to 3 additional years if the recipient maintains a GPA of 3.0 or higher.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to seniors graduating from high schools in Oregon who plan to attend Eastern Oregon University, Oregon Institute of Technology, Oregon State University, Portland State University, Southern Oregon University, Western Oregon University, or the University of Oregon. Applicants must be planning to major in biochemistry, chemical engineering, chemistry, computer engineering, computer science, electrical engineering, electronic engineering, engineering technology, industrial engineering, mathematics, mechanical engineering, or physics (not all majors are available at each institution). Women and ethnic minorities underrepresented in the technology industry (Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Native Americans) are strongly encouraged to apply. Selection is based on academic performance; college entrance examination scores; mathematics, science, and technology course work; achievements; leadership; civic participation; interests; employment; insight into and commitment to a career in technology; and communication skill. Deadline for Receipt: March of each year. Additional Information: This program was established in 1999 by Intel, which offered it to the Oregon Council of the AeA (formerly American Electronics Association) in the following year. Currently, Intel and other Oregon AeA member companies (such as Xerox and Hewlett Packard) provide ongoing support.

3193 ■ SEALASKA CORPORATION

Attn: Sealaska Heritage Institute
One Sealaska Plaza, Suite 301
Juneau, AK 99801-1249
Tel: (907)586-9166; 888-311-4992
Fax: (907)586-9293
E-mail: scholarship@sealaska.com
Web Site: http://www.sealaskaheritage.org/programs/university_scholarships.htm
To provide financial assistance for undergraduate or graduate study to Native Alaskans who have a connection to Sealaska Corporation and are majoring in designated fields.
Title of Award: Sealaska Heritage Institute 7(i) Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Business administration; Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Health care services; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Natural resources; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Graduate, Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year. Funds Available: The amount of the award depends on the availability of funds, the number of qualified applicants, class standing, and cumulative GPA. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed up to 5 years for a bachelor's degree, up to 3 years for a master's degree, up to 2 years for a doctorate, or up to 3 years for vocational study. The maximum total support is limited to 9 years. Renewal depends on recipients' maintaining full-time enrollment and a GPA of 2.5 or higher.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to 1) Alaska Natives who are enrolled to Sealaska Corporation, and 2) Native lineal descendants of Alaska Natives enrolled to Sealaska Corporation, whether or not the applicant owns Sealaska Corporation stock. Applicants must be enrolled or accepted for enrollment as full-time undergraduate or graduate students. Along with their application, they must submit 2 essays: 1) their personal history and educational goals, and 2) their expected contributions to the Alaska Native or Native American community. Financial need is also considered in the selection process. The following areas of study qualify for these awards: natural resources (environmental sciences, engineering, conservation biology, environmental law, fisheries, geology, marine science/biology, forestry, wildlife management, and mining technology); business administration (accounting, finance, marketing, international business, international commerce and trade, management of information systems, human resources management, economics, computer information systems, and industrial management); and other special fields (cadastral surveys, chemistry, equipment/machinery operators, industrial safety specialists, health specialists, plastics engineers, trade specialists, physics, mathematics, and marine trades and occupations). Deadline for Receipt: February of each year. Additional Information: Funding for this program is provided from Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANSCA) Section 7(i) revenue sharing provisions. Sealaska sponsors a number of other scholarships, including the Cape Fox Scholarships and the Sealaska Heritage Institute Scholarships.

3194 ■ SIEMENS FOUNDATION

170 Wood Avenue South Iselin, NJ 08830 877-822-5233
Fax: (732)603-5890
E-mail: foundation@sc.siemens.com
Web Site: http://www.siemens-foundation.org/awards
To recognize and reward high school students with exceptional scores on the Advanced Placement (AP) examinations in mathematics and the sciences.
Title of Award: Siemens Awards for Advanced Placement Area, Field, or Subject: Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Environmental conservation; Environmental science; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Statistics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Professional, Undergraduate Number Awarded: 24 regional scholarships (2 females and 2 males in each of the 6 regions), 2 national scholarships (1 female and 1 male), 12 high school awards (in each region, 1 to a school for improvement in the number and percentage of students taking AP examinations, 1 to an urban school for providing access to AP mathematics and science to minorities), and 18 teacher awards (in each region, 2 for commitment to students and the AP program, 1 for teaching minorities) are awarded each year. Funds Available: Regional scholarships are $3,000; national winners receive additional $5,000 scholarships. Awards to teachers and to schools are $1,000. Duration: The awards are presented annually.
Eligibility Requirements: All students in U.S. high schools are eligible to be considered for these awards (including home-schooled students and those in U.S. territories). Each fall, the College Board identifies the male and female seniors in each of its regions who have earned the highest number of scores on 7 AP exams: biology, calculus BC, chemistry, computer science AB, environmental science, physics C (physics C: mechanics and physics C: electricity each count as half), and statistics. Males and females are considered separately. Regional winners receive all-expense paid trips to Washington, D.C., where national winners are announced. The program also recognizes and rewards monetarily 1) schools that have shown the greatest improvement in the number and percentage of students taking AP examinations in biology, calculus, chemistry, computer science, environmental science, physics, and statistics in the past year; and 2) non-magnet urban schools that provide access to AP mathematics and science to a significant number of underrepresented minority students. In addition, teachers are rewarded for their commitment to students and the AP program. Additional teachers are recognized because they have successfully taught AP mathematics and/or science to underrepresented minority students in non-magnet urban schools. Deadline for Receipt: There is no application or nomination process for these awards. The College Board identifies the students, teachers, and high schools for the Siemens Foundation. Additional Information: Information from the College Board is available at (703) 707-8999.

3195 ■ SIEMENS FOUNDATION

170 Wood Avenue South
Iselin, NJ 08830
877-822-5233
Fax: (732)603-5890
E-mail: foundation@sc.siemens.com
Web Site: http://www.siemens-foundation.org/scholarship
To recognize and reward outstanding high school seniors who have undertaken individual or team research projects in science, mathematics, and technology (or in combinations of those disciplines).
Title of Award: Siemens Westinghouse Competition Awards Area, Field, or Subject: Astronomy and astronomical sciences; Atmospheric science; Biochemistry; Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Earth sciences; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Mechanical; Environmental science; Genetics; Geosciences; Materials research/science; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Nutrition; Physics; Writing Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: In the initial round of judging, up to 300 regional semifinalists (up to 50 in each region) are selected. Of those, 60 are chosen as regional finalists (5 individuals and 5 teams in each of the 6 regions). Then 12 regional winners (1 individual and 1 team) are selected in the regional competitions, and they become the national finalists. Funds Available: At the regional level, finalists receive $1,000 scholarships, both as individuals and members of teams. Individual regional winners receive $3,000 scholarships. Winning regional teams receive $6,000 scholarships to be divided among the team members. Those regional winners then receive additional scholarships as national finalists. In the national competition. first-place winners receive an additional $100,000 scholarship, second place an additional $50,000 scholarship, third place an additional $40,000 scholarship, fourth place an additional $30,000 scholarship, fifth place an additional $20,000 scholarship, and sixth place an additional $10,000 scholarship. Those national awards are provided both to individuals and to teams to be divided equally among team members. Scholarship money is sent directly to the recipient's college or university to cover undergraduate and/or graduate educational expenses. Schools with regional finalists receive a $2,000 award to be used to support science, mathematics, and technology programs in their schools. Duration: The competition is held annually.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to high school seniors who are legal or permanent U.S. residents. They must be enrolled in a high school in the United States, Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Wake and Midway Islands, or the Marianas. U.S. high school students enrolled in a Department of Defense dependents school, an accredited overseas American or international school, a foreign school as an exchange student, or a foreign school because their parent(s) live and work abroad are also eligible. Students being home-schooled qualify if they obtain the endorsement of the school district official responsible for such programs. Research projects may be submitted in mathematics and the biological and physical sciences, or involve combinations of disciplines, such as astrophysics, biochemistry, bioengineering, biology, biophysics, botany, chemistry, computer science, civil engineering, earth and atmospheric science engineering, electrical engineering, environmental sciences, fluid dynamics, genetics, geology, materials science, mathematics, mechanical engineering, nutritional science, physics, toxicology, and virology. Both individual and team projects (2 or 3 members) may be entered. All team members must meet the eligibility requirements. Team projects may include seniors, but that is not a requirement. Competition entrants must submit a detailed report on their research project, including a description of the purpose of the research, rationale for the research, pertinent scientific literature, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion. All projects must be endorsed by a sponsoring high school (except home-schooled students, who obtain their endorsement from the district or state home-school official). Each project must have a project advisor or mentor who is a member of the instructional staff or a person approved by the endorsing high school. There are 3 judging phases to the competition. An initial review panel selects outstanding research projects from 6 different regions of the country. The students submitting these projects are identified as regional semifinalists. Out of those, the highest-rated projects from each region are selected and the students who submitted them are recognized as regional finalists. For the next phase, the regional finalists are offered all-expense paid trips to the regional competition on the campus of a regional university partner, where their projects are reviewed by a panel of judges appointed by the host institution. Regional finalists are required to prepare a poster display of their research project, make an oral presentation about the research and research findings, and respond to questions from the judges. The top-rated individual and the top-rated team project in each region are selected as regional winners to represent the region in the national competition as national finalists. At that competition, the national finalists again display their projects, make oral presentations, and respond to judges' questions. At each phase, selection is based on clarity of expression, comprehensiveness, creativity, field knowledge, future work, interpretation, literature review, presentation, scientific importance, and validity. Deadline for Receipt: September of each year. Additional Information: The program is offered by Siemens Foundation, in partnership with the College Board. Information is available from the College Board at (703) 707-8999, E-mail: spro@collegeboard.org. Students submitting the projects with the highest evaluations become part of a registry that is circulated to colleges and universities nationwide. To continue receiving scholarships, winners must attend an accredited academic institution on a full-time basis.

3196 ■ SOCIETY OF AUTOMOTIVE ENGINEERS

Attn: Scholarship Administrator
400 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001
Tel: (724)772-4047
Fax: (724)776-3049
E-mail: scholarships@sae.org
Web Site: http://students.sae.org/awdscholar/scholarships/hillquist
To provide financial assistance to college juniors who are majoring in mechanical or automotive engineering.
Title of Award: Ralph K. Hillquist Honorary SAE Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Engineering, Automotive; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: 1 each odd-numbered year. Funds Available: The stipend is $1,000. Duration: 1 year; nonrenewable.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to juniors enrolled full time at U.S. universities. Applicants must have a declared major in mechanical engineering or an automotive-related engineering discipline, with preference given to those who have completed studies or courses in the areas of expertise related to noise and vibration (e.g., statics, dynamics, physics, vibration). They must be U.S. citizens with a GPA of 3.0 or higher and significant academic and leadership achievements. along with their application, they must submit a 300-word essay on the single experience that most strongly convinced them or confirmed their decision to prepare for a career in engineering. Financial need is not considered in the selection process. Deadline for Receipt: January of each oddnumbered year. Additional Information: This scholarship, first awarded in 2005, is funded by the Noise & Vibration Conference of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE).

3197 ■ SOCIETY OF FLIGHT TEST ENGINEERS

44814 North Elm Avenue
P.O. Box 4037
Lancaster, CA 93539-4037
Tel: (661)949-2095
Fax: (661)949-2096
E-mail: sfte@sfte.org
Web Site: http://www.sfte.org
To provide financial assistance for college to student members and children of members of the Society of Flight Test Engineers (SFTE).
Title of Award: Society of Flight Test Engineers Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Computer and information sciences; Engineering; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 1 or more each year. Funds Available: Stipends range from $200 to $2,000. Duration: 1 year; recipients may reapply.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to college students who have completed at least their freshman year. Applicants must be a student member of SFTE or the child of a member. They must be working on an undergraduate degree in engineering, computer sciences, mathematics, physics, or another technical discipline. Selection is based primarily on academic achievement; financial need is not considered. Deadline for Receipt: June of each year.

3198 ■ SOCIETY OF PHYSICS STUDENTS

c/o American Institute of Physics
One Physics Ellipse
College Park, MD 20740-3843
Tel: (301)209-3007
Fax: (301)209-0839
E-mail: sps@aip.org
Web Site: http://www.spsnational.org/programs/two_year.htm
To provide financial assistance to members of the Society of Physics Students (SPS) who are transitioning from a 2-year college into a physics bachelor's degree program.
Title of Award: Peggy Dixon Two-Year College Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $2,000. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to students at 2-year colleges who are entering a bachelor's degree program in physics. Applicants must have completed at least 1 semester or quarter of the introductory physics sequence and be currently enrolled in the appropriate subsequent physics courses. They must be members of the society. Selection is based on 1) high scholarship performance both in physics and overall studies, 2) potential for continued scholastic development in physics, and 3) active participation in society programs; those 3 criteria are given equal weight. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year. Additional Information: This program is sponsored by the Sigma Pi Sigma Trust Fund and the American Institute of Physics.

3199 ■ SOCIETY OF PHYSICS STUDENTS

c/o American Institute of Physics
One Physics Ellipse
College Park, MD 20740-3843
Tel: (301)209-3007
Fax: (301)209-0839
E-mail: sps@aip.org
Web Site: http://www.spsnational.org/programs/hlevy.htm
To provide financial assistance to members of the Society of Physics Students (SPS) in their final year of undergraduate study.
Title of Award: Herbert Levy Memorial Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $2,000. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to undergraduate students in any year of college who are active members of the society. Selection is based on 1) high scholarship performance both in physics and overall studies, 2) potential and intention for continued scholastic development in physics, 3) active participation in society programs, and 4) financial need. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year.

3200 ■ SOCIETY OF PHYSICS STUDENTS

c/o American Institute of Physics
One Physics Ellipse
College Park, MD 20740-3843
Tel: (301)209-3007
Fax: (301)209-0839
E-mail: sps@aip.org
Web Site: http://www.spsnational.org/programs/icpstravel.htm
To provide funding to members of the Society of Physics Students (SPS) who wish to attend the annual conference of the International Association of Physics Students (IAPS).
Title of Award: Outstanding Student Award for Undergraduate Research Area, Field, or Subject: Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College, Graduate Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, 3 of these awards were granted. Funds Available: Winners receive a $500 honorarium and a $500 award for their SPS chapter. Duration: These awards are presented annually.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to members of the society who wish to present a paper at the International Conference of Physics Students (ICPS), conducted by the IAPS. Normally, applicants are upper-division undergraduates or first-or second-year graduate students. Selection is based on the quality of an abstract, letters of recommendation, and demonstration of active participation in the society. Deadline for Receipt: April of each year. Additional Information: The ICPS is usually held in Europe; in previous years it has been in Turkey, Portugal, Austria, Russia, Denmark, Hungary, Finland, Croatia, and Ireland. This program was formerly known as the International Conference of Physics Students Travel Award.

3201 ■ SOCIETY OF PHYSICS STUDENTS

c/o American Institute of Physics
One Physics Ellipse
College Park, MD 20740-3843
Tel: (301)209-3007
Fax: (301)209-0839
E-mail: sps@aip.org
Web Site: http://www.spsnational.org/programs/future_teacher.htm
To provide financial assistance to members of the Society of Physics Students (SPS) interested in preparing for a career as a physics teacher.
Title of Award: SPS Future Teacher Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Education; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $2,000. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time college juniors who are active members of the society. Applicants must be enrolled in a teacher education program with plans to prepare for a career in physics education. Selection is based on 1) high scholarship performance both in physics and overall studies, 2) potential for continued scholastic development in physics, 3) active participation in society programs, and 4) a statement of experiences and ambitions with regard to teaching physics. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year. Additional Information: This program is sponsored by the Sigma Pi Sigma Trust Fund and the American Institute of Physics.

3202 ■ SOCIETY OF PHYSICS STUDENTS

Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, 26 of these scholarships were awarded. Funds Available: Stipends are $5,000 or $2,000. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: Eligible are full-time college juniors majoring in physics who are active members of the society. Selection is based on 1) high scholarship performance both in physics and overall studies, 2) potential for continued scholastic development in physics, and 3) active participation in society programs; those 3 criteria are given equal weight. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year. Additional Information: This program is sponsored by the Sigma Pi Sigma Trust Fund and the American Institute of Physics.

3203 ■ SOCIETY OF PLASTICS ENGINEERS

Attn: SPE Foundation
14 Fairfield Drive
Brookfield, CT 06804-0403
Tel: (203)740-5447
Fax: (203)775-1157
E-mail: foundation@4spe.org
Web Site: http://www.4spe.org/foundation/scholarships.php
To provide financial assistance to undergraduate students who have a career interest in the plastics industry.
Title of Award: American Plastics Council (APC)/SPE Plastics Environmental Division Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $2,500 per year. Funds are paid directly to the recipient's school. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time undergraduate students at 4-year colleges or in 2-year technical programs. Applicants must 1) have a demonstrated or expressed interest in the plastics industry; 2) be majoring in or taking courses that would be beneficial to a career in the plastics or polymer industry (e.g., plastics engineering, polymer sciences, chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, or industrial engineering); 3) be in good academic standing at their school; and 4) be able to document financial need. Along with their application, they must submit 3 letters of recommendation; a high school and/or college transcript; and a 1-to 2-page statement telling why they are interested in the scholarship, their qualifications, and their educational and career goals in the plastics industry. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year. Additional Information: This scholarship is awarded annually in the names of corporations cited as the Excellence in Plastics Impact on the Environment by the Plastics Environmental Division of the Society of Plastics Engineers (SPE).

3204 ■ SOCIETY OF PLASTICS ENGINEERS

Attn: SPE Foundation
14 Fairfield Drive
Brookfield, CT 06804-0403
Tel: (203)740-5447
Fax: (203)775-1157
E-mail: foundation@4spe.org
Web Site: http://www.4spe.org/foundation/scholarships.php
To provide financial assistance to undergraduate and graduate students who have a career interest in the plastics industry.
Title of Award: Composites Division/Harold Giles Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Graduate, Undergraduate Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $1,000 per year. Funds are paid directly to the recipient's school. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time undergraduate and graduate students at 4-year colleges or in 2-year technical programs. Applicants must 1) have a demonstrated or expressed interest in the plastics industry; 2) be majoring in or taking courses that would be beneficial to a career in the plastics or polymer industry (e.g., plastics engineering, polymer sciences, chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, or industrial engineering); 3) be in good academic standing at their school; and 4) be able to document financial need. Along with their application, they must submit 3 letters of recommendation; a high school and/or college transcript; and a 1-to 2-page statement telling why they are interested in the scholarship, their qualifications, and their educational and career goals in the plastics industry. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year.

3205 ■ SOCIETY OF PLASTICS ENGINEERS

Attn: SPE Foundation
14 Fairfield Drive
Brookfield, CT 06804-0403
Tel: (203)740-5447
Fax: (203)775-1157
E-mail: foundation@4spe.org
Web Site: http://www.4spe.org/foundation/scholarships.php
To provide financial assistance to undergraduate students who have a career interest in the plastics industry.
Title of Award: Robert E. Cramer/Product Design and Development Division/Mid-Michigan Section Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $1,000 per year. Funds are paid directly to the recipient's school. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time undergraduate students at 4-year colleges or in 2-year technical programs. Applicants must 1) have a demonstrated or expressed interest in the plastics industry; 2) be majoring in or taking courses that would be beneficial to a career in the plastics or polymer industry (e.g., plastics engineering, polymer sciences, chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, or industrial engineering); 3) be in good academic standing at their school; and 4) be able to document financial need. Along with their application, they must submit 3 letters of recommendation; a high school and/or college transcript; and a 1-to 2-page statement telling why they are interested in the scholarship, their qualifications, and their educational and career goals in the plastics industry. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year.

3206 ■ SOCIETY OF PLASTICS ENGINEERS

Attn: SPE Foundation
14 Fairfield Drive
Brookfield, CT 06804-0403
Tel: (203)740-5447
Fax: (203)775-1157
E-mail: foundation@4spe.org
Web Site: http://www.4spe.org/foundation/scholarships.php
To provide financial assistance to undergraduate students who have a career interest in the plastics industry.
Title of Award: Robert G. Dailey/Detroit Section Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $4,000 per year. Funds are paid directly to the recipient's school. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time undergraduate students at 4-year colleges or in 2-year technical programs. Applicants must 1) have a demonstrated or expressed interest in the plastics industry; 2) be majoring in or taking courses that would be beneficial to a career in the plastics or polymer industry (e.g., plastics engineering, polymer sciences, chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, or industrial engineering); 3) be in good academic standing at their school; and 4) be able to document financial need. Along with their application, they must submit 3 letters of recommendation; a high school and/or college transcript; and a 1-to 2-page statement telling why they are interested in the scholarship, their qualifications, and their educational and career goals in the plastics industry. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year.

3207 ■ SOCIETY OF PLASTICS ENGINEERS

Attn: SPE Foundation
14 Fairfield Drive
Brookfield, CT 06804-0403
Tel: (203)740-5447
Fax: (203)775-1157
E-mail: foundation@4spe.org
Web Site: http://www.4spe.org/foundation/scholarships.php
To provide financial assistance to Mexican American undergraduate and graduate students who have a career interest in the plastics industry.
Title of Award: Fleming/Blaszcak Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College, Graduate Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $2,000 per year. Funds are paid directly to the recipient's school. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time undergraduate and graduate students of Mexican descent who are enrolled in a 4-year college or university. Applicants must be U.S. citizens or legal residents. They must 1) have a demonstrated or expressed interest in the plastics industry; 2) be majoring in or taking courses that would be beneficial to a career in the plastics or polymer industry (e.g., plastics engineering, polymer sciences, chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, or industrial engineering); 3) be in good academic standing at their school; and 4) be able to document financial need. Along with their application, they must submit 3 letters of recommendation; a high school and/or college transcript; a 1-to 2-page statement telling why they are interested in the scholarship, their qualifications, and their educational and career goals in the plastics industry; and documentation of their Mexican heritage. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year. Additional Information: This program is sponsored by Cal Mold Inc. and Formula Plastics.

3208 ■ SOCIETY OF PLASTICS ENGINEERS

Attn: SPE Foundation
14 Fairfield Drive
Brookfield, CT 06804-0403
Tel: (203)740-5447
Fax: (203)775-1157
E-mail: foundation@4spe.org
Web Site: http://www.4spe.org/foundation/scholarships.php
To provide financial assistance to undergraduate and graduate students who have a career interest in the plastics industry and experience in the thermoset industry.
Title of Award: Thermoset Division/James I. MacKenzie Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Graduate, Undergraduate Number Awarded: 2 each year: 1 to an undergraduate and 1 to a graduate student. Funds Available: The stipend is $1,000 per year. Funds are paid directly to the recipient's school. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time undergraduate and graduate students at either a 4-year college or in a 2-year technical program. Applicants must have experience in the thermoset industry, such as courses taken, research conducted, or jobs held. They must 1) have a demonstrated or expressed interest in the plastics industry; 2) be majoring in or taking courses that would be beneficial to a career in the plastics or polymer industry (e.g., plastics engineering, polymer sciences, chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, or industrial engineering); 3) be in good academic standing at their school; and 4) be able to document financial need. Along with their application, they must submit 3 letters of recommendation; a high school and/or college transcript; a 1-to 2-page statement telling why they are interested in the scholarship, their qualifications, and their educational and career goals in the plastics industry; and a statement detailing their exposure to the thermoset industry. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year.

3209 ■ SOCIETY OF PLASTICS ENGINEERS

Attn: SPE Foundation
14 Fairfield Drive
Brookfield, CT 06804-0403
Tel: (203)740-5447
Fax: (203)775-1157
E-mail: foundation@4spe.org
Web Site: http://www.4spe.org/foundation/scholarships.php
To provide financial assistance to undergraduate and graduate students who have a career interest in the plastics industry.
Title of Award: Ted Neward Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Graduate, Undergraduate Number Awarded: 3 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $3,000 per year. Funds are paid directly to the recipient's school. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time undergraduate and graduate students at 4-year colleges or in 2-year technical programs. Applicants must 1) have a demonstrated or expressed interest in the plastics industry; 2) be majoring in or taking courses that would be beneficial to a career in the plastics or polymer industry (e.g., plastics engineering, polymer sciences, chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, or industrial engineering); 3) be in good academic standing at their school; and 4) be able to document financial need. U.S. citizenship is required. Along with their application, they must submit 3 letters of recommendation; a high school and/or college transcript; and a 1-to 2-page statement telling why they are interested in the scholarship, their qualifications, and their educational and career goals in the plastics industry. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year.

3210 ■ SOCIETY OF PLASTICS ENGINEERS

Attn: SPE Foundation
14 Fairfield Drive
Brookfield, CT 06804-0403
Tel: (203)740-5447
Fax: (203)775-1157
E-mail: foundation@4spe.org
Web Site: http://www.4spe.org/foundation/scholarships.php
To provide financial assistance to undergraduate students who have a career interest in the plastics industry.
Title of Award: Polymer Modifiers and Additives Division Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 4 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $4,000 per year. Funds are paid directly to the recipient's school. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time undergraduate students at 4-year colleges or in 2-year technical programs. Applicants must 1) have a demonstrated or expressed interest in the plastics industry; 2) be majoring in or taking courses that would be beneficial to a career in the plastics or polymer industry (e.g., plastics engineering, polymer sciences, chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, or industrial engineering); 3) be in good academic standing at their school; and 4) be able to document financial need. Along with their application, they must submit 3 letters of recommendation; a high school and/or college transcript; and a 1-to 2-page statement telling why they are interested in the scholarship, their qualifications, and their educational and career goals in the plastics industry. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year.

3211 ■ SOCIETY OF PLASTICS ENGINEERS

Attn: SPE Foundation
14 Fairfield Drive
Brookfield, CT 06804-0403
Tel: (203)740-5447
Fax: (203)775-1157
E-mail: foundation@4spe.org
Web Site: http://www.4spe.org/foundation/scholarships.php
To provide financial assistance to undergraduate and graduate students who have a career interest in the plastics industry.
Title of Award: Society of Plastics Engineers Foundation Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Graduate, Undergraduate Number Awarded: 10 to 12 each year. Funds Available: Stipends range up to $4,000 per year. Funds are paid directly to the recipient's school. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed for up to 3 additional years.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time undergraduate and graduate students at 4-year colleges or in 2-year technical programs. Applicants must 1) have a demonstrated or expressed interest in the plastics industry; 2) be majoring in or taking courses that would be beneficial to a career in the plastics or polymer industry (e.g., plastics engineering, polymer sciences, chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, or industrial engineering); 3) be in good academic standing at their school; and 4) be able to document financial need. Along with their application, they must submit 3 letters of recommendation; a high school and/or college transcript; and a 1-to 2-page statement telling why they are interested in the scholarship, their qualifications, and their educational and career goals in the plastics industry. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year.

3212 ■ SOCIETY OF PLASTICS ENGINEERS

Attn: SPE Foundation
14 Fairfield Drive
Brookfield, CT 06804-0403
Tel: (203)740-5447
Fax: (203)775-1157
E-mail: foundation@4spe.org
Web Site: http://www.4spe.org/foundation/scholarships.php
To provide college scholarships to students who have a career interest in the plastics industry and experience in the thermoforming industry.
Title of Award: Thermoforming Division Memorial Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Graduate, Undergraduate Number Awarded: 2 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $5,000 per year. Funds are paid directly to the recipient's school. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time undergraduate and graduate students at either a 4-year college or in a 2-year technical program. Applicants must have experience in the thermoforming industry, such as courses taken, research conducted, or jobs held. They must 1) have a demonstrated or expressed interest in the plastics industry; 2) be majoring in or taking courses that would be beneficial to a career in the plastics or polymer industry (e.g., plastics engineering, polymer sciences, chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, or industrial engineering); 3) be in good academic standing at their school; and 4) be able to document financial need. Along with their application, they must submit 3 letters of recommendation; a high school and/or college transcript; a 1to 2-page statement telling why they are interested in the scholarship, their qualifications, and their educational and career goals in the plastics industry; and a statement detailing their exposure to the thermoforming industry. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year.

3213 ■ SOCIETY OF PLASTICS ENGINEERS

Attn: SPE Foundation
14 Fairfield Drive
Brookfield, CT 06804-0403
Tel: (203)740-5447
Fax: (203)775-1157
E-mail: foundation@4spe.org
Web Site: http://www.4spe.org/foundation/scholarships.php
To provide financial assistance to undergraduate students who have a career interest in the plastics industry.
Title of Award: Vinyl Plastics Division Scholarship Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Materials; Engineering, Mechanical; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: 1 each year. Funds Available: The stipend is $1,000 per year. Funds are paid directly to the recipient's school. Duration: 1 year.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to full-time undergraduate students at 4-year colleges or in 2-year technical programs. Applicants must 1) have a demonstrated or expressed interest in the plastics industry; 2) be majoring in or taking courses that would be beneficial to a career in the plastics or polymer industry (e.g., plastics engineering, polymer sciences, chemistry, physics, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, or industrial engineering); 3) be in good academic standing at their school; and 4) be able to document financial need. Along with their application, they must submit 3 letters of recommendation; a high school and/or college transcript; and a 1-to 2-page statement telling why they are interested in the scholarship, their qualifications, and their educational and career goals in the plastics industry. Preference is given to applicants with experience in the vinyl industry, such as courses taken, research conducted, or jobs held. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year.

3214 ■ TEXAS SPACE GRANT CONSORTIUM

Attn: Administrative Assistant
3925 West Braker Lane, Suite 200
Austin, TX 78759
Tel: (512)471-3583
Free: 800-248-8742
Fax: (512)471-3585
E-mail: scholarships@tsgc.utexas.edu
Web Site: http://www.tsgc.utexas.edu/grants
To provide financial assistance to upper-division and medical students at Texas universities working on degrees in the fields of space science and engineering.
Title of Award: Columbia Crew Memorial Undergraduate Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Aerospace sciences; Biological and clinical sciences; Chemistry; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Chemical; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Industrial; Engineering, Mechanical; Geology; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Space and planetary sciences Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Doctorate, Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year; recently, 29 of these scholarships were awarded. Funds Available: The stipend is $1,000. Duration: 1 year; nonrenewable.
Eligibility Requirements: Applicants must be U.S. citizens, eligible for financial assistance, and registered for full-time study at a participating college or university. Applicants must be a sophomore at a 2-year institution, a junior or senior at a 4-year institution, or a first-or second-year student at a medical school. Supported fields of study have included aerospace engineering, biology, chemical engineering, chemistry, electrical engineering, geology, industrial engineering, mathematics, mechanical engineering, and physics. The program encourages participation by members of groups underrepresented in science and engineering (persons with disabilities, women, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, and Pacific Islanders). Selection is based on excellence in academics, participation in space education projects, participation in research projects, and exhibited leadership qualities. Deadline for Receipt: March of each year. Additional Information: In 2003, the Texas Space Grant Consortium renamed its undergraduate scholarship program in honor of the 7 Space Shuttle Columbia astronauts. The participating universities are Baylor University, Lamar University, Prairie View A&M University, Rice University, San Jacinto College, Southern Methodist University, Sul Ross State University, Texas A&M University (including Kingsville and Corpus Christi campuses), Texas Christian University, Texas Southern University, Texas Tech University, Trinity University, University of Houston (including Clear Lake and Downtown campuses), University of Texas at Arlington, University of Texas at Austin, University of Texas at Dallas, University of Texas at El Paso, University of Texas at San Antonio, and University of Texas/Pan American. This program is funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

3215 ■ U.S. AIR FORCE

Attn: Headquarters AFROTC/RRUC
551 East Maxwell Boulevard
Maxwell AFB, AL 36112-5917
Tel: (334)953-2091; (866)423-7682
Fax: (334)953-6167
Web Site: http://www.afrotc.com/scholarships/hsschol/types.php
To provide financial assistance to high school seniors or graduates who are interested in joining Air Force ROTC in college and are willing to serve as Air Force officers following completion of their bachelor's degree.
Title of Award: Air Force ROTC High School Scholarships Area, Field, or Subject: Architecture; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Architectural; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Mechanical; Environmental science; General studies/Field of study not specified; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Meteorology; Operations research; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: Approximately 2,000 each year. Funds Available: Type 1 scholarships provide payment of full tuition and most laboratory fees, as well as $600 for books. Type 2 scholarships pay the same benefits except tuition is capped at $15,000 per year; students who attend an institution where tuition exceeds $15,000 must pay the difference. Type 7 scholarships pay full tuition and most laboratory fees, but students must attend a college or university where the tuition is less than $9,000 per year or a public college or university where they qualify for the in-state tuition rate; they may not attend an institution with higher tuition and pay the difference. Approximately 5% of scholarship offers are for Type 1, approximately 20% are for Type 2, and approximately 75% are for type 7. All recipients are also awarded a tax-free subsistence allowance for 10 months of each year that is $250 per month as a freshman, $300 per month as a sophomore, $350 per month as a junior, and $400 per month as a senior. Duration: 4 years.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to high school seniors who are U.S. citizens at least 17 of age and have been accepted at a college or university with an Air Force ROTC unit on campus or a college with a cross-enrollment agreement with such a college. Applicants must have a cumulative GPA of 3.0 or higher and an ACT composite score of 24 or higher or an SAT score of 1100 (mathematics and verbal portion only) or higher. At the time of their commissioning in the Air Force, they must be no more than 31 years of age. They must agree to serve for at least 4 years as active-duty Air Force officers following graduation from college. Deadline for Receipt: November of each year. Additional Information: Recently, approximately 70% of these scholarships were offered to students planning to major in the science and technical fields of architecture, chemistry, computer science, engineering (aeronautical, aerospace, astronautical, architectural, civil, computer, electrical, environmental, or mechanical), mathematics, meteorology and atmospheric sciences, operations research, or physics. Approximately 30% were offered to students in all other fields. While scholarship recipients can major in any subject, they must enroll in 4 years of aerospace studies courses at 1 of the 144 colleges and universities that have an Air Force ROTC unit on campus; students may also attend nearly 900 other colleges that have cross-enrollment agreements with the institutions that have an Air Force ROTC unit on campus. Recipients must attend a 4-week summer training camp at an Air Force base, usually between their sophomore and junior years. Most cadets incur a 4-year active-duty commitment. Pilots incur a 10-year active-duty service commitment after successfully completing Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training and navigators incur a 6-year commitment after successfully completing Specialized Undergraduate Navigator Training. The minimum service obligation for intelligence and Air Battle Management career fields is 5 years.

3216 ■ U.S. AIR FORCE

Attn: Headquarters AFROTC/RRUC
551 East Maxwell Boulevard
Maxwell AFB, AL 36112-5917
Tel: (334)953-2091; (866)423-7682
Fax: (334)953-6167
Web Site: http://www.afrotc.com/scholarships/incolschol/incolProgram.php
To provide financial assistance to undergraduate students who are willing to join Air Force ROTC in college and serve as Air Force officers following completion of their bachelor's degree.
Title of Award: Air Force ROTC In-College Scholarship Program Area, Field, or Subject: Architecture; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Architectural; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Mechanical; Environmental science; General studies/Field of study not specified; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Meteorology; Operations research; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year. Funds Available: Cadets selected in Phase 1 are awarded type 2 AFROTC scholarships that provide for payment of tuition and fees, to a maximum of $15,000 per year. A limited number of cadets selected in Phase 2 are also awarded type 2 AFROTC scholarships, but most are awarded type 3 AFROTC scholarships with tuition capped at $9,000 per year. Cadets selected in Phase 3 are awarded type 6 AFROTC scholarships with tuition capped at $3,000 per year. All recipients are also awarded a book allowance of $600 and a tax-free subsistence allowance for 10 months of each year that is $300 per month during the sophomore year, $350 during the junior year, and $400 during the senior year. Duration: 3 years for students selected as freshmen or 2 years for students selected as sophomores.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to U.S. citizens enrolled as freshmen or sophomores at 1 of the 144 colleges and universities that have an Air Force ROTC unit on campus. Applicants must have a cumulative GPA of 2.5 or higher and be able to pass the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test and the Air Force ROTC Physical Fitness Test. At the time of commissioning, they may be no more than 31 years of age. They must agree to serve for at least 4 years as active-duty Air Force officers following graduation from college. Phase 1 is open to students enrolled in the Air Force ROTC program who do not currently have a scholarship but now wish to apply. Phase 2 is open to Phase 1 nonselects and students not enrolled in Air Force ROTC. Phase 3 is open only to Phase 2 nonselects. Recently, the program gave preference to students majoring in the science and technical fields of architecture, chemistry, computer science, engineering (aeronautical, aerospace, astronautical, architectural, civil, computer, electrical, environmental, or mechanical), mathematics, meteorology and atmospheric sciences, operations research, or physics. Deadline for Receipt: January of each year. Additional Information: While scholarship recipients can major in any subject, they must complete 4 years of aerospace studies courses at 1 of the 144 colleges or universities that have an Air Force ROTC unit on campus. Recipients must also attend a 4-week summer training camp at an Air Force base, usually between their sophomore and junior years; 2-year scholarship awardees attend in the summer after their junior year. Current military personnel are eligible for early release from active duty in order to enter the Air Force ROTC program. Following completion of their bachelor's degree, scholarship recipients earn a commission as a second lieutenant in the Air Force and serve at least 4 years.

3217 ■ U.S. AIR FORCE

Attn: Headquarters AFROTC/RRUE
Enlisted Commissioning Section
551 East Maxwell Boulevard
Maxwell AFB, AL 36112-5917
Tel: (334)953-2091; (866)423-7682
Fax: (334)953-6167
E-mail: enlisted@afrotc.com
Web Site: http://www.afoats.af.mil/AFROTC/EnlistedComm/AECP.asp
To allow selected enlisted Air Force personnel to earn a bachelor's degree in approved majors by providing financial assistance for full-time college study.
Title of Award: Airman Education and Commissioning Program Area, Field, or Subject: African studies; Asian studies; Computer and information sciences; Engineering; Foreign languages; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Meteorology; Near Eastern studies; Nursing; Physics; Russian studies Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Approximately 60 each year. Funds Available: While participating in this program, cadets remain on active duty in the Air Force and receive their regular salary and benefits. They also receive payment of tuition and fees up to $15,000 per year and an annual textbook allowance of $600. Duration: 1 to 3 years, until completion of a bachelor's degree.
Eligibility Requirements: Eligible to participate in this program are enlisted members of the Air Force who have been accepted at a university or college (or approved crosstown institution) that is associated with AFROTC and that offers an approved major. The majors currently supported are computer science, all ABET-accredited engineering fields (not engineering technology), foreign area studies (limited to Middle East, Africa, Asia, Russia/Eurasia), foreign languages (limited to Arabic, Armenian, Azeri, Chinese, French, Georgian, Hebrew, Hindi, Indonesian, Kazakh, Pashto, Persian Farsi, Russian, Swahili, and Turkish), mathematics, meteorology, nursing, and physics. Applicants must have completed at least 1 year of time-in-service and 1 year of time-on-station. They must have scores on the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test of at least 15 on the verbal and 10 on the quantitative and be able to pass the Air Force ROTC Physical Fitness Test. Normally they should have completed at least 30 semester hours of college study with a GPA of 2.75 or higher. They must be younger than 31 years of age or otherwise able to be commissioned before they become 35 years of age. Deadline for Receipt: February of each year. Additional Information: While attending college, participants in this program attend ROTC classes at their college or university. Upon completing their degree, they are commissioned to serve in the Air Force in their area of specialization with an active-duty service commitment of at least 4 years. Further information is available from base education service officers or an Air Force ROTC unit. This program does not provide for undergraduate flying training.

3218 ■ U.S. AIR FORCE

Attn: Headquarters AFROTC/RRUE
Enlisted Commissioning Section
551 East Maxwell Boulevard
Maxwell AFB, AL 36112-5917
Tel: (334)953-2091; (866)423-7682
Fax: (334)953-6167
E-mail: enlisted@afrotc.com
Web Site: http://www.afoats.af.mil/AFROTC/EnlistedComm/ASCP.asp
To allow selected enlisted Air Force personnel to earn a bachelor's degree in approved majors by providing financial assistance for full-time college study.
Title of Award: Airman Scholarship and Commissioning Program Area, Field, or Subject: Architecture; Atmospheric science; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Architectural; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Mechanical; Environmental science; General studies/Field of study not specified; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Meteorology; Operations research; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year. Funds Available: Awards are type 2 AFROTC scholarships that provide for payment of tuition and fees, to a maximum of $15,000 per year, plus an annual book allowance of $600. All recipients are also awarded a tax-free subsistence allowance for 10 months of each year that is $300 per month during their sophomore year, $350 during their junior year, and $400 during their senior year. Duration: 2 to 4 years, until completion of a bachelor's degree.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to active-duty enlisted members of the Air Force who have completed at least 1 year of continuous active duty and at least 1 year on station. Applicants normally must have completed at least 24 semester hours of graded college credit with a cumulative college GPA of 2.5 or higher. If they have not completed 24 hours of graded college credit, they must have an ACT score of 24 or higher or an SAT combined verbal and mathematics score of 1100 or higher. They must also have scores on the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test (AFOQT) of 15 or more on the verbal scale and 10 or more on the quantitative scale and be able to pass the Air Force ROTC Physical Fitness Test. Applicants must have been accepted at a college or university (including crosstown schools) offering the AFROTC 4-year program. When they complete the program and receive their commission, they may not be 31 years of age or older. U.S. citizenship is required. Recently, awards were presented according to the following priorities: 1) computer, electrical, and environmental engineering; 2) aeronautical, aerospace, architectural, astronautical, civil, and mechanical engineering and meteorology and atmospheric sciences; 3) all other ABET-accredited engineering majors, architecture, chemistry, computer science, mathematics, operations research, and physics; 4) all other majors. Deadline for Receipt: October of each year. Additional Information: Selectees separate from the active-duty Air Force, join an AFROTC detachment, and become full-time students. Upon completing their degree, they are commissioned as officers and returned to active duty in the Air Force with a 4-year service obligation. Further information is available from base education service officers or an Air Force ROTC unit.

3219 ■ U.S. AIR FORCE

Attn: Headquarters AFROTC/RRUE
Enlisted Commissioning Section
551 East Maxwell Boulevard Maxwell AFB, AL 36112-5917
Tel: (334)953-2091; (866)423-7682
Fax: (334)953-6167
E-mail: enlisted@afrotc.com
Web Site: http://www.afoats.af.mil/AFROTC/EnlistedComm/POCERP.asp
To allow selected enlisted Air Force personnel to earn a baccalaureate degree by providing financial assistance for full-time college study.
Title of Award: Professional Officer Course Early Release Program Area, Field, or Subject: Architecture; Atmospheric science; Chemistry; Computer and information sciences; Engineering; Engineering, Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical; Engineering, Architectural; Engineering, Civil; Engineering, Computer; Engineering, Electrical; Engineering, Mechanical; Environmental science; General studies/Field of study not specified; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Meteorology; Operations research; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Undergraduate Number Awarded: Varies each year. Funds Available: Participants receive a stipend for 10 months of the year that is $350 per month during the first year and $400 per month during the second year. Scholarship recipients earn the Professional Officer Course Incentive of $3,000 per year for tuition and $600 per year for books. Duration: 2 years (no more and no less).
Eligibility Requirements: Eligible to participate in this program are enlisted members of the Air Force under the age of 30 (or otherwise able to be commissioned before becoming 35 years of age) who have completed at least 1 year on continuous active duty, have served on station for at least 1 year, and have no more than 2 years remaining to complete their initial baccalaureate degree. Scholarship applicants must be younger than 31 years of age when they graduate and earn their commission. All applicants must have been accepted at a college or university offering the AFROTC 4-year program and must have a cumulative college GPA of 2.5 or higher. Their Air Force Officer Qualifying Test (AFOQT) scores must be at least 15 on the verbal and 10 on the quantitative. Applicants who have not completed 24 units of college work must have an ACT composite score of 24 or higher or an SAT combined verbal and mathematics score of 1100 or higher. U.S. citizenship is required. Recently, awards were presented according to the following priorities: 1) computer, electrical, and environmental engineering; 2) aeronautical, aerospace, architectural, astronautical, civil, and mechanical engineering and meteorology and atmospheric sciences; 3) all other ABET-accredited engineering majors, architecture, chemistry, computer science, mathematics, operations research, and physics; 4) all other majors. Deadline for Receipt: October of each year. Additional Information: Upon completing their degree, selectees are commissioned as officers in the Air Force with a 4-year service obligation. Further information is available from base education service officers or an Air Force ROTC unit.

3220 ■ U.S. NAVY

Attn: Navy Personnel Command
5722 Integrity Drive
Millington, TN 38054-5057
Tel: (901)874-3070; 888-633-9674
Fax: (901)874-2651
E-mail: nukeprograms@cnrc.navy.mil
Web Site: http://www.cnrc.navy.mil/nucfield/college/officer_options.htm
To provide financial assistance to college juniors and seniors who wish to serve in the Navy's nuclear propulsion training program following graduation.
Title of Award: Nuclear Propulsion Officer Candidate (NUPOC) Program Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Engineering; General studies/Field of study not specified; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Four Year College Number Awarded: Varies each year. Funds Available: Participants become Active Reserve enlisted Navy personnel and receive a salary of up to $2,500 per month; the exact amount depends on the local cost of living and other factors. A bonus of $10,000 is also paid at the time of enlistment and another $2,000 upon completion of nuclear power training. Duration: Up to 30 months, until completion of a bachelor's degree.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to U.S. citizens who are entering their junior or senior year of college as a full-time student. Strong technical majors (mathematics, physics, chemistry, or an engineering field) are encouraged but not required. Applicants must have completed at least 1 year of calculus and 1 year of physics and must have earned a grade of "C" or better in all mathematics, science, and technical courses. Normally, they must be 26 years of age or younger at the expected date of commissioning, although applicants for the design and research specialty may be 29 years old. Additional Information: Following graduation, participants attend Officer Candidate School in Pensacola, Florida for 4 months and receive their commissions. They have a service obligation of 8 years (of which at least 5 years must be on active duty), beginning with 6 months at the Navy Nuclear Power Training Command in Charleston, South Carolina and 6 more months of hands-on training at a nuclear reactor facility. Further information on this program is available from a local Navy recruiter or the Navy Recruiting Command, 801 North Randolph Street, Arlington, VA 22203-1991.

3221 ■ WASHINGTON HIGHER EDUCATION COORDINATING BOARD

917 Lakeridge Way
P.O. Box 43430
Olympia, WA 98504-3430
Tel: (360)753-7851; 888-535-0747
Fax: (360)753-7808
E-mail: futureteachers@hecb.wa.gov
Web Site: http://www.hecb.wa.gov/financialaid/other/alternative.asp
To provide forgivable loans to K-12 classified employees in Washington who are interested in attending a college or university in order to become a teacher.
Title of Award: Washington Conditional Scholarships for Alternative Teaching Certification Area, Field, or Subject: Chemistry; Education; Education, Bilingual and cross-cultural; Education, Elementary; Education, English as a second language; Education, Secondary; Education, Special; Foreign languages; Mathematics and mathematical sciences; Physics; Technology Level of Education for which Award is Granted: Professional, Undergraduate Number Awarded: Approximately 25 each year. Funds Available: The maximum award is $4,000 per academic year. These awards are in the form of loans that can be forgiven in exchange for teaching service. Each 2 years of eligible teaching service results in the forgiveness of 1 year of loan. Duration: 1 year; may be renewed up to 4 additional years.
Eligibility Requirements: This program is open to Washington residents who are currently employed as a classified instructional employee in a K-12 public school. Applicants must 1) have a transferable associate degree and be seeking residency teacher certification with endorsements in special education or English as a second language; or 2) have a bachelor's degree and subject matter expertise in a shortage area and be seeking residency teacher certification in a subject matter shortage area (currently defined as special education, English as a second language, chemistry, physics, Japanese, mathematics, and technology education). to enroll in an accredited Washington college or university and work as a teacher in a K-12 public school in the state after completing initial teacher certification. Selection is based on academic ability, a statement demonstrating commitment to the teaching profession, the applicant's ability to serve as a positive role model as a K-12 public school teacher, length and quality of contributions to the Washington K-12 public school, and recommendations from a current teacher or school official describing the applicant's potential as a future teacher. The priority in making awards is: 1) eligible renewal applicants who are within 2 years of completing their initial teacher certification requirements; 2) all other eligible renewable applicants; 3) eligible new applicants who are within 2 years of completing their initial teacher certification requirements; and 4) all other new eligible applicants. Deadline for Receipt: October of each year. Additional Information: This program was established by the Washington legislature in 2001. It is administered by the Washington Higher Education Coordinator Board, but the Washington State Professional Educator Standards Board selects the recipients.

College Blue Book

Physics

views updated Jun 08 2018

PHYSICS.

It should be understood that a full understanding of the history of physics would include consideration of its institutional, social, and cultural contexts. Physics became a scientific discipline during the nineteenth century, gaining a clear professional and cognitive identity as well as patronage from a number of institutions (especially those pertaining to education and the state). Before the nineteenth century, researchers who did work that we now refer to as physics identified themselves in more general terms—such as natural philosopher or applied mathematician —and discussion of their work often adopts a retrospective definition of physics.

For researchers of the nineteenth century, physics involved the development of quantifiable laws that could be tested by conducting experiments and taking precision measurements. The laws of physics focused on fundamental processes, often discovered in particular areas of research, such as mechanics, electricity and magnetism, optics, fluids, thermodynamics, and the kinetic theory of gases. The various specialists saw physics as a unified science, since they shared the same concepts and laws, with energy becoming the central unifying concept by the end of the century. In forming its cognitive and institutional identity, physics distinguished itself from other scientific and technical disciplines, including mathematics, engineering, chemistry, and astronomy. However, as we will see, the history of physics cannot be understood without considering developments in these other areas.

Middle Ages

The Middle Ages inherited a wealth of knowledge from antiquity, including the systematic philosophy of Aristotle (384–322 b.c.e.) and the synthesis of ancient astronomy in the work of the Hellenistic astronomer Ptolemy (fl. second century c.e.). In agreement with those before him, Aristotle maintained that the terrestrial and celestial realms, separated by the orbit of the Moon, featured entirely different physical behaviors. His terrestrial physics was founded on the existence of four elements (earth, water, air, and fire) and the idea that every motion requires the specification of a cause for that motion. Aristotle considered two broad classes of motion: natural motion, as an object returned to its natural place (as dictated by its elemental composition), and violent motion, as an object was removed forcibly from its natural place. Because the natural place of the element earth was at the center of the cosmos, Aristotle's physics necessitated a geocentric, or Earth-centered, model of the heavens.

Whereas the terrestrial realm featured constant change, the heavenly bodies moved in uniform circular orbits and were perfect and unchanging. Starting from an exhaustive tabulation of astronomical data, Ptolemy modeled the orbits of each heavenly body using a complex system of circular motions, including a fundamental deferent and one or more epicycles. Often, Ptolemy was forced to make additions, including the eccentric model (in which the center of rotation of the orbiting body was offset from Earth) and the equant model (in which a fictitious point, also not located at Earth, defined uniform motion).

Despite the great value of this work, the West lost a good portion of it with the erosion of the Roman Empire. Luckily, a number of Islamic scholars took an interest in the knowledge of the ancients. In addition to translating Aristotle and Ptolemy (among others) into Arabic, they commented on these works extensively and made a number of innovations in astronomy, optics, matter theory, and mathematics (including the use of "Arabic numerals," with the zero as a placeholder). For example, al-Battani (c. 858–929) made improvements to Ptolemy's orbits of the Sun and Moon, compiled a revised catalog of stars, and worked on the construction of astronomical instruments. Avempace (Ibn Badja, c. 1095–1138 or 1139) developed a position first staked out by the Neoplatonist philosopher John Philoponus (fl. sixth century c.e.), arguing that Aristotle was wrong to claim that the time for the fall of a body was proportional to its weight. After the reconquest of Spain during the twelfth century, ancient knowledge became available once again in the Latin West. Arab commentators such as Averroes (Ibn Rushd, 1126–1198) became influential interpreters of an Aristotle that was closer to the original texts and quite different from the glosses and explanatory aids that the West had grown accustomed to.

During the late Middle Ages, there was a general revival of learning and science in the West. The mathematician Jordanus de Nemore (fl. thirteenth century c.e.) pioneered a series of influential studies of static bodies. In addition to studying levers, Jordanus analyzed the (lower) apparent weight of a mass resting on an inclined plane. Despite the church's condemnation of certain radical interpretations of Aristotelianism during the late thirteenth century, there followed a flowering of activity during the fourteenth century, particularly concerning the problem of motion. Two important centers of activity were Merton College (at Oxford), where a group of mathematicians and logicians included Thomas Bradwardine (c. 1290–1349) and Richard Swineshead (d. 1355), and the University of Paris, which included John Buridan (c. 1295–1358) and Nicole Oresme (c. 1325–1382).

The scholars at Merton College adopted a distinction between dynamics (in which the causes of motion are specified) and kinematics (in which motion is only described). The dynamical problems implied by Aristotelian physics, especially the problem of projectile motion, occupied many medieval scholars (see sidebar, "Causes of Motion: Medieval Understandings"). In kinematics, the release from the search for causation encouraged a number of new developments. The Mertonians developed the concept of velocity in analogy with the medieval idea of the intensity of a quality (such as the redness of an apple), and distinguished between uniform (constant velocity) and nonuniform (accelerated) motion. They also gave the first statement of the mean velocity theorem, which offered a way of comparing constant-acceleration motion to uniform motion.

While the Mertonians presented their analyses of motion through the cumbersome medium of words, other scholars developed graphical techniques. The most influential presentation of the mean speed theorem was offered by Oresme, who recorded the duration of the motion along a horizontal line (or "subject line") and indicated the intensity of the velocity as a sequence of vertical line segments of varying height. Figure 1 shows that an object undergoing constant acceleration travels the same distance as if it were traveling for the same period of time at its average velocity (the average of its initial and final velocity). Although this work remained entirely abstract and was not based on experiment, it helped later work in kinematics, most notably Galileo's.

Following Aristotle's physics, medieval scholars pictured the celestial realm as being of unchanging perfection. Each heavenly body (the Sun, the Moon, the planets, and the sphere of the fixed stars) rotated around Earth on its own celestial sphere. Ptolemy's addition of epicycles on top of Aristotle's concentric spheres led medieval astronomers to speak of "partial orbs" within the "total orb" of each heavenly body. The orbs communicated rotational movement to one another without any resistive force and were made of a quintessence or ether, which was an ageless, transparent substance. Beyond the outermost sphere of the fixed stars was the "final cause" of the Unmoved Mover, which was usually equated with the Christian God. Buridan suggested that God impressed an impetus on each orb at the moment of creation and, in the absence of resistance, they had been rotating ever since. Both Buridan and Oresme considered the possibility of a rotating Earth as a way of explaining the diurnal motion of the fixed stars, and found their arguments to be promising but not sufficiently convincing.

Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries

The period of the scientific revolution can be taken to extend, simplistically but handily, from 1543, with the publication of Nicolaus Copernicus's De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, to 1687, with the publication of Isaac Newton's Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica, often referred to simply as the Principia. The term "revolution" remains useful, despite the fact that scholars have suggested that the period shows significant continuities with what came before and after. Copernicus (1473–1543) was attracted to a heliocentric, or Sun-centered, model of the universe (already considered over one thousand years before by Aristarchus of Samos) because it eliminated a number of complexities from Ptolemy's model (including the equant), provided a simple explanation for the diurnal motion of the stars, and agreed with certain theological ideas of his own regarding the Sun as a kind of mystical motive force of the heavens. Among the problems posed by Copernicus's model of the heavens, the most serious was that it contradicted Aristotelian physics.

Heliocentrism was pursued again by the German mathematician Johannes Kepler (1571–1630). Motivated by a deep religious conviction that a mathematical interpretation of nature reflected the grand plan of the Creator and an equally deep commitment to Copernicanism, Kepler worked with the Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe (1546–1601) with the intention of calculating the orbits of the planets around the Sun. After Brahe's death, Kepler gained control of his former associate's data and worked long and hard on the orbit of Mars, eventually to conclude that it was elliptical. Kepler's so-called "three laws" were identified later by other scholars (including Newton) from different parts of his work, with the elliptical orbits of the planets becoming the first law. The second and third laws were his findings that the area swept out by a line connecting the Sun and a particular planet is the same for any given period of time; and that the square of a planet's period of revolution around the Sun is proportional to the cube of its distance from the Sun.

The career of Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) began in earnest with his work on improved telescopes and using them to make observations that lent strength to Copernicanism, including the imperfections of the Moon's surface and the satellites of Jupiter. His public support of Copernicanism led to a struggle with the church, but his greater importance lies with his study of statics and kinematics, in his effort to formulate a new physics that would not conflict with the hypothesis of a moving Earth.

His work in statics was influenced by the Dutch engineer Simon Stevin (1548–1620), who made contributions to the analysis of the lever, to hydrostatics, and to arguments on the impossibility of perpetual motion. Galileo also repeated Stevin's experiments on free fall, which disproved Aristotle's contention that heavy bodies fall faster than light bodies, and wrote about them in On Motion (1590), which remained unpublished during his lifetime. There, he made use of a version of Buridan's impetus theory (see sidebar, "Causes of Motion: Medieval Understandings"), but shifted attention from the total weight of the object to the weight per unit volume. By the time of Two New Sciences (1638), he generalized this idea by claiming that all bodies—of whatever size and composition—fell with equal speed through a vacuum.

Two New Sciences summarized most of Galileo's work in statics and kinematics (the "two sciences" of the title). In order to better study the motion of bodies undergoing constant acceleration, Galileo used inclined planes pitched at very small angles in order to slow down the motion of a rolling ball. By taking careful distance and time measurements, and using the results of medieval scholars (including the mean speed theorem), he was able to show that the ball's instantaneous velocity increased linearly with time and that its distance increased according to the square of the time. Furthermore, Galileo proposed a notion of inertial motion as a limiting case of a ball rolling along a perfectly horizontal plane. Because, in this limiting case, the motion of the ball would ultimately follow the circular shape of the earth, his idea is sometimes referred to as a "circular inertia." Finally, Galileo presented his analysis of parabolic trajectories as a compound motion, made up of inertial motion in the horizontal direction and constant acceleration in the vertical.

The French philosopher René Descartes (1596–1650) and his contemporary Pierre Gassendi (1592–1655) independently came up with an improved conception of inertial motion. Both suggested that an object moving at constant speed and in a straight line (not Galileo's circle) was conceptually equivalent to the object being at rest. Gassendi tested this idea by observing the path of falling weights on a moving carriage. In his Principia philosophiae (1644), Descartes presented a number of other influential ideas, including his view that the physical world was a kind of clockwork mechanism. In order to communicate cause and effect in his "mechanical philosophy," all space was filled with matter, making a vacuum impossible. Descartes suggested, for example, that the planets moved in their orbits via a plenum of fine matter that communicated the influence of the Sun through the action of vortices.

Building on work in optics by Kepler, Descartes used the mechanical philosophy to derive the laws of reflection and refraction. In his Dioptrics (1631), he proposed that if light travels at different velocities in two different media, then the sine of the angle of incidence divided by the sine of the angle of refraction is a constant that is characteristic of a particular pair of media. This law of refraction had been discovered earlier, in 1621, by the Dutch scientist Willibrord Snel, though Descartes was probably unaware of this work. In 1662, the French mathematician Pierre de Fermat recast the law of refraction by showing that it follows from the principle that light follows the path of least time (not necessarily the least distance) between two points.

The study of kinematics yielded various conservation laws for collisions and falling bodies. Descartes defined the "quantity of motion" as the mass times the velocity (what is now called "momentum") and claimed that any closed system had a fixed total quantity of motion. In disagreement with Descartes, Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz (1646–1716) suggested instead the "living force" or vis viva as a measure of motion, equal to the mass times the square of the velocity (similar to what is now called "kinetic energy"). For a falling body, Leibniz asserted that the living force plus the "dead force," the weight of the object times its distance off the ground (similar to "potential energy"), was a constant.

The culmination of the scientific revolution is the work of Isaac Newton. In the Principia (1687), Newton presented a new mechanics that encompassed not only terrestrial physics but also the motion of the planets. A short way into the first book ("Of the Motion of Bodies"), Newton listed his axioms or laws of motion:

Every body perseveres in its state of being at rest or of moving uniformly straight forward, except insofar as it is compelled to change its state by forces impressed …
A change in motion is proportional to the motive force impressed and takes place along the straight line in which that force is impressed …
To any action there is always an opposite and equal reaction; in other words, the actions of two bodies upon each other are always equal and always opposite in direction … (1999, pp. 416–417)

The first law restates Descartes's concept of rectilinear, inertial motion. The second law introduces Newton's concept of force, as an entity that causes an object to depart from inertial motion. Following Descartes, Newton defined motion as the mass times the velocity. Assuming that the mass is constant, the "change of motion" is the mass (m) times the acceleration (a); thus the net force (F) acting on an object is given by the equation F ma. Analyzing the motion of the Moon led Newton to the inverse-square law of universal gravitation. Partly as a result of a debate with the scientist Robert Hooke (1635–1703), Newton came to see the Moon as undergoing a compound motion, made up of a tangential, inertial motion and a motion toward the Sun due to the Sun's gravitational attraction. The Dutch physicist Christiaan Huygens (1629–1695) had suggested that there was a centrifugal force acting away from the center of rotation, which was proportional to v²/r, where v is the velocity and r is the distance from the center of rotation. Newton had derived this result before Huygens but later renamed it the centripetal force, the force that is required to keep the body in orbit and that points toward the center of rotation. Using this relation and Kepler's finding that the square of the period was proportional to the cube of the distance (Kepler's "third law"), Newton concluded that the gravitational force on the Moon was proportional to the inverse square of its distance from Earth.

Newton presented his law of universal gravitation in the third book of the Principia ("The System of the World"), and showed that it was consistent with Kepler's findings and the orbits of the planets. Although he derived many of these results using a technique that he invented called the method of fluxions—differential calculus—Newton presented them in the Principia with the geometrical formalism familiar to readers of the time. He did not publish anything of his work on the calculus until De Analysi (1711; On analysis) during a priority dispute with Leibniz, who invented it independently.

Eighteenth Century

It is helpful to identify two broad tendencies in eighteenth-and nineteenth-century physics, which had been noted by a number of contemporaries, including the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804). On the one hand, a mechanical approach analyzed the physical universe as a great machine and built models relying on commonsense notions of cause and effect. This sometimes required the specification of ontological entities to communicate cause and effect, such as Descartes's plenum. On the other hand, the dynamical approach avoided mechanical models and, instead, concentrated on the mathematical relationship between quantities that could be measured. However, in avoiding mechanical models, the dynamical approach often speculated on the existence of active powers that resided within matter but could not be observed directly. Although this distinction is helpful, many scientists straddled the divide. Newton's physics, and the general Newtonian scientific culture of the eighteenth century, utilized elements of both approaches. It held true to a mechanical-world picture in analyzing macroscopic systems involving both contact, as in collisions, and action at a distance, as in the orbital motion. But it also contained a dynamical sensibility. Regarding gravity, Newton rejected Descartes's plenum and speculated that gravity might be due to an all-pervasive ether, tantamount to God's catholic presence. Such reflections appeared in Newton's private notes and letters, but some of these became known during the 1740s.

The development of mechanics during the eighteenth century marks one place where the histories of physics and mathematics overlap strongly. Mathematicians with an interest in physical problems recast Newtonian physics in an elegant formalism that took physics away from geometrical treatment and toward the reduction of physical problems to mathematical equations using calculus. Some of these developments were motivated by attempts to confirm Newton's universal gravitation. The French mathematician Alexis-Claude Clairaut (1713–1765) used perturbation techniques to account for tiny gravitational forces affecting the orbits of heavenly bodies. In 1747 Clairaut published improved predictions for the Moon's orbit, based on three-body calculations of the Moon, Earth, and Sun, and, in 1758, predictions of the orbit of Halley's comet, which changed slightly each time that it passed a planet. Some years later, Pierre-Simon Laplace produced a five-volume study, Celestial Mechanics (1799–1825), which showed that changes in planetary orbits, which had previously appeared to be accumulative, were in fact self-correcting. His (perhaps apocryphal) response to Napoléon's question regarding the place of God in his calculations has come to stand for eighteenth-century deism: "Sire, I had no need for that hypothesis."

The most important mathematical work was the generalization of Newton's mechanics using the calculus of variations. Starting from Fermat's principle of least time, Louis Moreau de Maupertuis (1698–1759) proposed that, for a moving particle, nature always sought to minimize a certain quantity equal to the mass times the velocity times the distance that the particle moves. This "principle of least action" was motivated by the religious idea that the economy of nature gave evidence of God's existence. The Swiss mathematician Leonhard Euler (1707–1783) recast this idea (but without Maupertuis's religious motivations) by minimizing the integral over distance of the mass of a particle times its velocity. The Italian Joseph-Louis Lagrange (1736–1813) restated and clarified Euler's idea, by focusing on minimizing the vis viva integrated over time. His Mécanique analytique (1787) summarized the whole of mechanics, for both solids and fluids and statics and dynamics.

In its high level of mathematical abstraction and its rejection of mechanical models, Lagrange's formalism typified a dynamical approach. In addition to making a number of problems tractable that had been impossible in Newton's original approach, the use of the calculus of variations removed from center stage the concept of force, a vector quantity (with magnitude and direction), and replaced it with scalar quantities (which had only magnitude). Lagrange was proud of the fact that Mécanique analytique did not contain a single diagram.

Newton's physics could be applied to continuous media just as much as systems of masses. In his Hydrodynamica (1738), the Swiss mathematician Daniel Bernoulli used conservation of vis viva to analyze fluid flow. His most famous result was an equation describing the rate at which liquid flows from a hole in a filled vessel. Euler elaborated on Bernoulli's analyses and developed additional formalism, including the general differential equations of fluid flow and fluid continuity (but restricted to the case of zero viscosity). Clairaut contributed to hydrostatics through his involvement with debates regarding the shape of the earth. In developing a Newtonian prediction, Clairaut analyzed the earth as a fluid mass. After defining an equilibrium condition, he showed that the earth should have an oblate shape, which was confirmed by experiments with pendulums at the earth's equator and as far north as Lapland.

The study of optics inherited an ambivalence from the previous century, which considered two different mechanical explanations of light. In his Opticks (1704), Newton had advocated a corpuscular, atomistic theory of light. As an emission of particles, light interacted with matter by vibrating in different ways and was therefore either reflected or refracted. In contrast with this, Descartes and Huygens proposed a wave theory of light, arguing that space was full and that light was nothing more than the vibration of a medium.

During the eighteenth century, most scientists preferred Newton's model of light as an emission of particles. The most important wave theory of light was put forward by Euler, who hypothesized that, in analogy with sound waves, light propagated through a medium, but that the medium itself did not travel. Euler also associated certain wavelengths with certain colors. After Euler, considerable debate occurred between the particle and wave theories of light. This debate was resolved during the early nineteenth century in favor of the wave theory. Between 1801 and 1803, the English physician Thomas Young conducted a series of experiments, the most notable of which was his two-slit experiment, which demonstrated that two coherent light sources set up interference patterns, thus behaving like two wave sources. This work was largely ignored until 1826, when Augustin-Jean Fresnel presented a paper to the French Academy of Science that reproduced Young's experiments and presented a mathematical analysis of the results.

Electrical research was especially fruitful in the eighteenth century and attracted a large number of researchers. Electricity was likened to "fire," the most volatile element in Aristotle's system. Electrical fire was an imponderable fluid that could be made to flow from one body to another but could not be weighed (see sidebar, "Forms of Matter"). After systematic experimentation, the French soldier-scientist Charles-François Du Fay (1698–1739) developed a two-fluid theory of electricity, positing both a negative and a positive fluid. The American statesman and scientist Benjamin Franklin (1706–1790) proposed a competing, one-fluid model. Franklin suggested that electrical fire was positively charged, mutually repulsive, and contained in every object. When fire was added to a body, it showed a positive charge; when fire was removed, the body showed a negative charge. Franklin's theory was especially successful in explaining the behavior of the Leyden jar (an early version of the capacitor) invented by Ewald Georg von Kleist in 1745. The device was able to store electrical fire using inner and outer electrodes, with the surface of the glass jar in between. Franklin's interpretation was that the glass was impervious to electrical fire and that while one electrode took on fire, the other electrode expelled an equal amount (see Fig. 3).

After early efforts by John Robison and Henry Cavendish, the first published precision measurements of the electric force law were attributed to the French physicist and engineer Charles-Augustin de Coulomb (1736–1806). Coulomb used a torsion balance to measure the small electrostatic force on pairs of charged spheres and found that it was proportional to the inverse square of the distance between the spheres and to the amount of charge on each sphere. At the close of the century, Cavendish used a similar device to experimentally confirm Newton's universal law of gravitation, using relatively large masses.

Nineteenth Century

The development of physics during the nineteenth century can be seen as both a culmination of what went before and as preparing the stage for the revolutions in relativity and quantum theory that were to follow. The work of the Irish mathematician and astronomer William Rowan Hamilton (1805–1865) built on Laplace's revision of Newtonian dynamics to establish a thoroughly abstract and mathematical approach to physical problems. Originally motivated by his work in optics, Hamilton developed a new principle of least action. Instead of using Lagrange's integral of kinetic energy, Hamilton chose to minimize the integral of the difference between the kinetic and the potential energies. In applying this principle in mechanics, Hamilton reproduced the results of Euler and Lagrange, and showed that it applied to a broader range of problems. After his work was published, as two essays in 1833 and 1834, it was critiqued and improved upon by the German mathematician Carl Gustav Jacob Jacobi (1804–1851). The resulting Hamilton-Jacobi formalism was applied in many fields of physics, including hydrodynamics, optics, acoustics, the kinetic theory of gases, and electrodynamics. However, it did not achieve its full significance until the twentieth century, when it was used to buttress the foundations of quantum mechanics.

Causes of Motion: Medieval Understandings

Medieval scholars put considerable effort into modifying Aristotelian dynamics and answering the problems posed by it. Because most terrestrial bodies were composed of many elements, their natural motion was explained by summing the total power of heavy and light elements. This led medieval scholars to consider the minority type of material as providing a kind of "internal resistance." Using this idea, motion in a hypothetical void or vacuum could be explained by qualities of both motive force and resistance that inhered in the object itself.

Probably the greatest puzzle facing medieval interpreters of Aristotle was the violent motion of projectiles. If the motion of every object required the analyst to specify a mover or cause for that motion, then what caused projectiles to continue in their trajectories after they lost contact with their original projector? Aristotle suggested that a surrounding medium was pushed by the original mover and so continued to push the projectile. For medieval scholars who admitted the possibility of a vacuum, however, this explanation was not tenable. In addition, if the medium was slight compared to the projectile (such as the air compared to a stone), then it was difficult to see how a corporeal mover could continue to be the cause of violent motion. Motivated by such concerns, in the sixth century John Philoponus suggested that the continued motion of a projectile was due to an incorporeal force that was impressed on the projectile itself by the original mover. The projectile would finish its motion when this impressed force wore off.

Some eight hundred years later, in the fourteenth century at the University of Paris, Jean Buridan renamed Philoponus's impressed force "impetus," and used the concept to interpret the motion of projectiles and falling bodies. Once impressed on a projectile, the impetus could bring about virtually constant motion unless it was interrupted or dissipated by a resistive medium, a notion that bears some resemblance to the conceptions of inertia developed later. Buridan also attempted to quantify impetus, by saying it was proportional to the moving object's speed and its quantity of matter. As an object engaged in free fall, the power of gravity imparted larger and larger amounts of impetus to the object, thereby increasing its velocity.

A number of scholars attempted to quantify a relation between the impressed force and the velocity of an object. Paramount among these was Thomas Bradwardine of Merton College. In comparison to a projectile, a falling object presented special problems. Aristotle suggested that the velocity of the object was proportional to the total impressed force (F) and inversely proportional to the resistance of an ambient medium (R). Bradwardine rejected this formulation and a number of other suggestions by Philoponus, Avempace, and Averroes that involved simple ratios or subtractions of F and R. Instead, he proposed a dynamics in which the velocity of a body increased arithmetically as the ratio F/R increased geometrically. This formulation proved to be influential well into the sixteenth century.

Work on magnetism was encouraged by Alessandro Volta's (1745–1827) development, in 1800, of the voltaic pile (an early battery), which, unlike the Leyden jar, was able to produce a steady source of electric current. Inspired by the German philosophical movement of Naturphilosophie, which espoused that the forces of nature were all interrelated in a higher unity, the Danish physicist Hans Christian Ørsted (1777–1851) sought a magnetic effect from the electric current of Volta's battery. Ørsted's announcement of his success, in 1820, brought a flurry of activity, including the work of Jean-Baptiste Biot and Félix Savart, on the force law between a current and a magnet, and the work of André-Marie Ampère, on the force law between two currents. The magnetic force was found to depend on the inverse square of the distance but was more complex due to the subtle vector relations between the currents and distances. For the analysis of inverse-square force laws, the German mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss (1777–1855) introduced, in 1839, the concept of "potential," which could be applied with great generality to both electrostatics and magnetism. This work grew from Gauss's efforts in measuring and understanding the earth's magnetic field, which he undertook with his compatriot Wilhelm Eduard Weber (d. 1891).

The Newtonian Synthesis

The Newtonian synthesis was, first and foremost, a unification of celestial and terrestrial physics. Newton's famous story of seeing an apple fall in his mother's garden does a good job in summarizing this achievement. According to the story, the falling apple made Newton consider that the gravitational force that influences the apple (a projectile in terrestrial motion) might also act on the moon (a satellite in celestial motion). He concluded that "the power of gravity … was not limited to a certain distance from the earth but that this power must extend much farther than was usually thought" (Westfall, 1980, p. 154). This idea is displayed in a famous diagram in the Principia, depicting a projectile being thrown from a mountain peak, which rests on a small planet; as the projectile is thrown with greater and greater speed, it eventually goes into orbit around the planet and becomes a satellite. Consideration of the moon's motion led Newton to the force law for universal gravitation. Simply by virtue of having mass, any two objects exert mutually attractive forces on each other (in accordance with the third law of motion). The inverse-square force law made the gravitational force quantified and calculable but regarding the cause of gravity itself, Newton famously claimed, "I feign no hypotheses."

As much as his specific scientific achievements, Newton's method of working became a touch-stone for scientists of the eighteenth century and defined a general scientific culture of "Newtonianism." In this regard, the Newtonian synthesis can be seen as a combination of three broad traditions: experiment, mathematics, and mechanism. Newton's Opticks (1704) exemplified the empirical, inductive approach recommended by Francis Bacon. There, Newton reports on careful experiments with light, including a series showing that when light passes through a prism, the prism does not modify the color of the light but rather separates it into its component colors (see Fig. 2). He also did experiments in which he shone monochromatic light on thin plates and films, to produce patterns of light and dark regions; these later became known as "Newton's rings."

The effort to describe physical events with mathematics, which was so evident in the work of Kepler, Galileo, and Descartes, reached its full expression in Newton's dynamics. The universal gravitation law, along with the three laws of motion and the calculus, presented a complete Newtonian approach to quantifying and calculating the motion of everything from the smallest atom to the largest planet. Closely related to this mathematical tendency is the mechanical philosophy pursued by Descartes, Gassendi, and Robert Boyle (1627–1691). Although Newton rejected Descartes's plenum, he retained a modified idea of mechanical causality. For Newton, gravity was an action at a distance; two masses acted on one another despite the fact that empty space lay between them. Defined as a change in motion, Newton's conception of force was a mechanical, causal agent that acted either through contact or through action at a distance.

The most significant work in magnetism was done by Michael Faraday (1791–1861) at the Royal Institution of London. By 1831, Faraday had characterized a kind of reverseØrsted effect, in which a change in magnetism gave rise to a current. For example, he showed that this "electromagnetic induction" occurred between two electric circuits that communicated magnetism through a shared iron ring but, otherwise, were electrically insulated from one another (an early version of the transformer). Faraday made the first measurements of magnetic materials, characterizing diamagnetic, paramagnetic, and ferromagnetic effects (though this terminology is

Forms of Matter

The development of physics both contributed to and depended on ideas about the structure of matter. In this regard, the history of physics is tied to the history of chemistry. Both sciences inherited a debate that began with the ancients regarding atomism versus continuity. Combining the influences of, among others, Pythagoras and Democritus, Plato saw matter as being composed of atoms that had different geometrical shapes for each of the four elements. Against this, Aristotle developed a continuum theory of matter, in part because his theory of motion would be contradicted by the existence of a void. This debate was reawakened during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. On the one hand, Descartes embraced a continuum theory involving a plenum of fine matter and vortices, founded on the idea that motion is caused through contact. On the other hand, Robert Boyle proposed atomistic explanations of his finding that reducing the volume of a gas increased its pressure proportionately. Newton refined Boyle's ideas by interpreting pressure as being due to mutually repelling atoms, and recommended an atomistic stance for further research in chemistry and optics.

During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, many theorists and experimentalists posited the existence of a number of "imponderables," substances that could produce physical effects but could not be weighed. The first of these was proposed in 1703 by the German physician and chemist Georg Ernst Stahl in order to explain the processes of oxidation and respiration. Stahl's phlogiston theory, and the renewed interest in Newton's theories of an ether medium for gravity, encouraged further theories involving imponderables, most notably electrical fire (to describe the flow of static electricity) and caloric (to describe heat flow). Although the imponderables were eventually rejected, they served as useful heuristic devices in quantifying physical laws. For example, the Scottish chemist Joseph Black (1728–1799) used the caloric theory to found the study of calorimetry and to measure specific heat (the heat required to raise the temperature of a substance one degree), and latent heat (the heat required for a substance to change its state).

Even after the work of John Dalton, few chemists and physicists before 1890 accepted the actual existence of atoms. Nevertheless, they found the atomic hypothesis to be useful in suggesting experiments and interpreting the results. In 1863, the Irish physical chemist Thomas Andrews experimentally characterized the "critical point" between the gas and liquid phases: at relatively low temperatures, as the pressure was increased, the change from gas to liquid was abrupt; however, at relatively high temperatures, the transition was continuous. In part to account for the behavior of the critical point, the Dutch physicist Johannes Diderik van der Waals (1837–1923) assumed that the forces between atoms were attractive at large range but repulsive at short range. The work of van der Waals represented the first successful theory of phase transitions and showed how an atomistic model could describe both phases.

In the mid-nineteenth century, Michael Faraday and Julius Plücker (1801–1868), among others, pioneered research on the discharge of electricity through partially evacuated glass tubes. The British chemist William Crookes made a number of improvements to these discharge tubes and called the glowing material that formed in them the "fourth state of matter" (which was later dubbed "plasma" by the American chemist Irving Langmuir). Work in this area eventually led to Joseph John Thomson's discovery of the electron and Philipp Lenard's characterization, in 1899, of the photoelectric effect.

due to the English mathematician William Whewell). Finally, Faraday pioneered the concept of the field, coining the term "magnetic field" in 1845. He saw the "lines of force" of magnetic or electric fields as being physically real and as filling space (in opposition to the idea of action at a distance).

Second Law of Thermodynamics

The development of the second law of thermodynamics was intimately tied to the kinetic theory of gases, and carried with it the rebirth of atomism and the founding of statistical mechanics. Despite the fact that Sadi Carnot believed that caloric was not lost when it traveled from the hot body to the cool body of an engine, he recognized that the work delivered depended on the temperature difference between the two bodies and that this difference constantly decreased. This observation was clarified by the German physicist Rudolf Clausius. In 1851, a few years after the acceptance of the first law of thermodynamics, Clausius recognized the need for a second law, to account for the fact that energy was often irrecoverably lost by a system. In a paper published in 1865, Clausius analyzed thermodynamic cycles with a quantity that he dubbed the "entropy" and found that it usually went up or at best (for a reversible process) was zero.

The Austrian Ludwig Boltzmann read Clausius's paper and set about developing a mechanical interpretation of the second law. In a first attempt, published in 1866, he used Hamilton's principle to analyze the development of a thermodynamic system made up of discrete particles. After Joseph Stefan (1835–1893) alerted Boltzmann to James Clerk Maxwell's probabilistic approach, Boltzmann made refinements to Maxwell's ideas and incorporated them into his mechanical interpretation. In 1872, he published a paper that made use of a transport equation (now called the "Boltzmann equation") to describe the evolution of a probability distribution of particles. As the atoms of a gas collided and eventually reached an equilibrium velocity distribution, the entropy was maximized.

Boltzmann's ideas were met with a number of objections. One objection argued that because Newton's laws were reversible, thermodynamic processes described by the motion of atoms could be reversed in time to yield processes that deterministically went to states of lower entropy, thus contradicting the second law. Boltzmann's response highlighted the statistical nature of his interpretation, arguing that, given particular initial conditions, any thermodynamic system has a vastly greater number of final states available to it with relatively high entropy. An increase of entropy means that the system has become randomized as the available energy is spread around to its constituent atoms. In 1877 Boltzmann published a paper that incorporated this idea and defined the entropy as a log of a quantity measuring the number of states available to a system. In doing his calculations, Boltzmann used the device of counting energy in discrete increments, which he took to zero at the end of his calculation. This method, a harbinger of the quantization of energy, influenced Planck and Einstein, over twenty years later.

Boltzmann had less success answering a second set of objections regarding atomism. The British physicist William Thomson (1824–1907) and Scottish physicist Peter Tait (1831–1901) rejected atomism as a result of their adherence to the dynamical theory of matter, which rejected the existence of a void. Similarly, Ernst Mach put forward empiricist counterarguments, which rejected Boltzmann's adherence to entities that could not be confirmed by direct observation.

One of the pinnacles of nineteenth-century physics is the theory of electromagnetism developed by the Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell (1831–1879). Maxwell brought together the work of Coulomb, Ampère, and Faraday, and made the crucial addition of the "displacement current," which acknowledged that a magnetic field can be produced not only by a current but also by a changing electric field. These efforts resulted in a set of four equations that Maxwell used to derive wave equations for the electric and magnetic fields. This led to the astonishing prediction that light was an electromagnetic wave. In developing and interpreting his results, Maxwell sought to build a mechanical model of electromagnetic radiation. Influenced by Faraday's rejection of action at a distance, Maxwell attempted to see electromagnetic waves as vortices in an ether medium, interspersed with small particles that acted as idle wheels to connect the vortices. Maxwell discarded this mechanical model in later years, in favor of a dynamical perspective. This latter attitude was taken by the German experimentalist Heinrich Rudolph Hertz (1857–1894), who, in 1886, first demonstrated the propagation of electromagnetic waves in the laboratory, using a spark-gap device as a transmitter.

During the eighteenth century, most researchers saw the flow of heat as the flow of the imponderable fluid caloric. Despite developments, such as Benjamin Thompson's cannon-boring experiments, which suggested that heat involved some sort of microscopic motion, caloric provided a heuristic model that aided in the quantification of experimental results and in the creation of mathematical models. For example, the French engineer Sadi Carnot (1837–1894) did empirical work on steam engines which led to the theory of the thermodynamic cycle, as reported in his Reflections on the Motive Power of Fire (1824). A purely mathematical approach was developed by Jean-Baptiste-Joseph Fourier, who analyzed heat conduction with the method of partial differential equations in his Analytical Theory of Heat (1822).

Carnot's opinion that caloric was conserved during the running of a steam engine was proved wrong by the development of the first law of thermodynamics. Similar conceptions of the conservation of energy (or "force," as energy was still referred to) were identified by at least three different people during the 1840s, including the German physician Julius Robert von Mayer (1814–1878), who was interested in the human body's ability to convert the chemical energy of food to other forms of energy, and the German theoretical physicist Hermann Ludwig Ferdinand von Helmholtz (1821–1894), who gave a mathematical treatment of different types of energy and showed that the different conservation laws could be traced back to the conservation of vis viva in mechanics. The British physicist James Prescott Joule (1818–1889) did an experiment that measured the mechanical equivalent of heat with a system of falling weights and a paddlewheel that stirred water within an insulated vessel (see Fig. 4).

In his Hydrodynamica, Bernoulli had proposed the first kinetic theory of gases, by suggesting that pressure was due to the motion and impact of atoms as they struck the sides of their containment vessel. The work of the chemists John Dalton (1766–1844) and Amedeo Avogadro (1776–1856) indirectly lent support to such a kinetic theory by casting doubt upon the Newtonian program of understanding chemistry in terms of force laws between atoms. After John Herapath's work on the kinetic theory, in 1820, was largely ignored, Rudolf Clausius published two papers, in 1857 and 1858, in which he sought to derive the specific heats of a gas and introduced the concept of the mean free path between atomic collisions. James Clerk Maxwell added the idea that the atomic collisions would result in a range of velocities, not an average velocity as Clausius thought, and that this would necessitate the use of a statistical approach. In a number of papers published from 1860 to 1862, Maxwell completed the foundations of the kinetic theory and introduced the equipartition theorem, the idea that each degree of freedom (translational or rotational) contributed the same average energy, which was proportional to the temperature of the gas. Clausius and Maxwell's work in kinetic theory was tied to their crucial contributions to developing the second law of thermodynamics (see sidebar, "Second Law of Thermodynamics").

End of Classical Physics

By the close of the nineteenth century, many physicists felt that the accomplishments of the century had produced a mature and relatively complete science. Nevertheless, a number of problem areas were apparent to at least some of the community, four of which are closely related to developments mentioned above.

New rays and radiations were discovered near the end of the century, which helped establish (among other things) the modern model of the atom. These included the discovery (by William Crookes and others) of cathode rays within discharge tubes; Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen's finding, in 1895, of X rays emanating from discharge tubes; and Antoine-Henri Becquerel's discovery in 1896 that uranium salts were "radioactive" (as Marie Curie labeled the effect in 1898). Each of these led to further developments. In 1897, Joseph John Thomson identified the cathode rays as negatively charged particles called "electrons" and, a year later, was able to measure the charge directly. In 1898, Ernest Rutherford identified two different kinds of radiation from uranium, calling them alpha and beta. In 1902 and 1903, he and Frederick Soddy demonstrated that radioactive decay was due to the disintegration of heavy elements into slightly lighter elements. In 1911, he scattered alpha particles from thin gold foils and explained infrequent scattering to large angles by the presence of a concentrated, positively charged atomic nucleus.

The study of blackbody radiation (radiation from a heated object that is a good emitter) yielded results that are crucial to the early development of quantum mechanics. In 1893 Wilhelm Wien derived a promising "displacement law" that gave the wavelength at which a blackbody radiated at maximum intensity, but precision data failed to confirm it. Furthermore, classical theory proved unable to model the intensity curves, especially at lower wavelengths. In 1900 the German theoretical physicist Max Planck (1858–1947) derived the intensity curve using the statistical methods of the Austrian physicist Ludwig Eduard Boltzmann (1844–1906) and the device of counting the energy of the oscillators of the blackbody in increments of hf, where f is the frequency and h is a constant (now known as "Planck's constant"). Despite achieving excellent fits to data, Planck was hesitant to accept his own derivation, due to his aversion for statistical methods and atomism.

It is doubtful that Planck interpreted his use of energy increments to mean that the energy of the oscillators and radiation came in chunks (or "quanta"). However, this idea was clearly enunciated by Albert Einstein in his 1905 paper on the photoelectric effect. Einstein explained in this paper why the electrons that are ejected from a cathode by incident light do not increase in energy when the intensity of the light is increased. Instead, the fact that the electrons increase in energy when the frequency of the light is increased suggested that light comes in quantum units (later called "photons") and have an energy given by Planck's equation, hf.

Electromagnetic theory, though one of the most important results of nineteenth-century physical theory, contained a number of puzzles. On the one hand, electromagnetism sometimes gave the same result for all reference frames. For example, Faraday's induction law gave the same result for the current induced in a loop of wire for two situations: when the loop moves relative to a stationary magnet and when the magnet moves (with the same speed) relative to a stationary loop. On the other hand, if an ether medium were introduced for electromagnetic waves, then the predictions of electromagnetism should usually change for different reference frames. In a second paper from 1905, Einstein reinterpreted attempts by Henri Poincaré (1854–1912) and Hendrik Antoon Lorentz (1853–1928) to answer this puzzle, by insisting that the laws of physics should give the same results in all inertial reference frames. This, along with the principle of the constancy of the speed of light, formed the basis of Einstein's special theory of relativity.

See also Causality ; Change ; Chemistry ; Experiment ; Field Theories ; Mathematics ; Mechanical Philosophy ; Quantum ; Relativity ; Science .

bibliography

PRIMARY SOURCES

Brush, Stephen G. The Kinetic Theory of Gases: An Anthology of Classic Papers with Historical Commentary. Edited by Nancy S. Hall. London: Imperial College Press, 2003.

Franklin, Benjamin, Benjamin Franklin's Experiments: A New Edition of Franklin's Experiments and Observations on Electricity. Edited by I. Bernard Cohen. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1941.

Galilei, Galileo. Two New Sciences: Including Centers of Gravity and Force of Percussion. Translated by Stillman Drake. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1974.

Newton, Isaac. Opticks; or, a Treatise of the Reflections, Refractions, Inflections, and Colours of Light. Based on the 4th ed., London 1730. New York: Dover, 1952.

——. The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. Translated by I. B. Cohen and Anne Whitman. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999.

Maxwell, James Clerk. A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism. 2 vols. Unabridged 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Shamos, Morris H., ed. Great Experiments in Physics. 1959. Reprint, New York: Dover, 1987. Features brief introductions to each experiment, followed by passages from the original publications.

SECONDARY SOURCES

Berry, Arthur. A Short History of Astronomy: From Earliest Times through the Nineteenth Century. New York: Dover, 1961.

Brush, Stephen G. Statistical Physics and the Atomic Theory of Matter: From Boyle and Newton to Landau and Onsager. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1983.

Buchwald, Jed Z. The Creation of Scientific Effects: Heinrich Hertz and Electric Waves. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994. A detailed account for the advanced reader.

——. The Rise of the Wave Theory of Light: Optical Theory and Experiment in the Early Nineteenth Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989.

Cahan, David. An Institute for an Empire: The Physikalisch-Technische Reichanstalt, 1871–1918. Cambridge, U.K., and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989. An exemplary study of how physical science served state interests.

Caneva, Kenneth L. Robert Mayer and the Conservation of Energy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1993.

Cannon, John T., and Sigalia Dostrovsky. The Evolution of Dynamics: Vibration Theory from 1687 to 1742. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981. Detailed history for mathematically adept readers.

Cercignani, Carlo. Ludwig Boltzmann: The Man Who Trusted Atoms. New York: Clarendon, 1998.

Clagett, Marshall. The Science of Mechanics in the Middle Ages. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1959.

Cohen, H. Floris. The Scientific Revolution: A Historiographical Inquiry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994. A long but valuable historiographic survey.

Cohen, I. Bernard. The Birth of a New Physics. Rev. ed. New York, W. W. Norton, 1985. An excellent place to start for the general reader, covering the period from Copernicus to Newton.

——. The Newtonian Revolution. Norwalk, Conn: Burndy Library, 1987.

D'Agostino, Salvo. A History of the Ideas of Theoretical Physics: Essays on the Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Physics. Boston: Kluwer, 2000.

Damerow, Peter, et al. Exploring the Limits of Preclassical Mechanics: A Study of Conceptual Development in Early Modern Science. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1992. Detailed treatments of the motion studies of Descartes, Galileo, and Beeckman.

Dear, Peter. Revolutionizing the Sciences: European Knowledge and Its Ambitions, 1500–1700. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2001.

Dobbs, Betty Jo Teeter, and Margaret C. Jacob. Newton and the Culture of Newtonianism. Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities Press, 1995.

Dugas, René. A History of Mechanics. Translated by J. R. Maddox. New York: Dover, 1988. A useful survey from ancient to modern times, concentrating on the development of theory and often using long quotations from the original sources.

Duhem, Pierre. Essays in History and Philosophy of Science. Edited by Roger Ariew and Peter Barker. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1996. Includes Duhem's excellent article on the history of physics, written for an encyclopedia.

——. Medieval Cosmology: Theories of Infinity, Place, Time, Void, and the Plurality of Worlds. Edited and translated by Roger Ariew. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985.

Elkana, Yehuda. The Discovery of the Conservation of Energy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, 1974.

Fraser, Craig G. Calculus and Analytical Mechanics in the Age of Enlightenment. Aldershot, U.K., and Brookfield, Vt.: Variorum, 1997. Detailed history for mathematically adept readers.

Gillmor, C. Stewart. Coulomb and the Evolution of Physics and Engineering in Eighteenth-Century France. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1971.

Goldstine, Herman H. A History of the Calculus of Variations from the Seventeenth through the Nineteenth Century. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1980. Detailed history for mathematically adept readers.

Grant, Edward. The Foundations of Modern Science in the Middle Ages: Their Religious, Institutional, and Intellectual Contexts. Cambridge, U.K., and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996. A good place to start for the general reader.

Hakfoort, Casper. Optics in the Age of Euler: Conceptions of the Nature of Light, 1700–1795. Cambridge, U.K., and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Hankins, Thomas L. Science and the Enlightenment. Cambridge, U.K., and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985. The best place to start for the general reader.

Harman, P. M. Energy, Force, and Matter: The Conceptual Development of Nineteenth-Century Physics. Cambridge, U.K., and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982. A useful book but compact and difficult for the beginner.

——. The Natural Philosophy of James Clerk Maxwell. Cambridge, U.K., and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Heilbron, J. L. Electricity in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries: A Study of Early Modern Physics. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979. A particularly good survey of both the conceptual and the institutional development of physics.

Hendry, John. James Clerk Maxwell and the Theory of the Electromagnetic Field. Bristol, U.K., and Boston: A. Hilger, 1986. A superb scientific biography with a useful interpretive framework that has been used in the present essay.

Hogendijk, Jan P., and Abdelhamid I. Sabra, eds. The Enterprise of Science in Islam: New Perspectives. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2003.

Holton, Gerald, and Stephen G. Brush. Physics, the Human Adventure: From Copernicus to Einstein and Beyond. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 2001. A textbook for teaching physics with history.

Jungnickel, Christa, and Russell McCormmach. Cavendish: The Experimental Life. Rev. ed. Cranbury, N.J.: Bucknell University Press, 1999.

——. Intellectual Mastery of Nature: Theoretical Physics from Ohm to Einstein. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986. A detailed study of the conceptual and institutional development of theoretical physics as a subdiscipline.

Kline, Morris. Mathematical Thought from Ancient to Modern Times. New York: Oxford University Press, 1972.

Kuhn, Thomas S. Black-body Theory and the Quantum Discontinuity, 1894–1912. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987.

——. The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western Thought. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971.

Leijenhorst, Cees, Christoph Luthy, Johannes M. M. H. Thigjssen, eds. The Dynamics of Aristotelian Natural Philosophy from Antiquity to the Seventeenth Century. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2002.

Lindberg, David C. The Beginnings of Western Science: The European Scientific Tradition in Philosophical, Religious, and Institutional Context, 600 b.c. to a.d. 1450. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992. A good place to start for the general reader.

Lindberg, David C., ed. Science in the Middle Ages. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.

Mach, Ernst. The Principles of Physical Optics: An Historical and Philosophical Treatment. Mineola, N.Y.: Dover, 2003.

——. Principles of the Theory of Heat: Historically and Critically Elucidated. Edited by Brian McGuinness. Boston: D. Reidel, 1986.

——. The Science of Mechanics: A Critical and Historical Account of Its Development. Translated by Thomas J. McCormack. 6th ed. LaSalle, Ill.: Open Court, 1960. Mach's books are guilty of "presentism," the tendency to judge past science in terms of current knowledge. Nevertheless, his work should be studied by the more advanced student.

Maier, Anneliese. On the Threshold of Exact Science: Selected Writings of Anneliese Maier on Late Medieval Natural Philosophy. Edited and translated by Steven D. Sargent. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1982.

Merz, John Theodore. A History of European Thought in the Nineteenth Century. Vols. 1 and 2. New York: Dover, 1965. Reprint of edition appearing between 1904 and 1912.

Olesko, Kathryn M. Physics as a Calling: Discipline and Practice in the Konigsberg Seminar for Physics. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1991.

Park, David. The Fire Within the Eye: A Historical Essay on the Nature and Meaning of Light. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1997. A good popularization.

Pullman, Bernard. The Atom in the History of Human Thought. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. Guilty of "presentism," but nevertheless a useful survey.

Purrington, Robert D. Physics in the Nineteenth Century. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1997. The best place to start for the general reader.

Segrè, Emilio. From Falling Bodies to Radio Waves: Classical Physicists and Their Discoveries. New York: W. H. Freeman, 1984.

——. From X-Rays to Quarks: Modern Physicists and Their Discoveries. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1980.

Stephenson, Bruce. Kepler's Physical Astronomy. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1987.

Tokaty, G.A. A History and Philosophy of Fluid Mechanics. 2nd ed. New York: Dover, 1994.

Toulmin, Stephen, and June Goodfield. The Architecture of Matter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982. A history of theories of matter, from ancient to modern times.

Truesdell, C., The Tragicomical History of Thermodynamics, 1822–1854. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1980. Detailed history for mathematically adept readers.

Westfall, Richard S. The Construction of Modern Science: Mechanisms and Mechanics. Cambridge, U.K., and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1977.

——. Force in Newton's Physics: The Science of Dynamics in the Seventeenth Century. New York: Elsevier, 1971.

——. Never at Rest: A Biography of Isaac Newton. Cambridge, U.K., and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1980.

Whittaker, Edmund. A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity. New York: Humanities Press, 1973.

Williams, L. Pearce. The Origins of Field Theory. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1980. This classic study focuses on the work of Michael Faraday.

G. J. Weisel

New Dictionary of the History of Ideas Weisel, G.

Physics

views updated May 08 2018

PHYSICS

PHYSICS This entry includes 4 subentries:
Overview
High-Energy Physics
Nuclear Physics
Solid-State Physics

Overview

From the colonial period through the early nineteenth century, physics, which was then a branch of natural philosophy, was practiced by only a few Americans, virtually none of whom earned his living primarily in research. Some, like John Winthrop at Harvard, were college professors who were expected and encouraged only to teach. Others were gentlemanly amateurs with private laboratories. The physics of that day ranged from astronomy and navigation to pneumatics, hydrostatics, mechanics, and optics. In virtually all these subjects Americans followed the intellectual lead of Europeans, especially the British. As well as the practitioners of other sciences, they were also inspired by the English philosopher Francis Bacon, who had urged scholars to study the facts of nature and had taught that knowledge led to power. Thus, American physicists emphasized the accumulation of experimental facts rather than mathematical theorizing, and they made no distinction between abstract and practical research, or what a later generation would call pure and applied science. The archetypal American physicist was Benjamin Franklin, the retired printer, man of affairs, and deist, who was celebrated for his practical lightning rod as well as for his speculative and experimental contributions to electrical science.

Nineteenth Century

From the Jacksonian era through the Civil War, American physics became more specialized, with its subject matter narrowing to geophysics, meteorology, and such topics of physics proper as the older mechanics and the newer heat, light, electricity, and magnetism. The leading American physicist of the period was Joseph Henry, who discovered electromagnetic induction while teaching at the Albany Academy in Albany, New York. Later he became a professor at Princeton and then the first secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. Imbibing the nationalism of the day, Henry worked to advance the study of physics and, indeed, of all science in America. With Henry's support, Alexander Dallas Bache, Franklin's great-grandson and the director of the U.S. Coast Survey, enlarged the scope of that agency to include studies in the geodesy and geophysics of the entire continent. In the 1850s the survey was the largest single employer of physicists in the country. Henry also channeled part of the Smithsonian's income into fundamental research, including research in meteorology. During Henry's lifetime, American physics became more professional; the gentlemanly amateur was gradually superseded by the college-trained physicist who was employed on a college faculty or by the government.

In the quarter-century after the Civil War, many physicists set themselves increasingly apart from utilitarian concerns and embraced the new ethic of "pure" science. At the same time, the reform of higher education gave physics a considerable boost by permitting students to major in the sciences, making laboratory work a standard part of the curriculum, creating programs of graduate studies, and establishing the advancement of knowledge, at least nominally, as an important function of the university and its professors. Between 1865 and 1890 the number of physicists in the United States doubled, to about 150. The profession included Albert A. Michelson, the first American to win the Nobel Prize in physics (1907), who measured the speed of light with unprecedented accuracy and invented the Michelson interferometer during his famed ether drift experiment in 1881. During the late 1870s and the 1880s, Henry A. Rowland won an international reputation for his invention of the Rowland spectral grating and for his painstakingly accurate determinations of the value of the ohm and of the mechanical equivalent of heat. Generally, American physics remained predominantly experimental, with the notable exception of the brilliant theorist Josiah Willard Gibbs of Yale, an authority in thermo dynamics and statistical mechanics.

Professionalization by the Early-Twentieth Century

In 1893 Edward L. Nichols of Cornell University inaugurated the Physical Review, the first journal devoted to the discipline in the United States. Six years later Arthur Gordon Webster of Clark University helped found the American Physical Society, which in 1913 assumed publication of the Review. After the turn of the century, a sharp rise in electrical engineering enrollments created an increased demand for college teachers of physics. Employment opportunities for physicists rose elsewhere also. Some of the major corporations, notably General Electric Company and American Telephone and Telegraph Company, opened industrial research laboratories; and the federal government established the National Bureau of Standards, whose charter permitted it to enter a wide area of physical research. Before World War I, the graduation of physics Ph.D.s climbed steadily, reaching 23 in 1914, when membership in the American Physical Society was close to 700.

Americans had not been responsible for any of the key discoveries of the 1890s—X rays, radioactivity, and the electron—that introduced the age of atomic studies.

Like many of their colleagues in Europe, the older American members of the profession were disturbed by the development in the early twentieth century of the quantum theory of radiation and the theory of relativity. But the younger scientists turned to the new atomic research fields, although not immediately to the new theories, with growing interest and enthusiasm. At the University of Chicago, Robert A. Millikan demonstrated that all electrons are identically charged particles (1909) and then more accurately measured the electronic charge (1913). Richard Tolman of the University of Illinois and Gilbert N. Lewis of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology delivered the first American paper on the theory of relativity (1908). By the beginning of World War I, modernist physicists like Millikan were moving into the front rank of the profession, which was focusing increasingly, at its meetings and in its publications, on the physics of the quantized atom.

During the war, physicists worked for the military in various ways, most notably in the development of systems and devices for the detection of submarines and for the location of artillery. Their success in this area helped bolster the argument that physics, like chemistry, could produce practical and, hence, economically valuable results. Partly in recognition of that fact, industrial research laboratories hired more physicists in the 1920s. Moreover, the funding for physical research rose considerably in both state and private universities. During the 1920s about 650 Americans received doctorates in physics; a number of them received postdoctoral fellowships from the International Education Board of the Rockefeller Foundation and from the National Research Council. After studying with the leading physicists in the United States and Europe, where the revolution in quantum mechanics was proceeding apace, many of these young scientists were well prepared for the pursuit of theoretical research.

World Class Physics by the 1930s

By the end of the 1920s the United States had more than 2,300 physicists, including a small but significant influx of Europeans, including Paul Epstein, Fritz Zwicky, Samuel Goudsmit, and George Uhlenbeck, who had joined American university faculties. During that decade, Nobel Prizes in physics were awarded to Millikan (1923), director of the Norman Bridge Laboratory of Physics (1921) and chief executive at the California Institute of Technology, and to Arthur H. Compton (1927) of the University of Chicago for his quantum interpretation of the collision of X rays and electrons. At the Bell Telephone Laboratories, Clinton J. Davisson performed the research in electron diffraction for which he became a Nobel laureate in 1937. By the early 1930s the American physics profession compared favorably in experimental achievement with its counterparts in Europe; and in theoretical studies its potential, although not yet its accomplishment, had also reached the first rank.

During the 1930s the interest of physicists shifted from the atom to the nucleus and to what were later called elementary particles. In 1932, while conducting research for which they later won Nobel Prizes, Carl Anderson of the California Institute of Technology identified the positron in cosmic rays and, at the University of California at Berkeley, Ernest O. Lawrence successfully accelerated protons to one million volts of energy with his new cyclotron. Despite the depression, which at first reduced the funds available for physics research, U.S. physicists managed to construct cyclotrons, arguing that the exploration of the nucleus might yield the secret of atomic energy or that the radioactive products of cyclotron bombardment might be medically useful, especially in the treatment of cancer. All the while, more Americans earned Ph.D.s in physics, and the profession was further enriched by such refugees from the Soviet Union as George Gamow, and from Nazi Europe as Albert Einstein, Hans Bethe, Felix Bloch, Victor Weisskopf, Enrico Fermi, Emilio Segrè, Leo Szilard, Eugene Wigner, and Edward Teller. By the end of the 1930s, the American physics profession, with more than 3,500 members, led the world in both theoretical and experimental research.

During World War II, physicists, mobilized primarily under the Office of Scientific Research and Development, contributed decisively to the development of microwave radar, the proximity fuse, and solid-fuel rockets. They also worked on the atomic bomb in various laboratories of the Manhattan Project, notably Los Alamos, New Mexico, which was directed by J. Robert Oppenheimer. Equally important, physicists began advising the military how best to use the new weapons tactically and, in some cases, strategically.

After World War II, American physicists became prominent figures in the government's strategic advisory councils, and they played a central role in the debates over nuclear and thermonuclear weapons programs in the 1950s and 1960s. Recognized as indispensable to the national defense and welfare, physics and physicists received massive governmental support in the postwar decades, notably from the National Science Foundation, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the Office of Naval Research. Thus, the profession expanded rapidly, totaling more than 32,000 by 1972. About half of all American physicists were employed in industry, most of the rest in universities and colleges, and the remainder in federal laboratories.

Big Science

Many academic physicists did their research in groups organized around large, highly energetic particle accelerators, notably those at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center and the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Illinois). The large teams of scientists and engineers involved, the giant machines constructed, and the huge budgets required reflected a new style of research in peacetime, appropriately called Big Science. With these accelerators, American physicists were among the world's leaders in uncovering experimental data about elementary particles, one of the central fields of postwar physics. New particles were discovered by Emilio Segrè, Owen Chamberlain, Burton Richter, Samuel Ting, and Martin Perl, among others, while the necessary detection apparatus, such as bubble and spark chambers, were devised by Donald Glaser, Luis Alvarez, and others. Theoretical understanding included the work of Murray Gell-Mann, Steven Weinberg, and Sheldon Glashow in particle physics, Julian Schwinger, Richard P. Feynman, and Freeman Dyson in quantum electro dynamics, and Tsung Dao Lee and Chen Ning Yang in the nonconservation of parity. I. I. Rabi, Otto Stern, and others measured nuclear properties to unprecedented accuracy, while Maria Goeppert-Mayer advanced the shell model of the nucleus.

Charles H. Townes in the early 1960s played a major role in the development of the laser, an optical device useful both for research and several applications. These latter included bar-code readers in stores, compact disk players, and an X-ray laser, built in 1984 as a component of the now-defunct Strategic Defense Initiative, to destroy enemy missiles.

Meanwhile, physicists, notably at Princeton University, developed the tokamak, a donut-shaped magnetic enclosure in which ionized matter could be contained and heated to the very high temperatures necessary for nuclear fusion to take place. By 1991 they sustained fusion for two seconds, a step on the path to creating an energy machine similar to the fission reactor. Lasers were also being used in the attempt to achieve controlled nuclear fusion.

John Bardeen, Leon Cooper, and Robert Schrieffer in the early 1970s developed a theory of super conductivity to explain the phenomenon where, at very low temperatures, electrical resistance ceases. Physicists soon discovered that a combination of the elements niobium and germanium became superconducting at 22.3 K, about 2 degrees higher than the previous record, and in the late 1980s and 1990s scientists found yet other combinations with much higher (but still very cold) temperatures—above 120 K—that still lacked electrical resistance. Commercial applications, with great savings in electricity, were promising, but not near.

Other American physicists pursued such important fields as astrophysics and relativity, while in applied physics, William Shockley, John Bardeen, and Walter Brattain invented the transistor. This device, widely used in electronic products, made computers—and the information age—possible. It is an example of the way in which the products of physics research have helped to mold modern society. A measure of the quality of research in this country is the record that, from the time the Nobel Prize in Physics was initiated in 1901 to the year 2001, more than seventy American physicists won or shared this honor.

In the last half of the twentieth century physicists came out of their ivory towers to voice concerns about political issues with technical components. Veterans of the Manhattan Project in 1945–1946 created the influential Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and formed the Federation of American Scientists to lobby for civilian control of atomic energy domestically and United Nations control of weapons internationally. During the intolerance of the McCarthy period of the 1950s, many physicists were held up to public scorn as communists or fellow travelers, or even feared as spies for the Kremlin. The President's Science Advisory Committee, formed in reaction to the Soviet Union's launch of Sputnik (1957), was initially dominated by physicists—whose understanding of the fundamentals of nature enabled them to advise knowingly on projects in other fields, such as missile technology.

The nation's principal organization of physicists, the American Physical Society, like many other professional groups, departed from its traditional role of publishing a journal and holding meetings. It began to lobby for financial support from a congress that contained few members with scientific credentials, and to issue reports on such controversial subjects as nuclear reactor safety, the Strategic Defense Initiative, and the alleged danger to health of electrical power lines. Some physicists participated in the long series of Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs, meeting with foreign colleagues to help solve problems caused mostly by the arms race. Others created the Council for a Livable World, a political action committee whose goal was to help elect senators who supported arms control efforts. Still others joined the Union of Concerned Scientists, an organization that documented the danger of many nuclear reactors and the flaws of many weapons systems. The community of physicists had come of age, not only in producing world-class physics but in contributing to the economic

and political health of society, often from a socially responsible perspective.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Childs, Herbert. An American Genius: The Life of Ernest Orlando Lawrence. New York: Dutton, 1968.

Coben, Stanley. "The Scientific Establishment and the Transmission of Quantum Mechanics to the United States, 1919–1932." American Historical Review 76 (1971): 442–466.

Kevles, Daniel J. "On the Flaws of American Physics: A Social and Institutional Analysis." In Nineteenth-Century American Science. Edited by George H. Daniels. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press, 1972.

———. The Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1995.

National Research Council, Physics Survey Committee. Physics in Perspective. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1973.

Reingold, Nathan. "Joseph Henry." In Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Volume 6. Edited by Charles C. Gillispie. New York: Scribners, 1972.

Tobey, Ronald. The American Ideology of National Science, 1919– 1930. Pittsburgh, Pa.: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1973.

LawrenceBadash, OwenGingerich

DanielKevles, S. S.Schweber

High-Energy Physics

High-energy physics, also known as particle physics, studies the constitution, properties, and interactions of elementary particles—the basic units of matter and energy, such as electrons, protons, neutrons, still smaller particles, and photons—as revealed through experiments using particle accelerators, which impart high velocities to charged particles. This extension of nuclear physics to higher energies grew in the 1950s. Earlier generations of accelerators, or "atom smashers, " such as the cyclotron, reached the range of millions of electron volts (MeV), allowing fast-moving charged particles to crash into targeted particles and the ensuing nuclear reactions to be observed. (Particles must collide with the nucleus of the target matter in order to be observed.) Immediately after World War II, Vladimir I. Veksler in the Soviet Union and Edwin McMillan at Berkeley independently devised the synchrotron principle, which adjusts a magnetic field in step with the relativistic mass increase experienced by particles traveling near the velocity of light. In this way more energy could be imparted to the projectiles. Since the moving particle's wavelength decreases as its energy increases, at high energies it provides greater resolution to determine the shape and structure of the target particles. By the 1970s large accelerators could attain hundreds of millions or even several billion electron volts (GeV) and were used to produce numerous elementary particles for study. Cosmic rays provide another source of high-energy particles, but machines offer a greater concentration under controlled circumstances, and are generally preferred.

Theoretical physics kept pace in understanding these particles, which compose the atomic nucleus, and their interactions. By the early 1960s physicists knew that in addition to the protons, neutrons, and electrons that had been used to explain atomic nuclei for several decades, there was a confusing number of additional particles that had been found using electron and proton accelerators. A pattern in the structure of the nucleus was discerned by Murray Gell-Mann at the California Institute of Technology and by the Israeli Yuval Ne'eman. Gaps in the pattern were noticed, predictions of a new particle were made, and the particle (the so-called Omega-minus) was promptly discovered. To explain the pattern, Gell-Mann devised a theoretical scheme, called the eightfold way, that attempted to classify the relationship between strongly interacting particles in the nucleus. He postulated the existence of some underlying but unobserved elementary particles that he called "quarks."

Quarks carry electrical charges equal to either one-third or two-thirds of the charge of an electron or proton. Gell-Mann postulated several different kinds of quarks, giving them idiosyncratic names such as "up" (with a charge of plus two-thirds), "down" (with a charge of minus one-third), and "strange." Protons and neutrons are clusters of three quarks. Protons are made of two up quarks and a single down quark, so the total charge is plus one. Neutrons are made of one up quark and two down quarks, so the total charge is zero.

Another group of particles, the mesons, are made up of quarks and antiquarks (identical to quarks in mass, but opposite in electric and magnetic properties). These more massive particles, such as the ones found independently by Burton Richter at the Stanford Linear Accelerator and Samuel C. C. Ting at Brookhaven National Laboratory in 1974, fit into the picture as being made from charm quarks. The masses of these particles, like the spectrum of the hydrogen atom used by Niels Bohr many decades earlier to elucidate the quantum structure of the outer parts of atoms, now provided a numerical key for understanding the inner structure of the atom. Six different "flavors" of quarks are required to account for these heavy particles, and they come in pairs: up-down, charm-strange, and top-bottom. The first member of each pair has an electrical charge of two-thirds and the second of minus one-third.

Meanwhile, Sheldon Lee Glashow at Harvard University, Steven Weinberg at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Abdus Salam at Imperial College in London in 1968 independently proposed a theory that linked two of the fundamental forces in nature, electromagnetism and the so-called weak nuclear force. Their proposal, known as quantum field theory, involved the notion of

quarks and required the existence of three massive particles to "carry" the weak force: two charged particles (W+ and –) and one neutral particle (Z). These particles are short-lived, massive versions of the massless photons that carry ordinary light. All of these particles are called bosons, or more precisely, gauge bosons, because the theory explaining them is called a gauge theory. The name boson, which comes about for purely historical reasons, refers to a type of symmetry in which labels of the particles can be interchanged according to rules suggested by quantum mechanics, and the resulting forces (and gauge bosons) are found as a consequence of the symmetry requirements. By 1972 indirect evidence for the existence of the Z particle was found in Geneva at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN). It was not until 1983 that the Z particle itself was found, also at CERN, and close on the heels of this discovery came the detection of the W particle.

In the United States, accelerator construction and use was supported primarily by the Atomic Energy Commission, by its successor, the Department of Energy, and by the National Science Foundation. One of the nation's principal machines, the Stanford Linear Accelerator fires particles down its two-mile length. Most other machines, such as those at CERN, Brookhaven (New York), KEK (Japan), and DESY (Germany) are circular or oval in shape. To increase energies still more, beams traveling in opposite directions are led to meet in "colliders, " thereby doubling the energy of collision. In early 1987 the Tevatron proton-antiproton accelerator at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) in Illinois came into operation, a machine in the trillion electron volt range. Having narrowly missed out on some of the earlier discoveries, Fermilab scientists were particularly keen to find evidence for the postulated top quark, the only one of the quarks not yet measured and a particle so massive that only the most powerful accelerators could produce enough energy to find it. Their search at last succeeded in 1995.

The Standard Model

By the closing decades of the twentieth century, along with the quarks and bosons, a third type of particle completed the roster: the lepton, of which the electron, positron, and a group of neutrinos are the best known examples. The leptons and quarks provide the building blocks for atoms. The gauge bosons interact with the leptons and quarks, and in the act of being emitted or absorbed, some of the gauge bosons transform one kind of quark or lepton into another. In the standard model, a common mechanism underlies the electromagnetic, weak, and strong interactions. Each is mediated by the exchange of a gauge boson. The gauge bosons of the strong and weak interactions carry electrical charges, whereas the photon, which carries the electromagnetic interactions, is electrically neutral.

In its simplest formulation, the standard model of the strong, weak, and electromagnetic interactions, although aesthetically beautiful, does not agree with all the known characteristics of the weak interactions, nor can it account for the experimentally derived masses of the quarks. High-energy physicists hoped that the Superconducting Super Collider (SSC), a machine with a fifty-mile circumference that was under construction in Texas in the late 1980s, would provide data to extend and correct the standard model. They were greatly disappointed when Congress cut off funding for this expensive atom smasher.

The standard model is one of the great achievements of the human intellect. It will be remembered—together with general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the unraveling of the genetic code—as one of the outstanding intellectual advances of the twentieth century. It is not, however, the "final theory, " because too many constants still must be empirically determined. A particularly interesting development since the 1970s is the joining of particle physics with the astrophysics of the earliest stages of the universe. The "Big Bang" may provide the laboratory for exploration of the grand unified theories (GUTs) at temperatures and energies that are and will remain inaccessible in terrestrial laboratories. Also of profound significance will be an understanding of the so-called dark matter that comprises most of the mass of the universe.

In acknowledgment of the importance of the subject, experimental and theoretical high-energy physics research was recognized with a host of Nobel Prizes, many of them to American scientists. With the demise of the SSC, however, the field's future is likely to lie in machines built by associations of several nations.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brown, Laurie M., and Lillian Hoddeson, eds. The Birth of Particle Physics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

Close, Frank, Michael Marten, and Christine Sutton. The Particle Explosion. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987.

Taubes, Gary. Nobel Dreams: Power, Deceit, and the Ultimate Experiment. New York: Random House, 1986.

Weinberg, Steven. Dreams of a Final Theory. New York: Pantheon Books, 1992.

LawrenceBadash

OwenGingerich

S. S.Schweber

See alsoEnergy, Department of .

Nuclear Physics

The age-old goal of physicists has been to understand the nature of matter and energy. Nowhere during the twentieth century were the boundaries of such knowledge further extended than in the field of nuclear physics. From an obscure corner of submicroscopic particle research, nuclear physics became the most prominent and fruitful area of physical investigation because of its fundamental insights and its applications.

Discovery of the Nucleus

In the first decade of the twentieth century J. J. Thomson's discovery of the electron at Cambridge University's Cavendish Laboratory changed the concept of the atom as a solid, homogeneous entity—a "billiard ball"—to one of a sphere of positive electrification studded throughout with negative electrons. This "plum pudding" atomic model, with a different number of electrons for each element, could not account for the large-angle scattering seen when alpha particles from naturally decaying radioactive sources were allowed to strike target materials. Thomson argued that the alpha particles suffered a series of small deflections in their encounters with the target atoms, resulting in some cases in a sizable deviation from their initial path. But between 1909 and 1911 in the Manchester laboratory of Thomson's former pupil Ernest Rutherford, Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden produced scattering data that showed too many alpha particles were bent through angles too large for such an explanation to be valid.

Instead of a series of small deflections, Rutherford suggested early in 1911 that large-angle scattering could occur in a single encounter between an alpha particle and a target atom if the mass of the atom were concentrated in a tiny volume. While the atomic diameter was of the order of 10^–8 centimeters, this atomic core (or nucleus), containing virtually the atom's entire mass, measured only about 10^–12 centimeters. The atom, therefore, consisted largely of empty space, with electrons circulating about the central nucleus. When an alpha-particle projectile closely approached a target nucleus, it encountered concentrated electrostatic repulsion sufficient to deflect it more than just a few degrees from its path.

The Danish physicist Niels Bohr absorbed these concepts while visiting Rutherford's laboratory and in 1913 gave mathematical formulation to the rules by which the orbital electrons behaved. The order and arrangement of these electrons were seen to be responsible for the chemical properties exhibited by different elements. Pursuit of this field led to modern atomic physics, including its quantum mechanical explanation, and bore fruit earlier than did studies in nuclear physics. Radioactivity was recognized as a nuclear phenomenon, and the emission of alpha particles, known by then to be nuclei of helium atoms; beta particles, long recognized as electrons; and gamma rays, an electromagnetic radiation, reopened the question of whether atoms were constructed from fundamental building blocks. The work in 1913 of Henry G. J. Moseley, another former student of Rutherford's, showed that an element's position in the periodic table (its atomic number), and not its atomic weight, determined its characteristics. Moreover, he established that the number of positive charges on the nucleus (equal to its atomic number) was balanced by an equal number of orbital electrons. Since atomic weights (A) were (except for hydrogen) higher than atomic numbers (Z), the atom's nuclear mass was considered to be composed of A positively charged particles, called protons, and A–Z electrons to neutralize enough protons for a net nuclear charge of Z.

Early Nuclear Transmutations

In 1919 Rutherford announced another major discovery. Radioactivity had long been understood as a process of transmutation from one type of atom into another, occurring spontaneously. Neither temperature, nor pressure, nor chemical combination could alter the rate of decay of a given radio element or change the identity of its daughter product. Now, however, Rutherford showed that he could deliberately cause transmutations. His were not among the elements at the high end of the periodic table, where natural radioactivity is commonly found, but were among the lighter elements. By allowing energetic alpha particles (⁴₂He) from decaying radium C' to fall upon nitrogen molecules, he observed the production of hydrogen nuclei, or protons (¹₁ H), and an oxygen isotope. The reaction may be written aswhere the superscript represents the atomic weight and the subscript the atomic number, or charge.

During the first half of the 1920s Rutherford, now at Cambridge, where he had succeeded Thomson, was able to effect transmutations in many of the lighter elements. (In this work he was assisted primarily by James Chadwick.) But elements heavier than potassium would not yield to the alpha particles from their strongest radioactive source. The greater nuclear charge on the heavier elements repelled the alpha particles, preventing an approach close enough for transmutation. This finding suggested that projectile particles of energies or velocities higher than those found in naturally decaying radio elements were required to overcome the potential barriers of target nuclei. Consequently, various means of accelerating particles were devised.

The Neutron

In 1920 William D. Harkins, a physical chemist at the University of Chicago, conceived that the existence of a neutron would simplify certain problems in the construction of nuclei. In the same year, Rutherford (on the basis of incorrectly interpreted experimental evidence) also postulated the existence of such a neutral particle, the mass of which was comparable to that of the proton. Throughout the 1920s he, and especially Chadwick, searched unsuccessfully for this particle. In 1931 in Germany Walther Bothe and H. Becker detected, when beryllium was bombarded by alpha particles, a penetrating radiation, which they concluded consisted of energetic gamma rays. In France, Irène Curie and her husband, Frédéric Joliot, placed paraffin in the path of this radiation and detected protons ejected from that hydrogenous compound. They, too, believed that gamma rays were being produced and that these somehow transferred sufficient energy to the hydrogen atoms to break their chemical bonds. Chadwick

learned of this work early in 1932 and immediately recognized that beryllium was yielding not gamma rays but the longelusive neutron and that this particle was encountering protons of similar mass, transferring much of its kinetic energy and momentum to them at the time of collision. Since the neutron is uncharged, it is not repelled by atomic nuclei. Consequently, it can enter easily into reactions when it finds itself near a nucleus; otherwise it travels great distances through matter, suffering no electrostatic attractions or repulsions.

Quantum Mechanics Applied to the Nucleus

Werner Heisenberg, in Leipzig, renowned for his articulation of quantum mechanics and its application to atomic physics, in 1932 applied his mathematical techniques to nuclear physics, successfully explaining that atomic nuclei are composed not of protons and electrons but of protons and neutrons. For a given element, Z protons furnish the positive charge, while A–Z neutrons bring the total mass up to the atomic weight A. Radioactive beta decay, formerly a strong argument for the existence of electrons in the nucleus, was now interpreted differently: the beta particles were formed only at the instant of decay, as a neutron changed into a proton. The reverse reaction could occur also, with the emission of a positive electron, or positron, as a proton changed into a neutron. This reaction was predicted by the Cambridge University theoretician P. A. M. Dirac and was experimentally detected in 1932 by Carl D. Anderson of the California Institute of Technology in cloud-chamber track photographs of cosmic-ray inter-actions. Two years later the Joliot-Curies noted the same result in certain radioactive decay patterns. The "fundamental" particles now consisted of the proton and neutron—nucleons (nuclear particles) with atomic masses of about 1—and of the electron and positron, with masses of about 1/1,840 of a nucleon.

The existence of yet another particle, the neutrino, was first suggested in 1931 by Wolfgang Pauli of Zurich in an address before the American Physical Society. When a nucleus is transmuted and beta particles emitted, there are specific changes in energy. Yet, unlike the case of alpha decay, beta particles exhibited a continuous energy distribution, with only the maximum energy seen as that of the reaction. The difference between the energy of a given beta particle and the maximum was thought to be carried off by a neutrino, the properties of which—very small or zero mass and no charge—accounted for the difficulty of detecting it. In 1934 Enrico Fermi presented a quantitative theory of beta decay incorporating Pauli's hypothesis. Gamma radiation, following either alpha or beta decay, was interpreted as being emitted from the daughter nucleus as it went from an excited level to its ground state.

Further Understanding Provided by the Neutron

The neutron, the greatest of these keys to an understanding of the nucleus, helped to clarify other physical problems besides nuclear charge and weight. In 1913 Kasimir Fajans in Karlsruhe and Frederick Soddy in Glasgow had fit the numerous radio elements into the periodic table, showing that in several cases more than one radio element must be placed in the same box. Mesothorium I, thorium X, and actinium X, for example, all were chemically identical to radium; that is, they were isotopes. This finding meant they each had 88 protons but had, respectively, 140,136, and 135 neutrons. Also, in the pre–World War I period Thomson showed that nonradioactive elements exist in isotopic forms—neon, for example, has atomic weights of 20 and 22. His colleague F. W. Aston perfected the mass spectrograph, with which during the 1920s he accurately measured the masses of numerous atomic species. It was revealed that these masses were generally close to, but were not exactly, whole numbers. The difference was termed the "packing effect" by Harkins and E. D. Wilson as early as 1915, and the "packing fraction" by Aston in 1927. After 1932 it was also learned that atomic masses were not the sums of Z proton masses and A–Z neutron masses, and the difference was termed the "mass defect." The concept of nuclear building blocks (protons and neutrons) was retained; however, it was seen that a certain amount of mass was converted into a nuclear binding energy to overcome the mutual repulsion of the protons. This binding energy is of the order of a million times greater than the energies binding atoms in compounds or in stable crystals, which indicates why nuclear reactions involve so much more energy than chemical reactions.

The existence of deuterium, a hydrogen isotope of mass 2 (²₁ H), present in ordinary (mass 1) hydrogen to the extent of about 1 part in 4,500, was suggested in 1931 by Raymond T. Birge and Donald H. Menzel at the University of California at Berkeley and shortly there after was confirmed by Harold C. Urey and George M. Murphy at Columbia University, in collaboration with Ferdinand G. Brickwedde of the National Bureau of Standards. The heavy-hydrogen atom's nucleus, called the deuteron, proved to be exceptionally useful: it entered into some nuclear reactions more readily than did the proton.

Shortly after their discovery in 1932, neutrons were used as projectiles to effect nuclear transmutations by Norman Feather in England and Harkins, David Gans, and Henry W. Newson at Chicago. Two years later the Joliot-Curies reported the discovery of yet another process of transmutation: artificial radioactivity. A target not normally radioactive was bombarded with alpha particles and continued to exhibit nuclear changes even after the projectile beam was stopped. Such bombardment has permitted the production of about 1,100 nuclear species beyond the 320 or so found occurring in nature.

Nuclear Fission, Fusion, and Nuclear Weapons

During the mid-1930s, Fermi and his colleagues in Rome were most successful in causing transmutations with neutrons, particularly after they discovered the greater likelihood of the reactions occurring when the neutrons' velocities were reduced by prior collisions. When uranium,

the heaviest known element, was bombarded with neutrons, several beta-particle (⁰_–1 e)-emitting substances were produced, which Fermi reasoned must be artificial elements beyond uranium in the periodic table. The reaction may be expressed aswith a possible subsequent decay of But radiochemical analyses of the trace amounts of new substances placed them in unexpected groupings in the periodic table, and, even worse, Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann, in Berlin toward the end of 1938, were unable to separate them chemically from elements found in the middle part of the periodic table. It seemed that the so-called transuranium elements had chemical properties identical to barium, lanthanum, and cerium. Hahn's longtime colleague Lise Meitner, then a refugee in Sweden, and her nephew Otto R. Frisch, at that time in Bohr's Copenhagen laboratory, in 1938 saw that the neutrons were not adhering to the uranium nuclei, followed by beta decay, but were causing the uranium nuclei to split (fission) into two roughly equal particles. They recognized that these fission fragments suffered beta decay in their movement toward conditions of greater internal stability.

With the accurate atomic-mass values then available, it was apparent that in fission a considerable amount of mass is converted into energy; that is, the mass of the neutron plus uranium is greater than that of the fragments. The potential for utilizing such energy was widely recognized in 1939, assuming that additional neutrons were released in the fission process and that at least one of the neutrons would rupture another uranium nucleus in a chain reaction. The United States, Great Britain, Canada, France, the Soviet Union, Germany, and Japan all made efforts in this direction during World War II. A controlled chain reaction was first produced in Fermi's "pile, " or "reactor, " in 1942 at the University of Chicago, and an uncontrolled or explosive chain reaction was first tested under the direction of J. Robert Oppenheimer in 1945 in New Mexico. Among the scientific feats of the atomic-bomb project was the production at Berkeley in 1940–1941 of the first man-made transuranium elements, neptunium and plutonium, by teams under Edwin M. McMillan and Glenn Seaborg, respectively. A weapon involving the fission of the uranium isotope 235 was employed against Hiroshima, and another using plutonium (element 94, the "Y" above) nuclei destroyed Nagasaki.

Like the fission of heavy elements, the joining together (fusion) of light elements is also a process in which mass is converted into energy. This reaction, experimentally studied as early as 1934 by Rutherford and his colleagues and theoretically treated in 1938 by George Gamow and Edward Teller, both then at George Washington University, has not been controlled successfully for appreciable periods of time (preventing its use as a reactor); but its uncontrolled form is represented in the hydrogen bomb, first tested in 1952.

Particle Accelerators

The growth of "big science, " measured by its cost and influence, is manifest not only in weaponry and power-producing reactors but also in huge particle-accelerating machines. Alpha particles from naturally decaying radio-elements carry a kinetic energy of between about 4 and 10 million electron volts (MeV). But, as only one projectile in several hundred thousand is likely to come close enough to a target nucleus to affect it, reactions occur relatively infrequently, even with concentrated radioactive sources. Cosmic radiation, which possesses far greater energy, has an even lower probability of interacting with a target nucleus. Means were sought for furnishing a copious supply of charged particles that could be accelerated to energies sufficient to overcome the nuclear electro-static repulsion. This feat would both shorten the time of experiments and increase the number of reactions. Since electrical technology had little or no previous application in the range of hundreds of thousands or millions of volts, these were pioneering efforts in engineering as well as in physics. In the late 1920s Charles C. Lauritsen and H. R. Crane at the California Institute of Technology succeeded with a cascade transformer in putting 700,000 volts across an X-ray tube. Merle A. Tuve, at the Carnegie Institution of Washington, in 1930 produced protons in a vacuum tube with energies of more than a million volts. The next year, at Princeton, Robert J. Van de Graaff built the first of his electrostatic generators, with a maximum potential of about 1.5 million volts. In 1932 Ernest O. Lawrence and his associates at Berkeley constructed a magnetic resonance device, called a cyclotron because a magnetic field bent the charged particles in a circular path. The novelty of this machine lay in its ability to impart high energies to particles in a series of steps, during each revolution, thereby avoiding the need for great voltages across the terminals, as in other accelerators. The cyclotron soon exceeded the energies of other machines and became the most commonly used "atom smasher."

Although Americans excelled in the mechanical ability that could produce such a variety of machines, they were only beginning to develop theoretical and experimental research to use them. They also lacked the driving force of Rutherford. Since 1929 John D. Cockcroft and E. T. S. Walton had been building and rebuilding, testing and calibrating their voltage multiplier in the Cavendish Laboratory. Rutherford finally insisted that they perform a real experiment on it. The Russian George Gamow and, independently, Edward U. Condon at Princeton with R. W. Gurney of England, had applied quantum mechanics to consideration of the nucleus. Gamow concluded that particles need not surmount the potential energy barrier of about 25 MeV, for an element of high atomic number, to penetrate into or escape from the nucleus; instead these particles could "tunnel" through the barrier at far

lower energies. The lower the energy, the less likely it was that tunneling would occur, yet an abundant supply of projectiles might produce enough reactions to be recorded. With protons accelerated to only 125,000 volts, Cock-croft and Walton, in 1932, found lithium disintegrated into two alpha particles in the reaction Not only was this the first completely artificial transmutation (Rutherford's transmutation in 1919 had used alpha-particle projectiles from naturally decaying radio-elements), but the two also measured the products' range, and therefore energy, combined with a precise value of the mass lost in the reaction, and verified for the first time Albert Einstein's famous E=mc² equation.

The United States continued to pioneer machine construction, often with medical and biological financial support: Donald W. Kerst of the University of Illinois built a circular electron accelerator, called a betatron, in 1940, and Luis W. Alvarez of Berkeley designed a linear proton accelerator in 1946. D. W. Fry in England perfected a linear electron accelerator (1946), as did W. W. Hansen at Stanford. Since particles traveling at velocities near that of light experience a relativistic mass increase, the synchrotron principle, which uses a varying magnetic field or radio frequency to control the particle orbits, was developed independently in 1945 by Vladimir I. Veksler in the Soviet Union and by McMillan at Berkeley. By the 1970s, large accelerators could attain hundreds of millions, or even several billion, electron volts and were used to produce numerous elementary particles. Below this realm of high-energy or particle physics, recognized as a separate field since the early 1950s, nuclear physics research continued in the more modest MeV range.

Nuclear Structure

With these methods of inducing nuclear reactions and the measurements of the masses and energies involved, questions arose about what actually occurs during a transmutation. Traditional instruments—electroscopes, electrometers, scintillating screens, electrical counters—and even the more modern electronic devices were of limited value. Visual evidence was most desirable. At Chicago in 1923 Harkins attempted unsuccessfully to photograph cloud-chamber tracks of Rutherford's 1919 transmutation of nitrogen. In 1921 Rutherford's pupil P. M. S. Blackett examined 400,000 tracks and found that 8 exhibited a Y-shaped fork, indicating that the alpha-particle projectile was absorbed by the nitrogen target into a compound nucleus, which immediately became an isotope of oxygen by the emission of a proton. The three branches of the Y consisted of the incident alpha and the two products, the initially neutral and slow-moving nitrogen having no track. Had the now-discredited alternative explanation of the process been true, namely, that the alpha particle merely bounced off the nitrogen nucleus, which then decayed according to the reaction a track of four branches would have been seen.

Experimental work by Harkins and Gans in 1935 and theoretical contributions by Bohr the next year clearly established the compound nucleus as the intermediate stage in most medium-energy nuclear reactions. Alvarez designed a velocity selector for monoenergetic neutrons that allowed greater precision in reaction calculations, while Gregory Breit at the University of Wisconsin and the Hungarian refugee Eugene P. Wigner at Princeton in 1936 published a formula that explained the theory of preferential absorption of neutrons (their cross sections): If the neutrons have an energy such that a compound nucleus can be formed at or near one of its permitted energy levels, there is a high probability that these neutrons will be captured.

It was recognized that the forces holding nucleons together are stronger than electrostatic, gravitational, and weak interaction (beta particle–neutrino) forces and that they operate over shorter ranges, namely, the nuclear dimension of 10^–12 centimeters. In 1936 Bohr made an analogy between nuclear forces and those within a drop of liquid. Both are short range, acting strongly on those nucleons/molecules in their immediate neighborhood but having no influence on those further away in the nucleus/drop. The total energy and volume of a nucleus/drop are directly proportional to the number of constituent nucleons/molecules, and any excess energy of a constituent is rapidly shared among the others. This liquid-drop model of the nucleus, which meshed well with Bohr's understanding of the compound-nucleus stage during reactions, treated the energy states of the nucleus as a whole. Its great success, discovered by Bohr in collaboration with John A. Wheeler of Princeton (1939), in explaining fission as a deformation of the spherical drop into a dumbbell shape that breaks apart at the narrow connection, assured its wide acceptance for a number of years.

The strongest opposition to this liquid-drop interpretation came from proponents of the nuclear-shell model, who felt that nucleons retain much of their individuality—that, for example, they move within their own well-defined orbits. In 1932 James H. Bartlett of the University of Illinois, by analogy to the grouping of orbital electrons, suggested that protons and neutrons in nuclei also form into shells. This idea was developed in France and Germany, where it was shown in 1937 that data on magnetic moments of nuclei conform to a shell-model interpretation.

To explain the very fine splitting (hyperfine structure) of lines in the optical spectra of some elements—spectra produced largely by the extra nuclear electrons—several European physicists in the 1920s had suggested that atomic nuclei possess mechanical and magnetic moments relating to their rotation and configuration. From the 1930s on, a number of techniques were developed for measuring such nuclear moments—including the radio-frequency resonance

method of Columbia University's I. I. Rabi—and from the resulting data certain regularities appeared. For example, nuclei with an odd number of particles have half units of spin and nuclei with an even number of particles have integer units of spin, while nuclei with an even number of protons and an even number of neutrons have zero spin. Evidence such as this suggested some sort of organization of the nucleons.

With the shell model overshadowed by the success of the liquid-drop model, and with much basic research interrupted by World War II, it was not until 1949 that Maria Goeppert Mayer at the University of Chicago and O. Haxel, J. H. D. Jensen, and H. E. Suess in Germany showed the success of the shell model in explaining the so-called magic numbers of nucleons: 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82, and 126. Elements having these numbers of nucleons, known to be unusually stable, were assumed to have closed shells in the nucleus. Lead 208, for example, is "doubly magic, " having 82 protons and 126 neutrons. More recent interpretations, incorporating features of both liquid-drop and shell models, are called the "collective" and "unified" models.

Aside from the question of the structure of the nucleus, after it was recognized that similarly charged particles were confined in a tiny volume, the problem existed of explaining the nature of the short-range forces that overcame their electrical repulsion. In 1935 Hideki Yukawa in Japan reasoned that just as electrical force is transmitted between charged bodies in an electromagnetic field by a particle called a photon, there might be an analogous nuclear-field particle. Accordingly, the meson, as it was called (with a predicted mass about 200 times that of the electron), was soon found in cosmic rays by Carl D. Anderson and Seth H. Neddermeyer. The existence of this particle was confirmed by 1938. But in 1947 Fermi, Teller, and Victor F. Weisskopf in the United States concluded that this mumeson, or muon, did not interact with matter in the necessary way to serve as a field particle; and S. Sakata and T. Inoue in Japan, and independently Hans A. Bethe at Cornell and Robert E. Marshak at the University of Rochester, suggested that yet another meson existed. Within the same year, Cecil F. Powell and G. P. S. Occhialini in Bristol, England, found the pi meson, or pion—a particle slightly heavier than the muon into which it decays and one that meets field-particle requirements—in cosmic-ray tracks. Neutrons and protons were thought to interact through the continual transfer of positive, negative, and neutral pions between them.

Wider Significance of Nuclear Physics

In addition to the profound insights to nature revealed by basic research in nuclear physics, and the awesome applications to power sources and weapons, the subject also contributed to important questions in other fields. Early in the twentieth century, Bertram B. Boltwood, a radiochemist at Yale, devised a radioactive dating technique to measure the age of the earth's oldest rocks, at one time a subject considered the domain of geologists. These procedures were refined, largely by British geologist Arthur Holmes and later by geochemist Claire Patterson at the California Institute of Technology, as data on isotopic concentrations were better appreciated and better measured, leading to an estimation of the earth's antiquity at several billion years. Measuring a shorter time scale with unprecedented accuracy, chemist Willard Libby at the University of Chicago developed a method of dating artifacts of anthropological age using the carbon 14 isotope. Nuclear physics informed yet another subject of longstanding fascination to humanity: What keeps stars shining over enormous periods of time? Just before World War II, Hans Bethe of Cornell conceived the carbon cycle of nuclear reactions and calculated the energy output of each step. And shortly after the war, Gamow extended the range of nuclear physics to the entire universe, answering the cosmological question of origin with the "Big Bang, " and detailing the nuclear reactions that occurred over the next several hundred million years.

The Profession

Although nuclear physics is sometimes said to have been born during the early 1930s—a period of many remarkable discoveries—it can more appropriately be dated from 1911 or 1919. What is true of the 1930s is that by this time nuclear physics was clearly defined as a major field. The percentage of nuclear-physics papers published in Physical Review rose dramatically; other measures of the field's prominence included research funds directed to it, the number of doctoral degrees awarded, and the number of fellowships tendered by such patrons as the Rockefeller Foundation. Although they were by no means the only scientists fashioning the subject in the United States, Lawrence at Berkeley and Oppenheimer at the California Institute of Technology and Berkeley were dominating figures in building American schools of experimental and theoretical research, respectively. This domestic activity was immeasurably enriched in the 1930s by the stream of refugee physicists from totalitarian Europe—men such as Bethe, Fermi, Leo Szilard, Wigner, Teller, Weisskopf, James Franck, Gamow, Emilio Segrè, and, of course, Einstein. Prominent Europeans had earlier taught at the summer schools for theoretical physics held at several American universities; now many came permanently.

Much of this domestic and foreign talent was mobilized during World War II for the development of radar, the proximity fuse, and most notably the Manhattan Project, which produced the first atomic bombs. So stunning was the news of Hiroshima's and Nagasaki's obliteration that nuclear physicists were regarded with a measure of awe. In the opinion of most people nuclear physics was the most exciting, meaningful, and fearful area of science, and its usefulness brought considerable government support. American domination of nuclear physics in the postwar decades resulted, therefore, from a combination of the wartime concentration of research in the United States and the simultaneous disruptions in

Europe, and from another combination of rising domestic abilities and exceptional foreign talent, financed by a government that had seen (at least for a while) that basic research was applicable to national needs.

In the postwar period, the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission and then the Department of Energy supported most research in this field. It was conducted in universities and in several national laboratories, such as those at Los Alamos, Livermore, Berkeley, Brookhaven, Argonne, and Oak Ridge. With the most fashionable side of the subject now called high-energy or particle physics, ever more energetic particle accelerators were constructed, seeking to produce reactions at high energies that would reveal new particles and their interactions. Their size and cost, however, led to dwindling support. By the end of the twentieth century, the nation's two most significant machines were at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center and the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. A larger machine of the next generation, the Super conducting Super Collider, was authorized by Congress and then cancelled when its fifty-mile-long tunnel was but a quarter excavated, because of its escalating, multi-billion-dollar price tag. Consequently, the research front will be at accelerator centers run by groups of nations for the foreseeable future.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Glasstone, Samuel. Sourcebook on Atomic Energy. 3d ed. Princeton, N.J.: Van Nostrand, 1967.

Livingston, M. Stanley. Particle Accelerators: A Brief History. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1969.

Stuewer, Roger, ed. Nuclear Physics in Retrospect: Proceedings of a Symposium on the 1930s. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1979.

Weiner, Charles, ed. Exploring the History of Nuclear Physics. New York: American Institute of Physics, 1972. Proceedings of the institute's conferences of 1967 and 1969.

Weisskopf, Victor F. Physics in the Twentieth Century: Selected Essays. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1972.

LawrenceBadash

See alsoEnergy, Department of ; Physics, High-Energy Physics .

Solid-State Physics

Solid-state is the branch of research that deals with properties of condensed matter—originally solids such as crystals and metals, later extended to liquids and more exotic forms of matter. The multitude of properties studied and the variety of materials that can be explored give this field enormous scope.

Modern solid-state physics relies on the concepts and techniques of twentieth-century atomic theory, in which a material substance is seen as an aggregate of atoms obeying the laws of quantum mechanics. Earlier concepts had failed to explain the most obvious characteristics of most materials. A few features of a metal could be explained by assuming that electrons moved freely within it, like a gas, but that did not lead far. Materials technology was built largely on age-old craft traditions.

The Rise of Solid-State Theory

Discoveries in the first quarter of the twentieth century opened the way to answers. The work began with a puzzle: experiments found that for most simple solids, as the temperature is lowered toward absolute zero, adding even an infinitesimally small amount of heat produces a large change in temperature. The classical model of a solid made up of vibrating atoms could not explain this. In 1907, Albert Einstein reworked the model using the radical new idea that energy comes in tiny, discrete "quantum" packets. The qualitative success of Einstein's theory, as refined by other physicists, helped confirm the new quantum theory and pointed to its uses for explaining solid-state phenomena.

In 1912, scientists in Munich discovered an experimental method of "seeing" the internal arrangement of atoms in solids. They sent X rays through crystals and produced patterns, which they interpreted as the result of the scattering of the X rays by atoms arranged in a lattice. By the late 1920s, X-ray studies had revealed most of the basic information about how atoms are arranged in simple crystals.

The theories that attempted to explain solids still contained crippling problems. Solutions became available only after a complete theory of quantum mechanics was invented, in 1925 and 1926, by the German physicist Werner Heisenberg and the Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger, building on work by the Danish physicist Niels Bohr. A quantum statistics that could be applied to the particles in condensed matter was invented in 1926 by the Italian physicist Enrico Fermi and the British physicist P. A. M. Dirac.

The next few years were a remarkably productive period as the new conceptual and mathematical tools were applied to the study of solids and liquids. Many leading physicists were involved in this work—Germans, Austrians, Russians, French, British, and a few Americans, notably John Van Vleck and John Slater. Between 1928 and 1931, Felix Bloch, Rudolf Peierls, Alan Wilson, and others developed a powerful concept of energy bands separated by gaps to describe the energy distribution of the swarm of electrons in a crystal. This concept explained why metals conduct electricity and heat while insulators do not, and why the electrical conductivity of a class of materials called semiconductors varies with temperature. Another breakthrough came in 1933 when Eugene Wigner and his student Frederick Seitz at Princeton University developed a simple approximate method for computing the energy bands of sodium and other real solids. By 1934, some of the most dramatic properties of solids, such as magnetism, had received qualitative (if not quantitative) explanation.

But the models of the new theory remained idealizations, applicable only to perfect materials. Physicists could

not extend the results, for the available materials contained far too many impurities and physical imperfections. Most practically important characteristics (such as the strength of an alloy) were far beyond the theorists' reach. In the mid-1930s, many theorists turned their attention to fields such as nuclear physics, which offered greater opportunities for making exciting intellectual contributions.

Yet a broader base was being laid for future progress. Established scientists and engineers, particularly in the United States, were avidly studying the new quantum theory of solids. It also became a standard topic in the graduate studies of the next generation. Meanwhile, leaders in universities, industrial labs, and philanthropies were deliberately striving to upgrade American research in all fields of physics. Their efforts were reinforced by the talents of more than 100 European physicists who immigrated to the United States between 1933 and 1941 as a result of the political upheavals in Europe.

Dynamic Growth in World War II and After

Military-oriented research during World War II (1939–1945) created many new techniques that would be useful for the study of solids. For example, Manhattan Project scientists studied neutrons, and in the postwar period these neutral subatomic particles were found to be effective probes of solids, especially in exploring magnetic properties. The fervent wartime development of micro-wave radar also brought a variety of new techniques useful for studying solids, such as microwave spectroscopy, in which radiation is tuned to coincide with natural vibrational or rotational frequencies of atoms and molecules within a magnetic field. The Collins liquefier, developed just after the war at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, made it possible for laboratories to get bulk liquid helium and study materials under the simplified conditions that prevail at extremely low temperatures. Methods were also developed during the war for producing single crystals in significant quantities. The production of pure crystals of the elements silicon and germanium, which found wartime use in microwave devices, became so highly developed that an enormous number of postwar studies used these semiconductors as prototypes for the study of solid-state phenomena in general.

Thus, by the late 1940s a seemingly mature field of solid-state physics was growing in scope and also in terms of the number of physicists attracted to the field. By 1947 solid-state physics had become a large enough field to justify establishing a separate division for it within the American Physical Society.

In the postwar period solid-state physics became even more closely tied to practical applications, which then stimulated new interest in the field and increased its funding. The development of the transistor offers a striking example. In January 1945, the Bell Telephone Laboratories in New Jersey officially authorized a group to do fundamental research on solids. William B. Shockley, one of the group's two leaders, believed that such research could lead to the invention of a solid-state amplifier. Members of a small semiconductor subgroup led by Shockley directed their attention to silicon and germanium, whose properties had been closely studied during the wartime radar program. In December 1947, two members of the group, the theorist John Bardeen and the experimentalist Walter Brattain, working closely together, invented the first transistor.

The transistor rectifies and amplifies electrical signals more rapidly and reliably than the more cumbersome, fragile, and costly vacuum tube. It rapidly found practical application. Among the first to take an interest were military agencies, driven by Cold War concerns to fund advanced research as well as development in all fields of physics. Commercial interests promptly followed; the first "transistorized" radio went on the market in 1954, and the term "solid-state" was soon popularized by advertisers' tags. Transistorized devices revolutionized communications, control apparatus, and data processing. The explosive growth of commercial and national security applications led to wide popular interest, and swift increases in funding for every kind of research. By 1960, there were roughly 2,000 solid-state physicists in the United States, making up one-fifth of all American physicists. Here, as in most fields of science since the war, more significant work had been done in the United States than in the rest of the world put together. As other countries recovered economically, they began to catch up.

Unlike most fields of physics at that time, in solid-state about half of the U.S. specialists worked in industry. Universities did not want to be left out, and starting in 1960 they established "materials science" centers with the aid of Department of Defense funding. As the name implied, the field was reaching past solid-state physicists to include chemists, engineers, and others in an interdisciplinary spirit.

Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, theory, technique, and applications of solid-state physics all advanced rapidly. The long list of achievements includes a theory for the details of atomic movements inside crystals, understanding of how impurities and imperfections cause optical properties and affect crystal growth, quantitative determination of such properties as electrical resistivity, and a more complete theory for the phase transitions between different states of matter. The biggest theoretical breakthrough of the period was an explanation of super conductivity in 1957 by Bardeen and two other American physicists, Leon N. Cooper and J. Robert Schrieffer. Their theory led the way to explanations of a whole series of so-called cooperative phenomena (which also include super fluidity, phase transitions, and tunneling) in which particles and sound-wave quanta move in unison, giving rise to strongly modified and sometimes astonishing properties. Theorists were further stimulated in 1972 when scientists at Cornell University, deploying ingenious new techniques to reach extremely low temperatures, discovered

that Helium-3 could become a super fluid with remarkable properties.

Meanwhile, many other important techniques were developed, such as the Josephson effect. In 1962, the young British physicist Brian D. Josephson proposed that a super current can "tunnel" through a thin barrier separating two super conductors. This led to important devices such as the SQUID (Super conducting Quantum Interference Device), which can probe the surface structures of solids and can even map faint magnetic fields that reflect human brain activity. Still more versatile were techniques to create entirely new, artificially structured materials. With vapors or beams of molecules, physicists could build up a surface molecule by molecule like layers of paint.

The list of applications continued to grow rapidly. By the mid-1970s, in addition to countless varieties of electronic diodes and transistors, there were, for example, solid-state lasers employed in such diverse applications as weaponry, welding, and eye surgery; magnetic bubble memories used in computers to store information in thin crystals; and improved understanding of processes in areas ranging from photography to metallurgy. In 1955, Shockley had established a semiconductor firm in California near Stanford University, creating a nucleus for what was later dubbed Silicon Valley—a hive of entrepreneurial capital, technical expertise, and innovation, but only one of many locales from Europe to Japan that thrived on solid-state physics. The creation of entire industries in turn stimulated interest in the specialty, now virtually a field of its own. In 1970 when the American Physical Society split up its massive flagship journal, the Physical Review, into manageable sections, the largest was devoted entirely to solids. But it was the "B" section, for in terms of intellectual prestige, solid-state physics had always taken second place behind fields such as nuclear and particle physics, which were called more "fundamental."

Condensed Matter from Stars to Super markets

To advance their status, and to emphasize their interest in ever more diverse materials, practitioners renamed the field; in 1978 the American Physical Society's division changed its name from "Solid State" to "Condensed Matter." The condensed-matter physicists were rapidly improving their understanding and control of the behavior of fluids and semidisordered materials like glasses. Theoretical studies of condensed matter began to range as far afield as the interiors of neutron stars, and even the entire universe in the moment following the Big Bang. Meanwhile, theory had become a real help to traditional solid-state technologies like metallurgy and inspired entire new classes of composite materials.

Experiment and theory, seemingly mature, continued to produce surprises. One spectacular advance, pointing to a future technology of submicroscopic machinery, was the development in the early 1980s of scanning micro-scopes. These could detect individual atoms on a surface, or nudge them into preferred configurations. Another discovery at that time was the Quantum Hall Effect: jumps of conductivity that allowed fundamental measurements with extraordinary precision. Later, a startling discovery at Bell Laboratories—using semiconductor crystals of unprecedented quality—revealed a new state of matter: a Quantum Hall Effect experiment showed highly correlated "quasiparticles" carrying only fractions of an electron's charge.

For research that could be considered fundamental, attention increasingly turned toward condensed matter systems with quantized entities such as cooperatively interacting swarms of electrons, seen especially at very low temperatures. The physics community was galvanized in 1986 when scientists at IBM's Zurich laboratory announced their discovery of super conductivity in a ceramic material, at temperatures higher than any previous super conductor. The established way of studying solids had been to pursue the simplest possible systems, but this showed that more complex structures could display startling new properties all their own. The study of "high-temperature" super conductivity has led to new concepts and techniques as well as hosts of new materials, including ones that super conduct at temperatures an order of magnitude higher than anything known before 1986. Many novel applications for microelectronics have grown from this field. Equally fascinating was the creation in the 1990s of microscopic clouds of "Bose-Einstein condensed" gases, in which the atoms behave collectively as a single quantum entity.

Most of this work depended on electronic computers: the field was advancing with the aid of its own applications. With new theoretical ideas and techniques developed in the 1960s, calculations of electronic structures became routine during the 1970s. In the 1980s, numerical simulations began to approach the power of experiment itself. This was most visible where the study of chaos and nonequilibrium phenomena, as in the phase transition of a melting solid, brought new understanding of many phenomena. There was steady progress in unraveling the old, great puzzle of fluids—turbulence—although here much remained unsolved. Studies of disorder also led to improved materials and new devices, such as the liquid crystal displays that turned up in items on super market shelves. Magnetism was studied with special intensity because of its importance in computer memories.

Physicists also cooperated with chemists to study polymers, and edged toward the study of proteins and other biological substances. Spider silk still beat anything a physicist could make. But the discovery that carbon atoms could be assembled in spheres (as in buckminsterfullerene) and tubes held hopes for fantastic new materials.

Some research problems now required big, expensive facilities. Ever since the 1950s, neutron beams from nuclear reactors had been useful to some research teams. A larger step toward "big science" came with the construction of machines resembling the accelerators of high-energy

physics that emitted beams of high-intensity radiation to probe matter. The National Synchrotron Light Source, starting up in 1982 in Brookhaven, New York, was followed by a half-dozen more in the United States and abroad. Yet most condensed-matter research continued to be done by small, intimate groups in one or two rooms.

In the 1990s the steep long-term rise of funding for basic research in the field leveled off. Military support waned with the Cold War, while intensified commercial competition impelled industrial leaders like Bell Labs to emphasize research with near-term benefits. The community continued to grow gradually along with other fields of research, no longer among the fastest. By 2001 the American Physical Society division had some 5,000 members, largely from industry; as a fraction of the Society's membership, they had declined to one-eighth. This was still more than any other specialty, and represented much more high-level research in the field than any other country could muster.

The field's impact on day-to-day living continued to grow. The applications of condensed-matter physics were most conspicuous in information processing and communications, but had also become integral to warfare, health care, power generation, education, travel, finance, politics, and entertainment.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hoddeson, Lillian, et al, eds. Out of the Crystal Maze: Chapters from the History of Solid-State Physics. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. Extended essays by professional historians (some are highly technical).

Hoddeson, Lillian, and Vicki Daitch. True Genius: The Life and Science of John Bardeen. Washington, D.C.: The Joseph Henry Press, 2002. Includes an overview of solid-state physics for the general reader.

Kittel, Charles. Introduction to Solid-State Physics. New York: Wiley, 1953. In five editions to 1976, the classic graduate-student text book.

Mott, Sir Nevill, ed. The Beginnings of Solid-State Physics. A Symposium. London: The Royal Society; Great Neck, N.Y.: Scholium International, 1980. Reminiscences by pioneers of the 1930s–1960s.

National Research Council, Solid-State Sciences Panel. Research in Solid-State Sciences: Opportunities and Relevance to National Needs. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1968. The state of U.S. physics fields has been reviewed at intervals by panels of leading physicists. Later reviews, by the National Academy of Sciences, are:

National Research Council, Physics Survey Committee. Physics in Perspective. Vol. II, part A, The Core Subfields of Physics. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1973. See "Physics of Condensed Matter, " pp. 445–558.

National Research Council, Physics Survey Committee, Panel on Condensed-Matter Physics. Condensed-Matter Physics. In series, Physics Through the 1990s. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1986.

National Research Council, Committee on Condensed-Matter and Materials Physics. Condensed-Matter and Materials Physics: Basic Research for Tomorrow's Technology. In series, Physics in a New Era. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999.

Riordan, Michael, and Lillian Hoddeson. Crystal Fire: The Birth of the Information Age. New York: Norton, 1997. For the general reader.

Weart, Spencer R., and Melba Phillips, eds. History of Physics. New York: American Institute of Physics, 1985. Includes readable articles on aspects of the history by P. Anderson, P. Ewald, L. Hoddeson, C. S. Smith.

LillianHoddeson

SpencerWeart

Dictionary of American History Badash, Lawrence; Kevles, Daniel; Badash, Lawrence; Gingerich, Owen; Schweber, S. S.; Badash, Lawrence; Hoddeson, Lillian; Weart, Spencer

Physics

views updated Jun 11 2018

PHYSICS

The material presented in this entry emphasizes those contributions which were important in arriving at verified present-day scientific results, rather than those that may have appeared important at the time. Unavoidably it will overlap in parts with material presented in the separate *Astronomy entry.

Introduction

Though rich, innovative, and highly creative, the Jewish intellectual contribution to civilization was initially an essentially humanistic and non-scientific "program," staying that way for more than 25 centuries, from the Patriarchs and Moses in the second millennium b.c.e. in the eastern Mediterranean to the great Jewish astronomers in the 10^th–15^th centuries c.e. at the other end of that sea. There was one exception, namely a marginal interest in astronomy, the "intercalation" sub-program motivated by repeated efforts aimed at the construction of an ever-improved calendar. Technically, this was a quest for better synchronization between the agriculturally important solar year and the timekeeping advantages of the lunar month, an aim which was indeed achieved in the present Jewish calendar, finalized by the end of the first century c.e.

It was only in the 10^th century c.e. that a major change appears to have occurred involving the Jewish communities in Europe along the western Mediterranean, from the Iberian Peninsula and southern France to Italy, with science gradually approaching (but not achieving) the status of Torah studies. These regions constituted the interface between the crystallizing Christian national dynastic states of the western Roman Empire, as parceled out by its Germanic conquerors, and the Ummayad and Abbasid caliphates and other Muslim states established in Northern Africa.

The Jewish interest in science was part of a general regional reawakening some four centuries after the almost complete eradication of Greek science with its remarkable achievements over the one thousand years from Pythagoras to Diophantus – e.g., the realization that the earth is round and measurement of its radius by Erathostenes with a better than 0.5% precision, the understanding by Aristarchus of Samos of the heliocentric structure of our planetary system 1,800 years before Copernicus, or Archimedes' derivation of the laws of mechanics and hydrostatics – just to mention three examples from the third century b.c.e. All this would have been lost forever upon the closure of the Academy in Athens on the orders of Justinian in 550 c.e., if not for the transplantation of nine Academy scholars with some of their documentation to Mesopotamia at the invitation of Persian emperor Khushru Anushirvan and the founding of an academy outside of Christianity's reach. The institution survived the Muslim conquest, developed under the Ummayads, and flourished under the Abbasids, who established the central school in their palace. Their Spanish Ummayad rivals responded by creating a similar academy in Cordoba. The preservation and consolidation process had thus lasted almost half a millennium, when science made its re-entry into western Europe from the Muslim bridgeheads in Sicily and Spain. Being neither Christian nor Muslim, Jewish scholars for a while enjoyed the advantage of having access to the research centers on both sides of the divide, but the religious zeal in England and France throughout the Crusades and their aftermath brought about the total expulsion of Jews from these countries, which thereby remained "judenrein" for several centuries.

The second millennium c.e. did witness two periods of peak Jewish creativity in the sciences, separated by a figurative "black hole," the Dark Age of European Jewry, lasting from the 16^th to the mid-18^th centuries.

Jewish involvement in the physical sciences can thus be summarized as follows:

(1) Creative Humanism, no physical sciences: 15^th century b.c.e.–10^th century c.e.

(2) First creative era in science (astronomy and physics): 11^th–15^th century (Spain, S. France)

(3) Jewish Dark Age (Europe): 16^th–mid-18^th century.

(4) Second creative era in science (physics and astronomy): 19^th century to present.

This can be further divided into two phases, according to the limitations on Jewish access to scientific research facilities, namely,

(a) a restricted phase, either

(a1) formal (through the Oath of Allegiance), or

(a2) patronizing ("they do not know how to behave …");

(b) the fully emancipated phase.

The transitions occurred at different periods in each of the western democracies (e.g., 1950 for full emancipation in the United States).

This chronology is followed in the present entry, with the Second Era section including three subsections dealing with special episodes: Nazi "Jewish Science" (1933–45), Nazi Germany and the Jewish initiative in the development of nuclear weapons (1938–46); and the "Scientists' Freedom of Movement" struggle in the U.S.S.R. (1971–91). It concludes with a survey of physics in modern Israel (from 1928).

From Antiquity to Sepharad (Humanism)

In its first 25 centuries (1500 b.c.e.–1000 c.e.), the creative Jewish cultural contribution effectively centered on humanism and its ethical, social or juridical realization, e.g. the idea of a weekly day of rest, moral codes (as in the Ten Commandments), the treatment of slaves, support for the weak, etc. Very little was achieved in the sciences, where both motivation and methodology remained purely pragmatic, whatever the activity. An example is the biblical value (i Kings 7:23) of 3 = ח for the ratio between circumference and diameter in a circle, a value indicating that it must have been determined experimentally, namely averaging between results of very rough measurements of the ratio in several round objects; the Masoretic editors (8^th–10^th century c.e.) noted the lack of precision and inserted an improved value in a footnote. Another example is R. Nehemiah's Sefer ha-Middah, a book which played an important role in the preservation of Greek geometry and its revival in the East under the Abbasid caliphate, yet without a single proof, only prescriptions. Compare this with Greek culture, where Archimedes provided a mathematical proof that the value of π, an important geometrical constant, lies between 22/7 and 223/71 (or between 3.1408 and 3.1428), while using a method that could be further extended to any degree of precision.

There is no real principle making it incompatible to be creatively involved both in humanistic culture and in science. There is even evidence that the conception of science as a worldview, i.e., the idea which emerged in sixth century b.c.e. Greece, that the physical world might be describable by laws of nature, was inspired by its humanistic analog, namely by the adoption of Solon's ethical code (human law), itself an imported offspring of the Middle Eastern ethical codes (Hammurapi, Moses, etc).

Returning to pragmatic scientific activity in early Jewish tradition, there is talmudic evidence in two cases for marked astronomical erudition, namely the tanna R. Joshua b. Hananiah in Judea (c. 40–100 c.e.) and the amora Mar Samuel of Nehardea in Babylonia. Such erudition was essential to the establishment of the Jewish calendar. On the other hand, there is no evidence for any systematic observation and recording of astronomical data. Such recording was performed by the Sumerian, Egyptian, and other priesthoods and was directly related to their cults. This is still universally reflected in the seven-day week, established for the seven deities identified with the seven astronomical "wanderers" (Sun, Moon, and five planets seen with the naked eye – Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, Saturn; notice the strange order).

The strong biblical injunction against "worship of stars and zodiac signs" notwithstanding, there was no hesitation about applying the data to evaluate the various intercalations required to fit a lunar calendar to the solar year, a pragmatic task that was indeed performed efficiently.

The First Active Scientific Age: Sepharad and Provence

The first Jewish scientific era lasted from 1000 to 1500 c.e., with major contributions in astronomy and physics (as well as *medicine), all by scholars residing in Spain and southern France. It began with R. *Abraham bar Ḥiyya ha-Nasi ("the Prince") of Barcelona (d. 1136), author of three books on astronomy (in Hebrew) and continued with his pupil R. Abraham *Ibn Ezra (1089–1164).

A formal dimension was acquired by this "dynasty of learning" between 1152 and 1156, when a team headed by R. Isaac *Ibn Sa'id and R. Judah ben Moses Cohen, working in Toledo in the service of King Alphonso x of Castille, calculated and published the Alphonsine Tables. These tables were designed to track the movement of the planets, mainly for high-seas navigation.

The two most original and effective Jewish contributions were those of R. *Levi ben Gershom in Provence in the 14^th century and R. Ḥasdai *Crescas in Aragon in the 15^th. The last astronomer in this sequence was "Zacut," namely R. Abraham ben Samuel *Zacuto (1452–1515), a leading scholar at Salamanca in Castille, who, at the expulsion, was welcomed for a while in Portugal and was given the responsibility for the scientific work at Sagres. Four years later, however, he was expelled with all other Jews in Portugal.

The Portuguese Marrano Jewish philosopher Baruch *Spinoza (1632–1677), working in Holland, where his family returned to the Jewish faith, can be considered as an extension of the Iberian age. Although the Amsterdam Jewish community leadership eventually excommunicated Spinoza (1656) because of his position on religious dogma, his overall views in several contexts are now not far from those of nonfundamentalist modern Jewish religious thinkers, such as R. Abraham Isaac *Kook.

R. Levi ben Gershom of Bagnols (1288–1344) lived in Avignon in the south of France, a city which at that time was the seat of the papacy. Jewish scholars and historians generally designate Levi by the acronym Ralbag – while to the gentiles he is Maestre Leo de Bagnols, Leo Hebraeus, Gersonides – but the crater on the moon named after him by the International Astronomical Union reads "Rabbi Levi." (It is situated in a "Jewish quarter" which also has craters named after Ibn Ezra, Zacuto, and Einstein. In the Jewish world, Gersonides is generally cited for his teachings in religious philosophy – sometimes with a footnote stating "he also wrote 118 chapters in astronomy" (these works were translated from the original Hebrew into Latin by Mordecai Finzi, astronomer to the duke of Mantua). Levi earned his living as "mathematicus" (astrologer) in the service of the popes, the same function filled by Johannes Kepler at the emperor's court in Prague 200 years later, or by Galileo Galilei at the duke of Tuscany's court in Florence.

Rabbi Levi was one of the greatest astronomers (and one of the greatest scientists) in the Middle Ages after the lights of science were turned off in the Greek centers along the shores of the Mediterranean. The following are but a few of his accomplishments: He invented the sextant (naming it Jacob's staff, a term used in the British Merchant Marine until the early 18^th century). He improved the camera obscura – the camera's ancestor. Predominantly, and contrary to social norms during the Middle Ages, R. Levi did not blindly accept dogma but tested every assumption with his instruments. He was criticized for this both in the Jewish world and by the secular astronomy establishment. In a brilliant experiment, in the spirit of 20^th century philosopher Karl *Popper's (1902–1994) invalidation ("falsification") doctrine, R. Levi measured variations in the luminosity of Mars over a period of five years. He proved that there was no correlation between the observed variations in the luminosity and the variations which would be expected if the planet Mars were following the path according to the then current version of Ptolemy's (Claudius Ptolemaeus of the second century c.e.) geocentric model with its epicycles – a theory universally accepted in the Middle Ages. He therefore disproved that model, and thereby paved the way for the adoption of the Copernican system two centuries later.

The greatest Jewish medieval non-mathematical theorist in physics and cosmology was R. Ḥasdai Crescas (d. 1412) of Barcelona. Better known for his philosophy, which argued against mixing science with religion (in itself a view, close to modern approaches), his impact on the rebirth of physics was unique. Plato had discussed vacua, but Aristotle had then stated that "nature does not tolerate a vacuum," and throughout the Middle Ages physical thinking was non-reductive, always "effective," a priori assuming the presence of friction, air resistance, etc. Without a vacuum, however, one cannot define inertia and mass,. In his book Or Adonai Crescas refuted Aristotle's arguments against the vacuum and presented an infinite empty space as the scene on which the physical world is enacted. Like Gersonides, he also assumed continuous creation and a multiplicity of worlds.

Pico della Mirandola (1463–1494), the one-man encyclopedic "team" who prepared the philosophical and scientific transition to the Renaissance, and who taught himself Hebrew and Arabic for that purpose, included an abstract of Crescas' book in his "900 theses." It was picked up by Giordano Bruno (1548–1600), who was burned at the stake specifically for spreading Crescas' notion of an infinite empty (presumably absolute) space. Galileo, however, could now "place" a moving body in this vacuum and invent inertia, while Newton could have a force act on the body and measure velocities and accelerations with respect to that space and define the concept of mass as a measure of inertia.

The Dark Age

causes

The 15^th and 16^th centuries are among the darkest in Jewish history. It is not that the previous 400 years in western Europe had been an idyll. On the contrary, the Jews in France suffered several expulsions and three countrywide massacres (1214, 1251, and 1320), by the Pastoureaux, sweeping peasant rebellions that struck almost only the Jews because they were the only unprotected group in the population. And yet there were a few quieter spots, in particular in the papal possessions in and around Avignon, where a Jewish presence lasted until the area was annexed to France during the Revolution. But the 15^th and 16^th centuries represented a regression. Two physical catastrophes followed by spiritual letdowns in the four movements they inspired, as well as the mystically oriented transformation of Judaism which they brought about, all contributed to the regression in Jewish participation in the development of science. The two major disasters were (1) the expulsion from Spain and other territories ruled by the Spanish monarchs (1492) and from Portugal (1497), and (2) the massacres in southeastern Poland (with about 600,000 dead), by the rebel Ukrainian Cossacks (1648) under the leadership of hetman Bogdan *Chmielnicki.

To these we may add the four pseudo-Messiahs (David *Reuveni, 1490–1538; Solomon *Molcho, 1591–1532; *Shabbetai Ẓevi, 1636–1676; Jacob *Frank, 1726–1791) with the despair and conversions which followed the failure of each movement. Finally, there was the boost enjoyed by the mystic interpretation of Judaism with the rise of Ḥasidism, following the teachings of R. *Israel ben Eleazar Ba'al Shem Tov (1700–1760), a trend which lasted about a 100 years and which was not inducive to scientific thinking.

haskalah

One development running counter to these trends occurred in Berlin, namely the rise of the *Haskalah (Enlightenment) movement, following the lead of Moses *Mendelssohn (1729–1786). This was an attempt to develop a westernized interpretation of Judaism, emphasizing modern approaches to the study of Jewish classics (also as a shield against conversion), coupled with an assimilationist approach regarding dress, language, and other everyday aspects of life to produce "Germans of the Mosaic persuasion." It was made possible in Berlin by the relative liberalism in matters of culture and science of Voltaire's friend, the scholarly King Frederick ii (the Great), whose academy included the key scientists of the era.

Moreover, while the norm throughout central Europe was for Jews to be confined to the ghettos and restricted to peddling as a "profession," 18^th-century Germany with its heterogeneous multitiered political structure offered a number of channels – "protected" Jews who could go anywhere because they were paying their "protection taxes" to the emperor, other taxes to the various kings, etc. In 1763, Mendelssohn won a prize offered by the Prussian Royal Academy of Sciences in a competition consisting in an essay on a question in metaphysics, with Immanuel Kant coming in second. The event had an impact on Jewish youth, attracting them to the sciences. The intellectual transformation was shaped and polished in the salons of several Jewish ladies (Rahel Levin *Varnhagen, Henriette *Herz, and others). The movement started by Mendelssohn thus played an important role in the return of Jews to science, literature, etc., but it failed badly in the prevention of conversion. It is rather tragic to note that much of the creative cultural harvest would have lost any trace of its Jewish origins had it not been for its rejection by the Nazis, together with their reclassification of the authors as Jews even at a distance of two generations.

mitnaggedim

The ḥasidic movement's rapid spread seemed to replace the "religion of learning" by one of hereditary dynasties of miracle-rabbis leading a following of ignoramuses. The spiritual leadership of classical Judaism in Lithuania, under the inspiration of *Elijah Gaon of Vilna (1726–1791), a leader revered for his spiritual creativity and his learning, organized a campaign aimed at stemming the growing mystical flood. After several decades of a bitter struggle, the conflict lost its "either/or" aspect and new trends appeared on the ḥasidic side, with a reemphasis on learning.

The Gaon was interested in science, considered himself fully knowledgeable in this matter, and promoted scientific studies as useful additions to Torah. However, the Jewish isolation and loss of contact were so great that what the Gaon meant in 1780 by "science" was Euclid's geometry and Aristotle's physics, having never heard of Descartes, Galileo, or Newton.

The Second Creative Period: Restricted Approach

To understand what happened to European Jewry around 1800, the reader should bear in mind the effective status of the Jewish population in central Europe, constrained to ghettos and to marginal professions. This state of affairs ended as a combined result of two roughly simultaneous "revolutions," namely the French Revolution (with its Napoleonic sequel) on the one hand, and the Industrial Revolution on the other. Napoleon's army reached every capital in Continental Europe at some time or other, and the reforms it either imposed or indirectly induced included the cancellation of employment and residence restrictions on the Jews. The Industrial Revolution created work and new white-collar jobs for bankers, financiers, accountants, clerks, lawyers, but also engineers of various specialties, etc. The autochthonous population generally preserved family traditions – nobility serving as professional army officers, peasants receiving farms from their parents and transferring them to their own children, etc. The white-collar jobs required literacy, but intellectual types in the nobility generally joined the Church.

The situation on the Jewish side was just the opposite: to the extent that anybody had risen above peddling and had some traditional family training, it was in moneylending, jewelry, or commerce, a preparation for banking and other financial professions. Males were all literate and with some preconditioning for logical structures, somewhat facilitating the study of law and mathematics. As a result, the 19^th century established an emancipated Jewish middle class throughout central Europe, and yet this did not include a serious academic or scientific component, mainly because of the customary Oath of Allegiance required upon becoming an ordinarius (full professor), a throwback to medieval times. The Oath was taken with one's hand on a New Testament and was thus considered de facto religious conversion.

One way of participating in academic activities without swearing allegiance was to have a parallel occupation outside the academic world and occupy it after resigning from the university before the oath stage, and whenever possible to return after a few years and repeat the cycle. This was somewhat easier in mathematics and mathematical physics, which did not require special equipment for the professor to continue his research and preserve his knowledge in the non-academic phase.

Prominent examples are the mathematicians John Joseph *Sylvester (1814–1897) in England and Leopold *Kronecker (1823–1891) in Prussia. England was still in its "formally restricted" stage as far as Jewish emancipation went, and Sylvester, who studied at Cambridge, could not even get his B.A. until 1871, when he received it together with his M.A. He "meandered" between academic life and working in an insurance company, and later as a lawyer. By 1883, though, progress in emancipation had reached a level which enabled Sylvester to become a full professor at Oxford without converting. Kronecker's line was commerce and banking, with short appointments in academe, until progress in emancipation allowed him to receive a professorship in 1883. In a somewhat bizarre twist, Kronecker converted to Christianity shortly before his death.

The mathematician and theoretical physicist Karl Gustav Jacob *Jacobi (1804–1851) was the first Jewish scientist to be appointed to a special royal chair without having to take the Oath, which had just been abolished by Prussian Minister of Culture Wilhelm von Humboldt (brother of the geographer). Intellectually, the von Humboldt brothers had grown up in the intellectual salons of the ladies of the *Mendelssohn family and its periphery, a liberal milieu, and it was natural that they should regard the Oath as a medieval vestige. However, this was not the end of the story. In 1848 politically liberal Jacobi signed a petition calling on the king to put an end to his absolute rule. The king put an end to Jacobi's chair and Jacobi found himself in the street with his wife and seven children. One year later, Alexander von Humboldt intervened and the king reestablished the chair. However, Wilhelm had died and the new minister had reestablished the Oath, so that Jacobi took it and converted shortly before his demise.

By the end of the 19^th century formal restrictions had been abolished almost everywhere, but they had been replaced by an unwritten numerical restriction policy. This was often represented as protection of the academic milieu against Jews in academe who "do not know how to behave," a phrase found in most appointment committee reports, such as the one dealing with Einstein's appointment in 1909 as professor at the University of Zurich, or that of the Princeton University Graduate School's admissions committee dealing with Richard Feynman's application (backed by his mit professor): "We do not like to have many Jews in the graduate school because it is difficult afterwards to find jobs for them."

In the United States, the restrictive policy lasted till the mid-1960s when an incident involving mit President Vannevar Bush and British mathematician G.H. Hardy (1877–1947) exposed the procedure and held it up to ridicule. Bush had fixed a ceiling of one Jew per department. In mathematics this position was occupied by Norbert *Wiener (1894–1964), but sometime in the 1950s the Department of Mathematics wanted to hire Norman Levinson, recommended by Hardy. This was vetoed by Bush in view of the restrictive policy of the institution. Some time later mit awarded Hardy an honorary doctorate. In the ceremony, Hardy thanked "the Mass. Inst. of Theology" for the award and, when corrected, insisted, explaining, "Why else would a professor's religious appartenance matter at all?"

Further Advances

The restrictions notwithstanding, the children and grandchildren of the earliest white-collar Jewish generations gradually replaced ḥeder or yeshivah schooling with state education and found their way to the universities as students and then as temporary teachers, etc. The formalities constituting the obstacles in the admission threshold for Jews were sometimes more flexible in medicine and pharmacy, perhaps a vestige of the traditionally high reputation enjoyed by medieval Jewish medicine. In Austro-Hungary, this extended to chemical engineering, which is why famous theoretical physicists such as E. Wigner, E. *Teller, etc., were originally trained as chemical engineers. The combination of talent, intellectual curiosity, and the willingness to be satisfied with temporary and somewhat insecure positions resulted in the emergence of a sizable Jewish component in most European countries' research setup. Towards the end of the 19^th century there were in the forefront of physics at least two future Jewish Nobel laureates, both experimentalists, Albert Abraham *Michelson (1852–1931) and Heinrich Hertz (1857–1894). Both of them, and more so, more recently, Dennis *Gabor (1900–1979) were investigating electromagnetic radiation in its overlap with optics, i.e., a field very remotely related to the traditional occupational expertise in lenses (itself probably an extension of diamond cutting and jewelry making) as exemplified by Spinoza. In France, the advance was more in the conceptual and abstract domain as represented by Henri *Bergson (1859–1941) in philosophy and Jacques *Hadamard (1865–1963) in mathematics.

The Einstein Era: Quantum Theory and Relativity

The more distinguished the Jews were, the greater their mark both within the system and outside it. Then a young German Jew, an employee of the Swiss Patent Office in Bern, published within the same year (1905) five articles in theoretical physics, each of which was a scientific high-water mark of the order of Newton's papers. This was Albert *Einstein (1879–1955), and his reputation grew accordingly after the experiments verifying his theory of gravity (1916), namely the general theory of relativity. His success attracted many a young Jew to physics.

Two conceptual revolutions occurred in physics in the first half of the 20^th century, namely relativity and quantum mechanics. Einstein spearheaded both, almost single-handedly in relativity and with M. Planck and Niels *Bohr (1885–1962) in the quantum maze. Aside from Michelson's initial experimental exposure of the failure of classical mechanics for velocities close to light-velocity, Einstein was assisted at the mathematical end by the perception of his former teacher Hermann *Minkowski (1864–1909) and by his former classmate Marcel Grossmann; the first interesting application was achieved by astronomer Karl *Schwarzschild (1873–1916). All three were Jewish.

On the quantum front, aside from Niels Bohr, there was Max *Born (1882–1970), who led in the initial understanding of the mathematical results, John von *Neumann (1903–1957), who provided the mathematical consolidation of the new formalism, and Wolfgang *Pauli (1900–1958), whose "Pauli Principle," forbidding having at any one time more than one electron for any set of quantum numbers, provided a master-key to understanding atomic physics and the Periodic Table in Chemistry and applications in electronics.

The growing sophistication both in the conceptual tool-kit of mathematical physics – and even more so in the rapidly evolving technological potentialities at the disposal of experimentation – forced 20^th century physicists to split according to a two-dimensional repartition, namely theorists versus experimentalists in the abcissa and the ordinate going from high-energy nuclear physics (or the physics of particles and fields), to (low-energy) nuclear physics, atomic physics, molecular, nanotechnology, condensed matter, astrophysics, and cosmology (plus the environmental refocusing – geophysics, oceanography, etc.). A glance at the list of Nobel laureates in physics shows that they are evenly distributed on the above chessboard. In theory, Lev *Landau (1908–1968) and Richard *Feynman (1918–1988) have both covered several areas and produced the deepest insights. Eugene *Wigner (1902–1999) (and Giulio Racah) developed algebraic methods which played an important role in atomic, nuclear and particle physics. Feynman's impact was mostly in particle physics; other theorists who made important contributions in that area are Julian *Schwinger (1918– ), Murray *Gell-Mann (1929– ) (and Yuval *Ne'eman), Steven *Weinberg (1933– ), Sheldon *Glashow (1932– ), and David *Gross, also Maria Goeppert-Mayer in nuclear physics. The leading experimentalists in this field are Donald *Glaser (1926– ), Leon *Lederman (1922– ), Fred *Reines, Jack *Steinberger (1931– ), Melvin *Schwartz (1932– ), Martin *Perl (1927– ), and Jerome *Friedman. In condensed matter physics, among the leading theorists are Vitaly *Ginsburg and Abrikosov. Isidor I. *Rabi (1898–1988) measured particle magnetic moments, while Felix *Bloch (1905–1983) turned them into a scientific and medical tool. Claude *Cohen-Tannoudji (1933– ) developed methods of trapping single atoms, David *Lee (1931– ) and Douglas *Osheroff advanced superfluidity.

One of the founders of modern cosmology was Alexander Friedman in the 1920s in the U.S.S.R., while Herbert Friedman was a pioneer in X-ray astronomy. Arno *Penzias discovered the cosmic background radiation. Ed Salpeter contributed to astrophysics and Jesse *Greenstein in astronomy.

Nazi Germany

The growth in size and in importance of the Jewish contribution to physics continued throughout the 20^th century, yet it was also especially marked by several momentous events belonging to both Jewish and general history. As against the gradual opening of the world of science (and physics in particular) to Jewish students, teachers, and researchers, the coming to power of the Nazis in Germany in 1933 acted more like lightning. All Jewish professors in German state universities were fired immediately, with only Max Planck and David Hilbert protesting – admittedly Germany's two top gentile scientists, which may also partly explain their civic courage (Planck's son later participated in the officers' plot to kill Hitler and was executed). Two prominent experimental physicists, Philip E.A. von Lenard (1862–1947) and Johannes Stark (1874–1957), both of them Nobel laureates, and two leading mathematicians, Ludwig Bieberbach, best known for the "Bieberbach conjecture," and Oswald Teichmullern, an important topologist, identified with Nazi policy and actively joined the campaign for the eradication of "Jewish physics" and "Jewish mathematics." The exodus of Germany's Jewish scientists was complete, from Albert Einstein, who left in 1931, settling in at the Princeton, to Max Born, who went to Scotland instead of moving to Jerusalem, Einstein's entreaties notwithstanding.

Three remarkable female Jewish physicists provide a typical sample of Jewish destinies reminiscent of 1492: Emmy *Noether, mathematical physicist, worked with F. Klein at Erlangen and with Hilbert at Goettingen, and was famous for "Noether's theorem" linking conservation laws (e.g., energy, linear and angular momentum, electric charge, etc.) to invariance under symmetry transformations (for the above examples these are, respectively, time translations, spatial translations, rotations, phase modifications). Barred from getting a professorial appointment by the double barrier of her sex and religion, she immigrated to the United States in 1933.

Mariette Blau of Vienna, who developed the detection of cosmic radiation with emulsions, fled Austria with the Anschluss (1938) for Sweden and later reached Mexico and the United States. Lise *Meitner (1878–1968), a physicist, collaborated with the chemist O. Hahn until 1933, then fled to Sweden. For many such cases, including that of her physicist nephew O. *Frisch, the Bohr Institute in Copenhagen served as a first stop when fleeing – until the start of World War ii and the German invasion of Denmark. Between 1933 and 1938 Nazi de facto domination spread over central and southern Europe, causing the flight of most Jewish physicists, as well as non-Jews married to Jews (e.g., E. Fermi, H. Weyl) or children of one Jewish parent (e.g., H. Bethe, N. Bohr, W. Pauli). In Italy, formal racist legislation was decreed in October 1938.

Conceiving Nuclear Weapons – a Jewish Response to the Nazi Threat of Annihilation

Scattering neutrons off uranium, and having detected the presence of elements resembling barium and iodine, Enrico Fermi announced the production of new elements (93 & 94 in the Periodic Table) and was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1938. The Fermi family fled to the United States after the Nobel ceremony, except for wife Laura's father, a Jewish admiral, who returned to Italy and indeed died in a concentration camp. The other Jewish members of the Fermi group were Emilio *Segre (1905–1989), who left for the United States, and Giulio Racah, who immigrated to Israel.

Around that time (Christmas 1938), Lise Meitner was visited by her nephew O. Frisch. They discussed a letter from her former partner O. Hahn, who had redone Fermi's experiment and was certain that these new products were not new elements but indeed true barium and strontium! Meitner and Frisch then recognized nuclear fission.

The news arrived in Copenhagen upon Frisch's return and was brought to the United States by N. Bohr and Leon Rosenfeld. Here it caught the attention of Leo *Szilard (1898–1964), a Hungarian Jewish engineer turned physicist (eventually also one of the founders of molecular biology), who had earlier considered the possibility of fission in nuclei and now realized its military potential. Meanwhile, Frisch moved to England, so that early in 1939 two alarmed groups of Jewish physicists ("Central European refugee scientists" in the textbooks), now refugees in the United States and England, were going through a nightmare as they considered the possibility of German physics and an eventual nuclear weapon joined to Evil as personified by Adolf Hitler. In America, the Szilard group included Edward Teller (1908–2003), John von Neumann, and Enrico Fermi; in England, Otto Frisch, Rudolph *Peierls (1907–1995), and Joseph *Rotblat (1908–2005). Both groups tried to alert the respective governments. In the United States, Szilard used Jewish contacts, in particular financier A. Sachs, to get to President Roosevelt; at Sachs' request, they informed Einstein and got from him a signed letter explaining the danger and calling for preempting Germany in developing the new weapon, in order, at least, to achieve through deterrence some protection against its use. The entire effort resulted in the allocation of $6,000 for Fermi, for an experimental study of an eventual chain reaction. In England, however, the lobby reached and convinced Winston Churchill, who wrote to Roosevelt. Less than a week before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, which drew America into World War ii, the president, now convinced, authorized the Manhattan Project.

The Manhattan Project, an R&D and production ensemble, was directed by American Jewish physicist J. Robert *Oppenheimer (1904–1967), with Hans *Bethe (1906–2005) heading the Theoretical Division and E. Segre and R.P. Feynman, members of the original initiating group, and others participating.

A 1995 study of the project by A. Makhijani (Bulletin of Atomic Scientists) reports that the Pentagon decided a priori that the new weapons would not be used on the European front, for fear of Germany's capability for nuclear retaliation, but that they could be used on the Japanese front, as Japan was not considered as scientifically capable of developing nuclear weapons – but it was also decided not to inform the scientific leadership of the project "because they are Jewish and singly motivated by fear of Hitler's Germany"; eventually, Germany surrendered before the weapons were ready, and when President Truman weighed their use in Japan, several of the Jewish physicists signed a letter to the president suggesting they be used in a harmless demonstration rather than on a target, whether military or civilian. The Dutch Jewish physicist Samuel Goudsmit (1902–1978), co-discoverer of the electron spin, was put in charge of alsos, a military unit whose task was to find out what Germany might be doing in the nuclear weapons context.

Of course, other war needs continued in parallel, with important roles played by Isidore I. Rabi working on microwave radar, Theodore von *Karman (1881–1963) on aeronautics, etc. In all of these developments, including the Manhattan Project, Jewish physicists were doing their duty as American patriots. The frantic concern of the two refugee groups on both sides of the Atlantic and the resulting initiative should be counted as an intrinsic part of Jewish history, a response to Germany's extermination program, in the same category as the Warsaw ghetto revolt or the Jewish maquis in France.

The second nuclear confrontation was the Cold War (1950–90). Edward Teller initiated the development of the H-bomb, a nuclear fusion weapon based on an idea of Teller and S. *Ulam, a Polish Jewish mathematician.

Physics in Israel

beginnings

The first academic appointment in physics in modern Israel was that of Samuel *Sambursky in 1928 as assistant for physics in the Department of Mathematics at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Einstein had joined the founders' group in 1921 when he traveled with Weizmann to the U.S. to collect the basic funds, then in 1923 when he visited Palestine under the British Mandate.

The head of the Department of Mathematics was A.H. Fraenkel of Set Theory fame, and helped by Einstein and L. Ornstein (Leyden, then Utrecht), he tried to attract quality personnel. The number of serious candidates rose considerably in 1933, when the Nazis came to power in Germany and all Jewish faculty members in all German universities were fired. For reasons of economy, however, hu President Magnes did not assign any priority to physics, and various candidates (F. London, F. Bloch, G. Placzek – who had planned to bring along his student – E. Teller) were effectively rejected. E. Wigner did stay one year, but left in order not to be in the way when a single position was made available for either him or L. *Farkas, a physical chemist (married with one child while Wigner was single). Farkas had arrived from Fritz *Haber's lab (Haber, of World War i chemical warfare repute, had been prevailed upon by Einstein to go to Jerusalem and was on his way, when he fell ill and died).

Finally, E. Alexander, an arrival from von Hevesy's Freibourg X-ray crystallography lab, with parallel theoretical experience in the study of symmetry in crystals, launched both the Physics Department at hu and a line of research which developed in all physics departments in the country, achieving important results, such as J. Zak's work, and culminating in D. *Shechtman's 1984 discovery of non-periodic ordering (pseudo crystals), both at the Technion. Alexander and Farkas created laboratories which fulfilled an important role in the defense of the eastern Mediterranean in World War ii. Another physicist whose role was extremely useful in World War ii and in Israel's War of Independence was E. *Goldberg, the former founder and director of Zeiss-IKON, the leading optics firm in Europe, and yet another refugee immigrant scientist fleeing Nazi rule. He founded Goldberg Instruments, the first high-tech firm in the country (renamed El Op after its merger with A. Jaffe's Rehovoth Instruments.

Condensed matter physics developed with the arrival of several key researchers: Cyril Domb, frs, who joined Bar-Ilan University in the 1960s; Guy Deutscher from France; Alexander Voronel and Mark Azbel arrived from the U.S.S.R. after a difficult struggle, joining Tel Aviv University (tau), which had been active in support of their struggle; M. Gitterman (Bar-Ilan) also arrived from the U.S.S.R., while Isaak Khalatnikov (tau) and Pitaievski (Technion) arrived in the early 1990s, after Glasnost.

Racah, arriving in 1938, launched theoretical physics and, in particular, atomic physics and spectroscopy in the country. On the experimental side, research in nuclear chemistry (as the experimentation in the production of elements and isotopes came to be called) was initiated at the Weizmann (formerly Sieff) Institute by Israel Dostrowski, who had worked on these subjects in England in the early 1940s. He developed techniques for the separation of isotopes of hydrogen and oxygen. The Weizmann Institute soon became an important supplier of the latter, much in use in the study of organic processes.

Sometime after the founding of the state in 1948, the government established an Atomic Energy Board, with E.D. *Bergmann, a distinguished organic chemist and the director of the Weizmann Institute, as chairman. Bergman, Racah, and Dostrowski selected good students and placed them in high-quality research centers and under good tutors. Amos *de-Shalit and Igal *Talmi (nuclear structure), G. Yekutielli (cosmic rays), I. Pellah (reactors), and U. Habersheim (physics education) were selected and were joined by H.J. Lipkin, who had immigrated from the United States after receiving a Ph.D. in physics. They returned in 1954, but Ben-Gurion had meanwhile resigned and retired. His successors, Prime Minister Sharett and Defense Minister Lavon, did not share Ben-Gurion's enthusiasm for science and transferred the group to the Weizmann Institute against a payment of $100,000, the estimated investment in their studies (U. Habersheim returned to the United States).

De-Shalit and Talmi produced important results, and the Weizmann Institute had thus become a bridgehead for nuclear physics in Israel, soon to become the most active center for nuclear structure studies after the Bohr Institute in Copenhagen. By the end of 1957 it was "natural" to have a well-attended International Conference on Nuclear Structure in Rehovot, discussing the hottest topic of the decade, namely parity nonconservation, and with W. Pauli, T.D. Lee, Mme C.S. Wu, and Ben Mottleson of Copenhagen in attendance.

Theory needs to be close to experiment for good balance and this came next – a Tandem Van de Graaff electrostatic accelerator was started up, with Gvirol Goldring in the lead.

Ben-Gurion returned from his Sedeh Boker retreat in 1955 and the iaec returned to its program, with two nuclear labs, and two reactors – a 1–5 mw "swimming pool" amf enriched uranium reactor at Sorek, supplied by the United States and under its surveillance, and a 24 mw natural uranium "heavy-water" cooled one in Dimonah, purchased in France. In reactor physics, experiment (I. Pellah) preceded theory (S. Yiftah). Members of the former team now served as advisors, sometime after taking specific courses in France.

rosen, relativity, and quantum foundations

At the *Technion (Haifa, founded 1912) the Physics Faculty was established around 1955, after Nathan Rosen immigrated to the country. Rosen had worked for many years with Albert Einstein on a variety of subjects: gravitational radiation, "worm-holes" (the "Einstein-Rosen bridge"), etc., in general relativity and "entanglement" in quantum mechanics (the Einstein-Podolski-Rosen ("epr") paper). He had developed his own modification of gr (the "two fields" theory). The study in Haifa of the non-intuitive aspects of quantum mechanics, inspired by Rosen's continuing interest in epr, strengthened with the arrival in Israel of David *Bohm, fleeing Senator McCarthy's House Un-American Activities Committee. Bohm left a year later for Bristol in the uk, but the seeds were planted. Two leading researchers in the foundations of quantum mechanics grew out of this, Yakir *Aharonov (tau after 1967) and Asher Peres (Technion), the latter also a leading researcher in GR. Among the next generation in this "school," Lev Veidman (tau) and Avshalom Elitzur (Bar-Ilan) have made important contributions. Michael Marainov (Technion) arrived from the ussr.

In general relativity and cosmology, the impact of Rosen's presence was felt in most physics departments, either through his students, as in Beersheva with Moshe Carmeli, or by the attraction of immigrant scientists, such as Gerald Tauber in Tel Aviv and his student Tsvi Piran or Jacob Bekenstein first in Beersheba and later in Jerusalem, a leader in the intersection of gr with thermodynamics, where his identification of a contribution to entropy generated by the gravitational field of a "black hole" opened up an entirely new chapter with profound conceptual aspects, as discussed in recent years by S. Hawking, L. Susskind (the "holographic" universe), S. Coleman ("Black Holes as Red Herrings"), and others.

Sometime in the 1970s new lines of research appeared: neural networks at hu, with David Horn at tau. Chaos was treated by Ittamar Procaccia at Weizmann, Shmuel Sambourski (hu), and Max Jammer (Bar-Ilan).

cosmic rays, particles, and fields

Cosmic ray physics developed with Y. Eisenberg, who had observed in 1958, in an emulsion that had been exposed to cosmic radiation, an "event" which was to be identified in 1962 with the omega-minus hyperon. He joined the Weizmann Institute in 1959; at the same time and in the same subdiscipline, Dan Kessler joined Sorek. At the Technion, Kurt Sitte, an experienced experimentalist, started an experimental cosmic ray group, short-lived because Sitte was arrested and tried for crimes against the nation's security. Paul Singer, joining in 1959–60, studied the theoretical issues involved, thus entering particle physics. While research in cosmic rays in Israel thus focused in the early years on the particle physics aspect, a new group was led by L. Dorman, who had immigrated from the ussr in the 1990s; their interest lay in the Earth's environment, the radiation belts, and the solar wind. The Emilio Segre Observatory collaborates with the Italian cr community.

Yuval Ne'eman (1925–2006), scion of several of the founding families of the modern Jewish resettlement (c. 1800, prior to organized Zionism, founded in 1897) and of the city of Tel Aviv (1909), after a career in the Israel Defense Forces, turned to physics at the age of 33, combining graduate studies at Imperial College with the duties of defense attaché in Israel's London embassy. Resigning from this position in May 1960 he "embarked on a highly speculative program" (in the words of A. Salam, his advisor, who advised against it), namely a search for a symmetry of the hadrons providing both a classification and dynamical couplings. The result, arrived at in October 1960, was submitted for publication early in February 1961. This was su(3) symmetry (now renamed flavor-su(3)) in a version based on the identification of the spin ½ baryons as an octet. It provided a hadron classification and an exact global-symmetry, also an effective local gauge-symmetry (mediated by a spin-1 massive vector-meson octet). The most elegant visualization of these octets sets them as 3 × 3 matrices. The octet's main competitor was the Sakata model, using the same su(3) group, but with a different and a priori more popular algebraic normalization, namely assigning the best-known multiplet {p,n,/\} to the group's defining representation.

The octet global symmetry was tested in hundreds of predictions relating to the couplings and based on the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients of the group, but the final verdict was supplied by the discovery of the omega-minus hyperon, fitting the predictions exactly. The classification and symmetry were discovered simultaneously and independently by M. Gell-Mann, who called them "the Eightfold Way."

Back in Israel, as scientific director of the Sorek Laboratory, Ne'eman also organized a group combining technical service in the establishment with research in particle physics. With H. Goldberg of that group, Ne'eman constructed a mathematical model yielding precisely the observed set of representations; this model consisted in fixing as the basic "brick" the 3-dimensional defining su(3) representation with a baryon-number b = ⅓ assignment (and fractional electric charges). We would also have to prepare the 3* anti-brick with b = –⅓. The b = 1 baryons are then in [3 (×) 3 (×) 3] = 1 + 8 + 8 + 10. The model was again discussed two years later as to the physical nature of these "bricks" by M. Gell-Mann (who named the "bricks" quarks) and by G. Zweig (who named them "aces").

Soon after this consolidation of the quark model it was tested and scored nicely through algebraic treatments based either on a nonrelativistic approximation, initiated by F. Gursey and L. Radicati, or applying an asymptotic limit, a method used by E. Levin and L. Frankfurt in Leningrad (1965; both were professors at tau by 1990).

In the first two years after his return to Israel, Ne'eman lectured on particle physics at the Technion. Hebrew University, Weizmann Institute. C. Levinson and S. Meshkov, who were guests from the United States, worked with H.J. Lipkin on the su(3) Elliott Model in nuclei, "transferred" to particle physics, and produced many of the predictions for both the Sakata and the Ne'eman/Gell-Mann models.

The first group of graduate students who worked with Ne'eman in particle physics then spent 1–2 years in leading centers – D. Horn and Y. Dothan at Caltech, H. Harari at slac, J. Rosen at bu, etc. – while a flux of guests and post-docs in particle physics arrived in Israel, L. Susskind, J. Rosner, J. Yellin at the new tau, H. Rubinstein, M. Virasoro, at Weizmann, D. Lurie at the Technion, etc.

Generally speaking, an internal symmetry, and even more so a global one, is an extension of the kinematics and has to be grafted onto a dynamical theory. In London in 1958–60 this was Relativistic Quantum Field Theory (rqft), which had been successfully applied to quantum electrodynamics in 1946–48, producing the most precise theory in physics.

Ne'eman was a guest at Caltech in 1963–65 and was impressed by the apparent rejection of Quantum Field Theory. R.P. Feynman, one of the heroes of that theory's success in the 1940s, had tried to extend it to quantum gravity and, encountering difficulties, had decided to do it first on the Yang-Mills gauge theory as a simplified model. He had then come across violations of unitarity off mass shell. The news spread to Berkeley, and G.F. Chew, the charismatic leader of particle physics in the 1950s and 1960s on the West Coast and sometimes everywhere in the United States, proclaimed Quantum Field Theory to have been a lucky accident of the 1940s, worthless beyond some special conditions. That verdict was accepted by the rank and file.

Luckily, qft could still be used for leptons, and the first important step in unification, the Weinberg-Salam theory, was presented in its leptonic dress (1967–68). For the hadrons Gell-Mann had then invented current algebra, a way of preserving those features onto which one could apply the symmetry. Ne'eman himself developed similar structures in the mid-1960s (e.g., "the algebra of Regge residues" in the work with N. Cabibbo and L.P. Horwitz). Hadron dynamics now moved on to "S-Matrix theory" and the Bootstrap hypothesis. Between 1966 and 1970, Israel – the local group and its guests – was in the lead internationally: D. Horn (with C. Schmid and R. Dolan) provided the bootstrap with a mathematical embodiment, the "Finite Energy Sum Rules." Gabriele Veneziano, an Italian-Jewish graduate student at Weizmann, solved these equations, L. Susskind (at that stage a prospective immigrant from the U.S.) at tau and Y. Nambu in Chicago showed that the Veneziano representation describes a quantum string. Harari at Weizmann with P.G.O. Freund in Chicago and G. Zweig at Caltech further developed the methodology, and M. Virasoro and H. Rubinstein at Weizmann enriched the string formalism. An international conference on "Dual Models" held in 1970 in Tel Aviv embodied the centrality achieved by particle physics in Israel in one decade. It was also a milestone in this first role of String Theory, here as a candidate theory for the Strong Interactions (1968–73).

The year 1970, however, was another "refocusing" year, when G. 't Hooft in Holland completed the renormalization of the Weinberg-Salam electroweak theory. That "infamous" breakdown of the unitarity of mass shell had been cured by its discoverer around 1962, when Feynman introduced ghost fields. Further work by B. de Witt, Slavnov, Taylor, Faddeev, and Popov had completed the cure, and now not only had 't Hooft finished the Yang-Mills case, he had also cleaned up the case of a spontaneous breakdown of that local gauge theory. Quantum Field Theory was now back with a vengeance.

In Israel, research in experimental particle physics is mostly done at cern (Israel was granted Associated Membership in 1991, together with Russia, after a weaker association starting from 1971) and at desy (Israeli formal association since 1983), with active groups at the Technion (J. Goldberg), tau (G. Alexander, A. Levy, Y. Oren, G. Bela, E. Etzion, S. Dagan, O. Benary), Weizmann (G. Mickenberg, U. Karshon) plus medium energy groups at hu (A. Gal) and tau (A. Yavin, P. Alster), etc. Theory groups are active in all these institutions.

geometrical developments

In 1971, Yu. Golfand (who later immigrated to Israel) and E. Likhtman in Russia introduced supersymmetry, which was then "sharpened" by J. Wess and B. Zumino and by A. Salam and J. Strathdee. This was a new opening both in mathematics and physics. The Harvard mathematician S. Sternberg, visiting Tel Aviv University yearly and bringing in other visitors such as B. Kostant of mit, etc., had already collaborated with Ne'eman on topics in current algebras, etc. In 1974, L. Corwin, Ne'eman, and Sternberg published a major exploratory study of "Graded Lie Algebras" which cleared the field and was soon followed by V. Kac's classification of the Simple Lie Superalgebras (the new name for the "Graded Lie Algebras"). Superalgebras avoided some of the "no-go" theorems forbidding mergers between spacetime and "internal" symmetries. One such application was supergravity, discovered in 1976 by D.Z. Freedman, S. Ferrara, and P. von Nieuwenhuizen and by S. Deser and B. Zumino. Gell-Mann and Ne'eman showed in 1976 that the gauge supersymmetry models with n = 4h (max) (n the number of internal degrees of freedom, h(max) the highest helicity) are so severely constrained algebraically as to be possibly renormalizable or even finite. The n = 4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills (h = 1) is indeed finite and the n = 8 (built by E. Cremmer and B. Julia in 1978) is still the great hope in the "M-theory" of 1997 as the field theory limit of a string theory embedded in a Membrane.

Moreover, Ne'eman's work with T. Regge in 1977 introduced a new geometrical approach, the group manifold method. Ne'eman's French student J. Thierry-Mieg then showed (1979–81) that the "ghost fields" have a very useful geometrical interpretation (in a Yang-Mills theory) as the vertical component of the connection 1-form, while the unitarity-guaranteeing equations (brs, etc.) just reproduce the Cartan-Maurer equations guaranteeing the horizontality of the curvature 2-forms. It also led Ne'eman (1979) to the concept of a "superconnection" – a concept independently introduced in mathematics by D. Quillen in 1985.

As a matter of fact, the geometric features present in much of algebraic physics – perhaps the most interesting aspect of Felix Klein's and Sophus Lie's (1872) Erlangen Program – first emphasized in gr, pervade gauge theories and spectrum generating algebras and have led both the string theorists and Ne'eman from the strong Interactions to gravity and back, though along different paths.

Ne'eman's collaboration with the Cologne group of F.W. Hehl, with D. Sijacki (Belgrade), R. Kerner (Paris), E. Mielke and A. Macias (Mexico), and others is the outcome of his discovery (1977) of world spinors, the infinite unitary spinorial reps of the double-covering of the sl(n, r) and of the covariance group, for long wrongly thought of as nonexistent. These have been used to describe Regge excitation sequencesin strong interactions ("chromogravity"), where they are the only clear link, to date, between qcd and the features that characterized the S.I. in the S-matrix analytical continuation formalism. All of this may find applications in gravity too and has also somewhat overlapped with mathematical work by Shmuel Kaniel's group in Jerusalem and the cosmological studies of Eduardo Guendelman's group in Beersheba.

Ne'eman's 1979 superconnection introduced an internal supersymmetry su(2/1) constraining the electroweak su(2) × u (1); the same theory (though derived differently) was suggested independently and simultaneously by D. Fairlie. It predicts the Higgs mass to be m(h) = 2m(w), prior to radiative corrections. We note that with his various collaborators at Harvard, Cologne, Turino, Belgrade, etc., Ne'eman's tau chair has been a source of innovative mathematical physics throughout the 1965–2005 period.

astronomy, astrophysics, and cosmology

There was no astronomy in Israel until 1965, although there were two young men who studied astronomy – Elia Leibowitz at Harvard and Raphael Steinitz in Holland – assuming that some day there would be such activity Israel. At tau, Ne'eman started to develop several programs in parallel. Solar astronomy was undertaken, using a telescope on a roof at the tau campus working in full conjunction with a Caltech telescope at Great Bear Lake in California under the guidance of H. Zirin. This was one of the first combined instruments providing 24-hour full coverage and thereby making it possible to follow eruptions, etc., throughout the entire season.

This small success (1967) was followed by a series of failed attempts in 1968–71. Still in solar astronomy, a special telescope – static and with a rotating mirror following the sun – was installed in a specially designed observatory (following advice from Kippenheuier) on another tau campus roof, and another Israeli who had studied and now worked in France under Michard undertook to operate it, but "defected" for family reasons, and this initiative collapsed. A second attempt failed some years later, when an excellent instrument in an observatory in California became available due to the closure of that base. One of the main supporters of tau, Raymond Sackler, undertook payment, and it was purchased at full price, but then the State of California authorities passed a law restricting the sale of scientific instrumentation belonging to the state, a restriction which included this case. In radio-astronomy, Arno Penzias, co-discoverer of the 3ok "background radiation," spending a semester at tau, developed a collaboration with a millimeter radioastronomical observatory at Bonn for n-s interferometry, but this scheme also collapsed due to the operators defecting, this time as a result of industry offering very much higher salaries.

Finally, after these three failures, a triumph was achieved late in 1971 with the inauguration of the George and Florence Wise (Optical) Observatory at Mitzpeh Ramon in the Negev at an altitude of 1000 m., with a 40ʹʹ wide angle Ritchie-Chretien reflector telescope with a Cassegrain mirror. The site was selected after a survey which covered the peaks from Mt. Sinai (where Abbott measured the solar constant around 1900) to Mt. Hermon. The Smithsonian Institute, under the leadership of F. Whipple, and with the active participation of M. Lecar, collaborated by supplying much of the auxiliary instrumentation for the project; the Israeli government paid for the building and tau President Dr. George Wise and Mrs. Wise contributed the telescope. The outcome was beyond expectations: within the first three years there were three fairly spectacular results: John and Neta Bahcall produced the first optical identification of an X-ray pulsar (Hercules hr); Peter Wehinger and Susan Wykopf produced a spectroscopic validation of F. Whipple's conjecture that comet tails are made of water and hydroxil by direct analysis of the comet Kohoutek and an on the spot collaboration with Herzog in Canada and Herbig in California; the discovery of clouds of sulfur and phosphorus around Jupiter, announced by Wise Observatory (tau) astronomers A. Eviathar, I. Kupo, and Y. Mekler was met with skepticism until nasa's Voyager radioed pictures of the fuming volcanoes on Jupiter's moon Io.

In the 1980s, H. Netzer and D. Maoz achieved the first precise measurements of the mass of black holes in active galactic nuclei. The Wise Observatory was then involved in several international collaborations that pursued these measurements extensively. Netzer, Maoz, and S. Caspi have since studied some of the largest black holes known to date. N. Brosh was involved in the discovery of extra-solar planetary systems by international collaborations in the 1990s. tauvex, a major instrumental setup for the exploration of the uv sky (quasars, etc.) built by el-op for tau in 1991–95, was due to be orbited in 1996 on Soviet satellite together with 13 other experiments, but changes in the ussr first caused a postponement and finally a cancellation in 2000. The instrument is now due to be raised on an Indian satellite in 2008.

Israel Dostrovsky at Weizmann designed and built the gallium-germanium neutrino-detector for the International experiment at the Gran Sasso tunnel in Italy. This experiment brought the first solid verification of John Bahcall's claim about missing solar neutrinos.

In radio-astronomy, work on the sun is done by D. Eichler at Ben-Gurion University in the Negev and by L. Pustilnik at the Jordan Valley College.

Research in theoretical astrophysics was done by A. Finzi at the Technion, by G. Rakavy, Z. Barkat, Z. Cinnamon at hu, G. Shaviv, M. Livio (tau, later at the Technion), M. Contini, J. Refaeli, B. Kozlovski, A. Yahil, U. Feldman, I. Goldman A. Kowacz at tau, Y. Avny and M. Milgrom at Weizmann. M. Gelman (Technion) leads in space physics. Work in cosmology started with the discovery of the first quasars, when I. Novikov in the U.S.S.R. (1964) and Y. Ne'eman (1965) independently suggested that quasars are lagging-cores in the cosmological expansion. Ne'eman and G. Tauber further developed this model, while it became clear that it does not fit the quasars. This model was in fact a very simple precursor of the presently used Eternal and Infinite Multi-core Inflationary Cosmology suggested by A. Linde after A. Guth's inflation hypothesis. In recent years, work in cosmology is mainly conducted at hu under the leadership of Avishay Dekel.

[Yuval Ne'eman (2^nd ed.)]

Encyclopaedia Judaica Ne'eman, Yuval

Physics

views updated May 29 2018

PHYSICS

PHYSICS. Physics, as a structured mathematical and experimental investigation into the fundamental constituents and laws of the natural world, was not recognized as a discipline until late in the early modern period. Derived from the Greek word meaning 'to grow', in ancient and medieval times "physics" (or "natural philosophy") was concerned with the investigation of the qualitative features of any natural phenomena (psychological, chemical, biological, meteorological, etc.) and was often guided by the metaphysical and epistemological tenets set out in the physical books of the Aristotelian corpus. These included the idea of the cosmos as a finite sphere in which no void or vacuum could exist, the division between the sublunary and celestial realms (each with its own types of matter and motion), the doctrine of the four sublunary elements (earth, air, water, and fire, each naturally moving either upward or downward), and a complex causal theory according to which any natural change requires the interaction of an agent that initiates the change and a patient that undergoes the change. As with many of the developments of the early modern period, modern physics defined itself in reaction to these received Aristotelian ideas.

This is not to say that Aristotle did not go unchallenged until the early modern period. In Hellenistic times, for example, Aristotle's theory of natural motion was seen to need supplementation since it could not explain satisfactorily why a thrown object continued in projectile motion once separated from the cause of its motion (for example, a hand) instead of immediately resuming its natural motion downward. The concept introduced to explain this was impetus—a propelling, motive force transferred from the cause of motion into the projectile. Similarly, atomism posed a long-standing challenge to Aristotelian matter theory. According to atomism, the universe consisted of small material particles moving in a void, and all natural change could be explained by the particles coming together and separating in various ways.

The challenges reached their climax in 1277 as Archbishop Tempier of Paris issued a condemnation that forbade the teaching of Aristotle as dogma. Although other criticisms of Aristotelian philosophy continued through the fourteenth century and after, the basic Aristotelian ideas regarding the nature of motion and the cosmos persisted in European schools and universities well into the seventeenth century, albeit in Christianized forms. The critical treatments of Aristotelian philosophy became the seeds from which modern physics grew.

Many other social, economic, and intellectual events also were responsible for the birth of physics and modern science. The Reformation and its consequent religious wars, the voyages of exploration and exploitation, the rise of capitalism and market economies, and the geographical shift of power from the Mediterranean basin to the north Atlantic were of particular import. In a somewhat controversial fashion we might characterize these influences as promoting a social, economic, and intellectual sense of insecurity among the people of Europe and contributing to a concomitant rise in entrepreneurial and epistemic individualism. One important result of this was an increased skepticism both as an everyday viewpoint and, as in Michel de Montaigne's (1533–1592) case, a full-blown skeptical theory.

The rise of printing is particularly important among the cultural changes leading to the birth of physics. The printed text allowed for wider distribution of recently resurrected and translated ancient texts on philosophy and mathematics. Euclid's (fl. c. 280 b.c.e.) Elements, for example, was published in numerous modern editions, and the pseudo-Aristotelian Mechanics and the works of Archimedes (c. 281–212 b.c.e.) were brought to the Latin-educated public. These works formed the basis of the mixed or middle sciences (being both mathematical and physical) and provided the disciplinary form into which the new physics would fit. The use of diagrams and illustrations as teaching and learning devices was crucial to this revival of applied geometry. Books also allowed for a standardization of material that enabled widely dispersed individuals to study the same texts of classical and modern authors. In the sixteenth century, publications of how-to-do books and pamphlets brought mathematics and concerns about mechanical devices to a much broader public, including artisan and nonuniversity classes. However, the practical inclination toward mechanics was given theoretical credence by the anti-Aristotelian theory of atomism (reinvigorated in the Latin West by the early-fifteenth-century recovery of Lucretius's [c. 95–55 b.c.e.] De rerum natura [On the nature of things ]) and philosophical criticisms of Aristotle's theory of causality, which took mechanical devices as exemplars of phenomena for which Aristotle's theory could not properly account.

The increased focus on the workings of the natural world led to the institution of societies dedicated to scientific learning. In 1603, for example, the Academy of the Lynxes (Academie dei Lincei) was founded in Naples by Prince Federico Cesi (1585–1630). In 1662, the most influential of the new institutions, the Royal Society of London, was founded by Charles II of England (ruled 1660–1685). The society encouraged Christian gentlemen to study natural philosophy, held regular meetings, and published its proceedings. The Royal Society proved a venue for many amateurs to pursue science and may have created the first professional scientist by hiring Robert Hooke (1635–1703) as its curator of experiments.

THE NEED FOR A NEW THEORY OF THE NATURAL WORLD

The general attacks on the Aristotelian view of nature gained momentum through the pressing need to solve a set of particular physical problems that were largely intractable given Aristotelian premises. In particular, demand for a revision to Aristotelianism was brought to crucial focus by Nicolaus Copernicus's (1473–1543) publication of On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres in 1543. In it, Copernicus laid out an astronomical system based on circles and epicycles much in the same mathematical vein as Claudius Ptolemy's (c. 100–170), but shifted the sun to the mathematical center of the earth's orbit and made the earth move in a threefold manner (daily, annual, and axial motion to account for precession). The theoretical shift left a major conceptual problem for Copernicus's followers: namely, how to reconcile a physical description of the universe with Copernicus's new mathematical description of it. In particular, it became problematic to talk about the motion of bodies on earth if the earth itself was moving and also to account for the motion of the earth itself. Tycho Brahe (1546–1601) was one of the first to worry about physical cosmos, and based on his own marvelous celestial observations, devised his own compromise system. But Tycho's system was qualitative and never put into good mathematical shape, and, therefore, useless to professional astronomers. Nevertheless, his work on comets did away with the crystalline spheres in which planets were thought to be embedded.

The first to successfully challenge Aristotle on his physics, matter theory, and cosmology—and, in the process, vindicate Copernicus—was Galileo Galilei (1564–1642). Galileo was trained by artisans, and after dropping out of medical school, began to work on problems of mechanics in an Archimedian manner, modeling his proofs on simple machines and floating bodies. Contributing to Galileo's confidence in the Copernican system was the construction of his own telescope in 1609 (one of the first) and his consequent investigation of the moon, the sun, the Milky Way, and the discovery of four moons of Jupiter. These investigations were published in The Starry Messenger in 1610 and in the Letters on the Sunspots in 1613. They affirmed Galileo's conviction that the earth was a material body like the other planets, and that Copernicus's system was an accurate physical description of the universe. But he still lacked an account of how bodies moved on an earth that was itself moving.

Galileo's most influential book, Dialogues concerning the Two Chief World Systems (1632), was his most elaborate defense of Copernicanism. In this book he argued most effectively that a theory of motion for a moving earth was not only possible but more plausible than the Aristotelian theory of motion. Specifically, he argued for a form of natural motion (inertia) where bodies moved circularly, and for the principle of the relativity of observed motion (which had been used before by Copernicus and others). This allowed him to claim that the motion of the earth was not perceptible since it was common to both the earth and bodies on it. At the end of the Dialogue, he thought he proved Copernicanism by claiming the earth's trifold motion could physically explain of the tides.

Galileo's condemnation for heresy under the papacy of his former friend Urban VIII was based on the Dialogue; he was put under house arrest for the rest of his life. During this time, he began work on his final publication, Discourses concerning Two New Sciences (1638). This work revived the Archimedean, mechanical physics he had virtually completed between 1604 and 1609. Here he argued for a one-element theory on which matter was to be understood solely by its mechanical properties, as Archimedean machines were understood, and for a theory of motion on which motion was essentially related to time. Particularly, he argued that falling bodies accelerate in proportion to the square of the time of their fall, and provided experimental evidence for this by measuring balls rolling down inclined planes. The emphasis on time as the important independent variable occurred to him from discovering the isochrony using pendulums, whose isochrony he discovered. As Galileo was working out the details of a new physics, Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) formed the world's first mathematical astrophysics. It was he who finally abandoned the principal assumptions of Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomy by introducing elliptical motion and demanding that astronomical calculation describe real physical objects. Although to his contemporaries Kepler was mostly known for producing the most accurate astronomical tables to date, his legacy lies in a reorientation of astronomy away from a predictive discipline aimed at mathematically "saving the phenomena" to one that combines observational predictions (how the planets move) with physical theory (why they move). For example, Kepler offered not only his so-called three laws describing planetary motion, but also answered the causal Copernican problem by explaining that the planets were moved by a quasi-magnetic force emanating from the sun that diminished with distance and were hindered by their natural inertia or "sluggishness." His integration of underlying physical mechanism and descriptive law, much in the same manner as Galileo's, was to become a hallmark of seventeenth-century science. It is in this sense that both thinkers built the foundation on which the mechanical philosophy was to rest.

THE NEW SYSTEMATIZERS

Although Galileo's and Kepler's works were complementary, neither thinker attempted to reformulate the whole of the Aristotelian natural philosophy. René Descartes (1596–1650), on the other hand, attempted to build a complete system to replace Aristotelianism and put philosophy, including natural philosophy and the science of motion, on a firm epistemic and theological basis (the Cartesian cogito —I think therefore I am—and that God is no deceiver; Meditations on the First Philosophy, 1641). Regarding motion, he shifted emphasis from Galileo's machines to collision laws and promulgated a version of straight-line inertia. Descartes's laws of collision combined with a belief in a corpuscular (if not strictly atomic) matter allowed him to consider many physical problems in terms of material contact action and resulting equilibrium situations. For example, Descartes attempted to account for planetary motion and gravity in terms of vortices of particles swirling around a center, pushing heavier particles down into the vortex while carrying others around in their whirl. The Cartesian program was laid out in its most complete form in The Principles of Philosophy (1644). There he used the vortex theory and the strict definition of place to placate the church and to show that Copernicanism was not literally true. Descartes hoped this book would become the standard text at Catholic schools, replacing even Thomas Aquinas, but it was placed on the Index of Prohibited Books in 1663.

Descartes's followers could be called "mechanical philosophers," though in fact the phrase was coined later by Robert Boyle (1627–1691). Most notable among them was Christiaan Huygens (1629–1695), who, apart from making several important astronomical discoveries (for example, the rings of Saturn and its largest moon, Titan), published works on analytic geometry, clockmaking, and the pendulum, and corrected Descartes's erroneous laws of collision. Huygens's laws were proven by using Galileo's principle of relativity of perceived motion in On Motion (published in 1703; composed in the mid-1650s). He forcefully championed Cartesian philosophy in his criticisms of Isaac Newton's (1642–1727) notion of gravity, rejecting it as a return to occult qualities and offering instead his own aetherial vortex theory in Discourse on the Cause of Heaviness (1690).

In England, Robert Boyle emerged as the most vocal champion of the new philosophy. Boyle wrote prolifically on physics, alchemy, philosophy, medicine, and theology, and approached all with a single and forcefully articulated mechanical worldview, though in practice he seldom rigorously applied it. For Boyle, all natural phenomena were to be studied experimentally, and explanations were to be given by the configurations and motions of minute material corpuscles. Boyle's writings either argue for this view generally—for example, The Origine of Formes and Qualities (1666)—or by example, for example, New Experiments Physico-Mechanicall, Touching the Spring of the Air and Its Effects (1660). In the Origine, for example, Boyle argues against the Scholastic reliance on substantial forms, holding these to be unintelligible in themselves and useless for practical purposes. Instead he offers explanation using analogies for natural processes that were already well worn: that of the lock and key and that of the world as a clock. Boyle's criticisms were widely circulated both in England and on the Continent. (It is of note that Robert Hooke's work on springs was more rigorous and his version of the mechanical philosophy in terms of vibrating particles was later to become more widely used than Boyle's.) Boyle, like some other seventeenth-century thinkers, was deeply committed to the use of mechanical science to further belief in God. This fact is important to note, as no great schism was felt in the seventeenth century between the findings of science and belief in the deity, although the charge of atheism was often leveled in battles between competing scientific schools, particularly against Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), who may be the most coherent of all the mechanical philosophers, and who had the widest philosophical impact during the mid-century.

THE NEW PHYSICS

If the systematization of these modes of thought and physical problems into a coherent whole can be attributed to one man, it is Isaac Newton (1642–1727). In his Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy (1687), Newton combined the study of collision theory, a new theory regarding substantial forces and their the measure, and a new geometrical version of the calculus to draw consequences regarding motion both on earth and in the heavens. The book begins with the three laws of motion: the law of inertia, the force law, and the law of action and reaction. Although the law of inertia was first framed by Descartes, the latter two laws were Newton's stunning innovations. Of particular importance is the second law, in which Newton introduces a novel measure of force akin to the modern notion of impact (instantaneous change in momentum). Considering force in this way, Newton was able to treat the effect of any force as if it were the result of a collision between two bodies, thus reducing the variety of physical phenomena to cases of collision.

In general, the evolution of the concept of force in the seventeenth century constitutes a crucial feature in the birth of modern physics. At the beginning of the century, the term "force" was used with a variety of intuitive meanings. Lack of a precise concept was due, in part, to the fact that characterizations of force were derived from analyses of several different physical situations: equilibrium situations in terms of the law of the lever (where a specific weight was related to the force required to balance it), impact in collisions, and free fall. It was unclear how to relate these, which were all by the Aristotelian tradition violent motions, that is, against a body's natural inclination. With Descartes's formulation of the principle of inertia, the mechanical analogue of Aristotelian natural motion, force came to indicate the cause of any deviation from (seemingly natural) inertial motion. By further fixing its meaning in all cases, Newton was able to provide a unified treatment of the physical situations mentioned above.

Newton also showed that the Cartesian explanation of planetary motion by an aetherial vortex was untenable. Moreover, using Kepler's laws and a host of other planetary observations, he demonstrated that the planets must be drawn toward the sun (as well as toward one another) by a force inversely proportional to their distance and directly proportional to their mass: by a gravitational force. This was Newton's most contentious discovery. Although his laws of motion were quickly recognized as correct, Newtonian gravitation, was dismissed by many as a "fiction" and a "mere hypothesis." Put differently, since the gravitational force did not rely on the collisions or springs endorsed by mechanical philosophers, Newton's contemporaries perceived it as a return to recently banished occult Aristotelian properties. In general, since force (gravitational or otherwise) is not a directly perceivable property of matter, it seemed Newton was rejecting a mainstay of the mechanical philosophy by admitting ontologically gratuitous terms into his physical explanations. (George Berkeley [1685–1753] would try to recast Newtonian mechanics without force in his On Motion [1721].)

Newton's most powerful critic in this and other regards was Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716). Although their antagonism originated with a priority dispute in the mid-1690s over the invention of the calculus—which Newton and Leibniz had actually invented independently—it ended with Newton's anonymous writing of the official opinion of the Royal Society in which it was declared that he, Newton, was the true originator. This tiff was continued in a protracted epistolary debate between Leibniz and Newton's disciple, Samuel Clarke (1675–1729), over the metaphysical and religious implication of Newtonian physics. Leibniz claimed that Newton's theory of gravitation not only did not explain anything (since the notion of gravitational action-at-a-distance was itself unintelligible), but promoted atheism. The other key debate was over the nature of relative versus Newtonian absolute space. Similar debates between Newtonians and their detractors regarding the explanatory and theological significance of universal gravitation were to color the philosophical landscape well into the eighteenth century.

Most importantly, however, Newton's debates with Leibniz yielded Newton's most explicit characterizations of his scientific method, which were to serve as a basis for all later science. In warding off criticism, Newton often insisted that the notion of universal gravitation was not in the least hypothetical, but was securely and positively based on empirical evidence. His insistence that theoretical claims should be justified only by observations, even when dealing with properties not directly perceivable, contradicted the idea of some of his contemporaries, who were accustomed to deducing theoretical claims from higher-level metaphysical or theological principles. The reliance on observation and experiment, more than any of Newton's particular claims, quickly became a hallmark of science as a whole. The Royal Society, increasing professionalization, an experimental method, and a set of unique problems all testify to physics' emergence as its own discipline during the latter half of the seventeenth century.

RECASTING PHYSICS

Curiously, despite its numerous innovations, Newton's work was mostly written in an older geometrical style, not the differential calculus. The move away from geometry—which had dominated mathematical thinking since antiquity—was not completed until the middle of the eighteenth century, well after Newton's death, although it had begun in the early years of the seventeenth century with the work of François Viète (1540–1603), Thomas Harriot (c. 1560–1621), Descartes, and Pierre de Fermat (1601–1665) on infinitesimals and the algebraic treatment of curves. This new analytical treatment of mathematics was the cause of aforementioned dispute between Newton and Leibniz regarding the calculus: while Leibniz's version of the calculus was based on the algebraic techniques gaining strength at the time, Newton's version (at least as published during his lifetime) was a geometrical analogue. Leibniz's version was eventually adopted, and by the mid-eighteenth century, virtually all developments of the calculus were undertaken in an algebraic style. The culmination of this movement was to come in Leonhard Euler's (1707–1783) Mechanics or the Science of Motion Exposited Analytically (1736) and Joseph-Louis Lagrange's (1736–1813) Analytical Mechanics (1788).

Finally, it remains to remark that Newtonian physics and Newton himself, by name if not by precise deed, was taken as exemplary for the age that followed. Numerous works for children and women, now thought fit for education, appeared in many languages; among such were E. Wells, Young Gentleman's Course in Mechanicks, Optics, and Astronomy (1714) and Francesco Algarotti's (1712–1764) Sir Isaac Newton for Use of Ladies (1739). More serious discussions and popularizations of Newton and his work were also numerous. To mention only a few, we find in the early eighteenth century John Theophilus Desagulier's (1683–1744) Course of Experimental Philosophy (1744), Willem Gravesande's (1688–1742) Mathematical Elements of Natural Philosophy (1721), Henry Pemberton's View of Sir Isaac Newton's Philosophy (1728), and most impressive of all Colin Maclaurin's (1698–1746) posthumously published An Account of Sir Isaac Newton's Philosophy (1748). In France Newton also had his fame; Pierre Louis Moreau de Maupertuis (1698–1759) taught Newtonianism to Voltaire (François-Marie Arouet, 1694–1778), and to Madame du Chatelet (1706–1749), leading Voltaire to write the popular Elements of Newtonian Philosophy (1741), which is perhaps the best known but certainly not an isolated instance. Newton was seen during this time as the man who had brought modernity (and perhaps salvation) to England and to the world. The prevailing thought of the times was well summed up by Alexander Pope in his "Epitaph Intended for Sir Isaac Newton":

Nature and Nature's laws lay hid in night; God said, "Let Newton be!" and all was light.

See also Academies, Learned ; Astronomy ; Berkeley, George ; Boyle, Robert ; Brahe, Tycho ; Catholicism ; Copernicus, Nicolaus ; Descartes, René ; Galileo Galilei ; Huygens Family ; Kepler, Johannes ; Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm ; Mathematics ; Montaigne, Michel de ; Newton, Isaac ; Philosophy ; Reformation, Protestant ; Scientific Method ; Scientific Revolution .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources

Boyle, Robert. The Origin of Forms and Qualities According to the Corpuscular Philosophy. 2nd ed. Oxford, 1667. Reprinted in Selected Papers of Robert Boyle. Edited by M. A. Stewart. Indianapolis, 1991.

Descartes, René. Principles of Philosophy. Translated by V. R. Miller and R. P. Miller. Dordrecht and Boston, 1983 [1647].

Galilei, Galileo. Dialogues on the Two Chief World Systems. Translated by S. Drake. Berkeley, 1967 [1632].

Galilei, Galileo. Two New Sciences [Discorsi]. Translated by S. Drake. 2nd ed. Toronto, 1989 [1638].

Maclaurin, Colin. An Account of Sir Isaac Newton's Philosophical Discoveries. Edited by L. L. Laudan. New York, 1968. Originally published 1748.

Newton, Isaac. The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy: A New Translation. Translated by I. Bernard Cohen and Anne Whitman. Berkeley, 1999.

Secondary Sources

Aiton, E. J. The Vortex Theory of Planetary Motion. New York, 1972.

Bertoloni-Meli, Dominico. Equivalence and Priority: Newton versus Leibniz: Including Leibniz's Unpublished Manuscripts on the "Principia." Oxford, 1993.

Brackenridge, J. Bruce. The Key to Newton's Dynamics: The Kepler Problem and the Principia. Berkeley, 1995.

Cohen, I. B., and George E. Smith, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Newton. Cambridge, U.K., and New York, 2002.

Dijksterhuis, E. J. The Mechanization of the World Picture: Pythagoras to Newton. Translated by C. Dikshoorn. Princeton, 1961.

Dugas, René. A History of Mechanics. Translated by J. R. Maddox. Neuchatel and New York, 1955.

Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge, U.K., and New York, 1983.

Grant, Edward. Physical Science in the Middle Ages. New York, 1971.

Hunter, Michael Cyril William. Archives of the Scientific Revolution: The Formation and Exchange of Ideas in Seventeenth-Century Europe. Woodbridge, U.K., and Rochester, N.Y., 1998.

Jardine, Nicholas. The Birth of History and Philosophy of Science: Kepler's "A Defense of Tycho against Ursus," with Essays on Its Provenance and Significance. Cambridge, U.K., and New York, 1984.

Kuhn, Thomas. The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western Thought. Cambridge, Mass., 1957.

Machamer, Peter. "Introduction." In The Cambridge Companion to Galileo, edited by Peter Machamer. Cambridge, U.K., and New York, 1998.

——. "Individualism and the Idea (l) of Method." In Scientific Controversies: Philosophical and Historical Perspectives, edited by Peter Machamer, Marcello Pera, and Aristide Baltas. New York, 2000.

McMullin, Ernan. Newton on Matter and Activity. Notre Dame, Ind., 1978.

Meyer, G. The Scientific Lady in England, 1650–1760: An Account of Her Rise, with Emphasis on the Major Roles of the Telescope and Microscope. Berkeley, 1965.

Osler, Margaret J., ed. Rethinking the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge, U.K., and New York, 2000.

Westfall, Richard S. The Construction of Modern Science: Mechanisms and Mechanisms. Cambridge, U.K., and New York, 1977.

——. Force in Newton's Physics: The Science of Dynamics in the Seventeenth Century. London and New York, 1971.

Peter Machamer and Zvi Biener

Europe, 1450 to 1789: Encyclopedia of the Early Modern World MACHAMER, PETER; BIENER, ZVI

Physics

views updated May 11 2018

Physics

Classical and modern physics

Divisions of physics

Interrelationship of physics to other sciences

Physics and philosophy

Resources

Physics is the science that deals with matter and energy and with the interactions between them. Physics, the foundation of all other sciences, is an attempt to provide a comprehensive rational explanation of the structure and workings of the universe.

An axiom among physicists—since the writings of Italian astronomer and physicist Galileo Galilei (1564–1642)—provides that the road to sure knowledge about the natural world is to carry out controlled observations (experiments) that will lead to measurable quantities. It is for this reason that experimental techniques, systems of measurements, and mathematical systems for expressing results lie at the core of research in physics.

In ancient Greece, in a natural world largely explained by mystical and supernatural forces (i.e., the whims of gods), the earliest scientists and philosophers of record dared to offer explanations of the natural world based on their observations and reasoning. Pythagoras (582–500 BC) argued about the nature of numbers, Leucippus (c. 440 BC), Democritus (c. 420 BC), and Epicurus (342–270 BC) asserted matter was composed of extremely small particles called atoms.

Many of the most cherished arguments of ancient science ultimately proved erroneous. For example, in Aristotle’s (384–322 BC) physics, a moving body of any mass had to be in contact with a “mover,” and for all things there had to be a “prime mover.” Errant models of the universe made by Ptolemy (ca. AD 87– 145) were destined to dominate the western intellectual tradition for more than a millennium. Midst these misguided concepts, however, were brilliant insights into natural phenomena. More then 1700 years before the Copernican revolution, Aristarchus of Samos (310–230 BC) proposed that Earth rotated around the sun and Eratosthenes Of Cyrene (276–194 BC), while working at the great library at Alexandria, deduced a reasonable estimate of the circumference of Earth.

Until the collapse of the Roman civilization there were constant refinements to physical concepts of matter and form. Yet, for all its glory and technological achievements, the science of ancient Greece and Rome was essentially nothing more than a branch of philosophy. Experimentation would wait almost another two thousand years for injecting its vigor into science. Although there were technological advances and more progress in civilization that commonly credited, during the Dark and Medieval Ages in Europe science slumbered. In other parts of the world, however, Arab scientists preserved the classical arguments as they developed accurate astronomical instruments and compiled new works on mathematics and optics.

At the start of the Renaissance in Western Europe, the invention of the printing press and a rediscovery of classical mathematics provided a foundation for the rise of empiricism during the subsequent scientific revolution. Early in the sixteenth century Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus’s (1473– 1543) reassertion of heliocentric theory sparked an intense interest in broad quantification of nature that eventually allowed German astronomer and mathematician Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) to develop laws of planetary motion. In addition to his fundamental astronomical discoveries, Galileo made concerted studies of the motion of bodies that subsequently inspired seventeenth century English physicist and mathematician sir Isaac Newton’s (1642–1727) development of the laws of motion and gravitation in his influential 1687 work, Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of natural Philosophy).

Following Principia, scientists embraced empiricism during an Age of Enlightenment. Practical advances spurred by the beginning of the Industrial Revolution resulted in technological advances and increasingly sophisticated instrumentation that allowed scientists to make exquisite and delicate calculations regarding physical phenomena. Concurrent advances in mathematics, allowed development of sophisticated and quantifiable models of nature. More tantalizingly for physicists, many of these mathematical insights ultimately pointed toward a physical reality not necessarily limited to three dimensions and not necessarily absolute in time and space.

Nineteenth century experimentation culminated in the formulation of Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell’s (1831–1879) unification of concepts regarding electricity, magnetism, and light in his four famous equations describing electromagnetic waves.

During the first half of the twentieth century, these insights found full expression in the advancement of quantum and relativity theory. Scientists, mathematicians, and philosophers united to examine and explain the innermost workings of the universe— both on the scale of the very small subatomic world and on the grandest of cosmic scales.

By the dawn of the twentieth century more than two centuries had elapsed since the Newton’s Principia set forth the foundations of classical physics. In 1905, in one grand and sweeping theory of special relativity German-American physicist Albert Einstein (1879– 1955) provided an explanation for seemingly conflicting and counter-intuitive experimental determinations of the constancy of the speed of light, length contraction, time dilation, and mass enlargements. A scant decade later, Einstein once again revolutionized concepts of space, time and gravity with his general theory of relativity.

Prior to Einstein’s revelations, German physicist Maxwell Planck (1858–1947) proposed that atoms absorb or emit electromagnetic radiation in discrete units of energy termed quanta. Although Planck’s quantum concept seemed counter-intuitive to well-established Newtonian physics, quantum mechanics accurately described the relationships between energy and matter on atomic and subatomic scale and provided a unifying basis to explain the properties of the elements.

Concepts regarding the stability of matter also proved ripe for revolution. Far from the initial assumption of the indivisibility of atoms, advancements in the discovery and understanding of radioactivity culminated in renewed quest to find the most elemental and fundamental particles of nature. In 1913, Danish physicist Niels Bohr (1885–1962) published a model of the hydrogen atom that, by incorporating quantum theory, dramatically improved existing classical Copernicanlike atomic models. The quantum leaps of electrons between orbits proposed by the Bohr model accounted for Planck’s observations and also explained many important properties of the photoelectric effect described by Einstein.

More mathematically complex atomic models were to follow based on the work of the French physicist Louis Victor de Broglie (1892–1987), Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger (1887–1961), German physicist Max Born (1882–1970), and English physicist P.A.M. Dirac (1902–1984). More than simple refinements of the Bohr model, however these scientists made fundamental advances in defining the properties of matter—especially the wave nature of subatomic particles. By 1950, the articulation of the elementary constituents of atoms grew dramatically in numbers and complexity and matter itself was ultimately to be understood as a synthesis of wave and particle properties.

The end of World War II gave formal birth to the atomic age. In one blinding flash, the Manhattan Project created the most terrifying of weapons that forever changed the course of history.

Classical and modern physics

The field of physics is commonly sub-divided into two large categories: classical and modern physics. The dividing line between these two sub-divisions can be drawn in the early 1900s, when a number of revolutionary new concepts about the nature of matter were proposed. Included among these were Einstein’s theories of general and special relativity, Planck’s concept of the quantum, Heisenberg’s principle of indeterminacy, and the concept of the equivalence of matter and energy.

In general, classical physics can be said to deal with topics on the macroscopic scale, that is on a scale that can be studied with the largely unaided five human senses. Modern physics, in contrast, concerns the nature and behavior of particles and energy at the sub-microscopic level. As it happens, the laws of classical physics are generally inapplicable or applicable only as approximations to the laws of modern physics.

The discoveries made during the first two decades of the twentieth century required a profound re-thinking of the nature of physics. Some broadly accepted laws had to be completely re-formulated. For example, many classical laws of physics are entirely deterministic. That is, one can say that if A occurs, B is certain to follow. This cause-and-effect relationship was long regarded as one of the major pillars of physics.

The discoveries of modern physics have demanded that this relationship be re-evaluated. With the formulation of quantum mechanics, physical phenomena could no longer be explained in terms of deterministic causality, that is, as a result of at least a theoretically measurable chain causes and effects. Instead, physical phenomena were described as the result of fundamentally statistical, unreadable, indeterminist (unpredictable) processes. Physicists are now more inclined to say that if A occurs, there is an X percent chance that B will follow. Determinism in physics—at very small physical scales—has been replaced by probability.

Divisions of physics

Like other fields of science, physics is commonly sub-divided into a number of more specific fields of research. In classical physics, those fields include mechanics, thermodynamics, sound, light and optics, and electricity and magnetism. In modern physics, some major sub-divisions include atomic, nuclear, and particle physics.

Mechanics, the oldest field of physics, is concerned with the description of motion and its causes. Thermodynamics deals with the nature of heat and its connection with work.

Sound, optics, electricity, and magnetism are all divisions of physics in which the nature and propagation of waves are important. The study of sound is also related to practical applications that can be made of this form of energy, as in radio communication and human speech. Similarly, optics deals not only with the reflection, refraction, diffraction, interference, polarization, and other properties of light, but also the ways in which these principles have practical applications in the design of tools and instruments such as telescopes and microscopes.

The study of electricity and magnetism focuses not only on the properties of particles at rest, but also on the properties of those particles in motion. The field of static electricity examines the forces that exist between charged particles at rest, while current electricity deals with the movement of electrical particles.

KEY TERMS

Determinism— The notion that a known effect can be attributed with certainty to a known cause.

Energy— A state function that reflects an ability to do work.

Matter— Anything that has mass and takes up space.

Mechanics— The science that deals with energy and forces and their effects on bodies.

Sub-microscopic— Referring to levels of matter that cannot be directly observed by the human senses, even with the best of instruments; the level of atoms and electrons.

In the area of modern physics, nuclear and atomic physics involve the study of the atomic nucleus and its parts, with special attention to changes that take place (such as nuclear decay) in the atom. Particle and high-energy physics, on the other hand, focus on the nature of the fundamental particles of which the natural world is made. In these two fields of research, very powerful, very expensive tools, such as linear accelerators and synchrotrons (“atom-smashers”) are required to carry out the necessary research.

Interrelationship of physics to other sciences

One trend in all fields of science over the past century has been to explore ways in which the five basic sciences (physics, chemistry, astronomy, biology, and earth sciences) are related to each other. This has led to another group of specialized sciences in which the laws of physics are used to interpret phenomena in other fields. Astrophysics, for example, is a study of the composition of astronomical objects, such as stars, and the changes that they undergo. Physical chemistry and chemical physics, on the other hand, are fields of research that deal with the physical nature of chemical molecules. Geophysics deals with the physics and chemistry of Earth’s dynamic processes. Biophysics, as another example, is concerned with the physical properties of molecules essential to living organisms.

Physics and philosophy

The development of quantum theory, especially the discovery of Planck’s constant and the articulation of the Heisenburg uncertainty principle, carried profound philosophical implications regarding limits on knowledge. Modern cosmological theory (i.e., theories regarding the nature and formation of the universe) have provided us with an understanding of nucleosyn-thesis (the formation of elements) that has forever linked mankind to the lives of the stars: our bodies and the ground beneath our feet are literally made out of the ashes of dead stars.

Resources

BOOKS

Bloomfield, Louis A. How Everything Works: Making Physics Out of the Ordinary. New York: Wiley, 2006.

Feynman, Richard P. The Character of Physical Law. MIT Press, 1965.

Hartle, James B. Gravity: An Introduction to Einstein’s General Relativity. Boston: Addison-Wesley, 2002.

Hawking, Stephen, ed. On the Shoulders of Giants. Running Press, 2000.

OTHER

National Institute of Standards and Technology. “Physics Laboratory” <http://physics.nist.gov/lab.html> (March 10, 2003).

Smolin, Lee. The Trouble With Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2006.

K. Lee Lerner

David E. Newton

The Gale Encyclopedia of Science

Physics, Classical

views updated May 14 2018

Physics, Classical

Classical physics is the science of physics as it was conceptualized and practiced in the three centuries prior to the advent of either quantum physics or relativity early in the twentieth century. The character of classical physics is well-represented by Isaac Newton's (1642–1727) formulation of the study of motion and James Clerk Maxwell's (1831–1879) approach to the study of electromagnetism.

Classical mechanics

Classical mechanics, the scientific study of motion in the style developed in the seventeenth century by Newton, is often taken as the foundational branch of classical physics. General physics courses commonly begin with the study of motion and use Newtonian mechanics as the setting in which numerous basic concepts, such as energy, force, and momentum, are first introduced.

Physics has long been concerned with understanding the nature and causes of motion. In the tradition of ancient Greek philosophy, the cosmos was thought to be divided into two distinctly differing realms—the terrestrial (near Earth) realm and the celestial realm (the region of the moon and beyond). As conceived in Greek thought, these two realms were not only spatially distinct, but they differed in character from one another in substantial ways. For one thing, the "natural" motions of things (motions that needed no further causation) in these two realms were presumed to be radically different.

According to Aristotle (384–322 b.c.e.), who was for nearly two millennia taken to be the authority on these matters, motion in the terrestrial realm required the continuous application of a cause. Remove the cause, and motion would cease. When a horse ceases to pull a cart, for instance, the cart comes to a halt. In Newton's formulation, however, what requires an active cause is not motion itself, but acceleration—any change in the speed or direction of motion. In effect, Newton's First Law of Motion asserts that the natural motion of things is uniform motion, straight-line motion at constant speed. Any deviation from this—any acceleration, that is—would require a cause. The name for this cause is force—specifically, the force exerted on one object by interaction with another. Expressed more traditionally, Newton's First Law states that unless acted upon by an applied force, an object will continue in a state of rest or uniform motion.

What happens when a force is applied to an object? The answer to that question is the subject of Newton's Second Law of Motion: When acted upon by an applied force, an object will accelerate; the resultant acceleration will be in the same direction as the applied force, and its magnitude will be directly proportional to the magnitude of the applied force and inversely proportional to the object's mass. Stated more succinctly, acceleration is proportional to force divided by mass. This statement, more than any other, functions as the core of Newtonian dynamics, Newton's formulation of the fundamental cause-effect relationship for motion. Force is the cause; acceleration is the effect. For a substantial class of motions, with exceptions to be noted later, this formulation continues to provide a fruitful way to predict or account for acceleration in response to applied forces.

Newton's Third Law of Motion is a statement about the character of the applied forces mentioned in the first two laws. All such forces occur in pairs and are the result of two bodies interacting with one another. When two bodies interact, says Newton, each exerts a force on the other. When bodies A and B interact, the force exerted on A by B is equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to the force exerted on B by A. This is sometimes abbreviated to read, "action equals reaction," but the meanings of action and reaction must be very carefully specified.

Among the various types of forces that contribute to the acceleration of terrestrial objects is the force of gravity—the force that causes apples, for example, to fall to the ground, or to "accelerate earthward." It was the genius of Newton that allowed him to consider the possibility that the orbital motion of the moon, which entails an acceleration toward the Earth, might also be a consequence of the Earth's gravitational attraction.

This suggestion required a remarkable break with Aristotelian tradition. According to Aristotle, the natural motion of the moon, of the planets, or of any other member of the celestial realm was entirely different from the terrestrial motions considered so far. The natural motion of celestial bodies was neither rest nor uniform straight-line motion. Rather, the motion of celestial bodies would necessarily be based on uniform circular motion, motion at constant speed on a circular path. In the spirit of this assumption, Claudius Ptolemy in the second century crafted a remarkably clever combination of uniform circular motions with which to describe the motions of the sun, moon, and planets relative to the central Earth.

However, building on the fruitful contributions of astronomers Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543), Galileo Galilei (1564–1642), and Johannes Kepler (1571–1630), Newton was able to demonstrate that Kepler's sun-centered model for planetary motions could be seen as but one more illustration of Newton's theory regarding the cause-effect relationship for motion. The moon was steered in its orbit around the Earth in response to a force exerted by the Earth on the moon. The Earth and the other planets orbited the sun in response to a force exerted on them by the sun. What was the force operating in these celestial motions? The same kind of force that caused apples to accelerate earthward—the universal gravitational force.

It was helpful to recognize gravity as a force exerted by one object on another. It was exceptionally insightful for Newton to propose that every pair of objects everywhere in the universe exerted gravitational forces on one another. Gone was the confusion of two kinds of natural motions. Gone was the even greater distinction between terrestrial and celestial realms—one characterized by imperfection and change, the other characterized by perfection and constancy. The cosmos is one system, not two. The world is a universe made of one set of substances and behaving according to one set of patterns. Classical mechanics provided the means to study all motions, both terrestrial and celestial, with one and the same methodology.

Classical electromagnetism

Classical electromagnetism provided a systematic account of numerous phenomena involving the interaction of electric charges and currents. Electric charges at rest were considered to be the source of electric fields—modifications in the nature of space that cause other charges to experience a force. Electric charges in motion, giving rise to an electric current, were considered to be the source of magnetic fields, modifications in the nature of space that could be detected by a magnetic compass and caused other electric currents to experience a force. Given any static distribution of electric charge, the configuration of the resultant electric field could be computed. Given any distribution of electric currents, the configuration of the resultant magnetic field could be computed. Given these electric and magnetic field configurations, the forces on all electric charges and currents could be predicted.

In addition to phenomena involving static charge distributions and steady electric currents, another important category of phenomena arises from dynamically changing configurations of charge or current. When charge or current configurations change, the resultant electric and magnetic fields will also change. However, changes in these field configurations must propagate at a finite speed—now called the speed of light, approximately 300,000 kilometers per second. Electromagnetic radiation is the phenomenon of traveling variations, or waves, in electric and magnetic field strength caused by accelerated electric charges. The electromagnetic spectrum spans the full range of wavelength values from very short to very long—from gamma rays, X-rays, and ultraviolet to visible light, infrared, microwaves and radio waves. Maxwell's equations—four mathematical statements that systematically integrated the work of predecessors like Charles-Augustin de Coulomb (1736–1806), Hans Christian Oersted (1777–1851), Michael Faraday (1791–1867), and André-Marie Ampère (1775–1836)—were taken to be the complete specification of all electromagnetic phenomena, including electromagnetic radiation.

Limitations of classical physics

Until the early twentieth century, classical physics appeared to be adequate to account for all observed phenomena. But new discoveries soon demonstrated that, although classical physics would continue to provide a convenient and powerful means of dealing with many phenomena, it needed to be supplemented with other theoretical strategies based on differing sets of assumptions regarding the fundamental character of the physical universe. In the arena of electromagnetism, for instance, classical physics assumed that electromagnetic energy could be continuously varied in value and that its transmission could be fully described in terms of traveling electromagnetic waves. However, in order to account for such phenomena as blackbody radiation (electromagnetic energy radiated by any warm object) and the photoelectric effect (electrons ejected from the surface of a metal illuminated by light), physicists had to propose and accept the idea that electromagnetic energy was transmitted in particle-like quanta of energy, now called photons. Phenomena in which the photon character of electromagnetic radiation plays a central role requires the employment of quantum physics in place of classical physics.

Quantum physics is also needed to account for the behavior of extremely small systems like atoms and molecules. The motion of electrons relative to atomic nuclei cannot be adequately described in the language of classical mechanics. Contrary to Newtonian expectations, the energy of atoms and molecules is not continuously variable, but is quantized—restricted to certain specific values. And, contrary to the expectations of classical electromagnetism, electrons in motion relative to atomic nuclei do not radiate energy continuously, but only when making a transition from one stable energy state to another of lower energy value. Consistent with the Principle of Conservation of Energy, the amount of energy lost by the atom is exactly equal to the energy carried away by the emitted photon.

A second shortcoming of classical physics becomes evident when Newtonian mechanics attempts to deal with things that are moving at very high speed relative to an observer. When this speed becomes a substantial fraction of the speed of light, several Newtonian expectations require modification. Many of these modifications are accounted for by the Special Theory of Relativity proposed by Albert Einstein (1879–1955) in 1905. The relationship between kinetic energy (energy associated with motion) and speed must be modified. Distance and time intervals once thought to be invariant become dependent on relative motion. Even the mass of an object is measured differently by different observers. Other modifications are accounted for by Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, published in 1916, which deals with the interaction of mass and the geometry of space. The General Theory describes the force of gravity in a manner very different from Newton's and is able to account for several discrepancies between observation and Newtonian predictions.

Religious concerns and classical physics

Classical physics gave support to the idea that the world was fundamentally deterministic. Given full information about the configuration and motion of some system today, its entire future could, in principle, be computed. Its future was considered to be fully determined by its present. But is there room in such a universe for contingency or choice? The apparent absence of choice presents difficulties for religious concepts like human responsibility and human accountability to God for obedience to revealed standards for moral action.

Another religious concern arises when one inquires about the character and role of divine action in the universe. When Newton considered the future motions of the planets in the solar system, for instance, he judged that this set of orbital motions was inherently unstable and would, from time to time, need to be adjusted by God to restore the desired array of orbits. This introduction of occasional supernatural interventions may be considered a form of the God of the gaps approach to divine action: the universe is presumed to lack some quality or capability that must be compensated for by direct divine action. In the case of planetary motions, for example, Newton considered the universe to lack the capability of maintaining a stable set of orbits. This "capability gap" could, however, be bridged with occasional acts of supernatural intervention. Eventually, however, it was demonstrated that the system of planetary orbits was, in fact, stable, thereby removing the need for occasional gap-bridging interventions. When a "gap" of this sort becomes filled, the God of the gaps becomes superfluous. For this reason, many contemporary theologians are inclined to see divine action, not as a supernatural compensation for capability gaps in the universe, but as an essential aspect of an enriched concept of what takes place naturally.

See also Aristotle; Determinism; Divine Action; God of the Gaps; Gravitation; Newton, Isaac; Physics, Quantum; Relativity, General Theory of; Relativity, Special Theory of; Wave-particle Duality

Bibliography

bernal, j. d. history of classical physics. new york: barnes and noble, 1997.

pullman, bernard. the atom in the history of human thought, trans. axel r. reisinger. oxford: oxford university press, 1998.

feynman, richard p.; leighton, robert b.; and sands, matthew l. the feynman lectures on physics. boston: addison-wesley, 1994.

goldstein, herbert; poole, charles; and safko, john l. classical mechanics, 3rd edition. upper saddle river, n.j.: prentice hall, 2002.

griffiths, david j. introduction to electrodynamics, 3rd edition. upper saddle river, n.j.: prentice hall, 1998.

halliday, david; resnick, robert; and walker, jearl. fundamentals of physics, 6th edition. new york: wiley, 2000.

jackson, john david. classical electrodynamics, 3rd edition. new york: wiley, 1998.

symon, keith r. mechanics, 3rd edition. boston: addison- wesley, 1971.

howard j. van till

Encyclopedia of Science and Religion VAN TILL, HOWARD J.

Physics

views updated May 21 2018

Physics

Physics is the science that deals with matter and energy and with the interaction between them. Physics, from which all other sciences derive their foundation, were the first attempts to provide rational explanations for the structure and workings of the Universe.

Even in the earliest civilizations, physics allowed a mechanism to understand and quantify nature.

In Ancient Greece, in a natural world largely explained by mystical and supernatural forces (i.e., the whim of Gods), the earliest scientists and philosophers of record dared to offer explanations of the natural world based on their observations and reasoning. Pythagoras (582–500 b.c.) argued about the nature of numbers, Leucippus (c. 440 b.c.), Democritus (c. 420 b.c.), and Epicurus (342–270 b.c.) asserted matter was composed of extremely small particles called atoms .

Many of the most cherished arguments of ancient science ultimately proved erroneous. For example, in Aristotle's (384–322 b.c.) physics, for example, a moving body of any mass had to be in contact with a "mover," and for all things there had to be a "prime mover." Errant models of the universe made by Ptolemy (ca. a.d 87–145) were destined to dominate the Western intellectual tradition for more than a millennium. Midst these misguided concepts, however, were brilliant insights into natural phenomena. More then 1700 years before the Copernican revolution, Aristarchus of Samos (310–230 b.c.) proposed that the earth rotated around the Sun and Eratosthenes Of Cyrene (276–194 b.c.), while working at the great library at Alexandria, deduced a reasonable estimate of the circumference of the earth.

Until the collapse of the Western Roman civilization there were constant refinements to physical concepts of matter and form. Yet, for all its glory and technological achievements, the science of ancient Greece and Rome was essentially nothing more than a branch of philosophy. Experimentation would wait almost another two thousand years for injecting its vigor into science. Although there were technological advances and more progress in civilization that commonly credited, during the Dark and Medieval Ages in Europe science slumbered. In other parts of the world, however, Arab scientists preserved the classical arguments as they developed accurate astronomical instruments and compiled new works on mathematics and optics .

At the start of the Renaissance in Western Europe, the invention of the printing press and a rediscovery of classical mathematics provided a foundation for the rise of empiricism during the subsequent Scientific Revolution. Early in the sixteenth century Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus's (1473–1543) reassertion of heliocentric theory sparked an intense interest in broad quantification of nature that eventually allowed German astronomer and mathematician Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) to develop laws of planetary motion . In addition to his fundamental astronomical discoveries, Galileo made concerted studies of the motion of bodies that subsequently inspired seventeenth century English physicist and mathematician Sir Isaac Newton's (1642–1727) development of the laws of motion and gravitation in his influential 1687 work, Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical principles of natural philosophy)

Following Principia, scientists embraced empiricism during an Age of Enlightenment. Practical advances spurred by the beginning of the Industrial Revolution resulted in technological advances and increasingly sophisticated instrumentation that allowed scientists to make exquisite and delicate calculations regarding physical phenomena. Concurrent advances in mathematics, allowed development of sophisticated and quantifiable models of nature. More tantalizingly for physicists, many of these mathematical insights ultimately pointed toward a physical reality not necessarily limited to three dimensions and not necessarily absolute in time and space.

Nineteenth century experimentation culminated in the formulation of Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell's (1831–1879) unification of concepts regarding electricity , magnetism , and light in his four famous equations describing electromagnetic waves.

During the first half of the twentieth century, these insights found full expression in the advancement of quantum and relativity theory. Scientists, mathematicians, and philosophers united to examine and explain the innermost workings of the universe—both on the scale of the very small subatomic world and on the grandest of cosmic scales.

By the dawn of the twentieth century more than two centuries had elapsed since the Newton's Principia set forth the foundations of classical physics. In 1905, in one grand and sweeping theory of Special relativity German-American physicist Albert Einstein (1879–1955) provided an explanation for seemingly conflicting and counterintuitive experimental determinations of the constancy of the speed of light, length contraction, time dilation, and mass enlargements. A scant decade later, Einstein once again revolutionized concepts of space, time and gravity with his General theory of relativity.

Prior to Einstein's revelations, German physicist Maxwell Planck (1858–1947) proposed that atoms absorb or emit electromagnetic radiation in discrete units of energy termed quanta. Although Planck's quantum concept seemed counter-intuitive to well-established Newtonian physics, quantum mechanics accurately described the relationships between energy and matter on atomic and subatomic scale and provided a unifying basis to explain the properties of the elements.

Concepts regarding the stability of matter also proved ripe for revolution. Far from the initial assumption of the indivisibility of atoms, advancements in the discovery and understanding of radioactivity culminated in renewed quest to find the most elemental and fundamental particles of nature. In 1913, Danish physicist Niels Bohr (1885–1962) published a model of the hydrogen atom that, by incorporating quantum theory, dramatically improved existing classical Copernican-like atomic models . The quantum leaps of electrons between orbits proposed by the Bohr model accounted for Planck's observations and also explained many important properties of the photoelectric effect described by Einstein.

More mathematically complex atomic models were to follow based on the work of the French physicist Louis Victor de Broglie (1892–1987), Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger (1887–1961), German physicist Max Born (1882–1970), and English physicist P.A.M Dirac (1902–1984). More than simple refinements of the Bohr model, however these scientists made fundamental advances in defining the properties of matter—especially the wave nature of subatomic particles . By 1950, the articulation of the elementary constituents of atoms grew dramatically in numbers and complexity and matter itself was ultimately to be understood as a synthesis of wave and particle properties.

The end of WWII gave formal birth to the atomic age. In one blinding flash, the Manhattan Project created the most terrifying of weapons that could—in a blinding flash—forever change course of history.

Classical and modern physics

The field of physics is commonly sub-divided into two large categories: classical and modern physics. The dividing line between these two sub-divisions can be drawn in the early 1900s, when a number of revolutionary new concepts about the nature of matter were proposed. Included among these were Einstein's theories of general and special relativity, Planck's concept of the quantum, Heisenberg's principle of indeterminacy, and the concept of the equivalence of matter and energy.

The discoveries made during the first two decades of the twentieth century required a profound re-thinking of the nature of physics. Some broadly-accepted laws had to be completely re-formulated. For example, many classical laws of physics are entirely deterministic. That is, one can say that if A occurs, B is certain to follow. This cause-and-effect relationship was long regarded as one of the major pillars of physics.

The discoveries of modern physics have demanded that this relationship be re-evaluated. With the formulation of quantum mechanics, physical phenomena could no longer be explained in terms of deterministic causality, that is, as a result of at least a theoretically measurable chain causes and effects. Instead, physical phenomena were described as the result of fundamentally statistical, unreadable, indeterminist (unpredictable) processes. Physicists are now more inclined to say that if A occurs, there is an X percent chance that B will follow. Determinism in physics has been replaced by probability.

Divisions of physics

Like other fields of science, physics is commonly subdivided into a number of more specific fields of research. In classical physics, those fields include mechanics, thermodynamics , sound, light and optics, and electricity and magnetism. In modern physics, some major sub-divisions include atomic, nuclear, and particle physics.

Mechanics, the oldest field of physics, is concerned with the description of motion and its causes. Thermodynamics deals with the nature of heat and its connection with work.

Sound, optics, electricity, and magnetism are all divisions of physics in which the nature and propagation of waves are important. The study of sound is also related to practical applications that can be made of this form of energy, as in radio communication and human speech . Similarly, optics deals not only with the reflection, refraction, diffraction , interference , polarization, and other properties of light, but also the ways in which these principles have practical applications in the design of tools and instruments such as telescopes and microscopes.

The study of electricity and magnetism focuses not only on the properties of particles at rest, but also on the properties of those particles in motion. Thus, the field of static electricity examines the forces that exist between charged particles at rest, while current electricity deals with the movement of electrical particles.

In the area of modern physics, nuclear and atomic physics involve the study of the atomic nucleus and its parts, with special attention to changes that take place (such as nuclear decay) in the atom. Particle and high-energy physics, on the other hand, focus on the nature of the fundamental particles of which the natural world is made. In these two fields of research, very powerful, very expensive tools, such as linear accelerators and synchrotrons ("atom-smashers") are required to carry out the necessary research.

Interrelationship of physics to other sciences

One trend in all fields of science over the past century has been to explore ways in which the five basic sciences (physics, chemistry , astronomy , biology , and earth sciences) are related to each other. This has led to another group of specialized sciences in which the laws of physics are used to interpret phenomena in other fields. Astrophysics , for example, is a study of the composition of astronomical objects, such as stars, and the changes that they undergo. Physical chemistry and chemical physics, on the other hand, are fields of research that deal with the physical nature of chemical molecules. Geophysics deals with the physics and chemistry of Earth's dynamic processes. Biophysics , as another example, is concerned with the physical properties of molecules essential to living organisms.

Physics and philosophy

The development of quantum theory, especially the delineation of Planck's constant and the articulation of the Heisenburg uncertainty principle carried profound philosophical implications regarding limits on knowledge. Modern cosmological theory (i.e., theories regarding the nature and formation of the universe) provided insight into the evolutionary stages of stars (e.g., neutron stars, pulsars, black holes, etc.) that carried with it an understanding of nucleosynthesis (the formation of elements) that forever linked mankind to the lives of the very stars that had once sparked the intellectual journey towards an understanding of nature based upon physical laws.

Resources

books

Bloomfield, Louis A. How Things Work: The Physics of Everyday Things. 2nd. ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2000.

Feynman, Richard P. The Character of Physical Law. MIT Press, 1965.

Gribbin, John. Q is for Quantum: An Encyclopedia of ParticlePhysics. New York: The Free Press, 1998.

Hartle, James B. Gravity: An Introduction to Einstein's General Relativity. Boston: Addsion-Wesley, 2002.

Hawking, Stephen, ed. On the Shoulders of Giants. Running Press, 2000.

other

National Institute of Standards and Technology. "Physics Laboratory" [cited March 10, 2003]. <http://physics.nist.gov/lab.html>.

K. Lee Lerner

David E. Newton

KEY TERMS

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Determinism: —The notion that a known effect can be attributed with certainty to a known cause.
Energy: —A state function that reflects an ability to do work.
Matter: —Anything that has mass and takes up space.
Mechanics: —The science that deals with energy and forces and their effects on bodies.
Sub-microscopic: —Referring to levels of matter that cannot be directly observed by the human senses, even with the best of instruments; the level of atoms and electrons.

The Gale Encyclopedia of Science

Physics

views updated May 18 2018

Physics

Physics and astronomy , from which all other sciences derive their foundation, are attempts to provide a rational explanation for the structure and workings of the Universe. The creation of the earliest civilizations and of mankind's religious beliefs was profoundly influenced by the movements of the Sun, Moon , and stars across the sky. As our most ancient ancestors instinctively sought to fashion tools through which they gained mechanical advantage beyond the strength of their limbs, they also sought to understand the mechanisms and patterns of the natural world. From this quest for understanding evolved the science of physics. Although these ancient civilizations were not mathematically sophisticated by contemporary standards, their early attempts at physics set mankind on the road toward the quantification of nature.

In Ancient Greece, in a natural world largely explained by the whim of gods, the earliest scientists and philosophers of record dared to offer explanations of the natural world based on their observations and reasoning. Pythagoras (582–500 b.c.) argued about the nature of numbers, Leucippus (c. 440 b.c.), Democritus (c. 420 b.c.), and Epicurus (342–270 b.c.) asserted matter was composed of extremely small particles called atoms.

Many of the most cherished arguments of ancient science ultimately proved erroneous. For example, in Aristotle's (384–322 b.c.) physics, for example, a moving body of any mass had to be in contact with a "mover," and for all things there had to be a "prime mover." Errant models of the universe made by Ptolemy (c.a.d.100–170) were destined to dominate the Western intellectual tradition for more than a millennium. Midst these misguided concepts, however, were brilliant insights into natural phenomena. More then 1700 years before the Copernican revolution, Aristarchus of Samos (310–230 b.c.) proposed that the earth rotated around the Sun and Eratosthenes Of Cyrene (276–194 b.c.), while working at

the great library at Alexandria, deduced a reasonable estimate of the circumference of the earth.

Until the collapse of the Western Roman civilization there were constant refinements to physical concepts of matter and form. Yet, for all its glory and technological achievements, the science of ancient Greece and Rome was essentially nothing more than a branch of philosophy. Experimentation would wait almost another two thousand years for injecting its vigor into science. Although there were technological advances and more progress in civilization than commonly credited, during the Dark and Medieval Ages in Europe science slumbered. In other parts of the world, however, Arab scientists preserved the classical arguments as they developed accurate astronomical instruments and compiled new works on mathematics and optics.

At the start of the Renaissance in Western Europe, the invention of the printing press and a rediscovery of classical mathematics provided a foundation for the rise of empiricism during the subsequent Scientific Revolution. Early in the sixteenth century, Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus's (1473–1543) reassertion of heliocentric theory sparked an intense interest in broad quantification of nature that eventually allowed German astronomer and mathematician Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) to develop laws of planetary motion. In addition to his fundamental astronomical discoveries, Italian astronomer and physicist Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) made concerted studies of the motion of bodies that subsequently inspired seventeenth century English physicist and mathematician Sir Isaac Newton's (1642–1727) development of the laws of motion and gravitation in his influential 1687 work, Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy).

Following the Principia, scientists embraced empiricism during an Age of Enlightenment. Practical advances spurred by the beginning of an industrial revolution resulted in technological advances and increasingly sophisticated instrumentation that allowed scientists to make exquisite and delicate calculations regarding physical phenomena. Concurrent advances in mathematics, allowed development of sophisticated and quantifiable models of nature. More tantalizingly for physicists, many of these mathematical insights ultimately pointed toward a physical reality not necessarily limited to three dimensions and not necessarily absolute in time and space .

Nineteenth century experimentation culminated in the formulation of Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell's (1831–1879) unification of concepts regarding electricity, magnetism , and light in his four famous equations describing electromagnetic waves.

During the first half of the twentieth century, these insights found full expression in the advancement of quantum and relativity theory . Scientists, mathematicians, and philosophers united to examine and explain the innermost workings of the universe—both on the scale of the very small subatomic world and on the grandest of cosmic scales.

By the dawn of the twentieth century more than two centuries had elapsed since Newton's Principia set forth the foundations of classical physics. In 1905, in one grand and sweeping Special Theory of Relativity, German-American physicist Albert Einstein (1879–1955) provided an explanation for seemingly conflicting and counter-intuitive experimental determinations of the constancy of the speed of light, length contraction, time dilation, and mass enlargements. A scant decade later, Einstein once again revolutionized concepts of space, time and gravity with his General Theory of Relativity.

Prior to Einstein's revelations, German physicist Maxwell Planck (1858–1947) proposed that atoms absorb or emit electromagnetic radiation in discrete units of energy termed quanta. Although Planck's quantum concept seemed counter-intuitive to well-established Newtonian physics, quantum mechanics accurately described the relationships between energy and matter on atomic and subatomic scale and provided a unifying basis to explain the properties of the elements.

Concepts regarding the stability of matter also proved ripe for revolution. Far from the initial assumption of the indivisibility of atoms, advancements in the discovery and understanding of radioactivity culminated in renewed quest to find the most elemental and fundamental particles of nature. In 1913, Danish physicist Niels Bohr (1885–1962) published a model of the hydrogen atom that, by incorporating quantum theory , dramatically improved existing classical Copernican-like atomic models. The quantum leaps of electrons between orbits proposed by the Bohr model accounted for Planck's observations and also explained many important properties of the photoelectric effect described by Einstein.

More mathematically complex atomic models were to follow based on the work of the French physicist Louis Victor de Broglie (1892–1987), Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger (1887–1961), German physicist Max Born (1882–1970) and English physicist P.A.M Dirac (1902–1984). More than simple refinements of the Bohr model, however, these scientists made fundamental advances in defining the properties of matter—especially the wave nature of subatomic particles. By 1950, the articulation of the elementary constituents of atoms grew dramatically in numbers and complexity and matter itself was ultimately to be understood as a synthesis of wave and particle properties.

Against a maddeningly complex backdrop of politics and fanaticism that resulted in two World Wars within the first half of the twentieth century, science knowledge and skill became more than a strategic advantage. The deliberate misuse of science scattered poisonous gases across World War I battlefields at the same time that advances in physical science (e.g., x-ray diagnostics) provided new ways to save lives. The dark abyss of WWII gave birth to the atomic age. In one blinding flash, the Manhattan Project created the most terrifying of weapons that could—in an blinding flash—forever change the course of history for all peoples of the earth.

The insights of relativity theory and quantum theory also stretched the methodology of science. No longer would science be mainly exercise in inductively applying the results of experimental data. Experimentation, instead of being only a genesis for theory, became a testing ground to test the apparent truths unveiled by increasingly mathematical models of the universe. Moreover, with the formulation of quantum mechanics, physical phenomena could no longer be explained in terms of deterministic causality, that is, as a result of at least a theoretically measurable chain causes and effects. Instead, physical phenomena were described as the result of fundamentally statistical, unreadable, indeterminant (unpredictable) processes.

The development of quantum theory, especially the delineation of Planck's constant and the articulation of the Heisenburg uncertainty principle carried profound philosophical implications regarding limits on knowledge. Modern cosmological theory (i.e., theories regarding the nature and formation of the universe) provided insight into the evolutionary stages of stars (e.g., neutron stars, pulsars, black holes, etc.) that carried with it an understanding of nucleosythesis (the formation of elements) that forever linked mankind to the lives of the very stars that had once sparked the intellectual journey towards an understanding of nature based upon physical laws.

With specific regard to geology , the twentieth century development of geophysics and advances in sensing technology made possible the revolutionary development of plate tectonic theory.

See also Earth Science; History of exploration I (Ancient and classical); History of exploration II (Age of exploration); History of exploration III (Modern era); History of geo-science: Women in the history of geoscience; History of manned space exploration

World of Earth Science

Physics

views updated Jun 27 2018

PHYSICS

emergence of physics
factors contributing to physics's formation
discoveries in electromagnetism
the new physics
bibliography

Physics is a systematic, organized, and ordered knowledge about the physical world. Concepts, theories, and laws of physics are obtained by experimental and mathematical reasoning.

Physics around 1914 was different from natural philosophy (as the study of the physical world was then known) around 1789. First, the community of physicists by 1914 was self-conscious and international, and consisted of trained professional physicists, whereas in 1789 natural philosophy was local and its community consisted of both professionals and amateurs. Second, the education of physicists in universities was systematic, whereas there was no such systematic education in natural philosophy. Third, research in physics was performed in university and national laboratories, whereas natural philosophy was practiced in private laboratories, theaters, salons, and even coffeehouses. Fourth, the tight linkage between mathematics and experimental data was emphasized in physics, whereas natural philosophy was largely experimental. Finally, research in physics was performed for its own sake or for the sake of technology and industries, whereas natural philosophy was more tig'htly coupled with religion and social philosophy.

emergence of physics

In the mid-nineteenth century, scientists noticed the emergence of a scientific discipline that is now called physics. Around this same time, some physicists appeared who began to teach physics at physics departments in universities. Before then, mathematical physics, such as Newtonian mechanics, belonged to mathematics, and experimental fields, such as the study of electricity, magnetism, and heat, belonged to natural philosophy. These two different traditions—mathematics and experimental (Baconian) physics—had developed along different paths. Mathematical physics, such as mechanics, had existed since ancient times, and it underwent a radical, conceptual transformation during the scientific revolution of the seventeenth century. On the other hand, experimental physics, such as the study of electricity, magnetism, and heat, was born during the scientific revolution with Francis Bacon's emphasis on experiments, and these fields used such new instruments as the barometer, air pump, and microscope. These two different fields, that is, mathematical mechanics and the experimental sciences, merged into a single discipline called physics in the mid-nineteenth century.

The gap between the mathematical sciences and the Baconian sciences was wide during the eighteenth century. One can see this in the case of French physique. Throughout the eighteenth century in France, physique had consisted of two separate disciplines: physique générale (general physics) and physique particulière (particular physics). The former meant Newtonian mechanics, while the latter connoted experimental science in general, but sometimes meant specific studies in heat, light, sound, electricity, and magnetism. They were not considered to form a unified discipline.

factors contributing to physics's formation

One factor that contributed to the formation of the single discipline of physics was the mathematization of experimental fields. Since the last quarter of the eighteenth century, experimental fields were rapidly mathematized mainly by French physicists such as Charles-Augustin de Coulomb, Pierre-Simon de Laplace, Siméon-Denis Poisson, Augustin-Jean Fresnel, and Jean-Baptiste Biot. Because of this mathematization, several branches of physics now use the same mathematics and the same mathematical equations. The second factor was the principle of the conservation of energy. In the first half of the nineteenth century, scientists discovered that various forms of forces were converted into other forms. The Danish physicist Hans Christian Ørsted and the English chemist and physicist Michael Faraday discovered the mutual relation between electricity and magnetism; Faraday also discovered the connection between magnetism and light; and the English physicist James Joule discovered the conversion of mechanical motion into heat. Mechanical motions, heat, electricity, and magnetism could be converted into one other, which meant that something in the universe was being conserved. This something was then named energy, which became a common element among various studies that eventually merged into physics.

The germ of this unifying concept can be found in the Scottish natural philosopher John Robison. He had divided mechanical philosophy into four subdisciplines: astronomy, studies on the force of cohesion (involving the theory of machines, hydrostatics, hydraulics, and pneumatics), electricity and magnetism, and optics. Robison saw two links between these four subdisciplines. First, all concentrated on "forces" existing in nature: gravitation, cohesion, electrical and magnetic forces, as well as forces between light and material particles. Second, all concerned motions of bodies in one fashion or another. Newtonian mechanics and electricity and magnetism were classified into a single discipline. During the 1850s, the second law of thermo-dynamics, which states that the entropy of the universe is always increased, was established.

Laplace's Celestial Mechanics (1799–1825) provided a conceptual basis for mathematization. In it, Laplace examined two phenomena—capillary action and the refraction of light in air—by employing the assumption of short-range forces that act between material particles, and between material particles and imponderables. These forces took the form of mathematical equations. His work influenced such followers as Biot, Étienne-Louis Malus, and Poisson. Biot extensively studied voltaic electricity, the propagation of sound, and chromatic polarization; Malus worked on double refraction and polarization; and Poisson devised mathematical formula on electricity and magnetism by using Laplace's method. Their work comprises what is now called "Laplacian physics."

It is worth noting that Laplace's followers were all graduates from the École Polytechnique, which was a new educational institution established during the French Revolution. It opened its doors to all classes of people, not just to the upper class. Though it was a military engineering institution, it trained students not only in military and civil engineering but also in mathematics and physics, including experimental fields such as heat, optics, electricity, and magnetism. Biot and Malus, two full-fledged Laplacians, were among the first polytechniciens. Poisson and François Arago studied there, as did Fresnel, who was, however, not a Laplacian physicist. Fresnel suggested the wave theory of light in the mid-1810s, and with this he successfully refuted the most important part of the Laplacian program in optics. After Fresnel's success, the Laplacian program rapidly declined. Although it was short-lived, Laplacian physics has historical significance, because it provided a model for research in experimental physics. The Laplacian physicists devised mathematical formulas for electricity, light, heat, and magnetism, and combined these mathematical formulas with precise experimental data.

discoveries in electromagnetism

During the nineteenth century, classical electro-magnetism was fully developed. The Italian physicist Alessandro Volta invented the voltaic pile to generate continuous electrical currents in 1800. Twenty years after Volta's invention, Ørsted discovered that a small magnetic needle was affected by a current-carrying wire near it, which showed that a magnetic force exists in a circular way around a current-carrying wire. This phenomenon was theoretically explained by a French physicist and mathematician, André-Marie Ampère. He conjectured that there were many tiny atomic electrical currents in a magnetic needle, and explained the interaction that Ørsted noticed in terms of the interaction between macrocurrent and atomic currents. Based on this idea, he established a mathematical formula of this force, following the Newtonian tradition. Ampère's achievement was developed further by some German scientists of the nineteenth century.

Faraday, however, suggested a radically different approach to electrical phenomena. In the early 1830s he discovered that a moving magnetic field (or a moving conductor that cuts the magnetic field lines) will generate electric currents on a nearby conductor. Faraday suggested a unique theory to understand electrical and magnetic phenomena. His theory had several distinct features, one of which was that electric and magnetic actions occurred along the curved line of actions. He later called these curves "the lines of electric and magnetic force" and gradually believed that these lines exist as a physical reality in the medium. His idea of the lines of force was taken up by two eminent British physicists, William Thomson and James Clerk Maxwell, and was developed in mathematical terms into the field theory.

In particular, Maxwell's field theory predicted the existence of electromagnetic waves that propagate in the medium at the velocity of light. In other words, light became a special form of electromagnetic waves. Around 1888, German physicist, Heinrich Hertz, first succeeded in generating and detecting the electromagnetic waves that Maxwell had predicted. The Italian physicist Guglielmo Marconi soon transformed Hertz's laboratory experiment into commercial wireless telegraphy, which opened a new era of radio communication and eventually radio and television broadcasting in the twentieth century.

the new physics

At the end of the nineteenth century, physicists began to feel that classical electromagnetism and thermodynamics did not fully or satisfactorily explain questions related to the microscopic world, such as blackbody radiation, the evasive ether, and the atomic structure. During the early twentieth century, new theories, such as Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity and quantum mechanics, began to replace the old physics. With this substitution, people gradually realized that there is a mysterious source of enormous energy inside the atom. Some scientists and writers dreamed about using this power for military or industrial purposes. Later, this dream came true with the discovery of atomic fission and chain reaction. The atomic bomb was the ultimate result of the power residing inside the atom.

bibliography

Buchwald, Jed Z., and Sungook Hong. "Physics." In From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences: Writing the History of Nineteenth-Century Science, edited by David Cahan, 163–195. Chicago, 2003.

Harman, P. M. Energy, Force, and Matter: The Conceptual Development of Nineteenth-Century Physics. Cambridge, U.K., 1982.

Purrington, Robert D. Physics in the Nineteenth Century. New Brunswick, N.J., 1997.

Warwick, Andrew. Masters of Theory: Cambridge and the Rise of Mathematical Physics. Chicago, 2003.

Sungook Hong

Encyclopedia of Modern Europe: Europe 1789-1914: Encyclopedia of the Age of Industry and Empire