Comsol -leaderboard other pages

Topics

Rutherford – Scientist Supreme

by John Campbell, AAS publications, 494pp hbk £25/$40 (obtainable direct from the publisher: AAS publications, PO Box 31-035, Christchurch, New Zealand; e-mail “aas@its.canterbury.ac.nz”).

cernbooks2_9-00

Ernest Rutherford towered over the early 20th-century decryption of the atom. At a series of university settings – Cambridge, McGill, Manchester and then Cambridge again – he masterminded a progression of classic experiments that dramatically revealed the nature of radioactivity, and the structure of the atom and its nucleus. Many of those he had chosen to be his research partners – Blackett, Chadwick, Cockcroft, Geiger and Walton, among others – went on to become physics figureheads in their own right. In Manchester, Rutherford inspired Niels Bohr to abandon the theory of electrons in metals and turn to that of electrons in atoms instead.

Rutherford biographies are not scarce, with inspired memoirs and nostalgic reminiscences by several contemporaries – Allibone, Da Costa Andrade, Oliphant – and the 1983 biography Rutherford, Simple Genius by David Wilson.

The title of Wilson’s book succinctly catches the nature of Rutherford. He was no fiery intellect like many of his central European contemporaries. Instead, his slow but penetrating insight and analysis, and his gift for patient, incisive investigation, isolated key problems and elucidated them.

Rutherford was born in modest surroundings in New Zealand when the country was still being settled. When New Zealand schoolchildren of the late 19th century learned history, they learned British history – there was no New Zealand history. University examination papers were despatched by boat to Britain for marking.

New Zealander John Campbell – he teaches physics at the University of Canterbury – was struck, ashamed even, by the lack of recognition of his nation’s premier scientist and he set out to do something about it. He developed a fitting memorial at Rutherford’s birthplace in Nelson and embarked on this major biography, which fleshed out Rutherford’s New Zealand background. While other epochs in Rutherford’s life have been well documented, his youthin New Zealand has until now been  largely overlooked. Compared with 50 sketchy pages in Wilson’s book, perhaps half of Campbell’s book deals with local matters – Rutherford’s birth, schooling, early university education and periodic visits throughout his life. During his studies, Rutherford emerged as a gifted student but no precocious childhood genius.

As well as the focus on New Zealand, there is much valuable additional material in the book – anecdotes, the paradox of how the 20th century’s foremost experimental physicist never received the Nobel Prize for Physics (even before his historic discovery of the atomic nucleus in 1911, he received the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for his work on radioactivity), several major discoveries that were missed at Cambridge in the early 1930s – the positron, induced radioactivity – and finally the bizarre circumstances of his death at the age of only 66. (Details of Rutherford’s death are strangely absent in existing biographies, written when many people still had an upright Victorian attitude.) Rutherford had been influential in key applied research positions in the First World War. What impact would his blustering no-nonsense personality have made in Second World War science and technology?

The book underlines Rutherford’s continual push for higher-energy particles. In a 1927 speech to the Royal Society, he said: “It has long been my ambition to have available for study a copious supply of atoms and electrons which have an individual energy far transcending that of particles from radioactive bodies.” At Cambridge, industrial techniques were exploited in the search for higher voltages – an early example of technology transfer. This ultimately led to Cockcroft and Walton’s accelerator, carried further by Oliphant. However, Rutherford dropped the ball by not acknowledging the arrival of the upstart cyclotron, developed by Ernest Lawrence in the US.

Especially poignant is the description of Rutherford’s undemonstrative romance and marriage to the faithful Mary (“May”) Newton, whom he met while a student in New Zealand and who eventually followed him to Britain after patiently waiting to be summoned.

Campbell’s homely but complete biography of “Ern” is totally in keeping with Rutherford’s own bluntness – a valuable addition to the biography of a key scientific figure. It will be particularly appreciated in New Zealand, even if major world publishers did not agree with this antipodean focus. A shorter 250-page version is thus in the pipeline.

Painstaking research

In his Rutherford biography, New Zealand physicist John Campbell has done an immense amount of spadework. Some of this is references in the book, but more complete references are being assigned to public repositories. He says:

“I have filled 10 quarto 120-page record books and three filing cabinet drawers with such notes. These have been willed to the Rutherford Collection at the Alexander Turnbull Library, the historic arm of the National Library of New Zealand. The master manuscript refers to these notes. The biography also draws extensively on the local newspapers of the day, Rutherford family correspondence and the official and unofficial records of the relevant organizations.

“In such a major research, sometimes every paragraph, sentence or even phrase requires a reference or further comment. This is too detailed for most users. In this book only the main points will be referenced due to space considerations.

“A master copy, which includes material edited out of the printed version, will be hand annotated with full references and comments on the sources of every statement. Two years after publication date, thus allowing for the incorporation of any new information which may come to light as a result of the book, I will donate a copy of this master manuscript to public repositories in each country with a Rutherford association. This will make the details more freely accessible to interested people.

“There will be one condition imposed, that for 10 years after the deposition date any person can copy no more than 10 pages per day. After that period copying will be as per the usual custom for the particular archive. During that 10 year period I will invite people seriously interested in Rutherford to purchase their own copy from AAS Publications, PO Box 31-035, Christchurch, New Zealand. Purchasers will be encouraged to donate their copy to any other appropriate public repository.”

Repositories of Master Copies:
Alexander Turnbull Library of the National Library of New Zealand Nelson Provincial Museum Cambridge University Library (Manuscripts) National Library of Scotland Center for the History of Science, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm Musée Curie (France) McGill University Library (Archives) P L Kapitza Institute for Physical Problems (Moscow) American Institute of Physics, Niels Bohr Library National Library of Australia

Antimatter – the Ultimate Mirror

by Gordon Fraser, Cambridge University Press, 0 521 65252 9, £16.95/$24.95.

cernbooks1_9-00

The correct prediction of antimatter by Paul Dirac is arguably the most astonishing intellectual achievement of the 20th century. By insisting that quantum theory and special relativity must be consistent, he was able to deduce the generalization of the Schrödinger equation to the Dirac equation. By doing that he was able to give a proximate explanation for spin, and to predict a whole new set of particles, antimatter. That the human mind can discover a previously unknown part of the world is a great achievement. (I largely agree with Antonino Zichichi who argued for Dirac as the most important physicist of the 20th century in Physics World in March.) Gordon Fraser’s lively and interesting book provides a broad treatment of this story, and the history, science and implications of antimatter.

This is a very nice book, totally accessible to any curious reader, yet with occasional thought-provoking pieces even for experts. Fraser keeps a fast pace, explaining the science well but taking care not to dwell too long on any difficult aspect. In a few places I didn’t fully agree with his viewpoint or arguments. I will mention some of these as a service to possible readers, but they do not detract from the value of a successful book.

Publishers are notorious for writing anything they please on book jackets and in publicity. Fraser is not responsible for then remark on the jacket that the book is about how science fiction became fact, which is, of course, the opposite of what happened (the remark is taken from the title of chapter 1, but its meaning is different there), or the charming reference to “Hans van der Meer” in the publicity, mixing up Hans Dehmelt (whose work with traps is described in chapter 11) and Simon van der Meer (who figured out how to get antiprotons in sufficient quantities to make a collider.)

Chapter 1 describes the public excitement about the 1995 discovery of antiatoms, and then begins the history. My impression of one bit of the history differs a little here. Fraser says that at first Dirac thought that the antielectron was the proton. He may be correct, but I have heard over the years that people pushed rather hard on Dirac about where the predicted antielectron was – after all, predicting new particles was not normal then. Dirac defensively remarked that perhaps it was the proton, though he knew that that didn’t make sense.

The next chapter introduces the relevant symmetries, charge conjugation, parity and time reversal, and then provides a quick history from Galileo through Newton to Einstein. It includes the Thornhill portrait of Newton without a wig, which I have seen in the Master’s Lodge of Trinity College, Cambridge – Newton looks much more like a physicist there than in his usual wigged appearances. Here and later the book has a nice way of giving brief descriptions that capture the essence of people.

Chapter 3 is a history of the acceptance of atoms, and the discoveries of the electron, nucleus, proton and neutron. Next is a more thorough biographical treatment of Dirac, with some of the many anecdotes, followed by the development of quantum theory and the Dirac equation. Chapter 5 describes the positron discovery, including the opposition of R A Millikan. That opposition helped to make European physicists more aware that Carl Anderson’s CalTech data could be the antielectron than were the US physicists. There is also a (delightful for a theorist) quote from Rutherford of a sentiment that we still encounter: “It seems to be to a certain degree regrettable that we had a theory of the positive electron before the experiments…I would be more pleased if the theory had appeared after the establishment of the experimental facts.”

Fraser then presents a quick discussion of infinities, renormalization and Richard Feynman, and interesting speculations on Dirac and Feynman’s distinctive personalities and the strong influences of their fathers as they were growing up. The story moves to the development of accelerators and the discovery of the antiproton, and then to quarks. (A minor point: the wording of a sentence on p108 suggests that quarks have a known size, but in fact there is only an upper limit and quarks are expected to be far too small to measure their size directly.) Next comes further discussion of parity violation and then CP violation, leading up to Andrei Sakharov’s statement of the conditions required for an explanation of the mysterious baryon asymmetry of the universe.

Particle colliders, which of course, require expertise in handling antimatter, are brought in and some of their discoveries presented. The only typographic error I found was on p175, where the ratio of the top quark mass to the b-quark mass is about 35, not 300. Chapter 13 is basically on antimatter technology, including PET scans and more. Fraser gets somewhat sensational here, beginning the chapter with a survey of the Reagan era “Star Wars” antimissile programme, and then unfairly relating that to the US plans to build the Superconducting SuperCollider, even seeing a connection to antimatter propulsion proposals and personnel for Star Wars. He also laments the loss of the LEAR antiproton beam at CERN, and perhaps misses an opportunity to discuss the difficulties of doing all science projects in times of limited resources, and of deciding which ones to pursue.

Why the universe is matter and not antimatter is still a mystery. The explanation of the evidence in chapter 14 is very clear. However, there are more approaches that could eventually explain this mystery than the book suggests. The problem is that the calculations are very difficult and the underlying theory is not established. Perhaps most fundamentally, we do not yet know the origin and size of the CP-violating effects that are essential to explain the matter asymmetry. One piece of progress is that we do know now that the Standard Model cannot explain the matter asymmetry of the universe, so new physics must enter. It is likely that the phases that lead to the CP violation needed to generate the matter asymmetry arise when string theories are compactified to three space dimensions and when supersymmetry is broken, but these subjects are not yet well understood. If you think these approaches are somewhat far out, you’ll enjoy Fraser’s speculations on this issue even more.

UK phenomenology centre is created

cernnews5_7-00

After several months of negotiations, the UK Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council has announced the establishment of an Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology at Durham University. The director designate is James Stirling.

The aim is to establish a broad-based, internationally competitive research activity in a key area. Phenomenology (the analysis, comparison and interpretation of data) is the bridge between theory and experiment. Durham already has a considerable international reputation in this field. The new Institute will set out to make additonal contributions to both the experimental and the wider UK theoretical programmes. Research will encompass accelerator and non-accelerator measurements, and the emphasis of the research should evolve with the UK experimental particle physics programme. Experimentalists will participate in the activities of the new institute, which will host an extensive visitor programme and hold workshops and summer schools for the benefit of the whole UK particle physics community. The institute is expected to start up in October.

Higgs is honoured in Edinburgh

cernnews8_7-00
cernnews9_7-00

As part of the recent UK Institute of Physics conference, Particle Physics 2000, in Edinburgh, a special symposium was held to celebrate the 70th year of Peter Higgs, after whom the elusive “Higgs field” is named. This field and its particles are responsible for the spontaneous symmetry breaking of the symmetry of electroweak interactions, so that, for example, the W and Z carriers of the weak force are heavy particles, while the electromagnetic photon remains massless. Finding the Higgs particle(s) is today’s major particle physics goal.

The event opened with a talk by current Nobel prizewinner Gerard ‘t Hooft on the early days of gauge theories, in which he reminded the audience that in the 1960s these theories were widely regarded as of little relevance to particle physics. However, his supervisor, Martinus Veltman, insisted that all of his students read an obscure paper from the 1950s by Yang and Mills, so helping the 1970s resurgence of gauge field theories.

In the following talks, Peter Zerwas (DESY) reviewed the phenomenology of the Higgs particle at current and future colliders, and Pedro Texeira-Dias (CERN) described the current experimental search for the Higgs at LEP.

The afternoon concluded with a lively talk by former CERN director-general Chris Llewellyn Smith on his long association with the search for the Higgs boson, which began as the theory convenor of a workshop in 1980. He gave a vivid description of the physics involved in engineering the LHC collider, including a picture of the CERN administration building apparently “relocated” to one of the LHC experimental caverns. He had used this to show the CERN Council how big the pits needed to be, and was asked why he wanted to move the administration building to the pit!

A theme of the meeting was that the Higgs is everywhere. In a public lecture by Frank Close on the origins of asymmetry, Higgs was seen to break the symmetry of an empty Coke can on which Close was balancing, causing Close’s potential to collapse into an asymmetric state.

At the banquet, Ken Peach, director of particle physics at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, gave a lecture from the pulpit of the former Highland Kirk. In this suitably Calvinist setting, he recalled his misspent youth as a student in Edinburgh, but seemed to remember attending a few field theory lectures by Higgs, which may account for his subsequent career. More recently he recalled an L3 speaker giving a seminar in Edinburgh describing the failure to find a Higgs at LEP, at the end of which it was pointed out that there was in fact a Higgs in the audience.

However, the most moving part of the Fest belonged to Higgs, who sported a T-shirt of his grandson, indicating the existence of a second light Higgs (evidence for super-symmetry?). He received an honorary fellowship of the Institute of Physics, and a piece of an LHC magnet from his colleagues, to which he responded in typically modest fashion. Apparently the famous Higgs particle was the result of only three weeks’ work in the mid-1960s. The first two weeks were spent writing a paper and having it rejected by the referee on the grounds that quantum field theory was obscure and of little interest. The referee suggested that the paper might be improved by the addition of some practical consequences of the theory. The third week was spent providing these examples, which included the Higgs particle. The audience, which included a large fraction of graduate students, was suitably awestruck by the idea that a mere three weeks’ work might be sufficient to get a particle named after you.

CMS contractors receive LHC collaboration awards

cernnews10_7-00
cernnews11_7-00

Three contractors involved in CERN’s forthcoming CM experiment’s magnet project became the first beneficiaries of the collaboration’s new awards scheme on 5 June. In the two-tiered scheme, major contractors deemed by the collaboration to have delivered exceptional service will receive the CMS Crystal Award. Other contractors are eligible for the CMS Gold Award.

CMS has initiated the scheme as a motivating factor for all of its contractors, and as a way of rewarding excellence. A panel of five has been established to consider award nominations made by CMS project leaders, and to make recommendations to the experiment’s Collaboration Board. Criteria considered by the panel include strict adherence to the terms and deadlines of a contract, a good working relationship and exceptional performance in terms of innovation.

The first three awards were made during a CMS collaboration meeting at CERN. It is no accident that they all went to contractors working on the experiment’s magnet, since that is the furthest advanced component of the new experiment. A Crystal Award went to Germany’s Deggendorfer Werft und Eisenbau (DWE) GmbH, principal contractor for the CMS magnet yoke. DWE delivered the fifth and final wheel for the barrel part of the yoke on time and within budget just before the meeting began. Gold Awards were presented to two of DWE’s subcontractors: Izhora of St Petersburg, which produced the 120 forged iron blocks making up the magnet yoke, and ZDAS of the Czech Republic, which made the brackets that will hold them all together in 12-sided wheels.

CERN and Pakistan strengthen agreement

Signed in Islamabad in May was an addendum to the Memorandum of Understanding between CERN and Pakistan, covering increased Pakistani involvement in the CMS experiment for CERN’s LHC collider.

Pakistan is supplying six giant 25 ton support feet for the main “barrel” magnet of the CMS detector, as well as material for the magnet itself. Under the new agreement the National Centre for Physics at Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, will also supply 432 resistive plate chambers (RPCs) for the CMS forward muon system as part of a collaboration that also involves China, Italy, Korea and the US. In addition the front-end electronics boards for RPC read-out will be manufactured in Pakistan.

A major CERN delegation was recently in Pakistan for the signing of the new agreement.

cernnews12_7-00
cernnews13_7-00

Czech physics scene is growing

Particle physics in the Czech Republic is maturing fast. This was the message that emerged from the European Committee for Future Accelerators (ECFA) during its continual tour of CERN member states as it recently surveyed national activities at a meeting at the Masaryk Hostel of the Czech Technical University, Prague. (The hostel is named after Tomás Masaryk, who was the first president of the Czechoslovakian Republic, from 1918 to 1935.)

At the ECFA meeting, policy issues in the Czech Republic were presented by M Potucek and Pavel Chraska, respectively deputy chairman and a member of the national Research and Development Council. This agency is proposing new rules for the organization finance of research and development. The keyword in these presentations was “changes”, of which there have already been many since the 1989 “velvet revolution”, but there are more to come.

One major purpose is to make the Czech system more compatible with that of the European Union countries. For example, scientific research was traditionally carried out almost entirely at the institutes of the Academy of Sciences while the universities were “just for teaching”. This has now changed. There has also been a drastic reduction in the number of people employed by the academy, from about 13 000 to about 6500. Several institutes of the academy have been closed.

After several difficult years there is now optimism in the air. The state support of R&D – 0.4% of national GNP in 1999 – is expected to be 0.6% in 2000 and to increase to 0.7% by 2002. One difficult remaining problem concerns how to attract young people, who are badly needed, because the average age in this sector is high. The salaries offered to young people are simply not attractive enough.

The status of high-energy physics in the Czech Republic was reviewed by J Niederle, president of the National Committee for Collaboration with CERN, and by J Hosek. The good news here is that there has been a substantial increase in the number of high-energy physicists in the Czech Republic since the ECFA last visited the country in 1994. The number of theorists has increased from 37 to 51 and that of experimentalists from 39 to 94. This is partially due to the change of orientation of scientists already in the system. The average age of permanently appointed staff is high – 48 for theorists and 51 for experimentalists.

So far the Delphi experiment at LEP has been the central activity of Czech experimental physics. For the future, ATLAS at the LHC will take over this role. However, Czech physicists also take part in a range of other experiments at CERN (ALICE, CERES, DIRAC, ISOLDE, NA57) as well as in several R&D projects. Outside CERN, Czech physicists participate in the D0 experiment at Fermilab and in H1 at DESY. Since 1998 the Czechs have also been involved with the Auger cosmic-ray project.

Across this now wide spectrum – in R&D, detector building, data analysis and theory – Czech physicists make an important contribution to the world particle physics effort in general and to the CERN programme in particular. At the meeting, Czech physicists described this contribution.

cernnews14_7-00
cernnews15_7-00

Charles University, Prague

The oldest university in central Europe, Charles University in Prague, was founded in 1348 by Charles IV, then Holy Roman Emperor and King of Bohemia. Austrian physicist and philosopher Ernst Mach was a professor there for 28 years (1867-95), during which time he proposed Mach’s principle, which greatly influenced Albert Einstein’s thinking in the formulation of his theory of gravity. Mach also served as rector of the University. Appointed professor at the university in 1911, Albert Einstein became aware there of the importance of tensor calculus for his work on general relativity. His student at Prague was Otto Stern. When Einstein left Prague the following year, he was succeeded by Philipp Frank.

Celebrating the centenary of a conscience

cernnews17_7-00
cernnews19_7-00
cernnews18_7-00

Wolfgang Pauli, the “conscience of physics” was born in Vienna on 25 April 1900. Among the events organized to celebrate the Pauli centenary was a series of public lectures, Wolfgang Pauli and Modern Physics, at the ETH (Swiss Federal Technical High School) Zurich, where Pauli spent his career from 1928 until his death in 1958, except for an interval during the Second World War. The Zurich lectures focused on Pauli’s life and work, and his scientific legacy, with a distinguished list of speakers. A Pauli exhibition, currently in Zurich, will be moved to CERN later this year.*

Pauli discovered many of the 20th century’s major new directions for modern physics and went on to lay the foundations for much of what was to come – quantum mechanics, the Exclusion Principle, electron spin, quantum field theory, the neutrino hypothesis, spin and statistics, among others.

Contemporary physics is, of course, his greatest monument, but another is his prolific correspondence with contemporary scientists. CERN has become the home of this carefully accumulated and maintained Pauli archive, the source for a four-volume series of scientific correspondence, published by Springer.

One of Pauli’s last major public appearances was at the 8th International (“Rochester”) Conference on High Energy Physics, hosted by CERN in Geneva on 30 June – 5 July 1958. This was the first time that this meeting had been held outside the US. As chairman of the Fundamental Ideas session, Pauli began:

“This session is called ‘fundamental ideas’ in field theory, but you will soon find out, or have already found out, that there are no new fundamental ideas. So what you shall hear are substitutes for fundamental ideas, and it works in the same way as I am the substitute for a rapporteur. So you will also see that there are two kinds of ignorance – rigorous ignorance and more clumsy ignorance. You will also hear that many speakers will want to form new credits for the future. I am personally not very willing to give such credits but it is for everybody to choose what he wants to do in this respect.”

The first three talks in the session were by Hideki Yukawa, Werner Heisenberg and Pauli. Immediately after Heisenberg’s talk, “Non-linear spinor theory with indefinite metric”, Pauli said sternly: “Regarding the papers of Heisenberg and collaborators on the spinor model…I reached the conclusion that they are mathematically objectionable.”

Heisenberg persisted, but Pauli eventually retorted again: “I completely disagree with the answer of Heisenberg _ not only unnatural but mathematically impossible.”

Heisenberg countered: “Of course I again disagree completely with what Pauli said…”

After the young Murray Gell-Mann (aged 28) tried to establish some calm and order between the warring quantum veterans, Heisenberg commented: “I agree completely with what Gell-Mann just said. But at the same time I propose to postpone the discussion for half a year and then we will know more.”

The ever-implacable Pauli concluded: “I think that is superfluous. In half a year the answer will be the same as Gell-Mann gave just now.”

Half a year later, Pauli was dead, but his name will live for ever.

Pauli polemics

Pauli became legendary not only for his physics but also for his vituperation and invective. Some examples:

At a seminar given by a young researcher: “Your first equation is already wrong, and your second does not follow from it”;

Of a young physicist, Pauli retorted: “What, so young and already unknown?”

The Vienna-born Pauli asked another physicist: “When did you leave Vienna?” “1938,” he replied. “I left in 1918,” retorted Pauli. “My intuition was always good.”

The festschift Das Gewissen der Physik(the Conscience of Physics), edited by Charles Enz and Karl von Meyenn, from a 1983 meeting in Vienna to mark the 25th anniversary of Pauli’s death, contains among a wealth of contributions a memorable collection of such anecdotes, compiled by Val Telegdi.

*The Pauli exhibition will be in CERN’s Main Building from 17 August until 26 September, and a ceremony will take place in the Council Chamber on Monday 11 September, beginning at 4.30 pm. This will include short presentations from Maurice Jacob (chairman of the Pauli Committee), Konrad Osterwalder (Rektor of the ETH Zurich), Luciano Maiani (director-general of CERN) and Charles Enz (University of Geneva) on Pauli’s life and legacy.

Strange Beauty: Murray Gell-Mann and the Revolution in 20th Century Physics

by George Johnson (published by Knopf in the US: 0679437649, and by Jonathan Cape in the UK: 0224044273).

cernbooks1_7-00

Murray Gell-Mann befriended me in Paris towards the end of my National Science Foundation postdoctoral junket and lured me to Pasadena. It was the year of the Eightfold Way, smack in the middle of Gell-Mann’s two-decade reign as emperor of elementary particles. His brilliance was so intense that lesser folk, such as myself and my sidekick Sidney Coleman, had to ration our time with him. Not only did Gell-Mann devise the lion’s share of today’s particle lore, but on first acquaintance you would soon learn, through his painfully in-your-face erudition, that he knew far more than you about almost everything, from archaeology, birds and cacti to Yoruban myth and zymology. He once drew a false etymology of avocado, but his errors were so rare as to be cherished.

This book is a brave attempt to interweave two stories. One is the history of particle physics according to Gell-Mann, from the development of quantum field theory to the fall of the Superconducting Super-Collider (which he lamented) and the coincidental rise of string theory (which he championed). The other is a must-read account of the life of a truly fascinating character.

Explaining particle physics to the lay reader is a labour of Hercules. Johnson strives magnificently but doesn’t always succeed. After a long explication of strangeness, he drops the ball by asserting that the Xi hyperon has strangeness +2. His exposition of the quark hypothesis is better: how they were invented and named by Gell-Mann; thought of independently by George Zweig, who called them “aces”, had his paper rejected and soon left physics; how Gell-Mann vacillated for years between the interpretation of quarks as helpful mathematical fictions or as real and observable particles (they are neither); how quarks acquired their “colours”, the change of which from patriotic to primary is given undue significance; and how they have become a crucial part of today’s Standard Model of particle physics.

However, bloopers like “the briefer a particle’s life span, the higher its energy”, “in quantum theory every particle can be represented by a differently shaped wave”, “neutrons and antineutrons [have] different spins” and the allegation that mesons are fermions will annoy physicist readers and mislead others. To explain the meaning of parity violation, Johnson asks how a radio message sent to Martians could tell them which side is the left. Two simple answers are given, but they are said to cheat or to “violate the spirit of the game”. Just what game is this?

Johnson portrays Gell-Mann’s family origins in Galicia and Austria, and his father’s difficult accommodation of life in the US, partly via his introduction of the curious hyphen. We see Gell-Mann evolve from an arrogantly precocious know-it-all, to a preppy pretender at Yale, to an aspiring then renowned theoretical physicist and, most recently, to a wealthy and charming curmudgeon with homes in Aspen, Santa Fe and Manhattan.

We follow his triumphant path through the reductionist subatomic world and his recent return to a childhood fascination with the richer world of “complex adaptive systems” consisting of such marvels as birds, jaguars and (says Johnson) the relationship between biographer and biographee. Along the way we learn how Gell-Mann wooed and wed two remarkable women, reared two difficult children and was almost jailed for receiving smuggled antiquities.

This tale of quarks and quirks is engagingly told, although Johnson often resorts to jarringly undocumentable quotations. He has Gell-Mann saying: “But I do know everything” to his classmates, “Where are the dotted eighth’s?” at a concert, “I would rather starve” to his father’s suggestion that he become an engineer, “The cross-sections are just details” to Dyson, “[Electromagnetism] doesn’t do dirty little jobs for people” to Fermi, and so on. Was Johnson there at the time, like Edmund Morris’s imaginary avatar who follows Reagan about in Dutch?

Much is made of the family’s rejection of their heritage: neither father nor son wished to be regarded as Jews. Gell-Mann once attributed his name to the confluence of two Scottish rivers. I recall another incident when, as we were wandering about Hollywood, Stanley Mandelstam read the Hebrew sign on a butcher’s shop and Gell-Mann immediately corrected his pronunciation of kosher. “I didn’t know you were Jewish,” said poor Stanley, to Murray’s pained “What? Me Jewish?” (Here I adopt Johnson’s conceit.) Why does Gell-Mann do this? Why does he refer to Israel as Palestine, and Jerusalem as the citadel of the Jebusites?

Another recurrent motif is Gell-Mann’s sometimes extreme difficulty in putting thoughts to paper. He was almost unable to complete his one book The Quark and the Jaguar,and he never did write up his Nobel lecture. However, Johnson errs when he relates Gell-Mann’s reluctance to disseminate his discovery of the Eightfold Way. The original version, a well circulated and often cited CalTech report, was created in just a few days.

In summary, I rather like this book. It explains why Gell-Mann is universally regarded as a great scientist, but only occasionally as a pompous prig. It describes his warmth and generosity toward his colleagues (Francis Low, Harald Fritzsch, John Schwarz and Yuval Ne’eman, among many others) and his problems with others (he alienated Zweig, belittled Julian Schwinger, detested Bram Pais, and his friendship with Dick Feynman turned sour). Most of all this book gives a new twist to the classic tale of a poor immigrant’s son from the Bronx making it big in the US.

This review first appeared in the June issue of the American Journal of Physics. Reprinted with permission. Sheldon Lee Glashow, who shared the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1979, has been Higgins Professor of Physics at Harvard since 1979. He is joining the faculty of Boston University as the first Arthur G B Metcalf Professor of Science.

bright-rec iop pub iop-science physcis connect