identifier
stringlengths 1
43
| dataset
stringclasses 3
values | question
stringclasses 4
values | rank
int64 0
99
| url
stringlengths 14
1.88k
| read_more_link
stringclasses 1
value | language
stringclasses 1
value | title
stringlengths 0
200
| top_image
stringlengths 0
125k
| meta_img
stringlengths 0
125k
| images
listlengths 0
18.2k
| movies
listlengths 0
484
| keywords
listlengths 0
0
| meta_keywords
listlengths 1
48.5k
| tags
null | authors
listlengths 0
10
| publish_date
stringlengths 19
32
⌀ | summary
stringclasses 1
value | meta_description
stringlengths 0
258k
| meta_lang
stringclasses 68
values | meta_favicon
stringlengths 0
20.2k
| meta_site_name
stringlengths 0
641
| canonical_link
stringlengths 9
1.88k
⌀ | text
stringlengths 0
100k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 65 |
https://www.carpentertechnology.com/blog/the-uses-for-invar-continue-to-multiply
|
en
|
The Uses for Invar Continue to Multiply
|
[
"https://www.carpentertechnology.com/hubfs/logos/carpenter-technology-logo.svg",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/a8ca1ef4-2f69-4085-9a2d-e6446410d1f2.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/7cc2f07a-858e-481d-b06e-cf4ec6517c0d.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/77d9fa95-966b-4eda-a305-fb85dce369ac.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/77d9fa95-966b-4eda-a305-fb85dce369ac.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/d267cf9b-a5fc-4000-9a41-856956a927cd.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/563c1169-51c9-4064-8caa-3c0ae8ae28fa.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/653802aa-fd87-44fd-be68-4ba31f3e7ef7.png",
"https://www.carpentertechnology.com/hubfs/hamburger-menu.svg",
"https://www.carpentertechnology.com/hs-fs/hubfs/alloy-techzone/technical-solutions/technical-articles/ta8image001.jpg?width=291&height=295&name=ta8image001.jpg",
"https://www.carpentertechnology.com/hs-fs/hubfs/alloy-techzone/technical-solutions/technical-articles/ta8image004.gif?width=374&height=364&name=ta8image004.gif",
"https://www.carpentertechnology.com/hs-fs/hubfs/alloy-techzone/technical-solutions/technical-articles/ta8image006.gif?width=348&height=321&name=ta8image006.gif",
"https://www.carpentertechnology.com/hs-fs/hubfs/alloy-techzone/technical-solutions/technical-articles/ta8image008_v2.jpg?width=550&height=461&name=ta8image008_v2.jpg",
"https://ws.zoominfo.com/pixel/61f175185a809b0012ce3bfc"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Leslie L. Harner"
] |
2020-08-19T18:44:25+00:00
|
Still exhibiting the "Invar Effect" that defies understanding, Invar has bred an entire family of low expansion, nickel-iron alloys that are used today.
|
en
|
https://www.carpentertechnology.com/blog/the-uses-for-invar-continue-to-multiply
|
After 100 Years, The Uses for Invar Continue to Multiply
The metals world in 1996 observed the centennial of the discovery of the low expansion alloy known as Invar (UNS K93600). This remarkable alloy has been so important to scientific advancement that it earned the Nobel Prize in 1920 for its inventor, Charles-Edouard Guillaume, the first and only scientist in history to be so honored for a metallurgical achievement.
Still exhibiting the "Invar Effect" that defies understanding, Invar has bred an entire family of low expansion, nickel-iron alloys that are used today in a wide variety of both commonplace and high technology applications. Commercial uses have proliferated in fields as diverse as semiconductors, television, information technology, aerospace and cryogenic transport.
The Discovery
Guillaume, employed by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, was looking in 1896 for a metal for geodesic tapes and wires that would not change in length when exposed to temperature variations. In addition, he wanted a cost-effective material for reference bars of perfectly defined length that could be used as secondary standards throughout the world.
He had many heats of nickel-iron alloys melted, handicapped often by feed stock that was contaminated. In the process, experimenting with nickel contents of 30% to 60%, Guillaume discovered that the coefficient of expansion at room temperature was lowest at a nickel level of 36%.
With 36% nickel, in fact, the alloy exhibited the least amount of thermal expansion of any alloy known. Since Guillaume considered the expansion of his new alloy "invariable", it eventually became known as Invar.
Guillaume published a graph similar to Fig. 1 visualizing the unique thermal expansion behavior of an "Invar-Effect" alloy. The expansion characteristic of these nickel-iron alloys is broadly determined by ferromagnetism.
These alloys exhibit very low expansivity below their Curie temperature (the temperature below which they are ferromagnetic). This low thermal expansivity anomaly, often referred to as the "Invar Effect", is related to spontaneous volume magnetostriction where lattice distortion counteracts the normal lattice thermal expansivity.
Above the Curie temperature, 36% nickel and other nickel-iron alloys expand at a high rate because they are no longer ferromagnetic. A number of theories have been proposed to explain this phenomenon. Although these theories have provided some insight, the mechanism is not yet sufficiently understood.
Early Applications
Once the 36% nickel and its companion nickel-iron alloys were discovered, it didn't take long to find applications that could utilize their low thermal expansivity. Surveying tapes and wires, as well as pendulums for grandfather clocks became important early applications. Nickel-iron alloys were substituted for platinum for glass sealing wire at great cost savings in the 1920's. They also were used in light bulbs and electronic vacuum tubes for radios.
Uses expanded further in the 1930's. Nickel-iron alloys were used as one of the bimetals in thermostats for temperature control. A copper-coated 42% nickel-balance iron alloy was being used in the lead-in seals of incandescent lights. A 56% nickel alloy was used to make measuring devices for testing gauges and machine parts.
World War II greatly increased the demand for "Invar Effect" nickel-iron alloys, particularly by the military. Demand escalated dramatically for alloys used in vacuum tubes and other products in the fast growing electronics industry.
Applications continued to spread in the prosperous 1950's and 1960's. The 36% nickel and other nickel-iron alloys were needed for low expansion components in bimetals for circuit breakers, motor controls, TV temperature compensating springs, appliance and heater thermostats, aerospace and automotive controls, heating and air conditioning, etc.
Glass-to-metal and ceramic-to-metal seals were in great demand. Since several of the "Invar-Effect" nickel-iron alloys had thermal characteristics similar to those of glass and ceramics, they were the natural choice for such applications. They were also used for the sealing needs of semi-conductors and microprocessors. These include pin feed-throughs, packaging and lid seals.
Newer Applications
The demand for thermostat metals continued to grow in the 1980's and 1990's. The 36% nickel alloy has been found quite useful for containers used to transport liquid natural gas on tankers. The alloy minimizes cryogenic shrinkage.
A 36% nickel-iron alloy has been used more recently for shadow masks in high-definition CRT (television) tubes. It has been used for this application in Japan and Europe as a solution to the "doming effect" of the shadow mask. In the U. S., the 36% nickel alloy with a high expansion alloy has been used in deflection springs which reposition the mask to the color phosphors.
Newer applications use nickel-iron alloys for structural components in precision laser and optical measuring systems, and wave guide tubes. These alloys have been used in microscopes, in support systems for giant mirrors in telescopes and in a variety of scientific instruments requiring mounted lenses.
36% nickel-balance iron alloys have been used for composite molds by the aerospace industry. New generation aircraft, in particular, need 36% nickel-balance iron alloys for molds that will hold tight dimensional tolerances while advanced composites are cured at moderately high temperatures. The "Invar-Effect" family of alloys, in fact, is helping to raise modern science to higher levels with applications in orbiting satellites, lasers, ring laser gyroscopes and a host of high-tech applications.
Nature of Expansivity As shown in Fig. 1, the thermal expansion curve for "Invar-Effect" alloys consists of a low expansivity portion and a high expansivity portion. Below their Curie Temperature, these alloys are magnetic and their expansivities are anomalously low. Above it, they expand at a normal, high rate. This high rate extends to the melting point of the alloy. It can be noticed that there is a transition range between the low expansion and high expansion components. This transition is evidently related to the deterioration of ferromagnetism as the alloy approaches the Curie Temperature
Below room temperature, these alloys have low expansivity. Below approximately liquid nitrogen temperature (-196°C), their expansivity declines to near zero. The low expansion portion of the curve is most important because its slope defines the coefficient of expansion, and its length describes the useful temperature range of low expansivity.
Inflection temperature can be determined by a slope intercept method. It is the temperature at which the slopes taken from the low expansivity and the high expansivity curve portions of the expansion curve intersect. Measuring the Curie Temperature is laborious. Whereas, the inflection temperature can be determined simply from expansion curves.
In his early investigations, Guillaume learned how variations in nickel content affect the coefficient of expansion of the nickel-iron alloys. He found that expansion reached a minimum with 36% nickel (Fig. 2), and that on either side of this value the expansion coefficient increased dramatically.
Alloys with nominally less than 36% nickel are seldom used for controlled expansion applications primarily for two reasons: (a) these alloys can transform to martensite, which drastically increases the expansivity, and (b) they have low Curie Temperatures, which reduce the temperature range over which they may be used. Therefore, the alloys with 36% or more nickel are usually considered for controlled expansion applications.
The Invar Family
All of the alloys in the Invar family are nickel-iron or nickel-iron-cobalt alloys, and all exhibit face-centered cubic crystal structure. As nickel content increases from 36%, thermal expansivity and Curie Temperature also increase. Curie Temperature increases from 280°C (536°F) for 36% nickel to greater than 565°C (1050°F) for 50% nickel.
The 36% nickel alloy's low coefficient of expansion, along with its off-the-shelf availability, make it one of the most commonly used materials for applications requiring low expansivity. But, depending on the temperature range of interest, it may not be entirely suitable for some applications. Although it exhibits the lowest thermal expansivity, it also has the lowest Curie Temperature. That limits its useful temperature range.
For applications around ambient temperature requiring the lowest expansivity, the 36% nickel is the obvious choice. It has been the most widely used nickel-iron alloy in applications such as electronic devices where dimensional changes due to temperature must be minimal, for structural members in precision optical measuring devices, and as the low expansion side in bimetal thermostats.
For certain applications, however, other alloys in the Invar family may be more suitable. In each case, alloy selection should take into account the temperature range for the intended application, as well as the coefficient of expansion desired over that range. The relative expansion rates for the "Invar-Effect" alloys are shown in Fig. 3.
Two alloys in this family (Fig. 4) have been found suitable for unique low expansion requirements. FCarpenter Technology Free-Cut Invar "36"® alloy (UNS K93050), with a slight increase in expansion properties, has been shown to offer improved machinability for applications where high parts productivity is important. This alloy has been used for aircraft controls and a variety of electronic devices
The second alloy - Carpenter Technology Super Invar "32-5" - is an iron-nickel-cobalt alloy which exhibits approximately one half the thermal of Carpenter Technology Invar "36"® alloy at or near room temperature. It has been used for structural components and supports for optical and laser instruments.
Fig. 4 - Typical properties and chemical composition of the Invar family of alloys.
Any one of four other nickel-iron alloys may be particularly suitable for service in higher temperature ranges. For example, Low Expansion "39" alloy (ASTM B-753) has a useful low thermal expansivity extending to approximately 250°C (482°F). It has been used as the low expansion element in thermostat bimetal products.
Carpenter Technology Glass Sealing 42 alloy, sometimes known as 42 alloy (ASTM F-30), has been commonly used for hermetic sealing to certain glasses. It is also has been used for high reliability ceramic- and plastic-sealed semiconductor packages.
Carpenter Technology Low Expansion "42"® thermostat alloy (ASTM B-753) has a virtually constant low rate of thermal expansion at temperatures up to about 350°C (662°F), while Low Expansion "45" alloy (ASTM B-753) has a relatively constant rate of thermal expansion to about 450°C (842°F). Both metals have been used in thermostats and thermoswitches. The thermal expansivity of the higher-nickel alloy approximates the thermal expansivity of alumina ceramics over certain temperature ranges. The alloy in this family with the highest nickel content, Carpenter Technology Glass Sealing "52" alloy (ASTM F-30) has been used for glass sealing of certain "soft" glasses.
Fabricating Parts
The entire group of "Invar-Effect" nickel-iron alloys machine similar to, but not as well as a Carpenter Technology 316 austenitic stainless steel. They are readily machinable, although they are soft and do produce gummy chips. Therefore, large, sharp and rigidly supported tooling is recommended, with slower speeds. Where high productivity and good surface finish are important, a big edge goes to the Carpenter Technology Free-Cut Invar "36" alloy, the free-machining alloy variation.
All of the alloys in the family are very ductile, thus readily cold headed and formed. Stamping from cold-rolled strip is easily accomplished. Parts may be deep drawn from properly annealed strip.
Fabrication does add stresses which, unrelieved, can change the thermal expansion behavior. When that happens, parts placed in service as fabricated may not meet design requirements. To prevent such incident, annealing and stress relieving thermal treatments may be needed to promote structural uniformity and dimensional stability.
After severe forming, bending and machining, relief of stresses induced by these operations can be accomplished by annealing at temperatures of 760°C (1400°F) to 980°C (1800°F) long enough to thoroughly heat through the section. However, nickel-iron alloys will oxidize readily at these high temperatures.
When annealing cannot be done in a non-oxidizing atmosphere (vacuum, dry hydrogen, dissociated ammonia, argon, etc.), sufficient material must be present to allow cleaning by light grinding, pickling, etc., after annealing. For sections having light finishing cuts or grinding performed after annealing, stress relief is accomplished by heating to 315°C (600°F) to 425°C (800°F) long enough to uniformly heat through the work piece.
Summary
Invar is a critical alloy that has endured for more than a century. It is in a league of its own, having grown in importance over the years and given life to a stream of new technologies.
The group of "Invar-Effect" alloys represents a significant, growing volume in today's specialty metals universe. Below their Curie Temperatures, these alloys exhibit anomalously low thermal expansivities. A minimum in low thermal expansivity is reached at approximately 36% nickel. Increasing the nickel content increases the thermal expansivity and also raises the Curie temperature.
Collectively, this family of nickel-iron alloys has been found suitable for a host of applications that require different expansivities over a broad temperature range. Because of the widespread and growing demand for their special properties, these alloys seem likely to make an even greater contribution to modern science as they begin their second century on Earth.
***
By Leslie L. Harner, Product Application Manager, Electronic & Magnetic Alloys
|
||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 93 |
http://www2.iap.fr/users/uzan/Science3.htm
|
en
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
I73TBA,
Symposium ÒGravity – the next generationÓ, Yukawa Insitute, 7-11 juin 2021, Kyoto, Japon.
I72Guillaume and the Nobel Prize - application-oriented research vs the new relativity and quantum physics,
Symposium to celebrate the centenary of the award of the Nobel Prize to Charles-douard Guillaume, 17 octobre 2020, BIPM, Pavillon de Breteuil.
I71 Statut du modle cosmologique
Colloque de la SFP, 25 janvier 2020.
I70 Peut-on affirmer que lÕunivers a 13,8 milliards dÕannes?
Confrence TimeWorld 2019, Cit des Sciences, 21-23 novembre 2019.
I69 The role of the (Planck) constants in physics
XXVIe CGPM, Versailles, 16 novembre 2018.
I68 Astrophysical stochastic gravitational wave background
JGRG meeting, Tokyo, 5-9 novembre 2018.
I67QuÕest-ce quÕune constante ?
Colloque Ç Tous mesureurs, tous mesurs È, CNRS, Paris, 17-18 octobre 2018.
I66 Fundamental constants – the new SI and general relativity
Keynote speaker, inaugural talk, Conference on precision electromagnetic measurements, Paris, 8-13 juillet 2018
I65Fundamental constants, gravitation and cosmology
Heraeus Workshop "Fundamental constants: Basic physics and unitsÓ, Bad-Honef, Allemagne, 14-18 mai 2018
I64 Fundamental constants, gravitation and cosmology
Solvay Colloquia, Bruxelles, 2018.
I63 Fundamental constants, gravitation and cosmology
BIPM, svres, 7 septembre 2017.
I62 Tuning of the nuclear processes in astrophysical and cosmological context
International conference on the physics of fine-tuning, Rithymna, Crete, 19-22 juin 2017
I61 Constraining non-universal couplings with MICROSCOPE
ONERA, Palaiseau, 12 juin 2017
I60 Gravitational and statistical physics to model the propagation of light in a (more) realistic universe
Recent developments in General Relativity, conference in memory of the late Joseph Katz, Jrusalem, 21-23 mai 2017.
I59 Gravitation: constants, a wall and some waves
Astroparticle physics looking forward – Olivefest, Minneapolis, 17-19 mai 2917
I58 Weak lensing B-modes as a test of isotropy
Workshop on general relativistic effects in galaxy surveys, 13-15 fvrier 2017, Nordhoek, Afrique du Sud
I57 Fundamental constants, gravitation and cosmology
Szecczin, September (2016)
I56 The view ahead after 100 years of General Relativity
GRG 21, New York City, 10-15 July (2016)
I55 Audiovisual hybrids rooted in science
2nd Symposium of the South-African Young Academy of Science on Science and Society in Africa ÒFact, Fiction and Media Re-imagining science engagement and its impactÓ, Cape Town 28-29 Sept. 2015.
I54 The big, the small, and conformal invariance
75th birthday of George Ellis, Cape Town, 24 November 2014.
I53 Dark energy - anything beyond General relativity and L?
Dark Side of the Universe, Cape Town, 17-21 November 2014.
I52 From configuration to dynamics -emergence of time in classical field theory
Dark energy meeting, Stockholm, 1-3 October 2014.
I51 Fundamental structures of effective field theories
Philosophy of cosmology, Tnrife, Spain, 12-16 September 2014.
I50 Fundamental constants, physics and cosmology
Athena Brussels workshop on astrophysics, Brussels, 27-28 janvier 2014.
I49 (1) Fundamental constants, physics and cosmology; (2) Variation of fundamental constants and the Equivalence principle.
`Multiverse and fine tuning' short courses, Department of physics,Universit dÕOxford, 2-5 December 2013.
I48 Gravitational lensing as a probe of the physics and geometry of the universe
Tokyo, Japon, 27 September-3 October 2013.
I47 Tests of the equivalence principle and the Copernican principle
Fifth challenges of new physics in space workshop, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 27 April-3 May 2013.
I46 Testing the Copernican principle with weak lensing
Workshop ÒGravity and Cosmology 2012Ó, Yukawa Institute, Kyoto, December 2012.
I45 Fundamental constants, gravitation and cosmology
Multiverse and fundamental cosmology, Szczecin, Poland, 10-14 September 2012.
I44 Models of the Cosmos: hypothesis, constraints and open possibilities
Krakow, Poland, 17-18 May 2012.
I43 10 questions for cosmology
Workshop ÒCosmology 2012 and beyondÓ, 26-19 March 2012.
I42 Introduction to cosmology
Invited lecture at Cosmology winter school, Passo del Tonale, Italie, 5-9 December 2011.
I41 Modification of general relativity and the dark sector
Invited talk, Firenze, October 2011.
I40 The dark sector and the equivalence principle
Invited talk, The dark universe, Heidelberg, 4-7 October 2011.
I39 Modifications of General relativity and the equivalence principle
Invited review Talk, COSMO-2011, Porto, 22-26 August 2011.
I38 Testing the equivalence principle: the link between constants, gravitation and cosmology
Invited Talk, Astrophysics, Clocks and fundamental constants, Bad-Honnef 18-21 July 2011.
I37 Fundamental constants and the equivalence principle: recent astrophysical developments
MEARIM II (2ndcMiddle-East and Africa Regional IAU meeting) Cape Town, 10-15 April 2011.
I36 Testing general relativity – from local to cosmological scales
Invited Talk, Royal Society Theo Murphy international scientific meeting Cosmological tests of general relativity,
Kavli Royal Society International Centre in Buckinghamshire, 28 February - 1 March 2011
[Podcast of the talk].
I35 Constraints on the deviations from general relativity – from local to cosmological scales
Invited Talk, GW2010, University of Minneapolis, October 2010
I34 Fundamental constants as a test of the equivalence principle
Invited Talk, Gphys workshop ``Theoretical Connections in Fundamental Physics, Astrophysics and Cosmology",
IAP, Paris, 21 June 2010.
I33 Perturbation theory in an anisotropic universe
Invited talk at the workshop ÒGravity and Cosmology 2010Ó
Kyoto, 25 mai 2010.
I32 Fundamental constants, gravitation and cosmology
Plenary talk, German Physical Society
Hannover, 8 mars 2010
I31 Cosmology as a science
Panel 7 with B. Stoeger, J. Butterfield, and J. Ismael,
Philosophy of cosmology 2009, 22 septembre 2009, Oxford.
I30 The case for the multiverse – critical commentaries
Panel 2 with B. Greene and A. Linde,
Philosophy of cosmology, 21 septembre 209, Oxford.
I29 Dark energy: theoretical aspects
J.-P. Uzan
Invited plenary talk, Method and probes for revealing dark energy properties
24-26 novembre 2008, IAS, Orsay.
I28 Variations of fundamental constants – cosmological bounds
J.-P. Uzan
Invited plenary talk, The nature of gravity, confronting theory and experiment in space,
6-10 octobre 2008, Berne (Suisse).
I27 Theory of modified general relativity
J.-P. Uzan
Invited talk 4th ICG workshop ÒModified gravity on cosmological scalesÓ,
23 juin 2008, Portsmouth (UK).
I26 Clocks, astrophysics and cosmology
J.-P. Uzan
Invited plenary talk, Theoretical aspects of the ACES mission,
29-30 Avril 2008, Firenze (Italie).
I25 Theoretical review
J.-P. Uzan
Invited plenary talk, CosmoTools workshop,
23-25 Avril 2008, Marseille.
I24 Lensing and cosmological tests of general relativity
J.-P. Uzan
Sino-french meeting,
15 octobre 2007, Meudon.
I23 Lensing and cosmological tests of general relativity
J.-P. Uzan
Invited plenary review XXIIIrd IAP Colloque ÒFrom giant arcs to CMB lensing: 20 years of gravitational distortionÓ,
2-6 juillet 2007, Paris.
I22 LÕacclration de lÕunivers et la nature de lÕnergie sombre
J.-P. Uzan
Journes de la SF2A, 23 juin 2006, Paris (France).
I21 Le temps en cosmologie
J.-P. Uzan
``Le temps en biologie'', Ecole interdisciplinaire dÕchanges et de formation en biologie, 26 mars-1 avril 2006, Berder (France).
I20 Gravit, principe cosmologique et acclration de l'univers
J.-P. Uzan
AMT workshop ``Open questions in cosmology'', 2-3 dcembre, Narbonne (France).
I19 Tests on time variation of the constants - local physics and cosmology
J.-P. Uzan
Cape Town Cosmology Meeting, 6-10 juillet, Cape Town (South Africa).
I18 Tests of gravity on large scales and acceleration of the universe
J.-P. Uzan
Cape Town Cosmology Meeting, 6-10 juillet, Cape Town (South Africa).
I17 Topology of the universe: Where are we after WMAP?
J.-P. Uzan
Cape Town Cosmology Meeting, 6-10 juillet, Cape Town (South Africa).
I16 Gravity under the spotlight of cosmology
J.-P. Uzan
Sino-French meeting on galaxy formation, 18-23 avril, Beijing (Chine).
I15 Variation of the constants in the early and late universe
J.-P. Uzan
Phi in the sky: The Quest for Cosmological Scalar Fields, 8-10 juillet, Porto (Portugal).
I14 Emergence en cosmologie
J.-P. Uzan
Rencontres de Berder, 22-27 mars 2004.
I13 L'nergie sombre: un problme de physique fondamentale
J.-P. Uzan
JDEM, CNES Paris, 15 mars 2004.
I12 La cosmologie tardive
J.-P. Uzan
CAPPS, IPN Orsay, 15 janvier 2004.
I11 Variation of the constants and test of gravity on large scales
J.-P. Uzan
XXXVIIIth Rencontres de Moriond, Gravitational Waves and Experimental Gravity, Les Arcs, France, 22-29 mars 2003.
I10 Probing the topology of the universe with the CMB
J.-P. Uzan
Royal Astronomical Society, London, UK, 14 mars 2003.
I9 Variation of the constants and test of gravity on large scales
J.-P. Uzan
NASSP lecture, Cape Town, South Africa, 21 fvrier 2003.
I8 Variation of the constants and test of gravity on large scales
J.-P. Uzan
GREX-2002, Gravitation an Experiment, Pisa, Italy, 6-10 octobre 2002.
I7 Variation of the constants and test of gravity on large scales
J.-P. Uzan
TH-2002, UNESCO, Paris, 22-27 juin 2002.
I6 What can we learn from the constants of physics?
J.-P. Uzan
Peyresq 7, 22-28 juin 2002.
I5 What is a topological defect?
J.-P. Uzan
Meeting of the American Mathematical Society, Williamston 13-14 octobre, 2001.
I4 Simulating gravity in the brane-world
J.-P. Uzan
Journes relativistes, Dublin, 5-7 septembre, 2001.
I3 Simulated gravity without true gravity in asymmetric brane world scemarios
J.-P. Uzan
Peyresq VI, 23-30 juin, 2001.
I2 Gravity without gravity
J.-P. Uzan
Workshop "Facts and fiction in cosmology", Sils Maria 2-9 avril, 2001.
I1 Cosmology in a finite universe
J.-P. Uzan
A conference for Joseph Katz, Jerusalem, novembre 2, 1999.
O22 Light fields in the early universe
J.-P. Uzan
XXth IAP colloquium "CMB physics and observation", Paris, 28 juin-2 juillet, 2004.
O21 Cosmography vs Cosmology
J.-P. Uzan
Workshop "Facts and fiction in cosmology", Sils Maria 2-9 avril, 2001.
O20 Proprits statistiques d'un rseau de cordes cosmiques
J.-P. Uzan
Journes de Physique Statistique, ESPCI, Paris 24-25 janvier, 2001.
O19 Phenomenology of gravitational lensing by cosmic strings
J.-P. Uzan
PNC meeting, Paris 19-20 octobre, 2000.
O18 Phenomenology of gravitational lensing by cosmic strings
J.-P. Uzan
IXth Marcel Grossman Meeting, Roma, 2-7 juillet 2000.
O17 Skewness: dynamics versus initial conditions
J.-P. Uzan
IXth Marcel Grossman Meeting, Roma, 2-7 juillet 2000.
O16 3D statistical methods for searching space topology: what are the limitations?
J.-P. Uzan
IXth Marcel Grossman Meeting, Roma, 2-7 juillet 2000.
O15 Dveloppements rcents en cosmologie
J.-P. Uzan
Colloque Allain Bouyssy, Universit Paris XI., 17 fvrier 2000.
O14 Calculer dans des espaces multi-connexes
J.-P. Uzan
PNC meeting Simulation numrique et cosmologie , Observatoire de Meudon, octobre 18, 1999.
O13 New developments in the search for the topology of the universe
J.-P. Uzan
Paris-UK Cosmology meeting, IAP Paris, mars 27, 1999.
O12 Cosmic crystallography : the non-Euclidean case,
J.-P. Uzan
Cosmo-topology workshop, Paris, dcembre 14, 1998.
O11 Anisotropies du fond diffus cosmologique,
N. Deruelle, A. Riazuelo and J.-P. Uzan
Colloque du PNC, Institut d'Astrophysique de Paris, septembre 16-17, 1998.
O10 Topologie et cosmologie,
J.-P. Uzan,
IV Ecole de Cosmologie de Luminy, septembre 7-12, 1998.
O9 Anisotropies du fond diffus cosmologique et dfauts topologiques
J.-P. Uzan,
Journes Dfauts Topologiques, Universit Paris VII, avril 7th 1998.
O8 Topology of the universe and topological defects
J.-P. Uzan,
XXXIIIth de Moriond, Fundamental Parameters in Cosmology, janvier 17-24, 1998, Les Arcs, France.
O7 The no-defect conjecture
J.-P. Uzan,
Workshop on Topology and Cosmology, Cleveland, 16-18 octobre 1997.
O6 Topology of the universe and topological defects
J.-P. Uzan,
VIIIth Marcel Grossman Meeting, Jrusalem, 22-27 juin 1997.
O5 Conservation laws in cosmology
J.-P. Uzan
VIIIth Marcel Grossman Meeting, Jrusalem, 22-27 juin 1997.
O4 Topologie de l'univers et formation des dfauts topologiques
J.-P. Uzan
Peyresq, juillet 1996.
O3 Particle precipitation in auroral breakups and westward travelling surges
A. Olsson, M.A.L. Persson, H. Opgenoorth and J.-P. Uzan
Poster, E.G.S. 95, Hambourgavril 1995.
O2 Effects of the terrestrial ring currents
E.F. Donovan and J.-P. Uzan
Winter workshop of the division of aeoronomy and space physics of the canadian association of physicists, Banff, Canada, fvrier 1995.
O1 Four applications of a new global magnetospheric magnetic field model
E.F. Donovan, S. Skone, J.-P. Uzan, H. Opgenoorth and G. Rostoker
|
|||||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 30 |
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Administrivia/nobel.html
|
en
|
The Nobel Prize for Physics
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
[Physics FAQ] - [Copyright]
Originally compiled by Scott Chase, Phil Gibbs, and Johan Wevers.
Nobel Prizes for Physics, 1901–2021
The following is a complete listing of Nobel Prize awards, from the first award in 1901. Prizes were not awarded in every year. The date in brackets is the approximate date of the work. The description following the names is an abbreviation of the official citation.
The Physics prize is announced near the beginning of October each year. One of the quickest ways to get the announcement is to watch the Nobel Foundation web site at http://nobelprize.org.
1901 [1895] Wilhelm Konrad Röntgen Discovery of X rays. 1902 [1896] Hendrik Antoon Lorentz Magnetism in radiation phenomena. Pieter Zeeman 1903 [1896] Antoine Henri Bequerel Spontaneous radioactivity. [1898] Pierre Curie Marie Sklodowska-Curie 1904 [1894] Lord Rayleigh Density of gases and discovery of argon. (a.k.a. John William Strutt) 1905 [1899] Pilipp Eduard Anton von Lenard Cathode rays. 1906 [1897] Joseph John Thomson Conduction of electricity by gases. 1907 Albert Abraham Michelson Precision meteorological investigations. 1908 Gabriel Lippman Reproducing colors photographically, based on the phenomenon of interference. 1909 [1901] Carl Ferdinand Braun Wireless telegraphy. Guglielmo Marconi 1910 [1873] Johannes Diderik van der Waals Equation of state of fluids. 1911 [1896] Wilhelm Wien Laws of radiation of heat. 1912 [1909] Nils Gustaf Dalén Automatic gas flow regulators. 1913 [1911] Heike Kamerlingh Onnes Matter at low temperature. 1914 [1912] Max von Laue Crystal diffraction of X rays. 1915 [1913] William Henry Bragg X-ray analysis of crystal structure. William Lawrence Bragg 1916 No award. 1917 [1911] Charles Glover Barkla Characteristic X-ray spectra of elements. 1918 [1900] Max Planck Energy quanta. 1919 [1913] Johannes Stark Splitting of spectral lines in electric fields. 1920 Charles-Edouard Guillaume Anomalies in nickel–steel alloys. 1921 [1905] Albert Einstein Photoelectric effect. 1922 [1913] Niels Bohr Structure of atoms. 1923 [1909] Robert Andrew Millikan Elementary charge of electricity. 1924 Karl Manne Georg Siegbahn X-ray spectroscopy. 1925 [1914] James Franck Impact of an electron on an atom. Gustav Hertz 1926 Jean Baptiste Perrin Sedimentation equilibrium. 1927 [1924] Arthur Holly Compton Compton effect. [1912] Charles Thomson Rees Wilson Invention of the cloud chamber. 1928 [1903] Owen Willans Richardson Thermionic phenomena, Richardson's Law. 1929 [1923] Prince Louis-Victor de Broglie Wave nature of electrons. 1930 [1928] Sir Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman Scattering of light, Raman effect. 1931 No award. 1932 [1925] Werner Heisenberg Quantum Mechanics. 1933 [1926] Erwin Schrödinger Atomic theory. [1928] Paul Dirac 1934 No award. 1935 [1932] James Chadwick The neutron. 1936 [1932] Carl Anderson The positron. [1911] Victor Franz Hess Cosmic rays. 1937 [1925] Clinton Joseph Davisson Crystal diffraction of electrons. George Paget Thomson 1938 [1935] Enrico Fermi New radioactive elements. 1939 [1929] Ernest Orlando Lawrence Invention of the cyclotron. 1940–1942 No award. 1943 [1933] Otto Stern Proton magnetic moment. 1944 [1935] Isador Isaac Rabi Magnetic resonance in atomic nuclei. 1945 [1924] Wolfgang Pauli The exclusion principle. 1946 [1925] Percy Williams Bridgman Production of extremely high pressures. 1947 [1924] Sir Edward Victor Appleton Physics of the upper atmosphere. 1948 [1932] Patrick Maynard Stuart Blackett Cosmic ray showers in cloud chambers. 1949 [1935] Hideki Yukawa Prediction of mesons. 1950 [1947] Cecil Frank Powell Photographic emulsion for meson studies. 1951 [1932] Sir John Douglas Cockroft Artificial acceleration of atomic particles and transmutation of nuclei. Ernest Thomas Sinton Walton 1952 [1946] Felix Bloch Nuclear magnetic precision methods. Edward Mills Purcell 1953 [1935] Frits Zernike Phase-contrast microscope. 1954 [1926] Max Born Fundamental research in quantum mechanics. [1925] Walther Bothe Coincidence counters. 1955 [1947] Polykarp Kusch Electron magnetic moment. [1947] Willis Eugene Lamb Hydrogen fine structure. 1956 [1948] William Shockley Transistors. John Bardeen Walter Houser Brattain 1957 Tsung Dao Lee Parity violation. [1956] Chen Ning Yang 1958 [1934] Pavel Aleksejevic Cerenkov Interpretation of the Cerenkov effect. [1937] Il'ja Mickajlovic Frank Igor' Evgen'evic Tamm 1959 Owen Chamberlain The antiproton. [1955] Emilio Gino Segre 1960 [1952] Donald Arthur Glaser The bubble chamber. 1961 [1953] Robert Hofstadter Electron scattering on nucleons. Rudolf Ludwig Mössbauer Resonant absorption of photons. 1962 [1941] Lev Davidovic Landau Theory of liquid helium. 1963 [1931] Eugene Wigner Fundamental symmetry principles. [1949] Hans Jensen Nuclear shell structure. Maria Goeppert Mayer 1964 Nikolai Basov Maser-Laser principle. Alexander Prochorov [1958] Charles Townes 1965 [1948] Richard Feynman Quantum electrodynamics. Julian Schwinger Sin-Itiro Tomonaga 1966 [1950] Alfred Kastler Study of hertzian resonance in atoms. 1967 [1938] Hans Albrecht Bethe Energy production in stars. 1968 [1955] Luis W. Alvarez Discovery of many-particle resonances. 1969 [1964] Murray Gell-Mann Quark model for particle classification. 1970 [1942] Hannes Alfvén Magneto-hydrodynamics in plasma physics. [1932] Louis Néel Ferromagnetism and antiferromagnetism. 1971 [1947] Dennis Gabor Principles of holography. 1972 [1957] John Bardeen Theory of superconductivity. Leon Cooper Robert Schrieffer 1973 [1960] Leo Esaki Tunneling in superconductors. Ivar Giaever [1962] Brian Josephson Super-current through tunnel barriers. 1974 [1974] Antony Hewish Discovery of pulsars. [1958] Sir Martin Ryle Pioneering radioastronomy work. 1975 [1950] Aage Bohr Structure of the atomic nucleus. Ben Mottelson James Rainwater 1976 [1974] Burton Richter Discovery of the J/Psi particle. Samual Chao Chung Ting 1977 [1958] Philip Warren Anderson Electronic structure of magnetic and disordered solids. [1967] Nevill Francis Mott John Hasbrouck Van Vleck 1978 [1932] Pyotr Kapitsa Liquefaction of helium. [1965] Arno Penzias Cosmic microwave background radiation. Robert Wilson 1979 [1961] Sheldon Glashow Electroweak theory, especially weak neutral currents. [1967] Steven Weinberg [1968] Abdus Salam 1980 [1964] James Cronin Discovery of CP violation in the asymmetric decay of neutral K mesons. Val Fitch 1981 Kai Seigbahn High-resolution electron spectroscopy. [1962] Nicolaas Bloembergen Laser spectroscopy. Arthur Schawlow 1982 [1972] Kenneth Wilson Critical phenomena in phase transitions. 1983 [1935] Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Evolution of stars. [1957] William Fowler 1984 [1970] Simon van der Meer Stochastic cooling for colliders. [1983] Carlo Rubbia Discovery of W and Z particles. 1985 [1977] Klaus von Klitzing Discovery of (integer) quantum Hall effect. 1986 [1981] Gerd Binnig Scanning tunneling microscopy. Heinrich Rohrer [1932] Ernst August Friedrich Ruska Electron microscopy. 1987 [1986] Georg Bednorz High-temperature superconductivity. Alex Müller 1988 [1962] Leon Max Lederman Discovery of the muon neutrino, leading to classification of particles into families. Melvin Schwartz Jack Steinberger 1989 Hans Georg Dehmelt Penning trap for charged particles. Wolfgang Paul Paul trap for charged particles. Norman Ramsey Control of atomic transitions by the separated oscillatory fields method. 1990 [1972] Jerome Isaac Friedman Deep inelastic scattering experiments leading to the discovery of quarks. Henry Way Kendall Richard Edward Taylor 1991 Pierre-Gilles de Gennes Order-disorder transitions in liquid crystals and polymers. 1992 Georges Charpak Multiwire proportional chamber. 1993 [1974] Russell Hulse Discovery of the first binary pulsar and subsequent tests of general relativity. Joseph Taylor 1994 [1960] Bertram Brockhouse Neutron scattering experiments. [1946] Clifford Shull 1995 [1975] Martin Perl Discovery of the tau lepton. [1953] Frederick Reines Detection of the neutrino. 1996 David Lee Superfluidity in helium-3. Douglas Osheroff Robert Richardson 1997 [1985] Steven Chu Development of methods to trap and cool atoms with laser light. Claude Cohen-Tannoudji William Phillips 1998 [1982] Robert Laughlin Discovery and theory of the fractional quantum Hall effect. Horst Störmer Daniel Tsui 1999 [1972] Gerard 't Hooft Development of a renormalisation scheme for non-abelian gauge theories. Martin Veltman 2000 [1957] Herbert Kroemer Growing of heterostructures. [1963] Zhores Alferov Semiconductor laser based on heterostructures. [1958] Jack Kilby Invention of the integrated circuit. 2001 Eric Cornell Bose–Einstein condensation of alkali metals. Carl Wieman Wolfgang Ketterle 2002 Raymond Davis Jr Detection of cosmic neutrinos. Masatosh Koshiba Riccardo Giacconi Detection of cosmic X rays. 2003 Alexei Abrikosov Pioneering contributions to the theory of superconductors and superfluids. [1950] Vitaly Ginzburg [1970] Anthony Leggett 2004 [1973] David Gross Discovery of asymptotic freedom in the theory of the strong interaction. David Politzer Frank Wilczek 2005 Roy Glauber Quantum theory of optical coherence. John Hall Development of ultra-high precision measurements of light. Theodor H�nsch 2006 John Mather Study of the early universe, and developing the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) experiment. George Smoot 2007 Albert Fert Discovery of giant magnetoresistance. Peter Gr�nberg 2008 Yoichiro Nambu Discovery of the mechanism of spontaneous symmetry breaking. Makoto Kobayashi Discovery of the origin of symmetry breaking. Toshihide Maskawa 2009 Charles Kao Achievements concerning transmission of light in optical fibres. Willard Boyle Invention of the charge-coupled device (CCD). George Smith 2010 Andre Geim Experiments in graphene. Konstantin Novoselov 2011 Saul Perlmutter Discovery of the accelerating expansion of the universe. Brian Schmidt Adam Riess 2012 Serge Haroche New experimental methods for studying individual quantum systems. David Wineland 2013 Fran�ois Englert Theory of the Higgs mechanism. Peter Higgs 2014 Isamu Akasaki Invention of efficient blue light-emitting diodes. Hiroshi Amano Shuji Nakamura 2015 Takaaki Kajita Discovery of neutrino oscillations. Arthur McDonald 2016 David Thouless Discoveries involving topological phase transitions and topological phases of matter. F. Haldane J. Kosterlitz 2017 Rainer Weiss Contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves. Barry Barish Kip Thorne 2018 Arthur Ashkin Inventions in the field of laser physics. G�rard Mourou Donna Strickland 2019 James Peebles Contributions to our understanding of the evolution of the universe and Earth's place in the cosmos. Michel Mayor Didier Queloz 2020 Roger Penrose The discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of general relativity. Reinhard Genzel The discovery of a supermassive compact object at the centre of our galaxy. Andrea Ghez 2021 Syukuro Manabe The physical modelling of Earth's climate, quantifying variability and reliably predicting global warming. Klaus Hasselmann Giorgio Parisi The discovery of the interplay of disorder and fluctuations in physical systems, from atomic to planetary scales.
|
||||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 85 |
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/nobel-prize-physics-and-chemistry.html
|
en
|
Nobel prize physics and chemistry hi
|
[
"https://s.alamy.com/logos/1.68.0/alamy.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/logos/1.68.0/alamy-black.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/logos/1.68.0/alamy-black.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/logos/1.68.0/alamy.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/mastercard.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/visa.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/amex.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/paypal.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/apple-pay.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/google-pay.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Alamy Limited"
] | null |
Find the perfect nobel prize physics and chemistry stock photo, image, vector, illustration or 360 image. Available for both RF and RM licensing.
|
en
|
Alamy
|
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/nobel-prize-physics-and-chemistry.html
|
Alamy and its logo are trademarks of Alamy Ltd. and are registered in certain countries. Copyright © 25/07/2024 Alamy Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 6 |
https://www.fhs.swiss/eng/guillaume_charles_edouard.html
|
en
|
Watchmakers' and Inventors' Hall of Fame
|
https://www.fhs.swiss/favicon.ico
|
https://www.fhs.swiss/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://www.fhs.swiss/images/logo_fh_swiss.png",
"https://www.fhs.swiss/images/banner_faq.jpg",
"https://www.fhs.swiss/images/fleche_gris.png",
"https://www.fhs.swiss/images/fleche_gris.png",
"https://www.fhs.swiss/pictures/631/guillaume.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
/favicon.ico
| null |
Physicists, astronomers, architects, geometricians, mathematicians, chronometer-makers, watchmakers: these are just some of the interested people who, through the years, have displayed a passion for the measurement of time. Their research led to major discoveries and inventions that are still relevant today. Whether physical or geometrical theories, natural laws or mechanical applications, their fundamental contributions have all made it possible to measure time with greater accuracy, to create timepieces to ever higher specifications while allowing aesthetic qualities to become more refined, and even to design increasingly efficient and modern production methods.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 11 |
https://history.aip.org/phn/11710005.html
|
en
|
Guillaume, Ch.
|
https://history.aip.org/phn/favicon.ico
|
https://history.aip.org/phn/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://history.aip.org/phn/AIP-Logo.png",
"https://history.aip.org/phn/Photos/guillaume_charles_a4.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
favicon.ico
|
https://history.aip.org/phn/11710005.html
| ||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 52 |
https://www.carpentertechnology.com/blog/the-uses-for-invar-continue-to-multiply
|
en
|
The Uses for Invar Continue to Multiply
|
[
"https://www.carpentertechnology.com/hubfs/logos/carpenter-technology-logo.svg",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/a8ca1ef4-2f69-4085-9a2d-e6446410d1f2.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/7cc2f07a-858e-481d-b06e-cf4ec6517c0d.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/77d9fa95-966b-4eda-a305-fb85dce369ac.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/77d9fa95-966b-4eda-a305-fb85dce369ac.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/d267cf9b-a5fc-4000-9a41-856956a927cd.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/563c1169-51c9-4064-8caa-3c0ae8ae28fa.png",
"https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/7407324/653802aa-fd87-44fd-be68-4ba31f3e7ef7.png",
"https://www.carpentertechnology.com/hubfs/hamburger-menu.svg",
"https://www.carpentertechnology.com/hs-fs/hubfs/alloy-techzone/technical-solutions/technical-articles/ta8image001.jpg?width=291&height=295&name=ta8image001.jpg",
"https://www.carpentertechnology.com/hs-fs/hubfs/alloy-techzone/technical-solutions/technical-articles/ta8image004.gif?width=374&height=364&name=ta8image004.gif",
"https://www.carpentertechnology.com/hs-fs/hubfs/alloy-techzone/technical-solutions/technical-articles/ta8image006.gif?width=348&height=321&name=ta8image006.gif",
"https://www.carpentertechnology.com/hs-fs/hubfs/alloy-techzone/technical-solutions/technical-articles/ta8image008_v2.jpg?width=550&height=461&name=ta8image008_v2.jpg",
"https://ws.zoominfo.com/pixel/61f175185a809b0012ce3bfc"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Leslie L. Harner"
] |
2020-08-19T18:44:25+00:00
|
Still exhibiting the "Invar Effect" that defies understanding, Invar has bred an entire family of low expansion, nickel-iron alloys that are used today.
|
en
|
https://www.carpentertechnology.com/blog/the-uses-for-invar-continue-to-multiply
|
After 100 Years, The Uses for Invar Continue to Multiply
The metals world in 1996 observed the centennial of the discovery of the low expansion alloy known as Invar (UNS K93600). This remarkable alloy has been so important to scientific advancement that it earned the Nobel Prize in 1920 for its inventor, Charles-Edouard Guillaume, the first and only scientist in history to be so honored for a metallurgical achievement.
Still exhibiting the "Invar Effect" that defies understanding, Invar has bred an entire family of low expansion, nickel-iron alloys that are used today in a wide variety of both commonplace and high technology applications. Commercial uses have proliferated in fields as diverse as semiconductors, television, information technology, aerospace and cryogenic transport.
The Discovery
Guillaume, employed by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, was looking in 1896 for a metal for geodesic tapes and wires that would not change in length when exposed to temperature variations. In addition, he wanted a cost-effective material for reference bars of perfectly defined length that could be used as secondary standards throughout the world.
He had many heats of nickel-iron alloys melted, handicapped often by feed stock that was contaminated. In the process, experimenting with nickel contents of 30% to 60%, Guillaume discovered that the coefficient of expansion at room temperature was lowest at a nickel level of 36%.
With 36% nickel, in fact, the alloy exhibited the least amount of thermal expansion of any alloy known. Since Guillaume considered the expansion of his new alloy "invariable", it eventually became known as Invar.
Guillaume published a graph similar to Fig. 1 visualizing the unique thermal expansion behavior of an "Invar-Effect" alloy. The expansion characteristic of these nickel-iron alloys is broadly determined by ferromagnetism.
These alloys exhibit very low expansivity below their Curie temperature (the temperature below which they are ferromagnetic). This low thermal expansivity anomaly, often referred to as the "Invar Effect", is related to spontaneous volume magnetostriction where lattice distortion counteracts the normal lattice thermal expansivity.
Above the Curie temperature, 36% nickel and other nickel-iron alloys expand at a high rate because they are no longer ferromagnetic. A number of theories have been proposed to explain this phenomenon. Although these theories have provided some insight, the mechanism is not yet sufficiently understood.
Early Applications
Once the 36% nickel and its companion nickel-iron alloys were discovered, it didn't take long to find applications that could utilize their low thermal expansivity. Surveying tapes and wires, as well as pendulums for grandfather clocks became important early applications. Nickel-iron alloys were substituted for platinum for glass sealing wire at great cost savings in the 1920's. They also were used in light bulbs and electronic vacuum tubes for radios.
Uses expanded further in the 1930's. Nickel-iron alloys were used as one of the bimetals in thermostats for temperature control. A copper-coated 42% nickel-balance iron alloy was being used in the lead-in seals of incandescent lights. A 56% nickel alloy was used to make measuring devices for testing gauges and machine parts.
World War II greatly increased the demand for "Invar Effect" nickel-iron alloys, particularly by the military. Demand escalated dramatically for alloys used in vacuum tubes and other products in the fast growing electronics industry.
Applications continued to spread in the prosperous 1950's and 1960's. The 36% nickel and other nickel-iron alloys were needed for low expansion components in bimetals for circuit breakers, motor controls, TV temperature compensating springs, appliance and heater thermostats, aerospace and automotive controls, heating and air conditioning, etc.
Glass-to-metal and ceramic-to-metal seals were in great demand. Since several of the "Invar-Effect" nickel-iron alloys had thermal characteristics similar to those of glass and ceramics, they were the natural choice for such applications. They were also used for the sealing needs of semi-conductors and microprocessors. These include pin feed-throughs, packaging and lid seals.
Newer Applications
The demand for thermostat metals continued to grow in the 1980's and 1990's. The 36% nickel alloy has been found quite useful for containers used to transport liquid natural gas on tankers. The alloy minimizes cryogenic shrinkage.
A 36% nickel-iron alloy has been used more recently for shadow masks in high-definition CRT (television) tubes. It has been used for this application in Japan and Europe as a solution to the "doming effect" of the shadow mask. In the U. S., the 36% nickel alloy with a high expansion alloy has been used in deflection springs which reposition the mask to the color phosphors.
Newer applications use nickel-iron alloys for structural components in precision laser and optical measuring systems, and wave guide tubes. These alloys have been used in microscopes, in support systems for giant mirrors in telescopes and in a variety of scientific instruments requiring mounted lenses.
36% nickel-balance iron alloys have been used for composite molds by the aerospace industry. New generation aircraft, in particular, need 36% nickel-balance iron alloys for molds that will hold tight dimensional tolerances while advanced composites are cured at moderately high temperatures. The "Invar-Effect" family of alloys, in fact, is helping to raise modern science to higher levels with applications in orbiting satellites, lasers, ring laser gyroscopes and a host of high-tech applications.
Nature of Expansivity As shown in Fig. 1, the thermal expansion curve for "Invar-Effect" alloys consists of a low expansivity portion and a high expansivity portion. Below their Curie Temperature, these alloys are magnetic and their expansivities are anomalously low. Above it, they expand at a normal, high rate. This high rate extends to the melting point of the alloy. It can be noticed that there is a transition range between the low expansion and high expansion components. This transition is evidently related to the deterioration of ferromagnetism as the alloy approaches the Curie Temperature
Below room temperature, these alloys have low expansivity. Below approximately liquid nitrogen temperature (-196°C), their expansivity declines to near zero. The low expansion portion of the curve is most important because its slope defines the coefficient of expansion, and its length describes the useful temperature range of low expansivity.
Inflection temperature can be determined by a slope intercept method. It is the temperature at which the slopes taken from the low expansivity and the high expansivity curve portions of the expansion curve intersect. Measuring the Curie Temperature is laborious. Whereas, the inflection temperature can be determined simply from expansion curves.
In his early investigations, Guillaume learned how variations in nickel content affect the coefficient of expansion of the nickel-iron alloys. He found that expansion reached a minimum with 36% nickel (Fig. 2), and that on either side of this value the expansion coefficient increased dramatically.
Alloys with nominally less than 36% nickel are seldom used for controlled expansion applications primarily for two reasons: (a) these alloys can transform to martensite, which drastically increases the expansivity, and (b) they have low Curie Temperatures, which reduce the temperature range over which they may be used. Therefore, the alloys with 36% or more nickel are usually considered for controlled expansion applications.
The Invar Family
All of the alloys in the Invar family are nickel-iron or nickel-iron-cobalt alloys, and all exhibit face-centered cubic crystal structure. As nickel content increases from 36%, thermal expansivity and Curie Temperature also increase. Curie Temperature increases from 280°C (536°F) for 36% nickel to greater than 565°C (1050°F) for 50% nickel.
The 36% nickel alloy's low coefficient of expansion, along with its off-the-shelf availability, make it one of the most commonly used materials for applications requiring low expansivity. But, depending on the temperature range of interest, it may not be entirely suitable for some applications. Although it exhibits the lowest thermal expansivity, it also has the lowest Curie Temperature. That limits its useful temperature range.
For applications around ambient temperature requiring the lowest expansivity, the 36% nickel is the obvious choice. It has been the most widely used nickel-iron alloy in applications such as electronic devices where dimensional changes due to temperature must be minimal, for structural members in precision optical measuring devices, and as the low expansion side in bimetal thermostats.
For certain applications, however, other alloys in the Invar family may be more suitable. In each case, alloy selection should take into account the temperature range for the intended application, as well as the coefficient of expansion desired over that range. The relative expansion rates for the "Invar-Effect" alloys are shown in Fig. 3.
Two alloys in this family (Fig. 4) have been found suitable for unique low expansion requirements. FCarpenter Technology Free-Cut Invar "36"® alloy (UNS K93050), with a slight increase in expansion properties, has been shown to offer improved machinability for applications where high parts productivity is important. This alloy has been used for aircraft controls and a variety of electronic devices
The second alloy - Carpenter Technology Super Invar "32-5" - is an iron-nickel-cobalt alloy which exhibits approximately one half the thermal of Carpenter Technology Invar "36"® alloy at or near room temperature. It has been used for structural components and supports for optical and laser instruments.
Fig. 4 - Typical properties and chemical composition of the Invar family of alloys.
Any one of four other nickel-iron alloys may be particularly suitable for service in higher temperature ranges. For example, Low Expansion "39" alloy (ASTM B-753) has a useful low thermal expansivity extending to approximately 250°C (482°F). It has been used as the low expansion element in thermostat bimetal products.
Carpenter Technology Glass Sealing 42 alloy, sometimes known as 42 alloy (ASTM F-30), has been commonly used for hermetic sealing to certain glasses. It is also has been used for high reliability ceramic- and plastic-sealed semiconductor packages.
Carpenter Technology Low Expansion "42"® thermostat alloy (ASTM B-753) has a virtually constant low rate of thermal expansion at temperatures up to about 350°C (662°F), while Low Expansion "45" alloy (ASTM B-753) has a relatively constant rate of thermal expansion to about 450°C (842°F). Both metals have been used in thermostats and thermoswitches. The thermal expansivity of the higher-nickel alloy approximates the thermal expansivity of alumina ceramics over certain temperature ranges. The alloy in this family with the highest nickel content, Carpenter Technology Glass Sealing "52" alloy (ASTM F-30) has been used for glass sealing of certain "soft" glasses.
Fabricating Parts
The entire group of "Invar-Effect" nickel-iron alloys machine similar to, but not as well as a Carpenter Technology 316 austenitic stainless steel. They are readily machinable, although they are soft and do produce gummy chips. Therefore, large, sharp and rigidly supported tooling is recommended, with slower speeds. Where high productivity and good surface finish are important, a big edge goes to the Carpenter Technology Free-Cut Invar "36" alloy, the free-machining alloy variation.
All of the alloys in the family are very ductile, thus readily cold headed and formed. Stamping from cold-rolled strip is easily accomplished. Parts may be deep drawn from properly annealed strip.
Fabrication does add stresses which, unrelieved, can change the thermal expansion behavior. When that happens, parts placed in service as fabricated may not meet design requirements. To prevent such incident, annealing and stress relieving thermal treatments may be needed to promote structural uniformity and dimensional stability.
After severe forming, bending and machining, relief of stresses induced by these operations can be accomplished by annealing at temperatures of 760°C (1400°F) to 980°C (1800°F) long enough to thoroughly heat through the section. However, nickel-iron alloys will oxidize readily at these high temperatures.
When annealing cannot be done in a non-oxidizing atmosphere (vacuum, dry hydrogen, dissociated ammonia, argon, etc.), sufficient material must be present to allow cleaning by light grinding, pickling, etc., after annealing. For sections having light finishing cuts or grinding performed after annealing, stress relief is accomplished by heating to 315°C (600°F) to 425°C (800°F) long enough to uniformly heat through the work piece.
Summary
Invar is a critical alloy that has endured for more than a century. It is in a league of its own, having grown in importance over the years and given life to a stream of new technologies.
The group of "Invar-Effect" alloys represents a significant, growing volume in today's specialty metals universe. Below their Curie Temperatures, these alloys exhibit anomalously low thermal expansivities. A minimum in low thermal expansivity is reached at approximately 36% nickel. Increasing the nickel content increases the thermal expansivity and also raises the Curie temperature.
Collectively, this family of nickel-iron alloys has been found suitable for a host of applications that require different expansivities over a broad temperature range. Because of the widespread and growing demand for their special properties, these alloys seem likely to make an even greater contribution to modern science as they begin their second century on Earth.
***
By Leslie L. Harner, Product Application Manager, Electronic & Magnetic Alloys
|
||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 4 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/ceremony-speech/
|
en
|
Nobel Prize in Physics 1920
|
[
"https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2023/10/nobelprizes_2023-1024x676.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/wp-content/themes/nobelprize/assets/images/spinner.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920 was awarded to Charles Edouard Guillaume "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys"
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/ceremony-speech/
|
Award ceremony speech
Presentation Speech by Dr. A.G. Ekstrand, President of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, on December 10, 1920
Your Majesty, Your Royal Highnesses, Ladies and Gentlemen.
The Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the Nobel Prize for Physics 1920 to Ch.E. Guillaume, Director of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, for the services he has rendered to the physical precision technique by his discovery of the properties of nickel steel.
One of Greece’s greatest thinkers said that “things are numbers” and attempted to explain the origin of everything by numbers. The scientists of today do not take the cult of numbers to quite that extent; yet they recognize nevertheless that every exact knowledge of Nature begins only when we succeed in expressing the phenomena in measures and weights. The development of science has always been in step with the progress in measuring precision. This applies to astronomy, geodesy, chemistry and above all to physics, the special growth of which dates from the time when modern precision began to be applied in observations.
This was the point which had been grasped by the French National Assembly when, in 1790, it instructed the Academy of Sciences of Paris to lay down an invariable base for weights and measures. A committee was set up for that purpose, consisting of Borda, Lagrange, Laplace, Monge and Condorcet, and on their suggestion the National Assembly adopted a decimal system based on a certain part of a quadrant of the Earth’s meridian. Thus the principle of the metric system was introduced into France which was then established by a law passed by the Convention held on August 1, 1793.
In the other countries progress was slower. It was not until after a few decades that people in Europe began to realize the advantages of the metric system and that mainly because of the large international exhibitions. During the 1867 international exhibition in Paris a committee was formed by most of the countries represented at the exhibition with a view to preparing the adoption of a single international system for weights and measures. The proposal to that effect, approved by the emperor on September 1, 1869, was submitted to all the states and thus was subsequently founded the International Bureau of Weights and Measures at Breteuil, near Paris.
It was the French nation which not only conceived the idea of this great reform, but which, by its diplomatic skill, was also able to bring about its adoption in the whole civilized world; on this account, therefore, mankind owes France a great debt of gratitude.
All the copies of the standard metre and the standard kilogramme intended for the various countries are meticulously examined and compared in this International Bureau, the head of which, Charles-Edouard Guillaume, is undeniably the foremost metrologist of today. By devoting his entire life to the service of science, this scientist has made a powerful contribution to the progress of the metric system; during his long and painstaking studies he discovered a metal with the most excellent metrological properties. That is the discovery which the Swedish Academy of Sciences has sought to reward by conferring this year’s Nobel Prize for Physics, since the discovery is of great significance for the precision of scientific measurements and thereby even for the development of science in general.
Actually the mere fact of possessing an international system for weights and measures and an International Bureau for the application of that system had not done away with the difficulties entailed in each measuring or weighing operation unless it is possible to achieve here the maximum precision. With measurements of length in particular the chief source of errors was dependent on temperature as a result of the well-known property of materials to change their volume with variations in temperature.
It was thus basic to examine with the greatest precision the expansibility of all metals and alloys under the action of heat. During these delicate examinations, and particularly while studying the properties of certain types of steel, Guillaume hit on the apparently paradoxical idea that it should be possible to produce an alloy free from this universal property of materials to change their volume at various temperatures. The long and difficult experiments performed by Guillaume year after year on numerous alloys and above all on nickel steel to determine their expansibility, elasticity, hardness, changeability with age, and stability ultimately led him to the important discovery of the nickel steel alloy known as invar, the temperature coefficient of which is practically zero.
These studies and discoveries by Guillaume have continued to give rise to new and significant practical applications. Instances are the use of invar in the design of physical instruments, and especially in geodesy where Guillaume’s discovery has completely transformed the methods of measuring base lines; nickel steel has also supplanted platinum in the manufacture of incandescent lamps and on the basis of the current price of platinum this represents an annual saving of twenty million francs; lastly chronometry is indebted to Guillaume’s discoveries and investigations for a new refinement – the use of the new alloys enables watches to be adjusted more accurately and at less cost than formerly.
From the theoretical standpoint, too, Guillaume’s penetrating and systematic studies on the properties of nickel steel have had the greatest significance because they have confirmed Le Chatelier’s allotropic theory for binary and ternary alloys. He has thus made an important contribution to our knowledge of the composition of solid matter.
In consideration of the great importance of Mr. Guillaume’s work for precision metrology and thus for the development of all modern science and engineering, the Swedish Academy of Sciences has awarded this year’s Nobel Prize for Physics to Charles-Edouard Guillaume in recognition of the services which he has rendered to the physical precision technique by his discovery of the properties of nickel steel.
Monsieur Guillaume. By your persevering studies in thermometry you have deserved well of physics and chemistry; but you have gained your scientific laurels mainly in a different sector. By your studies of metal alloys and their sensitivity to temperature influences, you established that a few of those alloys possess remarkable properties; some scarcely expand on heating which suggested to you the idea of making them into measuring standards. One of the nickel steel alloys in particular, the one containing thirty-six per cent nickel, you considered to fulfil the necessary conditions. Since it is almost invariable under the action of heat and under other influences, you have called it invar. Its potential benefit to science for the construction of standards and of various instruments can readily be appreciated. In geodesy, invar wires give much more accurate base-line values than those formerly obtained.
On behalf of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, I congratulate you on your studies and on your discoveries which have been of the greatest utility and for that very reason deemed worthy of the Nobel Prize. I would now ask you to receive the prize from the hands of His Majesty the King who has been pleased to make the presentation to you.
From Nobel Lectures, Physics 1901-1921, Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1967
Copyright © The Nobel Foundation 1920
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 72 |
https://www.eaglealloys.com/interesting-facts-about-invar/
|
en
|
Interesting Facts About Invar
|
[
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/themes/bones/library/images/logo.png",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/ISO-2-darkened.png",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/themes/bones/library/images/sameday-n.png",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Capture-4-768x403.jpg",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Capture-4-768x403.jpg",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/themes/bones/library/images/phoneround.svg",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/themes/bones/library/images/phoneround.svg",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/themes/bones/library/images/emailround.svg",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/themes/bones/library/images/emailround.svg",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/themes/bones/library/images/pinround.svg",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/themes/bones/library/images/pinround.svg",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/ISO-2-darkened.png",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/ISO-2-darkened.png",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/themes/bones/library/images/sameday-b.png",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/themes/bones/library/images/sameday-b.png",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/themes/bones/library/images/emailround.svg",
"https://www.eaglealloys.com/wp-content/themes/bones/library/images/emailround.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Eagle Alloys"
] |
2018-10-24T13:52:46+00:00
|
First discovered all the way back in the late 1800s, Invar is an alloy that’s made up of 64 percent iron and 36 percent nickel. Although it was originally used to create things like thermostats for electric immersion heaters, it plays a key role in an assortment of things today. You’ll find Invar in electric... Read more »
|
en
|
Eagle Alloys Corporation
|
https://www.eaglealloys.com/interesting-facts-about-invar/
|
First discovered all the way back in the late 1800s, Invar is an alloy that’s made up of 64 percent iron and 36 percent nickel. Although it was originally used to create things like thermostats for electric immersion heaters, it plays a key role in an assortment of things today. You’ll find Invar in electric irons, toasters, computer screens, and more. Check out a few interesting facts about Invar below.
The physicist who discovered it won a Nobel Prize for doing it.
Charles Edouard Guillaume was the Swiss physicist who first founded Invar. He was given a Nobel Prize for Physics at the start of the 20th century in large part because of his work with Invar.
It’s best known for its resistance to thermal expansion.
Invar has found a home inside of so many household items because of its resistance to thermal expansion. It has the lowest thermal expansion of any metal or alloy when the temperature sits at between room temperature and 230 degrees Celsius. This makes Invar weldable and very ductile. It also prevents is from experiencing stress corrosion cracking.
It could become even more valuable in the not-too-distant future.
The thought is that Invar might play a vital part in the future of composite manufacturing sometime soon. In the aerospace industry, for example, companies may begin using Invar more to make weight/strength improvements to their products while adding increased thermal resistance to them. It could make Invar even more valuable to the world as we move forward.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 84 |
https://www.geni.com/surnames/guillaume
|
en
|
Guillaume Genealogy, Guillaume Family History
|
[
"http://www.geni.com/images/rotating_world.gif?1721070649",
"http://www.geni.com/images/transparent.gif?1721070649",
"http://www.geni.com/images/transparent.gif?1721070649",
"http://www.geni.com/images/transparent.gif?1721070649",
"http://www.geni.com/images/transparent.gif?1721070649",
"http://www.geni.com/images/external/x_com_black.svg?1721070649",
"http://www.geni.com/images/transparent.gif?1721070649",
"http://www.geni.com/images/transparent.gif?1721070649",
"http://www.geni.com/images/march_mini_tree.png?1721070649",
"http://www.geni.com/images/transparent.gif?1721070649",
"http://www.geni.com/images/transparent.gif?1721070649",
"http://www.geni.com/images/transparent.gif?1721070649",
"https://media.geni.com/p13/9c/14/89/ac/53444849e3f9f861/6284aaed-f17f-446f-8ec5-bb4986313dc4_t2.jpg?hash=317918519169b1392dc60f61e09ff2241fb4f80f31f7e18f5144cafdabe0c1ae.1721458799",
"https://media.geni.com/p13/91/93/3e/39/53444839edeee75c/guillaume_1920_t2.jpg?hash=9f239a28da8a3aebebca8da66c4da796c092d18ba673de54bf1e127ec92bfdbc.1721458799",
"https://media.geni.com/p14/b9/7d/09/cc/53444863de848757/300px-ferdinand_guillaume_1911_t2.jpg?hash=4a6cbe49d9f44bd2f21f52452e53444201ce2b7e3bfae7319a784c7795f11475.1721458799",
"https://assets10.geni.com/images/photo_silhouette_m_thumb2.gif",
"https://assets10.geni.com/images/photo_silhouette_f_thumb2.gif",
"http://www.geni.com/images/external/x_com_black_16.png?1721070649",
"http://www.geni.com/images/facebook_white_small_short.gif?1721070649"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"family tree",
"genealogy",
"trace your ancestry",
"family tree maker",
"family tree search",
"family tree charts",
"family statistics",
"ancestors",
"research"
] | null |
[] | null |
There are 3283 profiles for the Guillaume family on Geni.com. Explore Guillaume genealogy and family history in the World's Largest Family Tree.
|
en
|
/touch-icon-iphone.png
|
geni_family_tree
|
https://www.geni.com/surnames/guillaume
|
Bonjour !
Je recherche à compléter l'ascendance de Louis GUILLAUME(-GENTIL), originaire de La Sagne NE (Suisse), né le 21.10.1878 à Besançon 25 (France). Je dispose d'une dizaine de générations - dont les données sont parfois incomplètes - que je vous vous transmets volontiers si je peux disposer d'une adresse E-mail...
Avec mes remerciements et cordiales salutations,
Eric Nusslé, conservateur www.archives-vivantes.ch
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 25 |
https://www.livescience.com/16362-nobel-prize-physics-list.html
|
en
|
Nobel Prize in Physics: 1901-Present
|
[
"https://mos.fie.futurecdn.net/nsn8tjxqmqhfgoo4-16455329884552.png",
"https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j8cKnbQFcGupxZQsTfdL34-320-80.jpg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://vanilla.futurecdn.net/cyclingnews/media/img/missing-image.svg",
"https://sb.scorecardresearch.com/p/?c1=2&c2=10055482&cv=4.4.0&cj=1"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Live Science Staff"
] |
2022-10-04T14:39:22+00:00
|
The history of the winners of the Nobel Prize in physics, including Steven Chu, Aage Niels Bohr and Enrico Fermi.
|
en
|
livescience.com
|
https://www.livescience.com/16362-nobel-prize-physics-list.html
|
According to Alfred Nobel's will, the Nobel Prize in Physics was to go to "the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics." The prize has been awarded every year except for 1916, 1931, 1934, 1940, 1941 and 1942.
Here is the full list of winners:
2023: Pierre Agostini, Ferenc Krausz, and Anne L’Huillier won the 2023 prize for devising a way to generate pulses of light measured in attoseconds — one quintillionth of a second. An attosecond is to a second what a second is to the age of the universe, a miniscule slice of time so short that it can be used to peer at the movements of electrons and molecules.
2022: American physicist John Clauser, French physicist Alain Aspect and Austrian physicist Anton Zeilinger each shared the 2022 prize "for experiments with entangled photons, establishing the violation of Bell inequalities and pioneering quantum information science,” according to the Nobel Prize organization. Their work demonstrated that what Einstein so famously dubbed "spooky action at a distance" is real and laid the groundwork for early quantum computers.
2021: The 2021 Nobel prize went to three scientists whose work alerted the world to the dangers of climate change. The prize was awarded for "for groundbreaking contributions to our understanding of complex physical systems." Syukuro Manabe and Klaus Hasselmann shared one-half of the prize "for the physical modeling of Earth’s climate, quantifying variability and reliably predicting global warming" while Giorgio Parisi won the other half "for the discovery of the interplay of disorder and fluctuations in physical systems from atomic to planetary scales."
2020: The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020 was divided amongst a trio of black hole researchers. One half of the award went to Roger Penrose, "for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity", while Reinhard Genzel and Andrea Ghez jointly shared the other half "for the discovery of a supermassive compact object at the centre of our galaxy"
2019: Canadian-American James Peebles of Princeton University received one-half of the Nobel "for theoretical discoveries in physical cosmology," the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said. The other half of the prize was awarded jointly to Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz, "for the discovery of an exoplanet orbiting a solar-type star," the Academy said. Mayor is a professor at the University of Geneva in Switzerland, and Queloz is at both the University of Geneva and the University of Cambridge in the U.K.
Together, the trio won the Nobel "for contributions to our understanding of the evolution of the universe and Earth’s place in the cosmos," the Academy said.
2018: Arthur Ashkin was awarded one half of the prize, and the other half was awarded jointly to Donna Strickland and Gérard Mourou, "for groundbreaking inventions in the field of laser physics." This was the first time in 55 years that a woman was part of the Nobel Prize in physics. [Read more about the 2018 prize and Nobel Laureates]
2017: Half of the 9 million Swedish krona ($1.1 million) award went to Rainer Weiss of MIT. The other half was shared jointly to Barry Barish and Kip Thorne of Caltech. The prize honored the trio's "decisive contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves," according to Nobelprize.org. The three scientists were integral in the first detection of the ripples in space-time called gravitational waves. The waves in this case came from the collision of two black holes 1.3 billion years ago.
2016: One half was awarded to David J. Thouless, of the University of Washington, Seattle, and the other half to F. Duncan M. Haldane, Princeton University, and J. Michael Kosterlitz, Brown University, Providence. Their theoretical discoveries opened the door to a weird world where matter can take on strange states. According to the Nobel Foundation: "Thanks to their pioneering work, the hunt is now on for new and exotic phases of matter. Many people are hopeful of future applications in both materials science and electronics."
2015: Takaaki Kajita and Arthur B. McDonald for showing the metamorphosis of neutrinos, which revealed that the subatomic particles have mass and opened up a new realm in particle physics.
2014: Isamu Akasaki, Hiroshi Amano and Shuji Nakamura for their invention of an energy-efficient light source: blue light-emitting diodes (LEDs).
2013: Peter Higgs of the United Kingdom and François Englert of Belgium, two of the scientists who predicted the existence of the Higgs boson nearly 50 years ago. [Related: Higgs Boson Physicists Snag Nobel Prize]
2012: French physicist Serge Haroche and American physicist David Wineland, for their pioneering research in quantum optics.
2011: One half awarded to Saul Perlmutter, the other half jointly to Brian P. Schmidt and Adam G. Riess, "for the discovery of the accelerating expansion of the Universe through observations of distant supernovae."
2010: Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov, "for groundbreaking experiments regarding the two-dimensional material graphene."
2009: Charles K. Kao, "for groundbreaking achievements concerning the transmission of light in fibers for optical communication," and Willard S. Boyle and George E. Smith, "for the invention of an imaging semiconductor circuit – the CCD sensor."
2008: Yoichiro Nambu, "for the discovery of the mechanism of spontaneous broken symmetry in subatomic physics," and Makoto Kobayashi, Toshihide Maskawa, "for the discovery of the origin of the broken symmetry which predicts the existence of at least three families of quarks in nature."
2007: Albert Fert and Peter Grünberg, "for the discovery of Giant Magnetoresistance"
2006: John C. Mather and George F. Smoot, "for their discovery of the blackbody form and anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background radiation."
2005: Roy J. Glauber, "for his contribution to the quantum theory of optical coherence," and John L. Hall and Theodor W. Hänsch, "for their contributions to the development of laser-based precision spectroscopy, including the optical frequency comb technique."
2004: David J. Gross, H. David Politzer and Frank Wilczek, "for the discovery of asymptotic freedom in the theory of the strong interaction."
2003: Alexei A. Abrikosov, Vitaly L. Ginzburg and Anthony J. Leggett, "for pioneering contributions to the theory of superconductors and superfluids."
2002: Raymond Davis Jr. and Masatoshi Koshiba, "for pioneering contributions to astrophysics, in particular for the detection of cosmic neutrinos," and Riccardo Giacconi, "for pioneering contributions to astrophysics, which have led to the discovery of cosmic X-ray sources."
2001: Eric A. Cornell, Wolfgang Ketterle and Carl E. Wieman, "for the achievement of Bose-Einstein condensation in dilute gases of alkali atoms, and for early fundamental studies of the properties of the condensates."
2000: Zhores I. Alferov and Herbert Kroemer, "for developing semiconductor heterostructures used in high-speed- and opto-electronics," and Jack S. Kilby "for his part in the invention of the integrated circuit."
1999: Gerardus 't Hooft and Martinus J.G. Veltman, "for elucidating the quantum structure of electroweak interactions in physics."
1998: Robert B. Laughlin, Horst L. Störmer and Daniel C. Tsui, "for their discovery of a new form of quantum fluid with fractionally charged excitations."
1997: Steven Chu, Claude Cohen-Tannoudji and William D. Phillips, "for development of methods to cool and trap atoms with laser light."
1996: David M. Lee, Douglas D. Osheroff and Robert C. Richardson, "for their discovery of superfluidity in helium-3."
1995: Martin L. Perl, "for the discovery of the tau lepton," and Frederick Reines, "for the detection of the neutrino."
1994: Bertram N. Brockhouse, "for the development of neutron spectroscopy," and Clifford G. Shull, "for the development of the neutron diffraction technique."
1993: Russell A. Hulse and Joseph H. Taylor Jr., "for the discovery of a new type of pulsar, a discovery that has opened up new possibilities for the study of gravitation."
1992: Georges Charpak, "for his invention and development of particle detectors, in particular the multiwire proportional chamber."
1991: Pierre-Gilles de Gennes, "for discovering that methods developed for studying order phenomena in simple systems can be generalized to more complex forms of matter, in particular to liquid crystals and polymers."
1990: Jerome I. Friedman, Henry W. Kendall and Richard E. Taylor, "for their pioneering investigations concerning deep inelastic scattering of electrons on protons and bound neutrons, which have been of essential importance for the development of the quark model in particle physics."
1989: Norman F. Ramsey, "for the invention of the separated oscillatory fields method and its use in the hydrogen maser and other atomic clocks," and Hans G. Dehmelt and Wolfgang Paul, "for the development of the ion trap technique."
1988: Leon M. Lederman, Melvin Schwartz and Jack Steinberger, "for the neutrino beam method and the demonstration of the doublet structure of the leptons through the discovery of the muon neutrino."
1987: J. Georg Bednorz and K. Alexander Müller, "for their important break-through in the discovery of superconductivity in ceramic materials."
1986: Ernst Ruska, "for his fundamental work in electron optics, and for the design of the first electron microscope," and Gerd Binnig and Heinrich Rohrer, "for their design of the scanning tunneling microscope."
1985: Klaus von Klitzing, "for the discovery of the quantized Hall effect".
1984: Carlo Rubbia and Simon van der Meer, "for their decisive contributions to the large project, which led to the discovery of the field particles W and Z, communicators of weak interaction."
1983: Subramanyan Chandrasekhar, "for his theoretical studies of the physical processes of importance to the structure and evolution of the stars," and William Alfred Fowler, "for his theoretical and experimental studies of the nuclear reactions of importance in the formation of the chemical elements in the universe."
1982: Kenneth G. Wilson, "for his theory for critical phenomena in connection with phase transitions."
1981: Nicolaas Bloembergen and Arthur Leonard Schawlow, "for their contribution to the development of laser spectroscopy," and Kai M. Siegbahn, "for his contribution to the development of high-resolution electron spectroscopy."
1980: James Watson Cronin and Val Logsdon Fitch, "for the discovery of violations of fundamental symmetry principles in the decay of neutral K-mesons."
1979: Sheldon Lee Glashow, Abdus Salam and Steven Weinberg, "for their contributions to the theory of the unified weak and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles, including, inter alia, the prediction of the weak neutral current."
1978: Pyotr Leonidovich Kapitsa, "for his basic inventions and discoveries in the area of low-temperature physics," and Arno Allan Penzias, Robert Woodrow Wilson "for their discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation."
1977: Philip Warren Anderson, Sir Nevill Francis Mott and John Hasbrouck van Vleck, "for their fundamental theoretical investigations of the electronic structure of magnetic and disordered systems."
1976: Burton Richter and Samuel Chao Chung Ting, "for their pioneering work in the discovery of a heavy elementary particle of a new kind."
1975: Aage Niels Bohr, Ben Roy Mottelson and Leo James Rainwater, "for the discovery of the connection between collective motion and particle motion in atomic nuclei and the development of the theory of the structure of the atomic nucleus based on this connection."
1974: Sir Martin Ryle and Antony Hewish, "for their pioneering research in radio astrophysics: Ryle for his observations and inventions, in particular of the aperture synthesis technique, and Hewish for his decisive role in the discovery of pulsars."
1973: Leo Esaki and Ivar Giaever, for "for their experimental discoveries regarding tunneling phenomena in semiconductors and superconductors, respectively," and Brian David Josephson, "for his theoretical predictions of the properties of a supercurrent through a tunnel barrier, in particular those phenomena which are generally known as the Josephson effects."
1972: John Bardeen, Leon Neil Cooper, John Robert Schrieffer, "for their jointly developed theory of superconductivity, usually called the BCS-theory."
1971: Dennis Gabor, "for his invention and development of the holographic method."
1970: Hannes Olof Gösta Alfvén, "for fundamental work and discoveries in magnetohydro- dynamics with fruitful applications in different parts of plasma physics," and Louis Eugène Félix Néel, "for fundamental work and discoveries concerning antiferromagnetism and ferrimagnetism which have led to important applications in solid state physics."
1969: Murray Gell-Mann, "for his contributions and discoveries concerning the classification of elementary particles and their interactions."
1968: Luis Walter Alvarez, "for his decisive contributions to elementary particle physics, in particular the discovery of a large number of resonance states, made possible through his development of the technique of using hydrogen bubble chamber and data analysis."
1967: Hans Albrecht Bethe, "for his contributions to the theory of nuclear reactions, especially his discoveries concerning the energy production in stars."
1966: Alfred Kastler, "for the discovery and development of optical methods for studying Hertzian resonances in atoms."
1965: Sin-Itiro Tomonaga, Julian Schwinger and Richard P. Feynman, "for their fundamental work in quantum electrodynamics, with deep-ploughing consequences for the physics of elementary particles."
1964: Charles Hard Townes, "for fundamental work in the field of quantum electronics, which has led to the construction of oscillators and amplifiers based on the maser-laser principle," and Nicolay Gennadiyevich Basov and Aleksandr Mikhailovich Prokhorov, "for fundamental work in the field of quantum electronics, which has led to the construction of oscillators and amplifiers based on the maser-laser principle."
1963: Eugene Paul Wigner, "for his contributions to the theory of the atomic nucleus and the elementary particles, particularly through the discovery and application of fundamental symmetry principles," and Maria Goeppert-Mayer and J. Hans D. Jensen, "for their discoveries concerning nuclear shell structure."
1962: Lev Davidovich Landau, "for his pioneering theories for condensed matter, especially liquid helium."
1961: Robert Hofstadter, "for his pioneering studies of electron scattering in atomic nuclei and for his thereby achieved discoveries concerning the structure of the nucleons," and Rudolf Ludwig Mössbauer, "for his researches concerning the resonance absorption of gamma radiation and his discovery in this connection of the effect which bears his name."
1960: Donald Arthur Glaser, "for the invention of the bubble chamber."
1959: Emilio Gino Segrè and Owen Chamberlain, "for their discovery of the antiproton."
1958: Pavel Alekseyevich Cherenkov, Il´ja Mikhailovich Frank and Igor Yevgenyevich Tamm, "for the discovery and the interpretation of the Cherenkov effect."
1957: Chen Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao (T.D.) Lee, "for their penetrating investigation of the so-called parity laws which has led to important discoveries regarding the elementary particles."
1956: William Bradford Shockley, John Bardeen and Walter Houser Brattain, "for their researches on semiconductors and their discovery of the transistor effect."
1955: Willis Eugene Lamb, "for his discoveries concerning the fine structure of the hydrogen spectrum," and Polykarp Kusch, "for his precision determination of the magnetic moment of the electron."
1954: Max Born, "for his fundamental research in quantum mechanics, especially for his statistical interpretation of the wavefunction," and Walther Bothe, "for the coincidence method and his discoveries made therewith."
1953: Frits (Frederik) Zernike, "for his demonstration of the phase contrast method, especially for his invention of the phase contrast microscope."
1952: Felix Bloch and Edward Mills Purcell, "for their development of new methods for nuclear magnetic precision measurements and discoveries in connection therewith."
1951: Sir John Douglas Cockcroft and Ernest Thomas Sinton Walton, "for their pioneer work on the transmutation of atomic nuclei by artificially accelerated atomic particles."
1950: Cecil Frank Powell, "for his development of the photographic method of studying nuclear processes and his discoveries regarding mesons made with this method."
1949: Hideki Yukawa, "for his prediction of the existence of mesons on the basis of theoretical work on nuclear forces."
1948: Patrick Maynard Stuart Blackett, "for his development of the Wilson cloud chamber method, and his discoveries therewith in the fields of nuclear physics and cosmic radiation."
1947: Sir Edward Victor Appleton, "for his investigations of the physics of the upper atmosphere especially for the discovery of the so-called Appleton layer."
1946: Percy Williams Bridgman, "for the invention of an apparatus to produce extremely high pressures, and for the discoveries he made therewith in the field of high pressure physics."
1945: Wolfgang Pauli, "for the discovery of the Exclusion Principle, also called the Pauli Principle."
1944: Isidor Isaac Rabi, "for his resonance method for recording the magnetic properties of atomic nuclei."
1943: Otto Stern, "for his contribution to the development of the molecular ray method and his discovery of the magnetic moment of the proton."
1940-1942: No Prizes awarded.
1939: Ernest Orlando Lawrence, "for the invention and development of the cyclotron and for results obtained with it, especially with regard to artificial radioactive elements."
1938: Enrico Fermi, "for his demonstrations of the existence of new radioactive elements produced by neutron irradiation, and for his related discovery of nuclear reactions brought about by slow neutrons."
1937: Clinton Joseph Davisson and George Paget Thomson, "for their experimental discovery of the diffraction of electrons by crystals."
1936: Victor Franz Hess, "for his discovery of cosmic radiation," and Carl David Anderson, "for his discovery of the positron."
1935: James Chadwick, "for the discovery of the neutron."
1934: No Prize awarded
1933: Erwin Schrödinger and Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac, "for the discovery of new productive forms of atomic theory."
1932: Werner Karl Heisenberg, "for the creation of quantum mechanics, the application of which has, inter alia, led to the discovery of the allotropic forms of hydrogen."
1931: No Prize awarded
1930: Sir Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman, "for his work on the scattering of light and for the discovery of the effect named after him"
1929: Prince Louis-Victor Pierre Raymond de Broglie, "for his discovery of the wave nature of electrons."
1928: Owen Willans Richardson, "for his work on the thermionic phenomenon and especially for the discovery of the law named after him."
1927: Arthur Holly Compton, "for his discovery of the effect named after him," and Charles Thomson Rees Wilson, "for his method of making the paths of electrically charged particles visible by condensation of vapor."
1926: Jean Baptiste Perrin, "for his work on the discontinuous structure of matter, and especially for his discovery of sedimentation equilibrium."
1925: James Franck and Gustav Ludwig Hertz, "for their discovery of the laws governing the impact of an electron upon an atom."
1924: Karl Manne Georg Siegbahn, "for his discoveries and research in the field of X-ray spectroscopy."
1923: Robert Andrews Millikan, "for his work on the elementary charge of electricity and on the photoelectric effect."
1922: Niels Henrik David Bohr, "for his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them."
1921: Albert Einstein, "for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect."
1920: Charles Edouard Guillaume, "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys."
1919: Johannes Stark, "for his discovery of the Doppler effect in canal rays and the splitting of spectral lines in electric fields."
1918: Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck, "in recognition of the services he rendered to the advancement of Physics by his discovery of energy quanta."
1917: Charles Glover Barkla, "for his discovery of the characteristic Röntgen radiation of the elements."
1916: No Prize awarded.
1915: Sir William Henry Bragg and William Lawrence Bragg, "for their services in the analysis of crystal structure by means of X-rays."
1914: Max von Laue, "for his discovery of the diffraction of X-rays by crystals."
1913: Heike Kamerlingh Onnes, "for his investigations on the properties of matter at low temperatures which led, inter alia, to the production of liquid helium."
1912: Nils Gustaf Dalén, "for his invention of automatic regulators for use in conjunction with gas accumulators for illuminating lighthouses and buoys."
1911: Wilhelm Wien, "for his discoveries regarding the laws governing the radiation of heat."
1910: Johannes Diderik van der Waals, "for his work on the equation of state for gases and liquids."
1909: Guglielmo Marconi and Karl Ferdinand Braun, "in recognition of their contributions to the development of wireless telegraphy."
1908: Gabriel Lippmann, "for his method of reproducing colors photographically based on the phenomenon of interference."
1907: Albert Abraham Michelson, "for his optical precision instruments and the spectroscopic and metrological investigations carried out with their aid."
1906: Joseph John Thomson, "in recognition of the great merits of his theoretical and experimental investigations on the conduction of electricity by gases."
1905: Philipp Eduard Anton von Lenard, "for his work on cathode rays."
1904: Lord Rayleigh (John William Strutt), "for his investigations of the densities of the most important gases and for his discovery of argon in connection with these studies."
1903: Antoine Henri Becquerel, " "in recognition of the extraordinary services he has rendered by his discovery of spontaneous radioactivity," and Pierre Curie and Marie Curie, née Sklodowska, "in recognition of the extraordinary services they have rendered by their joint researches on the radiation phenomena discovered by Professor Henri Becquerel."
1902: Hendrik Antoon Lorentz and Pieter Zeeman, "in recognition of the extraordinary service they rendered by their researches into the influence of magnetism upon radiation phenomena."
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 69 |
https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/en/jsh-archives-nobel-prize-winner-guillaume-1st-ssc-honorary-member/
|
en
|
JSH Archives: Nobel Prize winner Guillaume, 1st SSC honorary member
|
[
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/swiss-watch-passport-logo.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/cropped-swiss-watch-passport-favicon.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/plugins/sitepress-multilingual-cms/res/flags/en.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/plugins/sitepress-multilingual-cms/res/flags/fr.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/plugins/sitepress-multilingual-cms/res/flags/en.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/plugins/sitepress-multilingual-cms/res/flags/fr.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/03_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport_athenee-palais-geneve_005-1320x881-copie-600x380.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Athenee-Palais-Geneve_320x880.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/02_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-JSH-Dec-1924-La-Une-copie.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3f/1918_Charles_%C3%89douard_Guillaume.jpg/220px-1918_Charles_%C3%89douard_Guillaume.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/03_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Charles-Edouad-Guillaume_Nobel-1920.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/01_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Palais-de-l-Athenee-JSH-1924-copie.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport_.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/05_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Distribution-Congres-copie-1-scaled.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/04_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-SSC_Cover-Hors-Serie-copie-scaled.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/00_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-LVMH-Frederic-Arnault_©Ludovic-Marin_AFP-1-300x191.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/05_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Dufour-Fondation-Scaner-Hopital-Vallee-de-Joux-Famille-DSC02830-scaled-e1720703665266-300x188.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/00_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Tekitoi-marco_tedeschi-selfie2-230x300.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/01b_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-concepto-BUGATTI-World-Premiere-Presskit-Images-32-scaled-e1720722810763-300x188.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/00_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Ba111od-chapitre-6-Diamants-Lunaire-300x183.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/01_JSH-02-MOM-Le-Cadran-tranche-scaled-e1591960710478.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/01_JSH-Printemps-2020-Cover-LR-scaled.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/swiss-watch-passport-logo.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"✍ Joel A. Grandjean",
"www.facebook.com",
"joel.grandjean"
] |
2024-01-13T16:32:10+00:00
|
en
|
Watch Passports by JSH®
|
https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/en/jsh-archives-nobel-prize-winner-guillaume-1st-ssc-honorary-member/
| |||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 33 |
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/horologist/charles-edouard-guillaume-inventor-of-invar-hairsp-t853.html
|
en
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume. Inventor Of Invar Hairsprings.
|
[
"https://d5nxst8fruw4z.cloudfront.net/atrk.gif?account=fdH3q1kx0820/9",
"https://groups.tapatalk-cdn.com/static/image/logo_t.png",
"http://horologist.com/images/guillaume.gif",
"http://horologist.com/images/guillaume1.jpg",
"https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/horologist/cron.php?cron_type=cron.task.core.tidy_cache&sid=0adbd5ab338120164cac87bb48f88525"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2006-02-27T23:25:00+00:00
|
The 20th century began with a major breakthrough: The Frenchman Charles Edouard Guillaume invented a material called Invar, a nickel-steel alloy. (Gui
|
en
|
https://groups.tapatalk-cdn.com/static/image/favicon.ico
|
Antique Time American Horologist Message Board
|
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/horologist/charles-edouard-guillaume-inventor-of-invar-hairsp-t853.html
| |||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 89 |
en
|
File:Guillaume 1920.jpg
|
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Guillaume_1920.jpg?20100905232142",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/PD-icon.svg/64px-PD-icon.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6e/Dialog-warning.svg/25px-Dialog-warning.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/Flag_of_Sweden.svg/80px-Flag_of_Sweden.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/Guillaume_1920.jpg/85px-Guillaume_1920.jpg?20100905232142",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/archive/5/51/20100905232141%21Guillaume_1920.jpg/85px-Guillaume_1920.jpg",
"https://login.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAutoLogin/start?type=1x1",
"https://commons.wikimedia.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.svg",
"https://commons.wikimedia.org/static/images/footer/poweredby_mediawiki.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/static/apple-touch/commons.png
|
This Swedish photograph is in the public domain in Sweden because one of the following applies:
The photograph does not reach the Swedish threshold of originality (common for snapshots and journalistic photos) and was created before 1 January 1974 (SFS 1960:729, § 49a).
The photograph was published anonymously before 1 January 1954 and the author did not reveal their identity during the following 70 years (SFS 1960:729, § 44).
For photos in the first category created before 1969, also {{PD-1996}} usually applies. For photos in the second category published before 1929, also {{PD-US-expired}} usually applies.
If the photographer died before 1954, {{PD-old-70}} should be used instead of this tag. If the author died before 1926, also {{PD-1996}} usually applies.
You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States. Note that a few countries have copyright terms longer than 70 years: Mexico has 100 years, Jamaica has 95 years, Colombia has 80 years, and Guatemala and Samoa have 75 years. This image may not be in the public domain in these countries, which moreover do not implement the rule of the shorter term. Honduras has a general copyright term of 75 years, but it does implement the rule of the shorter term. Copyright may extend on works created by French who died for France in World War II (more information), Russians who served in the Eastern Front of World War II (known as the Great Patriotic War in Russia) and posthumously rehabilitated victims of Soviet repressions (more information).
|
||||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 1 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/summary/
|
en
|
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920
|
[
"https://www.nobelprize.org/images/guillaume-12918-portrait-medium.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2023/10/nobelprizes_2023-1024x676.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/wp-content/themes/nobelprize/assets/images/spinner.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920 was awarded to Charles Edouard Guillaume "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys"
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/summary/
|
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920 was awarded to Charles Edouard Guillaume "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys"
To cite this section
MLA style: The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach AB 2024. Mon. 22 Jul 2024. <https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/summary/>
Back to top Back To Top Takes users back to the top of the page
Nobel Prizes and laureates
Eleven laureates were awarded a Nobel Prize in 2023, for achievements that have conferred the greatest benefit to humankind. Their work and discoveries range from effective mRNA vaccines and attosecond physics to fighting against the oppression of women.
See them all presented here.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 28 |
https://letsquiz.com/quiz/charles-edouard-guillaume/where-did-charles-edouard-guillaume-give-the-guthrie-lecture
|
en
|
Where did Charles Édouard Guillaume give the Guthrie Lecture?
|
[
"https://letsquiz.com/_next/image?url=%2Flogo_23.png&w=256&q=75 1x, /_next/image?url=%2Flogo_23.png&w=384&q=75 2x",
"https://letsquiz.com/_next/image?url=%2Ffeedback_button.png&w=48&q=75 1x, /_next/image?url=%2Ffeedback_button.png&w=96&q=75 2x",
"https://letsquiz.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=64,format=webp/http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Guillaume_1920.jpg 1x, /cdn-cgi/image/width=128,format=webp/http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Guillaume_1920.jpg 2x",
"https://letsquiz.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=256,format=webp/http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Charles_Laveran_nobel.jpg 1x, /cdn-cgi/image/width=640,format=webp/http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Charles_Laveran_nobel.jpg 2x",
"https://letsquiz.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=256,format=webp/http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/L%C3%A9on_Bourgeois.jpg 1x, /cdn-cgi/image/width=640,format=webp/http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/L%C3%A9on_Bourgeois.jpg 2x",
"https://letsquiz.com/_next/image?url=%2Fsubscribe.png&w=640&q=75 1x, /_next/image?url=%2Fsubscribe.png&w=1080&q=75 2x",
"https://letsquiz.com/_next/image?url=%2Flogo_23.png&w=256&q=75 1x, /_next/image?url=%2Flogo_23.png&w=640&q=75 2x",
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=3564506823827494&ev=PageView&noscript=1"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
London was the location where Charles Édouard Guillaume delivered the Guthrie Lecture. This prestigious lecture is given annually by a distinguished scientist at the Institute of Physics in London. Gu
|
en
|
/apple-touch-icon.png
|
https://letsquiz.com/quiz/charles-edouard-guillaume/where-did-charles-edouard-guillaume-give-the-guthrie-lecture
|
Unraveling the Genius: The Life and Legacy of Charles Édouard Guillaume
Created using data under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike Licence & the media files are available under their respective licenses; additional terms may apply.
For more information, please review our About us page. // By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 48 |
https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/article/257
|
en
|
https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/assets/img/favicon.ico
|
https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/assets/img/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/assets/img/logo_288.jpg 2x",
"https://play.google.com/intl/it_it/badges/images/generic/it_badge_web_generic.png",
"https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/assets/img/badge_iOS.svg",
"https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/thumbs.php?ID=1445&W=1200 2x"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/assets/img/favicon144.png
| null |
On a hot summer afternoon in 1923 in the Conference Hall at the Gothenburg Jubilee Exhibition, Albert Einstein gave a talk on “Fundamental ideas and problems of the theory of relativity” as can be seen in fig. 1. In the large audience, besides the conference participants at the 17th Scandinavian Natural Sciences Meeting, were in the front row the Swedish King, Gustav V, and Svante Arrhenius (1859–1927) the man responsible for inviting Einstein. This lecture became Einstein’s Nobel Lecture for his 1921 Nobel Prize in physics that was awarded in 1922.
What was the background to this? Why on Earth did such a large crowd attend a physics lecture in the middle of a heat wave and why was Einstein not awarded the Nobel Prize for his theories of relativity as most people would expect? This paper will search for an explanation by looking into the evaluation work of Einstein for the Nobel Prize.
1 How the Nobel Prize works
The statutes of the Nobel Foundation govern how the Nobel system works. It is based on Alfred Nobel’s will, but the Nobel Foundation is nowhere mentioned in the will. The Nobel Foundation was instead created by the Prize awarding institutions to manage their common interests and facilitate the general collaboration between the Prize awarders. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, mentioned in the will, awards the Nobel Prizes in physics and chemistry. Each Prize awarder also has their separate statutes that govern the evaluation work. Only invited nominators in certain categories are entitled to nominate. A successful candidate must have at least one nomination, but it is not automatically so that the most nominations get you the Prize. A five-person Nobel committee then evaluates all nominees, and the committee decides who are the most interesting candidates who are subjected to special reports. Then the Nobel Committee writes up a general report briefly discussing all nominees before presenting more extensive coverage of the main contenders, and most reasoning goes into that year’s committee proposal in the end. Then the proposal is discussed by the physics class of the Academy and finally there is the formal vote in pleno where all members of the Academy have the right to vote.
During the period from the first nomination of Einstein in 1910 until he was awarded the 1921 Prize in 1922 there was an increasing number of nominations as can be seen from fig. 2, but it was not until 1919, when the Nobel Committee made its first special evaluation of Einstein, and then it was the case of the Brownian motion.
2 Nominations of Einstein
Aant Elzinga, who has closely studied Einstein and the Nobel Prize, has grouped the nominations for Einstein in three periods. In the first period of nominations (1910–1914) it was mostly the special relativity that was proposed.
For these early nominations the Nobel Committee did not make any special report thus indicating that Einstein was not yet considered a main candidate. From the general reports it was claimed that an award would be premature, and the often-used argument that it would be better to await further results and possible confirmations was raised. Also, counterarguments like that the special relativity theory had no practical importance and thus of no benefit to mankind to quote from Nobel’s will were raised. Another argument was that it was a question of theory of knowledge rather than physics.
The second period (1915–1919) saw an increase in nominations where other work by Einstein was proposed as his work on the Brownian motion. But most of the other nominations kept suggesting Einstein for the special relativity theory and now also the general theory of relativity. Some nominators apparently sensed the committee’s unease with theoretical work and pointed out that Einstein had done experimental work. Now the committee argued that others had precedence, when it came to the Brownian motion and as for the general relativity theory only Mercury’s perihelion precession supported the theory whereas gravitational redshift and light bending were not yet confirmed. Also, arguments that the general theory of relativity was just a belief rather than a proper physical theory was raised.
The third period (1920–1922) is of course marked by the attention the famous 1919 solar eclipse expeditions got, as seen in fig. 3. Nominations were soaring and almost all were arguing for the theories of relativity. But one nominator suggested the photoelectric effect. Now the Nobel Committee, not ready to award Einstein, questioned the validity of the solar eclipse data and also questioned the 1921 nomination for Einstein for the photoelectric effect, where Arrhenius in his special report would argue that it was a lucky guess by Einstein and that it was experimentalists that had made the work worthy of recognition.
3 Special reports on Einstein
Let us now look at the special reports on Einstein as can be seen in table 1. In 1919 there were nominations for The Svedberg and Jean Perrin for their work on the motions of molecules, but since their work was based on Einstein’s work on the Brownian motion Arrhenius had been asked by his colleagues in the committee to also nominate Einstein for the sake of thoroughness. Arrhenius also got the task to write the special report on the three, where he concluded the section on Einstein:
As far as the prize-awarding of these works is concerned, it must be confessed that they have had as great a value for experimental research as Einstein’s other works. Nevertheless, Einstein’s theoretical work, the theory of relativity and the quantum theory, are by far most proposed of the majority of nominators compared to his molecular kinetic works, when it comes to awarding him with the Nobel Prize. This is undoubtedly due to the fact that these first-mentioned works seem far more apt to change our conception of nature and therefore have a greater significance than the molecular kinetic studies, which are in the very best agreement with, and are a consequence of, the classical conception of the motion of molecules. It would therefore, no doubt, seem strange to the learned world if Einstein received a prize precisely for the works referred to here, notwithstanding their obviously great merit and usefulness for the development of science, and not for his other great works, which is what have attracted the attention of nominators.
So, the argument was that Einstein could not be awarded the Nobel Prize for his work on the Brownian motion since his peers expected it to be for the theories of relativity or quantum theory. This meant that Perrin and Svedberg also were put on hold until 1926 when Perrin got the physics prize and Svedberg the chemistry prize. Instead, Max Planck was awarded the reserved 1918 Nobel Prize for physics “in recognition of the services he rendered to the advancement of Physics by his discovery of energy quanta” and Johannes Stark was awarded the 1919 Nobel Prize in physics for “for his discovery of the Doppler effect in canal rays and the splitting of spectral lines in electric fields”.
The next year, in 1920, Svante Arrhenius followed up his own argument and made a special report on Einstein’s theories of relativity in light of the results from the solar eclipse the previous year. Now Einstein was the candidate that had the most nominations and also by important nominators. Arguments were again made for Einstein’s theories of the Brownian motion, the specific heat, but most of all for the theories of relativity. And as for the general theory of relativity there were discussions of the three specific cases where the theory could be put to the test.
1. The shift of Mercury’s perihelion (where Einstein’s theory was in agreement with observations).
2. The bending of light by the Sun (where there were arguments for and against the accuracy of the observations).
3. The redshift of lines in the solar spectra (which could not yet be detected).
Arrhenius in his report described the great interest and astonishment that had followed the presentation of the solar eclipse results at the joint meeting in November 1919 with the Royal Society and the Royal Astronomical Society. But he also reported on the subsequent critique. Although there was much in favour of the Mercury perihelion shift, Arrhenius also brought up critique and other explanations. For the red shift he, quite lengthy, presented the tests that had been made and none delivered any clear support: “In any case, this effect on wavelength seems unsuitable for supporting Einstein’s theory”. Arrhenius even observed at the end of his report that there had appeared both uncritical admiration and unjust critique of Einstein.
The Nobel Prize in physics for 1920 instead went to the director of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, Charles Edouard Guillaume, “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”.
Next year in 1921, there were even more nominations for Einstein. So, this year there were two special reports made on Einstein. One was written by Allvar Gullstrand (1862–1930) on the theories of relativity and the other one, due to a new nomination for the photoelectric effect, on which Arrhenius wrote the report.
Almost half of the general report in 1921 deals with Einstein. It first summed up arguments from Gullstrand’s special report and regarding the experimental tests of the theories of relativity that they had neither contradicted nor confirmed, and it was stated that “it demands a great deal of conviction in respect to phenomena, which lie entirely outside experience, it does not seem to meet the requirements which should apply to the awarding of the Nobel Prize”. Then followed brief summaries of the three different test options of Einstein’s theory arguing that they did not give any clear support. Gullstrand’s report also called into question the shift of Mercury’s perihelion, that many considered a solid argument for Einstein. Gullstrand, however, claimed that for now it was not clear if Einstein’s theory could be considered in agreement with Leverrier’s measurements. And since the general theory of relativity “so far in no way has been satisfactorily confirmed by experience, the committee does not currently consider themselves able to propose him for a Nobel Prize”. The end verdict this year was to wait for further observations and tests to determine the fortune of Einstein. This is a fate that Einstein has shared with many over the years, a cautious policy has perhaps helped the Nobel institution over the years. It must not be wrong. Noteworthy is that the general report in 1921 used terms as “Einstein’s followers” in connection with the discussion of the relativity theories. Normally, the general reports are very matter of fact, without references to anything outside the physics at hand. So, this phrase is special and cannot be understood in any positive sense.
But the general report continued with Einstein’s photoelectric effect. This was more summarily dismissed this year, based on the special report by Arrhenius, claiming that others than Einstein had been crucial in making the experimental work. Arrhenius also dismissed the argument from the nomination that the photoelectric law is fundamental for the quantum theory and its successful dealing with atomic phenomena. And since the 1918 Prize had gone to Planck, it was argued that this had already been awarded. So, prospects for Einstein seemed gloomy and the committee recommended that, since no prizeworthy candidate at all was at hand, the 1921 Nobel Prize should be reserved until next year, and such became the decision of the Academy.
4 Solving the gridlock
Something needed to change if this deadlock should go away. This dominance of experimentalists and experimental ethos in the committee has been observed by historians. And it was quite remarkable that the two members that got the task to evaluate Einstein were Allvar Gullstrand, a professor of ophtalmology and Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine in 1911, and Svante Arrhenius, director of the Nobel Institute for Physical Chemistry and Nobel Laureate in chemistry in 1903. The five-person physics committee did not have any professional theoretical physicist among them at this time.
There were two professors of mathematical physics in Sweden. At Lund University the professor was an expert on sea currents and at this time not a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. The other professor of mathematical physics was also an expert on hydrodynamics, Carl Wilhelm Oseen (1879–1944). He became professor already in 1909 at Uppsala University, but had for many years during the 1910s struggled with tuberculosis. He had early on taken an interest in Niels Bohr and together with Rutherford he helped the Dane to get his professorship. He had also debated some aspects of quantum theory with Planck in 1914. Niels and Margarethe Bohr had visited Oseen in 1913 while the Swede stayed at a sanatorium the months before Bohr published his famous papers on the atomic structure. In 1919 Oseen held a summer lecture series for teachers about the quantum theory and the theories of relativity. From these lectures we can conclude that he was positive although not uncritical to these theories. The lectures, together with the attention that the solar eclipse observations added, helped initiate the founding of the Swedish Physical Society in 1920, where Oseen became the first president. His training from Lund University was in mathematics, so in 1921 he got elected to the Swedish Academy of Sciences, at first to a mathematical class. Later in 1922 he was transferred to the physics class. And more importantly already in the autumn of 1921 Oseen had been adjoined to the Nobel Committee for physics. And at the first meeting he attended, where the above-mentioned decision to reserve the 1921 Prize was recommended by the class, he managed to invoke a possible future opening for the photoelectric law and he:
emphasized that this discovery could gain further significance in the future, which is why he hoped that the committee’s statement should not be understood that the matter was decided once and for all.
In view of this and after further deliberation, the class decided to state that Einstein’s law for the photoelectric effect must be ascribed great importance, but that any awarding of the prize should wait until a more reliable understanding was attained of its significance for science.
For a long time, the Nobel Committee had relied on Gullstrand’s investigations of Einstein’s theory of relativity for the candidacy, and he found the whole thing to be a matter of “belief.” His correspondence with Oseen from this time shows that Gullstrand constantly tried to find errors in Einstein’s theory, whereupon Oseen rejected his objections. At one point, Oseen wrote that it “took a few minutes” for him to dismiss the problem that Gullstrand had posed. But Gullstrand returned with “the fable of the clock that slows down” which was something for “the relativist believer”.
5 Oseen’s tandem solution
1922 became a busy year for Oseen. In May 1922 the astronomer and astrophysicist Bernhard Hasselberg died after years of dwindling health. His last major impact on the committee’s work had been the prize for Guillaume. In September 1922 Gullstrand proposed that Oseen should replace Hasselberg in the committee and brought up Oseen’s grasp of theoretical physics as beneficial for the committee’s work. The nomination was signed by two other members as well as by The Svedberg, member of the chemistry committee. It should also be noted that Oseen was still only member of the applied mathematics and astronomy class and had to be adjoined, not only to the Nobel committee, but also to the physics class to take part in the class’ discussions of the Nobel committee’s proposals. But already before this decision the Nobel committee had submitted its recommendation to the Academy of the two available Nobel Prizes in physics (1921 & 1922), and before that, during the summer, the special reports, by the adjoint member Oseen, had been submitted.
But other important events had also taken place in this context during the summer of 1922. In June Niels Bohr was invited to deliver the Wolfskehl lectures in Göttingen. He travelled there accompanied by his Swedish assistant at this time, Oskar Klein, and they stayed at an inn in the outskirts of the city. At the same inn Oseen also boarded. He was making a rare trip and was anxious to listen to his old friend Niels Bohr and meet other colleagues, as can be seen from fig. 4 and fig. 5. At this conference Bohr presented Hendrik Kramers’ dispersion theory, to which a young Werner Heisenberg raised objections.
Oseen already had a very positive opinion of Bohr’s work, and despite the criticism made by Heisenberg in Göttingen (that actually impressed Bohr), Oseen returned to Uppsala where he sat down and wrote two special Nobel reports, one on Bohr and one on Einstein, see fig. 6. He finished his 34 pages report on Bohr, “Bohr’s atomic theory,” on August 9, and a few days later, on August 13, he finished his 12 pages report on “Einstein’s law for the photoelectric effect”. After submitting these reports he had ten days before the second Nordic Physicist Meeting started in Uppsala, where he was one of the organizers. Bohr attended giving the main lecture “On the Explanation of the Periodic System.” The meeting provided another opportunity for Bohr and Oseen to meet. This conference can be seen as an important step in establishing theoretical atomic physics as a central area for physics among Nordic physicists. It was also considered as something of a “summit meeting” between Oseen and Bohr.
If we look closer at the evaluations by Oseen in 1922, it becomes clear that to him Bohr and Einstein were a tandem. Bohr’s work was based on Einstein’s theory and Einstein’s theory became more palatable when connected to Bohr’s work. Such a solution would manage a Nobel Prize to Einstein, but avoiding the contested issue of the relativity theories, and at the same time solving the pressure of all the nominations for Einstein. No one but Oseen ever nominated Einstein only for the photoelectric effect. He was well aware of the opposition to Einstein’s relativity theories and the political and cultural aspects pertaining to them. However, he was a supporter and one of few in Sweden that actually understood the general theory of relativity at this time. And since there were two available prizes in 1922 it was an opportunity that could not be missed. The postponing in 1921 might thus actually have helped to accommodate the solution in 1922.
6 Finally, a Nobel Prize for Einstein
Looking closer at Oseen’s reports we can note the different sections, after the first theoretical examination he addressed the experimental confirmations of Einstein’s law. And the usage of “law” of course underscores the irrefutable nature of the theory. Especially Millikan’s work was referred to. Then came a section “The Einstein law and Bohr’s atomic theory” which concluded: “The Einstein proposition and Bohr’s objectively identical frequency conditions are currently one of the most trustworthy propositions in physics”. Then followed a section “A look at Einstein’s activities,” where other Einstein’s important contributions were listed. The first group was his works based on classical physics like the Brownian motion, the second group was his writings on the quantum theory, like his papers on the specific heat. The third group was his contributions to electromagnetic theory to which his special theory of relativity was counted. The fourth group was the general theory of relativity. All very important contributions depending on one’s particular interest. “In any case, no other discovery made by Einstein than his proposition on the quantum emission and absorption of light has generated as much interest in measuring physics” Oseen stated. This argument was set to thwart any objections from the overly cautious experimentalists in the committee and in the physics class.
Most important is of course the concluding part:
At a time when physicists, with few exceptions, were opposed to Planck’s quantum theory, Einstein has shown through an original and astute analysis that the energy exchange between matter and ether must take place in such a way that an atom emits or absorbs an energy quantum hν, where ν is the oscillation number. As an application of this proposition, Einstein has established the law that if an electron is photoelectrically triggered from a substance, its energy after release must have the value $h\nu – P$, where $P$ is the work needed to release the electron from the substance. This law has been most beautifully confirmed by measurements by Millikan and others. Einstein’s proposition has received its greatest significance and also the most convincing confirmation in that it is one of the assumptions on which Bohr built his atomic theory. Almost all confirmations of Bohr’s atomic theory are also confirmations of Einstein’s proposition.
The discovery of Einstein’s law is without a doubt one of the most significant events in the history of physics. Its discoverer seems to me to fully deserve a Nobel Prize in physics.
A stronger endorsement cannot be phrased but let us also briefly examine Oseen’s report on Bohr. The different sections gave a hint of the way his argument went: “The historical assumptions for Bohr’s atomic theory”, “The basis for Bohr’s theory of 1913”, “The results of Bohr’s theory from 1913”, “Theory for the Stark effect and the Zeeman effect”, “Bohr’s correspondence principle”, “Bohr’s rule for determining the stationary states”, “The atomic theory’s development 1913–1921”, “Bohr’s atomic theory of 1921”, “Confirmations of Bohr’s theory”, and “Difficulties in Bohr’s atomic theory” concluded the report and the final words should be noted:
The cornerstone of Bohr’s thought structure, the Einstein-Bohr condition $\epsilon_{1} - \epsilon_{2} = h\nu$, has, through studies by Franck et al. received an extremely comprehensive and overwhelming confirmation. [...] Finally, if one asks whether the Bohr atomic theory is worthy of a Nobel Prize in physics, it seems to me that the answer can be no other than this. Both with regard to its already confirmed findings and with regard to the powerful stimulus that this theory has given to both experimental and theoretical physics, Bohr’s atomic theory seems to me fully worthy of a Nobel Prize.
Also, an extremely strong endorsement. There was also another seven pages special report in 1922 by Allvar Gullstrand supplementing his special report from the previous year on Einstein’s theories of relativity. Here Gullstrand reiterated that these theories were a “matter of faith”, and he went through the three tests for the general theory. For the red shift Gullstrand quoted von Laue that there was room for further tests. And he continued to quote von Laue that there was no absolute certainty and that there was room for more and further investigations. For the perihelion test Gullstrand referred to some papers that did not fully support Einstein’s theory, and that any certain judgment therefore would have to wait. He also referred several times to “followers of the relativity theory”, and concluded:
It should be clear from the above that my opinion from last year that Einstein cannot at present be advocated for the award of the Nobel Prize in Physics, either for the special or the general theory of relativity or for the combined value of these theories, is not only still valid, but has been further confirmed by subsequent publications.
Despite Gullstrand’s stubborn objections to relativity, Oseen convinced his colleagues in the Nobel Committee for his tandem solution, and Gullstrand could still be content that the relativity theories were not awarded a Nobel Prize. The general report also stated that there was an overwhelming number of nominations for Einstein, which might have made the Committee and the Academy members extra prone to accept Oseen’s solution. Most nominations for Einstein were for the relativity theories, and only Oseen had nominated Einstein exclusively for the photoelectric effect. The committee referred to Gullstrand’s present and prior reports and to Arrhenius previous report and the committee “maintained its verdict from last year and considered itself unable to propose Einstein for the Nobel Prize for his theories of relativity and gravitation”. Then the report continued discussing Einstein and Bohr simultaneously according to Oseen’s arguments and concluded:
Due to what the committee here had the honour to state, may the committee suggest that of the two available Nobel Prizes for Physics, the one reserved from the previous year should be awarded to Professor Albert Einstein in Berlin for his merits in theoretical physics, especially his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect; and that this year’s Nobel Prize in Physics should be awarded to Professor Niels Bohr in Copenhagen for his merits in exploring the structure of atoms and the radiation emanating from them.
The class did approve of this suggestion by the Nobel Committee, which basically was Oseen’s tandem solution.
All this was well-received, also in the Academy in pleno and on November 9, 1922 the decision was made at the Nobel meeting of the Academy to award Einstein the reserved 1921 Physics Prize and Niels Bohr the 1922 Physics Prize. Noteworthy is that the Academy was anxious to keep any trace of the theories of relativity out of the motivation and they changed the phrase: “for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect” adding “regardless of the value that, after any confirmation, could be attributed to the theories of relativity and gravity, [...] award the 1921 prize [...] to Albert Einstein for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect.” This text also made it onto Einstein’s Nobel diploma making it stand out as the only Nobel diploma with text stating what the Laureate was not awarded for. The most common interpretation of this is that it is a symptom of the anxious and perhaps not so brilliant Swedish Committee. That could well be the case, but another interpretation might be possible as we shall see.
7 The end of nominations
Oseen had managed an incredible feat to have two of his own candidates each being awarded the Nobel Prize and thus defusing the difficult situation with the many nominations for Einstein. And as we have seen, the Nobel Prize to Einstein was intrinsically coupled to the Nobel Prize to Bohr and vice versa. Also clear is that it was all Oseen’s doing. No one beside members of the Nobel Committee could fully understand what had played out, but some people did. Oseen’s former colleague from Uppsala, Eva von Bahr-Bergius, was pleased with the end result and wrote to Oseen:
More than one month ago – when the names of the Nobel laureates were announced – I was determined to write to you. I felt a need to thank you for being there and taking care of the Nobel Prizes, so that physicists will not make a fool of themselves in the same way as the Swedish [Literary] Academy. Because your influence on these matters is very great, I understand very well. I would very much wish that someday you alone could be in charge of the Nobel Prizes, but I am afraid that you write such learned things that – at least here in Sweden – there is no one who can judge them.
I assume that there was a controversy about Einstein’s name. His opponents, who succeeded in excluding the theory of relativity from the prize statement, have thereby simply ensured that in the future he will receive the prize one more time.
So, this is another possible interpretation. That the non-awarding of the theories of relativity would only mean that Einstein would be awarded the Nobel Prize again. And there were no formal objections to such a chain of events, Marie Curie had a decade earlier received her second Nobel Prize. And Einstein if any could have been nominated again for the theories of relativity and other works. But the fact is that that did not happen. The following year there were two nominations for him, but they were actually late arrivals from the previous year. And thereafter there are no nominations at all for Einstein. So, apparently his peers considered that he was now put up on the Nobel shelf, which is also telling of how awards in science may function, especially the Nobel Prize.
But let us return to where we started. Einstein did not come to Stockholm to pick up his Nobel Prize, he was on a boat on his way from the USA to Japan, when the news broke, and there was no possibility for him to make it to the Prize awarding events in Stockholm. Since it is mandatory to deliver a Nobel Prize Lecture to receive the prize amount, he eventually came to Sweden the year after, and invited by Svante Arrhenius he delivered a lecture in Gothenburg on July 11, 1923 on “Fundamental ideas and problems of the theory of relativity.” But that was not the work he had been awarded for. But since most people were more interested in a lecture on relativity theory than the photoelectric effect as can be seen in the large crowd in fig. 1, this is what Arrhenius asked Einstein to talk about. And immediately after Arrhenius delivered the manuscript of the lecture for the Nobel Foundation yearbook, Les Prix Nobel, as Einstein’s Nobel Lecture. This was questioned in the Academy, but Arrhenius then said that the manuscript had already been set, and proofs already sent out. So, it was agreed that it should be allowed. Among Einstein’s critics in Sweden this caused an outrage and a lot of complaints to the Academy that had let this pass, complaints arrived also from abroad. The lecture should take place within six months, but this was after seven months; the lecture should take place in Stockholm, and most of all it should be about the Prize awarded work. There had been instances of delay earlier, the Curies held their lecture one and a half year late, but they held it in Stockholm and on the topic they had been awarded for at least. The reason for Arrhenius’ actions might be found in his argument in the 1919 special report not to award Einstein for the Brownian motion, since it would be strange if Einstein was awarded the Nobel Prize for anything else than the theories of relativity. This is why Einstein’s Nobel lecture is about the theories of relativity, for which he was not awarded the Nobel Prize.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 51 |
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/nobel-prize-physics-and-chemistry.html
|
en
|
Nobel prize physics and chemistry hi
|
[
"https://s.alamy.com/logos/1.68.0/alamy.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/logos/1.68.0/alamy-black.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/logos/1.68.0/alamy-black.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/logos/1.68.0/alamy.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/mastercard.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/visa.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/amex.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/paypal.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/apple-pay.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/google-pay.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Alamy Limited"
] | null |
Find the perfect nobel prize physics and chemistry stock photo, image, vector, illustration or 360 image. Available for both RF and RM licensing.
|
en
|
Alamy
|
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/nobel-prize-physics-and-chemistry.html
|
Alamy and its logo are trademarks of Alamy Ltd. and are registered in certain countries. Copyright © 25/07/2024 Alamy Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 47 |
https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/article/257
|
en
|
https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/assets/img/favicon.ico
|
https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/assets/img/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/assets/img/logo_288.jpg 2x",
"https://play.google.com/intl/it_it/badges/images/generic/it_badge_web_generic.png",
"https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/assets/img/badge_iOS.svg",
"https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/thumbs.php?ID=1445&W=1200 2x"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/assets/img/favicon144.png
| null |
On a hot summer afternoon in 1923 in the Conference Hall at the Gothenburg Jubilee Exhibition, Albert Einstein gave a talk on “Fundamental ideas and problems of the theory of relativity” as can be seen in fig. 1. In the large audience, besides the conference participants at the 17th Scandinavian Natural Sciences Meeting, were in the front row the Swedish King, Gustav V, and Svante Arrhenius (1859–1927) the man responsible for inviting Einstein. This lecture became Einstein’s Nobel Lecture for his 1921 Nobel Prize in physics that was awarded in 1922.
What was the background to this? Why on Earth did such a large crowd attend a physics lecture in the middle of a heat wave and why was Einstein not awarded the Nobel Prize for his theories of relativity as most people would expect? This paper will search for an explanation by looking into the evaluation work of Einstein for the Nobel Prize.
1 How the Nobel Prize works
The statutes of the Nobel Foundation govern how the Nobel system works. It is based on Alfred Nobel’s will, but the Nobel Foundation is nowhere mentioned in the will. The Nobel Foundation was instead created by the Prize awarding institutions to manage their common interests and facilitate the general collaboration between the Prize awarders. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, mentioned in the will, awards the Nobel Prizes in physics and chemistry. Each Prize awarder also has their separate statutes that govern the evaluation work. Only invited nominators in certain categories are entitled to nominate. A successful candidate must have at least one nomination, but it is not automatically so that the most nominations get you the Prize. A five-person Nobel committee then evaluates all nominees, and the committee decides who are the most interesting candidates who are subjected to special reports. Then the Nobel Committee writes up a general report briefly discussing all nominees before presenting more extensive coverage of the main contenders, and most reasoning goes into that year’s committee proposal in the end. Then the proposal is discussed by the physics class of the Academy and finally there is the formal vote in pleno where all members of the Academy have the right to vote.
During the period from the first nomination of Einstein in 1910 until he was awarded the 1921 Prize in 1922 there was an increasing number of nominations as can be seen from fig. 2, but it was not until 1919, when the Nobel Committee made its first special evaluation of Einstein, and then it was the case of the Brownian motion.
2 Nominations of Einstein
Aant Elzinga, who has closely studied Einstein and the Nobel Prize, has grouped the nominations for Einstein in three periods. In the first period of nominations (1910–1914) it was mostly the special relativity that was proposed.
For these early nominations the Nobel Committee did not make any special report thus indicating that Einstein was not yet considered a main candidate. From the general reports it was claimed that an award would be premature, and the often-used argument that it would be better to await further results and possible confirmations was raised. Also, counterarguments like that the special relativity theory had no practical importance and thus of no benefit to mankind to quote from Nobel’s will were raised. Another argument was that it was a question of theory of knowledge rather than physics.
The second period (1915–1919) saw an increase in nominations where other work by Einstein was proposed as his work on the Brownian motion. But most of the other nominations kept suggesting Einstein for the special relativity theory and now also the general theory of relativity. Some nominators apparently sensed the committee’s unease with theoretical work and pointed out that Einstein had done experimental work. Now the committee argued that others had precedence, when it came to the Brownian motion and as for the general relativity theory only Mercury’s perihelion precession supported the theory whereas gravitational redshift and light bending were not yet confirmed. Also, arguments that the general theory of relativity was just a belief rather than a proper physical theory was raised.
The third period (1920–1922) is of course marked by the attention the famous 1919 solar eclipse expeditions got, as seen in fig. 3. Nominations were soaring and almost all were arguing for the theories of relativity. But one nominator suggested the photoelectric effect. Now the Nobel Committee, not ready to award Einstein, questioned the validity of the solar eclipse data and also questioned the 1921 nomination for Einstein for the photoelectric effect, where Arrhenius in his special report would argue that it was a lucky guess by Einstein and that it was experimentalists that had made the work worthy of recognition.
3 Special reports on Einstein
Let us now look at the special reports on Einstein as can be seen in table 1. In 1919 there were nominations for The Svedberg and Jean Perrin for their work on the motions of molecules, but since their work was based on Einstein’s work on the Brownian motion Arrhenius had been asked by his colleagues in the committee to also nominate Einstein for the sake of thoroughness. Arrhenius also got the task to write the special report on the three, where he concluded the section on Einstein:
As far as the prize-awarding of these works is concerned, it must be confessed that they have had as great a value for experimental research as Einstein’s other works. Nevertheless, Einstein’s theoretical work, the theory of relativity and the quantum theory, are by far most proposed of the majority of nominators compared to his molecular kinetic works, when it comes to awarding him with the Nobel Prize. This is undoubtedly due to the fact that these first-mentioned works seem far more apt to change our conception of nature and therefore have a greater significance than the molecular kinetic studies, which are in the very best agreement with, and are a consequence of, the classical conception of the motion of molecules. It would therefore, no doubt, seem strange to the learned world if Einstein received a prize precisely for the works referred to here, notwithstanding their obviously great merit and usefulness for the development of science, and not for his other great works, which is what have attracted the attention of nominators.
So, the argument was that Einstein could not be awarded the Nobel Prize for his work on the Brownian motion since his peers expected it to be for the theories of relativity or quantum theory. This meant that Perrin and Svedberg also were put on hold until 1926 when Perrin got the physics prize and Svedberg the chemistry prize. Instead, Max Planck was awarded the reserved 1918 Nobel Prize for physics “in recognition of the services he rendered to the advancement of Physics by his discovery of energy quanta” and Johannes Stark was awarded the 1919 Nobel Prize in physics for “for his discovery of the Doppler effect in canal rays and the splitting of spectral lines in electric fields”.
The next year, in 1920, Svante Arrhenius followed up his own argument and made a special report on Einstein’s theories of relativity in light of the results from the solar eclipse the previous year. Now Einstein was the candidate that had the most nominations and also by important nominators. Arguments were again made for Einstein’s theories of the Brownian motion, the specific heat, but most of all for the theories of relativity. And as for the general theory of relativity there were discussions of the three specific cases where the theory could be put to the test.
1. The shift of Mercury’s perihelion (where Einstein’s theory was in agreement with observations).
2. The bending of light by the Sun (where there were arguments for and against the accuracy of the observations).
3. The redshift of lines in the solar spectra (which could not yet be detected).
Arrhenius in his report described the great interest and astonishment that had followed the presentation of the solar eclipse results at the joint meeting in November 1919 with the Royal Society and the Royal Astronomical Society. But he also reported on the subsequent critique. Although there was much in favour of the Mercury perihelion shift, Arrhenius also brought up critique and other explanations. For the red shift he, quite lengthy, presented the tests that had been made and none delivered any clear support: “In any case, this effect on wavelength seems unsuitable for supporting Einstein’s theory”. Arrhenius even observed at the end of his report that there had appeared both uncritical admiration and unjust critique of Einstein.
The Nobel Prize in physics for 1920 instead went to the director of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, Charles Edouard Guillaume, “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”.
Next year in 1921, there were even more nominations for Einstein. So, this year there were two special reports made on Einstein. One was written by Allvar Gullstrand (1862–1930) on the theories of relativity and the other one, due to a new nomination for the photoelectric effect, on which Arrhenius wrote the report.
Almost half of the general report in 1921 deals with Einstein. It first summed up arguments from Gullstrand’s special report and regarding the experimental tests of the theories of relativity that they had neither contradicted nor confirmed, and it was stated that “it demands a great deal of conviction in respect to phenomena, which lie entirely outside experience, it does not seem to meet the requirements which should apply to the awarding of the Nobel Prize”. Then followed brief summaries of the three different test options of Einstein’s theory arguing that they did not give any clear support. Gullstrand’s report also called into question the shift of Mercury’s perihelion, that many considered a solid argument for Einstein. Gullstrand, however, claimed that for now it was not clear if Einstein’s theory could be considered in agreement with Leverrier’s measurements. And since the general theory of relativity “so far in no way has been satisfactorily confirmed by experience, the committee does not currently consider themselves able to propose him for a Nobel Prize”. The end verdict this year was to wait for further observations and tests to determine the fortune of Einstein. This is a fate that Einstein has shared with many over the years, a cautious policy has perhaps helped the Nobel institution over the years. It must not be wrong. Noteworthy is that the general report in 1921 used terms as “Einstein’s followers” in connection with the discussion of the relativity theories. Normally, the general reports are very matter of fact, without references to anything outside the physics at hand. So, this phrase is special and cannot be understood in any positive sense.
But the general report continued with Einstein’s photoelectric effect. This was more summarily dismissed this year, based on the special report by Arrhenius, claiming that others than Einstein had been crucial in making the experimental work. Arrhenius also dismissed the argument from the nomination that the photoelectric law is fundamental for the quantum theory and its successful dealing with atomic phenomena. And since the 1918 Prize had gone to Planck, it was argued that this had already been awarded. So, prospects for Einstein seemed gloomy and the committee recommended that, since no prizeworthy candidate at all was at hand, the 1921 Nobel Prize should be reserved until next year, and such became the decision of the Academy.
4 Solving the gridlock
Something needed to change if this deadlock should go away. This dominance of experimentalists and experimental ethos in the committee has been observed by historians. And it was quite remarkable that the two members that got the task to evaluate Einstein were Allvar Gullstrand, a professor of ophtalmology and Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine in 1911, and Svante Arrhenius, director of the Nobel Institute for Physical Chemistry and Nobel Laureate in chemistry in 1903. The five-person physics committee did not have any professional theoretical physicist among them at this time.
There were two professors of mathematical physics in Sweden. At Lund University the professor was an expert on sea currents and at this time not a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. The other professor of mathematical physics was also an expert on hydrodynamics, Carl Wilhelm Oseen (1879–1944). He became professor already in 1909 at Uppsala University, but had for many years during the 1910s struggled with tuberculosis. He had early on taken an interest in Niels Bohr and together with Rutherford he helped the Dane to get his professorship. He had also debated some aspects of quantum theory with Planck in 1914. Niels and Margarethe Bohr had visited Oseen in 1913 while the Swede stayed at a sanatorium the months before Bohr published his famous papers on the atomic structure. In 1919 Oseen held a summer lecture series for teachers about the quantum theory and the theories of relativity. From these lectures we can conclude that he was positive although not uncritical to these theories. The lectures, together with the attention that the solar eclipse observations added, helped initiate the founding of the Swedish Physical Society in 1920, where Oseen became the first president. His training from Lund University was in mathematics, so in 1921 he got elected to the Swedish Academy of Sciences, at first to a mathematical class. Later in 1922 he was transferred to the physics class. And more importantly already in the autumn of 1921 Oseen had been adjoined to the Nobel Committee for physics. And at the first meeting he attended, where the above-mentioned decision to reserve the 1921 Prize was recommended by the class, he managed to invoke a possible future opening for the photoelectric law and he:
emphasized that this discovery could gain further significance in the future, which is why he hoped that the committee’s statement should not be understood that the matter was decided once and for all.
In view of this and after further deliberation, the class decided to state that Einstein’s law for the photoelectric effect must be ascribed great importance, but that any awarding of the prize should wait until a more reliable understanding was attained of its significance for science.
For a long time, the Nobel Committee had relied on Gullstrand’s investigations of Einstein’s theory of relativity for the candidacy, and he found the whole thing to be a matter of “belief.” His correspondence with Oseen from this time shows that Gullstrand constantly tried to find errors in Einstein’s theory, whereupon Oseen rejected his objections. At one point, Oseen wrote that it “took a few minutes” for him to dismiss the problem that Gullstrand had posed. But Gullstrand returned with “the fable of the clock that slows down” which was something for “the relativist believer”.
5 Oseen’s tandem solution
1922 became a busy year for Oseen. In May 1922 the astronomer and astrophysicist Bernhard Hasselberg died after years of dwindling health. His last major impact on the committee’s work had been the prize for Guillaume. In September 1922 Gullstrand proposed that Oseen should replace Hasselberg in the committee and brought up Oseen’s grasp of theoretical physics as beneficial for the committee’s work. The nomination was signed by two other members as well as by The Svedberg, member of the chemistry committee. It should also be noted that Oseen was still only member of the applied mathematics and astronomy class and had to be adjoined, not only to the Nobel committee, but also to the physics class to take part in the class’ discussions of the Nobel committee’s proposals. But already before this decision the Nobel committee had submitted its recommendation to the Academy of the two available Nobel Prizes in physics (1921 & 1922), and before that, during the summer, the special reports, by the adjoint member Oseen, had been submitted.
But other important events had also taken place in this context during the summer of 1922. In June Niels Bohr was invited to deliver the Wolfskehl lectures in Göttingen. He travelled there accompanied by his Swedish assistant at this time, Oskar Klein, and they stayed at an inn in the outskirts of the city. At the same inn Oseen also boarded. He was making a rare trip and was anxious to listen to his old friend Niels Bohr and meet other colleagues, as can be seen from fig. 4 and fig. 5. At this conference Bohr presented Hendrik Kramers’ dispersion theory, to which a young Werner Heisenberg raised objections.
Oseen already had a very positive opinion of Bohr’s work, and despite the criticism made by Heisenberg in Göttingen (that actually impressed Bohr), Oseen returned to Uppsala where he sat down and wrote two special Nobel reports, one on Bohr and one on Einstein, see fig. 6. He finished his 34 pages report on Bohr, “Bohr’s atomic theory,” on August 9, and a few days later, on August 13, he finished his 12 pages report on “Einstein’s law for the photoelectric effect”. After submitting these reports he had ten days before the second Nordic Physicist Meeting started in Uppsala, where he was one of the organizers. Bohr attended giving the main lecture “On the Explanation of the Periodic System.” The meeting provided another opportunity for Bohr and Oseen to meet. This conference can be seen as an important step in establishing theoretical atomic physics as a central area for physics among Nordic physicists. It was also considered as something of a “summit meeting” between Oseen and Bohr.
If we look closer at the evaluations by Oseen in 1922, it becomes clear that to him Bohr and Einstein were a tandem. Bohr’s work was based on Einstein’s theory and Einstein’s theory became more palatable when connected to Bohr’s work. Such a solution would manage a Nobel Prize to Einstein, but avoiding the contested issue of the relativity theories, and at the same time solving the pressure of all the nominations for Einstein. No one but Oseen ever nominated Einstein only for the photoelectric effect. He was well aware of the opposition to Einstein’s relativity theories and the political and cultural aspects pertaining to them. However, he was a supporter and one of few in Sweden that actually understood the general theory of relativity at this time. And since there were two available prizes in 1922 it was an opportunity that could not be missed. The postponing in 1921 might thus actually have helped to accommodate the solution in 1922.
6 Finally, a Nobel Prize for Einstein
Looking closer at Oseen’s reports we can note the different sections, after the first theoretical examination he addressed the experimental confirmations of Einstein’s law. And the usage of “law” of course underscores the irrefutable nature of the theory. Especially Millikan’s work was referred to. Then came a section “The Einstein law and Bohr’s atomic theory” which concluded: “The Einstein proposition and Bohr’s objectively identical frequency conditions are currently one of the most trustworthy propositions in physics”. Then followed a section “A look at Einstein’s activities,” where other Einstein’s important contributions were listed. The first group was his works based on classical physics like the Brownian motion, the second group was his writings on the quantum theory, like his papers on the specific heat. The third group was his contributions to electromagnetic theory to which his special theory of relativity was counted. The fourth group was the general theory of relativity. All very important contributions depending on one’s particular interest. “In any case, no other discovery made by Einstein than his proposition on the quantum emission and absorption of light has generated as much interest in measuring physics” Oseen stated. This argument was set to thwart any objections from the overly cautious experimentalists in the committee and in the physics class.
Most important is of course the concluding part:
At a time when physicists, with few exceptions, were opposed to Planck’s quantum theory, Einstein has shown through an original and astute analysis that the energy exchange between matter and ether must take place in such a way that an atom emits or absorbs an energy quantum hν, where ν is the oscillation number. As an application of this proposition, Einstein has established the law that if an electron is photoelectrically triggered from a substance, its energy after release must have the value $h\nu – P$, where $P$ is the work needed to release the electron from the substance. This law has been most beautifully confirmed by measurements by Millikan and others. Einstein’s proposition has received its greatest significance and also the most convincing confirmation in that it is one of the assumptions on which Bohr built his atomic theory. Almost all confirmations of Bohr’s atomic theory are also confirmations of Einstein’s proposition.
The discovery of Einstein’s law is without a doubt one of the most significant events in the history of physics. Its discoverer seems to me to fully deserve a Nobel Prize in physics.
A stronger endorsement cannot be phrased but let us also briefly examine Oseen’s report on Bohr. The different sections gave a hint of the way his argument went: “The historical assumptions for Bohr’s atomic theory”, “The basis for Bohr’s theory of 1913”, “The results of Bohr’s theory from 1913”, “Theory for the Stark effect and the Zeeman effect”, “Bohr’s correspondence principle”, “Bohr’s rule for determining the stationary states”, “The atomic theory’s development 1913–1921”, “Bohr’s atomic theory of 1921”, “Confirmations of Bohr’s theory”, and “Difficulties in Bohr’s atomic theory” concluded the report and the final words should be noted:
The cornerstone of Bohr’s thought structure, the Einstein-Bohr condition $\epsilon_{1} - \epsilon_{2} = h\nu$, has, through studies by Franck et al. received an extremely comprehensive and overwhelming confirmation. [...] Finally, if one asks whether the Bohr atomic theory is worthy of a Nobel Prize in physics, it seems to me that the answer can be no other than this. Both with regard to its already confirmed findings and with regard to the powerful stimulus that this theory has given to both experimental and theoretical physics, Bohr’s atomic theory seems to me fully worthy of a Nobel Prize.
Also, an extremely strong endorsement. There was also another seven pages special report in 1922 by Allvar Gullstrand supplementing his special report from the previous year on Einstein’s theories of relativity. Here Gullstrand reiterated that these theories were a “matter of faith”, and he went through the three tests for the general theory. For the red shift Gullstrand quoted von Laue that there was room for further tests. And he continued to quote von Laue that there was no absolute certainty and that there was room for more and further investigations. For the perihelion test Gullstrand referred to some papers that did not fully support Einstein’s theory, and that any certain judgment therefore would have to wait. He also referred several times to “followers of the relativity theory”, and concluded:
It should be clear from the above that my opinion from last year that Einstein cannot at present be advocated for the award of the Nobel Prize in Physics, either for the special or the general theory of relativity or for the combined value of these theories, is not only still valid, but has been further confirmed by subsequent publications.
Despite Gullstrand’s stubborn objections to relativity, Oseen convinced his colleagues in the Nobel Committee for his tandem solution, and Gullstrand could still be content that the relativity theories were not awarded a Nobel Prize. The general report also stated that there was an overwhelming number of nominations for Einstein, which might have made the Committee and the Academy members extra prone to accept Oseen’s solution. Most nominations for Einstein were for the relativity theories, and only Oseen had nominated Einstein exclusively for the photoelectric effect. The committee referred to Gullstrand’s present and prior reports and to Arrhenius previous report and the committee “maintained its verdict from last year and considered itself unable to propose Einstein for the Nobel Prize for his theories of relativity and gravitation”. Then the report continued discussing Einstein and Bohr simultaneously according to Oseen’s arguments and concluded:
Due to what the committee here had the honour to state, may the committee suggest that of the two available Nobel Prizes for Physics, the one reserved from the previous year should be awarded to Professor Albert Einstein in Berlin for his merits in theoretical physics, especially his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect; and that this year’s Nobel Prize in Physics should be awarded to Professor Niels Bohr in Copenhagen for his merits in exploring the structure of atoms and the radiation emanating from them.
The class did approve of this suggestion by the Nobel Committee, which basically was Oseen’s tandem solution.
All this was well-received, also in the Academy in pleno and on November 9, 1922 the decision was made at the Nobel meeting of the Academy to award Einstein the reserved 1921 Physics Prize and Niels Bohr the 1922 Physics Prize. Noteworthy is that the Academy was anxious to keep any trace of the theories of relativity out of the motivation and they changed the phrase: “for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect” adding “regardless of the value that, after any confirmation, could be attributed to the theories of relativity and gravity, [...] award the 1921 prize [...] to Albert Einstein for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect.” This text also made it onto Einstein’s Nobel diploma making it stand out as the only Nobel diploma with text stating what the Laureate was not awarded for. The most common interpretation of this is that it is a symptom of the anxious and perhaps not so brilliant Swedish Committee. That could well be the case, but another interpretation might be possible as we shall see.
7 The end of nominations
Oseen had managed an incredible feat to have two of his own candidates each being awarded the Nobel Prize and thus defusing the difficult situation with the many nominations for Einstein. And as we have seen, the Nobel Prize to Einstein was intrinsically coupled to the Nobel Prize to Bohr and vice versa. Also clear is that it was all Oseen’s doing. No one beside members of the Nobel Committee could fully understand what had played out, but some people did. Oseen’s former colleague from Uppsala, Eva von Bahr-Bergius, was pleased with the end result and wrote to Oseen:
More than one month ago – when the names of the Nobel laureates were announced – I was determined to write to you. I felt a need to thank you for being there and taking care of the Nobel Prizes, so that physicists will not make a fool of themselves in the same way as the Swedish [Literary] Academy. Because your influence on these matters is very great, I understand very well. I would very much wish that someday you alone could be in charge of the Nobel Prizes, but I am afraid that you write such learned things that – at least here in Sweden – there is no one who can judge them.
I assume that there was a controversy about Einstein’s name. His opponents, who succeeded in excluding the theory of relativity from the prize statement, have thereby simply ensured that in the future he will receive the prize one more time.
So, this is another possible interpretation. That the non-awarding of the theories of relativity would only mean that Einstein would be awarded the Nobel Prize again. And there were no formal objections to such a chain of events, Marie Curie had a decade earlier received her second Nobel Prize. And Einstein if any could have been nominated again for the theories of relativity and other works. But the fact is that that did not happen. The following year there were two nominations for him, but they were actually late arrivals from the previous year. And thereafter there are no nominations at all for Einstein. So, apparently his peers considered that he was now put up on the Nobel shelf, which is also telling of how awards in science may function, especially the Nobel Prize.
But let us return to where we started. Einstein did not come to Stockholm to pick up his Nobel Prize, he was on a boat on his way from the USA to Japan, when the news broke, and there was no possibility for him to make it to the Prize awarding events in Stockholm. Since it is mandatory to deliver a Nobel Prize Lecture to receive the prize amount, he eventually came to Sweden the year after, and invited by Svante Arrhenius he delivered a lecture in Gothenburg on July 11, 1923 on “Fundamental ideas and problems of the theory of relativity.” But that was not the work he had been awarded for. But since most people were more interested in a lecture on relativity theory than the photoelectric effect as can be seen in the large crowd in fig. 1, this is what Arrhenius asked Einstein to talk about. And immediately after Arrhenius delivered the manuscript of the lecture for the Nobel Foundation yearbook, Les Prix Nobel, as Einstein’s Nobel Lecture. This was questioned in the Academy, but Arrhenius then said that the manuscript had already been set, and proofs already sent out. So, it was agreed that it should be allowed. Among Einstein’s critics in Sweden this caused an outrage and a lot of complaints to the Academy that had let this pass, complaints arrived also from abroad. The lecture should take place within six months, but this was after seven months; the lecture should take place in Stockholm, and most of all it should be about the Prize awarded work. There had been instances of delay earlier, the Curies held their lecture one and a half year late, but they held it in Stockholm and on the topic they had been awarded for at least. The reason for Arrhenius’ actions might be found in his argument in the 1919 special report not to award Einstein for the Brownian motion, since it would be strange if Einstein was awarded the Nobel Prize for anything else than the theories of relativity. This is why Einstein’s Nobel lecture is about the theories of relativity, for which he was not awarded the Nobel Prize.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 12 |
https://dbpedia.org/page/Charles_%25C3%2589douard_Guillaume
|
en
|
About: http://dbpedia.org/resource/Charles
|
[
"https://dbpedia.org/statics/images/dbpedia_logo_land_120.png",
"https://dbpedia.org/statics/images/virt_power_no_border.png",
"https://dbpedia.org/statics/images/LoDLogo.gif",
"https://dbpedia.org/statics/images/sw-sparql-blue.png",
"https://dbpedia.org/statics/images/od_80x15_red_green.png",
"https://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-xhtml-rdfa"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Charles Édouard Guillaume fou un físic suís guardonat l'any 1920 amb el Premi Nobel de Física.
|
DBpedia
|
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Charles_%C3%89douard_Guillaume
|
dbo:abstract
Charles Édouard Guillaume fou un físic suís guardonat l'any 1920 amb el Premi Nobel de Física. (ca)
شارل ادوار غيوم (Charles Édouard Guillaume) (مواليد 15 فبراير، 1861 - 13 مايو، 1938) كان عالم فيزياء سويسري فرنسي. حصل على جائزة نوبل في الفيزياء عام 1920 عن أعماله في مجال القياسات الفيزيائية الدقيقة واكتشاف سبيلكة النيكل-فولاذ التي تدعى invar و elinvar، حيث أن لمعدن إنفار معامل تمدد حراري قريب جداً من الصفر مما يعطي نتائج قياس دقيقة بغض النظر عن تغيرات درجة الحرارة. (ar)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (15. února 1861 – 13. května 1938 Sèvres) byl francouzsko-švýcarský fyzik, nositel Nobelovy ceny za fyziku (1920), kterou obdržel za objev anomálií v niklové oceli (invar), což přispělo k rozvoji přesných měření. Vynalezl slitiny invar a . Ve 22 letech nastoupil do BIPM. (cs)
Ο Σαρλ Εντουάρ Γκιγιόμ (Charles Édouard Guillaume, 15 Φεβρουαρίου 1861 - 13 Ιουνίου 1938) ήταν Ελβετός φυσικός στον οποίο απονεμήθηκε το βραβείο Νόμπελ Φυσικής το 1920 για τη συμβολή του σε πειράματα ακριβείας, μέσω της ανακάλυψης ανωμαλιών στα κράματα νικελίου - ατσαλιού. Ο Γκιγιόμ είναι γνωστός για την ανακάλυψη των κραμάτων του νικελίου - σιδήρου και χάλυβα τα οποία ονόμασε Ινβάρ και . (el)
Charles Édouard GUILLAUME (15-an de februaro 1861, Fleurier, Svislando – 13-an de junio 1938, Sèvres, Francio) estis franca fizikisto, kiu ricevis la Nobel-premion pri fiziko en 1920 pro la malkovro de invaro (specifa fer-nikela alojo). Guillaume en 1883 iĝis kunlaboranto de la Internacia Mezurafera Ofico en Sèvres, poste en 1915 ties direktoro. Li ekzamenis dum esploroj la hidrargan termometron kaj la litron kiel volumenan unuon. Li konstatis pri tiu lasta, ke ĝi egalas ne al 1.000.000 cm3 sed al 1.000.028 cm3. Li fokisis ekde 1890 je la alojoj kaj malkovris, ellaboris la invarton kaj elinvarton. La termodilatiĝa valoro de la invarto (volumena ŝanĝiĝo je ŝanĝiĝo de la temperaturo), la malgranda elasteca valoro de la elinvarto estis uzata en diversaj sciencaj mezuriloj. (eo)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (* 15. Februar 1861 in Fleurier, NE; † 13. Juni 1938 in Sèvres) war ein französisch-schweizerischer Physiker und Nobelpreisträger. (de)
Charles Édouard Guillaume suitzar fisikaria izan zen. 1920ko Fisikako Nobel Saria jaso zuen nikel eta altzairu aleazioetan izandako anomalien aurkikuntzagatik. ETH Zürich-en doktoratu zen. Pisuen eta Neurrien Nazioarteko Bulegoa zuzendu zuen eta esperimentuak egin zituen neurri termostatikoekin. Nikel eta altzairuzko aleazioak aurkitu zituen, "invar" eta "" deituak. Izarren erradiazioa aztertzen ere aitzindaria izan zen eta itsas kronometroez interesatu zen. (eu)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, cantón de Neuchâtel, Suiza, 15 de febrero de 1861-Sèvres, Francia, 13 de mayo de 1938) fue un físico suizo galardonado en 1920 con el Premio Nobel de Física. Descubrió la aleación de acero y níquel denominada invar, muy utilizada en instrumentos de precisión por su bajo coeficiente de dilatación térmica. (es)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 février 1861 à Fleurier, Suisse - 13 juin 1938 à Sèvres, France) est un physicien suisse. Il est lauréat du prix Nobel de physique de 1920 « en reconnaissance du service qu'il a rendu en métrologie en découvrant des anomalies dans les aciers de nickel ». Le plus célèbre des alliages qu'il invente est l'invar, au très faible coefficient de dilatation thermique, qui révolutionne la métrologie et la cryogénie, et qui contribue à l'invention de la télévision. (fr)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 Februari 1861 – 13 Juni 1938) adalah seorang fisikawan berkebangsaan Prancis. Dia meraih Penghargaan Nobel Fisika pada tahun 1920. Ia dikenal akan "" dan ""-nya. (in)
シャルル・エドゥアール・ギヨーム （Charles Edouard Guillaume、1861年2月15日 - 1938年6月13日）はフランス系スイス人の物理学者である。 (ja)
샤를 에두아르 기욤(독일어: Charles Édouard Guillaume, 1861년 ~ 1938년)은 스위스의 실험물리학자이다. 취리히 연방 공과대학을 졸업하였다. 1897년에는 열팽창 계수가 실내 온도에 가까워지면 거의 0인 인바(invar) 합금(36% 니켈 철합금)을 발견했다. 은 값싼 미터 표준기 외에 각종의 물리 정밀 측정 기기나 시계의 추 등에 널리 쓰여, 길이 측정의 정밀도를 두드러지게 향상시켰다. 그 중에서도 인바선(線)에 의한 기선 측정에 의해 종래의 측정법이 새롭게 바뀌었다. 또한 시간 측정의 정밀도를 높이기 위해서 합금의 탄성률을 연구하여, 1919년에 탄성률의 온도 계수가 실내 온도 가까이에서 거의 0인 엘린바(elinvar) 합금(36% 니켈, 12% 크롬, 철합금)을 발견했다. 이 합금은 시계의 태엽 등에 이용되어, 시간 측정의 정밀도는 비약적으로 향상되었다. 이러한 업적으로 1920년 노벨 물리학상을 받았고, 프랑스 정부로부터는 레종도뇌르 훈장을 받았다. (ko)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 febbraio 1861 – Sèvres, 13 giugno 1938) è stato un fisico svizzero, nato in Svizzera nel canton Neuchâtel, Premio Nobel per la fisica nel 1920. (it)
Charles-Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 februari 1861 – Sèvres, 13 juni 1938) was een Zwitserse natuurkundige. Hij werd bekend als de ontdekker van diverse bijzondere ijzer-nikkel legeringen, waaronder Invar, waarvoor hij in 1920 de Nobelprijs voor Natuurkunde ontving. (nl)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (ur. 15 lutego 1861 w Fleurier, Szwajcaria, zm. 13 maja 1938 w Sèvres, Francja) – szwajcarski fizyk, laureat Nagrody Nobla w dziedzinie fizyki w roku 1920 za wkład jaki wniósł w precyzyjne pomiary w fizyce dzięki odkryciu anomalii w wysokoniklowych stalach stopowych, Wielki Oficer Legii Honorowej. Odkrył m.in. dwa stopy nazwane przez niego inwar i elinwar, które używane były przy budowaniu precyzyjnych instrumentów pomiarowych. Pracował w Observatoire de Paris w Paryżu. Jako pierwszy prawidłowo przewidział temperaturę przestrzeni kosmicznej. (pl)
Шарль Эдуа́р Гийо́м (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 февраля 1861, , Швейцария — 13 июня 1938, Севр, Франция) — швейцарско-французский физик. Лауреат Нобелевской премии 1920 года за открытие сплавов с аномальным поведением коэффициента теплового расширения: инвара и элинвара. (ru)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 de fevereiro de 1861 — Sèvres, 13 de maio de 1938) foi um físico suíço. Recebeu em 1920 o Nobel de Física, pela melhora na precisão de medições na física e pela descoberta de anomalias em ligas de aço-níquel. (pt)
Charles Édouard Guillaume, född i Fleurier 15 februari 1861, död i Sèvres 13 maj 1938, var en schweizisk-fransk fysiker som mottog Nobelpriset i fysik 1920 för sin forskning på nickellegeringar. Guillaume blev 1915 föreståndare för Bureau international des poids et mesures. Han har utfört flera undersökningar över precisionsmätning av temperatur och tid. För sina undersökningar över anomalierna vid legeringar mellan nickel och järn, särskilt upptäckten av det märkliga nickelstålet invar, vars värmeutvidgning är ytterst liten, erhöll Guillaume 1920 års nobelpris i fysik. Guillaume invaldes 1919 som utländsk ledamot av Kungliga Vetenskapsakademien med ledamotsnummer 671. (sv)
Шарль Едуар Гійом (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 лютого 1861, , Швейцарія — 13 червня 1938, Севр, Франція) — швейцарсько-французький фізик.Лауреат Нобелівської премії 1920 року за відкриття сплавів з аномальною поведінкою коефіцієнта теплового розширення: Інвару і елінвару. (uk)
夏尔·纪尧姆（法语：Charles Guillaume ，1861年2月15日－1938年6月13日），瑞士物理學家。1920年，於瑞士辦事處任職的他，因發現鎳鋼合金於精密物理中的重要性，而獲得了該年度的諾貝爾物理學獎殊榮。 (zh)
Charles Édouard Guillaume fou un físic suís guardonat l'any 1920 amb el Premi Nobel de Física. (ca)
شارل ادوار غيوم (Charles Édouard Guillaume) (مواليد 15 فبراير، 1861 - 13 مايو، 1938) كان عالم فيزياء سويسري فرنسي. حصل على جائزة نوبل في الفيزياء عام 1920 عن أعماله في مجال القياسات الفيزيائية الدقيقة واكتشاف سبيلكة النيكل-فولاذ التي تدعى invar و elinvar، حيث أن لمعدن إنفار معامل تمدد حراري قريب جداً من الصفر مما يعطي نتائج قياس دقيقة بغض النظر عن تغيرات درجة الحرارة. (ar)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (15. února 1861 – 13. května 1938 Sèvres) byl francouzsko-švýcarský fyzik, nositel Nobelovy ceny za fyziku (1920), kterou obdržel za objev anomálií v niklové oceli (invar), což přispělo k rozvoji přesných měření. Vynalezl slitiny invar a . Ve 22 letech nastoupil do BIPM. (cs)
Ο Σαρλ Εντουάρ Γκιγιόμ (Charles Édouard Guillaume, 15 Φεβρουαρίου 1861 - 13 Ιουνίου 1938) ήταν Ελβετός φυσικός στον οποίο απονεμήθηκε το βραβείο Νόμπελ Φυσικής το 1920 για τη συμβολή του σε πειράματα ακριβείας, μέσω της ανακάλυψης ανωμαλιών στα κράματα νικελίου - ατσαλιού. Ο Γκιγιόμ είναι γνωστός για την ανακάλυψη των κραμάτων του νικελίου - σιδήρου και χάλυβα τα οποία ονόμασε Ινβάρ και . (el)
Charles Édouard GUILLAUME (15-an de februaro 1861, Fleurier, Svislando – 13-an de junio 1938, Sèvres, Francio) estis franca fizikisto, kiu ricevis la Nobel-premion pri fiziko en 1920 pro la malkovro de invaro (specifa fer-nikela alojo). Guillaume en 1883 iĝis kunlaboranto de la Internacia Mezurafera Ofico en Sèvres, poste en 1915 ties direktoro. Li ekzamenis dum esploroj la hidrargan termometron kaj la litron kiel volumenan unuon. Li konstatis pri tiu lasta, ke ĝi egalas ne al 1.000.000 cm3 sed al 1.000.028 cm3. Li fokisis ekde 1890 je la alojoj kaj malkovris, ellaboris la invarton kaj elinvarton. La termodilatiĝa valoro de la invarto (volumena ŝanĝiĝo je ŝanĝiĝo de la temperaturo), la malgranda elasteca valoro de la elinvarto estis uzata en diversaj sciencaj mezuriloj. (eo)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (* 15. Februar 1861 in Fleurier, NE; † 13. Juni 1938 in Sèvres) war ein französisch-schweizerischer Physiker und Nobelpreisträger. (de)
Charles Édouard Guillaume suitzar fisikaria izan zen. 1920ko Fisikako Nobel Saria jaso zuen nikel eta altzairu aleazioetan izandako anomalien aurkikuntzagatik. ETH Zürich-en doktoratu zen. Pisuen eta Neurrien Nazioarteko Bulegoa zuzendu zuen eta esperimentuak egin zituen neurri termostatikoekin. Nikel eta altzairuzko aleazioak aurkitu zituen, "invar" eta "" deituak. Izarren erradiazioa aztertzen ere aitzindaria izan zen eta itsas kronometroez interesatu zen. (eu)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, cantón de Neuchâtel, Suiza, 15 de febrero de 1861-Sèvres, Francia, 13 de mayo de 1938) fue un físico suizo galardonado en 1920 con el Premio Nobel de Física. Descubrió la aleación de acero y níquel denominada invar, muy utilizada en instrumentos de precisión por su bajo coeficiente de dilatación térmica. (es)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 février 1861 à Fleurier, Suisse - 13 juin 1938 à Sèvres, France) est un physicien suisse. Il est lauréat du prix Nobel de physique de 1920 « en reconnaissance du service qu'il a rendu en métrologie en découvrant des anomalies dans les aciers de nickel ». Le plus célèbre des alliages qu'il invente est l'invar, au très faible coefficient de dilatation thermique, qui révolutionne la métrologie et la cryogénie, et qui contribue à l'invention de la télévision. (fr)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 Februari 1861 – 13 Juni 1938) adalah seorang fisikawan berkebangsaan Prancis. Dia meraih Penghargaan Nobel Fisika pada tahun 1920. Ia dikenal akan "" dan ""-nya. (in)
シャルル・エドゥアール・ギヨーム （Charles Edouard Guillaume、1861年2月15日 - 1938年6月13日）はフランス系スイス人の物理学者である。 (ja)
샤를 에두아르 기욤(독일어: Charles Édouard Guillaume, 1861년 ~ 1938년)은 스위스의 실험물리학자이다. 취리히 연방 공과대학을 졸업하였다. 1897년에는 열팽창 계수가 실내 온도에 가까워지면 거의 0인 인바(invar) 합금(36% 니켈 철합금)을 발견했다. 은 값싼 미터 표준기 외에 각종의 물리 정밀 측정 기기나 시계의 추 등에 널리 쓰여, 길이 측정의 정밀도를 두드러지게 향상시켰다. 그 중에서도 인바선(線)에 의한 기선 측정에 의해 종래의 측정법이 새롭게 바뀌었다. 또한 시간 측정의 정밀도를 높이기 위해서 합금의 탄성률을 연구하여, 1919년에 탄성률의 온도 계수가 실내 온도 가까이에서 거의 0인 엘린바(elinvar) 합금(36% 니켈, 12% 크롬, 철합금)을 발견했다. 이 합금은 시계의 태엽 등에 이용되어, 시간 측정의 정밀도는 비약적으로 향상되었다. 이러한 업적으로 1920년 노벨 물리학상을 받았고, 프랑스 정부로부터는 레종도뇌르 훈장을 받았다. (ko)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 febbraio 1861 – Sèvres, 13 giugno 1938) è stato un fisico svizzero, nato in Svizzera nel canton Neuchâtel, Premio Nobel per la fisica nel 1920. (it)
Charles-Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 februari 1861 – Sèvres, 13 juni 1938) was een Zwitserse natuurkundige. Hij werd bekend als de ontdekker van diverse bijzondere ijzer-nikkel legeringen, waaronder Invar, waarvoor hij in 1920 de Nobelprijs voor Natuurkunde ontving. (nl)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (ur. 15 lutego 1861 w Fleurier, Szwajcaria, zm. 13 maja 1938 w Sèvres, Francja) – szwajcarski fizyk, laureat Nagrody Nobla w dziedzinie fizyki w roku 1920 za wkład jaki wniósł w precyzyjne pomiary w fizyce dzięki odkryciu anomalii w wysokoniklowych stalach stopowych, Wielki Oficer Legii Honorowej. Odkrył m.in. dwa stopy nazwane przez niego inwar i elinwar, które używane były przy budowaniu precyzyjnych instrumentów pomiarowych. Pracował w Observatoire de Paris w Paryżu. Jako pierwszy prawidłowo przewidział temperaturę przestrzeni kosmicznej. (pl)
Шарль Эдуа́р Гийо́м (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 февраля 1861, , Швейцария — 13 июня 1938, Севр, Франция) — швейцарско-французский физик. Лауреат Нобелевской премии 1920 года за открытие сплавов с аномальным поведением коэффициента теплового расширения: инвара и элинвара. (ru)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 de fevereiro de 1861 — Sèvres, 13 de maio de 1938) foi um físico suíço. Recebeu em 1920 o Nobel de Física, pela melhora na precisão de medições na física e pela descoberta de anomalias em ligas de aço-níquel. (pt)
Charles Édouard Guillaume, född i Fleurier 15 februari 1861, död i Sèvres 13 maj 1938, var en schweizisk-fransk fysiker som mottog Nobelpriset i fysik 1920 för sin forskning på nickellegeringar. Guillaume blev 1915 föreståndare för Bureau international des poids et mesures. Han har utfört flera undersökningar över precisionsmätning av temperatur och tid. För sina undersökningar över anomalierna vid legeringar mellan nickel och järn, särskilt upptäckten av det märkliga nickelstålet invar, vars värmeutvidgning är ytterst liten, erhöll Guillaume 1920 års nobelpris i fysik. Guillaume invaldes 1919 som utländsk ledamot av Kungliga Vetenskapsakademien med ledamotsnummer 671. (sv)
Шарль Едуар Гійом (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 лютого 1861, , Швейцарія — 13 червня 1938, Севр, Франція) — швейцарсько-французький фізик.Лауреат Нобелівської премії 1920 року за відкриття сплавів з аномальною поведінкою коефіцієнта теплового розширення: Інвару і елінвару. (uk)
夏尔·纪尧姆（法语：Charles Guillaume ，1861年2月15日－1938年6月13日），瑞士物理學家。1920年，於瑞士辦事處任職的他，因發現鎳鋼合金於精密物理中的重要性，而獲得了該年度的諾貝爾物理學獎殊榮。 (zh)
rdfs:comment
Charles Édouard Guillaume fou un físic suís guardonat l'any 1920 amb el Premi Nobel de Física. (ca)
شارل ادوار غيوم (Charles Édouard Guillaume) (مواليد 15 فبراير، 1861 - 13 مايو، 1938) كان عالم فيزياء سويسري فرنسي. حصل على جائزة نوبل في الفيزياء عام 1920 عن أعماله في مجال القياسات الفيزيائية الدقيقة واكتشاف سبيلكة النيكل-فولاذ التي تدعى invar و elinvar، حيث أن لمعدن إنفار معامل تمدد حراري قريب جداً من الصفر مما يعطي نتائج قياس دقيقة بغض النظر عن تغيرات درجة الحرارة. (ar)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (15. února 1861 – 13. května 1938 Sèvres) byl francouzsko-švýcarský fyzik, nositel Nobelovy ceny za fyziku (1920), kterou obdržel za objev anomálií v niklové oceli (invar), což přispělo k rozvoji přesných měření. Vynalezl slitiny invar a . Ve 22 letech nastoupil do BIPM. (cs)
Ο Σαρλ Εντουάρ Γκιγιόμ (Charles Édouard Guillaume, 15 Φεβρουαρίου 1861 - 13 Ιουνίου 1938) ήταν Ελβετός φυσικός στον οποίο απονεμήθηκε το βραβείο Νόμπελ Φυσικής το 1920 για τη συμβολή του σε πειράματα ακριβείας, μέσω της ανακάλυψης ανωμαλιών στα κράματα νικελίου - ατσαλιού. Ο Γκιγιόμ είναι γνωστός για την ανακάλυψη των κραμάτων του νικελίου - σιδήρου και χάλυβα τα οποία ονόμασε Ινβάρ και . (el)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (* 15. Februar 1861 in Fleurier, NE; † 13. Juni 1938 in Sèvres) war ein französisch-schweizerischer Physiker und Nobelpreisträger. (de)
Charles Édouard Guillaume suitzar fisikaria izan zen. 1920ko Fisikako Nobel Saria jaso zuen nikel eta altzairu aleazioetan izandako anomalien aurkikuntzagatik. ETH Zürich-en doktoratu zen. Pisuen eta Neurrien Nazioarteko Bulegoa zuzendu zuen eta esperimentuak egin zituen neurri termostatikoekin. Nikel eta altzairuzko aleazioak aurkitu zituen, "invar" eta "" deituak. Izarren erradiazioa aztertzen ere aitzindaria izan zen eta itsas kronometroez interesatu zen. (eu)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, cantón de Neuchâtel, Suiza, 15 de febrero de 1861-Sèvres, Francia, 13 de mayo de 1938) fue un físico suizo galardonado en 1920 con el Premio Nobel de Física. Descubrió la aleación de acero y níquel denominada invar, muy utilizada en instrumentos de precisión por su bajo coeficiente de dilatación térmica. (es)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 février 1861 à Fleurier, Suisse - 13 juin 1938 à Sèvres, France) est un physicien suisse. Il est lauréat du prix Nobel de physique de 1920 « en reconnaissance du service qu'il a rendu en métrologie en découvrant des anomalies dans les aciers de nickel ». Le plus célèbre des alliages qu'il invente est l'invar, au très faible coefficient de dilatation thermique, qui révolutionne la métrologie et la cryogénie, et qui contribue à l'invention de la télévision. (fr)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 Februari 1861 – 13 Juni 1938) adalah seorang fisikawan berkebangsaan Prancis. Dia meraih Penghargaan Nobel Fisika pada tahun 1920. Ia dikenal akan "" dan ""-nya. (in)
シャルル・エドゥアール・ギヨーム （Charles Edouard Guillaume、1861年2月15日 - 1938年6月13日）はフランス系スイス人の物理学者である。 (ja)
샤를 에두아르 기욤(독일어: Charles Édouard Guillaume, 1861년 ~ 1938년)은 스위스의 실험물리학자이다. 취리히 연방 공과대학을 졸업하였다. 1897년에는 열팽창 계수가 실내 온도에 가까워지면 거의 0인 인바(invar) 합금(36% 니켈 철합금)을 발견했다. 은 값싼 미터 표준기 외에 각종의 물리 정밀 측정 기기나 시계의 추 등에 널리 쓰여, 길이 측정의 정밀도를 두드러지게 향상시켰다. 그 중에서도 인바선(線)에 의한 기선 측정에 의해 종래의 측정법이 새롭게 바뀌었다. 또한 시간 측정의 정밀도를 높이기 위해서 합금의 탄성률을 연구하여, 1919년에 탄성률의 온도 계수가 실내 온도 가까이에서 거의 0인 엘린바(elinvar) 합금(36% 니켈, 12% 크롬, 철합금)을 발견했다. 이 합금은 시계의 태엽 등에 이용되어, 시간 측정의 정밀도는 비약적으로 향상되었다. 이러한 업적으로 1920년 노벨 물리학상을 받았고, 프랑스 정부로부터는 레종도뇌르 훈장을 받았다. (ko)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 febbraio 1861 – Sèvres, 13 giugno 1938) è stato un fisico svizzero, nato in Svizzera nel canton Neuchâtel, Premio Nobel per la fisica nel 1920. (it)
Charles-Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 februari 1861 – Sèvres, 13 juni 1938) was een Zwitserse natuurkundige. Hij werd bekend als de ontdekker van diverse bijzondere ijzer-nikkel legeringen, waaronder Invar, waarvoor hij in 1920 de Nobelprijs voor Natuurkunde ontving. (nl)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (ur. 15 lutego 1861 w Fleurier, Szwajcaria, zm. 13 maja 1938 w Sèvres, Francja) – szwajcarski fizyk, laureat Nagrody Nobla w dziedzinie fizyki w roku 1920 za wkład jaki wniósł w precyzyjne pomiary w fizyce dzięki odkryciu anomalii w wysokoniklowych stalach stopowych, Wielki Oficer Legii Honorowej. Odkrył m.in. dwa stopy nazwane przez niego inwar i elinwar, które używane były przy budowaniu precyzyjnych instrumentów pomiarowych. Pracował w Observatoire de Paris w Paryżu. Jako pierwszy prawidłowo przewidział temperaturę przestrzeni kosmicznej. (pl)
Шарль Эдуа́р Гийо́м (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 февраля 1861, , Швейцария — 13 июня 1938, Севр, Франция) — швейцарско-французский физик. Лауреат Нобелевской премии 1920 года за открытие сплавов с аномальным поведением коэффициента теплового расширения: инвара и элинвара. (ru)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 de fevereiro de 1861 — Sèvres, 13 de maio de 1938) foi um físico suíço. Recebeu em 1920 o Nobel de Física, pela melhora na precisão de medições na física e pela descoberta de anomalias em ligas de aço-níquel. (pt)
Шарль Едуар Гійом (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 лютого 1861, , Швейцарія — 13 червня 1938, Севр, Франція) — швейцарсько-французький фізик.Лауреат Нобелівської премії 1920 року за відкриття сплавів з аномальною поведінкою коефіцієнта теплового розширення: Інвару і елінвару. (uk)
夏尔·纪尧姆（法语：Charles Guillaume ，1861年2月15日－1938年6月13日），瑞士物理學家。1920年，於瑞士辦事處任職的他，因發現鎳鋼合金於精密物理中的重要性，而獲得了該年度的諾貝爾物理學獎殊榮。 (zh)
Charles Édouard GUILLAUME (15-an de februaro 1861, Fleurier, Svislando – 13-an de junio 1938, Sèvres, Francio) estis franca fizikisto, kiu ricevis la Nobel-premion pri fiziko en 1920 pro la malkovro de invaro (specifa fer-nikela alojo). Guillaume en 1883 iĝis kunlaboranto de la Internacia Mezurafera Ofico en Sèvres, poste en 1915 ties direktoro. Li ekzamenis dum esploroj la hidrargan termometron kaj la litron kiel volumenan unuon. Li konstatis pri tiu lasta, ke ĝi egalas ne al 1.000.000 cm3 sed al 1.000.028 cm3. (eo)
Charles Édouard Guillaume, född i Fleurier 15 februari 1861, död i Sèvres 13 maj 1938, var en schweizisk-fransk fysiker som mottog Nobelpriset i fysik 1920 för sin forskning på nickellegeringar. Guillaume blev 1915 föreståndare för Bureau international des poids et mesures. Han har utfört flera undersökningar över precisionsmätning av temperatur och tid. För sina undersökningar över anomalierna vid legeringar mellan nickel och järn, särskilt upptäckten av det märkliga nickelstålet invar, vars värmeutvidgning är ytterst liten, erhöll Guillaume 1920 års nobelpris i fysik. (sv)
Charles Édouard Guillaume fou un físic suís guardonat l'any 1920 amb el Premi Nobel de Física. (ca)
شارل ادوار غيوم (Charles Édouard Guillaume) (مواليد 15 فبراير، 1861 - 13 مايو، 1938) كان عالم فيزياء سويسري فرنسي. حصل على جائزة نوبل في الفيزياء عام 1920 عن أعماله في مجال القياسات الفيزيائية الدقيقة واكتشاف سبيلكة النيكل-فولاذ التي تدعى invar و elinvar، حيث أن لمعدن إنفار معامل تمدد حراري قريب جداً من الصفر مما يعطي نتائج قياس دقيقة بغض النظر عن تغيرات درجة الحرارة. (ar)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (15. února 1861 – 13. května 1938 Sèvres) byl francouzsko-švýcarský fyzik, nositel Nobelovy ceny za fyziku (1920), kterou obdržel za objev anomálií v niklové oceli (invar), což přispělo k rozvoji přesných měření. Vynalezl slitiny invar a . Ve 22 letech nastoupil do BIPM. (cs)
Ο Σαρλ Εντουάρ Γκιγιόμ (Charles Édouard Guillaume, 15 Φεβρουαρίου 1861 - 13 Ιουνίου 1938) ήταν Ελβετός φυσικός στον οποίο απονεμήθηκε το βραβείο Νόμπελ Φυσικής το 1920 για τη συμβολή του σε πειράματα ακριβείας, μέσω της ανακάλυψης ανωμαλιών στα κράματα νικελίου - ατσαλιού. Ο Γκιγιόμ είναι γνωστός για την ανακάλυψη των κραμάτων του νικελίου - σιδήρου και χάλυβα τα οποία ονόμασε Ινβάρ και . (el)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (* 15. Februar 1861 in Fleurier, NE; † 13. Juni 1938 in Sèvres) war ein französisch-schweizerischer Physiker und Nobelpreisträger. (de)
Charles Édouard Guillaume suitzar fisikaria izan zen. 1920ko Fisikako Nobel Saria jaso zuen nikel eta altzairu aleazioetan izandako anomalien aurkikuntzagatik. ETH Zürich-en doktoratu zen. Pisuen eta Neurrien Nazioarteko Bulegoa zuzendu zuen eta esperimentuak egin zituen neurri termostatikoekin. Nikel eta altzairuzko aleazioak aurkitu zituen, "invar" eta "" deituak. Izarren erradiazioa aztertzen ere aitzindaria izan zen eta itsas kronometroez interesatu zen. (eu)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, cantón de Neuchâtel, Suiza, 15 de febrero de 1861-Sèvres, Francia, 13 de mayo de 1938) fue un físico suizo galardonado en 1920 con el Premio Nobel de Física. Descubrió la aleación de acero y níquel denominada invar, muy utilizada en instrumentos de precisión por su bajo coeficiente de dilatación térmica. (es)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 février 1861 à Fleurier, Suisse - 13 juin 1938 à Sèvres, France) est un physicien suisse. Il est lauréat du prix Nobel de physique de 1920 « en reconnaissance du service qu'il a rendu en métrologie en découvrant des anomalies dans les aciers de nickel ». Le plus célèbre des alliages qu'il invente est l'invar, au très faible coefficient de dilatation thermique, qui révolutionne la métrologie et la cryogénie, et qui contribue à l'invention de la télévision. (fr)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 Februari 1861 – 13 Juni 1938) adalah seorang fisikawan berkebangsaan Prancis. Dia meraih Penghargaan Nobel Fisika pada tahun 1920. Ia dikenal akan "" dan ""-nya. (in)
シャルル・エドゥアール・ギヨーム （Charles Edouard Guillaume、1861年2月15日 - 1938年6月13日）はフランス系スイス人の物理学者である。 (ja)
샤를 에두아르 기욤(독일어: Charles Édouard Guillaume, 1861년 ~ 1938년)은 스위스의 실험물리학자이다. 취리히 연방 공과대학을 졸업하였다. 1897년에는 열팽창 계수가 실내 온도에 가까워지면 거의 0인 인바(invar) 합금(36% 니켈 철합금)을 발견했다. 은 값싼 미터 표준기 외에 각종의 물리 정밀 측정 기기나 시계의 추 등에 널리 쓰여, 길이 측정의 정밀도를 두드러지게 향상시켰다. 그 중에서도 인바선(線)에 의한 기선 측정에 의해 종래의 측정법이 새롭게 바뀌었다. 또한 시간 측정의 정밀도를 높이기 위해서 합금의 탄성률을 연구하여, 1919년에 탄성률의 온도 계수가 실내 온도 가까이에서 거의 0인 엘린바(elinvar) 합금(36% 니켈, 12% 크롬, 철합금)을 발견했다. 이 합금은 시계의 태엽 등에 이용되어, 시간 측정의 정밀도는 비약적으로 향상되었다. 이러한 업적으로 1920년 노벨 물리학상을 받았고, 프랑스 정부로부터는 레종도뇌르 훈장을 받았다. (ko)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 febbraio 1861 – Sèvres, 13 giugno 1938) è stato un fisico svizzero, nato in Svizzera nel canton Neuchâtel, Premio Nobel per la fisica nel 1920. (it)
Charles-Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 februari 1861 – Sèvres, 13 juni 1938) was een Zwitserse natuurkundige. Hij werd bekend als de ontdekker van diverse bijzondere ijzer-nikkel legeringen, waaronder Invar, waarvoor hij in 1920 de Nobelprijs voor Natuurkunde ontving. (nl)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (ur. 15 lutego 1861 w Fleurier, Szwajcaria, zm. 13 maja 1938 w Sèvres, Francja) – szwajcarski fizyk, laureat Nagrody Nobla w dziedzinie fizyki w roku 1920 za wkład jaki wniósł w precyzyjne pomiary w fizyce dzięki odkryciu anomalii w wysokoniklowych stalach stopowych, Wielki Oficer Legii Honorowej. Odkrył m.in. dwa stopy nazwane przez niego inwar i elinwar, które używane były przy budowaniu precyzyjnych instrumentów pomiarowych. Pracował w Observatoire de Paris w Paryżu. Jako pierwszy prawidłowo przewidział temperaturę przestrzeni kosmicznej. (pl)
Шарль Эдуа́р Гийо́м (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 февраля 1861, , Швейцария — 13 июня 1938, Севр, Франция) — швейцарско-французский физик. Лауреат Нобелевской премии 1920 года за открытие сплавов с аномальным поведением коэффициента теплового расширения: инвара и элинвара. (ru)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 de fevereiro de 1861 — Sèvres, 13 de maio de 1938) foi um físico suíço. Recebeu em 1920 o Nobel de Física, pela melhora na precisão de medições na física e pela descoberta de anomalias em ligas de aço-níquel. (pt)
Шарль Едуар Гійом (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 лютого 1861, , Швейцарія — 13 червня 1938, Севр, Франція) — швейцарсько-французький фізик.Лауреат Нобелівської премії 1920 року за відкриття сплавів з аномальною поведінкою коефіцієнта теплового розширення: Інвару і елінвару. (uk)
夏尔·纪尧姆（法语：Charles Guillaume ，1861年2月15日－1938年6月13日），瑞士物理學家。1920年，於瑞士辦事處任職的他，因發現鎳鋼合金於精密物理中的重要性，而獲得了該年度的諾貝爾物理學獎殊榮。 (zh)
Charles Édouard GUILLAUME (15-an de februaro 1861, Fleurier, Svislando – 13-an de junio 1938, Sèvres, Francio) estis franca fizikisto, kiu ricevis la Nobel-premion pri fiziko en 1920 pro la malkovro de invaro (specifa fer-nikela alojo). Guillaume en 1883 iĝis kunlaboranto de la Internacia Mezurafera Ofico en Sèvres, poste en 1915 ties direktoro. Li ekzamenis dum esploroj la hidrargan termometron kaj la litron kiel volumenan unuon. Li konstatis pri tiu lasta, ke ĝi egalas ne al 1.000.000 cm3 sed al 1.000.028 cm3. (eo)
Charles Édouard Guillaume, född i Fleurier 15 februari 1861, död i Sèvres 13 maj 1938, var en schweizisk-fransk fysiker som mottog Nobelpriset i fysik 1920 för sin forskning på nickellegeringar. Guillaume blev 1915 föreståndare för Bureau international des poids et mesures. Han har utfört flera undersökningar över precisionsmätning av temperatur och tid. För sina undersökningar över anomalierna vid legeringar mellan nickel och järn, särskilt upptäckten av det märkliga nickelstålet invar, vars värmeutvidgning är ytterst liten, erhöll Guillaume 1920 års nobelpris i fysik. (sv)
|
||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 45 |
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Administrivia/nobel.html
|
en
|
The Nobel Prize for Physics
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
[Physics FAQ] - [Copyright]
Originally compiled by Scott Chase, Phil Gibbs, and Johan Wevers.
Nobel Prizes for Physics, 1901–2021
The following is a complete listing of Nobel Prize awards, from the first award in 1901. Prizes were not awarded in every year. The date in brackets is the approximate date of the work. The description following the names is an abbreviation of the official citation.
The Physics prize is announced near the beginning of October each year. One of the quickest ways to get the announcement is to watch the Nobel Foundation web site at http://nobelprize.org.
1901 [1895] Wilhelm Konrad Röntgen Discovery of X rays. 1902 [1896] Hendrik Antoon Lorentz Magnetism in radiation phenomena. Pieter Zeeman 1903 [1896] Antoine Henri Bequerel Spontaneous radioactivity. [1898] Pierre Curie Marie Sklodowska-Curie 1904 [1894] Lord Rayleigh Density of gases and discovery of argon. (a.k.a. John William Strutt) 1905 [1899] Pilipp Eduard Anton von Lenard Cathode rays. 1906 [1897] Joseph John Thomson Conduction of electricity by gases. 1907 Albert Abraham Michelson Precision meteorological investigations. 1908 Gabriel Lippman Reproducing colors photographically, based on the phenomenon of interference. 1909 [1901] Carl Ferdinand Braun Wireless telegraphy. Guglielmo Marconi 1910 [1873] Johannes Diderik van der Waals Equation of state of fluids. 1911 [1896] Wilhelm Wien Laws of radiation of heat. 1912 [1909] Nils Gustaf Dalén Automatic gas flow regulators. 1913 [1911] Heike Kamerlingh Onnes Matter at low temperature. 1914 [1912] Max von Laue Crystal diffraction of X rays. 1915 [1913] William Henry Bragg X-ray analysis of crystal structure. William Lawrence Bragg 1916 No award. 1917 [1911] Charles Glover Barkla Characteristic X-ray spectra of elements. 1918 [1900] Max Planck Energy quanta. 1919 [1913] Johannes Stark Splitting of spectral lines in electric fields. 1920 Charles-Edouard Guillaume Anomalies in nickel–steel alloys. 1921 [1905] Albert Einstein Photoelectric effect. 1922 [1913] Niels Bohr Structure of atoms. 1923 [1909] Robert Andrew Millikan Elementary charge of electricity. 1924 Karl Manne Georg Siegbahn X-ray spectroscopy. 1925 [1914] James Franck Impact of an electron on an atom. Gustav Hertz 1926 Jean Baptiste Perrin Sedimentation equilibrium. 1927 [1924] Arthur Holly Compton Compton effect. [1912] Charles Thomson Rees Wilson Invention of the cloud chamber. 1928 [1903] Owen Willans Richardson Thermionic phenomena, Richardson's Law. 1929 [1923] Prince Louis-Victor de Broglie Wave nature of electrons. 1930 [1928] Sir Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman Scattering of light, Raman effect. 1931 No award. 1932 [1925] Werner Heisenberg Quantum Mechanics. 1933 [1926] Erwin Schrödinger Atomic theory. [1928] Paul Dirac 1934 No award. 1935 [1932] James Chadwick The neutron. 1936 [1932] Carl Anderson The positron. [1911] Victor Franz Hess Cosmic rays. 1937 [1925] Clinton Joseph Davisson Crystal diffraction of electrons. George Paget Thomson 1938 [1935] Enrico Fermi New radioactive elements. 1939 [1929] Ernest Orlando Lawrence Invention of the cyclotron. 1940–1942 No award. 1943 [1933] Otto Stern Proton magnetic moment. 1944 [1935] Isador Isaac Rabi Magnetic resonance in atomic nuclei. 1945 [1924] Wolfgang Pauli The exclusion principle. 1946 [1925] Percy Williams Bridgman Production of extremely high pressures. 1947 [1924] Sir Edward Victor Appleton Physics of the upper atmosphere. 1948 [1932] Patrick Maynard Stuart Blackett Cosmic ray showers in cloud chambers. 1949 [1935] Hideki Yukawa Prediction of mesons. 1950 [1947] Cecil Frank Powell Photographic emulsion for meson studies. 1951 [1932] Sir John Douglas Cockroft Artificial acceleration of atomic particles and transmutation of nuclei. Ernest Thomas Sinton Walton 1952 [1946] Felix Bloch Nuclear magnetic precision methods. Edward Mills Purcell 1953 [1935] Frits Zernike Phase-contrast microscope. 1954 [1926] Max Born Fundamental research in quantum mechanics. [1925] Walther Bothe Coincidence counters. 1955 [1947] Polykarp Kusch Electron magnetic moment. [1947] Willis Eugene Lamb Hydrogen fine structure. 1956 [1948] William Shockley Transistors. John Bardeen Walter Houser Brattain 1957 Tsung Dao Lee Parity violation. [1956] Chen Ning Yang 1958 [1934] Pavel Aleksejevic Cerenkov Interpretation of the Cerenkov effect. [1937] Il'ja Mickajlovic Frank Igor' Evgen'evic Tamm 1959 Owen Chamberlain The antiproton. [1955] Emilio Gino Segre 1960 [1952] Donald Arthur Glaser The bubble chamber. 1961 [1953] Robert Hofstadter Electron scattering on nucleons. Rudolf Ludwig Mössbauer Resonant absorption of photons. 1962 [1941] Lev Davidovic Landau Theory of liquid helium. 1963 [1931] Eugene Wigner Fundamental symmetry principles. [1949] Hans Jensen Nuclear shell structure. Maria Goeppert Mayer 1964 Nikolai Basov Maser-Laser principle. Alexander Prochorov [1958] Charles Townes 1965 [1948] Richard Feynman Quantum electrodynamics. Julian Schwinger Sin-Itiro Tomonaga 1966 [1950] Alfred Kastler Study of hertzian resonance in atoms. 1967 [1938] Hans Albrecht Bethe Energy production in stars. 1968 [1955] Luis W. Alvarez Discovery of many-particle resonances. 1969 [1964] Murray Gell-Mann Quark model for particle classification. 1970 [1942] Hannes Alfvén Magneto-hydrodynamics in plasma physics. [1932] Louis Néel Ferromagnetism and antiferromagnetism. 1971 [1947] Dennis Gabor Principles of holography. 1972 [1957] John Bardeen Theory of superconductivity. Leon Cooper Robert Schrieffer 1973 [1960] Leo Esaki Tunneling in superconductors. Ivar Giaever [1962] Brian Josephson Super-current through tunnel barriers. 1974 [1974] Antony Hewish Discovery of pulsars. [1958] Sir Martin Ryle Pioneering radioastronomy work. 1975 [1950] Aage Bohr Structure of the atomic nucleus. Ben Mottelson James Rainwater 1976 [1974] Burton Richter Discovery of the J/Psi particle. Samual Chao Chung Ting 1977 [1958] Philip Warren Anderson Electronic structure of magnetic and disordered solids. [1967] Nevill Francis Mott John Hasbrouck Van Vleck 1978 [1932] Pyotr Kapitsa Liquefaction of helium. [1965] Arno Penzias Cosmic microwave background radiation. Robert Wilson 1979 [1961] Sheldon Glashow Electroweak theory, especially weak neutral currents. [1967] Steven Weinberg [1968] Abdus Salam 1980 [1964] James Cronin Discovery of CP violation in the asymmetric decay of neutral K mesons. Val Fitch 1981 Kai Seigbahn High-resolution electron spectroscopy. [1962] Nicolaas Bloembergen Laser spectroscopy. Arthur Schawlow 1982 [1972] Kenneth Wilson Critical phenomena in phase transitions. 1983 [1935] Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Evolution of stars. [1957] William Fowler 1984 [1970] Simon van der Meer Stochastic cooling for colliders. [1983] Carlo Rubbia Discovery of W and Z particles. 1985 [1977] Klaus von Klitzing Discovery of (integer) quantum Hall effect. 1986 [1981] Gerd Binnig Scanning tunneling microscopy. Heinrich Rohrer [1932] Ernst August Friedrich Ruska Electron microscopy. 1987 [1986] Georg Bednorz High-temperature superconductivity. Alex Müller 1988 [1962] Leon Max Lederman Discovery of the muon neutrino, leading to classification of particles into families. Melvin Schwartz Jack Steinberger 1989 Hans Georg Dehmelt Penning trap for charged particles. Wolfgang Paul Paul trap for charged particles. Norman Ramsey Control of atomic transitions by the separated oscillatory fields method. 1990 [1972] Jerome Isaac Friedman Deep inelastic scattering experiments leading to the discovery of quarks. Henry Way Kendall Richard Edward Taylor 1991 Pierre-Gilles de Gennes Order-disorder transitions in liquid crystals and polymers. 1992 Georges Charpak Multiwire proportional chamber. 1993 [1974] Russell Hulse Discovery of the first binary pulsar and subsequent tests of general relativity. Joseph Taylor 1994 [1960] Bertram Brockhouse Neutron scattering experiments. [1946] Clifford Shull 1995 [1975] Martin Perl Discovery of the tau lepton. [1953] Frederick Reines Detection of the neutrino. 1996 David Lee Superfluidity in helium-3. Douglas Osheroff Robert Richardson 1997 [1985] Steven Chu Development of methods to trap and cool atoms with laser light. Claude Cohen-Tannoudji William Phillips 1998 [1982] Robert Laughlin Discovery and theory of the fractional quantum Hall effect. Horst Störmer Daniel Tsui 1999 [1972] Gerard 't Hooft Development of a renormalisation scheme for non-abelian gauge theories. Martin Veltman 2000 [1957] Herbert Kroemer Growing of heterostructures. [1963] Zhores Alferov Semiconductor laser based on heterostructures. [1958] Jack Kilby Invention of the integrated circuit. 2001 Eric Cornell Bose–Einstein condensation of alkali metals. Carl Wieman Wolfgang Ketterle 2002 Raymond Davis Jr Detection of cosmic neutrinos. Masatosh Koshiba Riccardo Giacconi Detection of cosmic X rays. 2003 Alexei Abrikosov Pioneering contributions to the theory of superconductors and superfluids. [1950] Vitaly Ginzburg [1970] Anthony Leggett 2004 [1973] David Gross Discovery of asymptotic freedom in the theory of the strong interaction. David Politzer Frank Wilczek 2005 Roy Glauber Quantum theory of optical coherence. John Hall Development of ultra-high precision measurements of light. Theodor H�nsch 2006 John Mather Study of the early universe, and developing the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) experiment. George Smoot 2007 Albert Fert Discovery of giant magnetoresistance. Peter Gr�nberg 2008 Yoichiro Nambu Discovery of the mechanism of spontaneous symmetry breaking. Makoto Kobayashi Discovery of the origin of symmetry breaking. Toshihide Maskawa 2009 Charles Kao Achievements concerning transmission of light in optical fibres. Willard Boyle Invention of the charge-coupled device (CCD). George Smith 2010 Andre Geim Experiments in graphene. Konstantin Novoselov 2011 Saul Perlmutter Discovery of the accelerating expansion of the universe. Brian Schmidt Adam Riess 2012 Serge Haroche New experimental methods for studying individual quantum systems. David Wineland 2013 Fran�ois Englert Theory of the Higgs mechanism. Peter Higgs 2014 Isamu Akasaki Invention of efficient blue light-emitting diodes. Hiroshi Amano Shuji Nakamura 2015 Takaaki Kajita Discovery of neutrino oscillations. Arthur McDonald 2016 David Thouless Discoveries involving topological phase transitions and topological phases of matter. F. Haldane J. Kosterlitz 2017 Rainer Weiss Contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves. Barry Barish Kip Thorne 2018 Arthur Ashkin Inventions in the field of laser physics. G�rard Mourou Donna Strickland 2019 James Peebles Contributions to our understanding of the evolution of the universe and Earth's place in the cosmos. Michel Mayor Didier Queloz 2020 Roger Penrose The discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of general relativity. Reinhard Genzel The discovery of a supermassive compact object at the centre of our galaxy. Andrea Ghez 2021 Syukuro Manabe The physical modelling of Earth's climate, quantifying variability and reliably predicting global warming. Klaus Hasselmann Giorgio Parisi The discovery of the interplay of disorder and fluctuations in physical systems, from atomic to planetary scales.
|
||||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 44 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes/1929-1920/
|
en
|
All Nobel Prizes
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
All Nobel Prizes
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes
|
Between 1901 and 2023, the Nobel Prizes and the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel were awarded 621 times to 1000 people and organisations. With some receiving the Nobel Prize more than once, this makes a total of 965 individuals and 27 organisations. Below, you can view the full list of Nobel Prizes and Nobel Prize laureates.
Find all prizes in | physics | chemistry | physiology or medicine | literature | peace | economic sciences | all categories
2024
The 2024 Nobel Prizes will be announced 7–14 October.
1929
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1929
“for his discovery of the wave nature of electrons”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1929
“for their investigations on the fermentation of sugar and fermentative enzymes”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1929
“for his discovery of the antineuritic vitamin”
“for his discovery of the growth-stimulating vitamins”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1929
“principally for his great novel, Buddenbrooks, which has won steadily increased recognition as one of the classic works of contemporary literature”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1929
“for his crucial role in bringing about the Briand-Kellogg Pact”
1928
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1928
“for his work on the thermionic phenomenon and especially for the discovery of the law named after him”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1928
“for the services rendered through his research into the constitution of the sterols and their connection with the vitamins”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1928
“for his work on typhus”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1928
“principally for her powerful descriptions of Northern life during the Middle Ages”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1928
“No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section”
1927
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1927
“for his discovery of the effect named after him”
“for his method of making the paths of electrically charged particles visible by condensation of vapour”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1927
“for his investigations of the constitution of the bile acids and related substances”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1927
“for his discovery of the therapeutic value of malaria inoculation in the treatment of dementia paralytica”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1927
“in recognition of his rich and vitalizing ideas and the brilliant skill with which they have been presented”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1927
“for their contribution to the emergence in France and Germany of a public opinion which favours peaceful international cooperation”
1926
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1926
“for his work on the discontinuous structure of matter, and especially for his discovery of sedimentation equilibrium”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1926
“for his work on disperse systems”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1926
“for his discovery of the Spiroptera carcinoma”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1926
“for her idealistically inspired writings which with plastic clarity picture the life on her native island and with depth and sympathy deal with human problems in general”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1926
“for their crucial role in bringing about the Locarno Treaty”
1925
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1925
“for their discovery of the laws governing the impact of an electron upon an atom”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1925
“for his demonstration of the heterogenous nature of colloid solutions and for the methods he used, which have since become fundamental in modern colloid chemistry”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1925
“No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1925
“for his work which is marked by both idealism and humanity, its stimulating satire often being infused with a singular poetic beauty”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1925
“for his crucial role in bringing about the Locarno Treaty”
“for his crucial role in bringing about the Dawes Plan”
1924
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1924
“for his discoveries and research in the field of X-ray spectroscopy”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1924
“No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1924
“for his discovery of the mechanism of the electrocardiogram”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1924
“for his great national epic, The Peasants”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1924
“No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section”
1923
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1923
“for his work on the elementary charge of electricity and on the photoelectric effect”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1923
“for his invention of the method of micro-analysis of organic substances”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1923
“for the discovery of insulin”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1923
“for his always inspired poetry, which in a highly artistic form gives expression to the spirit of a whole nation”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1923
“No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section”
1922
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1922
“for his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1922
“for his discovery, by means of his mass spectrograph, of isotopes, in a large number of non-radioactive elements, and for his enunciation of the whole-number rule”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1922
“for his discovery relating to the production of heat in the muscle”
“for his discovery of the fixed relationship between the consumption of oxygen and the metabolism of lactic acid in the muscle”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1922
“for the happy manner in which he has continued the illustrious traditions of the Spanish drama”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1922
“for his leading role in the repatriation of prisoners of war, in international relief work and as the League of Nations' High Commissioner for refugees”
1921
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1921
“for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1921
“for his contributions to our knowledge of the chemistry of radioactive substances, and his investigations into the origin and nature of isotopes”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1921
“No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1921
“in recognition of his brilliant literary achievements, characterized as they are by a nobility of style, a profound human sympathy, grace, and a true Gallic temperament”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1921
“for their lifelong contributions to the cause of peace and organized internationalism”
1920
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920
“in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1920
“in recognition of his work in thermochemistry”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1920
“for his discovery of the capillary motor regulating mechanism”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1920
“for his monumental work, Growth of the Soil”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1920
“for his longstanding contribution to the cause of peace and justice and his prominent role in the establishment of the League of Nations”
To cite this section
MLA style: All Nobel Prizes. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach AB 2024. Thu. 25 Jul 2024. <https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes>
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 13 |
https://www.bipm.org/en/-/guillaume-symposium
|
en
|
guillaume
|
https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/favicon.ico
|
https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/logo.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-burger-white.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-burger-blue.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/search-blue.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/search-white.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-user-blue.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-user-white.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-close.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/search-blue.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/search-white.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-user-blue.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-user-white.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/BIPM-logo-midi-white.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/BIPM-logo-midi-yellow.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-metrology-white.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-links-white.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-close.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-close.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-close.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/documents/53968/39300004/2020-03-guillaume.jpg/c09c2a44-60eb-c2e3-e87a-688d873f6238?t=1597071723360",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/BIPM-logo-name.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"2020",
"meeting/event (bipm)",
"staff",
"news",
"director's office"
] | null |
[] | null |
On 17 October 2020, the BIPM will celebrate the life and work of Charles-Édouard Guillaume with a symposium that will consider his legacy.
|
en
|
https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/favicon.ico
|
BIPM
|
https://www.bipm.org/en/-/guillaume-symposium
|
On 17 October 2020, the BIPM celebrated the life and work of Charles-Édouard Guillaume with a symposium, both online and at the BIPM, considering his legacy.
The year 2020 marks the centenary of the award of the Nobel Prize in Physics to Charles-Édouard Guillaume (1861-1938). He was born into a watchmaking family in Fleurier (Switzerland), and dedicated more than half a century to metrology through his work at the BIPM. His major study of the properties of nickel-iron alloys spanned more than twenty-five years and not only revolutionized geodesy measurements but also chronometry and precision horology; numerous applications still exist for these alloys. In 1915, he became Director of the BIPM, a position he held until his retirement in 1936.
Guillaume was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1920 "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys".
|
||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 9 |
https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/nobel-prize-discovery-invar/docview/1285129775/se-2
|
en
|
A Nobel prize for the discovery of Invar
|
[
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/f4326488/images/openlayer/PQ_Open_MyResearch.jpg",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/226656d3/images/openlayer/PQ_Open_Translate.jpg",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/e78dc4a9/images/openlayer/PQ_Open_Cite.jpg",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/39ef348f/images/openlayer/PQ_Open_PDF.jpg",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/9867d8ae/images/openlayer/PQ_Open_Save.jpg",
"https://www.syndetics.com/index.php?issn=0143-7798/mc.jpg&client=pqis",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Explore millions of resources from scholarly journals, books, newspapers, videos and more, on the ProQuest Platform.
|
en
|
/apple-icon-57x57.png
| null |
IN 1920, Charles Edouard Guillaume (Figi) received a Nobel prize in physics for work he had done in the late nineteenth century - the discovery of an iron - nickel alloy that does not expand upon heating. He named it Invar, short for 'invariable'. The discovery was immediately put to use for many kinds of precision instruments. To this day, this is the only Nobel prize awarded for a metallurgical contribution. The discovery was made at the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (International Bureau of Weights and Measures) in Sèvres near Paris.
Guillaume was born at Fleurier in the SwissJura. After graduating from the Technical University in Zurich he served briefly in the military before joining the Bureau in 1883. His tasks included finding better ways to increase the precision of standard measurements. He searched for inexpensive materials to make standards of length and mass. In use at that time was a platinum-iridium alloy which was very expensive but useful because it did not corrode and had a low coefficient of thermal expansion.
In his search he made a remarkable discovery in 1898, that nickel-iron containing about 30% nickel had a very low expansion coefficient (Fig 2), in...
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 46 |
https://pantheon.world/profile/occupation/physicist/country/switzerland
|
en
|
Greatest Swiss Physicists
|
http://localhost:3000/api/screenshot/occupation-country?occupation=physicist&country=che
|
http://localhost:3000/api/screenshot/occupation-country?occupation=physicist&country=che
|
[
"https://pantheon.world/images/icons/icon-nav.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/logos/logo_pantheon.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/icons/icon-search.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/573694.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/7790184.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/7790420.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/10896.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/768749.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/2889802.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/246299.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/314421.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/ui/profile-w.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/573694.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/7790184.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/7790420.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/10896.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/106014.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/768749.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/2889802.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/246299.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/314421.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/985295.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/ui/tri-left-b.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/573694.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/7790184.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/7790420.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/10896.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/106014.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/768749.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/2889802.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/246299.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/314421.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/985295.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/21044568.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/6274827.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/ui/tri-right-b.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/_next/image?url=%2Fimages%2Flogos%2Flogo_datawheel.png&w=256&q=75 1x, /_next/image?url=%2Fimages%2Flogos%2Flogo_datawheel.png&w=640&q=75 2x",
"https://pantheon.world/images/logos/logo_CL.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/_next/image?url=%2Fimages%2Flogos%2Flogo_creative_commons.png&w=96&q=75 1x, /_next/image?url=%2Fimages%2Flogos%2Flogo_creative_commons.png&w=256&q=75 2x",
"https://pantheon.world/images/logos/logo_facebook.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/logos/logo_twitter.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/images/favicon.ico
| null |
7 . Ami Argand ( 1750 - 1803 )
With an HPI of 58.82 , Ami Argand is the 7th most famous Swiss Physicist . His biography has been translated into 18 different languages.
François-Pierre-Amédée Argand, known as Ami Argand (5 July 1750 – 14 or 24 October 1803) was a Genevan physicist and chemist. He invented the Argand lamp, a great improvement on the traditional oil lamp. Francois-Pierre-Amédée Argand was born in Geneva, Republic of Geneva, the ninth of ten children. His father was a watchmaker, who intended for him to enter the clergy. However, he had an aptitude more for science, and became a pupil of the noted botanist and meteorologist Horace-Bénédict de Saussure. He published several scientific papers on meteorological subjects while in Paris in his late twenties. He took a teaching post in chemistry and developed some ideas for improving the distillation of wine into brandy, and, with his brother, successfully built a large distillery. During this period, in 1780, he started to invent improvements on the conventional oil lamp. The basic idea was to have a cylindrical wick which air could flow through and around, increasing the intensity of the light produced. A cylindrical chimney enhanced the air flow and a series of experiments gave the proportions for optimum operation. A mechanism for raising and lowering the wick allowed some adjustment and optimization as well. The light was much brighter than a candle (by a factor of five to ten), burned cleanly, and was cheaper than using candles. In 1783, Argand met Montgolfier brothers Jacques-Étienne and Joseph-Michel in France and became closely involved with his sensational experiments to devise a hot air balloon. When he was there, his acquaintance Antoine-Aroult Quinquet, to whom he had shown an early prototype, began to manufacture the lamps himself, with minor change, and successfully fought a protracted legal battle for patent infringement. Many problems attended the successful development of a lamp that could be a commercial success. Argand experimented with all of them, searching for practical compromises. The design manufacture of the wick was solved by a lacemaker. The type of glass to use next to the hot flame was a problem eventually solved. All available types of oil to use were tested, and methods to purify them for use were the subject of a number of experiments. Whale oil was eventually settled on, which eventually created an important new industry. The mechanism for holding the wick and moving it up and down went through many variations. Even the solder used to fabricate the oil reservoir was a problem when it was discovered that the soft solder joints leaked. The invention of the lamp did not consist, then, of only one invention, but rather of the improvement and development of a complete system of parts all working together, not unlike Edison's invention of the electrical lighting system that was to again revolutionize lighting over a century later. In October of the same year, he determined to manufacture his lamp, in England. He eventually formed a partnership with William Parker and Matthew Boulton to manufacture the lamp. In 1784, he received a patent for his design. Argand also formed a close relationship with James Watt who performed some experiments on the lamp's efficiency and advised him on waging his court battles. The demand for the lamps was high, and the partners had many difficulties at first in manufacturing them, but they eventually became the standard source of illumination in homes and shops. Many imitators and improvers evolved new variations, and thousands of shops sprang up to produce them in the next decades. They were eventually displaced by the kerosene lamp in about 1850. The invention of the lamp was not, in the end, profitable for Argand. He contracted malaria and suffered from it for twenty years before dying in Geneva at age 53. The lamp [1] In light houses [2]
10 . Walther Ritz ( 1878 - 1909 )
With an HPI of 52.67 , Walther Ritz is the 10th most famous Swiss Physicist . His biography has been translated into 20 different languages.
Walther Heinrich Wilhelm Ritz (22 February 1878 – 7 July 1909) was a Swiss theoretical physicist. He is most famous for his work with Johannes Rydberg on the Rydberg–Ritz combination principle. Ritz is also known for the variational method named after him, the Ritz method. Walter Ritz's father Raphael Ritz was born in Valais and was a well-known painter. His mother, born Nördlinger, was the daughter of an engineer from Tübingen. Ritz was a particularly gifted student and attended the municipal lyceum in Sion. In 1897, he entered the polytechnic school in Zürich, where he studied engineering. Soon, he found out that he could not live with the approximations and compromises associated with engineering, so he switched to the more mathematically accurate physical sciences. In 1900, Ritz contracted tuberculosis, possibly also pleurisy, which he later died from. In 1901 he moved to Göttingen for health reasons. There he was influenced by Woldemar Voigt and David Hilbert. Ritz wrote a dissertation on spectral lines of atoms and received his doctorate with summa cum laude. The theme later led to the Ritz combination principle and in 1913 to the atomic model of Ernest Rutherford and Niels Bohr. In the spring of 1903, he heard lectures by Hendrik Antoon Lorentz in Leiden on electrodynamic problems and his new electron theory. In June 1903 he was in Bonn at the Heinrich Kayser Institute, where he found in potash a spectral line that he had predicted in his dissertation. In November 1903, he was in Paris at the Ecole Normale Supérieure. There he worked on infrared photo plates. In July 1904 his illness worsened and he moved back to Zürich. The disease prevented him from publishing further scientific publications until 1906. In September 1907 he moved to Tübingen, the place of origin of his mother, and in 1908 again to Göttingen, where he became a private lecturer at the university. There he published his work Recherches critiques sur l'Electrodynamique Générale, see below. As a student, friend or colleague, Ritz had contacts with many contemporary scholars such as Hilbert, Andreas Heinrich Voigt, Hermann Minkowski, Lorentz, Aimé Cotton, Friedrich Paschen, Henri Poincaré and Albert Einstein. He was a fellow student of Einstein in Zürich, while he studied there. Ritz was an opponent of Einstein's theory of relativity. Ritz died in Göttingen and was buried in the Nordheim cemetery in Zürich. The family tomb was lifted on 15 November 1999. His tombstone is in section 17 with the grave number 84457. Not so well known is the fact that in 1908 Ritz produced a lengthy criticism of Maxwell–Lorentz electromagnetic theory, in which he contended that the theory's connection with the luminescent ether (see Lorentz ether theory) made it "essentially inappropriate to express the comprehensive laws for the propagation of electrodynamic actions." Ritz pointed out seven problems with Maxwell–Lorentz electromagnetic field equations: Electric and magnetic forces really express relations about space and time and should be replaced with non-instantaneous elementary actions. Advanced potentials don't exist (and their erroneous use led to the Rayleigh–Jeans ultraviolet catastrophe). Localization of energy in the ether is vague. It is impossible to reduce gravity to the same notions. The unacceptable inequality of action and reaction is brought about by the concept of absolute motion with respect to the ether. Apparent relativistic mass increase is amenable to different interpretations. The use of absolute coordinates, if independent of all motions of matter, requires throwing away the time-honoured use of Galilean relativity and our notions of rigid ponderable bodies. Instead, he indicated that light is not propagated (in a medium) but is projected. This theory, however, is considered to be refuted. In 1909 Ritz developed a direct method to find an approximate solution for boundary value problems. It converts the often insoluble differential equation into the solution of a matrix equation. It is a theoretical preparatory work for the finite element method (FEM). This method is also known as Ritz's variation principle and the Rayleigh-Ritz principle. In 1908, Ritz found empirically the Ritz combination principle named after him. After that, the sum or difference of the frequencies of two spectral lines is often the frequency of another line. Which of these calculated frequencies is actually observed was only explained later by selection rules, which follow from quantum mechanical calculations. The basis for this was the spectral line research (Balmer series) by Johann Jakob Balmer. The lunar crater Ritz is named after him. Jean-Claude Pont (ed.) Le Destin Douloureux de Walther Ritz, physicien théoricien de génie, Sion: Archives de l'Etat de Valais, 2012 (= Proceedings of the International Conference in Honor of Walther Ritz's 100th Anniversary). Media related to Walter Ritz at Wikimedia Commons Abbreviated Biographical Sketch of Walter Ritz Critical Researches on General Electrodynamics, Walter Ritz, 1908, English translation Ritz, Einstein and the Emission Hypothesis Gander, Martin J.; Wanner, Gerhard (2012). "From Euler, Ritz, and Galerkin to Modern Computing". SIAM Review. 54 (4): 627–666. doi:10.1137/100804036.
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 49 |
https://www.nealloys.com/invar_invar.php
|
en
|
Invar Properties & Low Coefficient of Thermal Expansion
|
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Invar-Graph-CTE-composition.png/350px-Invar-Graph-CTE-composition.png
|
[
"https://www.nealloys.com/images/NEA-Header-new.jpg",
"https://www.nealloys.com/images/PDF-Icon.gif",
"https://www.nealloys.com/images/PDF-Icon.gif",
"https://www.nealloys.com/images/PDF-Icon.gif",
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Invar-Graph-CTE-composition.png/350px-Invar-Graph-CTE-composition.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"invar 36",
"invar alloy",
"invar properties",
"nickel iron alloys",
"invar coefficient of thermal expansion",
"invar 36 properties",
"invar steel",
"invar material",
"invar welding",
"mateal",
"invar alloys",
"invar plate",
"pernifer 36",
"dilation 36",
"ATI 36",
"Nilo 36",
"normaperm 36",
"free cut invar",
"FM invar 36",
"sealmet",
"low expansion alloys"
] | null |
[] | null |
Invar CTE Properties of these Low Expansion Nickel Iron Alloys.
| null |
INVAR
36 ALLOY Invar Properties & Low Coefficient of Thermal Expansion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The coefficient of thermal expansion of nickel/iron alloys is plotted here against the nickel percentage (on a mass basis) in the alloy. The sharp minimum occurs at the Invar ratio of 36% Ni.
Invar, also known generically as FeNi36 (64FeNi in the US), is a nickel steel alloy notable for its uniquely low coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE or α). It was invented in 1896 by Swiss scientist Charles Édouard Guillaume. He received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1920 for this discovery, which shows the importance of this alloy in scientific instruments. Invar is a registered trademark of ArcelorMittal - Stainless & Nickel Alloys, formerly known as Imphy Alloys (US Trademark #63970). Like other nickel iron compositions, Invar is a solid solution; that is, it is a single-phase alloy — similar to a dilution of common table salt mixed into water. "Invar" refers to invariable; that is, it will not react to thermal expansion.
Common grades of Invar have an α (20–100 °C) of about 1.2 × 10–6 K–1 (1.2 ppm°C). However, extra-pure grades (<0.1% Co) can readily produce values as low as 0.62–0.65 ppm/°C. Some formulations display negative thermal expansion (NTE) characteristics. It is used in precision instruments such as clocks, physics laboratory devices, seismic creep gauges, shadow-mask frames, valves in motors, and antimagnetic watches, etc. However, it has a propensity to creep. In Land Surveying, when first-order (high-precision) elevation leveling is to be performed, the leveling rods used are made of Invar, instead of wood, fiberglass, or other metals.
There are variations of the original Invar material that have slightly different coefficient of thermal expansion such as:
Inovco, which Fe-33Ni-4.5Co and has an α (20–100 °C) of 0.55 ppm/°C.
FeNi42 (for example NILO alloy 42), has a nickel content of 42% and α ≈ 5.3 ppm/°C which matches that of silicon and therefore is widely used as lead frame material for electronic components, integrated circuits, etc.
FeNiCo alloys — named Kovar or Dilver P — that have the same expansion behaviour as borosilicate glass, and because of that are used for optical parts in a wide range of temperatures and applications, such as satellites.
Source of Invar’s CTE properties
A detailed explanation of Invar's anomalously low CTE has proven elusive for physicists. All the iron-rich face centered cubic Fe-Ni alloys show Invar anomalies in their measured thermal and magnetic properties that evolve continuously in intensity with varying alloy composition. Scientists had once proposed that Invar’s behavior was a direct consequence of a high-magnetic-moment to low-magnetic-moment transition occurring in the face centered cubic Fe-Ni series (and that gives rise to the mineral antitaenite), however this has now been shown to be incorrect. Instead, it appears that the low-moment/high-moment transition is preceded by a high-magnetic-moment frustrated ferromagnetic state in which the Fe-Fe magnetic exchange bonds have a large magneto-volume effect of the right sign and magnitude to create the observed thermal expansion anomaly.
Back to Invar Main Page
|
||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 0 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/guillaume/facts/
|
en
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume – Facts
|
[
"https://www.nobelprize.org/images/guillaume-12918-portrait-medium.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2023/10/nobelprizes_2023-1024x676.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/wp-content/themes/nobelprize/assets/images/spinner.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920 was awarded to Charles Edouard Guillaume "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys"
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/guillaume/facts/
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920
Affiliation at the time of the award: Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (International Bureau of Weights and Measures), Sèvres, France
Prize motivation: “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”
Prize share: 1/1
Work
Precise measurement plays an important role in science. To provide a basis for precise measurements, the metric system and a German legal meter were instituted to define lengths. However, different materials expand differently when temperatures change, which limits the ability to make very precise measurements. In 1896 Charles-Edouard Guillaume succeeded in finding an alloy of nickel and steel that registered almost no change in length and volume as a result of temperature changes. The invar nickel-steel alloy had a significant effect on scientific instruments and incandescent light bulbs.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 93 |
https://wellcomecollection.org/works/zqn66pk4
|
en
|
Gwen Prout stamp collection vol.36 Nobel Prize Physics 1910-1925
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
<p>The volume comprises a collection of stamps, first day covers, biographies and press cuttings about various winners of the Nobel Prize in Physics awarded between 1910 and 1925. Some of the items come with annotations and captions made by Gwen Prout. The stamps come from all over the world covering Europe, North America, South America and Africa.</p>
<p>The volume covers the following Nobel Prize winners:</p>
<p>1910: Johannes Diderik van der Waals</p>
<p>1911: Wilhelm Wien</p>
<p>1912: Nils Gustaf Dalén</p>
<p>1913: Heike Kamerlingh-Onnes</p>
<p>1914: Max von Laue</p>
<p>1915: Sir William Bragg and Sir William Lawrence Bragg</p>
<p>1917: Charles Glover Barkla</p>
<p>1918: Max Planck</p>
<p>1919: Johannes Stark</p>
<p>1920: Charles Édouard Guillaume</p>
<p>1922: Niels Bohr</p>
<p>1923: Robert Andrews Millikan</p>
<p>1924: Manne Siegbahn</p>
<p>1925: James Franck and Gustav Hertz</p>
<p>Items relating the the 1921 Nobel Prize winner, Albert Einstein, are in volume 37 and 38.</p>
|
en
|
Wellcome Collection
|
https://wellcomecollection.org/works/zqn66pk4
|
The volume comprises a collection of stamps, first day covers, biographies and press cuttings about various winners of the Nobel Prize in Physics awarded between 1910 and 1925. Some of the items come with annotations and captions made by Gwen Prout. The stamps come from all over the world covering Europe, North America, South America and Africa.
The volume covers the following Nobel Prize winners:
1910: Johannes Diderik van der Waals
1911: Wilhelm Wien
1912: Nils Gustaf Dalén
1913: Heike Kamerlingh-Onnes
1914: Max von Laue
1915: Sir William Bragg and Sir William Lawrence Bragg
1917: Charles Glover Barkla
1918: Max Planck
1919: Johannes Stark
1920: Charles Édouard Guillaume
1922: Niels Bohr
1923: Robert Andrews Millikan
1924: Manne Siegbahn
1925: James Franck and Gustav Hertz
Items relating the the 1921 Nobel Prize winner, Albert Einstein, are in volume 37 and 38.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 32 |
https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/charles-douard-guillaume-7048.php
|
en
|
Charles Édouard Guillaume Biography
|
[
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/charles-douard-guillaume-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/k-alex-mller-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/felix-bloch-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/heinrich-rohrer-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/johann-heinrich-lambert-2.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/k-alex-mller-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/felix-bloch-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/heinrich-rohrer-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/johann-heinrich-lambert-2.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/images/vinay.webp",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/images/print.png",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/k-alex-mller-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/felix-bloch-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/heinrich-rohrer-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/johann-heinrich-lambert-2.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/daniel-bernoulli-2.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/paul-dirac-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/martin-lewis-perl-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/muhammed-zafar-iqbal-1.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
A behind-the-scene look at the life of Charles Édouard Guillaume.
|
en
|
//www.thefamouspeople.com/images/favicon_tfp.ico
|
https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/charles-douard-guillaume-7048.php
|
See the events in life of Charles Édouard Guillaume in Chronological Order
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 71 |
https://m.facebook.com/980680772704078/
|
en
|
Du wurdest vorübergehend blockiert
|
[
"https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/rsrc.php/v3/y8/r/k97pj8-or6s.png",
"https://facebook.com/security/hsts-pixel.gif?c=3.2"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
de
| null | ||||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 87 |
https://www.metel.nl/en/nieuws/invar-36-feni36/
|
en
|
Invar 36: the remarkable alloy with near
|
[
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/04/logo-1.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/04/TITANIUM-light.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2024/06/Tungsten_carbide_wit-60x60.png",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/04/Zirconium-light.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/04/Nickel-light.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/04/Hafnium-light.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/04/Tantaal-light.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/04/Niobium-light.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/04/wolf-light.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/04/Molybdenum-light.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/12/light-metel.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/themes/metel/images/flags/de.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/themes/metel/images/flags/nl.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2024/02/Inconel-718-photo-2-1.jpg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2024/02/Thermal-expansion-of-a-Invar-36-and-b-stainless-steel-316-L-samples-manufactured-at.jpg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/04/logo-2.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/04/High-performance.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/12/brainport-industries.svg",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/12/DPT.png",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/12/Logo-High-Tech-Platform.png",
"https://www.metel.nl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/12/metaalunie-lid-logo.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2024-03-07T07:13:56+00:00
|
This article discusses the remarkable properties, machinability and availability of this unique alloy with an exceptionally low coefficient of thermal expansion.
|
en
|
Metel
|
https://www.metel.nl/en/nieuws/invar-36-feni36/
|
Invar 36: the remarkable alloy with near-zero thermal expansion
Containing 36% Nickel, Invar 36 is a unique alloy that is applied in markets ranging from scientific instruments to industrial machine building. Why is Invar 36 so remarkable and is it readily available? These are the questions we discuss in this in-depth article on the Nickel-Iron Alloy that is also known as FeNi36. Of course, we also talk about the machinability of it, one of the key concerns for many of Metel’s clients.
Metel is pleased to offer direct-from-stock availability of Invar 36, ensuring immediate delivery for our clients. Our inventory primarily consists of round bar stock, catering to immediate needs with efficiency and reliability. Additionally, we offer a wide range of other forms, including sheet, square bar, tubing, and more, all of which can be supplied directly from the Nickel factory. This comprehensive approach allows us to meet diverse requirements, providing customized solutions while maintaining the high-quality standards our clients expect.
“Machinability is a primary concern for our clients when selecting Invar 36,” states Nick Kesteloo, manager at Metel. “We’ve had clients switch to us, astounded by the superior milling experience with our Invar 36. The forging and annealing process we employ yields a more uniform metal, significantly enhancing its machinability. This ensures the Alloy’s quality is not just about its inherent properties, but also about how it’s processed to meet high machining standards.”
About Invar 36
Invar 36 stands out as a remarkable Alloy with unique properties that made it indispensable for various high-tech industries. Discovered in the early 20th century by Swiss physicist Charles Édouard Guillaume, earning him the Nobel Prize in Physics, the Nickel-Iron Alloy – also known as FeNi36 – is remarkable because of its exceptionally low coefficient of thermal expansion. This characteristic, virtually unmatched by any other Metal or Alloy over a range of temperatures, has cemented Invar 36’s role in applications where dimensional stability is critical. Applications range from intricate scientific instruments to large-scale industrial machinery. Its discovery not only marked a significant milestone in Alloy development but also opened up new avenues for technological advancements, highlighting the alloy’s enduring significance in the ever-evolving field of specialty Metals.
Invar effect
The name Invar 36 comes from the composition of the Alloy, 36% Nickel and 64% Iron, which results in a near-zero expansion due to temperature fluctuations. Up to a certain point, of course, when the temperature exceeds 200°C the expansion rate starts to increase, even though it is still lower than many common Metals. This phenomenon was named the ‘Invar effect’ because Invar 36 is the most notable example of this property. The Invar effect is the primary reason for selecting Invar 36 as a material for your components and is often used in:
Scientific instruments
Aerospace
Telecommunications
Transport of liquid gasses
Industrial machine building
Unique combination: Invar 36 and glass
A typical application of Invar 36 in combination with glass is in the manufacturing of precision optical instruments, such as telescopes, microscopes, and laser systems. In these applications, Invar 36 is used to create critical Metal-to-glass seals and components that require exceptional dimensional stability across a range of temperatures. The use of Invar 36 in such applications allows for the creation of optical systems with superior stability and precision, enabling accurate observations and measurements that are critical in scientific research, navigation, and in various fields of engineering and technology.
Availability and cost
At Metel, Invar 36 is readily available. We hold a significant stock of the alloy in our own warehouse and can ship at short notice. In terms of prices, these of course fluctuate, but at the moment Invar 36’ price per kilo is roughly the same as Titanium Grade 5. This makes the Alloy relatively economical when you consider its extraordinary properties.
Every batch is accompanied by the original factory certificate, the 3.1 certificate, with the batch’s mechanical properties and chemical analysis. This helps us, and our clients, guard the consistency of the Metal and its impact on machinability.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 73 |
https://einstein.manhattanrarebooks.com/pages/books/138/albert-einstein/typed-letter-signed
|
en
|
Typed Letter Signed
|
[
"https://einstein.manhattanrarebooks.com/images/logo.jpg",
"https://einstein-manhattanrarebooks.cdn.bibliopolis.com/pictures/138.jpg?width=768&height=1000&fit=bounds&auto=webp&v=1578341370",
"https://einstein-manhattanrarebooks.cdn.bibliopolis.com/pictures/138_2.jpg?width=320&height=427&fit=bounds&auto=webp&v=1578341370"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"www.bibliopolis.com"
] | null |
“It is impossible to assign, in any meaningful way, a universal time to the totality of inertial systems.” AT THE HEIGHT OF AN ANTI-RELATIVITY CAMPAIGN, EINSTEIN ADDRESSES PERHAPS HIS MOST PUBLIC CRITIC, REMINDING HIM OF ONE OF THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE THEORY: THAT THERE CAN BE NO MEANINGFUL NOTION OF “UNIVERSAL TIME” FOR “THE TOTALITY OF INERTIAL SYSTEMS”. Even though “Einstein achieved
|
en
|
/apple-touch-icon-57x57.png
|
Einstein Archives - Manhattan Rare Book Company
|
https://einstein.manhattanrarebooks.com/pages/books/138/albert-einstein/typed-letter-signed
|
“It is impossible to assign, in any meaningful way, a universal time to the totality of inertial systems.”
AT THE HEIGHT OF AN ANTI-RELATIVITY CAMPAIGN, EINSTEIN ADDRESSES PERHAPS HIS MOST PUBLIC CRITIC, REMINDING HIM OF ONE OF THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE THEORY: THAT THERE CAN BE NO MEANINGFUL NOTION OF “UNIVERSAL TIME” FOR “THE TOTALITY OF INERTIAL SYSTEMS”.
Even though “Einstein achieved worldwide fame in late 1919, when the scientific breakthrough of his general theory of relativity, as tested by British astronomers in South America and Africa during a total eclipse of the sun, was trumpeted to all corners of the globe” there still were influential and strident critics of his theory and “in 1920, a series of events took place that were directed against Einstein and relativity theory. They were thinly veiled anti-Semitic attacks instigated by physicist Philipp Lenard and right-wing publicist Paul Weyland, who accused Einstein of having a ‘particular press, a particular congregation’ that took it upon itself to promote Einstein as something more than he was... On August 24, the first of a lecture series intended to expose Einstein as a propagandist and fraud took place at the Berlin Philharmonic Hall... Einstein, who was in the audience, responded on August 27, with an article in the newspaper Berliner Tageblatt. In it, he denounced their campaign, refuted the assertions of the speakers point by point, and documented the acceptance of his theories by the most respected physicists. Still, he was rattled enough to consider leaving Germany, and received offers to work in other countries.”
In the midst of this anti-relativity fervor of 1920, Edouard Guillaume, a fierce critic of relativity for much of the decade, saw an opportunity to renew his attacks on Einstein’s theory. Guillaume was “an old colleague from Einstein’s days in the patent office in Bern. (He should not be confused with his relative Charles-Edouard Guillaume, a Swiss inventor who was awarded the Nobel Prize the year before Einstein.) The Guillaume with whom Einstein was friendly became determined to oppose relativity theory, especially in the period after the publication of general relativity (though his objections were related more to the special theory). Einstein devoted a long correspondence to patiently trying to explain to Guillaume that his arguments against the theory were invalid. Guillaume’s objections were based on his failure to properly comprehend the theory, as was the case with so many other anti-relativists”; a reminder of just how radical and counter-intuitive much of Einstein’s theory must have seemed to community of scientists in the early days of the theory. (Calaprice, et al., An Einstein Encyclopedia, pp.216-218).
In the present letter - one of the last Einstein wrote to Guillaume - Einstein hopes to finally dismiss Guillaume’s objections by making one of his clearest statements of the core of relativity thoery, namely that “[I]t is impossible to assign, in any meaningful way, a universal time to the totality of inertial systems.”
The full letter from December 16, 1920 - translated from the original German - reads in full:
Dear Guillaume,
I have so much obligatory work to do at present that I cannot think of writing a longer paper. Thus I am unfortunately not in a position to accept the friendly challenge. You might write Mr. Xavier Léon that he could address himself to Langevin, who is an outstanding expert in the theory. Grossmann recently asked me for an assessment of your papers in the area of relativity theory because it was supposedly necessary to take an official position on it, finally. I asserted that despite diligent attempts I was unable to make any progress toward comprehension and that I personally was convinced that there is no clear theoretical idea behind it. Don’t be cross with me; it was no longer appropriate to keep silent about my opinion on this point. It is impossible to assign, in any meaningful way, a universal time to the totality of inertial systems.
Amicable greetings to you and your wife,
yours,
[signed] A. Einstein
[Translation from The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume 10, #233.]
One page (8.5x11 inches), signed “A. Einstein” in ink. Usual folds. Very slight wear at extreme edges, otherwise fine. With the original typed and post-marked mailing envelope.
A REVEALING LETTER AFFIRMING THE CENTRAL TENET OF RELATIVITY DURING A PERIOD OF STRONG PUBLIC CRITICISM OF THE THEORY.
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 48 |
https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/charles-douard-guillaume-7048.php
|
en
|
Charles Édouard Guillaume Biography
|
[
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/charles-douard-guillaume-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/k-alex-mller-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/felix-bloch-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/heinrich-rohrer-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/johann-heinrich-lambert-2.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/k-alex-mller-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/felix-bloch-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/heinrich-rohrer-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/johann-heinrich-lambert-2.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/images/vinay.webp",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/images/print.png",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/k-alex-mller-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/felix-bloch-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/heinrich-rohrer-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/johann-heinrich-lambert-2.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/daniel-bernoulli-2.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/paul-dirac-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/martin-lewis-perl-1.jpg",
"https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/thumbs/muhammed-zafar-iqbal-1.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
A behind-the-scene look at the life of Charles Édouard Guillaume.
|
en
|
//www.thefamouspeople.com/images/favicon_tfp.ico
|
https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/charles-douard-guillaume-7048.php
|
See the events in life of Charles Édouard Guillaume in Chronological Order
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 51 |
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Administrivia/nobel.html
|
en
|
The Nobel Prize for Physics
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
[Physics FAQ] - [Copyright]
Originally compiled by Scott Chase, Phil Gibbs, and Johan Wevers.
Nobel Prizes for Physics, 1901–2021
The following is a complete listing of Nobel Prize awards, from the first award in 1901. Prizes were not awarded in every year. The date in brackets is the approximate date of the work. The description following the names is an abbreviation of the official citation.
The Physics prize is announced near the beginning of October each year. One of the quickest ways to get the announcement is to watch the Nobel Foundation web site at http://nobelprize.org.
1901 [1895] Wilhelm Konrad Röntgen Discovery of X rays. 1902 [1896] Hendrik Antoon Lorentz Magnetism in radiation phenomena. Pieter Zeeman 1903 [1896] Antoine Henri Bequerel Spontaneous radioactivity. [1898] Pierre Curie Marie Sklodowska-Curie 1904 [1894] Lord Rayleigh Density of gases and discovery of argon. (a.k.a. John William Strutt) 1905 [1899] Pilipp Eduard Anton von Lenard Cathode rays. 1906 [1897] Joseph John Thomson Conduction of electricity by gases. 1907 Albert Abraham Michelson Precision meteorological investigations. 1908 Gabriel Lippman Reproducing colors photographically, based on the phenomenon of interference. 1909 [1901] Carl Ferdinand Braun Wireless telegraphy. Guglielmo Marconi 1910 [1873] Johannes Diderik van der Waals Equation of state of fluids. 1911 [1896] Wilhelm Wien Laws of radiation of heat. 1912 [1909] Nils Gustaf Dalén Automatic gas flow regulators. 1913 [1911] Heike Kamerlingh Onnes Matter at low temperature. 1914 [1912] Max von Laue Crystal diffraction of X rays. 1915 [1913] William Henry Bragg X-ray analysis of crystal structure. William Lawrence Bragg 1916 No award. 1917 [1911] Charles Glover Barkla Characteristic X-ray spectra of elements. 1918 [1900] Max Planck Energy quanta. 1919 [1913] Johannes Stark Splitting of spectral lines in electric fields. 1920 Charles-Edouard Guillaume Anomalies in nickel–steel alloys. 1921 [1905] Albert Einstein Photoelectric effect. 1922 [1913] Niels Bohr Structure of atoms. 1923 [1909] Robert Andrew Millikan Elementary charge of electricity. 1924 Karl Manne Georg Siegbahn X-ray spectroscopy. 1925 [1914] James Franck Impact of an electron on an atom. Gustav Hertz 1926 Jean Baptiste Perrin Sedimentation equilibrium. 1927 [1924] Arthur Holly Compton Compton effect. [1912] Charles Thomson Rees Wilson Invention of the cloud chamber. 1928 [1903] Owen Willans Richardson Thermionic phenomena, Richardson's Law. 1929 [1923] Prince Louis-Victor de Broglie Wave nature of electrons. 1930 [1928] Sir Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman Scattering of light, Raman effect. 1931 No award. 1932 [1925] Werner Heisenberg Quantum Mechanics. 1933 [1926] Erwin Schrödinger Atomic theory. [1928] Paul Dirac 1934 No award. 1935 [1932] James Chadwick The neutron. 1936 [1932] Carl Anderson The positron. [1911] Victor Franz Hess Cosmic rays. 1937 [1925] Clinton Joseph Davisson Crystal diffraction of electrons. George Paget Thomson 1938 [1935] Enrico Fermi New radioactive elements. 1939 [1929] Ernest Orlando Lawrence Invention of the cyclotron. 1940–1942 No award. 1943 [1933] Otto Stern Proton magnetic moment. 1944 [1935] Isador Isaac Rabi Magnetic resonance in atomic nuclei. 1945 [1924] Wolfgang Pauli The exclusion principle. 1946 [1925] Percy Williams Bridgman Production of extremely high pressures. 1947 [1924] Sir Edward Victor Appleton Physics of the upper atmosphere. 1948 [1932] Patrick Maynard Stuart Blackett Cosmic ray showers in cloud chambers. 1949 [1935] Hideki Yukawa Prediction of mesons. 1950 [1947] Cecil Frank Powell Photographic emulsion for meson studies. 1951 [1932] Sir John Douglas Cockroft Artificial acceleration of atomic particles and transmutation of nuclei. Ernest Thomas Sinton Walton 1952 [1946] Felix Bloch Nuclear magnetic precision methods. Edward Mills Purcell 1953 [1935] Frits Zernike Phase-contrast microscope. 1954 [1926] Max Born Fundamental research in quantum mechanics. [1925] Walther Bothe Coincidence counters. 1955 [1947] Polykarp Kusch Electron magnetic moment. [1947] Willis Eugene Lamb Hydrogen fine structure. 1956 [1948] William Shockley Transistors. John Bardeen Walter Houser Brattain 1957 Tsung Dao Lee Parity violation. [1956] Chen Ning Yang 1958 [1934] Pavel Aleksejevic Cerenkov Interpretation of the Cerenkov effect. [1937] Il'ja Mickajlovic Frank Igor' Evgen'evic Tamm 1959 Owen Chamberlain The antiproton. [1955] Emilio Gino Segre 1960 [1952] Donald Arthur Glaser The bubble chamber. 1961 [1953] Robert Hofstadter Electron scattering on nucleons. Rudolf Ludwig Mössbauer Resonant absorption of photons. 1962 [1941] Lev Davidovic Landau Theory of liquid helium. 1963 [1931] Eugene Wigner Fundamental symmetry principles. [1949] Hans Jensen Nuclear shell structure. Maria Goeppert Mayer 1964 Nikolai Basov Maser-Laser principle. Alexander Prochorov [1958] Charles Townes 1965 [1948] Richard Feynman Quantum electrodynamics. Julian Schwinger Sin-Itiro Tomonaga 1966 [1950] Alfred Kastler Study of hertzian resonance in atoms. 1967 [1938] Hans Albrecht Bethe Energy production in stars. 1968 [1955] Luis W. Alvarez Discovery of many-particle resonances. 1969 [1964] Murray Gell-Mann Quark model for particle classification. 1970 [1942] Hannes Alfvén Magneto-hydrodynamics in plasma physics. [1932] Louis Néel Ferromagnetism and antiferromagnetism. 1971 [1947] Dennis Gabor Principles of holography. 1972 [1957] John Bardeen Theory of superconductivity. Leon Cooper Robert Schrieffer 1973 [1960] Leo Esaki Tunneling in superconductors. Ivar Giaever [1962] Brian Josephson Super-current through tunnel barriers. 1974 [1974] Antony Hewish Discovery of pulsars. [1958] Sir Martin Ryle Pioneering radioastronomy work. 1975 [1950] Aage Bohr Structure of the atomic nucleus. Ben Mottelson James Rainwater 1976 [1974] Burton Richter Discovery of the J/Psi particle. Samual Chao Chung Ting 1977 [1958] Philip Warren Anderson Electronic structure of magnetic and disordered solids. [1967] Nevill Francis Mott John Hasbrouck Van Vleck 1978 [1932] Pyotr Kapitsa Liquefaction of helium. [1965] Arno Penzias Cosmic microwave background radiation. Robert Wilson 1979 [1961] Sheldon Glashow Electroweak theory, especially weak neutral currents. [1967] Steven Weinberg [1968] Abdus Salam 1980 [1964] James Cronin Discovery of CP violation in the asymmetric decay of neutral K mesons. Val Fitch 1981 Kai Seigbahn High-resolution electron spectroscopy. [1962] Nicolaas Bloembergen Laser spectroscopy. Arthur Schawlow 1982 [1972] Kenneth Wilson Critical phenomena in phase transitions. 1983 [1935] Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Evolution of stars. [1957] William Fowler 1984 [1970] Simon van der Meer Stochastic cooling for colliders. [1983] Carlo Rubbia Discovery of W and Z particles. 1985 [1977] Klaus von Klitzing Discovery of (integer) quantum Hall effect. 1986 [1981] Gerd Binnig Scanning tunneling microscopy. Heinrich Rohrer [1932] Ernst August Friedrich Ruska Electron microscopy. 1987 [1986] Georg Bednorz High-temperature superconductivity. Alex Müller 1988 [1962] Leon Max Lederman Discovery of the muon neutrino, leading to classification of particles into families. Melvin Schwartz Jack Steinberger 1989 Hans Georg Dehmelt Penning trap for charged particles. Wolfgang Paul Paul trap for charged particles. Norman Ramsey Control of atomic transitions by the separated oscillatory fields method. 1990 [1972] Jerome Isaac Friedman Deep inelastic scattering experiments leading to the discovery of quarks. Henry Way Kendall Richard Edward Taylor 1991 Pierre-Gilles de Gennes Order-disorder transitions in liquid crystals and polymers. 1992 Georges Charpak Multiwire proportional chamber. 1993 [1974] Russell Hulse Discovery of the first binary pulsar and subsequent tests of general relativity. Joseph Taylor 1994 [1960] Bertram Brockhouse Neutron scattering experiments. [1946] Clifford Shull 1995 [1975] Martin Perl Discovery of the tau lepton. [1953] Frederick Reines Detection of the neutrino. 1996 David Lee Superfluidity in helium-3. Douglas Osheroff Robert Richardson 1997 [1985] Steven Chu Development of methods to trap and cool atoms with laser light. Claude Cohen-Tannoudji William Phillips 1998 [1982] Robert Laughlin Discovery and theory of the fractional quantum Hall effect. Horst Störmer Daniel Tsui 1999 [1972] Gerard 't Hooft Development of a renormalisation scheme for non-abelian gauge theories. Martin Veltman 2000 [1957] Herbert Kroemer Growing of heterostructures. [1963] Zhores Alferov Semiconductor laser based on heterostructures. [1958] Jack Kilby Invention of the integrated circuit. 2001 Eric Cornell Bose–Einstein condensation of alkali metals. Carl Wieman Wolfgang Ketterle 2002 Raymond Davis Jr Detection of cosmic neutrinos. Masatosh Koshiba Riccardo Giacconi Detection of cosmic X rays. 2003 Alexei Abrikosov Pioneering contributions to the theory of superconductors and superfluids. [1950] Vitaly Ginzburg [1970] Anthony Leggett 2004 [1973] David Gross Discovery of asymptotic freedom in the theory of the strong interaction. David Politzer Frank Wilczek 2005 Roy Glauber Quantum theory of optical coherence. John Hall Development of ultra-high precision measurements of light. Theodor H�nsch 2006 John Mather Study of the early universe, and developing the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) experiment. George Smoot 2007 Albert Fert Discovery of giant magnetoresistance. Peter Gr�nberg 2008 Yoichiro Nambu Discovery of the mechanism of spontaneous symmetry breaking. Makoto Kobayashi Discovery of the origin of symmetry breaking. Toshihide Maskawa 2009 Charles Kao Achievements concerning transmission of light in optical fibres. Willard Boyle Invention of the charge-coupled device (CCD). George Smith 2010 Andre Geim Experiments in graphene. Konstantin Novoselov 2011 Saul Perlmutter Discovery of the accelerating expansion of the universe. Brian Schmidt Adam Riess 2012 Serge Haroche New experimental methods for studying individual quantum systems. David Wineland 2013 Fran�ois Englert Theory of the Higgs mechanism. Peter Higgs 2014 Isamu Akasaki Invention of efficient blue light-emitting diodes. Hiroshi Amano Shuji Nakamura 2015 Takaaki Kajita Discovery of neutrino oscillations. Arthur McDonald 2016 David Thouless Discoveries involving topological phase transitions and topological phases of matter. F. Haldane J. Kosterlitz 2017 Rainer Weiss Contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves. Barry Barish Kip Thorne 2018 Arthur Ashkin Inventions in the field of laser physics. G�rard Mourou Donna Strickland 2019 James Peebles Contributions to our understanding of the evolution of the universe and Earth's place in the cosmos. Michel Mayor Didier Queloz 2020 Roger Penrose The discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of general relativity. Reinhard Genzel The discovery of a supermassive compact object at the centre of our galaxy. Andrea Ghez 2021 Syukuro Manabe The physical modelling of Earth's climate, quantifying variability and reliably predicting global warming. Klaus Hasselmann Giorgio Parisi The discovery of the interplay of disorder and fluctuations in physical systems, from atomic to planetary scales.
|
||||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 53 |
https://everything-everywhere.com/how-many-nobel-prizes-should-albert-einstein-have-won/
|
en
|
How Many Nobel Prizes Should Albert Einstein Have Won?
|
[
"https://everything-everywhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/NewLogo200Trans.png",
"https://everything-everywhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/NewLogo200Trans.png",
"https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/n-hRFP2/Podcast-Images/i-SNSFG3K/0/2d885a7e/L/einstein%20nobel%20prizes-L.png",
"https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/n-hRFP2/Misc/i-zGqp5HM/0/d41c466a/400x400/EverythingEverywherePodcastLarge-400x400.jpg"
] |
[
"about:blank",
"https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/how-many-nobel-prizes-should-einstein-have-won/id1521870190?i=1000501377801"
] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Gary Arndt",
"www.facebook.com"
] |
2020-12-04T22:44:36+00:00
|
How Many Nobel Prizes Should Albert Einstein Have Won?
|
en
|
Everything Everywhere
|
https://everything-everywhere.com/how-many-nobel-prizes-should-albert-einstein-have-won/
|
Subscribe
Apple | Spotify | Amazon | iHeart Radio | Player.FM | TuneIn
Castbox | Podurama | Podcast Republic | RSS | Patreon
Transcript
In the 120 year history of the Nobel Prize, there have been four people who have been given an award twice.
One of them is not Albert Einstein.
Yet, when you look at his list of accomplishments and the different fields of physics which he has touched, he arguably deserved more than one Nobel prize.
Join me as I play fantasy physics and try to figure out how many Nobel Prizes Albert Einstien should have won on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily.
The history of Albert Einstein and the Nobel Prize is a rather complex one.
By the year 1920, Einstein was unquestionably the most famous scientist in the world. Yet, he had not won a Nobel Prize.
He had developed the Special and General theories of Relativity, he had set the equivalence of mass and energy in his famous E=mc2 equation, and had contributed to many other areas of physics.
His work on relativity had been nominated by many physicists over several years, but the Nobel committee never gave him a prize.
There were a bunch of reasons why Einstein was never given a Nobel Prize. Being Jewish and pacifist were big ones. The Nobel committee didn’t want to honor someone who was so outside the mainstream. The biggest reason, however, was that he was a theoretical physicist. The prize had, up until this point, primarily been given to people who proved things through experimentation.
In 1919, evidence for the General Theory of Relativity was finally found during a solar eclipse when British astronomer Arthur Stanley Eddington detected light from stars which was bent by the gravity of the sun.
Everyone figured that 1920 would be the year when Einstein finally won his Nobel Prize. Instead, the award was given to Charles Edouard Guillaume “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”.
Yeah, Guillaume was just as surprised as everyone else that he won.
Well, OK. Maybe there wasn’t enough time for the result to sink in. Surely, 1921 would be the year that Einstien would win, right?
In 1921, they gave the Nobel Prize in Physics to no one. Yeah, they decided to give it to no one, rather than give it to Einstein.
The attitude of the Nobel committee was summed up by one Allvar Gullstrand, a Swedish ophthalmologist who sat on the physics committee. In his diaries, found long after his death, he wrote of the 1921 physics prize, “Einstein must never receive a Nobel Prize, even if the whole world demands it.”
By 1922, the Nobel Committee was looking ridiculous in the eyes of the world and in the eyes of the physics community for not giving Einstein a prize.
The rules of the prize stipulate that if no one were given an award in the sciences, it would roll over to the next year. So in 1922, they could retroactively give the 1921 prize.
The committee determined that they had to give the award to Einstein to maintain their respectability in the scientific world. It was just a matter of what they were going to give it to him for. This was probably the only time in the history of the Nobel when the winner was determined before the reason for the award.
In 1922 the nominations poured in again, and again there were dozens of nominations for Einstein and the General Theory of Relativity. However, there was one nomination for Einstein which wasn’t for relativity. Carl Wilhelm Oseen, a Swedish physicist, nominated Einstein for his work in discovering the photoelectric effect.
The photoelectric effect basically holds that photons of light will have more energy at shorter wavelengths.
The committee decided to give Einstein the 1921 award, which wasn’t given out the previous year and give the 1922 award to Niels Bohr who developed the theory of the atom. By giving an award to Einstein and Bohr at the same time, it eliminated having to give one to Einstein by himself.
So Einstein won his Nobel Prize, but it explicitly was not for relativity. In fact, when he was notified by the Nobel Committee they stated:
… the Royal Academy of Sciences has decided to award you last year’s Nobel Prize for physics, in consideration of your work in theoretical physics and in particular your discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect, but without taking into account the value which will be accorded your relativity and gravitation theories after these are confirmed in the future.
They left the door open for a future prize, but none was ever given.
Einstein didn’t really care much about the prize. He didn’t attend the prize ceremony because he was lecturing in Japan. All the money he won went to his ex-wife in a previous divorce settlement. Later in his life when he was asked which honors he was more proud of, he put the German Physical Society’s Max Planck Medal first and didn’t mention the Nobel Prize at all.
Given that we now have 120 years of Nobel Prizes under our belt, it is an interesting question to ask, how many Nobel Prizes should or could Einstein have won?
For the purposes of this theoretical discussion on theoretical physics, I’ll set a few rules:
Any prize he might share with someone else will count as a prize for Einstein. After all, if you share a prize with someone, you are still considered a Nobel laureate, and you still get the medal. You only split the prize money.
The Nobel committee does not award posthumous prizes. So for the purposes of this discussion, we’ll either assume that they do, or that Einstein is now 141 years old, and that he didn’t do any more physics after 1955, which was the year he died.
Before we dive in, how many people have ever won more than one Nobel prize?
The answer is four.
They are Marie Curie, who won in Physics in 1903 and Chemistry in 1911.
Linus Pauling, who won in Chemistry in 1954 and Peace in 1962.
John Bardeen, who won in Physics in 1956 and 1972.
And Frederick Sanger, who won in Chemistry in 1958 and 1980.
So with that, let’s start the Einstein count. For this I’ll basically count any scientific contributions which were at a Nobel Prize level, based on previous awards.
Number one is of course the prize he did win for the photoelectric effect. There is an argument that the 1921 and 1922 prizes that Einstein and Bohr received were really a single shared prize for the same thing, but it makes no difference for our purposes.
Number two would be for special relativity. He developed this in 1905 and he would probably end up sharing this prize with Hendrik Lorentz who developed some of the equations for it.
Number three would be for General Relativity which he published in 1915. This was all his and he would have gotten this alone.
Number four would be sharing in the 1929 prize with Louis de Broglie, for wave-particle duality. De Broglie freely admitted Einstein’s contribution to this, but Einstein was never given credit by the Nobel Committee.
Number five would be from his 1916 paper on spontaneous emission of light from atoms. This was the first time the idea of randomness was put in quantum mechanics, and it is now a pillar of science. This paper also developed the idea of stimulated emission, which was the theoretical basis for lasers. The 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics was given for the invention of the laser.
Number six would be the work he did with Indian physicist, Satyendra Bose in developing what became known as the Bose-Einstein Condensate. This is a state of matter at extremely low temperatures. The 2001 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded for proving and creating a Bose-Einstein Condensate, and Bose also never received a Nobel Prize.
Number seven would be for figuring out Browning Motion. The 1926 prize in physics was given to Jean Baptiste Perrin for experimentally proving the theory which Einstein established in 1905.
A possible eight prize could have been given for his work with quantum entanglement. The theoretical basis was set by Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen. They published a paper in 1935 titled “Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete?”. This was the theoretical basis that led to the 2012 Nobel Prize.
A possible ninth prize could be a share of the 1933 prize which went to Erwin Schrödinger. Einstein was involved in the creation of Schrödinger’s equations and contributed enough to jointly share in the prize.
A possible tenth prize could be his theory of gravity waves, which was finally proven true and awarded a Nobel prize in 2017.
So far we are at ten, and these are just things which actually did win Nobel Prizes, for which Einstein played a major part in the development of the theories which made winning the prize possible for someone else, or for his theories of relativity, which were obviously overlooked and ignored by the committee.
There is an 11th thing for which he could have won a prize for which is often overlooked. Peace. In his later years, Einstein was a big advocate for nuclear disarmament. Given his role in the development of the atomic bomb, he felt it was his duty.
Given that Chemist Linus Pauling won a peace prize in 1962 for basically the same thing, and Einstein was far more famous and influential, it is not at all out of the question that he could have shared the 1962 Nobel Peace Prize if he had lived that long.
So, 11 theoretical Nobel Prizes isn’t too shabby.
It is hard to overstate the impact Einstein had on almost every area of physics in the 20th century.
Yet, believe it or not, Einstein might not be the greatest of all time in physics. I’ll investigate that in a future episode when I dish out the theoretical Nobel prizes for one Isaac Newton.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 45 |
https://cityspecialmetals.com/alloys/invar-36/
|
en
|
Invar Plate, Bar & Sheet - City Special Metals
|
[
"https://secure.leadforensics.com/88065.png",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/themes/csm-2021/assets/img/logo.png",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/turbs-compressed-1-1500x200.jpg",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/DSC_0034-min-600x400.jpg",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/DSC_0132-min-600x400.jpg",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/IMG_0003-min-e1563972088314-600x400.jpg",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/DSC_0113-min-600x400.jpg",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/DSC_0130-min-600x400.jpg",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/icon-plate.png",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/icon-round-bar.png",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/icon-square-bar.png",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/icon-flat-bar.png",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/icon-roll.png",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/icon-wire.png",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/themes/csm-2021/assets/img/footer-logos.png",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/themes/csm-2021/assets/img/logo.png",
"https://moderate10-v4.cleantalk.org/pixel/50cf533f1cca335261012e75dd4ac2ef.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"tech@logicdesign.co.uk"
] |
2019-02-28T09:31:40+00:00
|
Invar® (Alloy 36 / FeNi36) is a low expansion alloy available at CSM in forms including Invar Bar, Sheet, Plate & more. Call 01268 774261.
|
en
|
https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/themes/csm-2021/assets/img/icons/favicon.ico
|
City Special Metals
|
https://cityspecialmetals.com/alloys/invar-36/
|
Global Supplier of Invar 36
City Special Metals are the UK’s leading stockist and supplier of high performance, specialist alloys including all varieties of Invar 36 (FeNi36).
Available in many forms we can offer a bespoke solution that meets your exact requirements and specification for your Invar 36 application, be it from Plate, Bar, Sheet, Coil or Wire. With over 20 years’ experience, our team has a combined wealth of knowledge about Invar 36 and its different characteristics, so we can guarantee you will find the product that fits your requirements.
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 12 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/guillaume/nominations/
|
en
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume – Nominations
|
[
"https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2018/06/guillaume-nomination.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2023/10/nobelprizes_2023-1024x676.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/wp-content/themes/nobelprize/assets/images/spinner.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920 was awarded to Charles Edouard Guillaume "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys"
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/guillaume/nominations/
|
Nobel Prizes and laureates
Eleven laureates were awarded a Nobel Prize in 2023, for achievements that have conferred the greatest benefit to humankind. Their work and discoveries range from effective mRNA vaccines and attosecond physics to fighting against the oppression of women.
See them all presented here.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 25 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/guillaume/lecture/
|
en
|
Edouard Guillaume – Nobel Lecture
|
[
"https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2023/10/nobelprizes_2023-1024x676.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/wp-content/themes/nobelprize/assets/images/spinner.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920 was awarded to Charles Edouard Guillaume "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys"
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/guillaume/lecture/
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume
Nobel Lecture
Nobel Lecture, December 11, 1920
Invar and Elinvar
Read the Nobel Lecture
Pdf 258 kB
From Nobel Lectures, Physics 1901-1921, Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1967
The Nobel Foundation's copyright has expired.
To cite this section
MLA style: Charles-Edouard Guillaume – Nobel Lecture. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach AB 2024. Mon. 22 Jul 2024. <https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/guillaume/lecture/>
Back to top Back To Top Takes users back to the top of the page
Nobel Prizes and laureates
Eleven laureates were awarded a Nobel Prize in 2023, for achievements that have conferred the greatest benefit to humankind. Their work and discoveries range from effective mRNA vaccines and attosecond physics to fighting against the oppression of women.
See them all presented here.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 84 |
https://cityspecialmetals.com/invar-legend-in-metals/
|
en
|
City Special Metals
|
[
"https://secure.leadforensics.com/88065.png",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/themes/csm-2021/assets/img/logo.png",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/DSC_0132-min-600x400.jpg",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/alexandre-debieve-FO7JIlwjOtU-unsplash-min-600x400.jpg",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/themes/csm-2021/assets/img/footer-logos.png",
"https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/themes/csm-2021/assets/img/logo.png",
"https://moderate3-v4.cleantalk.org/pixel/449f0aa70189dace1d84c7443183efe1.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Mark Cox"
] |
2019-07-08T15:51:47+00:00
|
The low expansion alloy known as Invar has been around for some time. In fact, 1996 marked the centennial of its discovery.
|
en
|
https://cityspecialmetals.com/wp-content/themes/csm-2021/assets/img/icons/favicon.ico
|
City Special Metals
|
https://cityspecialmetals.com/invar-legend-in-metals/
|
The History & Uses of Invar
The low expansion alloy known as Invar has been around for some time. In fact, 1996 marked the centennial of its discovery.
This alloy has been so important to scientific advancement that it earned the Nobel Prize in 1920 for its inventor, Charles-Edouard Guillaume, the first and only scientist in history to be so honoured for a metallurgical achievement.
Invar has developed into a family of low expansion, nickel-iron alloys including Free-Cut Invar “36” alloy, a variation of the original material with improved machinability. Both grades contain 36% nickel, key to achieving a low coefficient of expansion, and both continue as the most commonly used alloys in the group.
On Paper the downsides for Free-Cut Invar “36” alloy is negligible. Its coefficient of thermal expansion is slightly higher than that of the basic alloy, which is not enough to make a difference in part performance. Minimal loss in both transverse toughness and corrosion resistance. It may be necessary to clean and passivate the free-cut alloy to remove selenides from the surface. However, a good case can be made for the free-cut alloy because it machines without a hassle and often boosts production.
However due to the improvements in the quality of Invar production, advancements made in machining technology and capabilities Free Machining Invar is becoming less readily available in the common market place. Whilst Free Machining invar can still offer a slight production improvement, this is highly offset by the rising cost and availability of this grade.
These two alloys, along with the other Invar grades, have been used in a wide variety of both common-place and high technology applications. Commercial uses have proliferated over the years in fields as diverse as semiconductors, television, information technology, aerospace, and cryogenic transport. Invar has been used in a host of applications. Early uses include light bulbs and electronic vacuum tubes for radios; bimetals in ther-mostats for temperature control; lead-in seals of fluorescent lights; measuring devices for testing gages and machine parts; military and electronics applications where expansion control is critical; bimetals for circuit breakers, motor controls, TV temperature compensating springs, appliances and heaters, aerospace and automotive controls, heating and air conditioning, as well as many others.
With ever-increasing vigor, this 102 year old alloy continues to expand in usage, with newer applications like more sophisticated thermostatic controls, containers used to transport cryogenic liquid natural gas in tankers, shadow masks in high-definition television tubes, structural components in precision laser and optical measuring systems, wave guide tubes, microscopes, supports for giant mirrors in telescopes and scientific instruments requiring mounted lenses, composite molds used in building new generation aircraft, and in a range of scientific applications such as orbiting satellites, lasers, and ring-laser gyroscopes.
The information provided above is freely available in the public domain, and while we endeavour to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind.
In no event will we be liable for any loss or damage including without limitation, indirect or consequential loss or damage, or any loss or damage whatsoever.
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 72 |
https://www.sothebys.com/buy/5c983999-f7a4-400b-a60d-08679a3ca25d/lots/4a1d933d-7e82-4bec-b9ce-5df1c7fee0ee
|
en
|
EINSTEIN TLS TO CHARLES EDOUARD GUILLAUME, FEUDING OVER THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY. 1 P. 16 DEC 1920.
|
https://sothebys-md.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/502bf9d/2147483647/strip/true/crop/1523x2000+0+0/resize/1024x1345!/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsothebys-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fmedia-desk%2F35%2F16%2F45e32ae0492390571dbb82eb5bdd%2F069n10172-bf2tg.jpg
|
https://sothebys-md.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/502bf9d/2147483647/strip/true/crop/1523x2000+0+0/resize/1024x1345!/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsothebys-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fmedia-desk%2F35%2F16%2F45e32ae0492390571dbb82eb5bdd%2F069n10172-bf2tg.jpg
|
[
"https://dam.sothebys.com/dam/image/lot/4a1d933d-7e82-4bec-b9ce-5df1c7fee0ee/primary/extra_small",
"https://sothebys-md.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/e369d0b/2147483647/strip/true/crop/1523x2000+0+0/resize/385x506!/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsothebys-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fmedia-desk%2F35%2F16%2F45e32ae0492390571dbb82eb5bdd%2F069n10172-bf2tg.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
<p>EINSTEIN, ALBERT</p><p>Typed letter signed to Charles Edouard Guillaume, Berlin, 16 December 1920</p><p><br></p><p>1 page, signed "<em>A. Einstein</em>,"
|
en
|
/favicon-16x16.png
|
Sotheby's
|
https://www.sothebys.com/buy/5c983999-f7a4-400b-a60d-08679a3ca25d/lots/4a1d933d-7e82-4bec-b9ce-5df1c7fee0ee
|
EINSTEIN, ALBERT
Typed letter signed to Charles Edouard Guillaume, Berlin, 16 December 1920
1 page, signed "A. Einstein," in German, crease where previously folded. With the original typed envelope.
FEUDING OVER THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY.
One of Einstein’s final letters to Charles Edouard Guillaume, who in 1913 publicly began a long-running feud with Einstein’s Theory of Relativity (both Special and General) – Guillaume announcing publicly that “I will destroy relativity!” Guillaume published multiple articles “in which he argued for a Lorentzian electrodynamics that retained the concept of a universal time.” Though Einstein initially disregarded Guillaume’s attacks, he responded to them in 1917, launching several years of correspondence. Einstein here definitively states that “there is no clear theoretical idea” behind Guillaume’s position; and because it is precisely the Newtonian notion of a universal time that Einstein’s Relativity demolishes, Einstein here firmly concludes: “It is impossible to assign, in any meaningful way, a universal time to the totality of inertial systems.”
Guillaume was a Swiss-born physicist. He and Einstein knew each other from the patent office in Bern, where both worked as patent examiners. Rather ironically, Guillaume received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1920 – one year before Einstein, “in recognition of the service he had rendered to precision measurements in physics his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys.” Though not the only critic of the theory of Relativity, Guillaume was perhaps the most vocal and public.
A FINE LETTER AFFIRMING THE CENTRAL TENET OF RELATIVITY.
|
||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 28 |
https://www.wikidoc.org/index.php/Nobel_Prize_in_Physics
|
en
|
Nobel Prize in Physics
|
http://static.wikidoc.org/Wikidoc.ico
|
http://static.wikidoc.org/Wikidoc.ico
|
[
"https://www.wikidoc.org/images/c/c9/Nobel_medal_dsc06171.jpg",
"http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-sa/3.0/80x15.png",
"https://www.wikidoc.org/resources/assets/poweredby_mediawiki_88x31.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
http://static.wikidoc.org/Wikidoc.ico
| null |
The Nobel Prize in Physics (Swedish: Nobelpriset i fysik) is awarded once a year by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. It is one of the five Nobel Prizes established by the will of Alfred Nobel in 1895 and awarded since 1901; the others are the Nobel Prize in chemistry, Nobel Prize in literature, Nobel Peace Prize, and Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine. The first Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen, a German, "in recognition of the extraordinary services he has rendered by the discovery of the remarkable rays (or x-rays)." This award is administered by the Nobel Foundation and widely regarded as the most prestigious award that a scientist can receive in Physics. It is presented in Stockholm at an annual ceremony on December 10, the anniversary of Nobel's death. In 2007 the Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Albert Fert (of France) and Peter Grünberg (of Germany) for the discovery of giant magnetoresistance; they share the prize amount of 10,000,000 SEK (slightly more than €1 million, or US$1.6 million).
Nomination and selection
Template:Tfd A maximum of three Nobel Laureates and two different works may be selected for the Nobel Prize in Physics.[1] Compared with some other Nobel Prizes, the nomination and selection process for the Nobel Prize in Physics is long and rigorous. This is a key reason why these Nobel Prizes have grown in importance over the years to become the most important prizes in Physics.[2]
These Nobel Laureates are selected by a committee that consists of five members elected by The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. In its first stage, several thousand people are asked to nominate candidates. These names are scrutinized and discussed by experts until only the winners remain. This slow and thorough process, insisted upon by Alfred Nobel, is arguably what gives the prize its importance.
Forms, which amount to a personal and exclusive invitation, are sent to about three thousand selected individuals to invite them to submit nominations. The names of the nominees are never publicly announced, and neither are they told that they have been considered for the Prize. Nomination records are sealed for fifty years. In practice some nominees do become known. It is also common for publicists to make such a claim, founded or not.
The nominations are screened by committee, and a list is produced of approximately two hundred preliminary candidates. This list is forwarded to selected experts in the field. They remove all but approximately fifteen names. The committee submits a report with recommendations to the appropriate institution.
While posthumous nominations are not permitted, awards can occur if the individual died in the months between the nomination and the decision of the prize committee.
The Nobel Prize in Physics requires that the significance of achievements being recognized is "tested by time." In practice it means that the lag between the discovery and the award is typically on the order of 20 years and can be much longer. For example, half of the 1983 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar for his work on stellar structure and evolution that was done during the 1930s. As a downside of this approach, not all scientists live long enough for their work to be recognized. Some important scientific discoveries are never considered for a Prize, as the discoverers may have died by the time the impact of their work is realized.[citation needed]
The Award
The Nobel Prize in Physics consists of a gold medallion (the "Nobel Prize Medal for Physics"), a diploma, and a monetary grant.[1] The Nobel Prize Medals, which have been minted in Sweden since 1902, are registered trademarks of the Nobel Foundation. Their engraved designs are internationally-recognized symbols of the prestige of the Nobel Prize.
The front side (obverse) of the Nobel Prize Medals for Physics, Chemistry, Literature, and Physiology or Medicine (for the "Swedish Prizes") features the same engraved profile of Alfred Nobel with his name abbreviated as "Alfr. Nobel" to the left of his profile and the dates of his birth and death to the right of it (in capital letters and Roman numerals).[1]
The reverse side of the medals for Physics and Chemistry is "The medal of The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences," which "represents Nature in the form of a goddess resembling Isis, emerging from the clouds and holding in her arms a cornucopia. The veil which covers her cold and austere face is held up by the Genius of Science" ("The Nobel Medal for Physics and Chemistry").[3]
The grant is currently approximately 10 million SEK, slightly more than €1 million (US$1.6 million).[1][4]
The Nobel Award Ceremony
The committee and institution serving as the selection board for the prize typically announce the names of the laureates in October. The prize is then awarded at formal ceremonies held annually on December 10, the anniversary of Alfred Nobel's death. "The highlight of the Nobel Prize Award Ceremony in Stockholm is when each Nobel Laureate steps forward to receive the prize from the hands of His Majesty the King of Sweden. ... Under the eyes of a watching world, the Nobel Laureate receives three things: a diploma, a medal and a document confirming the prize amount" ("What the Nobel Laureates Receive").
The Nobel Banquet is the banquet that is held every year in Stockholm City Hall in connection with the Nobel Prize.[1][4]
List of Laureates
180 Nobel Laureates in Physics have been selected as of 2007. The following chart includes the Nobel Laureates in Physics since its inceptions in 1901.[5]
Year Name Country Citation 1901 Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen Germany "in recognition of the extraordinary services he has rendered by the discovery of the remarkable rays (or x-rays)" 1902 Hendrik Lorentz
Pieter Zeeman Netherlands "in recognition of the extraordinary service they rendered by their researches into the influence of magnetism upon radiation phenomena". See Zeeman effect. 1903 Antoine Henri Becquerel France "in recognition of the extraordinary services he has rendered by his discovery of spontaneous radioactivity" Pierre Curie
Marie Curie France
Poland / France "in recognition of the extraordinary services they have rendered by their joint researches on the radiation phenomena discovered by Professor Henri Becquerel" 1904 John William Strutt United Kingdom "for his investigations of the densities of the most important gases and for his discovery of argon in connection with these studies" 1905 Philipp Eduard Anton von Lenard Germany "for his work on cathode rays" 1906 Joseph John Thomson United Kingdom "in recognition of the great merits of his theoretical and experimental investigations on the conduction of electricity by gases" 1907 Albert Abraham Michelson United States "for his optical precision instruments and the spectroscopic and metrological investigations carried out with their aid". See Michelson-Morley experiment. 1908 Gabriel Lippmann France "for his method of reproducing colours photographically based on the phenomenon of interference" 1909 Guglielmo Marconi
Karl Ferdinand Braun Italy
Germany "in recognition of their contributions to the development of wireless telegraphy" 1910 Johannes Diderik van der Waals Netherlands "For his work on the equation of state for gases and liquids." See van der Waals force. 1911 Wilhelm Wien Germany "for his discoveries regarding the laws governing the radiation of heat." 1912 Nils Gustaf Dalén Sweden "invention of automatic valves designed to be used in combination with gas accumulators in lighthouses and light-buoys." 1913 Heike Kamerlingh-Onnes Netherlands "For his investigations on the properties of matter at low temperatures which led, inter alia, to the production of liquid helium" 1914 Max von Laue Germany "For his discovery of the diffraction of X-rays by crystals." 1915 William Henry Bragg
William Lawrence Bragg Australia/United Kingdom "For their services in the analysis of crystal structure by means of X-rays." 1916 no award prize purse allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section. 1917 Charles Glover Barkla United Kingdom "For his discovery of the characteristic Röntgen radiation of the elements." 1918 Max Planck Germany "In recognition of the services he rendered to the advancement of Physics by his discovery of energy quanta." See Planck constant. 1919 Johannes Stark Germany "For his discovery of the Doppler effect in canal rays and the splitting of spectral lines in electric fields." 1920 Charles Édouard Guillaume Switzerland "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys" 1921 Albert Einstein Germany
Switzerland "for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his explanation of the photoelectric effect" 1922 Niels Bohr Denmark "for his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them" 1923 Robert Andrews Millikan United States "for his work on the elementary charge of electricity and on the photoelectric effect" 1924 Manne Siegbahn Sweden "for his discoveries and research in the field of X-ray spectroscopy" 1925 James Franck
Gustav Hertz Germany "for their discovery of the laws governing the impact of an electron upon an atom" 1926 Jean Baptiste Perrin France "for his work on the discontinuous structure of matter, and especially for his discovery of sedimentation equilibrium" 1927 Arthur Holly Compton United States "for his discovery of the effect named after him". See Compton effect. Charles Thomson Rees Wilson United Kingdom "for his method of making the paths of electrically charged particles visible by condensation of vapour". See cloud chamber. 1928 Owen Willans Richardson United Kingdom "for his work on the thermionic phenomenon and especially for the discovery of the law named after him" 1929 Prince Louis-Victor Pierre Raymond de Broglie France "for his discovery of the wave nature of electrons". See De Broglie hypothesis. 1930 Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman India "for his work on the scattering of light and for the discovery of the effect named after him" 1931 no award prize purse allocated to the Special Fund for this prize. 1932 Werner Heisenberg Germany "for the creation of quantum mechanics, the application of which has, inter alia, led to the discovery of the allotropic forms of hydrogen" 1933 Erwin Schrödinger
Paul Dirac Austria
United Kingdom "for the discovery of new productive forms of atomic theory" 1934 no award prize purse allocated half to the Main Fund and half to the Special Fund for this prize. 1935 James Chadwick United Kingdom "for the discovery of the neutron" 1936 Victor Francis Hess Austria "for his discovery of cosmic radiation" Carl David Anderson United States "for his discovery of the positron" 1937 Clinton Joseph Davisson
George Paget Thomson United States
United Kingdom "for their experimental discovery of the diffraction of electrons by crystals". See wave-particle duality. 1938 Enrico Fermi Italy "for his demonstrations of the existence of new radioactive elements produced by neutron irradiation, and for his related discovery of nuclear reactions brought about by slow neutrons" 1939 Ernest Lawrence United States "for the invention and development of the cyclotron and for results obtained with it, especially with regard to artificial radioactive elements" 1940 no award prize purse allocated half to the Main Fund and half to the Special Fund for this prize. 1941 1942 1943 Otto Stern Germany
United States "for his contribution to the development of the molecular ray method and his discovery of the magnetic moment of the proton" 1944 Isidor Isaac Rabi United States "for his resonance method for recording the magnetic properties of atomic nuclei" 1945 Wolfgang Pauli Austria "for the discovery of the Exclusion Principle, also called the Pauli principle" 1946 Percy Williams Bridgman United States "for the invention of an apparatus to produce extremely high pressures, and for the discoveries he made there within the field of high pressure physics" 1947 Edward Victor Appleton United Kingdom "for his investigations of the physics of the upper atmosphere especially for the discovery of the so-called Appleton layer" 1948 Patrick Maynard Stuart Blackett United Kingdom "for his development of the Wilson cloud chamber method, and his discoveries therewith in the fields of nuclear physics and cosmic radiation" 1949 Hideki Yukawa Japan "for his prediction of the existence of mesons on the basis of theoretical work on nuclear forces". See Yukawa potential. 1950 Cecil Frank Powell United Kingdom "for his development of the photographic method of studying nuclear processes and his discoveries regarding mesons made with this method" 1951 John Douglas Cockcroft
Ernest Thomas Sinton Walton United Kingdom
Ireland "for their pioneering work on the transmutation of atomic nuclei by artificially accelerated atomic particles" 1952 Felix Bloch
Edward Mills Purcell Switzerland
United States "for their development of new methods for nuclear magnetic precision measurements and discoveries in connection therewith" 1953 Frits Zernike Netherlands "for his demonstration of the phase contrast method, especially for his invention of the phase contrast microscope" 1954 Max Born Germany
1939: United Kingdom "for his fundamental research in quantum mechanics, especially for his statistical interpretation of the wavefunction" Walther Bothe West Germany "for the coincidence method and his discoveries made therewith" 1955 Willis Eugene Lamb United States "for his discoveries concerning the fine structure of the hydrogen spectrum". See Lamb shift. Polykarp Kusch United States "for his precision determination of the magnetic moment of the electron" 1956 William Bradford Shockley
John Bardeen
Walter Houser Brattain United States "for their researches on semiconductors and their discovery of the transistor effect" 1957 Chen Ning Yang (楊振寧)
Tsung-Dao Lee (李政道) People's Republic of China
United States "for their penetrating investigation of the so-called parity laws which has led to important discoveries regarding the elementary particles" 1958 Pavel Alekseyevich Čerenkov
Il'ya Frank
Igor Yevgenyevich Tamm Soviet Union "for the discovery and the interpretation of the Cherenkov-Vavilov effect" 1959 Emilio Gino Segrè
Owen Chamberlain United States "for their discovery of the antiproton" 1960 Donald Arthur Glaser United States "for the invention of the bubble chamber" 1961 Robert Hofstadter United States "for his pioneering studies of electron scattering in atomic nuclei and for his thereby achieved discoveries concerning the structure of the nucleons" Rudolf Ludwig Mössbauer West Germany "for his researches concerning the resonance absorption of gamma radiation and his discovery in this connection of the effect which bears his name". See Mössbauer effect. 1962 Lev Davidovich Landau Soviet Union "for his pioneering theories for condensed matter, especially liquid helium" 1963 Eugene Paul Wigner Hungary
United States "for his contributions to the theory of the atomic nucleus and the elementary particles, particularly through the discovery and application of fundamental symmetry principles" Maria Goeppert-Mayer
J. Hans D. Jensen United States
West Germany "for their discoveries concerning nuclear shell structure" 1964 Charles Hard Townes United States "for fundamental work in the field of quantum electronics, which has led to the construction of oscillators and amplifiers based on the maser-laser principle" Nicolay Gennadiyevich Basov
Aleksandr Prokhorov Soviet Union;
Australia/Soviet Union 1965 Sin-Itiro Tomonaga
Julian Schwinger
Richard Phillips Feynman Japan
United States
United States "for their fundamental work in quantum electrodynamics, with deep-ploughing consequences for the physics of elementary particles" 1966 Alfred Kastler France "for the discovery and development of optical methods for studying Hertzian resonances in atoms" 1967 Hans Albrecht Bethe United States "for his contributions to the theory of nuclear reactions, especially his discoveries concerning the energy production in stars" 1968 Luis Walter Alvarez United States "for his decisive contributions to elementary particle physics, in particular the discovery of a large number of resonance states, made possible through his development of the technique of using hydrogen bubble chamber and data analysis" 1969 Murray Gell-Mann United States "for his contributions and discoveries concerning the classification of elementary particles and their interactions". See Eightfold way. 1970 Hannes Olof Gösta Alfvén Sweden "for fundamental work and discoveries in magneto-hydrodynamics with fruitful applications in different parts of plasma physics" Louis Eugene Félix Néel France "for fundamental work and discoveries concerning antiferromagnetism and ferrimagnetism which have led to important applications in solid state physics" 1971 Dennis Gabor United Kingdom "for his invention and development of the holographic method" 1972 John Bardeen
Leon Neil Cooper
John Robert Schrieffer United States "for their jointly developed theory of superconductivity, usually called the BCS-theory" 1973 Leo Esaki
Ivar Giaever Japan;
Norway/United States "for their experimental discoveries regarding tunneling phenomena in semiconductors and superconductors, respectively" Brian David Josephson United Kingdom "for his theoretical predictions of the properties of a supercurrent through a tunnel barrier, in particular those phenomena which are generally known as the Josephson effect" 1974 Martin Ryle
Antony Hewish United Kingdom "for their pioneering research in radio astrophysics: Ryle for his observations and inventions, in particular of the aperture synthesis technique, and Hewish for his decisive role in the discovery of pulsars" 1975 Aage Niels Bohr
Ben Roy Mottelson
Leo James Rainwater Denmark
Denmark
United States "for the discovery of the connection between collective motion and particle motion in atomic nuclei and the development of the theory of the structure of the atomic nucleus based on this connection" 1976 Burton Richter
Samuel Chao Chung Ting United States "for their pioneering work in the discovery of a heavy elementary particle of a new kind". In other words: for discovery of the J/Ψ particle as it confirmed the idea that baryonic matter (such as the nuclei of atoms) is made out of quarks. 1977 Philip Warren Anderson
Nevill Francis Mott
John Hasbrouck van Vleck United States
United Kingdom
United States "for their fundamental theoretical investigations of the electronic structure of magnetic and disordered systems" 1978 Pyotr Leonidovich Kapitsa Soviet Union "for his basic inventions and discoveries in the area of low-temperature physics" Arno Allan Penzias
Robert Woodrow Wilson United States
United States "for their discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation" 1979 Sheldon Lee Glashow
Abdus Salam
Steven Weinberg United States
Pakistan
United States "for their contributions to the theory of the unified weak and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles, including, inter alia, the prediction of the weak neutral current" 1980 James Watson Cronin
Val Logsdon Fitch United States "for the discovery of violations of fundamental symmetry principles in the decay of neutral K-mesons". See CP-violation. 1981 Nicolaas Bloembergen
Arthur Leonard Schawlow United States
United States "for their contribution to the development of laser spectroscopy" Kai Manne Börje Siegbahn Sweden "for his contribution to the development of high-resolution electron spectroscopy" 1982 Kenneth G. Wilson United States "for his theory for critical phenomena in connection with phase transitions" 1983 Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar India
United States "for his theoretical studies of the physical processes of importance to the structure and evolution of the stars". See Chandrasekhar limit. William Alfred Fowler United States "for his theoretical and experimental studies of the nuclear reactions of importance in the formation of the chemical elements in the universe" 1984 Carlo Rubbia
Simon van der Meer Italy
Netherlands "for their decisive contributions to the large project, which led to the discovery of the field particles W and Z, communicators of weak interaction" 1985 Klaus von Klitzing West Germany "for the discovery of the quantized Hall effect" 1986 Ernst Ruska West Germany "for his fundamental work in electron optics, and for the design of the first electron microscope" Gerd Binnig
Heinrich Rohrer West Germany
Switzerland "for their design of the scanning tunneling microscope" 1987 Johannes Georg Bednorz
Karl Alexander Müller West Germany
Switzerland "for their important break-through in the discovery of superconductivity in ceramic materials" 1988 Leon Max Lederman
Melvin Schwartz
Jack Steinberger United States "for the neutrino beam method and the demonstration of the doublet structure of the leptons through the discovery of the muon neutrino" 1989 Norman Foster Ramsey United States "for the invention of the separated oscillatory fields method and its use in the hydrogen maser and other atomic clocks" Hans Georg Dehmelt
Wolfgang Paul United States
West Germany "for the development of the ion trap technique" 1990 Jerome I. Friedman
Henry Way Kendall
Richard E. Taylor United States
United States
Canada "for their pioneering investigations concerning deep inelastic scattering of electrons on protons and bound neutrons, which have been of essential importance for the development of the quark model in particle physics" 1991 Pierre-Gilles de Gennes France "for discovering that methods developed for studying order phenomena in simple systems can be generalized to more complex forms of matter, in particular to liquid crystals and polymers" 1992 Georges Charpak France "for his invention and development of particle detectors, in particular the multiwire proportional chamber" 1993 Russell Alan Hulse
Joseph Hooton Taylor Jr. United States "for the discovery of a new type of pulsar, a discovery that has opened up new possibilities for the study of gravitation" 1994 Bertram Brockhouse Canada "for the development of neutron spectroscopy" and "for pioneering contributions to the development of neutron scattering techniques for studies of condensed matter" Clifford Glenwood Shull United States "for the development of the neutron diffraction technique" and "for pioneering contributions to the development of neutron scattering techniques for studies of condensed matter" 1998 Robert B. Laughlin
Horst Ludwig Störmer
Daniel Chee Tsui United States
Germany
United States "for their discovery of a new form of quantum fluid with fractionally charged excitations". See Quantum Hall effect. 1999 Gerardus 't Hooft
Martinus J.G. Veltman Netherlands "for elucidating the quantum structure of electroweak interactions in physics" 2000 Zhores Ivanovich Alferov
Herbert Kroemer Russia
Germany "for developing semiconductor heterostructures used in high-speed- and optoelectronics" Jack St. Clair Kilby United States "for his part in the invention of the integrated circuit" 2001 Eric Allin Cornell
Wolfgang Ketterle
Carl Edwin Wieman United States
Germany
United States "for the achievement of Bose-Einstein condensation in dilute gases of alkali atoms, and for early fundamental studies of the properties of the condensates" 2002 Raymond Davis Jr.
Masatoshi Koshiba United States
Japan "for pioneering contributions to astrophysics, in particular for the detection of cosmic neutrinos" Riccardo Giacconi United States "for pioneering contributions to astrophysics, which have led to the discovery of cosmic X-ray sources" 2003 Alexei Alexeevich Abrikosov
Vitaly Lazarevich Ginzburg
Anthony James Leggett Russia
Russia
United Kingdom "for pioneering contributions to the theory of superconductors and superfluids" 2004 David J. Gross
H. David Politzer
Frank Wilczek United States "for the discovery of asymptotic freedom in the theory of the strong interaction" 2005 Roy J. Glauber United States "for his contribution to the quantum theory of optical coherence" John L. Hall
Theodor W. Hänsch United States
Germany "for their contributions to the development of laser-based precision spectroscopy, including the optical frequency comb technique" 2006 John C. Mather
George F. Smoot United States "for their discovery of the blackbody form and anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background radiation" 2007 Albert Fert
Peter Grünberg France
Germany "for the discovery of giant magnetoresistance"
Notes
Other references
Friedman, Robert Marc (2001). The Politics of Excellence: Behind the Nobel Prize in Science. New York & Stuttgart: VHPS (Times Books). ISBN 0716731037 (10). ISBN 978-0716731030 (13).
Gill, Mohammad (March 10, 2005). "Prize and Prejudice". Chowk ("Voices that question, provoke and inspire"; ideas, identities and interactions"; "Where paths intersect"). Accessed November 5, 2007. ("Chowk is a platform to publish, discuss and debate writings on a variety of issues that are important to the people of India, Pakistan, and other South Asian countries" ["About Chowk"].)
Hillebrand, Claus D. (June 2002). "Nobel century: a biographical analysis of physics laureates". Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 27.2: 87-93.
Lemmel, Birgitta. "The Nobel Prize Medals and the Medal for the Prize in Economics". nobelprize.org. Copyright © The Nobel Foundation 2006. Accessed November 9, 2007. (An article on the history of the design of the medals featured on the official site of the Nobel Foundation.)
"What the Nobel Laureates Receive". nobelprize.org. Copyright © Nobel Web AB 2007. Accessed November 9, 2007. (Featured link in "The Nobel Prize Award Ceremonies".)
See also
Nobel laureates by country
"All Nobel Laureates in Physics" - Index webpage on the official site of the Nobel Foundation.
"The Nobel Prize Award Ceremonies" – Official hyperlinked webpage of the Nobel Foundation.
"The Nobel Prize in Physics" - Official webpage of the Nobel Foundation.
"The Nobel Prize Medal for Physics and Chemistry" – Official webpage of the Nobel Foundation.
Template:Nobel Prizes Template:Nobel Prize in Physics
Template:Link FA als:Nobelpreis für Physik ar:جائزة نوبل في الفيزياء ast:Premiu Nobel de Física zh-min-nan:Nobel Bu̍t-lí-ha̍k Chióng br:Priz Nobel ar fizik bg:Нобелова награда за физика ca:Premi Nobel de Física cs:Nobelova cena za fyziku cy:Gwobr Ffiseg Nobel da:Nobelprisen i fysik de:Nobelpreis für Physik et:Nobeli füüsikaauhind el:Βραβείο Νόμπελ Φυσικής eo:Premio Nobel de Fiziko eu:Fisikako Nobel Saria fa:جایزه نوبل فیزیک gl:Premio Nobel de Física ko:노벨 물리학상 hr:Nobelova nagrada za fiziku ia:Premio Nobel pro Physica io:Nobel-premiarii por fiziko id:Penghargaan Nobel dalam Fisika is:Nóbelsverðlaun í eðlisfræði it:Premio Nobel per la fisica he:פרס נובל לפיזיקה hu:Fizikai Nobel-díj ms:Hadiah Nobel dalam Fizik nl:Nobelprijs voor de Natuurkunde no:Nobelprisen i fysikk oc:Prèmi Nobel de fisica scn:Premiu Nobel pâ fìsica simple:Nobel Prize in Physics sk:Zoznam nositeľov Nobelovej ceny za fyziku sl:Nobelova nagrada za fiziko sr:Нобелова награда за физику fi:Nobelin fysiikanpalkinto sv:Nobelpriset i fysik th:รายชื่อผู้ได้รับรางวัลโนเบลสาขาฟิสิกส์ uk:Нобелівська премія з фізики
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 64 |
https://www.nealloys.com/invar_invar.php
|
en
|
Invar Properties & Low Coefficient of Thermal Expansion
|
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Invar-Graph-CTE-composition.png/350px-Invar-Graph-CTE-composition.png
|
[
"https://www.nealloys.com/images/NEA-Header-new.jpg",
"https://www.nealloys.com/images/PDF-Icon.gif",
"https://www.nealloys.com/images/PDF-Icon.gif",
"https://www.nealloys.com/images/PDF-Icon.gif",
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Invar-Graph-CTE-composition.png/350px-Invar-Graph-CTE-composition.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"invar 36",
"invar alloy",
"invar properties",
"nickel iron alloys",
"invar coefficient of thermal expansion",
"invar 36 properties",
"invar steel",
"invar material",
"invar welding",
"mateal",
"invar alloys",
"invar plate",
"pernifer 36",
"dilation 36",
"ATI 36",
"Nilo 36",
"normaperm 36",
"free cut invar",
"FM invar 36",
"sealmet",
"low expansion alloys"
] | null |
[] | null |
Invar CTE Properties of these Low Expansion Nickel Iron Alloys.
| null |
INVAR
36 ALLOY Invar Properties & Low Coefficient of Thermal Expansion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The coefficient of thermal expansion of nickel/iron alloys is plotted here against the nickel percentage (on a mass basis) in the alloy. The sharp minimum occurs at the Invar ratio of 36% Ni.
Invar, also known generically as FeNi36 (64FeNi in the US), is a nickel steel alloy notable for its uniquely low coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE or α). It was invented in 1896 by Swiss scientist Charles Édouard Guillaume. He received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1920 for this discovery, which shows the importance of this alloy in scientific instruments. Invar is a registered trademark of ArcelorMittal - Stainless & Nickel Alloys, formerly known as Imphy Alloys (US Trademark #63970). Like other nickel iron compositions, Invar is a solid solution; that is, it is a single-phase alloy — similar to a dilution of common table salt mixed into water. "Invar" refers to invariable; that is, it will not react to thermal expansion.
Common grades of Invar have an α (20–100 °C) of about 1.2 × 10–6 K–1 (1.2 ppm°C). However, extra-pure grades (<0.1% Co) can readily produce values as low as 0.62–0.65 ppm/°C. Some formulations display negative thermal expansion (NTE) characteristics. It is used in precision instruments such as clocks, physics laboratory devices, seismic creep gauges, shadow-mask frames, valves in motors, and antimagnetic watches, etc. However, it has a propensity to creep. In Land Surveying, when first-order (high-precision) elevation leveling is to be performed, the leveling rods used are made of Invar, instead of wood, fiberglass, or other metals.
There are variations of the original Invar material that have slightly different coefficient of thermal expansion such as:
Inovco, which Fe-33Ni-4.5Co and has an α (20–100 °C) of 0.55 ppm/°C.
FeNi42 (for example NILO alloy 42), has a nickel content of 42% and α ≈ 5.3 ppm/°C which matches that of silicon and therefore is widely used as lead frame material for electronic components, integrated circuits, etc.
FeNiCo alloys — named Kovar or Dilver P — that have the same expansion behaviour as borosilicate glass, and because of that are used for optical parts in a wide range of temperatures and applications, such as satellites.
Source of Invar’s CTE properties
A detailed explanation of Invar's anomalously low CTE has proven elusive for physicists. All the iron-rich face centered cubic Fe-Ni alloys show Invar anomalies in their measured thermal and magnetic properties that evolve continuously in intensity with varying alloy composition. Scientists had once proposed that Invar’s behavior was a direct consequence of a high-magnetic-moment to low-magnetic-moment transition occurring in the face centered cubic Fe-Ni series (and that gives rise to the mineral antitaenite), however this has now been shown to be incorrect. Instead, it appears that the low-moment/high-moment transition is preceded by a high-magnetic-moment frustrated ferromagnetic state in which the Fe-Fe magnetic exchange bonds have a large magneto-volume effect of the right sign and magnitude to create the observed thermal expansion anomaly.
Back to Invar Main Page
|
||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 92 |
https://www.nickel-alloys.net/article/invar-nickel-iron-alloy.html
|
en
|
FeNi36: Nickel Iron Alloy
|
[
"https://www.nickel-alloys.net/article/logo_small.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"eSites Network"
] | null |
Invar FeNi36 has the lowest thermal expansion of any known metal or alloy from room temperature up to 230C. Special low expansion and sealing alloy grades are available. Applications include thermostats, bimetallic strips, cathode ray tubes, telecommunications, aerospace and gas tankers.
|
en
|
favicon.ico
|
https://www.nickel-alloys.net/
|
FeNi36 Invar - Nickel Iron Alloy
Chemical Formula
Ni-Fe Alloy
Topics Covered
Background
Discovery and Nobel Prize
Physical Properties
Current Uses
Cathode Ray Tubes
Other Applications
Low Expansion Alloys
Sealing Alloys
Future Uses
Composite Manufacturing
Background
Few people realise that the nickel-iron alloy, FeNi36 Invar, plays a crucial part in so many of their household controls and office appliances. This role was established soon after its discovery 100 years ago in 1896. FeNi36 is the forerunner of a family of controlled expansion nickel-iron alloys which form the essential part of bimetals and thermostats. FeNi36 Invaritself is still used today in vast numbers of household appliances, from electric irons and toasters to gas cookers and fire safety cutoffs. In the office, computer terminals and TV screens make extensive use of FeNi36 and other Ni-Fe alloys for shadow masks, frames, and cathode ray tube gun parts.
Other applications for these special alloys are continuing to be found in industry for advanced electronic components, filters in mobile phone networks and even as tank membranes for massive liquefied natural gas transport ships.
Discovery and Nobel Prize
When Invar FeNi36 was discovered in 1896, its unique property of low and linear expansion over a wide temperature range allowed the production of effective bimetals which could be used in safety cut-off devices for gas cookers and heaters. For his work on the nickel-iron system and the discovery of FeNi36 Invar, Charles Edouard Guillaume of Imphy was awarded a Nobel prize for Physics early in the 20th century.
One of the traditional uses for Invar FeNi36 has been for the thermostat of electric immersion heaters, used for a variety of domestic and commercial water heating systems. Operation of the thermostat is based upon differential expansion between a brass tube and an inner Invar FeNi36 rod, the resulting movement being used to actuate a microswitch. The set temperature is commonly adjustable in the range between 48-83°C.
Physical Properties
Invar FeNi36 is a 36% nickel iron alloy which has the lowest thermal expansion among all metals and alloys in the range from room temperature up to approximately 230°C. The Invar FeNi36 alloy is ductile and easily weldable, and machinability is similar to austenitic stainless steel. It does not suffer from stress corrosion cracking.
The mean coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) of FeNi36 from 20-100°C is less than 1.3 x 10-6°C-1. The Curie point is 230°C, and density is 8.1 kg.m-3.
Current Uses of Nickel Iron Alloy FeNi36 Invar
Cathode Ray Tubes
Between the range -100 to +200°C Invar FeNi36's CTE is very low. This feature is very useful for many specific applications in high tech industry. Cathode ray tubes for television and display screens are increasingly required to provide greater user comfort, with higher contrast, improved brightness and sharper definition. This progress has been made possible by the use of shadow masks made from Invar FeNi36 strip, with its low coefficient of thermal expansion allowing precise dimensioning of components even with changing temperature.
Other Applications
Other application areas, such as telecommunications, aeronautical and aerospace engineering, cryogenic engineering (liquefied natural gas tankers) etc, require either high dimensional stability with variation in temperature, or expansion characteristics matched with those of other materials, such as glass, ceramics, or composites.
The diversity of these requirements has led to the development of a wide range of Fe-Ni, Fe-Ni-Co and Fe-Ni-Cr alloys, in two major groups:
Low Expansion Alloys
These include Invar FeNi36 and N42. As electronic components become ever more miniature, the demands on the material used in their manufacture become ever more critical. The production of lead frames for example requires very close dimensional tolerances and high cleanliness combined with exceptional stamping or chemical etching performance. Grades of N42 have been specifically developed to match these requirements.
Sealing Alloys
These include other Fe-Ni grades, Fe-Ni-Co and Fe-Ni-Cr alloys. A full range of alloys have been produced to associate with the principal glasses supplied by major manufacturers including Schott, Corning, NEG and Ashai. These glasses used in electronics are chosen for specific physical, chemical or optical properties and the choice of the associated sealing metal depends on the glass and the type of seal (matched or compressive).
Future Uses
Appropriate solutions are needed to match the requirements created by technologies which are in rapid and perpetual evolution, and these could come from Invar FeNi36 and its nickel iron alloy derivatives.
Composite Manufacturing
Invar FeNi36 also has an important role to play in the future of composite manufacturing. The aerospace industry will make increasing use of composites for weight/strength improvements. The manufacturing process of composite multilayer structures involves moulding on tools which are then autoclaved. Tooling materials must provide temperature resistance, very low CTE to match the composite, vacuum integrity, thermal conductivity and machinability.
A single tooling material to meet all the requirements does not exist, but of all metallic and non-metallic (e.g. carbon fibre/epoxy) options, Invar FeNi36 provides one of the lowest CTEs of all, the major criterion. The compatibility of the CTE of the Invar mould and the composite parts avoids distortion, induced stress and warpage. Studies carried out by Boeing show that Invar FeNi36 is the material which will provide the best compromise between the most important requirements (like CTE and durability) and overall fabrication costs.
Property Table of Invar FeNi36
Material Invar FeNi36 - Nickel Iron Alloy
Property Minimum Value (S.I.) Maximum Value (S.I.) Units (S.I.) Minimum Value (Imp.) Maximum Value (Imp.) Units (Imp.) Atomic Volume (average) 0.0068 0.0071 m3/kmol 414.961 433.268 in3/kmol Density 8.1 8.2 Mg/m3 505.667 511.91 lb/ft3 Energy Content 50 200 MJ/kg 5416.93 21667.7 kcal/lb Bulk Modulus 106 112 GPa 15.374 16.2442 106 psi Compressive Strength 240 725 MPa 34.8091 105.152 ksi Ductility 0.06 0.45 0.06 0.45 Elastic Limit 240 725 MPa 34.8091 105.152 ksi Endurance Limit 185 405 MPa 26.832 58.7402 ksi Fracture Toughness 120 150 MPa.m1/2 109.206 136.507 ksi.in1/2 Hardness 1200 2400 MPa 174.045 348.091 ksi Loss Coefficient 0.0003 0.0011 0.0003 0.0011 Modulus of Rupture 240 725 MPa 34.8091 105.152 ksi Poisson's Ratio 0.28 0.3 0.28 0.3 Shear Modulus 54 58 GPa 7.83204 8.41219 106 psi Tensile Strength 445 810 MPa 64.5418 117.481 ksi Young's Modulus 137 145 GPa 19.8702 21.0305 106 psi Glass Temperature K °F Latent Heat of Fusion 270 290 kJ/kg 116.079 124.677 BTU/lb Maximum Service Temperature 600 700 K 620.33 800.33 °F Melting Point 1690 1710 K 2582.33 2618.33 °F Minimum Service Temperature 0 0 K -459.67 -459.67 °F Specific Heat 505 525 J/kg.K 0.390798 0.406276 BTU/lb.F Thermal Conductivity 12 15 W/m.K 22.4644 28.0805 BTU.ft/h.ft2.F Thermal Expansion 0.5 2 10-6/K 0.9 3.6 10-6/°F Breakdown Potential MV/m V/mil Dielectric Constant Resistivity 75 85 10-8 ohm.m 75 85 10-8 ohm.m
Primary author: Colin Woolger | Source: Materials World, Vol. No. pp. 332-33, June 1996.
For more information on Materials World please visit The Institute of Materials. Invar FeNi36 has the lowest thermal expansion of any known metal or alloy from room temperature up to 230C. Special low expansion and sealing alloy grades are available. Applications include thermostats, bimetallic strips, cathode ray tubes, telecommunications, aerospace and gas tankers.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 89 |
https://www.mapsofworld.com/answers/world/what-countries-have-the-most-physics-nobel-laureates/
|
en
|
What countries have the most Physics Nobel Laureates?
|
[
"https://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-98f87jYQeyLZ6.gif",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/images2016/logo_mow_high.png",
"https://images.mapsofworld.com/answers/2018/07/world-map-nobel-prize-winners-physics.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/world-map-public-libraries-by-country-thumb.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/world-map-english-proficiency-index-thumb.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/world-map-nobel-prize-winners-literature-thumb.png",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/world-map.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/map-of-us.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/world-large-map.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/large-world-map-in-robinson-projection.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/world-political-map.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/russia-map.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/united-states-map.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/usa-major-cities-map.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/canada-map.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/world-map-with-latitude-and-longitude.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/world-political-map.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/china-map.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/usa-national-park-map.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/map-of-europe.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/map-of-italy.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/world-map-with-continents.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/map-of-asia.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/map-of-australia.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/uk-map.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/usa-states-map.jpg",
"https://www.mapsofworld.com/thumbnails/answers/map-of-california.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"adminanswers"
] |
2018-07-18T12:30:54+00:00
|
From 1901 to 2017, the Nobel prize has been awarded 111 times. A few years saw more than 1 recipient which makes a total 206 individuals till date. Here is a world map indicating all the winners and the countries they belong to.
|
en
|
Answers
|
https://www.mapsofworld.com/answers/world/what-countries-have-the-most-physics-nobel-laureates/
|
Nobel Prize in Physics for year 2018 was declared on 2nd of October. Arthur Ashkin of the US has won the prize for finding the usage of optical tweezers in biological system. Gerard Mourou of France and Donna Strickland of Canada, have also been awarded jointly for their method of generating high-intensity, ultra-short optical pulses. Donna Strickland now also stands as the third woman to win the Nobel Prize in Physics.
Alfred Nobel, the man behind the Nobel Prize stated in his will that the Nobel Prize in Physics goes to “the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics.” The first Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded in 1901 to Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen. Since then, the award is a mark of honor for its recipients. A few years saw more than 1 recipient which makes a total 206 individuals who have been honored by this prestigious award.
Nobel Prize in physics is given because physics plays an important role in the society by educating the people to access the technological advancements. It also creates a room for developments and innovations, thus contributing to economic growth.
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences gives the prize and the prize has been awarded every year except for 1916, 1931, 1934, 1940, 1941 and 1942. The death anniversary of Alfred Nobel on December 10 is observed as the award giving ceremony.
Here is a list of all the Nobel Prize winners in Physics that the world has been blessed with.
Year Laureates Country 2018 Donna Strickland Canada 2018 Gerard Mourou France 2018 Arthur Ashkin United States 2017 Rainer Weiss United States 2017 Kip Thorne United States 2017 Barry Barish United States 2016 David J. Thouless United States 2016 F. Duncan M. Haldane United Kingdom 2016 John M. Kosterlitz United Kingdom 2015 Takaaki Kajita Japan 2015 Arthur B. McDonald Canada 2014 Shuji Nakamura United States 2014 Isamu Akasaki Japan 2014 Hiroshi Amano Japan 2013 Peter Higgs United Kingdom 2013 François Englert Belgium 2012 David J. Wineland United States 2012 Serge Haroche France 2011 Saul Perlmutter United States 2011 Adam G. Riess United States 2011 Brian P. Schmidt Australia 2010 Konstantin Novoselov United Kingdom 2010 Andre Geim United Kingdom 2009 Willard S. Boyle United States 2009 George E. Smith United States 2009 Charles K. Kao Hong Kong 2008 Yoichiro Nambu United States 2008 Makoto Kobayashi Japan 2008 Toshihide Maskawa Japan 2007 Peter Grünberg Germany 2007 Albert Fert France 2006 John C. Mather United States 2006 George F. Smoot United States 2005 Roy J. Glauber United States 2005 John L. Hall United States 2005 Theodor W. Hänsch Germany 2004 David J. Gross United States 2004 Hugh David Politzer United States 2004 Frank Wilczek United States 2003 Alexei Alexeyevich Abrikosov United States 2003 Anthony James Leggett United States 2003 Vitaly Lazarevich Ginzburg Russia 2002 Riccardo Giacconi United States 2002 Raymond Davis Jr. United States 2002 Masatoshi Koshiba Japan 2001 Eric Allin Cornell United States 2001 Carl Edwin Wieman United States 2001 Wolfgang Ketterle Germany 2000 Jack St. Clair Kilby United States 2000 Herbert Kroemer Germany 2000 Zhores Ivanovich Alferov Russia 1999 Gerard ‘t Hooft Netherlands 1999 Martinus J. G. Veltman Netherlands 1998 Daniel Chee Tsui United States 1998 Robert B. Laughlin United States 1998 Horst Ludwig Störmer Germany 1997 Steven Chu United States 1997 William Daniel Phillips United States 1997 Claude Cohen-Tannoudji France 1996 David Morris Lee United States 1996 Douglas D. Osheroff United States 1996 Robert Coleman Richardson United States 1995 Martin Lewis Perl United States 1995 Frederick Reines United States 1994 Clifford Glenwood Shull United States 1994 Bertram Brockhouse Canada 1993 Russell Alan Hulse United States 1993 Joseph Hooton Taylor Jr. United States 1992 Georges Charpak Switzerland 1991 Pierre-Gilles de Gennes France 1990 Jerome I. Friedman United States 1990 Henry Way Kendall United States 1990 Richard E. Taylor Canada 1989 Norman Foster Ramsey United States 1989 Hans Georg Dehmelt United States 1989 Wolfgang Paul West Germany 1988 Leon Max Lederman United States 1988 Melvin Schwartz United States 1988 Jack Steinberger United States 1987 Johannes Georg Bednorz West Germany 1987 Karl Alexander Müller Switzerland 1986 Ernst Ruska West Germany 1986 Gerd Binnig West Germany 1986 Heinrich Rohrer Switzerland 1985 Klaus von Klitzing West Germany 1984 Simon van der Meer Netherlands 1984 Carlo Rubbia Italy 1983 Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar United States 1983 William Alfred Fowler United States 1982 Kenneth G. Wilson United States 1981 Nicolaas Bloembergen United States 1981 Arthur Leonard Schawlow United States 1981 Kai Manne Börje Siegbahn Sweden 1980 James Watson Cronin United States 1980 Val Logsdon Fitch United States 1979 Sheldon Lee Glashow United States 1979 Steven Weinberg United States 1979 Abdus Salam Pakistan 1978 Arno Allan Penzias United States 1978 Robert Woodrow Wilson United States 1978 Pyotr Leonidovich Kapitsa Soviet Union 1977 Philip Warren Anderson United States 1977 John Hasbrouck Van Vleck United States 1977 Nevill Francis Mott United Kingdom 1976 Burton Richter United States 1976 Samuel Chao Chung Ting United States 1975 Leo James Rainwater United States 1975 Aage Bohr Denmark 1975 Ben Roy Mottelson Denmark 1974 Martin Ryle United Kingdom 1974 Antony Hewish United Kingdom 1973 Ivar Giaever United States 1973 Brian David Josephson United Kingdom 1973 Leo Esaki Japan 1972 John Bardeen United States 1972 Leon Neil Cooper United States 1972 John Robert Schrieffer United States 1971 Dennis Gabor United Kingdom 1970 Louis Néel France 1970 Hannes Olof Gösta Alfvén Sweden 1969 Murray Gell-Mann United States 1968 Luis Walter Alvarez United States 1967 Hans Albrecht Bethe United States 1966 Alfred Kastler France 1965 Richard Phillips Feynman United States 1965 Julian Schwinger United States 1965 Shin’ichirō Tomonaga Japan 1964 Charles Hard Townes United States 1964 Nicolay Gennadiyevich Basov Soviet Union 1964 Alexander Prokhorov Soviet Union 1963 Eugene Paul Wigner United States 1963 Maria Goeppert-Mayer United States 1963 J. Hans D. Jensen West Germany 1962 Lev Davidovich Landau Soviet Union 1961 Robert Hofstadter United States 1961 Rudolf Ludwig Mössbauer West Germany 1960 Donald Arthur Glaser United States 1959 Emilio Gino Segrè United States 1959 Owen Chamberlain United States 1958 Pavel Alekseyevich Cherenkov Soviet Union 1958 Ilya Frank Soviet Union 1958 Igor Yevgenyevich Tamm Soviet Union 1957 Tsung-Dao Lee Republic of China 1957 Chen-Ning Yang Republic of China 1956 John Bardeen United States 1956 Walter Houser Brattain United States 1956 William Bradford Shockley United States 1955 Willis Eugene Lamb United States 1955 Polykarp Kusch United States 1954 Max Born West Germany 1954 Walther Bothe West Germany 1953 Frits Zernike Netherlands 1952 Felix Bloch United States 1952 Edward Mills Purcell United States 1951 John Douglas Cockcroft United Kingdom 1951 Ernest Thomas Sinton Walton Ireland 1950 Cecil Frank Powell United Kingdom 1949 Hideki Yukawa Japan 1948 Patrick Maynard Stuart Blackett United Kingdom 1947 Edward Victor Appleton United Kingdom 1946 Percy Williams Bridgman United States 1945 Wolfgang Pauli Austria 1944 Isidor Isaac Rabi United States 1943 Otto Stern United States 1939 Ernest Lawrence United States 1938 Enrico Fermi Italy 1937 Clinton Joseph Davisson United States 1937 George Paget Thomson United Kingdom 1936 Carl David Anderson United States 1936 Victor Francis Hess Austria 1935 James Chadwick United Kingdom 1933 Paul Dirac United Kingdom 1933 Erwin Schrödinger Austria 1932 Werner Heisenberg Germany 1930 Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman India 1929 Louis Victor Pierre Raymond, 7th Duc de Broglie France 1928 Owen Willans Richardson United Kingdom 1927 Arthur Holly Compton United States 1927 Charles Thomson Rees Wilson United Kingdom 1926 Jean Baptiste Perrin France 1925 James Franck Germany 1925 Gustav Hertz Germany 1924 Manne Siegbahn Sweden 1923 Robert Andrews Millikan United States 1922 Niels Bohr Denmark 1921 Albert Einstein Germany 1920 Charles Édouard Guillaume Switzerland 1919 Johannes Stark Germany 1918 Max Planck Germany 1917 Charles Glover Barkla United Kingdom 1915 William Lawrence Bragg United Kingdom 1915 William Henry Bragg United Kingdom 1914 Max von Laue Germany 1913 Heike Kamerlingh-Onnes Netherlands 1912 Nils Gustaf Dalén Sweden 1911 Wilhelm Wien Germany 1910 Johannes Diderik van der Waals Netherlands 1909 Karl Ferdinand Braun Germany 1909 Guglielmo Marconi Italy 1908 Gabriel Lippmann France 1907 Albert Abraham Michelson United States 1906 Joseph John Thomson United Kingdom 1905 Philipp Eduard Anton von Lenard Germany 1904 Lord Rayleigh United Kingdom 1903 Antoine Henri Becquerel France 1903 Pierre Curie France 1903 Maria Skłodowska-Curie France 1902 Hendrik Lorentz Netherlands 1902 Pieter Zeeman Netherlands 1901 Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen Germany
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 38 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes-in-physics/1929-1920/
|
en
|
All Nobel Prizes in Physics
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
All Nobel Prizes in Physics
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes-in-physics
|
The Nobel Prize in Physics has been awarded 117 times to 225 Nobel Prize laureates between 1901 and 2023. John Bardeen is the only laureate who has been awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics twice, in 1956 and 1972. This means that a total of 224 individuals have received the Nobel Prize in Physics. Click on the links to get more information.
Find all prizes in | physics | chemistry | physiology or medicine | literature | peace | economic sciences | all categories
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2024
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2024 will be announced on Tuesday 8 October, 11:45 CEST at the earliest.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1929
“for his discovery of the wave nature of electrons”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1928
“for his work on the thermionic phenomenon and especially for the discovery of the law named after him”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1927
“for his discovery of the effect named after him”
“for his method of making the paths of electrically charged particles visible by condensation of vapour”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1926
“for his work on the discontinuous structure of matter, and especially for his discovery of sedimentation equilibrium”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1925
“for their discovery of the laws governing the impact of an electron upon an atom”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1924
“for his discoveries and research in the field of X-ray spectroscopy”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1923
“for his work on the elementary charge of electricity and on the photoelectric effect”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1922
“for his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1921
“for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920
“in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”
To cite this section
MLA style: All Nobel Prizes in Physics. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach AB 2024. Thu. 25 Jul 2024. <https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes-in-physics>
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 80 |
https://grail-watch.com/2023/11/15/the-controversial-career-of-paul-perret/
|
en
|
The Controversial Career of Paul Perret
|
[
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/cropped-Grail-Watch-Icon-512-1.png",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Paul-Perret-featured-image.jpg?resize=512%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/La-Sagne-Huguenin-Godet-Postcard.jpeg?resize=512%2C319&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/1897-Ecole-dhorlogerie-et-Ecole-de-mecanique-attenante-en-construction.jpeg?resize=512%2C365&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Journal-Suisse-dHorlogerie-1876-257-000-Talantoscope-small.jpg?resize=512%2C406&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Davoine_1883-1884_0048.png?resize=305%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/1912-La-Chaux-de-Fonds-Rue-du-Parc-65.jpeg?resize=512%2C407&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1881-10-08-002-000.jpg?resize=512%2C507&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/1913-LHotel-des-Postes-et-la-rue-Leopold-Robert.jpeg?resize=1625%2C1014&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1882-07-29-001-000.jpg?resize=317%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1888-12-06-002-000.jpg?resize=387%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CH_1_A-3-crop.png?resize=183%2C300&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CH_21_A-3-crop.png?resize=185%2C300&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CH_22_A-3-crop.png?resize=143%2C300&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CH_23_A-3-crop.png?resize=190%2C300&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CH_24_A-3-crop.png?resize=182%2C300&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-06-28-003-000-Anonymous-Perret-Letter.jpg?resize=441%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-07-02-008-000.jpg?resize=390%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/zui-001_1930_006_1369-Charles-Edouard-Guillaume-square.jpg?resize=663%2C663&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/JSdH-1897_03-013-Paul-Berner-Nickel-Steel-scaled.jpg?resize=2374%2C2560&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/bsn-001_1897_025_0229-Tableau-des-resultats-observes-par-M.-Guillaume-sur-les-alliages-dacier-au-nickel.jpg?resize=1135%2C1279&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CH_14270_A-crop.png?resize=389%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/bsn-001_1897_025_0224-Metal-a-Dilatation-Presque-Insensible-Invar-Adolphe-Hirsch.jpg?resize=327%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FH_1898_0512_01-Paul-Perrets-announcement.jpg?resize=418%2C996&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/1908-Avenue-Dr.-Jean-Richard-a-Fleurier-Perret-and-Renfer.jpeg?resize=1615%2C1007&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1904_04-038-Paul-Perret-Necrologie.jpg?resize=512%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Rue-de-lEcole-dHorlogerie-7-Fleurier-Apple-Maps.jpg?resize=512%2C282&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/JSdH-1907_04-042-Second-Study.jpg?resize=2000%2C1777&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1882-07-29-001-000.jpg?resize=317%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1882-10-01-001-000.jpg?resize=486%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1882-10-11-001-000.jpg?resize=230%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1888-10-09-002-000.jpg?resize=292%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1888-10-20-001-000-small.jpg?resize=361%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1888-12-06-002-000.jpg?resize=387%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1877_05-017.jpg?resize=307%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1877_05-018.jpg?resize=307%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1877_05-019.jpg?resize=307%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Journal-Suisse-dHorlogerie-1876-257-000-Talantoscope-small.jpg?resize=512%2C406&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-06-28-003-000-Anonymous-Perret-Letter.jpg?resize=441%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-06-30-003-000-First-Reaction.jpg?resize=385%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-07-02-003-000-Immediate-Reaction.jpg?resize=130%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-07-02-008-000.jpg?resize=390%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-07-07-003-000.jpg?resize=243%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-07-12-003-000.jpg?resize=488%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-07-12-009-000.jpg?resize=512%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1890-06-12-003-000.jpg?resize=459%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FH_1898_0512_01-Paul-Perrets-announcement.jpg?resize=418%2C996&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FH_1898_0515_01-Solution-de-la-crise-des-spiraux.jpg?resize=415%2C1138&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FH_1898_0630_02.jpg?resize=842%2C1768&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FH_1898_0630_03.jpg?resize=1259%2C851&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1899_01-001.jpg?resize=334%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1899_01-002.jpg?resize=333%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1899_01-003.jpg?resize=331%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1899_01-004.jpg?resize=316%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1903_12-040.jpg?resize=324%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1903_12-041.jpg?resize=334%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1904-04-01-004-000.jpg?resize=861%2C1269&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1904-04-01-010-000.jpg?resize=684%2C924&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FH_1904_0403_03-Paul-Perret.jpg?resize=1306%2C974&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1904_04-038-Paul-Perret-Necrologie-scaled.jpg?resize=2560%2C2560&ssl=1",
"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/34ef4974b5d89940e35755aca617f3b7?s=140&d=mm&r=g",
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/LR94-highlight.jpg",
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/FHF-19th-Century-Logo.jpg",
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Fiedler-Highlight.jpeg",
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Hebdomas-Featured-Image.jpg",
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Cartel-featured-image.png",
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Glycine-Automatic-logo.jpg",
"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/53ec8f8b74b65765f517fd4881edcc82?s=96&d=mm&r=g",
"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/3d0243d1d4ab989f8e75f9654d138f4b?s=96&d=mm&r=g",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Zodiac-Sea-Wolf-highlight.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Paul-Perret-featured-image.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/1010-gphg2023_l1040027_-g-maillot_point-of-views-ch_-square.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Le-Retour-du-Tic-Tac-Title.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/LR94-highlight.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Cartel-featured-image.png?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Intel-Gordon-Moore-3.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Venus-featured-image-2.png?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/FHF-19th-Century-Logo.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/5_FC_WEB_The_Naked_Watchmaker_Product_800_800px.jpeg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Stephen"
] |
2023-11-15T00:00:00
|
The story of Paul Perret is quite unusual: He was famous not for one single accomplishment but for three different ones: He revolutionized watch adjustment, registered the very first Swiss patent, and contributed to the only watchmaking-related discovery to win a Nobel Prize! Perret was incredibly controversial in his time, vilified and then embraced by his peers, yet there is little record of his life. Read on and discover why Paul Perret deserves to be remembered!
|
en
|
Grail Watch
|
https://grail-watch.com/2023/11/15/the-controversial-career-of-paul-perret/
|
The story of Paul Perret is quite unusual: He was famous not for one single accomplishment but for three different ones: He revolutionized watch adjustment, registered the very first Swiss patent, and contributed to the only watchmaking-related discovery to win a Nobel Prize! Perret was incredibly controversial in his time, vilified and then embraced by his peers, yet there is little record of his life. Read on and discover why Paul Perret deserves to be remembered!
Learn about the unrelated watch company, Montre Invar, and the first watch boutique in La Chaux-de-Fonds!
Three Moments of Fame
Most of the people in watchmaking labor in obscurity, never getting credit for their contributions. The nature of the Swiss people is partly to blame: They do not love attention-seeking behavior and prefer to let their works speak for them. My writing at Grail Watch and elsewhere tends to cast a light on these unsung heroes of the industry, though it is often difficult to uncover their stories.
Before I tell the story of his life, let us briefly enumerate the remarkable yet controversial contributions made by Paul Perret:
In his 20s, Perret invented essential machines for the adjustment of a watch balance and spring. This made him infamous, as his friends touted the incredible speed at which he could tune a chronometer using his Talantoscope. This self-promotion was widely ridiculed as non-Swiss, but threats against him became more serious when it was rumored that he would sell his device in America!
In his 30s, Perret was an outspoken proponent of the establishment of a system of patents in Switzerland. He was ultimately successful in his campaign, and camped out overnight to receive Swiss patent number 1 on November 15, 1888. But he was once again called a narcissist after he also collected patents 21, 22, 23, and 24 that day!
In his 40s, on May 11, 1898, Perret took the stage at a meeting of the entire industry as it struggled under the balance spring cartel. He announced that a nickel-steel alloy called Invar, developed with Nobel Prize-winning scientist Charles-Edouard Guillaume, was immune to the variability of temperature and could be produced outside the cartel. Perret became a hero to the industry but his springs only went into production after his death in 1904, and then by the very cartel he sought to undermine.
Any of these contributions would warrant an article in Grail Watch, but it is incredible that all three came from the same man. The fact that he was such a controversial figure yet quickly cast aside by the industry also drew my attention. Let us consider the man called “shameless” and “savior”, “threat” and “failure” in his time!
Farmer, Soldier, Watchmaker
Paul Perret was born in 1854 in the village of La Sagne. Situated in the same valley as Les Ponts-de-Martel, the town was one of many that supplied watchmakers in Le Locle and La Chaux-de-Fonds on the other side of the mountain to the north. Like most residents, the young Perret worked as a farmer in the summer and spent the winter producing components for watches by hand at the family workbench. His was a large family and was very well-connected to others in the area, which was the home of pioneering 18th century watchmaker Daniel JeanRichard dit Bressel.
Although he was unable to regularly attend school, Paul Perret was gifted with his hands and earned a spot as a watchmaking apprentice in La Chaux-de-Fonds at the age of 17. His skills were quickly evident, and he was recruited by the Fabrique d’Horlogerie de Fontainemelon in 1874. The village of Fontainemelon must have felt like home to the 20 year old Perret, but it is unclear how well he got along with technical director Edouard Junod, who would run that important factory for nearly 4 decades. Most likely Perret was unhappy to be focused on manufacturing rather than the skillful and careful adjustment of watch movements.
Perret returned to La Chaux-de-Fonds in 1877, renting a home with a workshop and opening his own business as an adjuster of chronometers the following year. There were many such businesses in the watchmaking city, as movements were still quite rough at this point, with the hand-made wheels and pivots requiring rework before they could be used. Perret specialized in the escapement, balance, and balance spring, an elite trade.
The young Paul Perret stood out for the speed and accuracy of his adjustment: He could turn around a chronometer in just a few hours! After a few years he revealed that he had been developing machines to assist in watch adjustment since 1875, and these would propel him to notoriety in his industry.
Paul Perret’s Automatic Adjustment Machine
Not content to practice his trade as an adjuster of watches, Paul Perret began inventing new tools and machines at an early age. He began working on a machine to assist in the regulation of a balance and spring while still an apprentice in La Chaux-de-Fonds, and perfected the machine by 1877. Later called the Talantoscope, Perret’s adjustment machine gave him an incredible advantage over other adjusters.
It was widely understood that the accuracy of a watch depended on the frequency and amplitude of the balance. But setting these properly depended on numerous factors, including the exact shape and length of the balance spring as well as the poise of the balance wheel. This was confounded by the relatively primitive materials used (Bessemer steel was just emerging) and the fact that most components, notably springs, were cut and shaped by hand. Adjusting the rate of a movement was a painstaking process of trial and error, with each setting checked against a reference chronometer.
Perret’s device simplified this process by allowing direct comparison and adjustment in real time. The balance to be adjusted was held directly above a reference balance under glass. Thus, any variation of frequency and amplitude were immediately and obviously visible. The spring was mounted on a tweezer that could be easily adjusted to grip the balance spring at different locations until the optimal point was found. The spring would then be kinked and permanently set.
This machine allowed Perret to adjust balance springs so efficiently that he could singlehandedly handle large orders that would swamp every other adjuster in town. The entrepreneurial Perret set up an “atelier de réglages” on the fashionable Rue du Parc in La Chaux-de-Fonds, directly across from the railroad station. It was said that he delivered an astonishing 200,000 Breguet settings to the industry between 1878 and 1888, nearly 300 per workday!
Perret soon dominated the trade, and became very rich in the process. By 1884 he was able to purchase a large house with a garden along the fashionable and growing Avenue Léopold-Robert. His house was located at number 68, just a block down from his workshop at Rue du Parc 65.
A young gentleman about town, Perret became involved in many social and civic positions. He served on the commission of the watchmaking school in La Chaux-de-Fonds, joining the elite of the industry including his old boss from FHF, Auguste Robert. He also served on the board for the national exhibition and Tir Canonale, a shooting competition. And Perret joined the military, becoming a First Lieutenant in 1881 and Major of the Infantry in 1889. His skill with the revolver was so renowned that he became known as the “King of the Tir!”
In 1884, Perret requested the Government of Neuchâtel to transmit the time signal from the telegraph office in La Chaux-de-Fonds to his workshop. Professor Adolphe Hirsch of the Neuchâtel Observatory handled the installation of the line to Perret’s shop at Rue du Parc 65 and it was operational by April 26 of that year. This was the first private use of the Observatory’s telegraph time signal, and Hirsch and Perret remained friendly until his death 20 years later. It seems that Perret allowed other adjusters to use the signal in his workshop, as noted by a Dr. J. Hilfiker the following year.
In the 1880s, Perret invented another consequential machine for the production of balance springs. His Campyloscope was a specialized pantograph for the shaping of balance springs. Stencil forms were placed on the bed of the machine and their exact shape could be reproduced in miniature on a steel spring placed under a microscope. Although extremely effective, the Campyloscope was much less controversial. Perret’s basic design continued to be used for many decades by watchmakers worldwide, especially in the watchmaking schools that appeared in the 20th century.
Perret continued to invent through the 1880s. He created a novel method to construct a watch using bridges to accurately locate the components. He also created a fine regulation system using a pointer that followed an inscribed snail-shaped track. There was also the Perret Escapement, an alternative to the dominant Swiss lever. And he notably created a split bi-metallic balance wheel in an attempt to combat the effects of temperature variation on the accuracy of a movement. This presaged his focus around the turn of the century on compensating springs in an attempt to solve the same problem.
The Fight for Patents
Although Perret offered his Talantoscope for sale soon after he invented it in the late 1870s, he was careful about who he allowed to purchase one. It was a fairly simple machine and could easily be reproduced. And the Campyloscope quickly became a generic instrument, widely copied in schools and workshops.
The concept of intellectual property was not widely recognized until the 19th century, and even then it was often seen as a tool for the rich or a restraint on invention and trade. The idea that patented inventions must be disclosed publicly and that monopolies would have an expiration date gained traction in Italy and France in the 16th century, with rigorous examination of claims following soon after. The English struggled to find a balance between profit and openness, and the system there was widely abused despite the building Industrial Revolution. It was not until after the French Revolution and the creation of a modern patent system in America that the idea of intellectual property was widely accepted.
Switzerland was quite late in establishing a system of patents and trademarks, with resistance to the concept continuing even into the 1880s. Paul Perret was an outspoken booster of the establishment of a patent system in Switzerland modeled after the French and American systems. In 1882, after the national council failed to enact a patent law, a referendum was held to enact it. When voters rejected this July 30 initiative, Perret convened a meeting of interested groups from across Switzerland to promote another referendum or bill. The Olten Meeting, held in October, brought together luminaries including Ernest Francillon of Longines and the Chancellor of the Canton of Geneva. Still, Perret’s efforts were unsuccessful.
Ultimately the Swiss were shamed into adopting patent protection. During the 1878 International Congress of Industrial Property in Paris, Hungarian-American patent attorney Anthony Pollok called Switzerland “a nation of counterfeiters” (“un pays de contrefacteurs”) due to their knack of duplicating the inventions published in other countries. After the Swiss agreed to uphold the intellectual property protections of trading partners it was only a matter of time before they created protections for Swiss citizens as well. A law to register and enforce patents and trademarks was quietly passed on June 29, 1888, and was ultimately enacted without resistance.
The Swiss Federal Intellectual Property Office was opened in Berne on the grounds of the Asylum for the Blind on November 15, 1888. The irrepressible Paul Perret arrived the day before and was first in line when the doors opened at 8 AM. Thus, he was able to secure Swiss Patent Number 1 for his “Perfectionnements apportés à la construction des mouvements de montres de toutes dimensions.” Edouard Heuer stood just a few steps behind, registering his “Nouveau système de montre, grande sonnerie, répétition” as patent number 9. And Perret was able to re-enter the queue and register four more patents (numbers 21-24) later that day!
Among the other early patent holders were Albert Jeanneret (founder of Excelsior Park and Moeris), a representative from Fabrique d’Horlogerie de Fontainemelon, and Irénée Aubry (inventor of the Hebdomas), who we have covered here. It is likely that all four men stood in line together that November morning in Berne.
Although Perret had many friends and supporters in the Swiss watchmaking establishment, his reputation as an outspoken and aggressive businessman was growing. Many were shocked to see him waiting at the Patent Office in Berne before the sun rose, and his aggressive registration of essential elements of the watch movement put them on notice that he intended to compete in areas beyond regulation. Their patience was soon put to the test!
Amazingly, Perret was already distracted from his growing watch regulation business in La Chaux-de-Fonds. In February of 1888 he turned management of the company over to his father, Numa Perret, and associate Louis-Ulysse Vuille. The firm handled large adjustment orders from watchmakers throughout the city for the next five years but was dissolved after the elder Perret’s death on June 27, 1893.
Pompous Praise for a Charlatan
On June 28, 1889, newspapers across Switzerland published an anonymous letter announcing a remarkable achievement: Thanks to his “very important” yet “secret” invention, Paul Perret was able to adjust 24 balances from inexpensive watches in a single day, delivering 21 which met the “1st class” criteria of the Geneva Observatory. Proclaiming him to be “among the boldest innovators in this industry,” the letter writers claim that “this invention will mark an important date in the history of watchmaking.”
This extraordinary claim was not met with enthusiasm.
Swiss people tend to be reserved, but they can become quite aggressive when provoked. I am not aware of anything in historic watchmaking that compares to the anger, accusations, and incredible sarcasm that followed this open letter!
The “pompous praise” of this letter was compared to “a large American advertisement” as the claims were ripped apart. Obtaining a 1st class certificate from the Geneva Observatory requires 45 days of observation of a complete, cased watch, and no such trial was performed with Perret’s specimens. In fact, it was claimed that two thirds of the movements actually failed at day 17, so the test was cut short. A representative of the Observatory confirmed their participation in the experiment but also these failures.
Perret’s promoters quickly folded in the face of such criticism, acknowledging the folly of their initial anonymous letter. They revealed themselves as Albert-H. Potter and Berthold Pellaton, and claimed to have promoted Perret’s work to prod him to promote himself more heavily! They also promised to publish the data behind their claims in Journal Suisse d’Horlogerie, which they did a week later, both there and in the ordinary newspapers.
But the accusations continued, with many seeing a connection between Perret’s promotion of patents and his revolutionary machine. They accused him of attempting to withhold his invention from his Swiss critics to favor the burgeoning American watchmaking industry! This accusation forced a response, with Perret himself promising to make the device openly available to Swiss watchmakers.
Given the emotional response to Perret’s claims, it is surprising that the controversy quickly faded. He licensed his secret device, which proved to be little more than an improved Talentoscope, to Paul Jeannot of Geneva, who set up a business in La Chaux-de-Fonds to regulate watches using the technique. And so the controversy was resolved for a time.
Perret and Jeannot worked together to produce watches as well. Perret licensed Patent CH1 to Jeannot and shared ownership of a number of patents with him through the 1890s. These included an improved chronograph mechanism, a replaceable balance cock (precursor to the porte-echappements that gave Portescap its name), and an improved independent seconds hand mechanism. Paul Jeannot was the son of a watchmaker from Les Brenets near the border with France who set up a watch factory in Barcelona before expanding in Switzerland. But the 1890s Jeannot junior was trying to grow the family business but was beset by the emerging unionization of workers, who rejected his paltry pay rates. He was arrested in 1895 related to the bankruptcy of his factory, which likely spelled the end of Paul Perret’s participation in the business.
Guillaume and the Invar Balance Spring
Given the importance of chronometry in many fields of science and the incredible progress in watchmaking over the last 150 years, it is somewhat surprising that there has only ever been a single Nobel Prize awarded in the field. Charles-Édouard Guillaume received the prize in physics in 1920 “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys.” Yet the humble Guillaume was happy to share credit for this discovery with one of his fellow Neuchâteloise: Paul Perret!
Guillaume was a remarkably dedicated scientist. Born in Fleurier, Canton Neuchâtel, in 1861, he proved his ability while studying engineering at the Federal Polytechnic School in Zürich (ETH). After graduation, Guillaume relocated to Sèvres near Paris to join the International Bureau of Weights and Measures in 1883, where he spent his entire 5 decade career. Guillaume was attracted to Pavillion de Breteuil to contribute to the standardization of the metric system. He was assigned to develop a less-expensive prototype of the meter, then constructed of iridium platinum, for use in surveying. Working with the steelmakers at Imphy, Guillaume discovered the variable magnetism and coefficient of expansion of certain nickel steel alloys.
Realizing that nickel steel could have many applications beyond metrology, Guillaume shared his findings at public scientific conferences. Paul Berner, head of the watchmaking school in La Chaux-de-Fonds, realized that this new alloy could be useful in watchmaking and published the first article on the subject. Upon reading about the material in March of 1897, Paul Perret contacted Guillaume requesting a sample. Guillaume constructed a balance spring from the new alloy and was “struck ill” at the results: The stiffness of the alloy increased with temperature, making the balance run faster. Perret suspected that a slightly different alloy would be perfectly stable in normal temperature ranges, eliminating the need to pair compensating springs and balances!
Perret immediately traveled to Paris to demonstrate his findings, and was amazed as Guillaume produced a plot showing the performance of every alloy. The two quickly secured the proper samples and traveled together back to Perret’s workshop in La Chaux-de-Fonds to construct and observe a prototype balance. Their progress was so impressive that it was shared by Dr. Hirsch, director of the Neuchâtel Observatory, in a June 17 meeting of the Society of Natural Sciences. On August 20, 1897, their nickel steel balance spring was recorded maintaining the same accuracy at 0 and 30 degrees Celsius. Uninterested in commercial matters, Guillaume returned to Sèvres, leaving Perret to bring the new material to market.
Paul Perret had already filed for a patent on the concept, registering it as number CH14270 on May 6, 1897. This patent covered the use of a nickel and steel alloy that increased in elastic force as temperature increased to compensate for a conventional “non-compensated” balance wheel. Incredibly, he had already determined appropriate ratios for a brass balance (28% nickel), a popular brass alloy (35%-36% nickel), and a steel balance (27% nickel). This was written and filed even before his hands-on demonstrations with Guillaume.
Perret’s next challenge was to improve the durability of the alloy. As was then done with steel springs, Perret applied a process of heat treating to harden the new material. This allowed it to be shaped and adjusted like steel, though the long-term reliability of Invar springs would continue to be a question for years to come.
The new spring material was dubbed Invar by Professor Marc Thury, reflecting its invariability to changes in temperature and magnetism. The self-taught Thury was well-known for his work on pendulum clocks and used Guillaume’s alloy to construct a remarkably accurate example. Invar remains a popular pendulum material to this day since it maintains its length as temperature changes.
But Paul Perret’s balance springs actively exploited the predictable expansion of slightly different Invar alloys. This discovery came at exactly the right moment, as the Swiss watchmaking industry was struggling to respond to the newly-formed balance spring cartel. On May 11, 1898, representatives from nearly every watchmaking company gathered in La Chaux-de-Fonds to discuss the creation of their own balance spring company to break the cartel. Although some of those in the audience likely still held a grudge against him, the hosts agreed to allow Paul Perret to take the stage.
At the convocation of watchmakers, and in the watchmaking press the following day, Paul Perret detailed the remarkable properties of Invar balance springs and announced the creation of a new company to produce them in volume. Perret’s claims were supported by respected members of the watchmaking elite: Paul-David Nardin and Paul Ditisheim had experimented with Invar balance wheels and confirmed the material’s properties, while Dr. Hirsch of the Neuchâtel Observatory and Guillaume himself vouched for his experiments. Perret was able to convince the attendees that Invar balance springs could not only replace the steel springs of the cartel but could also enable simple balance wheels to achieve chronometer-level performance. But the meeting also resulted in a commitment to create the Société Suisse des Spiraux, a factory to produce conventional steel springs.
Perret went further than simply announcing the properties of Invar springs that day: He also detailed pricing and immediate commercial availability of two varieties! Although he struggled to produce them in volume, Perret was able to deliver some Invar springs from a workshop he set up in Fleurier by August of that year.
It seems curious that Paul Perret located his Invar spring factory in Fleurier rather than La Chaux-de-Fonds. A fairly small village, Fleurier is strategically located near the center of Swiss watch production and already housed many makers of watch components. And it was the home town of Charles-Édouard Guillaume, which was certainly also a factor. On August 1, 1901, the Fabrique de Spiraux Paul Perret was officially registered, though it had been in operation for three years in a smaller temporary space.
Perret immediately faced financial and health issues and declared bankruptcy on May 16, 1902. Like Guillaume, he struggled with inconsistent quality of the alloy produced by the Imphy forges. And even after tempering his Invar springs were easily damaged with improper handling. Although his Campyloscope made it easier to shape springs with precision, it was difficult to find workers in the small town of Fleurier. Most of the positions were eventually filled by young ladies rather than graduates of the Fleurier watchmaking school.
Paul Perret’s Death and Legacy
Despite being just 49 years of age, Paul Perret suffered a sudden illness on March 30, 1904. He was transferred to the hospital in Le Landeron but died that evening. The company was inherited by his daughter Emma and her stepmother Amélie (née Perrenoud). Emma handled the estate and issued a public appeal to continue the firm “in the interest of the many consumers of this product.”
Although information about these women is sparse, Emma appears to have been a capable businesswoman and accountant, managing the Busga watch factory in La Chaux-de-Fonds in the 1930s. She appears to have married a Mr. Juvet and lived in Geneva for a time. Emma’s sister Marie-Lucie was born in 1882 and likely died around 1893. We know nothing of their mother, Paul Perret’s first wife, but she likely died around the same time. Paul’s father Numa Perret also died that year, suggesting that an illness affected the family.
Paul Perret remarried around 1894. Amélie Perrenoud (1858?-1931) was well-connected in the watchmaking world: She was the aunt of Camille Flotron, a rising star in the world of watchmaking. He managed the main spring factory Resist SA before becoming president of UBAH (overseeing all component makers) and representing spring makers on the board of ASUAG. Amélie died on November 4, 1931, with Emma as Paul Perret’s only surviving family. Her prominent nephew was killed when his car was hit by a train in 1941. Sitting next to Camille Flotron in that car was Robert Guye, manager of the watch balance cartel.
Henri Wittwer, director of the Suchard chocolate factory and Jura-Neuchatelois railroad, and watch tool maker Edouard Ledermann purchased Perret’s Fabrique de Spiraux in 1904, while Perret’s assistant Albert Welter became manager. Wittwer and Ledermann partnered with the rebel balance spring maker Fabrique Nationale de Spiraux, angering the FSR cartel which was eager to produce Invar springs of their own. Paul Baehni of Bienne, director of the largest factory within the cartel, saw the potential of the alloy and pressed to acquire the company. Finally, on September 12, 1906, the cartel took over Paul Perret’s spring factory and acquired his patents.
Production of the springs was transferred to Baehni’s factory in Bienne and the newly-built FSR factory in Geneva in 1915. Perret’s Fleurier factory was closed and his roster of young female workers left unemployed.
Forgetting Paul Perret
It is obvious that Paul Perret still had detractors working against him during the final years of his life. The attributes of Invar were widely and publicly disputed by adjusters, who were certainly worried about losing their livelihood. Although Dr. Hirsch of the Neuchâtel Observatory was a supporter of Perret, his institution took its time in certifying the performance of his balance springs. And the industry backed the conventional steel springs produced by the Société Suisse des Spiraux and rebel factories rather than throwing their weight behind Perret’s Invar springs.
But his sudden death changed everything.
The reputation of Invar balance springs as temperamental and unproven was quickly rehabilitated by the cartel. FSR pushed to release a study confirming the remarkable properties of Invar springs, conducted by Dr. Arndt of the Neuchâtel Observatory. The great Longines factory in Saint-Imier became an enthusiastic supporter of Invar springs, celebrating the accuracy of their mass-produced watches. Soon Invar balance springs became the standard for firms like Moeris (known for anti-magnetic watches), Omega, Zénith, and Tavannes.
For a few years, the name of Paul Perret was generally respected in the industry. His Invar springs enabled watchmakers to industrialize, since they no longer needed to rely on skilled adjusters and compensators. And their performance boosted sales.
But the Invar alloy was constantly being improved, and Perret’s contributions were forgotten. Guillaume created new alloys, including Elinvar in 1920, and he became a genuine celebrity when he received the Nobel Prize that year. Guillaume’s name had far more value than Perret’s. Although Guillaume was personally inclined to share credit with his collaborator even late in life, Perret’s name gradually disappeared. His contribution was largely left out of Guillaume’s obituaries when he died in 1938. Today Paul Perret is hardly ever mentioned, though a homage watch brand did briefly use his name from 2014 to 2020.
The largest watchmakers learned to appreciate the FSR cartel after World War I as industry consolidation became widely accepted. The FSR was absorbed into ASUAG in 1932 along with most of the rebel balance spring makers. An even better balance spring material was developed by Reinhard Straumann just a few years later, and most watchmakers soon switched to his Nivarox alloy, which was also produced by the cartel. Yet Invar remains in wide use today, and every Jaeger-LeCoultre Atmos clock features an Elinvar torsion spring.
The Grail Watch Perspective: We Should Celebrate Paul Perret
Few individuals contributed as much to watchmaking as Paul Perret, yet he is largely forgotten today. Whether for his adjusting and spring shaping machines, his promotion and exploitation of the patent system, or his contribution to the development of a temperature compensating balance spring, Paul Perret left a lasting legacy. And the way he and his friends promoted his accomplishments is just as compelling. If he had not died so suddenly and at such a young age, perhaps there would be even more to tell. But all of this is enough: Paul Perret should not be forgotten!
Reference Material
Happily, I am not the only person to note the accomplishments of Paul Perret. I must first give credit to Hans Weil of Faszination Uhrwerk who created a remarkable study of Daniel JeanRichard, Pierre-Louis Guinand, and Paul Perret. This document (in German), provides much-needed context and helps fill in the story of Paul Jeannot as well! I also recommend Andreas Kelz’ excellent article, Paul Perret and the Swiss Patent No. 1.
I have a great deal more I could say about Paul Perret, and certainly gave short shrift to his other patents and inventions. I also have much more to say about Paul Berner, Marc Thury, Camille Flotron, Adolphe Hirsch, and many other supporting players in this story. Hopefully I will have the time to share their stories as well!
Because information on Paul Perret is so scarce, I am sure I have made some mistakes in this article. If you have additional material or clarifications, please email me (Stephen at grail-watch.com) and I will update this piece. I would particularly love to add a picture of Paul Perret himself, additional details on the life of his daughter Emma, and more about his other accomplishments.
The Swiss Patent System
July 1882 Referendum
October 1882 Olten Meeting
The First Swiss Patents
The Talantoscope
The Talantoscope Controversy
Guillaume and Perret
Paul Perret’s Announcement of Invar
Charles-Édouard Guillaume’s Praise
Paul Perret’s Family
Paul Perret’s Obituaries
The Swiss Patent System
Paul Perret was elected to the Société d’Emulation Industrielle in La Chaux-de-Fonds in 1881 and promptly directed the organization to support the establishment of a patent system in Switzerland. This was an unusual move, since the society had previously steered clear of politics. But when the national council rejected a bill to establish the system, individuals like Perret supported referenda to establish such a system directly. The initial referendum on July 30, 1882, failed but Perret convened a meeting in Olten in October to continue the campaign. The system was ultimately established in November 1888, and Perret received the first patent!
July 1882 Referendum
Patents (REVISION OF ART. 64.)
The Industrial Emulation Society of La Chaux-de-Fonds to the federal electors of the canton of Neuchâtel.
Dear fellow citizens!
The Swiss people are called upon to decide on July 30 an addition to the Federal Constitution, stolen by the Chambers, and intended to give the Confederation the competence necessary to legislate on the protection of inventions in the field of industry and agriculture, as well as on the protection of designs.
For the first time, the Industrial Emulation Society intervenes in a popular vote: That is to say that it is not a political question. We are indeed in the presence of a purely economic and industrial question whose solution will cost nothing to the State and will contribute to the prosperity of the nation.
We come to urge our fellow citizens to vote for the new constitutional provision submitted to them and to set out the main reasons that guide us:
1. Until now, intellectual property has not enjoyed any protection with us. The most important discoveries and inventions can be exploited by anyone, overnight, without there being any guarantee for the work, always considerable and often ruinous, to which the inventors have devoted themselves. Why has the Law, so concerned with the protection of all other property, whatever its origins, remained indifferent to that of inventions? It will be difficult to say, but what is certain is that this unequal treatment constitutes an injustice which must disappear.
2. The Federal Constitution provides for the protection of literary and artistic property. A law on this matter is currently before the Chambers. Why should industry not have the same right? Why should the worker not enjoy the same advantages as the writer, the painter, the sculptor, etc.?
3. If we want to see our watchmaking schools, our art schools, and all the institutions whose goal is the technical and artistic development of work prosper, those who make the necessary sacrifices to follow these courses must know that they do not run the risk of being dispossessed of the fruit of their labors.
4. All civilized nations protect inventions and most of them work together for the creation of international legislation in this field. A draft convention drawn up by representatives of thirteen States provides for the creation of a central office for patents of invention, of which Switzerland would have the honor of being the seat.
5. The absence of a protective law, in our country, has already had unfortunate consequences for us, because it has led a good number of Swiss to seek – with regret – outside the homeland, the guarantee that it will not offered them point; it forced them to carry abroad the product of their labor and their intelligence and thus to join foreign competition.
6. Vis-à-vis other nations, our situation becomes more false day by day. Here, as a result of a commercial treaty, foreigners enjoy with us a protection which does not exist for the Swiss. There, the law only protects nationals of countries in which reciprocity exists. Everywhere we are bound in a state of suspicion which comes to light in all the exhibitions, as if we were a nation which relies on counterfeiting to live, whereas free Switzerland must be enlightened enough to know that there is no lasting prosperity than that which is based on the loyalty of all its children.
Dear fellow citizens!
Our canton cannot remain indifferent.
Our industrial interests require us to turn out en masse at the polls to show that we are interested to a large extent in this important question. An imposing demonstration will give us a good situation to make our wishes heard during the elaboration of the federal law which will be failed following the revision of the Constitution.
So let’s all go to the polls next Sunday and vote: YES!
Chaux-de-Fonds, July 27, 1882.
In the name of the industrial emulation society gathered in assembly today: THE COMMITTEE: Paul Perret, President; Auguste Ducommun, Vice-President; Edward Steiner, Secretary; Jules Brandt, Deputy Secretary; Edward Meyer, treasurer; Charles Couleru-Meuri, Deputy Secretary. Fritz Humbert, Eugène Lenz, Nutin Fiffel, Auguste Reymond, Clément Guisan, Tissot-Vougeux, Jean Brandli, Auguste Klinger, Philippe Girard, Henry Perregaux, Albert Vuille, Eugene Soguel, Fritz Cuanillon, Albert Sandoz.
l’Impartial, July 29, 1882
October 1882 Olten Meeting
The issue of patents, so unfortunately rejected by the people on July 30, will be taken up again. We know that the Industrial Emulation Society of La Chaux-de-Fonds requested this, in order to have a point of support in order to organize the petitioning of the federal authorities for the main Swiss companies which are interested to trade and industry. The Committee, encouraged by the favorable and benevolent replies which it has received from various quarters, has taken the initiative of convening in Olten, on Sunday, October 8, a meeting of delegates from these societies. The appeal is at the same time addressed to the press and to all those who have the protection of inventions at heart. Here is the text of this document:
Dear fellow citizens, dear Confederates,
The result of the July 30 referendum concerning the protection of inventions in the field of industry and agriculture, as well as the protection of designs and models, caused throughout Switzerland such a general feeling of astonishment that it is permissible to think that this vote does not represent the last word of the nation.
The many supporters of this protection did not think for a moment that one could offend cantonal sovereignty by giving the federal power this administrative power, because it is obvious that the cantons would be powerless to exercise it, and they believed that the triumph of their idea was assured.
Hence an almost complete absence of work to overcome the indifference of the electorate and to enlighten the vote.
The undersigned committees, while expressing their respect for any demonstration of universal suffrage, whatever the result, cannot however resolve to consider the question as definitively settled.
They have the deep conviction that concerns unrelated to the thing itself exerted a great influence on the vote.
They hope that by calling from the misinformed people to the well-informed people, our homeland can finally be provided with an institution necessary for our industrial and economic development.
It is guided by this idea that the undersigned committees, thinking that it is necessary to act while public opinion is still awake, believe that they must, as a first step, appeal to all the companies which interests of commerce and industry, to the press and to all persons interested in the protection of inventions, and to invite them to attend a General Assembly which will take place at the Buffet de la Gare d’Olten, on Sunday October 8, 1882; at 11.30 a.m., with the following agenda. Is there any reason to take up again the question of patents for invention now, and, if so, what is the best course of action to obtain a favorable result?
This appeal is addressed to all the societies and to all the newspapers of which we have been able to obtain the list. It is certain that we will have made involuntary omissions, so we ask all newspapers sympathetic to the work to reproduce it, so that all interested societies know that they are warmly invited to attend the meeting in Olten.
Dear fellow citizens, dear Confederates,
We are counting on the support of all men who are concerned about the future of our country and who want to contribute to ensuring this future through innovation based on principles of justice and loyalty in work, the value of which cannot be contested and which all civilized nations have enshrined in their laws.
We believe that the federal authorities, who have pronounced themselves by a large majority in favor of this new constitutional provision, will not hesitate to adopt it, if the Swiss people express their wish by imposing demonstrations.
This is why we address an urgent appeal to all those who agree with us that we must act. The indifference that accompanied the popular vote will be without excuse today, after the lesson of July 30th.
So come in large numbers to Olten, so that when we leave the assembly we can all cry out together: The invention patent is dead; long live the patent!
September 1882.
On behalf of the Committee of the Industrial Emulation Society: President, Paul Perret; Secretary, E. Steiner. On behalf of the Assembly of Sculptors of the Öberland Sculpture Institute and the Society of Sculptors of Bronze: President due filled, H. Baumgartner, pastor; Secretary, C. Bigler-Leitz. On behalf of the Commission of the Society of Former Polytechnicians for the adoption of the protection of inventions: President, P.-E. Huber; Secretary, H. Paul, Engineer. On behalf of the Intercantonal Society of
Industries of the Jura: President, H. Etienne; Vice-President, E. Francillon. On behalf of the Swiss Section of the International Permanent Commission for the Protection of Industrial Intellectual Property: President, J. Weibel; Secretary, E. Imer-Schneider, Engineer. On behalf of the Geneva Commercial and Industrial Association: Chairman, E. Pictet; Vice-President, J. Weibel.
l’Impartial, October 1, 1882
The Olten Meeting, convened on Sunday, 8 October, had 70 delegates from various Swiss companies involved in industry and commerce. Mr. Paul Perret, President of the Industrial Emulation Society of La Chaux-de-Fonds, opened the meeting with a speech included in the protocol and which will be communicated to the Swiss press.
The office of the assembly was composed as follows: MM. Hoffmann-Merian, Basel, President; Paul Perret, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Vice-President; D’Oelli, Berne, German Secretary; Humbert-Droz, Locle, French secretary; Mulhaupt, Berne, and L. Rozat, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Scrutineers.
Several speakers developed the question of industrial protection and declared themselves in favor of patents. This question must be taken up again despite the disastrous result of the popular vote of July 30th. M. Paru, Chancellor of the State of Geneva, spoke in this sense; Emile Merz, engineer in Basel; Zschokke, deputy to the State, at Aarau, and Greisely, at Solothurn.
Mr. Steiger, from Hérisau, a very determined adversary, proposes not to take up the question again. The assembly, unanimously minus two votes, decides that it will be resumed immediately.
The program proposed by the Industrial Emulation Society of La Chaux-de-Fonds was adopted in full and almost unanimously.
The office of the Intercantonal Society of Jura Industries is appointed central committee; he will designate two committees of action and execution, one for German Switzerland, the other for French Switzerland. This mode of proceeding was very favorably received by the assembly, which augurs well for the upcoming campaign. The Central Committee, inspired by the ideas expressed in the meeting of October 8, will bring it to a successful conclusion.
Many testimonials of congratulations and energetic support reached the Initiative Committee from the invited companies who could not be represented.
Everything leads us to believe that the desired end will be achieved for the greater good of our national industries.
l’Impartial, October 11, 1882
The First Swiss Patents
Although Perret’s referenda failed, a system of patents was ultimately established in Switzerland in 1888. Perret, being the driver of this reform and a very prolific inventor, arrived the night before to register the very first Swiss patent on November 15, 1888. He also received four more patents that first day!
Patents of invention, literary property, etc. Bern, October 6, 1888.
In the legal referendum period that ended on the 2nd, no opposition was raised against the Federal Law on Invention Patents of June 29, 1888.
The Federal Council ordered the publication of this law in the official collection and approved its implementation from November 15.
At the same time, it decided that, under the name of the Federal Intellectual Property Office, a special division of the respective federal department (under that of foreign affairs) would be created, which will be responsible for the enforcement of the following laws: a) The Federal Law on Invention Patents; b) The Federal Law concerning the protection of trademarks; c) The Federal Law on literary and artistic property; d) The federal law – currently in deliberation – of designs.
The belongings to this office will be sent, for the time being, by the following staff: A director, one or two assistants, a manager and the necessary number of clerks.
The Department of Foreign Affairs is responsible for contesting these various functions. Upon appointment to these positions, the Federal Council will fix the treatments for them according to the Federal Law on the Organization of the Federal Department of Commerce and Agriculture of April 21, 1883, and will ask this effort for the necessary appropriations from the Federal Assembly.
l’Impartial, October 9, 1888
The Swiss law on patents will enter into force on November 15th. The question has been on the table for a long time, says M. C. Bodenheimer, in the Lausanne Gazette, where he devotes the following lines to this question:
As early as 1849 a motion requesting the introduction of patents was presented to the National Council, which rejected it. In 1851, petitions to the same effect from Mr. Theodore Zappinger, of Mannedorf, and two other Zurich manufacturers. In 1834, petition from M. Lambelet, from Verrières, former member of the National Council; the National Council also rejects it. In 1861, the Prussian legation to the Swiss Confederation requested the Federal Council to provide it with information on the effects produced in Switzerland by the absence of any protection for inventions; the Federal Council replies by transmitting to La Prasse an opinion from MM. Bolley and Kronauer, professors at Zurich, the former of chemistry, the latter of mechanical technology, and both speaking out against patents. In 1862, the National Council rejects a motion of Dr. J. Schneider, of Bern, asking for the introduction of patents.
In 1865, the same fate befell the petition of Mr. Walter Zappinger, chief engineer of the firm of Escher, Wyss and Co., and yet this petition was supported by Alfred Escher, Dubs, Rüttimann, Vigier, Eugene Escher, & Co. The same year a brochure was created by Dr. Honegger for patents. In 1869, a pamphlet by Mr. Victor Boeehmert, professor at the Polytechnic (today director of the statistical office of the kingdom of Saxony) against patents. In 1871, rejection of a motion by Dr. Joos, asking that an article be introduced into the Constitution allowing the Confederation to legislate without patents. In 1874, favorable brochure by Mr. Adolphe Olt. The same year, rejection of a new Zuppinger petition. In 1876, petition of MM. Nestlé et al., petition by 43 Swiss photographers and to the National Council, motion by MM. Bally et al. In 1877, favorable pamphlet by Max Wirth, former director of the Federal Bureau of Statistics. The same year the committee of the Swiss Society of Commerce and Industry (the president then being Mr. Kochlin-Geigy, from Basle) decides on various questions relating to industrial and literary property that the Federal Department of Commerce had submitted, and requests, with regard to patents, that the Saisse not take a decision before Germany has legislated on the matter.
The question finally took shape after Mr. N. Droz, then head of the Federal Department for the Interior, had published a study on the question of patents entitled “general inquiry and preliminary draft law”.
As early as 1873 the Federal Council was represented at Vienna, where the Universal Exhibition was linked to the International Congress of Industrial Property. In 1878, a second congress was held in Paris, also on the occasion of the exhibition. The Federal Council delegated the author of these lines, Mr. Imer-Schneider, a civil engineer, and Mr. Schreyer, now an insurance director and at that time a professor in Geneva. The report, which we sent to the Federal Council on our return from Paris, is now just ten years old (October 1878). In his conclusions he said among other things: “… A very striking reproach that we heard made selling the congress to the Swiss industry in its present position, that is to say in the absence of patents of invention is that of not having perfected the foreign inventions which it appropriated, and on the contrary of having made only mediocre imitations of them. This observation, if it is justified, is important, because it refutes one of the main arguments of the adversaries of the protection of inventions, who see in this very protection an obstacle to the general progress of the industry, which would result. This means that, during a certain period of time, the inventor alone has the right to perfect his invention … The Swiss will not be able to rely on protecting industrial property for a long time … It owes this, among other things, to the reputation of its industry. At the congress, an official delegate from America, Mr. PolIok, called Switzerland a country of counterfeiters. We have rejected this unfair reproach, but there will not be, each time this reproach is peddled by interested competitors, we will be present to respond.”
After pointing out that watchmaking, embroidery and other industries could not do without industrial protection if foreigners do not want to exploit their reputation for their own profit, we added: “There is also another point; it is that of the internal discipline of our industries. Germany has entered into the path of minute protection, and at Congress she has supported the projects of international understanding. (She has since abandoned them. The author.) And why? Is it not up to a certain point because the German industry is impatient to be able to get rid of this epithet “schlecht und billig” (bad and cheap) that M. Reuleaux (he was a delegate to the congress) act has applied and which has earned him such enemy numbers and such warm friends? And don’t we in Switzerland have some considerations of this nature to weigh and examine?”
“Once again we ask what would be the role played by Switzerland if it remained isolated in the midst of the international understanding which is in the process of being created? Forced by treaties to protect foreigners, it would be powerless to protect its own nationals.”
Since then, international agreement has been reached and Switzerland has adopted its own law on patents. At the time when it will come into force it was perhaps worth remembering that we have been asking for it for a long time.
l’Impartial, October 20, 1888
Under this title we will regularly publish the list of registered patents concerning the watch industry. We recall, in passing, that the federal office of intellectual property opened, in Bern, on November 15, 1888, rue de la Lorraine, n° 3 (asylum for the blind); those interested may obtain free of charge from the said office copies of the laws, regulations and federal decrees on the subject, as well as forms for applications for patents of invention and certificates of temporary protection at exhibitions. These same forms will continue to be delivered free of charge to those concerned by the care of the cantonal chancelleries.
It should also be remembered that the Federal Trademark Office is also transferred to the above address.
From the first day of opening of the office on intellectual property, 120 applications are received: here are those for patents concerning the world of watchmaking:
N° 1. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Perfectionnements apportés à la construction des mouvements de montres de toutes dimensions. – Perret, Paul, rue du Pare, 65, Chaux-de-Fonds.
N° 8. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Nouveau mécanisme de remontoir et de mise à l’heure par le pendant pour montres de tous calibres. – Kuhn & Tieche, fabricants d’horlogerie, Bienne.
N° 9. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Nouveau système de montre, grande sonnerie, répétition. – Heuer, Edouard, Bienne.
N° 10. 15 nor. 1888, 8 h. – Nouvelle disposition du mécanisme des montres à répétition avec chronographe. – Goy-Golay, Auguste, Brassus (Vaud).
N° 12. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Nouveau système de chronographe-compteur. – Boret, Hermann, Quartier neuf, Bienne.
N° 15. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Nouveau calibre de montres de poche pour être exécuté en toutes dimensions et en tous métaux. – Humbert fils, Charles, successeur, Chaux-de-Fonds, rue Léopold Robert, 03.
N° 21. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Nouveau système de raquette avec colimaçon régulateur. – Perret, Paul, rue du Parc, 65, Chaux-de-Fonds.
Nº 22. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Pièces détachées servant à fabriquer par un nouveau procédé les balanciers compensés et spiraux pour montres et chronomètres. – Perret, Paul, rue du Parc, 65, Chaux-de-Fonds.
N° 23. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Perfectionnements apportés à la construction du moteur (ressort et barillet) des montres de poche de tous systèmes et de toutes dimensions. – Perret, Paul, rue du Parc, 65, Chaux-de-Fonds.
N° 21. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Perfectionnements apportés à la construction des couronnes de remontoir pour montres de toutes dimensions. – Perret, Paul, rue du Parc, 65, Chaux-de-Fonds.
N° 32. 15 nov. 1888, 9¼ h. – Nouvelle montre chronographe. – Jacot-Burmann, Bienne, et Æby, Léo, Madretsch.
N° 44. 15 nov. 1888, h h. – Nouveau système de ferrure à glace. – Perret, David, Neuchâtel.
N° 46. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Nouvelle composition des plaques métalliques servant â la fabrication des boites de montres, médaillons et autres bijoux. – Bargel, François, place Cornavin, Genève.
l’Impartial, December 6, 1888
The Talantoscope
Paul Perret was said to have invented his adjusting machine as early as 1873 (when he was just 19 years of age) and certainly perfected it by 1877 when he published the following article in Journal Suisse d’Horlogerie. Later versions were named Talantoscope and were produced for commercial sale by 1883.
The Talantoscope Controversy
A controversy over the device arose in 1889 when it was suggested that the machine produced such good results that skilled adjusters were no longer needed. Not wanting to fan the flames, Perret ignored the talk and this caused rumors that he meant to sell the device in America rather than in Switzerland.
We are asked for the hospitality of our columns for the following lines:
A very important invention was made by M. Paul Perret, of La Chaux-de-Fonds, concerning the adjustment of watches.
The inventor communicated to a group of competent men, the results at which he arrived, and it is these people who take pleasure in making public the merits of Mr. Paul Perret.
In their opinion, this invention will mark an important date in the history of watchmaking and its author will henceforth be among the boldest innovators in this industry.
Performing precision adjustment mechanically and in an absolutely scientific manner, then applying it to inexpensive watches, such is the problem posed by Mr. Paul Perret in 1875, and which will seem insane to the eyes especially of those who deal precision adjustment.
After 14 years of study, research and application, our compatriot has carried out this vast project. He had to overcome one after another considerable difficulties, difficulties that several masters of science had declared insurmountable.
The invention of Mr. Paul Perret currently remains a secret but we were allowed to attend an experiment made especially with a view to proving the existence of this invention. The Geneva Observatory was kind enough to lend its support to this scientific test. Twenty-four balance cocks and pendulums belonging to movements he did not know were given to Mr. Paul Perret and at the end of the same day, he returned the adjustments made.
At that time only the cogs and pendulums were adjusted to the movements and these were carried directly without prior observation at the Geneva Observatory. The observations lasted twelve days namely during top, right, left, dial bottom, top, cooler and oven with intermediate days and to finish during top.
As these movements were of standard quality, two could not subsequently withstand the test of stops resulting from manufacturing defects. Of the 22 who remained under observation, twenty-one fulfilled the conditions for the 1st class bulletin (Category A of the Geneva Observatory); Only one gasped for a 3 second gap.
Citation of these results is sufficient. Any comment becomes useless, if one takes into account the fact that Mr. Paul Perret, born near La Sagne in 1855, was a farmer until the age of 17 and prevented from regularly attending a local school, one must be surprised at the perseverance he had to display to walk so quickly and get so far. Indeed, he settled in La Chaux-de-Fonds as an apprentice watchmaker in 1872, and already in 1873 he invented his first adjusting machine. In 1874 he was called as technical director of the Fontainemelon blanks factory, functions which he resigned in 1876 to devote himself to the practice of watchmaking and to continue his studies concerning the problem he had posed in 1875. In 1878 Mr. Paul Perret exhibited in Paris two machines of his invention, the Talantoscope and the Campyloscope, which earned him a medal and the praise of the jury.
In 1881, at the national watchmaking exhibition in La Chaux-de-Fonds, we see him obtain the first class prize with silver medal, the highest award, and in 1883 we meet him in Zurich as a member of the jury of the Swiss national exhibition.
In 1882, it was Mr. Paul Perret who took the initiative in the campaign which fortunately endowed Switzerland with a law on patents for invention and from 1878 to 1888 he delivered 200,000 Breguet settings to industry. Despite all these occupations, Mr. Perret nevertheless continued unceasingly to pursue the goal he had proposed and it is thanks to this incessant work that he arrived at the full possession of his invention.
Also to this brave pioneer of our national industry we say courage! To the work belongs the reward.
l’Impartial, June 28, 1889
We receive the following letter for which we are asked for a place in our columns:
Mr. Editor of the Impartial, your issue the day before yesterday contains an anonymous article about Mr. Paul Perret’s wonderful inventions.
It seems to me that the people who wrote this statement would have done well to sign their article so that it does not look like a large American advertisement.
If after fourteen years of research and application, the inventor of the Talantoscope and the Campyloscope “carried out a vast project for for which he had to overcome one after the other considerable difficulties, difficulties that several masters of science had declared insurmountable!”
If really our young compatriot from the surroundings of la Sagne made a discovery that places him at the rank of famous men, it is an insult to him to give in a newspaper, under the veil of the anonymous, an overview of his invention and his biography.
While thanking you in advance, please accept, Mr. Editor, my most respectful greetings.
A. S.
l’Impartial, June 30, 1889
We published, in our Friday edition, a communication relating to an alleged invention of Mr. Paul Perret, concerning the setting of watches. We accorded hospitality to these lines for the reason above all that the said communication was addressed to other Neuchâtel and even Geneva newspapers; several of them – the Neuchatelois and the Tribune de Genève in the lead – have published this article. We have also inserted it in our columns with the aim of provoking a public debate on the alleged inventions of Mr. Perret which have been talked about for some time.
We have already received a communication that we published in a previous issue. Today we receive the following letters to which we grant the hospitality requested by their authors:
La Chaux-de-Fonds, July 1, 1889.
Mr. Editor of the Impartial, You would oblige me, by inserting in your honorable journal the following lines:
I have just read in l’Impartial of June 28, an article pompously praising an invention of Mr. Paul Perret, adjuster in La Chaux-de-Fonds, an invention by means of which he claims to be able to adjust watches in the different positions without the help of movements. I am certain that this is not possible, for the most perfect machine cannot take into account the irregularities resulting from the driving force, the train, the assortment, the crashing of the escapement, the friction of pivots in the stone holes.
How could a machine predict and correct these irregularities? Irregularities which, as all competent persons know, vary from one watch to another.
I doubt very much that the competent people mentioned in the article in question are Nardins, Potters, Borgsteits, etc., etc.
How is it that the Geneva Observatory granted Mr. P. P. 1st class bulletins (Category A), when its regulations provide for 45 days of observation?
Please accept, Mr. Editor, with my thanks in advance, the assurance of my highest consideration.
N. ROBERT-WÆLTI.
Mr. Editor of the Impartial, please grant these few lines the hospitality of your columns:
In No. 2619 of l’Impartial, published Friday, June 28, I read an anonymous article relating to inventions and other specialties of P. Perret.
Allow me to point out to you that this article is only a tissue of erroneous affirmations and that it seems very much to be the work of a charlatan.
Then, from information taken from a good source, I am permitted to say that it is completely inaccurate that Mr. P. Perret obtained 1st class bulletins (Category A) at the Geneva Observatory.
To obtain these certifications, the parts must undergo 45 days of tests; however, Mr. Perret’s watches having only stayed 17 days at the Observatory, no certificate could therefore be delivered to him.
As for the amazing result, here it is: After 17 days of observations, 17 parts out of the 24 in question had already failed and the remaining 7 would certainly have suffered the same fate if the tests had continued during the 45 regulatory days.
For the moment, I will not point out the other errors with which the authors of this article have been pleased to point out our valiant pioneer, the conqueror of the considerable difficulties which several masters of science had declared insurmountable.
Please accept, Mr. Editor, with my thanks in advance, assurance of my perfect time.
G.-R.
On the other hand, the Geneva Observatory sends the following correction to the Tribune:
The tests undergone by watches registered to examine the results of Mr. P. Perret’s invention for adjustment cannot be assimilated to the regulatory tests required for category chronometers.
It cannot therefore be claimed that the majority of these pieces would have obtained a very satisfactory report, as defined by the rules of the Observatory. We can only affirm that seven of the watches compared over 17 days provided average deviations remaining below the limits assigned for obtaining these ratings.
You will find on the advertisement pages of this issue a humorous article with the title: Extraordinary progress, which naturally targets Mr. Perret and his invention. It will be curious to see how he will defend himself against the assertions contained in the above letters.
l’Impartial, July 1, 1889
Extraordinary progress!
A young compatriot, having arrived after eighty-five years of study at the goal of his research concerning a machine to adjust chronometers automatically, recommends himself to the industrialists of La Chaux-de-Fonds and the surrounding area.
With the help of this machine, it can provide after 12 hours two large chronometer settings, with first-class Observatory bulletins, observed in 36 positions, guaranteed to be set to 2 hundredths of a second.
The undersigned declares that, if a single piece from this house fails, he will not be compensated.
To execute these adjustments, it is enough to send the numbers of the cartons and the screw of a cock.
Campi LOOS,
Rue des Talents N° 100 (Oscop house), SAINT-IMIER.
N.B. This invention is for sale at the price of TWO million and 25 cents.
l’Impartial, July 1, 1889
We receive the following letter to which we grant the hospitality of our columns in the same way as to the communications dealing with the same subject, and which have been inserted in our journal.
Geneva, July 5, 1889. Mr. Impartial Editor, La Chaux-de-Fonds.
We take advantage of the kind hospitality you accord to the articles concerning the inventions of Mr. Paul Perret.
First of all, we claim the authorship of the very first article, which highlighted the merits of Mr. Paul Perret and the path he has traveled so quickly.
Acting on behalf of a few friends, we wanted to encourage the inventor and do him justice, breaking with the tradition that often wanted the researcher in Switzerland to remain anonymous and even sometimes frustrated of the benefits of his painful work.
We recognize that the discoveries of Mr. Paul Perret can arouse great emotion. Our friends and ourselves could hardly believe them when they were first developed among us, but we had to bow before the brutal fact.
We will not speak here of a first experiment which took place on movements provided by Mr. Paul Perret. It was on this occasion that, wanting to have absolutely conclusive proofs, we imposed on him the experiment in question and which consisted in providing the operator with 24 movements which would be absolutely foreign to him and of ordinary quality.
This is what happened last April and we certify that Mr. Perret only received the cogs and balance wheels for his adjustments and that he made them in a single day. We further certify that the cogs were adjusted to the movements under our eyes and that we transported them to the Geneva Observatory without any prior observation having taken place. The experiment made under these conditions was reckless; also what was the general astonishment when we received communication of the magnificent results obtained by these movements.
The table of these observations, issued by Colonel Gautier, director of the Geneva Observatory, is a very interesting document, which will be published in the August issue of the Journal suisse d’Horlogerie.
We refer our readers to it, while expressing the wish that Mr. Perret would add a few developments.
Receive, Mr. Editor, the assurance of our highest consideration.
Albert-H. Potter, Berthold Pellaton
l’Impartial, July 7, 1889
Dear Editor of L’Impartial, at La Chaux-de-Fonds.
You published a press release from the Geneva Observatory about our first article on the inventions of Paul Perret.
After conferring with the Director of the Geneva Observatory, we recognize that the form of our assessment could mislead by suggesting that we wanted to assimilate 12-day tests with the regulatory 45-day tests imposed on Category A chronometers.
We only heard of the results obtained to compare them with the limits imposed on pieces of this category, results deduced from the TABLE below certified by the director of the observatory.
Receive, Sir, the assurance of our highest consideration.
Albert H. Potter, Berthold Pellaton
l’Impartial, July 12, 1889
We remember the controversy that arose, a year ago, after the announcement of results obtained by Mr. Paul Perret, of our city, for the adjustment of watches by a rapid process of his invention, and presented to the Geneva Observatory without the running and adjustment of these watches having been subjected to any prior observation.
The results were so surprising that many people had questioned them and taxed their publication as mere advertising. A circular which we have in front of us tells us that the house of Paul Jeannot, of Geneva, has acquired joint ownership of the inventions, models and trademarks of Mr. Perret and that it has founded, in our city, under his technical direction, a watchmaking factory, with application of its mechanical precision adjustment process.
At the same time, we learn that the important house of Paul Jeannot, from Geneva, will move its head office to La Chaux-de-Fonds next November.
l’Impartial, June 12, 1890
Guillaume and Perret
Paul Perret’s greatest accomplishment was the discovery, with Charles-Édouard Guillaume, of the nickel steel alloy known as Invar. Guillaume’s work showed the many properties of the alloy but it was Perret who developed the material for use as a balance spring for watches.
Paul Perret’s Announcement of Invar
The hairspring crisis
They write to us:
According to the scholarly research of Dr. Ch.-Ed. Guillaume on nickel steels, with his collaboration and that of the metallurgical company of Commentry-Fourchambault, I discovered a new principle, which allows this metal to be applied to the adjustment of watches.
Today, after carefully verified work, I am able to provide the watchmaking industry with two solutions: one which replaces the hardened steel hairspring with the steel-nickel durei hairspring; the other replacing the soft steel hairspring with another, also in nickel-steel, which is superior to it being not very magnetic and very little oxidable.
The hardened steel-nickel hairsprings, advantageously replacing the hardened steel hairspring, will be on sale from May 15. Those which will replace the soft steel hairspring from June 16.
Prices are set at:
Fr. 2.— a dozen for the dureis spirals, tight with turns, sizes 1 to 50, and spaced apart with turns, sizes 12 to 25.
Fr. 0.50 per dozen for soft, common sizes, from sizes 7, tee 1, to size 30.
I will deal exclusively with wholesale sales, the depositaries, whose names will be published soon, will have retail sales.
La Chaux-de-Fonds, May 10, 1898.
Paul PERRET
La Fédération Horlogère, May 12, 1898
Solution to the hairspring crisis
The watch manufacturers of La Chaux-de-Fonds, brought together here, numbering around a hundred, by the General Secretariat of the Cantonal Chamber of Commerce, were made aware of the question through a complete history accompanied by a presentation of the various solutions. Delegates from the Society of Watch Manufacturers of Le Locle, the Berne Cantonal Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the Union of Watch Manufacturers of the Canton of Bern were present.
Unanimously, the assembly refused to enter into discussion on the proposals for agreement offered by the Society of Reunited Spiral Factories.
A communication concerning the steel-nickel hairspring, which Mr. Paul Perret, from La Chaux-de-Fonds, will launch, was received with sympathy by the assembly.
Taught by experience, and determined not to suffer, in the present and in the future, the tyranny of any group of speculators or hoarders, the assembly decided the immediate creation of a joint stock company for the manufacture of hairsprings for watches.
Immediately, around thirty thousand francs were subscribed. At the time of writing, underwriting among manufacturers in La Chaux-de-Fonds exceeds 50,000 francs. Bienne supplies 16,000 francs. We will know, in a few days, the results of the other industrial centers.
These are the first fruits of the rise of April 0 and the intransigent attitude of the Society of United Spiral Factories.
La Fédération Horlogère, May 15, 1898
Nickel steels
There is a lot of talk at the moment about nickel steels, with regard to the appearance of Paul Perret hairsprings, made with metal of this composition. We therefore read with interest the following article, published in the Chronometric Review:
The Bulletin of the National Industry Encouragement Society contains in its March 1898 issue a memoir by M. Ch.-Ed. Guillaume, entitled Research on nickel steels, in which this scholar, member of the Institute, reports on the numerous tests he carried out on alloys obtained by adding varying amounts of nickel to steel.
Mr. Ed. Guillaume divides nickel steels into two distinct categories: steels containing 0 to 25% nickel and to which he gives the name of irreversible alloys and those where the nickel content exceeds 25% and which he calls reversible alloys because of their different magnetic properties.
Most nickel steels are not very oxidizable, they are all very tough, remarkably homogeneous and capable of a fine polish: reversible alloys lend themselves to rolling, drawing into bars or wires down to diameters of less than one tenth of a millimeter.
Reversible alloys have a dilation which varies within very wide limits depending on the proportion of nickel, but when the content of the latter metal is between 35% and 36% steel can have a dilation ten times lower than that of platinum and more than twenty times lower than that of brass, the expansion is not exclusively a function of the nickel content, it also depends on the state of annealing or scorching of the metal lowers at the same time the dilation, finally the stretching succeeding the quenching is another factor of reduction of the dilation.
Nickel steels experience variations in length under the action of time, which are accentuated by a rise in temperature according to complex laws having, however, a great analogy with the variations in volume of glass.
Properly conducted annealing shortens the duration of the perceptible variation of the bars and when a variation of 0.001 mm per meter can be accepted, annealing in SO for 100 hours at 100° is fully sufficient to ensure the permanence of an instrument for at least one year If a consistency twice as great is required, this annealing must be followed by a series of heatings. for example, that the ruler stays at least 400 hours in the region of 80° to 60′, 700 hours from 60P to 10°.
The annealing can without inconvenience be practiced in several times. The use of such a metal was ideal for the construction of clock regulators: we know that a variation of 1 micron (1 hundredth of a millimeter) per meter in the length of a pendulum corresponds to a variation in the duration of oscillation less than 0.05 per day. Now, after six or seven months, a bar of the least expandable alloy takes three or four months to experience a variation of this order. A clock provided with a pendulum constituted by one of these suitably dragged alloys would take a march which, at the end of six months, would experience, by the fact of the pendulum, only a delay in; daytime walking of less than 0.02 seconds in a month.
Today, for the pendulum of clocks, we hardly practice more than grid compensation and mercury compensation, even the first is increasingly neglected because of the extreme difficulty of adjusting many rods. steel and brass which must fulfill the double condition of being perfectly guided and absolutely free.
In the mercury pendulum, the play of the elongation of the rod is counterbalanced by the expansion of the mercury contained either in a vase fisé at the end of the rod, or in a tube replacing this rod as in the Riefier system.
The relative expansion of mercury in glass being about fifteen times greater than that of steel, it suffices that the height of the mercury be the sixth or seventh part of the length comprised between the axis of rotation and the center of oscillation. of the pendulum so that there is compensation.
If the steel rod is replaced by a bar of the least expandable nickel steel, the errors are immediately reduced in the ratio of 13 to 1: a difference of 10′ more or less no longer produces , in the diurnal course, only differences less than half a second and it is this already very small quantity that remains to be corrected by compensation.
It suffices to achieve this, to fix on the rod a lens of a sufficiently expandable metal, resting on a nut screwed directly on the rod. By making the lens of non-expandable brass or nickel steel, a ratio of expansions more favorable than that which results from the combination of mercury and steel will be obtained. „It is easily found that if we retain the proportion of oscillating mass and diameter of the stem used in astronomical pendulums, the total height of the lens will be about 14 centimeters for a pendulum beating the second. The dilatation which is compensated is twelve times lower than in the ordinary system. The difference in temperature from the top to the bottom of the cage and the variations resulting from rapid variations in temperature will be reduced in the same proportion. In addition, the disadvantages resulting from the oxydation of the mercury, its evaporation, the variation in the shape of the meniscus and its mobility will be avoided.
There is a point to which it is advisable to draw further attention, it is the possibility of arriving, in the use of new alloys. to full compensation. When one associates mercury with steel, one establishes the compensation for two determined temperatures, but one renounces by the intermediate or external lemperalures an exact compensation. In fact, for it to be complete, it is necessary that the ratio of the two expansions be the same at all temperatures, a condition which is fulfilled when the two terms of the dilation formulas are separately in the same ratio.
However, for steel, the second term is important whereas it is almost nil in the mer-cure. There is therefore, in the system in use, an advance at intermediate temperatures and a delay at extreme temperatures.
With nickel steels, we can choose an alloy which gives a ratio of two terms identical to that of the metal chosen for the lens and we will thus have achieved the compen-salion complete at all the temperatures at which a clock can be exposed.
Recalling that in the course of his thesis he indicated the reservations required by the use of new alloys because of their variations over time, Mr. Ed. Guillaume adds: The pendulum, even of high precision, is the instrument where this defect has the least importance.
In a clock, irregular and accidental variations are much more dangerous than slow and systematic variations whose law is known. Moreover, as has been said, these variations can easily be reduced to ½o of a second in three months for daytime running.
La Fédération Horlogère, June 30, 1898
Charles-Édouard Guillaume’s Praise
Charles-Édouard Guillaume gave much of the credit for the development of practical Invar balance springs to Paul Perret, though his contributions were later ignored or marginalized. The following article in Journal Suisse d’Horlogerie was written by Guillaume and clearly credits Perret.
Guillaume again gave Perret credit for his contribution at the so-called Conference Guillaume in La Chaux-de-Fonds on November 12, 1903, shortly before Perret’s death. He writes the following, as reported in Journal Suisse d’Horlogerie:
“In March 1897, following my initial communications to the Paris Academy of Sciences, a very skilled watchmaker, Mr. Paul Perret, asked me to send him a sample of Invar. Shortly after, he visited me in Sèvres and brought me the extraordinary fact that a watch equipped with a spiral made of this alloy and a brass balance wheel gained a significant amount of time when subjected to heat. This discovery had such a strong impact on Mr. Paul Perret that it made him ill…
“By noting that his watch gained time when exposed to heat, Mr. Paul Perret immediately concluded that the stiffness of invar increases with temperature, and logically, he thought that within the series of nickel-steel alloys, one could find an alloy with zero variation, eliminating the need for watch compensation.
“Mr. Perret presented me with this result and asked me to collaborate with him in further research. At that time, I had already pondered the general theory of nickel-steel alloys enough to feel comfortable with it.
“Instead of one alloy with zero variation, as envisioned by Mr. Perret, I was able to identify two alloys and even point out the range of compositions where they could be found. Some quick experiments confirmed the validity of these observations, and on August 20th, 1897, during the joint observations we conducted in La Chaux-de-Fonds, we found that a watch equipped with a steel-nickel spiral maintained the same accuracy at 0 and 30 degrees Celsius.
“The problem seemed to be solved at that point; the next step was to make it an industrial reality…”
– Charles Édouard Guillaume, November 12, 1903
Paul Perret’s Family
Very little information is available about Paul Perret and his family. However we have a few facts for certain:
It seems likely that his father was Numa Perret (1829-1893) of Canton Neuchâtel, husband of Lucie-Lina Maire. His father was listed on his death as a watch adjuster (“régulier”) like his son.
He was born in La Sagne in 1854 and died on March 31, 1904 (not 1903 as is often listed).
He had one surviving child, Emma, who was his executor and appears to have married Mr. Juvet.
His other daughter was named Lucie, likely after his mother, or Marie-Lucie and may have been born on July 5, 1882 and died after 1893
His wife Amélie (née Perrenoud) is the step-mother of Emma and was the aunt of Camille Flotron, an important figure in the watch industry in his own right.
Paul Perret’s Obituaries
Despite his accomplishments, and likely because of the many controversies surrounding them, Paul Perret was not memorialized like Charles-Édouard Guillaume and others. Still, his death was recorded and reported. His death announcement also provides crucial biographical information.
Interestingly, all of his obituaries claim that he died at home in Fleurier, but it was later noted that he died in Le Landeron.
l’Impartial
We learn of the death, which occurred suddenly, yesterday, of Mr. Paul Perret, manufacturer of hairsprings in Fleurier. This skillful watchmaker-adjuster, very well known in our city, where he practiced his profession for many years, has had the merit of attaching his name to the remarkable work on steel and nickel alloys of our learned compatriot, of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures,
M. Ch.-Ed. Guillaume.
Paul Perret hairsprings considerably reduce, as we know, the effect of temperature on the rate of watches, and as a result have achieved significant progress, from which civilian watchmaking benefits.
Let us add that Mr. Paul Perret is the inventor of instruments for the construction of the terminal curves of hairsprings and for the determination of their lengths, which earned him laudatory appreciations from the Jury of the Universal Exhibition of Paris in 1878, and the highest awards for tuning instruments.
Mr. Paul Perret was a member of the commission of our Watchmaking School in the years 1877 and 1878. In military life he held the rank of major in the infantry. Mr. Perret was only 49 years old. We present our condolences to the family.
l’Impartial, April 1, 1904
La Fédération Horlogère
On Thursday, we were sorry to learn of the death of Mr. Paul Perret, one of our most skillful watchmakers from Neuchâtel, which had occurred the day before, in Fleurier, where he had been living for two or three years.
Paul Perret spent most of his life in La Chaux-de-Fonds, where he was very busy with watchmaking research, and above all with simplifying watch regulating methods.
It is to him that we owe the first idea of the application of nickel steels to the manufacture of the hairspring. Its role in this question was clarified a few months ago in the lecture given at La Chaux-de-Fonds by Mr. Ch-Ed Guillaume. We had quoted, in the Fédération Horlogère of November 15, 1903, the very words of the speaker, which establish an important point for the history of watchmaking:
“In March 1897, following my first communications at the Academy of Sciences in Paris, said M. Ch-Ed. Guillaume, a very skillful adjuster, then a fellow citizen, M. Paul Perret, asked me to send him a sample of Invar. Shortly after, he came to see me at Sèvres, and brought me this extraordinary fact that a watch equipped with a hairspring of this alloy and a brass balance, took a strong lead in heat. This discovery had struck M. Paul Perret so strongly that he had fallen ill! (laughs). You are smiling, gentlemen, but think of the impression that must have been felt by a man who had devoted his whole life to the problem of regulation, when suddenly seeing the possibility of a complete transformation of the question of compensation. Faced with such an unexpected fact, the passionate researcher cannot defend himself from deep emotion.
“To understand what is the significance of the discovery made by M. Perret, it is necessary to become fully aware of the conditions which cause the watch to vary according to the temperature.”
the lecturer developed the mathematical theory of compensation, put by him in a very simple form.
“The main culprit of the lag of watches in the heat, you see, gentlemen, is the variation in the modulus of elasticity of the hairspring. Noting that his watch was moving warm, Mr. Paul Perret immediately concluded that the rigidity of the invar increases at the same time as the temperature, and, by a logical consequence. he thought that one should find in the series of nickel steels an alloy with zero variation, dispensing with the compensation of watches.
“Mr. Perret brought me this result, asking me to join him in the continuation of the research. At that time, I had given enough thought to the general theory of nickel steels to be able to move about it at ease.
“Instead of an alloy with zero variation planned by Mr. Perret, I was able to indicate two to him, and already put my finger on the point of the curves, but I had to look for them. A few quick experiments showed the correctness of these views, and on August 20, 1897, in the observations we made together at La Chaux-de-Fonds, we observed that a watch fitted with a nickel-steel hairspring had exactly the same step at zero el at 30º. The problem therefore seemed solved: all that remained was to make it industrial.”
The second part of the problem has been solved and the factory of nickel steel hairsprings, founded by Mr. Paul Perret, at Fleurier, is in full operation.
It has been recognized, following numerous serious tests, the significant improvement brought to the adjustment of watches, by the use of these spirals which solves the problem of the compensation of civil watches.
Paul Perret is leaving at the age of 49, too early to have been able to benefit, insofar as he deserved it, from the remarkable progress with which he endowed the watchmaking industry in his country. We address his family to express our sincere condolences.
La Fédération Horlogère, April 3, 1904
OBITUARY – The name of Paul Perret, recently deceased, is intimately linked to the history of the watchmaking industry over the past thirty years. He was successively a watchmaker-mechanic, regulator, and spring manufacturer.
As a watchmaker-mechanic, he built a highly regarded regulating machine, for which he himself provided a description in our journal a long time ago (Issue 221). As a regulator, he earned a just reputation in his hometown of La Chaux-de-Fonds. From there, he established himself in Fleurier, where he created a spring manufacturing factory and focused particularly on steel-nickel springs. In this regard, he was a dedicated and appreciated collaborator of Dr. Guillaume, as mentioned in an article recently published about the conference given in La Chaux-de-Fonds by our esteemed compatriot.
A correspondence from Fleurier states that the deceased leaves behind the memory of a good citizen and a amiable man from whom one always learned something interesting. We can only join in the sorrow caused by this premature death: Paul Perret was only 49 years old.
Journal Suisse d’Horlogerie, April 1904
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 35 |
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/nmah_1167898
|
en
|
National Museum of American History
|
https://ids.si.edu/ids/deliveryService?id=NMAH-72-11256&max_w=1200
|
https://ids.si.edu/ids/deliveryService?id=NMAH-72-11256&max_w=1200
|
[
"https://ids.si.edu/ids/deliveryService?id=NMAH-72-11256&max=600"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Charles Edouard Guillaume was a Swiss metallurgist working at the International Bureau of Weights and Measures in Paris who, in 1896, found that a nickel-steel alloy (with about 35 per cent nickel) has a very small coefficient of expansion.
|
en
|
/themes/gesso/dist/images/favicon.ico
| null |
Our collection database is a work in progress. We may update this record based on further research and review. Learn more about our approach to sharing our collection online.
If you would like to know how you can use content on this page, see the Smithsonian's Terms of Use. If you need to request an image for publication or other use, please visit Rights and Reproductions.
|
|||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 7 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/guillaume/nominations/
|
en
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume – Nominations
|
[
"https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2018/06/guillaume-nomination.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2023/10/nobelprizes_2023-1024x676.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/wp-content/themes/nobelprize/assets/images/spinner.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920 was awarded to Charles Edouard Guillaume "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys"
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/guillaume/nominations/
|
Nobel Prizes and laureates
Eleven laureates were awarded a Nobel Prize in 2023, for achievements that have conferred the greatest benefit to humankind. Their work and discoveries range from effective mRNA vaccines and attosecond physics to fighting against the oppression of women.
See them all presented here.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 55 |
https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/article/257
|
en
|
https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/assets/img/favicon.ico
|
https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/assets/img/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/assets/img/logo_288.jpg 2x",
"https://play.google.com/intl/it_it/badges/images/generic/it_badge_web_generic.png",
"https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/assets/img/badge_iOS.svg",
"https://www.ilnuovosaggiatore.sif.it/thumbs.php?ID=1445&W=1200 2x"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/assets/img/favicon144.png
| null |
On a hot summer afternoon in 1923 in the Conference Hall at the Gothenburg Jubilee Exhibition, Albert Einstein gave a talk on “Fundamental ideas and problems of the theory of relativity” as can be seen in fig. 1. In the large audience, besides the conference participants at the 17th Scandinavian Natural Sciences Meeting, were in the front row the Swedish King, Gustav V, and Svante Arrhenius (1859–1927) the man responsible for inviting Einstein. This lecture became Einstein’s Nobel Lecture for his 1921 Nobel Prize in physics that was awarded in 1922.
What was the background to this? Why on Earth did such a large crowd attend a physics lecture in the middle of a heat wave and why was Einstein not awarded the Nobel Prize for his theories of relativity as most people would expect? This paper will search for an explanation by looking into the evaluation work of Einstein for the Nobel Prize.
1 How the Nobel Prize works
The statutes of the Nobel Foundation govern how the Nobel system works. It is based on Alfred Nobel’s will, but the Nobel Foundation is nowhere mentioned in the will. The Nobel Foundation was instead created by the Prize awarding institutions to manage their common interests and facilitate the general collaboration between the Prize awarders. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, mentioned in the will, awards the Nobel Prizes in physics and chemistry. Each Prize awarder also has their separate statutes that govern the evaluation work. Only invited nominators in certain categories are entitled to nominate. A successful candidate must have at least one nomination, but it is not automatically so that the most nominations get you the Prize. A five-person Nobel committee then evaluates all nominees, and the committee decides who are the most interesting candidates who are subjected to special reports. Then the Nobel Committee writes up a general report briefly discussing all nominees before presenting more extensive coverage of the main contenders, and most reasoning goes into that year’s committee proposal in the end. Then the proposal is discussed by the physics class of the Academy and finally there is the formal vote in pleno where all members of the Academy have the right to vote.
During the period from the first nomination of Einstein in 1910 until he was awarded the 1921 Prize in 1922 there was an increasing number of nominations as can be seen from fig. 2, but it was not until 1919, when the Nobel Committee made its first special evaluation of Einstein, and then it was the case of the Brownian motion.
2 Nominations of Einstein
Aant Elzinga, who has closely studied Einstein and the Nobel Prize, has grouped the nominations for Einstein in three periods. In the first period of nominations (1910–1914) it was mostly the special relativity that was proposed.
For these early nominations the Nobel Committee did not make any special report thus indicating that Einstein was not yet considered a main candidate. From the general reports it was claimed that an award would be premature, and the often-used argument that it would be better to await further results and possible confirmations was raised. Also, counterarguments like that the special relativity theory had no practical importance and thus of no benefit to mankind to quote from Nobel’s will were raised. Another argument was that it was a question of theory of knowledge rather than physics.
The second period (1915–1919) saw an increase in nominations where other work by Einstein was proposed as his work on the Brownian motion. But most of the other nominations kept suggesting Einstein for the special relativity theory and now also the general theory of relativity. Some nominators apparently sensed the committee’s unease with theoretical work and pointed out that Einstein had done experimental work. Now the committee argued that others had precedence, when it came to the Brownian motion and as for the general relativity theory only Mercury’s perihelion precession supported the theory whereas gravitational redshift and light bending were not yet confirmed. Also, arguments that the general theory of relativity was just a belief rather than a proper physical theory was raised.
The third period (1920–1922) is of course marked by the attention the famous 1919 solar eclipse expeditions got, as seen in fig. 3. Nominations were soaring and almost all were arguing for the theories of relativity. But one nominator suggested the photoelectric effect. Now the Nobel Committee, not ready to award Einstein, questioned the validity of the solar eclipse data and also questioned the 1921 nomination for Einstein for the photoelectric effect, where Arrhenius in his special report would argue that it was a lucky guess by Einstein and that it was experimentalists that had made the work worthy of recognition.
3 Special reports on Einstein
Let us now look at the special reports on Einstein as can be seen in table 1. In 1919 there were nominations for The Svedberg and Jean Perrin for their work on the motions of molecules, but since their work was based on Einstein’s work on the Brownian motion Arrhenius had been asked by his colleagues in the committee to also nominate Einstein for the sake of thoroughness. Arrhenius also got the task to write the special report on the three, where he concluded the section on Einstein:
As far as the prize-awarding of these works is concerned, it must be confessed that they have had as great a value for experimental research as Einstein’s other works. Nevertheless, Einstein’s theoretical work, the theory of relativity and the quantum theory, are by far most proposed of the majority of nominators compared to his molecular kinetic works, when it comes to awarding him with the Nobel Prize. This is undoubtedly due to the fact that these first-mentioned works seem far more apt to change our conception of nature and therefore have a greater significance than the molecular kinetic studies, which are in the very best agreement with, and are a consequence of, the classical conception of the motion of molecules. It would therefore, no doubt, seem strange to the learned world if Einstein received a prize precisely for the works referred to here, notwithstanding their obviously great merit and usefulness for the development of science, and not for his other great works, which is what have attracted the attention of nominators.
So, the argument was that Einstein could not be awarded the Nobel Prize for his work on the Brownian motion since his peers expected it to be for the theories of relativity or quantum theory. This meant that Perrin and Svedberg also were put on hold until 1926 when Perrin got the physics prize and Svedberg the chemistry prize. Instead, Max Planck was awarded the reserved 1918 Nobel Prize for physics “in recognition of the services he rendered to the advancement of Physics by his discovery of energy quanta” and Johannes Stark was awarded the 1919 Nobel Prize in physics for “for his discovery of the Doppler effect in canal rays and the splitting of spectral lines in electric fields”.
The next year, in 1920, Svante Arrhenius followed up his own argument and made a special report on Einstein’s theories of relativity in light of the results from the solar eclipse the previous year. Now Einstein was the candidate that had the most nominations and also by important nominators. Arguments were again made for Einstein’s theories of the Brownian motion, the specific heat, but most of all for the theories of relativity. And as for the general theory of relativity there were discussions of the three specific cases where the theory could be put to the test.
1. The shift of Mercury’s perihelion (where Einstein’s theory was in agreement with observations).
2. The bending of light by the Sun (where there were arguments for and against the accuracy of the observations).
3. The redshift of lines in the solar spectra (which could not yet be detected).
Arrhenius in his report described the great interest and astonishment that had followed the presentation of the solar eclipse results at the joint meeting in November 1919 with the Royal Society and the Royal Astronomical Society. But he also reported on the subsequent critique. Although there was much in favour of the Mercury perihelion shift, Arrhenius also brought up critique and other explanations. For the red shift he, quite lengthy, presented the tests that had been made and none delivered any clear support: “In any case, this effect on wavelength seems unsuitable for supporting Einstein’s theory”. Arrhenius even observed at the end of his report that there had appeared both uncritical admiration and unjust critique of Einstein.
The Nobel Prize in physics for 1920 instead went to the director of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, Charles Edouard Guillaume, “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”.
Next year in 1921, there were even more nominations for Einstein. So, this year there were two special reports made on Einstein. One was written by Allvar Gullstrand (1862–1930) on the theories of relativity and the other one, due to a new nomination for the photoelectric effect, on which Arrhenius wrote the report.
Almost half of the general report in 1921 deals with Einstein. It first summed up arguments from Gullstrand’s special report and regarding the experimental tests of the theories of relativity that they had neither contradicted nor confirmed, and it was stated that “it demands a great deal of conviction in respect to phenomena, which lie entirely outside experience, it does not seem to meet the requirements which should apply to the awarding of the Nobel Prize”. Then followed brief summaries of the three different test options of Einstein’s theory arguing that they did not give any clear support. Gullstrand’s report also called into question the shift of Mercury’s perihelion, that many considered a solid argument for Einstein. Gullstrand, however, claimed that for now it was not clear if Einstein’s theory could be considered in agreement with Leverrier’s measurements. And since the general theory of relativity “so far in no way has been satisfactorily confirmed by experience, the committee does not currently consider themselves able to propose him for a Nobel Prize”. The end verdict this year was to wait for further observations and tests to determine the fortune of Einstein. This is a fate that Einstein has shared with many over the years, a cautious policy has perhaps helped the Nobel institution over the years. It must not be wrong. Noteworthy is that the general report in 1921 used terms as “Einstein’s followers” in connection with the discussion of the relativity theories. Normally, the general reports are very matter of fact, without references to anything outside the physics at hand. So, this phrase is special and cannot be understood in any positive sense.
But the general report continued with Einstein’s photoelectric effect. This was more summarily dismissed this year, based on the special report by Arrhenius, claiming that others than Einstein had been crucial in making the experimental work. Arrhenius also dismissed the argument from the nomination that the photoelectric law is fundamental for the quantum theory and its successful dealing with atomic phenomena. And since the 1918 Prize had gone to Planck, it was argued that this had already been awarded. So, prospects for Einstein seemed gloomy and the committee recommended that, since no prizeworthy candidate at all was at hand, the 1921 Nobel Prize should be reserved until next year, and such became the decision of the Academy.
4 Solving the gridlock
Something needed to change if this deadlock should go away. This dominance of experimentalists and experimental ethos in the committee has been observed by historians. And it was quite remarkable that the two members that got the task to evaluate Einstein were Allvar Gullstrand, a professor of ophtalmology and Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine in 1911, and Svante Arrhenius, director of the Nobel Institute for Physical Chemistry and Nobel Laureate in chemistry in 1903. The five-person physics committee did not have any professional theoretical physicist among them at this time.
There were two professors of mathematical physics in Sweden. At Lund University the professor was an expert on sea currents and at this time not a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. The other professor of mathematical physics was also an expert on hydrodynamics, Carl Wilhelm Oseen (1879–1944). He became professor already in 1909 at Uppsala University, but had for many years during the 1910s struggled with tuberculosis. He had early on taken an interest in Niels Bohr and together with Rutherford he helped the Dane to get his professorship. He had also debated some aspects of quantum theory with Planck in 1914. Niels and Margarethe Bohr had visited Oseen in 1913 while the Swede stayed at a sanatorium the months before Bohr published his famous papers on the atomic structure. In 1919 Oseen held a summer lecture series for teachers about the quantum theory and the theories of relativity. From these lectures we can conclude that he was positive although not uncritical to these theories. The lectures, together with the attention that the solar eclipse observations added, helped initiate the founding of the Swedish Physical Society in 1920, where Oseen became the first president. His training from Lund University was in mathematics, so in 1921 he got elected to the Swedish Academy of Sciences, at first to a mathematical class. Later in 1922 he was transferred to the physics class. And more importantly already in the autumn of 1921 Oseen had been adjoined to the Nobel Committee for physics. And at the first meeting he attended, where the above-mentioned decision to reserve the 1921 Prize was recommended by the class, he managed to invoke a possible future opening for the photoelectric law and he:
emphasized that this discovery could gain further significance in the future, which is why he hoped that the committee’s statement should not be understood that the matter was decided once and for all.
In view of this and after further deliberation, the class decided to state that Einstein’s law for the photoelectric effect must be ascribed great importance, but that any awarding of the prize should wait until a more reliable understanding was attained of its significance for science.
For a long time, the Nobel Committee had relied on Gullstrand’s investigations of Einstein’s theory of relativity for the candidacy, and he found the whole thing to be a matter of “belief.” His correspondence with Oseen from this time shows that Gullstrand constantly tried to find errors in Einstein’s theory, whereupon Oseen rejected his objections. At one point, Oseen wrote that it “took a few minutes” for him to dismiss the problem that Gullstrand had posed. But Gullstrand returned with “the fable of the clock that slows down” which was something for “the relativist believer”.
5 Oseen’s tandem solution
1922 became a busy year for Oseen. In May 1922 the astronomer and astrophysicist Bernhard Hasselberg died after years of dwindling health. His last major impact on the committee’s work had been the prize for Guillaume. In September 1922 Gullstrand proposed that Oseen should replace Hasselberg in the committee and brought up Oseen’s grasp of theoretical physics as beneficial for the committee’s work. The nomination was signed by two other members as well as by The Svedberg, member of the chemistry committee. It should also be noted that Oseen was still only member of the applied mathematics and astronomy class and had to be adjoined, not only to the Nobel committee, but also to the physics class to take part in the class’ discussions of the Nobel committee’s proposals. But already before this decision the Nobel committee had submitted its recommendation to the Academy of the two available Nobel Prizes in physics (1921 & 1922), and before that, during the summer, the special reports, by the adjoint member Oseen, had been submitted.
But other important events had also taken place in this context during the summer of 1922. In June Niels Bohr was invited to deliver the Wolfskehl lectures in Göttingen. He travelled there accompanied by his Swedish assistant at this time, Oskar Klein, and they stayed at an inn in the outskirts of the city. At the same inn Oseen also boarded. He was making a rare trip and was anxious to listen to his old friend Niels Bohr and meet other colleagues, as can be seen from fig. 4 and fig. 5. At this conference Bohr presented Hendrik Kramers’ dispersion theory, to which a young Werner Heisenberg raised objections.
Oseen already had a very positive opinion of Bohr’s work, and despite the criticism made by Heisenberg in Göttingen (that actually impressed Bohr), Oseen returned to Uppsala where he sat down and wrote two special Nobel reports, one on Bohr and one on Einstein, see fig. 6. He finished his 34 pages report on Bohr, “Bohr’s atomic theory,” on August 9, and a few days later, on August 13, he finished his 12 pages report on “Einstein’s law for the photoelectric effect”. After submitting these reports he had ten days before the second Nordic Physicist Meeting started in Uppsala, where he was one of the organizers. Bohr attended giving the main lecture “On the Explanation of the Periodic System.” The meeting provided another opportunity for Bohr and Oseen to meet. This conference can be seen as an important step in establishing theoretical atomic physics as a central area for physics among Nordic physicists. It was also considered as something of a “summit meeting” between Oseen and Bohr.
If we look closer at the evaluations by Oseen in 1922, it becomes clear that to him Bohr and Einstein were a tandem. Bohr’s work was based on Einstein’s theory and Einstein’s theory became more palatable when connected to Bohr’s work. Such a solution would manage a Nobel Prize to Einstein, but avoiding the contested issue of the relativity theories, and at the same time solving the pressure of all the nominations for Einstein. No one but Oseen ever nominated Einstein only for the photoelectric effect. He was well aware of the opposition to Einstein’s relativity theories and the political and cultural aspects pertaining to them. However, he was a supporter and one of few in Sweden that actually understood the general theory of relativity at this time. And since there were two available prizes in 1922 it was an opportunity that could not be missed. The postponing in 1921 might thus actually have helped to accommodate the solution in 1922.
6 Finally, a Nobel Prize for Einstein
Looking closer at Oseen’s reports we can note the different sections, after the first theoretical examination he addressed the experimental confirmations of Einstein’s law. And the usage of “law” of course underscores the irrefutable nature of the theory. Especially Millikan’s work was referred to. Then came a section “The Einstein law and Bohr’s atomic theory” which concluded: “The Einstein proposition and Bohr’s objectively identical frequency conditions are currently one of the most trustworthy propositions in physics”. Then followed a section “A look at Einstein’s activities,” where other Einstein’s important contributions were listed. The first group was his works based on classical physics like the Brownian motion, the second group was his writings on the quantum theory, like his papers on the specific heat. The third group was his contributions to electromagnetic theory to which his special theory of relativity was counted. The fourth group was the general theory of relativity. All very important contributions depending on one’s particular interest. “In any case, no other discovery made by Einstein than his proposition on the quantum emission and absorption of light has generated as much interest in measuring physics” Oseen stated. This argument was set to thwart any objections from the overly cautious experimentalists in the committee and in the physics class.
Most important is of course the concluding part:
At a time when physicists, with few exceptions, were opposed to Planck’s quantum theory, Einstein has shown through an original and astute analysis that the energy exchange between matter and ether must take place in such a way that an atom emits or absorbs an energy quantum hν, where ν is the oscillation number. As an application of this proposition, Einstein has established the law that if an electron is photoelectrically triggered from a substance, its energy after release must have the value $h\nu – P$, where $P$ is the work needed to release the electron from the substance. This law has been most beautifully confirmed by measurements by Millikan and others. Einstein’s proposition has received its greatest significance and also the most convincing confirmation in that it is one of the assumptions on which Bohr built his atomic theory. Almost all confirmations of Bohr’s atomic theory are also confirmations of Einstein’s proposition.
The discovery of Einstein’s law is without a doubt one of the most significant events in the history of physics. Its discoverer seems to me to fully deserve a Nobel Prize in physics.
A stronger endorsement cannot be phrased but let us also briefly examine Oseen’s report on Bohr. The different sections gave a hint of the way his argument went: “The historical assumptions for Bohr’s atomic theory”, “The basis for Bohr’s theory of 1913”, “The results of Bohr’s theory from 1913”, “Theory for the Stark effect and the Zeeman effect”, “Bohr’s correspondence principle”, “Bohr’s rule for determining the stationary states”, “The atomic theory’s development 1913–1921”, “Bohr’s atomic theory of 1921”, “Confirmations of Bohr’s theory”, and “Difficulties in Bohr’s atomic theory” concluded the report and the final words should be noted:
The cornerstone of Bohr’s thought structure, the Einstein-Bohr condition $\epsilon_{1} - \epsilon_{2} = h\nu$, has, through studies by Franck et al. received an extremely comprehensive and overwhelming confirmation. [...] Finally, if one asks whether the Bohr atomic theory is worthy of a Nobel Prize in physics, it seems to me that the answer can be no other than this. Both with regard to its already confirmed findings and with regard to the powerful stimulus that this theory has given to both experimental and theoretical physics, Bohr’s atomic theory seems to me fully worthy of a Nobel Prize.
Also, an extremely strong endorsement. There was also another seven pages special report in 1922 by Allvar Gullstrand supplementing his special report from the previous year on Einstein’s theories of relativity. Here Gullstrand reiterated that these theories were a “matter of faith”, and he went through the three tests for the general theory. For the red shift Gullstrand quoted von Laue that there was room for further tests. And he continued to quote von Laue that there was no absolute certainty and that there was room for more and further investigations. For the perihelion test Gullstrand referred to some papers that did not fully support Einstein’s theory, and that any certain judgment therefore would have to wait. He also referred several times to “followers of the relativity theory”, and concluded:
It should be clear from the above that my opinion from last year that Einstein cannot at present be advocated for the award of the Nobel Prize in Physics, either for the special or the general theory of relativity or for the combined value of these theories, is not only still valid, but has been further confirmed by subsequent publications.
Despite Gullstrand’s stubborn objections to relativity, Oseen convinced his colleagues in the Nobel Committee for his tandem solution, and Gullstrand could still be content that the relativity theories were not awarded a Nobel Prize. The general report also stated that there was an overwhelming number of nominations for Einstein, which might have made the Committee and the Academy members extra prone to accept Oseen’s solution. Most nominations for Einstein were for the relativity theories, and only Oseen had nominated Einstein exclusively for the photoelectric effect. The committee referred to Gullstrand’s present and prior reports and to Arrhenius previous report and the committee “maintained its verdict from last year and considered itself unable to propose Einstein for the Nobel Prize for his theories of relativity and gravitation”. Then the report continued discussing Einstein and Bohr simultaneously according to Oseen’s arguments and concluded:
Due to what the committee here had the honour to state, may the committee suggest that of the two available Nobel Prizes for Physics, the one reserved from the previous year should be awarded to Professor Albert Einstein in Berlin for his merits in theoretical physics, especially his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect; and that this year’s Nobel Prize in Physics should be awarded to Professor Niels Bohr in Copenhagen for his merits in exploring the structure of atoms and the radiation emanating from them.
The class did approve of this suggestion by the Nobel Committee, which basically was Oseen’s tandem solution.
All this was well-received, also in the Academy in pleno and on November 9, 1922 the decision was made at the Nobel meeting of the Academy to award Einstein the reserved 1921 Physics Prize and Niels Bohr the 1922 Physics Prize. Noteworthy is that the Academy was anxious to keep any trace of the theories of relativity out of the motivation and they changed the phrase: “for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect” adding “regardless of the value that, after any confirmation, could be attributed to the theories of relativity and gravity, [...] award the 1921 prize [...] to Albert Einstein for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect.” This text also made it onto Einstein’s Nobel diploma making it stand out as the only Nobel diploma with text stating what the Laureate was not awarded for. The most common interpretation of this is that it is a symptom of the anxious and perhaps not so brilliant Swedish Committee. That could well be the case, but another interpretation might be possible as we shall see.
7 The end of nominations
Oseen had managed an incredible feat to have two of his own candidates each being awarded the Nobel Prize and thus defusing the difficult situation with the many nominations for Einstein. And as we have seen, the Nobel Prize to Einstein was intrinsically coupled to the Nobel Prize to Bohr and vice versa. Also clear is that it was all Oseen’s doing. No one beside members of the Nobel Committee could fully understand what had played out, but some people did. Oseen’s former colleague from Uppsala, Eva von Bahr-Bergius, was pleased with the end result and wrote to Oseen:
More than one month ago – when the names of the Nobel laureates were announced – I was determined to write to you. I felt a need to thank you for being there and taking care of the Nobel Prizes, so that physicists will not make a fool of themselves in the same way as the Swedish [Literary] Academy. Because your influence on these matters is very great, I understand very well. I would very much wish that someday you alone could be in charge of the Nobel Prizes, but I am afraid that you write such learned things that – at least here in Sweden – there is no one who can judge them.
I assume that there was a controversy about Einstein’s name. His opponents, who succeeded in excluding the theory of relativity from the prize statement, have thereby simply ensured that in the future he will receive the prize one more time.
So, this is another possible interpretation. That the non-awarding of the theories of relativity would only mean that Einstein would be awarded the Nobel Prize again. And there were no formal objections to such a chain of events, Marie Curie had a decade earlier received her second Nobel Prize. And Einstein if any could have been nominated again for the theories of relativity and other works. But the fact is that that did not happen. The following year there were two nominations for him, but they were actually late arrivals from the previous year. And thereafter there are no nominations at all for Einstein. So, apparently his peers considered that he was now put up on the Nobel shelf, which is also telling of how awards in science may function, especially the Nobel Prize.
But let us return to where we started. Einstein did not come to Stockholm to pick up his Nobel Prize, he was on a boat on his way from the USA to Japan, when the news broke, and there was no possibility for him to make it to the Prize awarding events in Stockholm. Since it is mandatory to deliver a Nobel Prize Lecture to receive the prize amount, he eventually came to Sweden the year after, and invited by Svante Arrhenius he delivered a lecture in Gothenburg on July 11, 1923 on “Fundamental ideas and problems of the theory of relativity.” But that was not the work he had been awarded for. But since most people were more interested in a lecture on relativity theory than the photoelectric effect as can be seen in the large crowd in fig. 1, this is what Arrhenius asked Einstein to talk about. And immediately after Arrhenius delivered the manuscript of the lecture for the Nobel Foundation yearbook, Les Prix Nobel, as Einstein’s Nobel Lecture. This was questioned in the Academy, but Arrhenius then said that the manuscript had already been set, and proofs already sent out. So, it was agreed that it should be allowed. Among Einstein’s critics in Sweden this caused an outrage and a lot of complaints to the Academy that had let this pass, complaints arrived also from abroad. The lecture should take place within six months, but this was after seven months; the lecture should take place in Stockholm, and most of all it should be about the Prize awarded work. There had been instances of delay earlier, the Curies held their lecture one and a half year late, but they held it in Stockholm and on the topic they had been awarded for at least. The reason for Arrhenius’ actions might be found in his argument in the 1919 special report not to award Einstein for the Brownian motion, since it would be strange if Einstein was awarded the Nobel Prize for anything else than the theories of relativity. This is why Einstein’s Nobel lecture is about the theories of relativity, for which he was not awarded the Nobel Prize.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 57 |
https://johnmarkmorris.com/2020/08/08/revisiting-nobel-prize-research/
|
en
|
Revisiting Nobel Prize Research
|
[
"https://johnmarkmorris.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/icantgetnoonefoundation1.png?w=1024",
"https://johnmarkmorris.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/3e4c4021-4861-4bd0-998a-9385ab25a7bf.jpeg?w=50",
"https://johnmarkmorris.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/3e4c4021-4861-4bd0-998a-9385ab25a7bf.jpeg?w=50",
"https://pixel.wp.com/b.gif?v=noscript"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2020-08-08T00:00:00
|
I have been considering writing this post for over a year. I have mixed feelings about revisiting the Nobel prizes in physics with the knowledge of NPQG in hand. Let's go through the set of conflicting thoughts that run through my mind. The Nobel Prize is considered the highest award in physics (and other fields)…
|
en
|
Emergent Universe
|
https://johnmarkmorris.com/2020/08/08/revisiting-nobel-prize-research/
|
I have been considering writing this post for over a year. I have mixed feelings about revisiting the Nobel prizes in physics with the knowledge of NPQG in hand. Let’s go through the set of conflicting thoughts that run through my mind.
The Nobel Prize is considered the highest award in physics (and other fields) and the award and winners are generally held in high esteem.
Modern day criticism of the Nobel Prize concept resonates with me, specifically that it reinforces the power and competition hierarchy of academic physics which has been and still is dominated by a non-diverse group and which leads to unhealthy behaviour in the physics community.
I don’t wish to tarnish the past prize in the eyes of the public, the scientific community, nor the recipients. However, science marches onward. It is inevitable that if a paradigm shift occurs in a field, that many of the past results, while possibly fine work in their era, are rendered incorrect, obsolete, or misinterpretations by the science of the new era.
It is important for science historians to understand and document the errors in thinking and faulty methods of prior eras and why those eras advocated incorrect narratives that deviated to a large degree from the ground truth of nature. While I am not a science historian, I have studied the history of physics, cosmology, and astronomy in order to fathom the errors and misinterpretations that have blinded these fields to solutions that are rather painfully obvious in retrospect.
Under the fair use doctrine, I have copied the text of the All Nobel Prizes in Physics page from the Nobel Prize website. I’ve kept the links intact to the annual prize and winner pages. I will add my comments in red font if NPQG has a material impact on the science that led to the prize and green font if NPQG impact is none to minimal. Where I use an orange font, NPQG will have a material impact to the area, but it is unknown if it will impact the research for which the prize was awarded. If there is no comment after a prize winner section then either I have not found a serious NPQG impact to that research or I have not yet evaluated it.
NPQG will undoubtedly have a degree of impact on all science of standard matter-energy in spacetime æther going forward. However, prior work may be minimally impacted at its scale of reference. I’ll use the symbol 𝛿NPQG to indicate Nobel prizes where there may be minor deltas or reframing needed in the context of NPQG and often this is with respect to the fundamental narratives of GR/QM/ΛCDM.
The first version of this post will be a quick pass through, based simply on the high level description of the research for which the prize was awarded. In the future, I may come back and revisit some of these in more detail.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020
The 2020 Nobel Prize in Physics has not been awarded yet. It will be announced on Tuesday 6 October, 11:45 CEST at the earliest.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2019
“for contributions to our understanding of the evolution of the universe and Earth’s place in the cosmos”
James Peebles “for theoretical discoveries in physical cosmology”
Dr. Peebles work on ΛCDM cosmology occurred during an era where a fundamental narrative misconception has been in place – specifically the physical implementation of the Big Bang, inflation, and expansion as whole universe concepts (LeMaitre rewind to a single event). NPQG teaches that these concepts are all galaxy local and this resolves a number of tensions in cosmology that had largely been discounted by scientists, including the Hubble rate and the age of the universe relative to other processes. Presumably much of Dr. Peebles work can be mapped over to the galaxy local processes.
Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz “for the discovery of an exoplanet orbiting a solar-type star”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2018
“for groundbreaking inventions in the field of laser physics”
Arthur Ashkin “for the optical tweezers and their application to biological systems”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino), nor of the composite electrino/positrino structure of the photon.
Gérard Mourou and Donna Strickland “for their method of generating high-intensity, ultra-short optical pulses”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck particles (electrino and positrino), nor of the composite electrino/positrino structure of the photon.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2017
Rainer Weiss, Barry C. Barish and Kip S. Thorne “for decisive contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves”
I suspect that NPQG will inform gravitational wave science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino), nor of galaxy local recycling as the dominant large process in the universe.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2016
David J. Thouless, F. Duncan M. Haldane and J. Michael Kosterlitz “for theoretical discoveries of topological phase transitions and topological phases of matter”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2015
Takaaki Kajita and Arthur B. McDonald “for the discovery of neutrino oscillations, which shows that neutrinos have mass”
I suspect that NPQG will inform neutrino science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino).
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2014
Isamu Akasaki, Hiroshi Amano and Shuji Nakamura “for the invention of efficient blue light-emitting diodes which has enabled bright and energy-saving white light sources”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2013
François Englert and Peter W. Higgs “for the theoretical discovery of a mechanism that contributes to our understanding of the origin of mass of subatomic particles, and which recently was confirmed through the discovery of the predicted fundamental particle, by the ATLAS and CMS experiments at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider”
I suspect that NPQG will inform particle physics and Higgs research to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino).
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2012
Serge Haroche and David J. Wineland“for ground-breaking experimental methods that enable measuring and manipulation of individual quantum systems”
I suspect that NPQG will inform particle physics and quantum research to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino), nor composite particles of standard matter, nor does quantum mechanics understand uncertainty properly.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2011
Saul Perlmutter, Brian P. Schmidt and Adam G. Riess“for the discovery of the accelerating expansion of the Universe through observations of distant supernovae”
This work on ΛCDM cosmology has been during an era where a fundamental narrative misconception has been in place – specifically the physical implementation of the Big Bang, inflation, and expansion as whole universe concepts (LeMaitre rewind to a single event). NPQG teaches that these concepts are all galaxy local and this resolves a number of tensions in cosmology that had largely been discounted by scientists, including the Hubble rate and the age of the universe relative to other processes. The discrepancy between Supernovae distance calculations, redshift, and directional Hubble rate will need to be re-evaluted in the context of NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2010
Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov “for groundbreaking experiments regarding the two-dimensional material graphene”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2009
Charles Kuen Kao“for groundbreaking achievements concerning the transmission of light in fibers for optical communication”
𝛿NPQG
Willard S. Boyle and George E. Smith“for the invention of an imaging semiconductor circuit – the CCD sensor”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2008
Yoichiro Nambu “for the discovery of the mechanism of spontaneous broken symmetry in subatomic physics”
I suspect that NPQG the understanding of symmetries of nature and symmetry breaking will gain new insights as a result of NPQG and the Planck scale point charge basis of nature.
Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa “for the discovery of the origin of the broken symmetry which predicts the existence of at least three families of quarks in nature”
I suspect that NPQG the understanding of symmetries of nature and symmetry breaking will gain new insights as a result of NPQG and the Planck scale point charges basis of nature.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2007
Albert Fert and Peter Grünberg“for the discovery of Giant Magnetoresistance”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2006
John C. Mather and George F. Smoot“for their discovery of the blackbody form and anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background radiation”
This work on ΛCDM cosmology has been during an era where a fundamental narrative misconception has been in place – specifically the physical implementation of the Big Bang, inflation, and expansion as whole universe concepts (LeMaitre rewind to a single event). NPQG teaches that these concepts are all galaxy local and this resolves a number of tensions in cosmology that had largely been discounted by scientists, including the Hubble rate and the age of the universe relative to other processes. The multi-peaked power spectrum of the CMB background may be related to the composite of several black body spectra for constituent particles of space time æther.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2005
Roy J. Glauber“for his contribution to the quantum theory of optical coherence”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck particles (electrino and positrino), nor of the composite electrino/positrino structure of the photon.
John L. Hall and Theodor W. Hänsch“for their contributions to the development of laser-based precision spectroscopy, including the optical frequency comb technique”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2004
David J. Gross, H. David Politzer and Frank Wilczek “for the discovery of asymptotic freedom in the theory of the strong interaction”
NPQG teaches that the UV divergence, IR divergence, renormalization, and asymptotic freedom are related to the immutability of the Planck scale point charges from whence the universe emerges.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2003
Alexei A. Abrikosov, Vitaly L. Ginzburg and Anthony J. Leggett “for pioneering contributions to the theory of superconductors and superfluids”
𝛿NPQG. I would expect rapid advancement in this research area once informed by NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2002
Raymond Davis Jr. and Masatoshi Koshiba “for pioneering contributions to astrophysics, in particular for the detection of cosmic neutrinos”
I suspect that NPQG will inform neutrino science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino).
Riccardo Giacconi “for pioneering contributions to astrophysics, which have led to the discovery of cosmic X-ray sources”
I suspect that NPQG will inform astronomy to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of the Euclidean background space of the universe and the corresponding Map 1 equations where observers in Euclidean space would see a variable speed of photons in the spacetime æther which we describe by Map 2 which has Riemannian geometry at all but the smallest scales.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2001
Eric A. Cornell, Wolfgang Ketterle and Carl E. Wieman “for the achievement of Bose-Einstein condensation in dilute gases of alkali atoms, and for early fundamental studies of the properties of the condensates”
𝛿NPQG. I would expect rapid advancement in this research area once informed by NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2000
“for basic work on information and communication technology”
Zhores I. Alferov and Herbert Kroemer“for developing semiconductor heterostructures used in high-speed- and opto-electronics”
𝛿NPQG.
Jack S. Kilby “for his part in the invention of the integrated circuit”
𝛿NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1999
Gerardus ‘t Hooft and Martinus J.G. Veltman “for elucidating the quantum structure of electroweak interactions in physics”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino).
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1998
Robert B. Laughlin, Horst L. Störmer and Daniel C. Tsui “for their discovery of a new form of quantum fluid with fractionally charged excitations”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino).
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1997
Steven Chu, Claude Cohen-Tannoudji and William D. Phillips “for development of methods to cool and trap atoms with laser light”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino), nor of the composite electrino/positrino structure of the photon.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1996
David M. Lee, Douglas D. Osheroff and Robert C. Richardson “for their discovery of superfluidity in helium-3”
𝛿NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1995
“for pioneering experimental contributions to lepton physics”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino), nor of the composite electrino/positrino structure of the photon.
Martin L. Perl “for the discovery of the tau lepton”
Frederick Reines “for the detection of the neutrino”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1994
“for pioneering contributions to the development of neutron scattering techniques for studies of condensed matter”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino), nor of the composite electrino/positrino structure of the photon.
Bertram N. Brockhouse“for the development of neutron spectroscopy”
Clifford G. Shull“for the development of the neutron diffraction technique”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1993
Russell A. Hulse and Joseph H. Taylor Jr. “for the discovery of a new type of pulsar, a discovery that has opened up new possibilities for the study of gravitation”
𝛿NPQG. I do imagine that this science will be greatly informed by NPQG but I do not know if it will impact this work directly.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1992
Georges Charpak “for his invention and development of particle detectors, in particular the multiwire proportional chamber”
𝛿NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1991
Pierre-Gilles de Gennes “for discovering that methods developed for studying order phenomena in simple systems can be generalized to more complex forms of matter, in particular to liquid crystals and polymers”
𝛿NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1990
Jerome I. Friedman, Henry W. Kendall and Richard E. Taylor “for their pioneering investigations concerning deep inelastic scattering of electrons on protons and bound neutrons, which have been of essential importance for the development of the quark model in particle physics”
𝛿NPQG. I do imagine that this science will be greatly informed by NPQG but I do not know if it will impact this work directly.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1989
Norman F. Ramsey “for the invention of the separated oscillatory fields method and its use in the hydrogen maser and other atomic clocks”
𝛿NPQG.
Hans G. Dehmelt and Wolfgang Paul“for the development of the ion trap technique”
𝛿NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1988
Leon M. Lederman, Melvin Schwartz and Jack Steinberger “for the neutrino beam method and the demonstration of the doublet structure of the leptons through the discovery of the muon neutrino”
I suspect that NPQG will inform neutrino science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino).
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1987
J. Georg Bednorz and K. Alexander Müller“for their important break-through in the discovery of superconductivity in ceramic materials”
𝛿NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1986
Ernst Ruska“for his fundamental work in electron optics, and for the design of the first electron microscope”
𝛿NPQG.
Gerd Binnig and Heinrich Rohrer“for their design of the scanning tunneling microscope”
𝛿NPQG.
The pattern is becoming evident.
Research related to the paradoxes and open problems of physics and cosmology are highly likely to be materially impacted by NPQG.
The smaller the scale of the study domain the more likely that NPQG will have a material impact. This includes small physical scale and low energy reactions. Definitely anything involving photons. Definitely anything involving spacetime æther interactions. Certainly standard model and below. Possibly atomic and molecular research.
The larger the scale of the study domain the more likely that NPQG will have a material impact. This includes high energy scales as well as large distance scales. Impacted subjects span universe as a whole, ΛCDM cosmology, astronomy beyond our galaxy, galaxy dynamics, black holes, supermassive black holes and their jets, dark matter, dark energy, galaxy rotation curves, and high energy gravitatonal waves.
Research in-between these extremes of scale is less likely to be directly impacted by NPQG as long as the science has minimal dependency on the narrative from the extremes of scale. That said, there may be advances in these areas that will be enabled by NPQG.
Beyond this point, I’ll comment on the Nobel prizes that are significantly impacted by NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1985
Klaus von Klitzing“for the discovery of the quantized Hall effect”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1984
Carlo Rubbia and Simon van der Meer “for their decisive contributions to the large project, which led to the discovery of the field particles W and Z, communicators of weak interaction”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1983
Subramanyan Chandrasekhar “for his theoretical studies of the physical processes of importance to the structure and evolution of the stars”
William Alfred Fowler “for his theoretical and experimental studies of the nuclear reactions of importance in the formation of the chemical elements in the universe”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1982
Kenneth G. Wilson “for his theory for critical phenomena in connection with phase transitions”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1981
Nicolaas Bloembergen and Arthur Leonard Schawlow “for their contribution to the development of laser spectroscopy”
Kai M. Siegbahn “for his contribution to the development of high-resolution electron spectroscopy”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1980
James Watson Cronin and Val Logsdon Fitch “for the discovery of violations of fundamental symmetry principles in the decay of neutral K-mesons”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1979
Sheldon Lee Glashow, Abdus Salam and Steven Weinberg “for their contributions to the theory of the unified weak and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles, including, inter alia, the prediction of the weak neutral current”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1978
Pyotr Leonidovich Kapitsa “for his basic inventions and discoveries in the area of low-temperature physics”
Arno Allan Penzias and Robert Woodrow Wilson “for their discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation”
I suspect NPQG will lead to a fundamental reinterpretation of the CMB.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1977
Philip Warren Anderson, Sir Nevill Francis Mott and John Hasbrouck van Vleck “for their fundamental theoretical investigations of the electronic structure of magnetic and disordered systems”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1976
Burton Richter and Samuel Chao Chung Ting “for their pioneering work in the discovery of a heavy elementary particle of a new kind”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1975
Aage Niels Bohr, Ben Roy Mottelson and Leo James Rainwater “for the discovery of the connection between collective motion and particle motion in atomic nuclei and the development of the theory of the structure of the atomic nucleus based on this connection”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1974
Sir Martin Ryle and Antony Hewish “for their pioneering research in radio astrophysics: Ryle for his observations and inventions, in particular of the aperture synthesis technique, and Hewish for his decisive role in the discovery of pulsars”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1973
Leo Esaki and Ivar Giaever “for their experimental discoveries regarding tunneling phenomena in semiconductors and superconductors, respectively”
Brian David Josephson “for his theoretical predictions of the properties of a supercurrent through a tunnel barrier, in particular those phenomena which are generally known as the Josephson effects”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1972
John Bardeen, Leon Neil Cooper and John Robert Schrieffer “for their jointly developed theory of superconductivity, usually called the BCS-theory”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1971
Dennis Gabor “for his invention and development of the holographic method”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1970
Hannes Olof Gösta Alfvén “for fundamental work and discoveries in magnetohydro-dynamics with fruitful applications in different parts of plasma physics”
Louis Eugène Félix Néel “for fundamental work and discoveries concerning antiferromagnetism and ferrimagnetism which have led to important applications in solid state physics”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1969
Murray Gell-Mann “for his contributions and discoveries concerning the classification of elementary particles and their interactions”
NPQG will lead to a profound new understanding of composite point charge structure of standard matter and their interactions.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1968
Luis Walter Alvarez “for his decisive contributions to elementary particle physics, in particular the discovery of a large number of resonance states, made possible through his development of the technique of using hydrogen bubble chamber and data analysis”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1967
Hans Albrecht Bethe “for his contributions to the theory of nuclear reactions, especially his discoveries concerning the energy production in stars”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1966
Alfred Kastler “for the discovery and development of optical methods for studying Hertzian resonances in atoms”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1965
Sin-Itiro Tomonaga, Julian Schwinger and Richard P. Feynman “for their fundamental work in quantum electrodynamics, with deep-ploughing consequences for the physics of elementary particles”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1964
Charles Hard Townes, Nicolay Gennadiyevich Basov and Aleksandr Mikhailovich Prokhorov “for fundamental work in the field of quantum electronics, which has led to the construction of oscillators and amplifiers based on the maser-laser principle”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1963
Eugene Paul Wigner “for his contributions to the theory of the atomic nucleus and the elementary particles, particularly through the discovery and application of fundamental symmetry principles”
Maria Goeppert Mayer and J. Hans D. Jensen “for their discoveries concerning nuclear shell structure”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1962
Lev Davidovich Landau “for his pioneering theories for condensed matter, especially liquid helium”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1961
Robert Hofstadter “for his pioneering studies of electron scattering in atomic nuclei and for his thereby achieved discoveries concerning the structure of the nucleons”
Rudolf Ludwig Mössbauer “for his researches concerning the resonance absorption of gamma radiation and his discovery in this connection of the effect which bears his name”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1960
Donald Arthur Glaser “for the invention of the bubble chamber”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1959
Emilio Gino Segrè and Owen Chamberlain “for their discovery of the antiproton”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1958
Pavel Alekseyevich Cherenkov, Il´ja Mikhailovich Frank and Igor Yevgenyevich Tamm “for the discovery and the interpretation of the Cherenkov effect”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1957
Chen Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao (T.D.) Lee “for their penetrating investigation of the so-called parity laws which has led to important discoveries regarding the elementary particles”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1956
William Bradford Shockley, John Bardeen and Walter Houser Brattain “for their researches on semiconductors and their discovery of the transistor effect”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1955
Willis Eugene Lamb “for his discoveries concerning the fine structure of the hydrogen spectrum”
Polykarp Kusch “for his precision determination of the magnetic moment of the electron”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1954
Max Born “for his fundamental research in quantum mechanics, especially for his statistical interpretation of the wavefunction”
Walther Bothe “for the coincidence method and his discoveries made therewith”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1953
Frits Zernike“for his demonstration of the phase contrast method, especially for his invention of the phase contrast microscope”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1952
Felix Bloch and Edward Mills Purcell “for their development of new methods for nuclear magnetic precision measurements and discoveries in connection therewith”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1951
Sir John Douglas Cockcroft and Ernest Thomas Sinton Walton “for their pioneer work on the transmutation of atomic nuclei by artificially accelerated atomic particles”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1950
Cecil Frank Powell “for his development of the photographic method of studying nuclear processes and his discoveries regarding mesons made with this method”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1949
Hideki Yukawa “for his prediction of the existence of mesons on the basis of theoretical work on nuclear forces”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1948
Patrick Maynard Stuart Blackett “for his development of the Wilson cloud chamber method, and his discoveries therewith in the fields of nuclear physics and cosmic radiation”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1947
Sir Edward Victor Appleton “for his investigations of the physics of the upper atmosphere especially for the discovery of the so-called Appleton layer”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1946
Percy Williams Bridgman “for the invention of an apparatus to produce extremely high pressures, and for the discoveries he made therewith in the field of high pressure physics”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1945
Wolfgang Pauli “for the discovery of the Exclusion Principle, also called the Pauli Principle”
NPQG will illuminate the physical root cause for this principle.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1944
Isidor Isaac Rabi “for his resonance method for recording the magnetic properties of atomic nuclei”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1943
Otto Stern “for his contribution to the development of the molecular ray method and his discovery of the magnetic moment of the proton”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1942
No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1941
No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1940
No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1939
Ernest Orlando Lawrence “for the invention and development of the cyclotron and for results obtained with it, especially with regard to artificial radioactive elements”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1938
Enrico Fermi“for his demonstrations of the existence of new radioactive elements produced by neutron irradiation, and for his related discovery of nuclear reactions brought about by slow neutrons”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1937
Clinton Joseph Davisson and George Paget Thomson “for their experimental discovery of the diffraction of electrons by crystals”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1936
Victor Franz Hess “for his discovery of cosmic radiation”
Carl David Anderson “for his discovery of the positron”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1935
James Chadwick“for the discovery of the neutron”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1934
No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1933
Erwin Schrödinger and Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac “for the discovery of new productive forms of atomic theory”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1932
Werner Karl Heisenberg “for the creation of quantum mechanics, the application of which has, inter alia, led to the discovery of the allotropic forms of hydrogen”
NPQG has significant impact on quantum mechanics based on the knowledge of Planck scale point charges the electrino and positrino and the composite structures they form. Furthermore the spacetime æther has a huge impact on redefinition of the quantum vacuum. NPQG indentifies the correct root causes for uncertainty as well as comes down firmly on the side of EPR.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1931
No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1930
Sir Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman“for his work on the scattering of light and for the discovery of the effect named after him”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1929
Prince Louis-Victor Pierre Raymond de Broglie “for his discovery of the wave nature of electrons”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1928
Owen Willans Richardson “for his work on the thermionic phenomenon and especially for the discovery of the law named after him”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1927
Arthur Holly Compton “for his discovery of the effect named after him”
Charles Thomson Rees Wilson“for his method of making the paths of electrically charged particles visible by condensation of vapour”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1926
Jean Baptiste Perrin“for his work on the discontinuous structure of matter, and especially for his discovery of sedimentation equilibrium”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1925
James Franck and Gustav Ludwig Hertz “for their discovery of the laws governing the impact of an electron upon an atom”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1924
Karl Manne Georg Siegbahn “for his discoveries and research in the field of X-ray spectroscopy”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1923
Robert Andrews Millikan “for his work on the elementary charge of electricity and on the photoelectric effect”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1922
Niels Henrik David Bohr “for his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1921
Albert Einstein “for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect”
Note that Einstein did not receive his Nobel for his work on special or general relativity, which are both significantly impacted by NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920
Charles Edouard Guillaume “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1919
Johannes Stark “for his discovery of the Doppler effect in canal rays and the splitting of spectral lines in electric fields”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1918
Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck “in recognition of the services he rendered to the advancement of Physics by his discovery of energy quanta”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1917
Charles Glover Barkla “for his discovery of the characteristic Röntgen radiation of the elements”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1916
No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1915
Sir William Henry Bragg and William Lawrence Bragg “for their services in the analysis of crystal structure by means of X-rays”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1914
Max von Laue “for his discovery of the diffraction of X-rays by crystals”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1913
Heike Kamerlingh Onnes “for his investigations on the properties of matter at low temperatures which led, inter alia, to the production of liquid helium”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1912
Nils Gustaf Dalén “for his invention of automatic regulators for use in conjunction with gas accumulators for illuminating lighthouses and buoys”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1911
Wilhelm Wien “for his discoveries regarding the laws governing the radiation of heat”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1910
Johannes Diderik van der Waals “for his work on the equation of state for gases and liquids”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1909
Guglielmo Marconi and Karl Ferdinand Braun “in recognition of their contributions to the development of wireless telegraphy”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1908
Gabriel Lippmann “for his method of reproducing colours photographically based on the phenomenon of interference”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1907
Albert Abraham Michelson “for his optical precision instruments and the spectroscopic and metrological investigations carried out with their aid”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1906
Joseph John Thomson “in recognition of the great merits of his theoretical and experimental investigations on the conduction of electricity by gases”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1905
Philipp Eduard Anton von Lenard “for his work on cathode rays”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1904
Lord Rayleigh (John William Strutt) “for his investigations of the densities of the most important gases and for his discovery of argon in connection with these studies”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1903
Antoine Henri Becquerel “in recognition of the extraordinary services he has rendered by his discovery of spontaneous radioactivity”
Pierre Curie and Marie Curie, née Sklodowska “in recognition of the extraordinary services they have rendered by their joint researches on the radiation phenomena discovered by Professor Henri Becquerel”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1902
Hendrik Antoon Lorentz and Pieter Zeeman “in recognition of the extraordinary service they rendered by their researches into the influence of magnetism upon radiation phenomena”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1901
Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen“in recognition of the extraordinary services he has rendered by the discovery of the remarkable rays subsequently named after him”
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 41 |
https://dashamlav.com/kb/world/nobel-prize-winners/charles-edouard-guillaume-1920-physics-nobel-prize/
|
en
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume: Nobel Prize Winners
|
[
"https://certify.alexametrics.com/atrk.gif?account=dKTsu1DlQy20Y8",
"https://dashamlav.com/kb/world/nobel-prize-winners/_img/nobel-prize-both-sides.jpg",
"https://dashamlav.com/static/images/logo-50px.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
All the details about the Nobel Prize in Physics won by Charles Edouard Guillaume in the year 1920. Nobel Prize Awardees are considered to be the winners of world's highest award.
|
en
|
Dashamlav
|
https://dashamlav.com/kb/world/nobel-prize-winners/charles-edouard-guillaume-1920-physics-nobel-prize/
|
Motivation
for the Awardin recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 16 |
https://wiki.grail-watch.com/index.php/Charles-Edouard_Guillaume
|
en
|
Edouard Guillaume
|
https://wiki.grail-watch.com/favicon.ico
|
https://wiki.grail-watch.com/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://wiki.grail-watch.com/resources/assets/licenses/cc-by-nc-sa.png",
"https://wiki.grail-watch.com/resources/assets/poweredby_mediawiki_88x31.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/favicon.ico
| null |
Charles-Edouard Guillaume (1861-1938) was a genius physicist born in Fleurier, Switzerland, who completed his studies in Neuchâtel before obtaining an engineering degree from the Federal Polytechnic School in Zurich. Guillaume joined the International Bureau of Weights and Measures in Paris in 1883, where he worked for 53 years and became its director for 17 years until 1936. Guillaume's work on the alloys of iron, chromium, and nickel led to the discovery of Invar, a substance with almost zero expansion coefficient over a wide temperature range, and Elinvar, a substance with a constant Young's modulus between - 50° and + 100°, which is suitable for the construction of watch springs, tuning forks, springs for seismographs, and more. Guillaume received numerous awards and honors, including the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1920. He retired in 1936 and passed away in 1938 after a long illness.
Find a Grave
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 5 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/ceremony-speech/
|
en
|
Nobel Prize in Physics 1920
|
[
"https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2023/10/nobelprizes_2023-1024x676.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/wp-content/themes/nobelprize/assets/images/spinner.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920 was awarded to Charles Edouard Guillaume "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys"
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/ceremony-speech/
|
Award ceremony speech
Presentation Speech by Dr. A.G. Ekstrand, President of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, on December 10, 1920
Your Majesty, Your Royal Highnesses, Ladies and Gentlemen.
The Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the Nobel Prize for Physics 1920 to Ch.E. Guillaume, Director of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, for the services he has rendered to the physical precision technique by his discovery of the properties of nickel steel.
One of Greece’s greatest thinkers said that “things are numbers” and attempted to explain the origin of everything by numbers. The scientists of today do not take the cult of numbers to quite that extent; yet they recognize nevertheless that every exact knowledge of Nature begins only when we succeed in expressing the phenomena in measures and weights. The development of science has always been in step with the progress in measuring precision. This applies to astronomy, geodesy, chemistry and above all to physics, the special growth of which dates from the time when modern precision began to be applied in observations.
This was the point which had been grasped by the French National Assembly when, in 1790, it instructed the Academy of Sciences of Paris to lay down an invariable base for weights and measures. A committee was set up for that purpose, consisting of Borda, Lagrange, Laplace, Monge and Condorcet, and on their suggestion the National Assembly adopted a decimal system based on a certain part of a quadrant of the Earth’s meridian. Thus the principle of the metric system was introduced into France which was then established by a law passed by the Convention held on August 1, 1793.
In the other countries progress was slower. It was not until after a few decades that people in Europe began to realize the advantages of the metric system and that mainly because of the large international exhibitions. During the 1867 international exhibition in Paris a committee was formed by most of the countries represented at the exhibition with a view to preparing the adoption of a single international system for weights and measures. The proposal to that effect, approved by the emperor on September 1, 1869, was submitted to all the states and thus was subsequently founded the International Bureau of Weights and Measures at Breteuil, near Paris.
It was the French nation which not only conceived the idea of this great reform, but which, by its diplomatic skill, was also able to bring about its adoption in the whole civilized world; on this account, therefore, mankind owes France a great debt of gratitude.
All the copies of the standard metre and the standard kilogramme intended for the various countries are meticulously examined and compared in this International Bureau, the head of which, Charles-Edouard Guillaume, is undeniably the foremost metrologist of today. By devoting his entire life to the service of science, this scientist has made a powerful contribution to the progress of the metric system; during his long and painstaking studies he discovered a metal with the most excellent metrological properties. That is the discovery which the Swedish Academy of Sciences has sought to reward by conferring this year’s Nobel Prize for Physics, since the discovery is of great significance for the precision of scientific measurements and thereby even for the development of science in general.
Actually the mere fact of possessing an international system for weights and measures and an International Bureau for the application of that system had not done away with the difficulties entailed in each measuring or weighing operation unless it is possible to achieve here the maximum precision. With measurements of length in particular the chief source of errors was dependent on temperature as a result of the well-known property of materials to change their volume with variations in temperature.
It was thus basic to examine with the greatest precision the expansibility of all metals and alloys under the action of heat. During these delicate examinations, and particularly while studying the properties of certain types of steel, Guillaume hit on the apparently paradoxical idea that it should be possible to produce an alloy free from this universal property of materials to change their volume at various temperatures. The long and difficult experiments performed by Guillaume year after year on numerous alloys and above all on nickel steel to determine their expansibility, elasticity, hardness, changeability with age, and stability ultimately led him to the important discovery of the nickel steel alloy known as invar, the temperature coefficient of which is practically zero.
These studies and discoveries by Guillaume have continued to give rise to new and significant practical applications. Instances are the use of invar in the design of physical instruments, and especially in geodesy where Guillaume’s discovery has completely transformed the methods of measuring base lines; nickel steel has also supplanted platinum in the manufacture of incandescent lamps and on the basis of the current price of platinum this represents an annual saving of twenty million francs; lastly chronometry is indebted to Guillaume’s discoveries and investigations for a new refinement – the use of the new alloys enables watches to be adjusted more accurately and at less cost than formerly.
From the theoretical standpoint, too, Guillaume’s penetrating and systematic studies on the properties of nickel steel have had the greatest significance because they have confirmed Le Chatelier’s allotropic theory for binary and ternary alloys. He has thus made an important contribution to our knowledge of the composition of solid matter.
In consideration of the great importance of Mr. Guillaume’s work for precision metrology and thus for the development of all modern science and engineering, the Swedish Academy of Sciences has awarded this year’s Nobel Prize for Physics to Charles-Edouard Guillaume in recognition of the services which he has rendered to the physical precision technique by his discovery of the properties of nickel steel.
Monsieur Guillaume. By your persevering studies in thermometry you have deserved well of physics and chemistry; but you have gained your scientific laurels mainly in a different sector. By your studies of metal alloys and their sensitivity to temperature influences, you established that a few of those alloys possess remarkable properties; some scarcely expand on heating which suggested to you the idea of making them into measuring standards. One of the nickel steel alloys in particular, the one containing thirty-six per cent nickel, you considered to fulfil the necessary conditions. Since it is almost invariable under the action of heat and under other influences, you have called it invar. Its potential benefit to science for the construction of standards and of various instruments can readily be appreciated. In geodesy, invar wires give much more accurate base-line values than those formerly obtained.
On behalf of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, I congratulate you on your studies and on your discoveries which have been of the greatest utility and for that very reason deemed worthy of the Nobel Prize. I would now ask you to receive the prize from the hands of His Majesty the King who has been pleased to make the presentation to you.
From Nobel Lectures, Physics 1901-1921, Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1967
Copyright © The Nobel Foundation 1920
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 34 |
http://almaz.com/nobel/physics/1920a.html
|
en
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume Winner of the 1920 Nobel Prize in Physics
|
[
"http://almaz.com/nobel/physics/images/ruler.gif",
"http://www.google.com/logos/Logo_40wht.gif",
"http://almaz.com/nobel/images/addlink.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"Nobel",
"archive",
"Nobel Prize",
"literature",
"physics",
"chemistry",
"peace",
"medicine",
"physiology",
"economics",
"winner",
"Java",
"prize",
"prizes",
"award",
"awards",
"Charles Edouard Guillaume"
] | null |
[] | null |
Charles Edouard Guillaume, a Nobel Prize Laureate in Physics, at the Nobel Prize Internet Archive.
| null | ||||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 61 |
https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/en/jsh-archives-nobel-prize-winner-guillaume-1st-ssc-honorary-member/
|
en
|
JSH Archives: Nobel Prize winner Guillaume, 1st SSC honorary member
|
[
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/swiss-watch-passport-logo.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/cropped-swiss-watch-passport-favicon.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/plugins/sitepress-multilingual-cms/res/flags/en.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/plugins/sitepress-multilingual-cms/res/flags/fr.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/plugins/sitepress-multilingual-cms/res/flags/en.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/plugins/sitepress-multilingual-cms/res/flags/fr.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/03_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport_athenee-palais-geneve_005-1320x881-copie-600x380.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Athenee-Palais-Geneve_320x880.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/02_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-JSH-Dec-1924-La-Une-copie.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3f/1918_Charles_%C3%89douard_Guillaume.jpg/220px-1918_Charles_%C3%89douard_Guillaume.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/03_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Charles-Edouad-Guillaume_Nobel-1920.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/01_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Palais-de-l-Athenee-JSH-1924-copie.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport_.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/05_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Distribution-Congres-copie-1-scaled.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/04_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-SSC_Cover-Hors-Serie-copie-scaled.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/00_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Coutellerie-Halles-Cout-horlogerie-300x201.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/00_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-LVMH-Frederic-Arnault_©Ludovic-Marin_AFP-1-300x191.png",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/05_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Dufour-Fondation-Scaner-Hopital-Vallee-de-Joux-Famille-DSC02830-scaled-e1720703665266-300x188.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/00_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-Tekitoi-marco_tedeschi-selfie2-230x300.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/01b_JSH-Swiss-Watch-Passport-concepto-BUGATTI-World-Premiere-Presskit-Images-32-scaled-e1720722810763-300x188.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/01_JSH-02-MOM-Le-Cadran-tranche-scaled-e1591960710478.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/01_JSH-Printemps-2020-Cover-LR-scaled.jpg",
"https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/swiss-watch-passport-logo.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"✍ Joel A. Grandjean",
"www.facebook.com",
"joel.grandjean"
] |
2024-01-13T16:32:10+00:00
|
en
|
Watch Passports by JSH®
|
https://swiss-watch-passport.ch/en/jsh-archives-nobel-prize-winner-guillaume-1st-ssc-honorary-member/
| |||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 78 |
https://scite.ai/reports/an-unusual-nobel-prize-ewjl8Y
|
en
|
[citation report] An unusual Nobel Prize
|
http://image.thum.io/get/ogImage/https://scite.ai/reports/an-unusual-nobel-prize-ewjl8Y?bannerClosed=true&onboardingOff=true&paywallOff=true&v=2
|
http://image.thum.io/get/ogImage/https://scite.ai/reports/an-unusual-nobel-prize-ewjl8Y?bannerClosed=true&onboardingOff=true&paywallOff=true&v=2
|
[
"https://cdn.scite.ai/assets/images/logo.svg",
"https://cdn.scite.ai/assets/images/logo.svg",
"https://cdn.scite.ai/assets/images/logo.svg",
"https://cdn.scite.ai/assets/images/logo.svg",
"https://cdn.scite.ai/assets/images/icons/reports/download-csv.svg",
"https://cdn.scite.ai/assets/images/icons/citations-icon.svg",
"https://cdn.scite.ai/assets/images/icons/references-icon.svg",
"https://cdn.scite.ai/assets/images/logo.svg",
"https://cdn.scite.ai/assets/images/Logo_RS_Dark-cropped.svg",
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=927411631440706&ev=PageView&noscript=1"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Robert W. Cahn",
"Robert W"
] | null |
Mentioning: 6 - Summary
C.-E. Guillaume received the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1920 for the discovery and development of a pair of alloys that had characteristics invariant with temperature: one had constant length near ambient temperature, the other had constant Young's modulus. A recent analysis expresses retrospective surprise at this award: the objective of this short paper is to justify the award retrospectively, in terms of the continuing and impressive consequences of Guillaume's discoveries.
|
en
|
https://cdn.scite.ai/assets/images/favicon.ico
|
scite.ai
|
https://scite.ai/reports/an-unusual-nobel-prize-ewjl8Y
|
The first Elinvar alloy, FeNiCr, which has invariant elastic modulus over a wide temperature range, was discovered almost 100 years ago by Guillaume. The physical origin of such an anomaly has been attributed to the magnetic phase transition taking place in the system. However, the recent discovery of non-magnetic Elinvar such as multi-functional β-type Ti alloys has imposed a new challenge to the existing theories. In this study we show that random field from stress-carrying defects could suppress the sharp first-order martensitic transformation into a continuous strain glass transition, leading to continued formation and confined growth of nano-domains of martensite in a broad temperature range. Accompanying such a unique transition, there is a gradual softening of the elastic modulus over a wide temperature range, which compensates the normal modulus hardening due to anharmonic atomic vibration, resulting in a low and temperature-independent elastic modulus. The abundance of austenite/martensite interfaces are found responsible for the low elastic modulus.
|
||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 63 |
en
|
File:Guillaume 1920.jpg
|
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Guillaume_1920.jpg?20100905232142",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/PD-icon.svg/64px-PD-icon.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6e/Dialog-warning.svg/25px-Dialog-warning.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/Flag_of_Sweden.svg/80px-Flag_of_Sweden.svg.png",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/Guillaume_1920.jpg/85px-Guillaume_1920.jpg?20100905232142",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/archive/5/51/20100905232141%21Guillaume_1920.jpg/85px-Guillaume_1920.jpg",
"https://login.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAutoLogin/start?type=1x1",
"https://commons.wikimedia.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.svg",
"https://commons.wikimedia.org/static/images/footer/poweredby_mediawiki.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/static/apple-touch/commons.png
|
This Swedish photograph is in the public domain in Sweden because one of the following applies:
The photograph does not reach the Swedish threshold of originality (common for snapshots and journalistic photos) and was created before 1 January 1974 (SFS 1960:729, § 49a).
The photograph was published anonymously before 1 January 1954 and the author did not reveal their identity during the following 70 years (SFS 1960:729, § 44).
For photos in the first category created before 1969, also {{PD-1996}} usually applies. For photos in the second category published before 1929, also {{PD-US-expired}} usually applies.
If the photographer died before 1954, {{PD-old-70}} should be used instead of this tag. If the author died before 1926, also {{PD-1996}} usually applies.
You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States. Note that a few countries have copyright terms longer than 70 years: Mexico has 100 years, Jamaica has 95 years, Colombia has 80 years, and Guatemala and Samoa have 75 years. This image may not be in the public domain in these countries, which moreover do not implement the rule of the shorter term. Honduras has a general copyright term of 75 years, but it does implement the rule of the shorter term. Copyright may extend on works created by French who died for France in World War II (more information), Russians who served in the Eastern Front of World War II (known as the Great Patriotic War in Russia) and posthumously rehabilitated victims of Soviet repressions (more information).
|
||||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 0 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/guillaume/facts/
|
en
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume – Facts
|
[
"https://www.nobelprize.org/images/guillaume-12918-portrait-medium.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2023/10/nobelprizes_2023-1024x676.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/wp-content/themes/nobelprize/assets/images/spinner.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920 was awarded to Charles Edouard Guillaume "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys"
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/guillaume/facts/
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920
Affiliation at the time of the award: Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (International Bureau of Weights and Measures), Sèvres, France
Prize motivation: “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”
Prize share: 1/1
Work
Precise measurement plays an important role in science. To provide a basis for precise measurements, the metric system and a German legal meter were instituted to define lengths. However, different materials expand differently when temperatures change, which limits the ability to make very precise measurements. In 1896 Charles-Edouard Guillaume succeeded in finding an alloy of nickel and steel that registered almost no change in length and volume as a result of temperature changes. The invar nickel-steel alloy had a significant effect on scientific instruments and incandescent light bulbs.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 75 |
https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/einstein-vs-the-nobel-prize
|
en
|
Einstein vs. the Nobel Prize
|
[
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/globalAssets/DSC_white_small.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/facebook.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/instagram.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/twitter.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/youtube.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/soundcloud.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/rss.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Virginia Hughes"
] |
2006-09-28T05:00:00+00:00
|
Why the Nobel Committee repeatedly dissed this "world-bluffing Jewish physicist"
|
en
|
/assets/favicon/favicon16.png
|
Discover Magazine
|
https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/einstein-vs-the-nobel-prize
|
When Albert Einstein listed the most important honors of his life, he began with the German Physical Society's Max Planck Medal, named for a physicist he revered. He went on from there to list the prizes and honorary doctorate degrees awarded him in many nations. Conspicuously absent was the plaudit with the highest profile and payout: the Nobel Prize. But in context this omission isn't so surprising. The Nobel nod—17 years after Einstein published his special theory of relativity—came long after recognition by the physics world and even the general public. Even more bizarre, the prize was awarded to Einstein not for his relativity revolution, but for the comparatively obscure discovery of the photoelectric effect. Why? After years of sifting through letters and diaries of the Scandinavian archives, science historian Robert Marc Friedman says it was an intentional snub fueled by the biases of the day—a prejudice against pacifists, Jews, and, most of all, theoretical physics.
In 1905, while working as a patent clerk in Switzerland, 26-year-old Albert Einstein published five seminal papers on the nature of space, light, and motion. One paper introduced the special theory of relativity, which dramatically broke with Newton's universally accepted description of how physics worked. Special relativity did away with the notion of absolute space and time—Einstein said they were instead "relative" to the observer's conditions—effectively flipping the Newtonian model on its apple-bruised head. In 1915, Einstein expanded the theory by incorporating gravity: it was not just a force of attraction between bodies, he said, but the result of distortions in space itself. This new, more robust version was called the theory of general relativity.
Today, general relativity is celebrated as Einstein's most impressive work. But as Friedman wrote in his 2001 book, The Politics of Excellence, in post-War Germany Einstein was despised as a pacifist Jew who renounced his German citizenship, went to meetings of radical groups, and publicly supported socialism. His theories were dismissed as "world-bluffing Jewish physics" by some prominent German physicists, who claimed to practice "true" German science based on observations of the natural world and hypotheses that could be tested in a laboratory.
Luckily for Einstein, British astronomer Arthur Stanley Eddington believed there was a way to test the general theory. If massive objects curved space itself, as Einstein proposed, then they should bend nearby rays of light, as well. During six minutes of a total solar eclipse on May 29, 1919, Eddington measured the positions of stars that appeared next to the blotted-out sun. Sure enough, they followed the predictions of Einstein's general theory.
Eddington revealed the results of his eclipse experiment on November 6, and Einstein became a household name throughout the world practically overnight—literally overnight in some places; the next day, the London Times ran the headline, "Revolution in Science, New Theory of the Universe." Within a month, the news traveled through the American press; a New York Times headline declared, "Given the Speed, Time Is Naught."
The nominations for Einstein that poured into the laps of the Nobel Committee members as they were reviewing candidates for the 1920 prize were not exactly well received. The committee did not want a "political and intellectual radical, who—it was said—did not conduct experiments, crowned as the pinnacle of physics," says Friedman. So the 1920 prize was given to the Swiss Charles-Edouard Guillaume for his ho-hum discovery of an inert nickel-steel alloy. When the announcement was made, Friedman says the previously unknown Guillaume "was as surprised as the rest of the world."
By the next year, "Einstein-mania" was in full bloom. During his first trip to the United States he gave many public lectures on relativity, and received the prestigious Barnard Medal from the National Academy of Sciences. After one particularly crowded lecture at Princeton, legend has it that Einstein said wryly to the chairman, "I never realized that so many Americans were interested in tensor analysis."
As his quirky personality and untamed tresses gained more popularity with the general public, his momentous theory gained more credibility in the scientific community. In 1921, swarms of both theoreticians and experimentalists again nominated Einstein for his work on relativity. Reporters kept asking him, to his great annoyance, if this would be the year that he received a Nobel Prize.
But 1921 was not the year, thanks to one stubborn senior member of the prize committee, ophthalmologist Allvar Gullstrand. "Einstein must never receive a Nobel Prize, even if the whole world demands it," said Gullstrand, according to a Swedish mathematician's diary dug up by Friedman. Gullstrand's arguments, however biased, convinced the rest of the committee. In 1921, the Swedish Academy of Sciences awarded no physics prize.
Two prizes were thus available in 1922. By this time, Einstein's popularity was so great that many members of the committee feared for their international reputations if they didn't recognize him in some way. As in the previous two years, Einstein received many nominations for his relativity theory. But this year there was one nomination—from Carl Wilhelm Oseen—not for relativity, but for the discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect. In another of his 1905 papers, Einstein had proposed that light, which had been thought to act only as a wave, sometimes acted as a particle—and laboratory experiments conducted in 1916 showed he was right.
In his exhaustive research, Friedman realized that Oseen lobbied the committee to recognize the photoelectric effect not as a "theory," but as a fundamental "law" of nature–not because he cared about recognizing Einstein, but because he had another theoretical physicist in mind for that second available prize: Niels Bohr. Bohr had proposed a new quantum theory of the atom that Oseen felt was "the most beautiful of all the beautiful" ideas in recent theoretical physics. In his report to the committee, Oseen exaggerated the close bond between Einstein's proven law of nature and Bohr's new atom. "In one brilliant stroke," Friedman says, "he saw how to meet the objections against both Einstein and Bohr."
The committee was indeed won over. On November 10, 1922, they gave the 1922 prize to Bohr and the delayed 1921 prize to Einstein, "especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect." Einstein, en route to Japan (and perhaps huffy after the committee's long delay) did not attend the official ceremony. According to Friedman, Einstein didn't care much about the medal, anyway, though he did care about the money. As the German mark decreased in value after the war, Einstein needed a hard foreign currency for alimony payments to his ex-wife. Moreover, under the terms of his 1919 divorce settlement, she was already entitled to all the money "from an eventual Nobel Prize." Bruce Hunt, an Einstein historian at the University of Texas at Austin, says that calling attention to these financial arrangements "brings out the fact that Einstein was a much more worldly and savvy man than his later public image would suggest."
Of course, Einstein isn't the only player who emerges as being not quite angelic. "The decisions of the Nobel Committees are often treated by the press and public as the voice of god," Hunt says. But Friedman's research brought to light "how political the deliberations of the Nobel Committees sometimes were—and presumably still are."
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 20 |
https://www.phillips.com/article/145337269/guillaume-balance-wheel-what-is-bimetallic-pocket-watch-patek-philippe-kari-voutilainen
|
en
|
The Remarkable History of the Guillaume Balance
|
[
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=315233648948652&ev=PageView&noscript=1",
"https://flockler.com/thumbs/sites/889/202655_002-b0038d8f-9504-4378-a7ed-d050e9056726_s600x0_c1708x999_l337x3.jpeg",
"https://flockler.com/thumbs/sites/889/202659_005-af2445a5-46c2-498f-8205-e50b5f6ae2a9_s600x0_q80_noupscale.jpeg",
"https://flockler.com/thumbs/sites/889/201230_004-8bd7b9a5-9581-4651-9956-80bf274b081b_s600x0_q80_noupscale.jpeg",
"https://flockler.com/thumbs/sites/889/202655_001-985bdd56-2435-4d60-99f5-38674f841368_s600x0_q80_noupscale.jpeg",
"https://flockler.com/thumbs/sites/889/202659_002-2d9c02c7-92d4-4fdb-9ff9-d19320a421a2_s600x0_q80_noupscale.jpeg",
"https://flockler.com/thumbs/sites/889/201230_006-73d7383d-0423-4d5e-a2e6-1da004ab57f3_s600x0_q80_noupscale.jpeg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Phillips is synonymous with contemporary culture. As the most forward-looking of the international auction houses, we have set ourselves apart through our focus on the defining aesthetic movements of the 20th century as well as today's most cutting-edge art. Headquartered in New York and London, with offices throughout the world, Phillips conducts sales in a select number of categories: Contemporary Art, Photographs, Editions, Design and Jewelry. Additionally, our core art business includes curating exhibitions, brokering private sales, advising estates and corporate clients and consulting with private individuals on the management of their collections. Accordingly, Phillips boutique, ‘white glove’ service best positions our firm to provide superior counsel to new and seasoned collectors alike.
|
en
|
/Content/images/phillipsdepury.ico
|
Phillips
|
https://www.phillips.com/article/145337269/guillaume-balance-wheel-what-is-bimetallic-pocket-watch-patek-philippe-kari-voutilainen
|
The PHILLIPS New York Watch Auction: X, takes place on June 8 and 9, 2024, at our Park Avenue headquarters. The auction includes more than 150 of the world's finest watches – and though we are loath to boast, we truly think it's one of the best catalogs we've ever put together. We'll be highlighting a number of the most interesting lots and stories featured in the sale right here, including the three timepieces with Guillaume balances featured below.
– By Logan Baker
Only one Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to an individual directly associated with watchmaking: Charles Édouard Guillaume, who was awarded the 1920 Nobel Prize in Physics for his work discovering how anomalies in nickel-iron alloys could enable more precise measurement instruments.
The three alloys discovered by Guillaume – invar, elinvar, and platinite – found a variety of applications, including thermostats, but the most relevant for our purposes is the so-called Guillaume balance, arguably one of the most important horological developments of the early 20th century.
Charles-Édouard Guillaume was born in Val-de-Travers, Switzerland, on February 15, 1861. His father was a watchmaker. and Guillaume maintained close ties to the Swiss watch industry throughout his life. Guillaume spent 53 years working for the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, where in the late 1890s he first observed the unique properties of invar, elinvar, and platinite.
Temperature is a natural foe to physical measurement. Sudden temperature changes cause most materials to expand or contract, impacting precision. But Invar offered a near zero coefficient of thermal expansion, and elinvar had almost no elasticity ratio, which meant any object would experience only microscopic change in size from heat and cold.
Remembering his father's work as a watchmaker, Guillaume developed a compensated invar rod pendulum which set him on the road to the first compensating spring made of an iron-nickel alloy with 28 percent nickel (a Paul Perret spring).
After publishing the inaugural results on his work with invar, a watchmaker named Paul Perret contacted Guillaume to ask for an invar sample. Assisted by the engineer Marc Thury (who is said to have suggested the name "invar"), Perret discovered that invar had a coefficient of thermal expansion that was near zero.
In 1899, Guillaume identified that his nickel-iron alloy experiments could solve the horological problem known as watchmaking's "Secondary Error."
A material's temperature coefficient identifies the daily error range caused by an increase or decrease in the material's surrounding temperature. A coefficient of 0.1, for instance, indicates a gain of 0.1 seconds for every single degree rise in temperature per day.
The Secondary Error in watchmaking is determined by observing a timepiece's precision in at a pair of high and low temperatures, so that the fluctuations in isochronism, due to the temperature coefficiency of the watch’s components, can be noted and compared to reveal the anticipated effects of temperature variation on timekeeping. The timepiece's precision is then tested one final time at the average temperature between the high and low temperatures; the difference between the real value and the expected value is your Secondary Error, expressed as a gain or a loss.
Guillaume realized his nickel-iron alloys could effectively solve the problem of the Secondary Error due to their remarkable temperature coefficient.
After developing a slight variation of the invar alloy with a negative quadratic coefficient of expansion, he contacted a pair of external watchmakers to test his theory: Paul-D. Nardin, in Le Locle, and Paul Ditisheim, in La Chaux-de-Fonds. Their tests quickly proved Guillaume's theory as correct – the secondary error had been completely eliminated in timepieces with nick-iron balances. The first official results were then presented at the Neuchâtel Observatory in front of the legendary Adolphe Hirsch.
Then, in 1912, Guillaume had another thought: What if his nickel-iron alloy was combined with a metal such as manganese or chromium. His hypothesis being that this would allow for total compensation of the regulating organ, resulting in the construction of his monometallic balance using the new alloy of elinvar (invariable elasticity).
Zenith was the first watchmaker to utilize the elinvar spring, inside a chronograph produced in 1916. And four years later, Guillaume's discovery and application of invar and elinvar would be honored with recognition from the Swiss Academy of Sciences, in addition to the prestigious Nobel Prize in Physics.
With invar and elinvar, Charles-Édouard Guillaume brought major progress to horology: thanks to the Guillaume balance, the rate discrepancies of marine and on-board chronometers are reduced to one tenth of a second. The invar pendulum that controls the beatings of astronomical clocks provides an accuracy in the order of one hundredth of a second.
Guillaume balances can mostly be found in Observatory competition-grade pocket watch movements produced in the early 20th century. Patek Philippe, Ulysse Nardin, Zenith, and numerous other makers adopted their application for use in their most precise timekeeping instruments.
Three remarkable timepieces available in the upcoming Phillips New York Watch Auction: X contain a Guillaume balance: lot 26, a 1912 Patek Philippe pocket watch with an "Extra"-grade movement that was awarded "Honourable Mention" at the 1915-1916 edition of the Geneva Astronomical Observatory Timing Contest; lot 28, a 1913 Patek Philippe pocket watch with an "Extra Special"-grade movement, originally made for Henry Graves Jr.; and lot 29, a truly incredible, oversized 1915 Ulysse Nardin split-seconds chronograph wristwatch.
You might also recall that the 2022 Zenith × Kari Voutilainen × Phillips in Association with Bacs & Russo Calibre 135 Observatoire Limited Edition wristwatch featured a vintage Zenith Observatory-grade movement fitted with a Guillaume balance, as well.
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 39 |
https://johnmarkmorris.com/2020/08/08/revisiting-nobel-prize-research/
|
en
|
Revisiting Nobel Prize Research
|
[
"https://johnmarkmorris.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/icantgetnoonefoundation1.png?w=1024",
"https://johnmarkmorris.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/3e4c4021-4861-4bd0-998a-9385ab25a7bf.jpeg?w=50",
"https://johnmarkmorris.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/3e4c4021-4861-4bd0-998a-9385ab25a7bf.jpeg?w=50",
"https://pixel.wp.com/b.gif?v=noscript"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2020-08-08T00:00:00
|
I have been considering writing this post for over a year. I have mixed feelings about revisiting the Nobel prizes in physics with the knowledge of NPQG in hand. Let's go through the set of conflicting thoughts that run through my mind. The Nobel Prize is considered the highest award in physics (and other fields)…
|
en
|
Emergent Universe
|
https://johnmarkmorris.com/2020/08/08/revisiting-nobel-prize-research/
|
I have been considering writing this post for over a year. I have mixed feelings about revisiting the Nobel prizes in physics with the knowledge of NPQG in hand. Let’s go through the set of conflicting thoughts that run through my mind.
The Nobel Prize is considered the highest award in physics (and other fields) and the award and winners are generally held in high esteem.
Modern day criticism of the Nobel Prize concept resonates with me, specifically that it reinforces the power and competition hierarchy of academic physics which has been and still is dominated by a non-diverse group and which leads to unhealthy behaviour in the physics community.
I don’t wish to tarnish the past prize in the eyes of the public, the scientific community, nor the recipients. However, science marches onward. It is inevitable that if a paradigm shift occurs in a field, that many of the past results, while possibly fine work in their era, are rendered incorrect, obsolete, or misinterpretations by the science of the new era.
It is important for science historians to understand and document the errors in thinking and faulty methods of prior eras and why those eras advocated incorrect narratives that deviated to a large degree from the ground truth of nature. While I am not a science historian, I have studied the history of physics, cosmology, and astronomy in order to fathom the errors and misinterpretations that have blinded these fields to solutions that are rather painfully obvious in retrospect.
Under the fair use doctrine, I have copied the text of the All Nobel Prizes in Physics page from the Nobel Prize website. I’ve kept the links intact to the annual prize and winner pages. I will add my comments in red font if NPQG has a material impact on the science that led to the prize and green font if NPQG impact is none to minimal. Where I use an orange font, NPQG will have a material impact to the area, but it is unknown if it will impact the research for which the prize was awarded. If there is no comment after a prize winner section then either I have not found a serious NPQG impact to that research or I have not yet evaluated it.
NPQG will undoubtedly have a degree of impact on all science of standard matter-energy in spacetime æther going forward. However, prior work may be minimally impacted at its scale of reference. I’ll use the symbol 𝛿NPQG to indicate Nobel prizes where there may be minor deltas or reframing needed in the context of NPQG and often this is with respect to the fundamental narratives of GR/QM/ΛCDM.
The first version of this post will be a quick pass through, based simply on the high level description of the research for which the prize was awarded. In the future, I may come back and revisit some of these in more detail.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020
The 2020 Nobel Prize in Physics has not been awarded yet. It will be announced on Tuesday 6 October, 11:45 CEST at the earliest.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2019
“for contributions to our understanding of the evolution of the universe and Earth’s place in the cosmos”
James Peebles “for theoretical discoveries in physical cosmology”
Dr. Peebles work on ΛCDM cosmology occurred during an era where a fundamental narrative misconception has been in place – specifically the physical implementation of the Big Bang, inflation, and expansion as whole universe concepts (LeMaitre rewind to a single event). NPQG teaches that these concepts are all galaxy local and this resolves a number of tensions in cosmology that had largely been discounted by scientists, including the Hubble rate and the age of the universe relative to other processes. Presumably much of Dr. Peebles work can be mapped over to the galaxy local processes.
Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz “for the discovery of an exoplanet orbiting a solar-type star”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2018
“for groundbreaking inventions in the field of laser physics”
Arthur Ashkin “for the optical tweezers and their application to biological systems”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino), nor of the composite electrino/positrino structure of the photon.
Gérard Mourou and Donna Strickland “for their method of generating high-intensity, ultra-short optical pulses”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck particles (electrino and positrino), nor of the composite electrino/positrino structure of the photon.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2017
Rainer Weiss, Barry C. Barish and Kip S. Thorne “for decisive contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves”
I suspect that NPQG will inform gravitational wave science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino), nor of galaxy local recycling as the dominant large process in the universe.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2016
David J. Thouless, F. Duncan M. Haldane and J. Michael Kosterlitz “for theoretical discoveries of topological phase transitions and topological phases of matter”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2015
Takaaki Kajita and Arthur B. McDonald “for the discovery of neutrino oscillations, which shows that neutrinos have mass”
I suspect that NPQG will inform neutrino science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino).
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2014
Isamu Akasaki, Hiroshi Amano and Shuji Nakamura “for the invention of efficient blue light-emitting diodes which has enabled bright and energy-saving white light sources”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2013
François Englert and Peter W. Higgs “for the theoretical discovery of a mechanism that contributes to our understanding of the origin of mass of subatomic particles, and which recently was confirmed through the discovery of the predicted fundamental particle, by the ATLAS and CMS experiments at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider”
I suspect that NPQG will inform particle physics and Higgs research to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino).
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2012
Serge Haroche and David J. Wineland“for ground-breaking experimental methods that enable measuring and manipulation of individual quantum systems”
I suspect that NPQG will inform particle physics and quantum research to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino), nor composite particles of standard matter, nor does quantum mechanics understand uncertainty properly.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2011
Saul Perlmutter, Brian P. Schmidt and Adam G. Riess“for the discovery of the accelerating expansion of the Universe through observations of distant supernovae”
This work on ΛCDM cosmology has been during an era where a fundamental narrative misconception has been in place – specifically the physical implementation of the Big Bang, inflation, and expansion as whole universe concepts (LeMaitre rewind to a single event). NPQG teaches that these concepts are all galaxy local and this resolves a number of tensions in cosmology that had largely been discounted by scientists, including the Hubble rate and the age of the universe relative to other processes. The discrepancy between Supernovae distance calculations, redshift, and directional Hubble rate will need to be re-evaluted in the context of NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2010
Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov “for groundbreaking experiments regarding the two-dimensional material graphene”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2009
Charles Kuen Kao“for groundbreaking achievements concerning the transmission of light in fibers for optical communication”
𝛿NPQG
Willard S. Boyle and George E. Smith“for the invention of an imaging semiconductor circuit – the CCD sensor”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2008
Yoichiro Nambu “for the discovery of the mechanism of spontaneous broken symmetry in subatomic physics”
I suspect that NPQG the understanding of symmetries of nature and symmetry breaking will gain new insights as a result of NPQG and the Planck scale point charge basis of nature.
Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa “for the discovery of the origin of the broken symmetry which predicts the existence of at least three families of quarks in nature”
I suspect that NPQG the understanding of symmetries of nature and symmetry breaking will gain new insights as a result of NPQG and the Planck scale point charges basis of nature.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2007
Albert Fert and Peter Grünberg“for the discovery of Giant Magnetoresistance”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2006
John C. Mather and George F. Smoot“for their discovery of the blackbody form and anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background radiation”
This work on ΛCDM cosmology has been during an era where a fundamental narrative misconception has been in place – specifically the physical implementation of the Big Bang, inflation, and expansion as whole universe concepts (LeMaitre rewind to a single event). NPQG teaches that these concepts are all galaxy local and this resolves a number of tensions in cosmology that had largely been discounted by scientists, including the Hubble rate and the age of the universe relative to other processes. The multi-peaked power spectrum of the CMB background may be related to the composite of several black body spectra for constituent particles of space time æther.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2005
Roy J. Glauber“for his contribution to the quantum theory of optical coherence”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck particles (electrino and positrino), nor of the composite electrino/positrino structure of the photon.
John L. Hall and Theodor W. Hänsch“for their contributions to the development of laser-based precision spectroscopy, including the optical frequency comb technique”
𝛿NPQG
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2004
David J. Gross, H. David Politzer and Frank Wilczek “for the discovery of asymptotic freedom in the theory of the strong interaction”
NPQG teaches that the UV divergence, IR divergence, renormalization, and asymptotic freedom are related to the immutability of the Planck scale point charges from whence the universe emerges.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2003
Alexei A. Abrikosov, Vitaly L. Ginzburg and Anthony J. Leggett “for pioneering contributions to the theory of superconductors and superfluids”
𝛿NPQG. I would expect rapid advancement in this research area once informed by NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2002
Raymond Davis Jr. and Masatoshi Koshiba “for pioneering contributions to astrophysics, in particular for the detection of cosmic neutrinos”
I suspect that NPQG will inform neutrino science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino).
Riccardo Giacconi “for pioneering contributions to astrophysics, which have led to the discovery of cosmic X-ray sources”
I suspect that NPQG will inform astronomy to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of the Euclidean background space of the universe and the corresponding Map 1 equations where observers in Euclidean space would see a variable speed of photons in the spacetime æther which we describe by Map 2 which has Riemannian geometry at all but the smallest scales.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2001
Eric A. Cornell, Wolfgang Ketterle and Carl E. Wieman “for the achievement of Bose-Einstein condensation in dilute gases of alkali atoms, and for early fundamental studies of the properties of the condensates”
𝛿NPQG. I would expect rapid advancement in this research area once informed by NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2000
“for basic work on information and communication technology”
Zhores I. Alferov and Herbert Kroemer“for developing semiconductor heterostructures used in high-speed- and opto-electronics”
𝛿NPQG.
Jack S. Kilby “for his part in the invention of the integrated circuit”
𝛿NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1999
Gerardus ‘t Hooft and Martinus J.G. Veltman “for elucidating the quantum structure of electroweak interactions in physics”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino).
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1998
Robert B. Laughlin, Horst L. Störmer and Daniel C. Tsui “for their discovery of a new form of quantum fluid with fractionally charged excitations”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino).
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1997
Steven Chu, Claude Cohen-Tannoudji and William D. Phillips “for development of methods to cool and trap atoms with laser light”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino), nor of the composite electrino/positrino structure of the photon.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1996
David M. Lee, Douglas D. Osheroff and Robert C. Richardson “for their discovery of superfluidity in helium-3”
𝛿NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1995
“for pioneering experimental contributions to lepton physics”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino), nor of the composite electrino/positrino structure of the photon.
Martin L. Perl “for the discovery of the tau lepton”
Frederick Reines “for the detection of the neutrino”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1994
“for pioneering contributions to the development of neutron scattering techniques for studies of condensed matter”
I suspect that NPQG will inform this science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino), nor of the composite electrino/positrino structure of the photon.
Bertram N. Brockhouse“for the development of neutron spectroscopy”
Clifford G. Shull“for the development of the neutron diffraction technique”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1993
Russell A. Hulse and Joseph H. Taylor Jr. “for the discovery of a new type of pulsar, a discovery that has opened up new possibilities for the study of gravitation”
𝛿NPQG. I do imagine that this science will be greatly informed by NPQG but I do not know if it will impact this work directly.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1992
Georges Charpak “for his invention and development of particle detectors, in particular the multiwire proportional chamber”
𝛿NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1991
Pierre-Gilles de Gennes “for discovering that methods developed for studying order phenomena in simple systems can be generalized to more complex forms of matter, in particular to liquid crystals and polymers”
𝛿NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1990
Jerome I. Friedman, Henry W. Kendall and Richard E. Taylor “for their pioneering investigations concerning deep inelastic scattering of electrons on protons and bound neutrons, which have been of essential importance for the development of the quark model in particle physics”
𝛿NPQG. I do imagine that this science will be greatly informed by NPQG but I do not know if it will impact this work directly.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1989
Norman F. Ramsey “for the invention of the separated oscillatory fields method and its use in the hydrogen maser and other atomic clocks”
𝛿NPQG.
Hans G. Dehmelt and Wolfgang Paul“for the development of the ion trap technique”
𝛿NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1988
Leon M. Lederman, Melvin Schwartz and Jack Steinberger “for the neutrino beam method and the demonstration of the doublet structure of the leptons through the discovery of the muon neutrino”
I suspect that NPQG will inform neutrino science to a large degree, especially considering that prior science is not aware of spacetime æther nor of the Planck scale point charges (electrino and positrino).
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1987
J. Georg Bednorz and K. Alexander Müller“for their important break-through in the discovery of superconductivity in ceramic materials”
𝛿NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1986
Ernst Ruska“for his fundamental work in electron optics, and for the design of the first electron microscope”
𝛿NPQG.
Gerd Binnig and Heinrich Rohrer“for their design of the scanning tunneling microscope”
𝛿NPQG.
The pattern is becoming evident.
Research related to the paradoxes and open problems of physics and cosmology are highly likely to be materially impacted by NPQG.
The smaller the scale of the study domain the more likely that NPQG will have a material impact. This includes small physical scale and low energy reactions. Definitely anything involving photons. Definitely anything involving spacetime æther interactions. Certainly standard model and below. Possibly atomic and molecular research.
The larger the scale of the study domain the more likely that NPQG will have a material impact. This includes high energy scales as well as large distance scales. Impacted subjects span universe as a whole, ΛCDM cosmology, astronomy beyond our galaxy, galaxy dynamics, black holes, supermassive black holes and their jets, dark matter, dark energy, galaxy rotation curves, and high energy gravitatonal waves.
Research in-between these extremes of scale is less likely to be directly impacted by NPQG as long as the science has minimal dependency on the narrative from the extremes of scale. That said, there may be advances in these areas that will be enabled by NPQG.
Beyond this point, I’ll comment on the Nobel prizes that are significantly impacted by NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1985
Klaus von Klitzing“for the discovery of the quantized Hall effect”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1984
Carlo Rubbia and Simon van der Meer “for their decisive contributions to the large project, which led to the discovery of the field particles W and Z, communicators of weak interaction”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1983
Subramanyan Chandrasekhar “for his theoretical studies of the physical processes of importance to the structure and evolution of the stars”
William Alfred Fowler “for his theoretical and experimental studies of the nuclear reactions of importance in the formation of the chemical elements in the universe”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1982
Kenneth G. Wilson “for his theory for critical phenomena in connection with phase transitions”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1981
Nicolaas Bloembergen and Arthur Leonard Schawlow “for their contribution to the development of laser spectroscopy”
Kai M. Siegbahn “for his contribution to the development of high-resolution electron spectroscopy”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1980
James Watson Cronin and Val Logsdon Fitch “for the discovery of violations of fundamental symmetry principles in the decay of neutral K-mesons”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1979
Sheldon Lee Glashow, Abdus Salam and Steven Weinberg “for their contributions to the theory of the unified weak and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles, including, inter alia, the prediction of the weak neutral current”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1978
Pyotr Leonidovich Kapitsa “for his basic inventions and discoveries in the area of low-temperature physics”
Arno Allan Penzias and Robert Woodrow Wilson “for their discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation”
I suspect NPQG will lead to a fundamental reinterpretation of the CMB.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1977
Philip Warren Anderson, Sir Nevill Francis Mott and John Hasbrouck van Vleck “for their fundamental theoretical investigations of the electronic structure of magnetic and disordered systems”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1976
Burton Richter and Samuel Chao Chung Ting “for their pioneering work in the discovery of a heavy elementary particle of a new kind”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1975
Aage Niels Bohr, Ben Roy Mottelson and Leo James Rainwater “for the discovery of the connection between collective motion and particle motion in atomic nuclei and the development of the theory of the structure of the atomic nucleus based on this connection”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1974
Sir Martin Ryle and Antony Hewish “for their pioneering research in radio astrophysics: Ryle for his observations and inventions, in particular of the aperture synthesis technique, and Hewish for his decisive role in the discovery of pulsars”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1973
Leo Esaki and Ivar Giaever “for their experimental discoveries regarding tunneling phenomena in semiconductors and superconductors, respectively”
Brian David Josephson “for his theoretical predictions of the properties of a supercurrent through a tunnel barrier, in particular those phenomena which are generally known as the Josephson effects”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1972
John Bardeen, Leon Neil Cooper and John Robert Schrieffer “for their jointly developed theory of superconductivity, usually called the BCS-theory”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1971
Dennis Gabor “for his invention and development of the holographic method”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1970
Hannes Olof Gösta Alfvén “for fundamental work and discoveries in magnetohydro-dynamics with fruitful applications in different parts of plasma physics”
Louis Eugène Félix Néel “for fundamental work and discoveries concerning antiferromagnetism and ferrimagnetism which have led to important applications in solid state physics”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1969
Murray Gell-Mann “for his contributions and discoveries concerning the classification of elementary particles and their interactions”
NPQG will lead to a profound new understanding of composite point charge structure of standard matter and their interactions.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1968
Luis Walter Alvarez “for his decisive contributions to elementary particle physics, in particular the discovery of a large number of resonance states, made possible through his development of the technique of using hydrogen bubble chamber and data analysis”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1967
Hans Albrecht Bethe “for his contributions to the theory of nuclear reactions, especially his discoveries concerning the energy production in stars”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1966
Alfred Kastler “for the discovery and development of optical methods for studying Hertzian resonances in atoms”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1965
Sin-Itiro Tomonaga, Julian Schwinger and Richard P. Feynman “for their fundamental work in quantum electrodynamics, with deep-ploughing consequences for the physics of elementary particles”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1964
Charles Hard Townes, Nicolay Gennadiyevich Basov and Aleksandr Mikhailovich Prokhorov “for fundamental work in the field of quantum electronics, which has led to the construction of oscillators and amplifiers based on the maser-laser principle”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1963
Eugene Paul Wigner “for his contributions to the theory of the atomic nucleus and the elementary particles, particularly through the discovery and application of fundamental symmetry principles”
Maria Goeppert Mayer and J. Hans D. Jensen “for their discoveries concerning nuclear shell structure”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1962
Lev Davidovich Landau “for his pioneering theories for condensed matter, especially liquid helium”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1961
Robert Hofstadter “for his pioneering studies of electron scattering in atomic nuclei and for his thereby achieved discoveries concerning the structure of the nucleons”
Rudolf Ludwig Mössbauer “for his researches concerning the resonance absorption of gamma radiation and his discovery in this connection of the effect which bears his name”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1960
Donald Arthur Glaser “for the invention of the bubble chamber”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1959
Emilio Gino Segrè and Owen Chamberlain “for their discovery of the antiproton”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1958
Pavel Alekseyevich Cherenkov, Il´ja Mikhailovich Frank and Igor Yevgenyevich Tamm “for the discovery and the interpretation of the Cherenkov effect”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1957
Chen Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao (T.D.) Lee “for their penetrating investigation of the so-called parity laws which has led to important discoveries regarding the elementary particles”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1956
William Bradford Shockley, John Bardeen and Walter Houser Brattain “for their researches on semiconductors and their discovery of the transistor effect”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1955
Willis Eugene Lamb “for his discoveries concerning the fine structure of the hydrogen spectrum”
Polykarp Kusch “for his precision determination of the magnetic moment of the electron”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1954
Max Born “for his fundamental research in quantum mechanics, especially for his statistical interpretation of the wavefunction”
Walther Bothe “for the coincidence method and his discoveries made therewith”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1953
Frits Zernike“for his demonstration of the phase contrast method, especially for his invention of the phase contrast microscope”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1952
Felix Bloch and Edward Mills Purcell “for their development of new methods for nuclear magnetic precision measurements and discoveries in connection therewith”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1951
Sir John Douglas Cockcroft and Ernest Thomas Sinton Walton “for their pioneer work on the transmutation of atomic nuclei by artificially accelerated atomic particles”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1950
Cecil Frank Powell “for his development of the photographic method of studying nuclear processes and his discoveries regarding mesons made with this method”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1949
Hideki Yukawa “for his prediction of the existence of mesons on the basis of theoretical work on nuclear forces”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1948
Patrick Maynard Stuart Blackett “for his development of the Wilson cloud chamber method, and his discoveries therewith in the fields of nuclear physics and cosmic radiation”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1947
Sir Edward Victor Appleton “for his investigations of the physics of the upper atmosphere especially for the discovery of the so-called Appleton layer”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1946
Percy Williams Bridgman “for the invention of an apparatus to produce extremely high pressures, and for the discoveries he made therewith in the field of high pressure physics”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1945
Wolfgang Pauli “for the discovery of the Exclusion Principle, also called the Pauli Principle”
NPQG will illuminate the physical root cause for this principle.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1944
Isidor Isaac Rabi “for his resonance method for recording the magnetic properties of atomic nuclei”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1943
Otto Stern “for his contribution to the development of the molecular ray method and his discovery of the magnetic moment of the proton”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1942
No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1941
No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1940
No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1939
Ernest Orlando Lawrence “for the invention and development of the cyclotron and for results obtained with it, especially with regard to artificial radioactive elements”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1938
Enrico Fermi“for his demonstrations of the existence of new radioactive elements produced by neutron irradiation, and for his related discovery of nuclear reactions brought about by slow neutrons”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1937
Clinton Joseph Davisson and George Paget Thomson “for their experimental discovery of the diffraction of electrons by crystals”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1936
Victor Franz Hess “for his discovery of cosmic radiation”
Carl David Anderson “for his discovery of the positron”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1935
James Chadwick“for the discovery of the neutron”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1934
No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1933
Erwin Schrödinger and Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac “for the discovery of new productive forms of atomic theory”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1932
Werner Karl Heisenberg “for the creation of quantum mechanics, the application of which has, inter alia, led to the discovery of the allotropic forms of hydrogen”
NPQG has significant impact on quantum mechanics based on the knowledge of Planck scale point charges the electrino and positrino and the composite structures they form. Furthermore the spacetime æther has a huge impact on redefinition of the quantum vacuum. NPQG indentifies the correct root causes for uncertainty as well as comes down firmly on the side of EPR.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1931
No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1930
Sir Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman“for his work on the scattering of light and for the discovery of the effect named after him”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1929
Prince Louis-Victor Pierre Raymond de Broglie “for his discovery of the wave nature of electrons”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1928
Owen Willans Richardson “for his work on the thermionic phenomenon and especially for the discovery of the law named after him”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1927
Arthur Holly Compton “for his discovery of the effect named after him”
Charles Thomson Rees Wilson“for his method of making the paths of electrically charged particles visible by condensation of vapour”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1926
Jean Baptiste Perrin“for his work on the discontinuous structure of matter, and especially for his discovery of sedimentation equilibrium”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1925
James Franck and Gustav Ludwig Hertz “for their discovery of the laws governing the impact of an electron upon an atom”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1924
Karl Manne Georg Siegbahn “for his discoveries and research in the field of X-ray spectroscopy”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1923
Robert Andrews Millikan “for his work on the elementary charge of electricity and on the photoelectric effect”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1922
Niels Henrik David Bohr “for his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1921
Albert Einstein “for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect”
Note that Einstein did not receive his Nobel for his work on special or general relativity, which are both significantly impacted by NPQG.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920
Charles Edouard Guillaume “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1919
Johannes Stark “for his discovery of the Doppler effect in canal rays and the splitting of spectral lines in electric fields”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1918
Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck “in recognition of the services he rendered to the advancement of Physics by his discovery of energy quanta”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1917
Charles Glover Barkla “for his discovery of the characteristic Röntgen radiation of the elements”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1916
No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1915
Sir William Henry Bragg and William Lawrence Bragg “for their services in the analysis of crystal structure by means of X-rays”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1914
Max von Laue “for his discovery of the diffraction of X-rays by crystals”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1913
Heike Kamerlingh Onnes “for his investigations on the properties of matter at low temperatures which led, inter alia, to the production of liquid helium”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1912
Nils Gustaf Dalén “for his invention of automatic regulators for use in conjunction with gas accumulators for illuminating lighthouses and buoys”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1911
Wilhelm Wien “for his discoveries regarding the laws governing the radiation of heat”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1910
Johannes Diderik van der Waals “for his work on the equation of state for gases and liquids”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1909
Guglielmo Marconi and Karl Ferdinand Braun “in recognition of their contributions to the development of wireless telegraphy”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1908
Gabriel Lippmann “for his method of reproducing colours photographically based on the phenomenon of interference”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1907
Albert Abraham Michelson “for his optical precision instruments and the spectroscopic and metrological investigations carried out with their aid”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1906
Joseph John Thomson “in recognition of the great merits of his theoretical and experimental investigations on the conduction of electricity by gases”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1905
Philipp Eduard Anton von Lenard “for his work on cathode rays”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1904
Lord Rayleigh (John William Strutt) “for his investigations of the densities of the most important gases and for his discovery of argon in connection with these studies”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1903
Antoine Henri Becquerel “in recognition of the extraordinary services he has rendered by his discovery of spontaneous radioactivity”
Pierre Curie and Marie Curie, née Sklodowska “in recognition of the extraordinary services they have rendered by their joint researches on the radiation phenomena discovered by Professor Henri Becquerel”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1902
Hendrik Antoon Lorentz and Pieter Zeeman “in recognition of the extraordinary service they rendered by their researches into the influence of magnetism upon radiation phenomena”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1901
Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen“in recognition of the extraordinary services he has rendered by the discovery of the remarkable rays subsequently named after him”
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 22 |
https://www.phillips.com/article/145337269/guillaume-balance-wheel-what-is-bimetallic-pocket-watch-patek-philippe-kari-voutilainen
|
en
|
The Remarkable History of the Guillaume Balance
|
[
"https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=315233648948652&ev=PageView&noscript=1",
"https://flockler.com/thumbs/sites/889/202655_002-b0038d8f-9504-4378-a7ed-d050e9056726_s600x0_c1708x999_l337x3.jpeg",
"https://flockler.com/thumbs/sites/889/202659_005-af2445a5-46c2-498f-8205-e50b5f6ae2a9_s600x0_q80_noupscale.jpeg",
"https://flockler.com/thumbs/sites/889/201230_004-8bd7b9a5-9581-4651-9956-80bf274b081b_s600x0_q80_noupscale.jpeg",
"https://flockler.com/thumbs/sites/889/202655_001-985bdd56-2435-4d60-99f5-38674f841368_s600x0_q80_noupscale.jpeg",
"https://flockler.com/thumbs/sites/889/202659_002-2d9c02c7-92d4-4fdb-9ff9-d19320a421a2_s600x0_q80_noupscale.jpeg",
"https://flockler.com/thumbs/sites/889/201230_006-73d7383d-0423-4d5e-a2e6-1da004ab57f3_s600x0_q80_noupscale.jpeg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Phillips is synonymous with contemporary culture. As the most forward-looking of the international auction houses, we have set ourselves apart through our focus on the defining aesthetic movements of the 20th century as well as today's most cutting-edge art. Headquartered in New York and London, with offices throughout the world, Phillips conducts sales in a select number of categories: Contemporary Art, Photographs, Editions, Design and Jewelry. Additionally, our core art business includes curating exhibitions, brokering private sales, advising estates and corporate clients and consulting with private individuals on the management of their collections. Accordingly, Phillips boutique, ‘white glove’ service best positions our firm to provide superior counsel to new and seasoned collectors alike.
|
en
|
/Content/images/phillipsdepury.ico
|
Phillips
|
https://www.phillips.com/article/145337269/guillaume-balance-wheel-what-is-bimetallic-pocket-watch-patek-philippe-kari-voutilainen
|
The PHILLIPS New York Watch Auction: X, takes place on June 8 and 9, 2024, at our Park Avenue headquarters. The auction includes more than 150 of the world's finest watches – and though we are loath to boast, we truly think it's one of the best catalogs we've ever put together. We'll be highlighting a number of the most interesting lots and stories featured in the sale right here, including the three timepieces with Guillaume balances featured below.
– By Logan Baker
Only one Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to an individual directly associated with watchmaking: Charles Édouard Guillaume, who was awarded the 1920 Nobel Prize in Physics for his work discovering how anomalies in nickel-iron alloys could enable more precise measurement instruments.
The three alloys discovered by Guillaume – invar, elinvar, and platinite – found a variety of applications, including thermostats, but the most relevant for our purposes is the so-called Guillaume balance, arguably one of the most important horological developments of the early 20th century.
Charles-Édouard Guillaume was born in Val-de-Travers, Switzerland, on February 15, 1861. His father was a watchmaker. and Guillaume maintained close ties to the Swiss watch industry throughout his life. Guillaume spent 53 years working for the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, where in the late 1890s he first observed the unique properties of invar, elinvar, and platinite.
Temperature is a natural foe to physical measurement. Sudden temperature changes cause most materials to expand or contract, impacting precision. But Invar offered a near zero coefficient of thermal expansion, and elinvar had almost no elasticity ratio, which meant any object would experience only microscopic change in size from heat and cold.
Remembering his father's work as a watchmaker, Guillaume developed a compensated invar rod pendulum which set him on the road to the first compensating spring made of an iron-nickel alloy with 28 percent nickel (a Paul Perret spring).
After publishing the inaugural results on his work with invar, a watchmaker named Paul Perret contacted Guillaume to ask for an invar sample. Assisted by the engineer Marc Thury (who is said to have suggested the name "invar"), Perret discovered that invar had a coefficient of thermal expansion that was near zero.
In 1899, Guillaume identified that his nickel-iron alloy experiments could solve the horological problem known as watchmaking's "Secondary Error."
A material's temperature coefficient identifies the daily error range caused by an increase or decrease in the material's surrounding temperature. A coefficient of 0.1, for instance, indicates a gain of 0.1 seconds for every single degree rise in temperature per day.
The Secondary Error in watchmaking is determined by observing a timepiece's precision in at a pair of high and low temperatures, so that the fluctuations in isochronism, due to the temperature coefficiency of the watch’s components, can be noted and compared to reveal the anticipated effects of temperature variation on timekeeping. The timepiece's precision is then tested one final time at the average temperature between the high and low temperatures; the difference between the real value and the expected value is your Secondary Error, expressed as a gain or a loss.
Guillaume realized his nickel-iron alloys could effectively solve the problem of the Secondary Error due to their remarkable temperature coefficient.
After developing a slight variation of the invar alloy with a negative quadratic coefficient of expansion, he contacted a pair of external watchmakers to test his theory: Paul-D. Nardin, in Le Locle, and Paul Ditisheim, in La Chaux-de-Fonds. Their tests quickly proved Guillaume's theory as correct – the secondary error had been completely eliminated in timepieces with nick-iron balances. The first official results were then presented at the Neuchâtel Observatory in front of the legendary Adolphe Hirsch.
Then, in 1912, Guillaume had another thought: What if his nickel-iron alloy was combined with a metal such as manganese or chromium. His hypothesis being that this would allow for total compensation of the regulating organ, resulting in the construction of his monometallic balance using the new alloy of elinvar (invariable elasticity).
Zenith was the first watchmaker to utilize the elinvar spring, inside a chronograph produced in 1916. And four years later, Guillaume's discovery and application of invar and elinvar would be honored with recognition from the Swiss Academy of Sciences, in addition to the prestigious Nobel Prize in Physics.
With invar and elinvar, Charles-Édouard Guillaume brought major progress to horology: thanks to the Guillaume balance, the rate discrepancies of marine and on-board chronometers are reduced to one tenth of a second. The invar pendulum that controls the beatings of astronomical clocks provides an accuracy in the order of one hundredth of a second.
Guillaume balances can mostly be found in Observatory competition-grade pocket watch movements produced in the early 20th century. Patek Philippe, Ulysse Nardin, Zenith, and numerous other makers adopted their application for use in their most precise timekeeping instruments.
Three remarkable timepieces available in the upcoming Phillips New York Watch Auction: X contain a Guillaume balance: lot 26, a 1912 Patek Philippe pocket watch with an "Extra"-grade movement that was awarded "Honourable Mention" at the 1915-1916 edition of the Geneva Astronomical Observatory Timing Contest; lot 28, a 1913 Patek Philippe pocket watch with an "Extra Special"-grade movement, originally made for Henry Graves Jr.; and lot 29, a truly incredible, oversized 1915 Ulysse Nardin split-seconds chronograph wristwatch.
You might also recall that the 2022 Zenith × Kari Voutilainen × Phillips in Association with Bacs & Russo Calibre 135 Observatoire Limited Edition wristwatch featured a vintage Zenith Observatory-grade movement fitted with a Guillaume balance, as well.
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 81 |
https://independent.academia.edu/wwwcharlesedouardlevillainfr
|
en
|
Edouard LEVILLAIN FRHistS, MAE
|
[
"https://sb.scorecardresearch.com/p?c1=2&c2=26766707&cv=2.0&cj=1",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/academia-logo-redesign-2015-A.svg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/academia-logo-redesign-2015.svg",
"https://0.academia-photos.com/39478267/10978635/12252219/s200_charles-edouard.levillain.jpg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/61816017/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/61796036/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/58671768/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/46120185/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/43682703/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/blank-paper.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/blank-paper.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/blank-paper.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/43682690/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/43682698/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/41079177/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40999758/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40999737/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991863/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991801/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991648/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991636/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991617/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991600/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991592/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/61816017/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/61796036/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/58671768/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/46120185/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/43682703/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/blank-paper.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/blank-paper.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/blank-paper.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/43682690/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/43682698/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/41079177/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40999758/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40999737/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991863/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991801/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991648/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991636/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991617/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991600/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg",
"https://attachments.academia-assets.com/40991592/thumbnails/1.jpg",
"https://a.academia-assets.com/images/profile/academia-gold.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Academia.edu is a place to share and follow research.
|
en
|
//a.academia-assets.com/images/favicons/favicon-production.ico
| null |
Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 59 |
https://pantheon.world/profile/occupation/physicist/country/switzerland
|
en
|
Greatest Swiss Physicists
|
http://localhost:3000/api/screenshot/occupation-country?occupation=physicist&country=che
|
http://localhost:3000/api/screenshot/occupation-country?occupation=physicist&country=che
|
[
"https://pantheon.world/images/icons/icon-nav.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/logos/logo_pantheon.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/icons/icon-search.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/573694.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/7790184.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/7790420.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/10896.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/768749.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/2889802.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/246299.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/314421.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/ui/profile-w.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/573694.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/7790184.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/7790420.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/10896.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/106014.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/768749.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/2889802.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/246299.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/314421.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/985295.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/ui/tri-left-b.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/573694.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/7790184.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/7790420.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/10896.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/106014.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/768749.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/2889802.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/246299.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/314421.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/985295.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/21044568.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/profile/people/6274827.jpg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/ui/tri-right-b.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/_next/image?url=%2Fimages%2Flogos%2Flogo_datawheel.png&w=256&q=75 1x, /_next/image?url=%2Fimages%2Flogos%2Flogo_datawheel.png&w=640&q=75 2x",
"https://pantheon.world/images/logos/logo_CL.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/_next/image?url=%2Fimages%2Flogos%2Flogo_creative_commons.png&w=96&q=75 1x, /_next/image?url=%2Fimages%2Flogos%2Flogo_creative_commons.png&w=256&q=75 2x",
"https://pantheon.world/images/logos/logo_facebook.svg",
"https://pantheon.world/images/logos/logo_twitter.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
en
|
/images/favicon.ico
| null |
1. Charles Édouard Guillaume ( 1861 - 1938 )
With an HPI of 72.08 , Charles Édouard Guillaume is the most famous Swiss Physicist . His biography has been translated into 80 different languages on wikipedia.
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 February 1861, in Fleurier, Switzerland – 13 May 1938, in Sèvres, France) was a Swiss physicist who received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1920 in recognition of the service he had rendered to precision measurements in physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys. In 1919, he gave the fifth Guthrie Lecture at the Institute of Physics in London with the title "The Anomaly of the Nickel-Steels".
2 . Heinrich Rohrer ( 1933 - 2013 )
With an HPI of 68.24 , Heinrich Rohrer is the 2nd most famous Swiss Physicist . His biography has been translated into 67 different languages.
Heinrich Rohrer (6 June 1933 – 16 May 2013) was a Swiss physicist who shared half of the 1986 Nobel Prize in Physics with Gerd Binnig for the design of the scanning tunneling microscope (STM). The other half of the Prize was awarded to Ernst Ruska. The Heinrich Rohrer Medal is presented triennially by the Surface Science Society of Japan with IBM Research – Zurich, Swiss Embassy in Japan, and Ms. Rohrer in his memory. The medal is not to be confused with the Heinrich Rohrer Award presented at the Nano Seoul 2020 conference.
4 . Felix Bloch ( 1905 - 1983 )
With an HPI of 67.21 , Felix Bloch is the 4th most famous Swiss Physicist . His biography has been translated into 76 different languages.
Felix Bloch (23 October 1905 – 10 September 1983) was a Swiss-American physicist and Nobel physics laureate who worked mainly in the U.S. He and Edward Mills Purcell were awarded the 1952 Nobel Prize for Physics for "their development of new ways and methods for nuclear magnetic precision measurements." In 1954–1955, he served for one year as the first director-general of CERN. Felix Bloch made fundamental theoretical contributions to the understanding of ferromagnetism and electron behavior in crystal lattices. He is also considered one of the developers of nuclear magnetic resonance.
5 . Auguste Piccard ( 1884 - 1962 )
With an HPI of 66.77 , Auguste Piccard is the 5th most famous Swiss Physicist . His biography has been translated into 43 different languages.
Auguste Antoine Piccard (28 January 1884 – 24 March 1962) was a Swiss physicist, inventor and explorer known for his record-breaking hydrogen balloon flights, with which he studied the Earth's upper atmosphere and became the first person to enter the Stratosphere. Piccard was also known for his invention of the first bathyscaphe, FNRS-2, with which he made a number of unmanned dives in 1948 to explore the ocean's depths. Piccard's twin brother Jean Felix Piccard is also a notable figure in the annals of science and exploration, as are a number of their relatives, including Jacques Piccard, Bertrand Piccard, Jeannette Piccard and Don Piccard.
8 . Walter H. Schottky ( 1886 - 1976 )
With an HPI of 57.75 , Walter H. Schottky is the 8th most famous Swiss Physicist . His biography has been translated into 31 different languages.
Walter Hans Schottky (23 July 1886 – 4 March 1976) was a German physicist who played a major early role in developing the theory of electron and ion emission phenomena, invented the screen-grid vacuum tube in 1915 while working at Siemens, co-invented the ribbon microphone and ribbon loudspeaker along with Dr. Erwin Gerlach in 1924 and later made many significant contributions in the areas of semiconductor devices, technical physics and technology. The Schottky effect (a thermionic emission, important for vacuum tube technology), the Schottky diode (where the depletion layer occurring in it is called the Schottky barrier), the Schottky vacancies (or Schottky defects), the Schottky anomaly (a peak value of the heat capacity) and the Mott-Schottky equation (also Langmuir-Schottky space charge law) were named after him. He conducted research on electrical noise mechanisms (shot noise), space charge, especially in electron tubes, and the barrier layer in semiconductors, which were important for the development of copper oxide rectifiers and transistors.
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 40 |
https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/charles-edouard-guillaume
|
en
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume
|
[
"https://www.encyclopedia.com/themes/custom/trustme/images/header-logo.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"Charles Edouard Guillaume1861-1938 Swiss physicist who developed a nickel-steel alloy (Invar)",
"whose properties make it ideal for precision instruments and standard measures. Guillaume served as the director of the Bureau of International Weights and Measures",
"where he contributed toward the standardization of accurate scientific and commercial measurements. He was awarded the 1920 Nobel Prize in physics."
] | null |
[] | null |
Charles Edouard Guillaume1861-1938 Swiss physicist who developed a nickel-steel alloy (Invar), whose properties make it ideal for precision instruments and standard measures. Guillaume served as the director of the Bureau of International Weights and Measures, where he contributed toward the standardization of accurate scientific and commercial measurements. He was awarded the 1920 Nobel Prize in physics. Source for information on Charles Edouard Guillaume: Science and Its Times: Understanding the Social Significance of Scientific Discovery dictionary.
|
en
|
/sites/default/files/favicon.ico
|
https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/charles-edouard-guillaume
|
Citation styles
Encyclopedia.com gives you the ability to cite reference entries and articles according to common styles from the Modern Language Association (MLA), The Chicago Manual of Style, and the American Psychological Association (APA).
Within the “Cite this article” tool, pick a style to see how all available information looks when formatted according to that style. Then, copy and paste the text into your bibliography or works cited list.
Because each style has its own formatting nuances that evolve over time and not all information is available for every reference entry or article, Encyclopedia.com cannot guarantee each citation it generates. Therefore, it’s best to use Encyclopedia.com citations as a starting point before checking the style against your school or publication’s requirements and the most-recent information available at these sites:
Notes:
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 17 |
https://www.encyclopedia.com/people/science-and-technology/metallurgy-and-mining-biographies/charles-edouard-guillaume
|
en
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume
|
[
"https://www.encyclopedia.com/themes/custom/trustme/images/header-logo.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"Get information",
"facts",
"and pictures",
"about Charles Edouard Guillaume",
"at Encyclopedia.com",
"Make",
"research",
"projects",
"and school reports",
"about Charles Edouard Guillaume",
"easy",
"with credible",
"articles",
"from our FREE",
"online encyclopedia and dictionary"
] | null |
[] | null |
Charles Edouard Guillaume [1] >Swiss scientist Charles–Edouard Guillaume (1861–1936) worked at the >International Bureau of Weights and Measures for almost 50 years. His >discovery of a steel–nickel alloy called invar that was impervious to >temperature changes advanced science and technology.
|
en
|
/sites/default/files/favicon.ico
|
https://www.encyclopedia.com/people/science-and-technology/metallurgy-and-mining-biographies/charles-edouard-guillaume
|
Swiss scientist Charles–Edouard Guillaume (1861–1936) worked at the International Bureau of Weights and Measures for almost 50 years. His discovery of a steel–nickel alloy called invar that was impervious to temperature changes advanced science and technology. After discovering invar, he discovered a variation in the alloy called elinvar. When Guillaume received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1920, the honor was not just in recognition of his discovery of iron–nickel steel alloys, however. He was also honored for his contributions to the field of metrology and his long career with the Bureau of Weights and Measures, where he helped establish international standards. His work in both alloys and metrology would have a profound impact on the world.
Early Life
Guillaume was born in Fleurier, Switzerland, on February 15, 1861. Guillame's family had originally been from France, but his grandfather, Charles Frederic Alexandre Guillaume, had left France for political reasons during the French Revolution that erupted in the last part of eighteenth century in France. He settled in England and established a successful watch–making business in London. The business was passed down to his three sons, including Edouard, Charles–Edouard Guillaume's father. Edouard Guillaume eventually relocated the business to Switzerland, when he settled in Fleurier. He later married and had Guillame in Switzerland.
Growing up in Switzerland, Charles–Edouard Guillaume received his early education at the Neuchâtel gymnasium. When he was 17 years old, he enrolled in the Zurich Polytechnic (which was later renamed the Federal Institute of Technology). At the Polytechnic, he quickly developed an interest in physics. He later indicated that François Arago's text book, Éloges académiques, was the major influencing factor that guided his decision about pursuing a career in science. He was awarded a Ph.D. in 1882 for his thesis on electrolytic capacitors. After graduation, he performed compulsory service for a year as an officer in the Swiss artillery. During this very short military career, Guillaume studied mechanics and ballistics.
International Bureau of Weights and Measures
In 1883, he accepted a position as an assistant at the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, which had just been established in Sevres, France, located just outside Paris. Guillaume joined the Bureau at an important time. Six years later, in 1889, the Bureau embarked on the approval and distribution, among all of the governments of the world, of metric standards.
Guillaume would remain with the Bureau for his entire career. In 1902, he became its associate director. From 1915 until his retirement in 1936, he was director of the Bureau. From 1936 until his death in that same year, Guillaume was honorary director.
Guillaume's earliest research at the Bureau involved thermometry. He conducted important investigations on corrections to mercury–in–glass thermometers. Also, he was responsible for the detailed calibration of thermometers used at the Bureau in the establishment of the thermal expansions of the standards of metrical length. He was engaged in establishing, duplicating, and distributing the international metric standards, and he worked on determining the volume of one kilogram of water by the contact method.
Accidentally Discovered Invar
It was the work involving calibration that led Guillaume to the accidental discovery that would make him famous and lead to his Nobel Prize. A chance observation by Guillaume on the coefficient of expansion of nickel–iron alloys led to investigations of alloys and culminated in the discovery of "invar," an alloy with a very low coefficient of expansion, and later would lead to the discovery of elinvar, which has an extremely low thermoelastic coefficient over a large temperature range.
Among his duties at the Bureau, Guillaume was charged with making precise copies of the standard meter for distribution to countries around the world. The standard meter bar kept at the Bureau had been made of a platinum–iridium alloy, developed by Henri Sainte–Claire–Deville, to prevent corrosion and changes due to temperature. The hardness, permanence, and resistance to chemical agents would be perfect for standards that would have to last for years and years.
However, duplicating the standard meter bar would simply cost too much money, as the metals used to make it were too expensive. Seeking a solution, Guillaume began investigating other potential materials that could be used to make duplicates of the meter bar.
In 1896, Guillaume was studying the properties of iron–nickel alloys (or ferronickel alloys). He melted various ferronickel alloys, experimenting with different nickel contents (from thirty percent to sixty percent nickel). He found that the coefficient of expansion at room temperature was lowest at a nickel level of 36–percent (to the 64–percent iron level). In fact, an alloy with that percentage of nickel exhibited the least amount of thermal expansion of any alloy known. Guillaume considered the expansion of this new alloy "invariable," so he eventually named it invar.
Practical Applications of Invar
The value of invar to metrology was immediately apparent. It was economically feasible to duplicate the standard meter bar. Moreover, measuring devices such as the bar that were made of the alloy containing a 36–percent nickel content would not change in size due to changes in temperature. However, it did not take long for people to perceive its value to other fields. Soon the alloy was being applied to clock–making. It was necessary that pendulum rods maintain the same length regardless of temperature, and invar would ensure that the lengths were maintained. Previously, clockmakers needed to equip the very best clocks—the ones with the highest levels of precision—with some form of expansion–compensation device. The warming of the steel rods used in pendulums resulted in a loss of 0.5 second–per–degree Celsius a day, or 0.28 second–per–degree Fahrenheit a day.
Ferronickel alloys quickly became widely used in other instruments of precision, as well as in surveying tapes and wires. Later, it would be used in light bulbs and in the electronic vacuum tubes that once were used in radios. In addition, the alloy became a substitute for platinum for glass sealing wire, which resulted in huge cost savings for manufacturers.
With each new decade, it seemed that more uses for the alloy were being found. In the 1930s, ferronickel alloys proved useful in thermostats for temperature control, and they were used to make measuring devices for testing gauges and machine parts. During World War II, there was a great demand for the alloys in the United States Armed Forces.
Awarded the Nobel Prize
However, invar's potential impact on the world was recognized almost as soon at Guillaume announced its discovery. By 1920, its importance to the advancement of science and technology was so obvious that it earned Guillaume that year's Nobel Prize in Physics. Moreover, Guillaume became the first and only scientist in history to be recognized by the Swedish Academy of Sciences for a metallurgical achievement.
In presenting the award to Guillaume, the Academy lauded both his efforts in helping establish an international metric standard and in developing the ferronickel alloy. "Charles–Edouard Guillaume is undeniably the foremost metrologist of today," the Academy said. "By devoting his entire life to the service of science, [he] has made a powerful contribution to the progress of the metric system; during his long and painstaking studies he discovered a metal with the most excellent metrological properties. . . . the discovery is of great significance for the precision of scientific measurements and thereby even for the development of science in general."
However, Guillaume was not finished making discoveries in alloys. In the early 1920s, working in collaboration with Chenevard and the Imphy steel laboratory, he developed a variation of invar called elinvar (a contraction of elasticité invariable). Elinvar was an improvement over invar in that its thermoelastic coefficient is essentially zero. Also, it is less susceptible to the effects of magnetism and oxidation.
Later Applications
The use of invar has continued for more than a century, and its importance has grown as the years have gone by, as it led to new or improved technologies. Ferronickel alloys are valuable in a wide range of applications. With its low coefficient of expansion, as well as its wide and easy availability, the 36–percent nickel alloy has become one of the most commonly used materials for applications that require low expansivity. It became the most commonly used ferronickel alloy in applications such as electronic devices, where size changes due to temperature must be minimized, and it makes up some parts in precision optical measuring devices.
As the United States experienced a period of historically unprecedented prosperity in the 1950s and the 1960s, the use of 36–percent alloy and other ferronickel alloys became even more widespread in new technological devices such as circuit breakers, motor controls, TV temperature compensating springs, appliance and heater thermostats, automotive controls, heating, and air conditioning.
Later, invar resulted in a whole new breed of low expansion, nickel–iron alloys, as the use of the 36–percent did not prove useful in all applications. Invar has the lowest thermal expansivity, but it also has the lowest Curie Temperature (the temperature at which a material loses it magnetic properties), which limits its usefulness in certain potential applications. However, other alloys in the so–called "invar family" alleviate that problem. Other ferronickel alloys became used in a variety of commercial and technological applications such as semiconductors, high–definition television, information technology devices, aeronautical devices, and cryogenic transport. The most recent applications of ferronickel alloys include use as structural components in precision laser and optical measuring systems and wave guide tubes, in microscopes, and in support systems for giant mirrors in telescopes. The aerospace industry has used 36–percent alloys to make composite molds in new generations of aircraft. The alloys are also used in orbiting satellites and laser gyroscopes. It is expected that ferronickel alloys will have a growing impact on science and technology throughout the twenty–first century.
Distinguished Career
Records of Guillaume's research can be found in the many papers published by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures. In addition, Guillaume himself wrote Études thermométriques (Studies on Thermometry, 1886), Traité de thermométrie (Treatise on Thermometry, 1889), Unités et Étalons (Units and Standards, 1894), Les rayons X (X–Rays, 1896), Recherches sur le nickel et ses alliages (Investigations on Nickel and its Alloys, 1898), La vie de la matière (The Life of Matter, 1899), La Convention du Mètre et le Bureau international des Poids et Mesures (Metrical Convention and the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, 1902), Les applications des aciers au nickel (Applications of Nickel–Steels, 1904), Des états de la matière (States of Matter, 1907), Les récent progrès du système métrique (Recent progress in the Metric System, 1907, 1913), and many more essays. His book, Initiation à la Mécanique (Introduction to Mechanics), was translated into several languages.
Beside the Nobel Prize, Guillaume received distinctions and honors throughout his career. He was appointed Grand Officer of the Legion of Honour and received honorary Doctor of Science degrees from the Universities of Geneva, Neuchatel, and Paris. He was a President of the Sociétá Française de Physique. In addition, he was a member, honorary member or corresponding member of more than a dozen of the leading scientific academies of Europe. In 1888, Guillaume married A. M. Taufflieb. They had three children. He died on May 13, 1938, in Sevres, France.
Books
Notable Scientists: From 1900 to the Present, Gale Group, 2001. World of Scientific Discovery, Second Edition, Gale Group, 1999.
Online
"Charles–Edouard Guillaume–Biography," Nobel Prize Website,http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1920/guillaume-bio.html (January 12, 2005).
Harner, Leslie, "After 100 Years, the Uses for Invar Continue to Multiply," Center for Materials Science and Engineering,http://www.cmse.ed.ac.uk/MSE3/Topics/TA00008.htm (January 12, 2005).
Nicolet, J.C., "Questions in Time," Europa Star, http://www.europastar.com/europastar/watch–tech/nicolet6.jsp (January 12, 2005).
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 42 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes/1929-1920/
|
en
|
All Nobel Prizes
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
All Nobel Prizes
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes
|
Between 1901 and 2023, the Nobel Prizes and the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel were awarded 621 times to 1000 people and organisations. With some receiving the Nobel Prize more than once, this makes a total of 965 individuals and 27 organisations. Below, you can view the full list of Nobel Prizes and Nobel Prize laureates.
Find all prizes in | physics | chemistry | physiology or medicine | literature | peace | economic sciences | all categories
2024
The 2024 Nobel Prizes will be announced 7–14 October.
1929
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1929
“for his discovery of the wave nature of electrons”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1929
“for their investigations on the fermentation of sugar and fermentative enzymes”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1929
“for his discovery of the antineuritic vitamin”
“for his discovery of the growth-stimulating vitamins”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1929
“principally for his great novel, Buddenbrooks, which has won steadily increased recognition as one of the classic works of contemporary literature”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1929
“for his crucial role in bringing about the Briand-Kellogg Pact”
1928
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1928
“for his work on the thermionic phenomenon and especially for the discovery of the law named after him”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1928
“for the services rendered through his research into the constitution of the sterols and their connection with the vitamins”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1928
“for his work on typhus”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1928
“principally for her powerful descriptions of Northern life during the Middle Ages”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1928
“No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section”
1927
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1927
“for his discovery of the effect named after him”
“for his method of making the paths of electrically charged particles visible by condensation of vapour”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1927
“for his investigations of the constitution of the bile acids and related substances”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1927
“for his discovery of the therapeutic value of malaria inoculation in the treatment of dementia paralytica”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1927
“in recognition of his rich and vitalizing ideas and the brilliant skill with which they have been presented”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1927
“for their contribution to the emergence in France and Germany of a public opinion which favours peaceful international cooperation”
1926
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1926
“for his work on the discontinuous structure of matter, and especially for his discovery of sedimentation equilibrium”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1926
“for his work on disperse systems”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1926
“for his discovery of the Spiroptera carcinoma”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1926
“for her idealistically inspired writings which with plastic clarity picture the life on her native island and with depth and sympathy deal with human problems in general”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1926
“for their crucial role in bringing about the Locarno Treaty”
1925
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1925
“for their discovery of the laws governing the impact of an electron upon an atom”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1925
“for his demonstration of the heterogenous nature of colloid solutions and for the methods he used, which have since become fundamental in modern colloid chemistry”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1925
“No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1925
“for his work which is marked by both idealism and humanity, its stimulating satire often being infused with a singular poetic beauty”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1925
“for his crucial role in bringing about the Locarno Treaty”
“for his crucial role in bringing about the Dawes Plan”
1924
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1924
“for his discoveries and research in the field of X-ray spectroscopy”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1924
“No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1924
“for his discovery of the mechanism of the electrocardiogram”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1924
“for his great national epic, The Peasants”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1924
“No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section”
1923
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1923
“for his work on the elementary charge of electricity and on the photoelectric effect”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1923
“for his invention of the method of micro-analysis of organic substances”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1923
“for the discovery of insulin”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1923
“for his always inspired poetry, which in a highly artistic form gives expression to the spirit of a whole nation”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1923
“No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section”
1922
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1922
“for his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1922
“for his discovery, by means of his mass spectrograph, of isotopes, in a large number of non-radioactive elements, and for his enunciation of the whole-number rule”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1922
“for his discovery relating to the production of heat in the muscle”
“for his discovery of the fixed relationship between the consumption of oxygen and the metabolism of lactic acid in the muscle”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1922
“for the happy manner in which he has continued the illustrious traditions of the Spanish drama”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1922
“for his leading role in the repatriation of prisoners of war, in international relief work and as the League of Nations' High Commissioner for refugees”
1921
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1921
“for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1921
“for his contributions to our knowledge of the chemistry of radioactive substances, and his investigations into the origin and nature of isotopes”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1921
“No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1921
“in recognition of his brilliant literary achievements, characterized as they are by a nobility of style, a profound human sympathy, grace, and a true Gallic temperament”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1921
“for their lifelong contributions to the cause of peace and organized internationalism”
1920
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920
“in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”
The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1920
“in recognition of his work in thermochemistry”
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1920
“for his discovery of the capillary motor regulating mechanism”
The Nobel Prize in Literature 1920
“for his monumental work, Growth of the Soil”
The Nobel Peace Prize 1920
“for his longstanding contribution to the cause of peace and justice and his prominent role in the establishment of the League of Nations”
To cite this section
MLA style: All Nobel Prizes. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach AB 2024. Mon. 22 Jul 2024. <https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes>
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 54 |
https://grail-watch.com/2023/11/15/the-controversial-career-of-paul-perret/
|
en
|
The Controversial Career of Paul Perret
|
[
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/cropped-Grail-Watch-Icon-512-1.png",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Paul-Perret-featured-image.jpg?resize=512%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/La-Sagne-Huguenin-Godet-Postcard.jpeg?resize=512%2C319&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/1897-Ecole-dhorlogerie-et-Ecole-de-mecanique-attenante-en-construction.jpeg?resize=512%2C365&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Journal-Suisse-dHorlogerie-1876-257-000-Talantoscope-small.jpg?resize=512%2C406&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Davoine_1883-1884_0048.png?resize=305%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/1912-La-Chaux-de-Fonds-Rue-du-Parc-65.jpeg?resize=512%2C407&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1881-10-08-002-000.jpg?resize=512%2C507&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/1913-LHotel-des-Postes-et-la-rue-Leopold-Robert.jpeg?resize=1625%2C1014&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1882-07-29-001-000.jpg?resize=317%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1888-12-06-002-000.jpg?resize=387%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CH_1_A-3-crop.png?resize=183%2C300&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CH_21_A-3-crop.png?resize=185%2C300&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CH_22_A-3-crop.png?resize=143%2C300&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CH_23_A-3-crop.png?resize=190%2C300&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CH_24_A-3-crop.png?resize=182%2C300&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-06-28-003-000-Anonymous-Perret-Letter.jpg?resize=441%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-07-02-008-000.jpg?resize=390%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/zui-001_1930_006_1369-Charles-Edouard-Guillaume-square.jpg?resize=663%2C663&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/JSdH-1897_03-013-Paul-Berner-Nickel-Steel-scaled.jpg?resize=2374%2C2560&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/bsn-001_1897_025_0229-Tableau-des-resultats-observes-par-M.-Guillaume-sur-les-alliages-dacier-au-nickel.jpg?resize=1135%2C1279&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CH_14270_A-crop.png?resize=389%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/bsn-001_1897_025_0224-Metal-a-Dilatation-Presque-Insensible-Invar-Adolphe-Hirsch.jpg?resize=327%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FH_1898_0512_01-Paul-Perrets-announcement.jpg?resize=418%2C996&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/1908-Avenue-Dr.-Jean-Richard-a-Fleurier-Perret-and-Renfer.jpeg?resize=1615%2C1007&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1904_04-038-Paul-Perret-Necrologie.jpg?resize=512%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Rue-de-lEcole-dHorlogerie-7-Fleurier-Apple-Maps.jpg?resize=512%2C282&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/JSdH-1907_04-042-Second-Study.jpg?resize=2000%2C1777&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1882-07-29-001-000.jpg?resize=317%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1882-10-01-001-000.jpg?resize=486%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1882-10-11-001-000.jpg?resize=230%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1888-10-09-002-000.jpg?resize=292%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1888-10-20-001-000-small.jpg?resize=361%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1888-12-06-002-000.jpg?resize=387%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1877_05-017.jpg?resize=307%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1877_05-018.jpg?resize=307%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1877_05-019.jpg?resize=307%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Journal-Suisse-dHorlogerie-1876-257-000-Talantoscope-small.jpg?resize=512%2C406&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-06-28-003-000-Anonymous-Perret-Letter.jpg?resize=441%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-06-30-003-000-First-Reaction.jpg?resize=385%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-07-02-003-000-Immediate-Reaction.jpg?resize=130%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-07-02-008-000.jpg?resize=390%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-07-07-003-000.jpg?resize=243%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-07-12-003-000.jpg?resize=488%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1889-07-12-009-000.jpg?resize=512%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1890-06-12-003-000.jpg?resize=459%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FH_1898_0512_01-Paul-Perrets-announcement.jpg?resize=418%2C996&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FH_1898_0515_01-Solution-de-la-crise-des-spiraux.jpg?resize=415%2C1138&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FH_1898_0630_02.jpg?resize=842%2C1768&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FH_1898_0630_03.jpg?resize=1259%2C851&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1899_01-001.jpg?resize=334%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1899_01-002.jpg?resize=333%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1899_01-003.jpg?resize=331%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1899_01-004.jpg?resize=316%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1903_12-040.jpg?resize=324%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1903_12-041.jpg?resize=334%2C512&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1904-04-01-004-000.jpg?resize=861%2C1269&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lImpartial-1904-04-01-010-000.jpg?resize=684%2C924&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/FH_1904_0403_03-Paul-Perret.jpg?resize=1306%2C974&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/JSdH-1904_04-038-Paul-Perret-Necrologie-scaled.jpg?resize=2560%2C2560&ssl=1",
"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/34ef4974b5d89940e35755aca617f3b7?s=140&d=mm&r=g",
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/LR94-highlight.jpg",
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/FHF-19th-Century-Logo.jpg",
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Fiedler-Highlight.jpeg",
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Hebdomas-Featured-Image.jpg",
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Cartel-featured-image.png",
"https://grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Glycine-Automatic-logo.jpg",
"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/53ec8f8b74b65765f517fd4881edcc82?s=96&d=mm&r=g",
"https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/3d0243d1d4ab989f8e75f9654d138f4b?s=96&d=mm&r=g",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Zodiac-Sea-Wolf-highlight.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Paul-Perret-featured-image.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/1010-gphg2023_l1040027_-g-maillot_point-of-views-ch_-square.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Le-Retour-du-Tic-Tac-Title.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/LR94-highlight.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Cartel-featured-image.png?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Intel-Gordon-Moore-3.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Venus-featured-image-2.png?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/FHF-19th-Century-Logo.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1",
"https://i0.wp.com/grail-watch.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/5_FC_WEB_The_Naked_Watchmaker_Product_800_800px.jpeg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Stephen"
] |
2023-11-15T00:00:00
|
The story of Paul Perret is quite unusual: He was famous not for one single accomplishment but for three different ones: He revolutionized watch adjustment, registered the very first Swiss patent, and contributed to the only watchmaking-related discovery to win a Nobel Prize! Perret was incredibly controversial in his time, vilified and then embraced by his peers, yet there is little record of his life. Read on and discover why Paul Perret deserves to be remembered!
|
en
|
Grail Watch
|
https://grail-watch.com/2023/11/15/the-controversial-career-of-paul-perret/
|
The story of Paul Perret is quite unusual: He was famous not for one single accomplishment but for three different ones: He revolutionized watch adjustment, registered the very first Swiss patent, and contributed to the only watchmaking-related discovery to win a Nobel Prize! Perret was incredibly controversial in his time, vilified and then embraced by his peers, yet there is little record of his life. Read on and discover why Paul Perret deserves to be remembered!
Learn about the unrelated watch company, Montre Invar, and the first watch boutique in La Chaux-de-Fonds!
Three Moments of Fame
Most of the people in watchmaking labor in obscurity, never getting credit for their contributions. The nature of the Swiss people is partly to blame: They do not love attention-seeking behavior and prefer to let their works speak for them. My writing at Grail Watch and elsewhere tends to cast a light on these unsung heroes of the industry, though it is often difficult to uncover their stories.
Before I tell the story of his life, let us briefly enumerate the remarkable yet controversial contributions made by Paul Perret:
In his 20s, Perret invented essential machines for the adjustment of a watch balance and spring. This made him infamous, as his friends touted the incredible speed at which he could tune a chronometer using his Talantoscope. This self-promotion was widely ridiculed as non-Swiss, but threats against him became more serious when it was rumored that he would sell his device in America!
In his 30s, Perret was an outspoken proponent of the establishment of a system of patents in Switzerland. He was ultimately successful in his campaign, and camped out overnight to receive Swiss patent number 1 on November 15, 1888. But he was once again called a narcissist after he also collected patents 21, 22, 23, and 24 that day!
In his 40s, on May 11, 1898, Perret took the stage at a meeting of the entire industry as it struggled under the balance spring cartel. He announced that a nickel-steel alloy called Invar, developed with Nobel Prize-winning scientist Charles-Edouard Guillaume, was immune to the variability of temperature and could be produced outside the cartel. Perret became a hero to the industry but his springs only went into production after his death in 1904, and then by the very cartel he sought to undermine.
Any of these contributions would warrant an article in Grail Watch, but it is incredible that all three came from the same man. The fact that he was such a controversial figure yet quickly cast aside by the industry also drew my attention. Let us consider the man called “shameless” and “savior”, “threat” and “failure” in his time!
Farmer, Soldier, Watchmaker
Paul Perret was born in 1854 in the village of La Sagne. Situated in the same valley as Les Ponts-de-Martel, the town was one of many that supplied watchmakers in Le Locle and La Chaux-de-Fonds on the other side of the mountain to the north. Like most residents, the young Perret worked as a farmer in the summer and spent the winter producing components for watches by hand at the family workbench. His was a large family and was very well-connected to others in the area, which was the home of pioneering 18th century watchmaker Daniel JeanRichard dit Bressel.
Although he was unable to regularly attend school, Paul Perret was gifted with his hands and earned a spot as a watchmaking apprentice in La Chaux-de-Fonds at the age of 17. His skills were quickly evident, and he was recruited by the Fabrique d’Horlogerie de Fontainemelon in 1874. The village of Fontainemelon must have felt like home to the 20 year old Perret, but it is unclear how well he got along with technical director Edouard Junod, who would run that important factory for nearly 4 decades. Most likely Perret was unhappy to be focused on manufacturing rather than the skillful and careful adjustment of watch movements.
Perret returned to La Chaux-de-Fonds in 1877, renting a home with a workshop and opening his own business as an adjuster of chronometers the following year. There were many such businesses in the watchmaking city, as movements were still quite rough at this point, with the hand-made wheels and pivots requiring rework before they could be used. Perret specialized in the escapement, balance, and balance spring, an elite trade.
The young Paul Perret stood out for the speed and accuracy of his adjustment: He could turn around a chronometer in just a few hours! After a few years he revealed that he had been developing machines to assist in watch adjustment since 1875, and these would propel him to notoriety in his industry.
Paul Perret’s Automatic Adjustment Machine
Not content to practice his trade as an adjuster of watches, Paul Perret began inventing new tools and machines at an early age. He began working on a machine to assist in the regulation of a balance and spring while still an apprentice in La Chaux-de-Fonds, and perfected the machine by 1877. Later called the Talantoscope, Perret’s adjustment machine gave him an incredible advantage over other adjusters.
It was widely understood that the accuracy of a watch depended on the frequency and amplitude of the balance. But setting these properly depended on numerous factors, including the exact shape and length of the balance spring as well as the poise of the balance wheel. This was confounded by the relatively primitive materials used (Bessemer steel was just emerging) and the fact that most components, notably springs, were cut and shaped by hand. Adjusting the rate of a movement was a painstaking process of trial and error, with each setting checked against a reference chronometer.
Perret’s device simplified this process by allowing direct comparison and adjustment in real time. The balance to be adjusted was held directly above a reference balance under glass. Thus, any variation of frequency and amplitude were immediately and obviously visible. The spring was mounted on a tweezer that could be easily adjusted to grip the balance spring at different locations until the optimal point was found. The spring would then be kinked and permanently set.
This machine allowed Perret to adjust balance springs so efficiently that he could singlehandedly handle large orders that would swamp every other adjuster in town. The entrepreneurial Perret set up an “atelier de réglages” on the fashionable Rue du Parc in La Chaux-de-Fonds, directly across from the railroad station. It was said that he delivered an astonishing 200,000 Breguet settings to the industry between 1878 and 1888, nearly 300 per workday!
Perret soon dominated the trade, and became very rich in the process. By 1884 he was able to purchase a large house with a garden along the fashionable and growing Avenue Léopold-Robert. His house was located at number 68, just a block down from his workshop at Rue du Parc 65.
A young gentleman about town, Perret became involved in many social and civic positions. He served on the commission of the watchmaking school in La Chaux-de-Fonds, joining the elite of the industry including his old boss from FHF, Auguste Robert. He also served on the board for the national exhibition and Tir Canonale, a shooting competition. And Perret joined the military, becoming a First Lieutenant in 1881 and Major of the Infantry in 1889. His skill with the revolver was so renowned that he became known as the “King of the Tir!”
In 1884, Perret requested the Government of Neuchâtel to transmit the time signal from the telegraph office in La Chaux-de-Fonds to his workshop. Professor Adolphe Hirsch of the Neuchâtel Observatory handled the installation of the line to Perret’s shop at Rue du Parc 65 and it was operational by April 26 of that year. This was the first private use of the Observatory’s telegraph time signal, and Hirsch and Perret remained friendly until his death 20 years later. It seems that Perret allowed other adjusters to use the signal in his workshop, as noted by a Dr. J. Hilfiker the following year.
In the 1880s, Perret invented another consequential machine for the production of balance springs. His Campyloscope was a specialized pantograph for the shaping of balance springs. Stencil forms were placed on the bed of the machine and their exact shape could be reproduced in miniature on a steel spring placed under a microscope. Although extremely effective, the Campyloscope was much less controversial. Perret’s basic design continued to be used for many decades by watchmakers worldwide, especially in the watchmaking schools that appeared in the 20th century.
Perret continued to invent through the 1880s. He created a novel method to construct a watch using bridges to accurately locate the components. He also created a fine regulation system using a pointer that followed an inscribed snail-shaped track. There was also the Perret Escapement, an alternative to the dominant Swiss lever. And he notably created a split bi-metallic balance wheel in an attempt to combat the effects of temperature variation on the accuracy of a movement. This presaged his focus around the turn of the century on compensating springs in an attempt to solve the same problem.
The Fight for Patents
Although Perret offered his Talantoscope for sale soon after he invented it in the late 1870s, he was careful about who he allowed to purchase one. It was a fairly simple machine and could easily be reproduced. And the Campyloscope quickly became a generic instrument, widely copied in schools and workshops.
The concept of intellectual property was not widely recognized until the 19th century, and even then it was often seen as a tool for the rich or a restraint on invention and trade. The idea that patented inventions must be disclosed publicly and that monopolies would have an expiration date gained traction in Italy and France in the 16th century, with rigorous examination of claims following soon after. The English struggled to find a balance between profit and openness, and the system there was widely abused despite the building Industrial Revolution. It was not until after the French Revolution and the creation of a modern patent system in America that the idea of intellectual property was widely accepted.
Switzerland was quite late in establishing a system of patents and trademarks, with resistance to the concept continuing even into the 1880s. Paul Perret was an outspoken booster of the establishment of a patent system in Switzerland modeled after the French and American systems. In 1882, after the national council failed to enact a patent law, a referendum was held to enact it. When voters rejected this July 30 initiative, Perret convened a meeting of interested groups from across Switzerland to promote another referendum or bill. The Olten Meeting, held in October, brought together luminaries including Ernest Francillon of Longines and the Chancellor of the Canton of Geneva. Still, Perret’s efforts were unsuccessful.
Ultimately the Swiss were shamed into adopting patent protection. During the 1878 International Congress of Industrial Property in Paris, Hungarian-American patent attorney Anthony Pollok called Switzerland “a nation of counterfeiters” (“un pays de contrefacteurs”) due to their knack of duplicating the inventions published in other countries. After the Swiss agreed to uphold the intellectual property protections of trading partners it was only a matter of time before they created protections for Swiss citizens as well. A law to register and enforce patents and trademarks was quietly passed on June 29, 1888, and was ultimately enacted without resistance.
The Swiss Federal Intellectual Property Office was opened in Berne on the grounds of the Asylum for the Blind on November 15, 1888. The irrepressible Paul Perret arrived the day before and was first in line when the doors opened at 8 AM. Thus, he was able to secure Swiss Patent Number 1 for his “Perfectionnements apportés à la construction des mouvements de montres de toutes dimensions.” Edouard Heuer stood just a few steps behind, registering his “Nouveau système de montre, grande sonnerie, répétition” as patent number 9. And Perret was able to re-enter the queue and register four more patents (numbers 21-24) later that day!
Among the other early patent holders were Albert Jeanneret (founder of Excelsior Park and Moeris), a representative from Fabrique d’Horlogerie de Fontainemelon, and Irénée Aubry (inventor of the Hebdomas), who we have covered here. It is likely that all four men stood in line together that November morning in Berne.
Although Perret had many friends and supporters in the Swiss watchmaking establishment, his reputation as an outspoken and aggressive businessman was growing. Many were shocked to see him waiting at the Patent Office in Berne before the sun rose, and his aggressive registration of essential elements of the watch movement put them on notice that he intended to compete in areas beyond regulation. Their patience was soon put to the test!
Amazingly, Perret was already distracted from his growing watch regulation business in La Chaux-de-Fonds. In February of 1888 he turned management of the company over to his father, Numa Perret, and associate Louis-Ulysse Vuille. The firm handled large adjustment orders from watchmakers throughout the city for the next five years but was dissolved after the elder Perret’s death on June 27, 1893.
Pompous Praise for a Charlatan
On June 28, 1889, newspapers across Switzerland published an anonymous letter announcing a remarkable achievement: Thanks to his “very important” yet “secret” invention, Paul Perret was able to adjust 24 balances from inexpensive watches in a single day, delivering 21 which met the “1st class” criteria of the Geneva Observatory. Proclaiming him to be “among the boldest innovators in this industry,” the letter writers claim that “this invention will mark an important date in the history of watchmaking.”
This extraordinary claim was not met with enthusiasm.
Swiss people tend to be reserved, but they can become quite aggressive when provoked. I am not aware of anything in historic watchmaking that compares to the anger, accusations, and incredible sarcasm that followed this open letter!
The “pompous praise” of this letter was compared to “a large American advertisement” as the claims were ripped apart. Obtaining a 1st class certificate from the Geneva Observatory requires 45 days of observation of a complete, cased watch, and no such trial was performed with Perret’s specimens. In fact, it was claimed that two thirds of the movements actually failed at day 17, so the test was cut short. A representative of the Observatory confirmed their participation in the experiment but also these failures.
Perret’s promoters quickly folded in the face of such criticism, acknowledging the folly of their initial anonymous letter. They revealed themselves as Albert-H. Potter and Berthold Pellaton, and claimed to have promoted Perret’s work to prod him to promote himself more heavily! They also promised to publish the data behind their claims in Journal Suisse d’Horlogerie, which they did a week later, both there and in the ordinary newspapers.
But the accusations continued, with many seeing a connection between Perret’s promotion of patents and his revolutionary machine. They accused him of attempting to withhold his invention from his Swiss critics to favor the burgeoning American watchmaking industry! This accusation forced a response, with Perret himself promising to make the device openly available to Swiss watchmakers.
Given the emotional response to Perret’s claims, it is surprising that the controversy quickly faded. He licensed his secret device, which proved to be little more than an improved Talentoscope, to Paul Jeannot of Geneva, who set up a business in La Chaux-de-Fonds to regulate watches using the technique. And so the controversy was resolved for a time.
Perret and Jeannot worked together to produce watches as well. Perret licensed Patent CH1 to Jeannot and shared ownership of a number of patents with him through the 1890s. These included an improved chronograph mechanism, a replaceable balance cock (precursor to the porte-echappements that gave Portescap its name), and an improved independent seconds hand mechanism. Paul Jeannot was the son of a watchmaker from Les Brenets near the border with France who set up a watch factory in Barcelona before expanding in Switzerland. But the 1890s Jeannot junior was trying to grow the family business but was beset by the emerging unionization of workers, who rejected his paltry pay rates. He was arrested in 1895 related to the bankruptcy of his factory, which likely spelled the end of Paul Perret’s participation in the business.
Guillaume and the Invar Balance Spring
Given the importance of chronometry in many fields of science and the incredible progress in watchmaking over the last 150 years, it is somewhat surprising that there has only ever been a single Nobel Prize awarded in the field. Charles-Édouard Guillaume received the prize in physics in 1920 “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys.” Yet the humble Guillaume was happy to share credit for this discovery with one of his fellow Neuchâteloise: Paul Perret!
Guillaume was a remarkably dedicated scientist. Born in Fleurier, Canton Neuchâtel, in 1861, he proved his ability while studying engineering at the Federal Polytechnic School in Zürich (ETH). After graduation, Guillaume relocated to Sèvres near Paris to join the International Bureau of Weights and Measures in 1883, where he spent his entire 5 decade career. Guillaume was attracted to Pavillion de Breteuil to contribute to the standardization of the metric system. He was assigned to develop a less-expensive prototype of the meter, then constructed of iridium platinum, for use in surveying. Working with the steelmakers at Imphy, Guillaume discovered the variable magnetism and coefficient of expansion of certain nickel steel alloys.
Realizing that nickel steel could have many applications beyond metrology, Guillaume shared his findings at public scientific conferences. Paul Berner, head of the watchmaking school in La Chaux-de-Fonds, realized that this new alloy could be useful in watchmaking and published the first article on the subject. Upon reading about the material in March of 1897, Paul Perret contacted Guillaume requesting a sample. Guillaume constructed a balance spring from the new alloy and was “struck ill” at the results: The stiffness of the alloy increased with temperature, making the balance run faster. Perret suspected that a slightly different alloy would be perfectly stable in normal temperature ranges, eliminating the need to pair compensating springs and balances!
Perret immediately traveled to Paris to demonstrate his findings, and was amazed as Guillaume produced a plot showing the performance of every alloy. The two quickly secured the proper samples and traveled together back to Perret’s workshop in La Chaux-de-Fonds to construct and observe a prototype balance. Their progress was so impressive that it was shared by Dr. Hirsch, director of the Neuchâtel Observatory, in a June 17 meeting of the Society of Natural Sciences. On August 20, 1897, their nickel steel balance spring was recorded maintaining the same accuracy at 0 and 30 degrees Celsius. Uninterested in commercial matters, Guillaume returned to Sèvres, leaving Perret to bring the new material to market.
Paul Perret had already filed for a patent on the concept, registering it as number CH14270 on May 6, 1897. This patent covered the use of a nickel and steel alloy that increased in elastic force as temperature increased to compensate for a conventional “non-compensated” balance wheel. Incredibly, he had already determined appropriate ratios for a brass balance (28% nickel), a popular brass alloy (35%-36% nickel), and a steel balance (27% nickel). This was written and filed even before his hands-on demonstrations with Guillaume.
Perret’s next challenge was to improve the durability of the alloy. As was then done with steel springs, Perret applied a process of heat treating to harden the new material. This allowed it to be shaped and adjusted like steel, though the long-term reliability of Invar springs would continue to be a question for years to come.
The new spring material was dubbed Invar by Professor Marc Thury, reflecting its invariability to changes in temperature and magnetism. The self-taught Thury was well-known for his work on pendulum clocks and used Guillaume’s alloy to construct a remarkably accurate example. Invar remains a popular pendulum material to this day since it maintains its length as temperature changes.
But Paul Perret’s balance springs actively exploited the predictable expansion of slightly different Invar alloys. This discovery came at exactly the right moment, as the Swiss watchmaking industry was struggling to respond to the newly-formed balance spring cartel. On May 11, 1898, representatives from nearly every watchmaking company gathered in La Chaux-de-Fonds to discuss the creation of their own balance spring company to break the cartel. Although some of those in the audience likely still held a grudge against him, the hosts agreed to allow Paul Perret to take the stage.
At the convocation of watchmakers, and in the watchmaking press the following day, Paul Perret detailed the remarkable properties of Invar balance springs and announced the creation of a new company to produce them in volume. Perret’s claims were supported by respected members of the watchmaking elite: Paul-David Nardin and Paul Ditisheim had experimented with Invar balance wheels and confirmed the material’s properties, while Dr. Hirsch of the Neuchâtel Observatory and Guillaume himself vouched for his experiments. Perret was able to convince the attendees that Invar balance springs could not only replace the steel springs of the cartel but could also enable simple balance wheels to achieve chronometer-level performance. But the meeting also resulted in a commitment to create the Société Suisse des Spiraux, a factory to produce conventional steel springs.
Perret went further than simply announcing the properties of Invar springs that day: He also detailed pricing and immediate commercial availability of two varieties! Although he struggled to produce them in volume, Perret was able to deliver some Invar springs from a workshop he set up in Fleurier by August of that year.
It seems curious that Paul Perret located his Invar spring factory in Fleurier rather than La Chaux-de-Fonds. A fairly small village, Fleurier is strategically located near the center of Swiss watch production and already housed many makers of watch components. And it was the home town of Charles-Édouard Guillaume, which was certainly also a factor. On August 1, 1901, the Fabrique de Spiraux Paul Perret was officially registered, though it had been in operation for three years in a smaller temporary space.
Perret immediately faced financial and health issues and declared bankruptcy on May 16, 1902. Like Guillaume, he struggled with inconsistent quality of the alloy produced by the Imphy forges. And even after tempering his Invar springs were easily damaged with improper handling. Although his Campyloscope made it easier to shape springs with precision, it was difficult to find workers in the small town of Fleurier. Most of the positions were eventually filled by young ladies rather than graduates of the Fleurier watchmaking school.
Paul Perret’s Death and Legacy
Despite being just 49 years of age, Paul Perret suffered a sudden illness on March 30, 1904. He was transferred to the hospital in Le Landeron but died that evening. The company was inherited by his daughter Emma and her stepmother Amélie (née Perrenoud). Emma handled the estate and issued a public appeal to continue the firm “in the interest of the many consumers of this product.”
Although information about these women is sparse, Emma appears to have been a capable businesswoman and accountant, managing the Busga watch factory in La Chaux-de-Fonds in the 1930s. She appears to have married a Mr. Juvet and lived in Geneva for a time. Emma’s sister Marie-Lucie was born in 1882 and likely died around 1893. We know nothing of their mother, Paul Perret’s first wife, but she likely died around the same time. Paul’s father Numa Perret also died that year, suggesting that an illness affected the family.
Paul Perret remarried around 1894. Amélie Perrenoud (1858?-1931) was well-connected in the watchmaking world: She was the aunt of Camille Flotron, a rising star in the world of watchmaking. He managed the main spring factory Resist SA before becoming president of UBAH (overseeing all component makers) and representing spring makers on the board of ASUAG. Amélie died on November 4, 1931, with Emma as Paul Perret’s only surviving family. Her prominent nephew was killed when his car was hit by a train in 1941. Sitting next to Camille Flotron in that car was Robert Guye, manager of the watch balance cartel.
Henri Wittwer, director of the Suchard chocolate factory and Jura-Neuchatelois railroad, and watch tool maker Edouard Ledermann purchased Perret’s Fabrique de Spiraux in 1904, while Perret’s assistant Albert Welter became manager. Wittwer and Ledermann partnered with the rebel balance spring maker Fabrique Nationale de Spiraux, angering the FSR cartel which was eager to produce Invar springs of their own. Paul Baehni of Bienne, director of the largest factory within the cartel, saw the potential of the alloy and pressed to acquire the company. Finally, on September 12, 1906, the cartel took over Paul Perret’s spring factory and acquired his patents.
Production of the springs was transferred to Baehni’s factory in Bienne and the newly-built FSR factory in Geneva in 1915. Perret’s Fleurier factory was closed and his roster of young female workers left unemployed.
Forgetting Paul Perret
It is obvious that Paul Perret still had detractors working against him during the final years of his life. The attributes of Invar were widely and publicly disputed by adjusters, who were certainly worried about losing their livelihood. Although Dr. Hirsch of the Neuchâtel Observatory was a supporter of Perret, his institution took its time in certifying the performance of his balance springs. And the industry backed the conventional steel springs produced by the Société Suisse des Spiraux and rebel factories rather than throwing their weight behind Perret’s Invar springs.
But his sudden death changed everything.
The reputation of Invar balance springs as temperamental and unproven was quickly rehabilitated by the cartel. FSR pushed to release a study confirming the remarkable properties of Invar springs, conducted by Dr. Arndt of the Neuchâtel Observatory. The great Longines factory in Saint-Imier became an enthusiastic supporter of Invar springs, celebrating the accuracy of their mass-produced watches. Soon Invar balance springs became the standard for firms like Moeris (known for anti-magnetic watches), Omega, Zénith, and Tavannes.
For a few years, the name of Paul Perret was generally respected in the industry. His Invar springs enabled watchmakers to industrialize, since they no longer needed to rely on skilled adjusters and compensators. And their performance boosted sales.
But the Invar alloy was constantly being improved, and Perret’s contributions were forgotten. Guillaume created new alloys, including Elinvar in 1920, and he became a genuine celebrity when he received the Nobel Prize that year. Guillaume’s name had far more value than Perret’s. Although Guillaume was personally inclined to share credit with his collaborator even late in life, Perret’s name gradually disappeared. His contribution was largely left out of Guillaume’s obituaries when he died in 1938. Today Paul Perret is hardly ever mentioned, though a homage watch brand did briefly use his name from 2014 to 2020.
The largest watchmakers learned to appreciate the FSR cartel after World War I as industry consolidation became widely accepted. The FSR was absorbed into ASUAG in 1932 along with most of the rebel balance spring makers. An even better balance spring material was developed by Reinhard Straumann just a few years later, and most watchmakers soon switched to his Nivarox alloy, which was also produced by the cartel. Yet Invar remains in wide use today, and every Jaeger-LeCoultre Atmos clock features an Elinvar torsion spring.
The Grail Watch Perspective: We Should Celebrate Paul Perret
Few individuals contributed as much to watchmaking as Paul Perret, yet he is largely forgotten today. Whether for his adjusting and spring shaping machines, his promotion and exploitation of the patent system, or his contribution to the development of a temperature compensating balance spring, Paul Perret left a lasting legacy. And the way he and his friends promoted his accomplishments is just as compelling. If he had not died so suddenly and at such a young age, perhaps there would be even more to tell. But all of this is enough: Paul Perret should not be forgotten!
Reference Material
Happily, I am not the only person to note the accomplishments of Paul Perret. I must first give credit to Hans Weil of Faszination Uhrwerk who created a remarkable study of Daniel JeanRichard, Pierre-Louis Guinand, and Paul Perret. This document (in German), provides much-needed context and helps fill in the story of Paul Jeannot as well! I also recommend Andreas Kelz’ excellent article, Paul Perret and the Swiss Patent No. 1.
I have a great deal more I could say about Paul Perret, and certainly gave short shrift to his other patents and inventions. I also have much more to say about Paul Berner, Marc Thury, Camille Flotron, Adolphe Hirsch, and many other supporting players in this story. Hopefully I will have the time to share their stories as well!
Because information on Paul Perret is so scarce, I am sure I have made some mistakes in this article. If you have additional material or clarifications, please email me (Stephen at grail-watch.com) and I will update this piece. I would particularly love to add a picture of Paul Perret himself, additional details on the life of his daughter Emma, and more about his other accomplishments.
The Swiss Patent System
July 1882 Referendum
October 1882 Olten Meeting
The First Swiss Patents
The Talantoscope
The Talantoscope Controversy
Guillaume and Perret
Paul Perret’s Announcement of Invar
Charles-Édouard Guillaume’s Praise
Paul Perret’s Family
Paul Perret’s Obituaries
The Swiss Patent System
Paul Perret was elected to the Société d’Emulation Industrielle in La Chaux-de-Fonds in 1881 and promptly directed the organization to support the establishment of a patent system in Switzerland. This was an unusual move, since the society had previously steered clear of politics. But when the national council rejected a bill to establish the system, individuals like Perret supported referenda to establish such a system directly. The initial referendum on July 30, 1882, failed but Perret convened a meeting in Olten in October to continue the campaign. The system was ultimately established in November 1888, and Perret received the first patent!
July 1882 Referendum
Patents (REVISION OF ART. 64.)
The Industrial Emulation Society of La Chaux-de-Fonds to the federal electors of the canton of Neuchâtel.
Dear fellow citizens!
The Swiss people are called upon to decide on July 30 an addition to the Federal Constitution, stolen by the Chambers, and intended to give the Confederation the competence necessary to legislate on the protection of inventions in the field of industry and agriculture, as well as on the protection of designs.
For the first time, the Industrial Emulation Society intervenes in a popular vote: That is to say that it is not a political question. We are indeed in the presence of a purely economic and industrial question whose solution will cost nothing to the State and will contribute to the prosperity of the nation.
We come to urge our fellow citizens to vote for the new constitutional provision submitted to them and to set out the main reasons that guide us:
1. Until now, intellectual property has not enjoyed any protection with us. The most important discoveries and inventions can be exploited by anyone, overnight, without there being any guarantee for the work, always considerable and often ruinous, to which the inventors have devoted themselves. Why has the Law, so concerned with the protection of all other property, whatever its origins, remained indifferent to that of inventions? It will be difficult to say, but what is certain is that this unequal treatment constitutes an injustice which must disappear.
2. The Federal Constitution provides for the protection of literary and artistic property. A law on this matter is currently before the Chambers. Why should industry not have the same right? Why should the worker not enjoy the same advantages as the writer, the painter, the sculptor, etc.?
3. If we want to see our watchmaking schools, our art schools, and all the institutions whose goal is the technical and artistic development of work prosper, those who make the necessary sacrifices to follow these courses must know that they do not run the risk of being dispossessed of the fruit of their labors.
4. All civilized nations protect inventions and most of them work together for the creation of international legislation in this field. A draft convention drawn up by representatives of thirteen States provides for the creation of a central office for patents of invention, of which Switzerland would have the honor of being the seat.
5. The absence of a protective law, in our country, has already had unfortunate consequences for us, because it has led a good number of Swiss to seek – with regret – outside the homeland, the guarantee that it will not offered them point; it forced them to carry abroad the product of their labor and their intelligence and thus to join foreign competition.
6. Vis-à-vis other nations, our situation becomes more false day by day. Here, as a result of a commercial treaty, foreigners enjoy with us a protection which does not exist for the Swiss. There, the law only protects nationals of countries in which reciprocity exists. Everywhere we are bound in a state of suspicion which comes to light in all the exhibitions, as if we were a nation which relies on counterfeiting to live, whereas free Switzerland must be enlightened enough to know that there is no lasting prosperity than that which is based on the loyalty of all its children.
Dear fellow citizens!
Our canton cannot remain indifferent.
Our industrial interests require us to turn out en masse at the polls to show that we are interested to a large extent in this important question. An imposing demonstration will give us a good situation to make our wishes heard during the elaboration of the federal law which will be failed following the revision of the Constitution.
So let’s all go to the polls next Sunday and vote: YES!
Chaux-de-Fonds, July 27, 1882.
In the name of the industrial emulation society gathered in assembly today: THE COMMITTEE: Paul Perret, President; Auguste Ducommun, Vice-President; Edward Steiner, Secretary; Jules Brandt, Deputy Secretary; Edward Meyer, treasurer; Charles Couleru-Meuri, Deputy Secretary. Fritz Humbert, Eugène Lenz, Nutin Fiffel, Auguste Reymond, Clément Guisan, Tissot-Vougeux, Jean Brandli, Auguste Klinger, Philippe Girard, Henry Perregaux, Albert Vuille, Eugene Soguel, Fritz Cuanillon, Albert Sandoz.
l’Impartial, July 29, 1882
October 1882 Olten Meeting
The issue of patents, so unfortunately rejected by the people on July 30, will be taken up again. We know that the Industrial Emulation Society of La Chaux-de-Fonds requested this, in order to have a point of support in order to organize the petitioning of the federal authorities for the main Swiss companies which are interested to trade and industry. The Committee, encouraged by the favorable and benevolent replies which it has received from various quarters, has taken the initiative of convening in Olten, on Sunday, October 8, a meeting of delegates from these societies. The appeal is at the same time addressed to the press and to all those who have the protection of inventions at heart. Here is the text of this document:
Dear fellow citizens, dear Confederates,
The result of the July 30 referendum concerning the protection of inventions in the field of industry and agriculture, as well as the protection of designs and models, caused throughout Switzerland such a general feeling of astonishment that it is permissible to think that this vote does not represent the last word of the nation.
The many supporters of this protection did not think for a moment that one could offend cantonal sovereignty by giving the federal power this administrative power, because it is obvious that the cantons would be powerless to exercise it, and they believed that the triumph of their idea was assured.
Hence an almost complete absence of work to overcome the indifference of the electorate and to enlighten the vote.
The undersigned committees, while expressing their respect for any demonstration of universal suffrage, whatever the result, cannot however resolve to consider the question as definitively settled.
They have the deep conviction that concerns unrelated to the thing itself exerted a great influence on the vote.
They hope that by calling from the misinformed people to the well-informed people, our homeland can finally be provided with an institution necessary for our industrial and economic development.
It is guided by this idea that the undersigned committees, thinking that it is necessary to act while public opinion is still awake, believe that they must, as a first step, appeal to all the companies which interests of commerce and industry, to the press and to all persons interested in the protection of inventions, and to invite them to attend a General Assembly which will take place at the Buffet de la Gare d’Olten, on Sunday October 8, 1882; at 11.30 a.m., with the following agenda. Is there any reason to take up again the question of patents for invention now, and, if so, what is the best course of action to obtain a favorable result?
This appeal is addressed to all the societies and to all the newspapers of which we have been able to obtain the list. It is certain that we will have made involuntary omissions, so we ask all newspapers sympathetic to the work to reproduce it, so that all interested societies know that they are warmly invited to attend the meeting in Olten.
Dear fellow citizens, dear Confederates,
We are counting on the support of all men who are concerned about the future of our country and who want to contribute to ensuring this future through innovation based on principles of justice and loyalty in work, the value of which cannot be contested and which all civilized nations have enshrined in their laws.
We believe that the federal authorities, who have pronounced themselves by a large majority in favor of this new constitutional provision, will not hesitate to adopt it, if the Swiss people express their wish by imposing demonstrations.
This is why we address an urgent appeal to all those who agree with us that we must act. The indifference that accompanied the popular vote will be without excuse today, after the lesson of July 30th.
So come in large numbers to Olten, so that when we leave the assembly we can all cry out together: The invention patent is dead; long live the patent!
September 1882.
On behalf of the Committee of the Industrial Emulation Society: President, Paul Perret; Secretary, E. Steiner. On behalf of the Assembly of Sculptors of the Öberland Sculpture Institute and the Society of Sculptors of Bronze: President due filled, H. Baumgartner, pastor; Secretary, C. Bigler-Leitz. On behalf of the Commission of the Society of Former Polytechnicians for the adoption of the protection of inventions: President, P.-E. Huber; Secretary, H. Paul, Engineer. On behalf of the Intercantonal Society of
Industries of the Jura: President, H. Etienne; Vice-President, E. Francillon. On behalf of the Swiss Section of the International Permanent Commission for the Protection of Industrial Intellectual Property: President, J. Weibel; Secretary, E. Imer-Schneider, Engineer. On behalf of the Geneva Commercial and Industrial Association: Chairman, E. Pictet; Vice-President, J. Weibel.
l’Impartial, October 1, 1882
The Olten Meeting, convened on Sunday, 8 October, had 70 delegates from various Swiss companies involved in industry and commerce. Mr. Paul Perret, President of the Industrial Emulation Society of La Chaux-de-Fonds, opened the meeting with a speech included in the protocol and which will be communicated to the Swiss press.
The office of the assembly was composed as follows: MM. Hoffmann-Merian, Basel, President; Paul Perret, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Vice-President; D’Oelli, Berne, German Secretary; Humbert-Droz, Locle, French secretary; Mulhaupt, Berne, and L. Rozat, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Scrutineers.
Several speakers developed the question of industrial protection and declared themselves in favor of patents. This question must be taken up again despite the disastrous result of the popular vote of July 30th. M. Paru, Chancellor of the State of Geneva, spoke in this sense; Emile Merz, engineer in Basel; Zschokke, deputy to the State, at Aarau, and Greisely, at Solothurn.
Mr. Steiger, from Hérisau, a very determined adversary, proposes not to take up the question again. The assembly, unanimously minus two votes, decides that it will be resumed immediately.
The program proposed by the Industrial Emulation Society of La Chaux-de-Fonds was adopted in full and almost unanimously.
The office of the Intercantonal Society of Jura Industries is appointed central committee; he will designate two committees of action and execution, one for German Switzerland, the other for French Switzerland. This mode of proceeding was very favorably received by the assembly, which augurs well for the upcoming campaign. The Central Committee, inspired by the ideas expressed in the meeting of October 8, will bring it to a successful conclusion.
Many testimonials of congratulations and energetic support reached the Initiative Committee from the invited companies who could not be represented.
Everything leads us to believe that the desired end will be achieved for the greater good of our national industries.
l’Impartial, October 11, 1882
The First Swiss Patents
Although Perret’s referenda failed, a system of patents was ultimately established in Switzerland in 1888. Perret, being the driver of this reform and a very prolific inventor, arrived the night before to register the very first Swiss patent on November 15, 1888. He also received four more patents that first day!
Patents of invention, literary property, etc. Bern, October 6, 1888.
In the legal referendum period that ended on the 2nd, no opposition was raised against the Federal Law on Invention Patents of June 29, 1888.
The Federal Council ordered the publication of this law in the official collection and approved its implementation from November 15.
At the same time, it decided that, under the name of the Federal Intellectual Property Office, a special division of the respective federal department (under that of foreign affairs) would be created, which will be responsible for the enforcement of the following laws: a) The Federal Law on Invention Patents; b) The Federal Law concerning the protection of trademarks; c) The Federal Law on literary and artistic property; d) The federal law – currently in deliberation – of designs.
The belongings to this office will be sent, for the time being, by the following staff: A director, one or two assistants, a manager and the necessary number of clerks.
The Department of Foreign Affairs is responsible for contesting these various functions. Upon appointment to these positions, the Federal Council will fix the treatments for them according to the Federal Law on the Organization of the Federal Department of Commerce and Agriculture of April 21, 1883, and will ask this effort for the necessary appropriations from the Federal Assembly.
l’Impartial, October 9, 1888
The Swiss law on patents will enter into force on November 15th. The question has been on the table for a long time, says M. C. Bodenheimer, in the Lausanne Gazette, where he devotes the following lines to this question:
As early as 1849 a motion requesting the introduction of patents was presented to the National Council, which rejected it. In 1851, petitions to the same effect from Mr. Theodore Zappinger, of Mannedorf, and two other Zurich manufacturers. In 1834, petition from M. Lambelet, from Verrières, former member of the National Council; the National Council also rejects it. In 1861, the Prussian legation to the Swiss Confederation requested the Federal Council to provide it with information on the effects produced in Switzerland by the absence of any protection for inventions; the Federal Council replies by transmitting to La Prasse an opinion from MM. Bolley and Kronauer, professors at Zurich, the former of chemistry, the latter of mechanical technology, and both speaking out against patents. In 1862, the National Council rejects a motion of Dr. J. Schneider, of Bern, asking for the introduction of patents.
In 1865, the same fate befell the petition of Mr. Walter Zappinger, chief engineer of the firm of Escher, Wyss and Co., and yet this petition was supported by Alfred Escher, Dubs, Rüttimann, Vigier, Eugene Escher, & Co. The same year a brochure was created by Dr. Honegger for patents. In 1869, a pamphlet by Mr. Victor Boeehmert, professor at the Polytechnic (today director of the statistical office of the kingdom of Saxony) against patents. In 1871, rejection of a motion by Dr. Joos, asking that an article be introduced into the Constitution allowing the Confederation to legislate without patents. In 1874, favorable brochure by Mr. Adolphe Olt. The same year, rejection of a new Zuppinger petition. In 1876, petition of MM. Nestlé et al., petition by 43 Swiss photographers and to the National Council, motion by MM. Bally et al. In 1877, favorable pamphlet by Max Wirth, former director of the Federal Bureau of Statistics. The same year the committee of the Swiss Society of Commerce and Industry (the president then being Mr. Kochlin-Geigy, from Basle) decides on various questions relating to industrial and literary property that the Federal Department of Commerce had submitted, and requests, with regard to patents, that the Saisse not take a decision before Germany has legislated on the matter.
The question finally took shape after Mr. N. Droz, then head of the Federal Department for the Interior, had published a study on the question of patents entitled “general inquiry and preliminary draft law”.
As early as 1873 the Federal Council was represented at Vienna, where the Universal Exhibition was linked to the International Congress of Industrial Property. In 1878, a second congress was held in Paris, also on the occasion of the exhibition. The Federal Council delegated the author of these lines, Mr. Imer-Schneider, a civil engineer, and Mr. Schreyer, now an insurance director and at that time a professor in Geneva. The report, which we sent to the Federal Council on our return from Paris, is now just ten years old (October 1878). In his conclusions he said among other things: “… A very striking reproach that we heard made selling the congress to the Swiss industry in its present position, that is to say in the absence of patents of invention is that of not having perfected the foreign inventions which it appropriated, and on the contrary of having made only mediocre imitations of them. This observation, if it is justified, is important, because it refutes one of the main arguments of the adversaries of the protection of inventions, who see in this very protection an obstacle to the general progress of the industry, which would result. This means that, during a certain period of time, the inventor alone has the right to perfect his invention … The Swiss will not be able to rely on protecting industrial property for a long time … It owes this, among other things, to the reputation of its industry. At the congress, an official delegate from America, Mr. PolIok, called Switzerland a country of counterfeiters. We have rejected this unfair reproach, but there will not be, each time this reproach is peddled by interested competitors, we will be present to respond.”
After pointing out that watchmaking, embroidery and other industries could not do without industrial protection if foreigners do not want to exploit their reputation for their own profit, we added: “There is also another point; it is that of the internal discipline of our industries. Germany has entered into the path of minute protection, and at Congress she has supported the projects of international understanding. (She has since abandoned them. The author.) And why? Is it not up to a certain point because the German industry is impatient to be able to get rid of this epithet “schlecht und billig” (bad and cheap) that M. Reuleaux (he was a delegate to the congress) act has applied and which has earned him such enemy numbers and such warm friends? And don’t we in Switzerland have some considerations of this nature to weigh and examine?”
“Once again we ask what would be the role played by Switzerland if it remained isolated in the midst of the international understanding which is in the process of being created? Forced by treaties to protect foreigners, it would be powerless to protect its own nationals.”
Since then, international agreement has been reached and Switzerland has adopted its own law on patents. At the time when it will come into force it was perhaps worth remembering that we have been asking for it for a long time.
l’Impartial, October 20, 1888
Under this title we will regularly publish the list of registered patents concerning the watch industry. We recall, in passing, that the federal office of intellectual property opened, in Bern, on November 15, 1888, rue de la Lorraine, n° 3 (asylum for the blind); those interested may obtain free of charge from the said office copies of the laws, regulations and federal decrees on the subject, as well as forms for applications for patents of invention and certificates of temporary protection at exhibitions. These same forms will continue to be delivered free of charge to those concerned by the care of the cantonal chancelleries.
It should also be remembered that the Federal Trademark Office is also transferred to the above address.
From the first day of opening of the office on intellectual property, 120 applications are received: here are those for patents concerning the world of watchmaking:
N° 1. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Perfectionnements apportés à la construction des mouvements de montres de toutes dimensions. – Perret, Paul, rue du Pare, 65, Chaux-de-Fonds.
N° 8. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Nouveau mécanisme de remontoir et de mise à l’heure par le pendant pour montres de tous calibres. – Kuhn & Tieche, fabricants d’horlogerie, Bienne.
N° 9. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Nouveau système de montre, grande sonnerie, répétition. – Heuer, Edouard, Bienne.
N° 10. 15 nor. 1888, 8 h. – Nouvelle disposition du mécanisme des montres à répétition avec chronographe. – Goy-Golay, Auguste, Brassus (Vaud).
N° 12. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Nouveau système de chronographe-compteur. – Boret, Hermann, Quartier neuf, Bienne.
N° 15. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Nouveau calibre de montres de poche pour être exécuté en toutes dimensions et en tous métaux. – Humbert fils, Charles, successeur, Chaux-de-Fonds, rue Léopold Robert, 03.
N° 21. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Nouveau système de raquette avec colimaçon régulateur. – Perret, Paul, rue du Parc, 65, Chaux-de-Fonds.
Nº 22. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Pièces détachées servant à fabriquer par un nouveau procédé les balanciers compensés et spiraux pour montres et chronomètres. – Perret, Paul, rue du Parc, 65, Chaux-de-Fonds.
N° 23. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Perfectionnements apportés à la construction du moteur (ressort et barillet) des montres de poche de tous systèmes et de toutes dimensions. – Perret, Paul, rue du Parc, 65, Chaux-de-Fonds.
N° 21. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Perfectionnements apportés à la construction des couronnes de remontoir pour montres de toutes dimensions. – Perret, Paul, rue du Parc, 65, Chaux-de-Fonds.
N° 32. 15 nov. 1888, 9¼ h. – Nouvelle montre chronographe. – Jacot-Burmann, Bienne, et Æby, Léo, Madretsch.
N° 44. 15 nov. 1888, h h. – Nouveau système de ferrure à glace. – Perret, David, Neuchâtel.
N° 46. 15 nov. 1888, 8 h. – Nouvelle composition des plaques métalliques servant â la fabrication des boites de montres, médaillons et autres bijoux. – Bargel, François, place Cornavin, Genève.
l’Impartial, December 6, 1888
The Talantoscope
Paul Perret was said to have invented his adjusting machine as early as 1873 (when he was just 19 years of age) and certainly perfected it by 1877 when he published the following article in Journal Suisse d’Horlogerie. Later versions were named Talantoscope and were produced for commercial sale by 1883.
The Talantoscope Controversy
A controversy over the device arose in 1889 when it was suggested that the machine produced such good results that skilled adjusters were no longer needed. Not wanting to fan the flames, Perret ignored the talk and this caused rumors that he meant to sell the device in America rather than in Switzerland.
We are asked for the hospitality of our columns for the following lines:
A very important invention was made by M. Paul Perret, of La Chaux-de-Fonds, concerning the adjustment of watches.
The inventor communicated to a group of competent men, the results at which he arrived, and it is these people who take pleasure in making public the merits of Mr. Paul Perret.
In their opinion, this invention will mark an important date in the history of watchmaking and its author will henceforth be among the boldest innovators in this industry.
Performing precision adjustment mechanically and in an absolutely scientific manner, then applying it to inexpensive watches, such is the problem posed by Mr. Paul Perret in 1875, and which will seem insane to the eyes especially of those who deal precision adjustment.
After 14 years of study, research and application, our compatriot has carried out this vast project. He had to overcome one after another considerable difficulties, difficulties that several masters of science had declared insurmountable.
The invention of Mr. Paul Perret currently remains a secret but we were allowed to attend an experiment made especially with a view to proving the existence of this invention. The Geneva Observatory was kind enough to lend its support to this scientific test. Twenty-four balance cocks and pendulums belonging to movements he did not know were given to Mr. Paul Perret and at the end of the same day, he returned the adjustments made.
At that time only the cogs and pendulums were adjusted to the movements and these were carried directly without prior observation at the Geneva Observatory. The observations lasted twelve days namely during top, right, left, dial bottom, top, cooler and oven with intermediate days and to finish during top.
As these movements were of standard quality, two could not subsequently withstand the test of stops resulting from manufacturing defects. Of the 22 who remained under observation, twenty-one fulfilled the conditions for the 1st class bulletin (Category A of the Geneva Observatory); Only one gasped for a 3 second gap.
Citation of these results is sufficient. Any comment becomes useless, if one takes into account the fact that Mr. Paul Perret, born near La Sagne in 1855, was a farmer until the age of 17 and prevented from regularly attending a local school, one must be surprised at the perseverance he had to display to walk so quickly and get so far. Indeed, he settled in La Chaux-de-Fonds as an apprentice watchmaker in 1872, and already in 1873 he invented his first adjusting machine. In 1874 he was called as technical director of the Fontainemelon blanks factory, functions which he resigned in 1876 to devote himself to the practice of watchmaking and to continue his studies concerning the problem he had posed in 1875. In 1878 Mr. Paul Perret exhibited in Paris two machines of his invention, the Talantoscope and the Campyloscope, which earned him a medal and the praise of the jury.
In 1881, at the national watchmaking exhibition in La Chaux-de-Fonds, we see him obtain the first class prize with silver medal, the highest award, and in 1883 we meet him in Zurich as a member of the jury of the Swiss national exhibition.
In 1882, it was Mr. Paul Perret who took the initiative in the campaign which fortunately endowed Switzerland with a law on patents for invention and from 1878 to 1888 he delivered 200,000 Breguet settings to industry. Despite all these occupations, Mr. Perret nevertheless continued unceasingly to pursue the goal he had proposed and it is thanks to this incessant work that he arrived at the full possession of his invention.
Also to this brave pioneer of our national industry we say courage! To the work belongs the reward.
l’Impartial, June 28, 1889
We receive the following letter for which we are asked for a place in our columns:
Mr. Editor of the Impartial, your issue the day before yesterday contains an anonymous article about Mr. Paul Perret’s wonderful inventions.
It seems to me that the people who wrote this statement would have done well to sign their article so that it does not look like a large American advertisement.
If after fourteen years of research and application, the inventor of the Talantoscope and the Campyloscope “carried out a vast project for for which he had to overcome one after the other considerable difficulties, difficulties that several masters of science had declared insurmountable!”
If really our young compatriot from the surroundings of la Sagne made a discovery that places him at the rank of famous men, it is an insult to him to give in a newspaper, under the veil of the anonymous, an overview of his invention and his biography.
While thanking you in advance, please accept, Mr. Editor, my most respectful greetings.
A. S.
l’Impartial, June 30, 1889
We published, in our Friday edition, a communication relating to an alleged invention of Mr. Paul Perret, concerning the setting of watches. We accorded hospitality to these lines for the reason above all that the said communication was addressed to other Neuchâtel and even Geneva newspapers; several of them – the Neuchatelois and the Tribune de Genève in the lead – have published this article. We have also inserted it in our columns with the aim of provoking a public debate on the alleged inventions of Mr. Perret which have been talked about for some time.
We have already received a communication that we published in a previous issue. Today we receive the following letters to which we grant the hospitality requested by their authors:
La Chaux-de-Fonds, July 1, 1889.
Mr. Editor of the Impartial, You would oblige me, by inserting in your honorable journal the following lines:
I have just read in l’Impartial of June 28, an article pompously praising an invention of Mr. Paul Perret, adjuster in La Chaux-de-Fonds, an invention by means of which he claims to be able to adjust watches in the different positions without the help of movements. I am certain that this is not possible, for the most perfect machine cannot take into account the irregularities resulting from the driving force, the train, the assortment, the crashing of the escapement, the friction of pivots in the stone holes.
How could a machine predict and correct these irregularities? Irregularities which, as all competent persons know, vary from one watch to another.
I doubt very much that the competent people mentioned in the article in question are Nardins, Potters, Borgsteits, etc., etc.
How is it that the Geneva Observatory granted Mr. P. P. 1st class bulletins (Category A), when its regulations provide for 45 days of observation?
Please accept, Mr. Editor, with my thanks in advance, the assurance of my highest consideration.
N. ROBERT-WÆLTI.
Mr. Editor of the Impartial, please grant these few lines the hospitality of your columns:
In No. 2619 of l’Impartial, published Friday, June 28, I read an anonymous article relating to inventions and other specialties of P. Perret.
Allow me to point out to you that this article is only a tissue of erroneous affirmations and that it seems very much to be the work of a charlatan.
Then, from information taken from a good source, I am permitted to say that it is completely inaccurate that Mr. P. Perret obtained 1st class bulletins (Category A) at the Geneva Observatory.
To obtain these certifications, the parts must undergo 45 days of tests; however, Mr. Perret’s watches having only stayed 17 days at the Observatory, no certificate could therefore be delivered to him.
As for the amazing result, here it is: After 17 days of observations, 17 parts out of the 24 in question had already failed and the remaining 7 would certainly have suffered the same fate if the tests had continued during the 45 regulatory days.
For the moment, I will not point out the other errors with which the authors of this article have been pleased to point out our valiant pioneer, the conqueror of the considerable difficulties which several masters of science had declared insurmountable.
Please accept, Mr. Editor, with my thanks in advance, assurance of my perfect time.
G.-R.
On the other hand, the Geneva Observatory sends the following correction to the Tribune:
The tests undergone by watches registered to examine the results of Mr. P. Perret’s invention for adjustment cannot be assimilated to the regulatory tests required for category chronometers.
It cannot therefore be claimed that the majority of these pieces would have obtained a very satisfactory report, as defined by the rules of the Observatory. We can only affirm that seven of the watches compared over 17 days provided average deviations remaining below the limits assigned for obtaining these ratings.
You will find on the advertisement pages of this issue a humorous article with the title: Extraordinary progress, which naturally targets Mr. Perret and his invention. It will be curious to see how he will defend himself against the assertions contained in the above letters.
l’Impartial, July 1, 1889
Extraordinary progress!
A young compatriot, having arrived after eighty-five years of study at the goal of his research concerning a machine to adjust chronometers automatically, recommends himself to the industrialists of La Chaux-de-Fonds and the surrounding area.
With the help of this machine, it can provide after 12 hours two large chronometer settings, with first-class Observatory bulletins, observed in 36 positions, guaranteed to be set to 2 hundredths of a second.
The undersigned declares that, if a single piece from this house fails, he will not be compensated.
To execute these adjustments, it is enough to send the numbers of the cartons and the screw of a cock.
Campi LOOS,
Rue des Talents N° 100 (Oscop house), SAINT-IMIER.
N.B. This invention is for sale at the price of TWO million and 25 cents.
l’Impartial, July 1, 1889
We receive the following letter to which we grant the hospitality of our columns in the same way as to the communications dealing with the same subject, and which have been inserted in our journal.
Geneva, July 5, 1889. Mr. Impartial Editor, La Chaux-de-Fonds.
We take advantage of the kind hospitality you accord to the articles concerning the inventions of Mr. Paul Perret.
First of all, we claim the authorship of the very first article, which highlighted the merits of Mr. Paul Perret and the path he has traveled so quickly.
Acting on behalf of a few friends, we wanted to encourage the inventor and do him justice, breaking with the tradition that often wanted the researcher in Switzerland to remain anonymous and even sometimes frustrated of the benefits of his painful work.
We recognize that the discoveries of Mr. Paul Perret can arouse great emotion. Our friends and ourselves could hardly believe them when they were first developed among us, but we had to bow before the brutal fact.
We will not speak here of a first experiment which took place on movements provided by Mr. Paul Perret. It was on this occasion that, wanting to have absolutely conclusive proofs, we imposed on him the experiment in question and which consisted in providing the operator with 24 movements which would be absolutely foreign to him and of ordinary quality.
This is what happened last April and we certify that Mr. Perret only received the cogs and balance wheels for his adjustments and that he made them in a single day. We further certify that the cogs were adjusted to the movements under our eyes and that we transported them to the Geneva Observatory without any prior observation having taken place. The experiment made under these conditions was reckless; also what was the general astonishment when we received communication of the magnificent results obtained by these movements.
The table of these observations, issued by Colonel Gautier, director of the Geneva Observatory, is a very interesting document, which will be published in the August issue of the Journal suisse d’Horlogerie.
We refer our readers to it, while expressing the wish that Mr. Perret would add a few developments.
Receive, Mr. Editor, the assurance of our highest consideration.
Albert-H. Potter, Berthold Pellaton
l’Impartial, July 7, 1889
Dear Editor of L’Impartial, at La Chaux-de-Fonds.
You published a press release from the Geneva Observatory about our first article on the inventions of Paul Perret.
After conferring with the Director of the Geneva Observatory, we recognize that the form of our assessment could mislead by suggesting that we wanted to assimilate 12-day tests with the regulatory 45-day tests imposed on Category A chronometers.
We only heard of the results obtained to compare them with the limits imposed on pieces of this category, results deduced from the TABLE below certified by the director of the observatory.
Receive, Sir, the assurance of our highest consideration.
Albert H. Potter, Berthold Pellaton
l’Impartial, July 12, 1889
We remember the controversy that arose, a year ago, after the announcement of results obtained by Mr. Paul Perret, of our city, for the adjustment of watches by a rapid process of his invention, and presented to the Geneva Observatory without the running and adjustment of these watches having been subjected to any prior observation.
The results were so surprising that many people had questioned them and taxed their publication as mere advertising. A circular which we have in front of us tells us that the house of Paul Jeannot, of Geneva, has acquired joint ownership of the inventions, models and trademarks of Mr. Perret and that it has founded, in our city, under his technical direction, a watchmaking factory, with application of its mechanical precision adjustment process.
At the same time, we learn that the important house of Paul Jeannot, from Geneva, will move its head office to La Chaux-de-Fonds next November.
l’Impartial, June 12, 1890
Guillaume and Perret
Paul Perret’s greatest accomplishment was the discovery, with Charles-Édouard Guillaume, of the nickel steel alloy known as Invar. Guillaume’s work showed the many properties of the alloy but it was Perret who developed the material for use as a balance spring for watches.
Paul Perret’s Announcement of Invar
The hairspring crisis
They write to us:
According to the scholarly research of Dr. Ch.-Ed. Guillaume on nickel steels, with his collaboration and that of the metallurgical company of Commentry-Fourchambault, I discovered a new principle, which allows this metal to be applied to the adjustment of watches.
Today, after carefully verified work, I am able to provide the watchmaking industry with two solutions: one which replaces the hardened steel hairspring with the steel-nickel durei hairspring; the other replacing the soft steel hairspring with another, also in nickel-steel, which is superior to it being not very magnetic and very little oxidable.
The hardened steel-nickel hairsprings, advantageously replacing the hardened steel hairspring, will be on sale from May 15. Those which will replace the soft steel hairspring from June 16.
Prices are set at:
Fr. 2.— a dozen for the dureis spirals, tight with turns, sizes 1 to 50, and spaced apart with turns, sizes 12 to 25.
Fr. 0.50 per dozen for soft, common sizes, from sizes 7, tee 1, to size 30.
I will deal exclusively with wholesale sales, the depositaries, whose names will be published soon, will have retail sales.
La Chaux-de-Fonds, May 10, 1898.
Paul PERRET
La Fédération Horlogère, May 12, 1898
Solution to the hairspring crisis
The watch manufacturers of La Chaux-de-Fonds, brought together here, numbering around a hundred, by the General Secretariat of the Cantonal Chamber of Commerce, were made aware of the question through a complete history accompanied by a presentation of the various solutions. Delegates from the Society of Watch Manufacturers of Le Locle, the Berne Cantonal Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the Union of Watch Manufacturers of the Canton of Bern were present.
Unanimously, the assembly refused to enter into discussion on the proposals for agreement offered by the Society of Reunited Spiral Factories.
A communication concerning the steel-nickel hairspring, which Mr. Paul Perret, from La Chaux-de-Fonds, will launch, was received with sympathy by the assembly.
Taught by experience, and determined not to suffer, in the present and in the future, the tyranny of any group of speculators or hoarders, the assembly decided the immediate creation of a joint stock company for the manufacture of hairsprings for watches.
Immediately, around thirty thousand francs were subscribed. At the time of writing, underwriting among manufacturers in La Chaux-de-Fonds exceeds 50,000 francs. Bienne supplies 16,000 francs. We will know, in a few days, the results of the other industrial centers.
These are the first fruits of the rise of April 0 and the intransigent attitude of the Society of United Spiral Factories.
La Fédération Horlogère, May 15, 1898
Nickel steels
There is a lot of talk at the moment about nickel steels, with regard to the appearance of Paul Perret hairsprings, made with metal of this composition. We therefore read with interest the following article, published in the Chronometric Review:
The Bulletin of the National Industry Encouragement Society contains in its March 1898 issue a memoir by M. Ch.-Ed. Guillaume, entitled Research on nickel steels, in which this scholar, member of the Institute, reports on the numerous tests he carried out on alloys obtained by adding varying amounts of nickel to steel.
Mr. Ed. Guillaume divides nickel steels into two distinct categories: steels containing 0 to 25% nickel and to which he gives the name of irreversible alloys and those where the nickel content exceeds 25% and which he calls reversible alloys because of their different magnetic properties.
Most nickel steels are not very oxidizable, they are all very tough, remarkably homogeneous and capable of a fine polish: reversible alloys lend themselves to rolling, drawing into bars or wires down to diameters of less than one tenth of a millimeter.
Reversible alloys have a dilation which varies within very wide limits depending on the proportion of nickel, but when the content of the latter metal is between 35% and 36% steel can have a dilation ten times lower than that of platinum and more than twenty times lower than that of brass, the expansion is not exclusively a function of the nickel content, it also depends on the state of annealing or scorching of the metal lowers at the same time the dilation, finally the stretching succeeding the quenching is another factor of reduction of the dilation.
Nickel steels experience variations in length under the action of time, which are accentuated by a rise in temperature according to complex laws having, however, a great analogy with the variations in volume of glass.
Properly conducted annealing shortens the duration of the perceptible variation of the bars and when a variation of 0.001 mm per meter can be accepted, annealing in SO for 100 hours at 100° is fully sufficient to ensure the permanence of an instrument for at least one year If a consistency twice as great is required, this annealing must be followed by a series of heatings. for example, that the ruler stays at least 400 hours in the region of 80° to 60′, 700 hours from 60P to 10°.
The annealing can without inconvenience be practiced in several times. The use of such a metal was ideal for the construction of clock regulators: we know that a variation of 1 micron (1 hundredth of a millimeter) per meter in the length of a pendulum corresponds to a variation in the duration of oscillation less than 0.05 per day. Now, after six or seven months, a bar of the least expandable alloy takes three or four months to experience a variation of this order. A clock provided with a pendulum constituted by one of these suitably dragged alloys would take a march which, at the end of six months, would experience, by the fact of the pendulum, only a delay in; daytime walking of less than 0.02 seconds in a month.
Today, for the pendulum of clocks, we hardly practice more than grid compensation and mercury compensation, even the first is increasingly neglected because of the extreme difficulty of adjusting many rods. steel and brass which must fulfill the double condition of being perfectly guided and absolutely free.
In the mercury pendulum, the play of the elongation of the rod is counterbalanced by the expansion of the mercury contained either in a vase fisé at the end of the rod, or in a tube replacing this rod as in the Riefier system.
The relative expansion of mercury in glass being about fifteen times greater than that of steel, it suffices that the height of the mercury be the sixth or seventh part of the length comprised between the axis of rotation and the center of oscillation. of the pendulum so that there is compensation.
If the steel rod is replaced by a bar of the least expandable nickel steel, the errors are immediately reduced in the ratio of 13 to 1: a difference of 10′ more or less no longer produces , in the diurnal course, only differences less than half a second and it is this already very small quantity that remains to be corrected by compensation.
It suffices to achieve this, to fix on the rod a lens of a sufficiently expandable metal, resting on a nut screwed directly on the rod. By making the lens of non-expandable brass or nickel steel, a ratio of expansions more favorable than that which results from the combination of mercury and steel will be obtained. „It is easily found that if we retain the proportion of oscillating mass and diameter of the stem used in astronomical pendulums, the total height of the lens will be about 14 centimeters for a pendulum beating the second. The dilatation which is compensated is twelve times lower than in the ordinary system. The difference in temperature from the top to the bottom of the cage and the variations resulting from rapid variations in temperature will be reduced in the same proportion. In addition, the disadvantages resulting from the oxydation of the mercury, its evaporation, the variation in the shape of the meniscus and its mobility will be avoided.
There is a point to which it is advisable to draw further attention, it is the possibility of arriving, in the use of new alloys. to full compensation. When one associates mercury with steel, one establishes the compensation for two determined temperatures, but one renounces by the intermediate or external lemperalures an exact compensation. In fact, for it to be complete, it is necessary that the ratio of the two expansions be the same at all temperatures, a condition which is fulfilled when the two terms of the dilation formulas are separately in the same ratio.
However, for steel, the second term is important whereas it is almost nil in the mer-cure. There is therefore, in the system in use, an advance at intermediate temperatures and a delay at extreme temperatures.
With nickel steels, we can choose an alloy which gives a ratio of two terms identical to that of the metal chosen for the lens and we will thus have achieved the compen-salion complete at all the temperatures at which a clock can be exposed.
Recalling that in the course of his thesis he indicated the reservations required by the use of new alloys because of their variations over time, Mr. Ed. Guillaume adds: The pendulum, even of high precision, is the instrument where this defect has the least importance.
In a clock, irregular and accidental variations are much more dangerous than slow and systematic variations whose law is known. Moreover, as has been said, these variations can easily be reduced to ½o of a second in three months for daytime running.
La Fédération Horlogère, June 30, 1898
Charles-Édouard Guillaume’s Praise
Charles-Édouard Guillaume gave much of the credit for the development of practical Invar balance springs to Paul Perret, though his contributions were later ignored or marginalized. The following article in Journal Suisse d’Horlogerie was written by Guillaume and clearly credits Perret.
Guillaume again gave Perret credit for his contribution at the so-called Conference Guillaume in La Chaux-de-Fonds on November 12, 1903, shortly before Perret’s death. He writes the following, as reported in Journal Suisse d’Horlogerie:
“In March 1897, following my initial communications to the Paris Academy of Sciences, a very skilled watchmaker, Mr. Paul Perret, asked me to send him a sample of Invar. Shortly after, he visited me in Sèvres and brought me the extraordinary fact that a watch equipped with a spiral made of this alloy and a brass balance wheel gained a significant amount of time when subjected to heat. This discovery had such a strong impact on Mr. Paul Perret that it made him ill…
“By noting that his watch gained time when exposed to heat, Mr. Paul Perret immediately concluded that the stiffness of invar increases with temperature, and logically, he thought that within the series of nickel-steel alloys, one could find an alloy with zero variation, eliminating the need for watch compensation.
“Mr. Perret presented me with this result and asked me to collaborate with him in further research. At that time, I had already pondered the general theory of nickel-steel alloys enough to feel comfortable with it.
“Instead of one alloy with zero variation, as envisioned by Mr. Perret, I was able to identify two alloys and even point out the range of compositions where they could be found. Some quick experiments confirmed the validity of these observations, and on August 20th, 1897, during the joint observations we conducted in La Chaux-de-Fonds, we found that a watch equipped with a steel-nickel spiral maintained the same accuracy at 0 and 30 degrees Celsius.
“The problem seemed to be solved at that point; the next step was to make it an industrial reality…”
– Charles Édouard Guillaume, November 12, 1903
Paul Perret’s Family
Very little information is available about Paul Perret and his family. However we have a few facts for certain:
It seems likely that his father was Numa Perret (1829-1893) of Canton Neuchâtel, husband of Lucie-Lina Maire. His father was listed on his death as a watch adjuster (“régulier”) like his son.
He was born in La Sagne in 1854 and died on March 31, 1904 (not 1903 as is often listed).
He had one surviving child, Emma, who was his executor and appears to have married Mr. Juvet.
His other daughter was named Lucie, likely after his mother, or Marie-Lucie and may have been born on July 5, 1882 and died after 1893
His wife Amélie (née Perrenoud) is the step-mother of Emma and was the aunt of Camille Flotron, an important figure in the watch industry in his own right.
Paul Perret’s Obituaries
Despite his accomplishments, and likely because of the many controversies surrounding them, Paul Perret was not memorialized like Charles-Édouard Guillaume and others. Still, his death was recorded and reported. His death announcement also provides crucial biographical information.
Interestingly, all of his obituaries claim that he died at home in Fleurier, but it was later noted that he died in Le Landeron.
l’Impartial
We learn of the death, which occurred suddenly, yesterday, of Mr. Paul Perret, manufacturer of hairsprings in Fleurier. This skillful watchmaker-adjuster, very well known in our city, where he practiced his profession for many years, has had the merit of attaching his name to the remarkable work on steel and nickel alloys of our learned compatriot, of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures,
M. Ch.-Ed. Guillaume.
Paul Perret hairsprings considerably reduce, as we know, the effect of temperature on the rate of watches, and as a result have achieved significant progress, from which civilian watchmaking benefits.
Let us add that Mr. Paul Perret is the inventor of instruments for the construction of the terminal curves of hairsprings and for the determination of their lengths, which earned him laudatory appreciations from the Jury of the Universal Exhibition of Paris in 1878, and the highest awards for tuning instruments.
Mr. Paul Perret was a member of the commission of our Watchmaking School in the years 1877 and 1878. In military life he held the rank of major in the infantry. Mr. Perret was only 49 years old. We present our condolences to the family.
l’Impartial, April 1, 1904
La Fédération Horlogère
On Thursday, we were sorry to learn of the death of Mr. Paul Perret, one of our most skillful watchmakers from Neuchâtel, which had occurred the day before, in Fleurier, where he had been living for two or three years.
Paul Perret spent most of his life in La Chaux-de-Fonds, where he was very busy with watchmaking research, and above all with simplifying watch regulating methods.
It is to him that we owe the first idea of the application of nickel steels to the manufacture of the hairspring. Its role in this question was clarified a few months ago in the lecture given at La Chaux-de-Fonds by Mr. Ch-Ed Guillaume. We had quoted, in the Fédération Horlogère of November 15, 1903, the very words of the speaker, which establish an important point for the history of watchmaking:
“In March 1897, following my first communications at the Academy of Sciences in Paris, said M. Ch-Ed. Guillaume, a very skillful adjuster, then a fellow citizen, M. Paul Perret, asked me to send him a sample of Invar. Shortly after, he came to see me at Sèvres, and brought me this extraordinary fact that a watch equipped with a hairspring of this alloy and a brass balance, took a strong lead in heat. This discovery had struck M. Paul Perret so strongly that he had fallen ill! (laughs). You are smiling, gentlemen, but think of the impression that must have been felt by a man who had devoted his whole life to the problem of regulation, when suddenly seeing the possibility of a complete transformation of the question of compensation. Faced with such an unexpected fact, the passionate researcher cannot defend himself from deep emotion.
“To understand what is the significance of the discovery made by M. Perret, it is necessary to become fully aware of the conditions which cause the watch to vary according to the temperature.”
the lecturer developed the mathematical theory of compensation, put by him in a very simple form.
“The main culprit of the lag of watches in the heat, you see, gentlemen, is the variation in the modulus of elasticity of the hairspring. Noting that his watch was moving warm, Mr. Paul Perret immediately concluded that the rigidity of the invar increases at the same time as the temperature, and, by a logical consequence. he thought that one should find in the series of nickel steels an alloy with zero variation, dispensing with the compensation of watches.
“Mr. Perret brought me this result, asking me to join him in the continuation of the research. At that time, I had given enough thought to the general theory of nickel steels to be able to move about it at ease.
“Instead of an alloy with zero variation planned by Mr. Perret, I was able to indicate two to him, and already put my finger on the point of the curves, but I had to look for them. A few quick experiments showed the correctness of these views, and on August 20, 1897, in the observations we made together at La Chaux-de-Fonds, we observed that a watch fitted with a nickel-steel hairspring had exactly the same step at zero el at 30º. The problem therefore seemed solved: all that remained was to make it industrial.”
The second part of the problem has been solved and the factory of nickel steel hairsprings, founded by Mr. Paul Perret, at Fleurier, is in full operation.
It has been recognized, following numerous serious tests, the significant improvement brought to the adjustment of watches, by the use of these spirals which solves the problem of the compensation of civil watches.
Paul Perret is leaving at the age of 49, too early to have been able to benefit, insofar as he deserved it, from the remarkable progress with which he endowed the watchmaking industry in his country. We address his family to express our sincere condolences.
La Fédération Horlogère, April 3, 1904
OBITUARY – The name of Paul Perret, recently deceased, is intimately linked to the history of the watchmaking industry over the past thirty years. He was successively a watchmaker-mechanic, regulator, and spring manufacturer.
As a watchmaker-mechanic, he built a highly regarded regulating machine, for which he himself provided a description in our journal a long time ago (Issue 221). As a regulator, he earned a just reputation in his hometown of La Chaux-de-Fonds. From there, he established himself in Fleurier, where he created a spring manufacturing factory and focused particularly on steel-nickel springs. In this regard, he was a dedicated and appreciated collaborator of Dr. Guillaume, as mentioned in an article recently published about the conference given in La Chaux-de-Fonds by our esteemed compatriot.
A correspondence from Fleurier states that the deceased leaves behind the memory of a good citizen and a amiable man from whom one always learned something interesting. We can only join in the sorrow caused by this premature death: Paul Perret was only 49 years old.
Journal Suisse d’Horlogerie, April 1904
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 9 |
https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/nobel-prize-discovery-invar/docview/1285129775/se-2
|
en
|
A Nobel prize for the discovery of Invar
|
[
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/f4326488/images/openlayer/PQ_Open_MyResearch.jpg",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/226656d3/images/openlayer/PQ_Open_Translate.jpg",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/e78dc4a9/images/openlayer/PQ_Open_Cite.jpg",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/39ef348f/images/openlayer/PQ_Open_PDF.jpg",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/9867d8ae/images/openlayer/PQ_Open_Save.jpg",
"https://www.syndetics.com/index.php?issn=0143-7798/mc.jpg&client=pqis",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif",
"https://www.proquest.com/assets/ctx/51be0a5b/images/icons/blank.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Explore millions of resources from scholarly journals, books, newspapers, videos and more, on the ProQuest Platform.
|
en
|
/apple-icon-57x57.png
| null |
IN 1920, Charles Edouard Guillaume (Figi) received a Nobel prize in physics for work he had done in the late nineteenth century - the discovery of an iron - nickel alloy that does not expand upon heating. He named it Invar, short for 'invariable'. The discovery was immediately put to use for many kinds of precision instruments. To this day, this is the only Nobel prize awarded for a metallurgical contribution. The discovery was made at the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (International Bureau of Weights and Measures) in Sèvres near Paris.
Guillaume was born at Fleurier in the SwissJura. After graduating from the Technical University in Zurich he served briefly in the military before joining the Bureau in 1883. His tasks included finding better ways to increase the precision of standard measurements. He searched for inexpensive materials to make standards of length and mass. In use at that time was a platinum-iridium alloy which was very expensive but useful because it did not corrode and had a low coefficient of thermal expansion.
In his search he made a remarkable discovery in 1898, that nickel-iron containing about 30% nickel had a very low expansion coefficient (Fig 2), in...
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 56 |
https://iopscience.iop.org/page/nobel-prize
|
en
|
Radware Bot Manager Captcha
|
[
"https://cdn.images.iop.org/website-logos/IOP-Publishing-300x83.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
We apologize for the inconvenience...
To ensure we keep this website safe, please can you confirm you are a human by ticking the box below.
If you are unable to complete the above request please contact us using the below link, providing a screenshot of your experience.
|
||||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 8 |
https://dbpedia.org/page/Charles_%25C3%2589douard_Guillaume
|
en
|
About: http://dbpedia.org/resource/Charles
|
[
"https://dbpedia.org/statics/images/dbpedia_logo_land_120.png",
"https://dbpedia.org/statics/images/virt_power_no_border.png",
"https://dbpedia.org/statics/images/LoDLogo.gif",
"https://dbpedia.org/statics/images/sw-sparql-blue.png",
"https://dbpedia.org/statics/images/od_80x15_red_green.png",
"https://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-xhtml-rdfa"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Charles Édouard Guillaume fou un físic suís guardonat l'any 1920 amb el Premi Nobel de Física.
|
DBpedia
|
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Charles_%C3%89douard_Guillaume
|
dbo:abstract
Charles Édouard Guillaume fou un físic suís guardonat l'any 1920 amb el Premi Nobel de Física. (ca)
شارل ادوار غيوم (Charles Édouard Guillaume) (مواليد 15 فبراير، 1861 - 13 مايو، 1938) كان عالم فيزياء سويسري فرنسي. حصل على جائزة نوبل في الفيزياء عام 1920 عن أعماله في مجال القياسات الفيزيائية الدقيقة واكتشاف سبيلكة النيكل-فولاذ التي تدعى invar و elinvar، حيث أن لمعدن إنفار معامل تمدد حراري قريب جداً من الصفر مما يعطي نتائج قياس دقيقة بغض النظر عن تغيرات درجة الحرارة. (ar)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (15. února 1861 – 13. května 1938 Sèvres) byl francouzsko-švýcarský fyzik, nositel Nobelovy ceny za fyziku (1920), kterou obdržel za objev anomálií v niklové oceli (invar), což přispělo k rozvoji přesných měření. Vynalezl slitiny invar a . Ve 22 letech nastoupil do BIPM. (cs)
Ο Σαρλ Εντουάρ Γκιγιόμ (Charles Édouard Guillaume, 15 Φεβρουαρίου 1861 - 13 Ιουνίου 1938) ήταν Ελβετός φυσικός στον οποίο απονεμήθηκε το βραβείο Νόμπελ Φυσικής το 1920 για τη συμβολή του σε πειράματα ακριβείας, μέσω της ανακάλυψης ανωμαλιών στα κράματα νικελίου - ατσαλιού. Ο Γκιγιόμ είναι γνωστός για την ανακάλυψη των κραμάτων του νικελίου - σιδήρου και χάλυβα τα οποία ονόμασε Ινβάρ και . (el)
Charles Édouard GUILLAUME (15-an de februaro 1861, Fleurier, Svislando – 13-an de junio 1938, Sèvres, Francio) estis franca fizikisto, kiu ricevis la Nobel-premion pri fiziko en 1920 pro la malkovro de invaro (specifa fer-nikela alojo). Guillaume en 1883 iĝis kunlaboranto de la Internacia Mezurafera Ofico en Sèvres, poste en 1915 ties direktoro. Li ekzamenis dum esploroj la hidrargan termometron kaj la litron kiel volumenan unuon. Li konstatis pri tiu lasta, ke ĝi egalas ne al 1.000.000 cm3 sed al 1.000.028 cm3. Li fokisis ekde 1890 je la alojoj kaj malkovris, ellaboris la invarton kaj elinvarton. La termodilatiĝa valoro de la invarto (volumena ŝanĝiĝo je ŝanĝiĝo de la temperaturo), la malgranda elasteca valoro de la elinvarto estis uzata en diversaj sciencaj mezuriloj. (eo)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (* 15. Februar 1861 in Fleurier, NE; † 13. Juni 1938 in Sèvres) war ein französisch-schweizerischer Physiker und Nobelpreisträger. (de)
Charles Édouard Guillaume suitzar fisikaria izan zen. 1920ko Fisikako Nobel Saria jaso zuen nikel eta altzairu aleazioetan izandako anomalien aurkikuntzagatik. ETH Zürich-en doktoratu zen. Pisuen eta Neurrien Nazioarteko Bulegoa zuzendu zuen eta esperimentuak egin zituen neurri termostatikoekin. Nikel eta altzairuzko aleazioak aurkitu zituen, "invar" eta "" deituak. Izarren erradiazioa aztertzen ere aitzindaria izan zen eta itsas kronometroez interesatu zen. (eu)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, cantón de Neuchâtel, Suiza, 15 de febrero de 1861-Sèvres, Francia, 13 de mayo de 1938) fue un físico suizo galardonado en 1920 con el Premio Nobel de Física. Descubrió la aleación de acero y níquel denominada invar, muy utilizada en instrumentos de precisión por su bajo coeficiente de dilatación térmica. (es)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 février 1861 à Fleurier, Suisse - 13 juin 1938 à Sèvres, France) est un physicien suisse. Il est lauréat du prix Nobel de physique de 1920 « en reconnaissance du service qu'il a rendu en métrologie en découvrant des anomalies dans les aciers de nickel ». Le plus célèbre des alliages qu'il invente est l'invar, au très faible coefficient de dilatation thermique, qui révolutionne la métrologie et la cryogénie, et qui contribue à l'invention de la télévision. (fr)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 Februari 1861 – 13 Juni 1938) adalah seorang fisikawan berkebangsaan Prancis. Dia meraih Penghargaan Nobel Fisika pada tahun 1920. Ia dikenal akan "" dan ""-nya. (in)
シャルル・エドゥアール・ギヨーム （Charles Edouard Guillaume、1861年2月15日 - 1938年6月13日）はフランス系スイス人の物理学者である。 (ja)
샤를 에두아르 기욤(독일어: Charles Édouard Guillaume, 1861년 ~ 1938년)은 스위스의 실험물리학자이다. 취리히 연방 공과대학을 졸업하였다. 1897년에는 열팽창 계수가 실내 온도에 가까워지면 거의 0인 인바(invar) 합금(36% 니켈 철합금)을 발견했다. 은 값싼 미터 표준기 외에 각종의 물리 정밀 측정 기기나 시계의 추 등에 널리 쓰여, 길이 측정의 정밀도를 두드러지게 향상시켰다. 그 중에서도 인바선(線)에 의한 기선 측정에 의해 종래의 측정법이 새롭게 바뀌었다. 또한 시간 측정의 정밀도를 높이기 위해서 합금의 탄성률을 연구하여, 1919년에 탄성률의 온도 계수가 실내 온도 가까이에서 거의 0인 엘린바(elinvar) 합금(36% 니켈, 12% 크롬, 철합금)을 발견했다. 이 합금은 시계의 태엽 등에 이용되어, 시간 측정의 정밀도는 비약적으로 향상되었다. 이러한 업적으로 1920년 노벨 물리학상을 받았고, 프랑스 정부로부터는 레종도뇌르 훈장을 받았다. (ko)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 febbraio 1861 – Sèvres, 13 giugno 1938) è stato un fisico svizzero, nato in Svizzera nel canton Neuchâtel, Premio Nobel per la fisica nel 1920. (it)
Charles-Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 februari 1861 – Sèvres, 13 juni 1938) was een Zwitserse natuurkundige. Hij werd bekend als de ontdekker van diverse bijzondere ijzer-nikkel legeringen, waaronder Invar, waarvoor hij in 1920 de Nobelprijs voor Natuurkunde ontving. (nl)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (ur. 15 lutego 1861 w Fleurier, Szwajcaria, zm. 13 maja 1938 w Sèvres, Francja) – szwajcarski fizyk, laureat Nagrody Nobla w dziedzinie fizyki w roku 1920 za wkład jaki wniósł w precyzyjne pomiary w fizyce dzięki odkryciu anomalii w wysokoniklowych stalach stopowych, Wielki Oficer Legii Honorowej. Odkrył m.in. dwa stopy nazwane przez niego inwar i elinwar, które używane były przy budowaniu precyzyjnych instrumentów pomiarowych. Pracował w Observatoire de Paris w Paryżu. Jako pierwszy prawidłowo przewidział temperaturę przestrzeni kosmicznej. (pl)
Шарль Эдуа́р Гийо́м (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 февраля 1861, , Швейцария — 13 июня 1938, Севр, Франция) — швейцарско-французский физик. Лауреат Нобелевской премии 1920 года за открытие сплавов с аномальным поведением коэффициента теплового расширения: инвара и элинвара. (ru)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 de fevereiro de 1861 — Sèvres, 13 de maio de 1938) foi um físico suíço. Recebeu em 1920 o Nobel de Física, pela melhora na precisão de medições na física e pela descoberta de anomalias em ligas de aço-níquel. (pt)
Charles Édouard Guillaume, född i Fleurier 15 februari 1861, död i Sèvres 13 maj 1938, var en schweizisk-fransk fysiker som mottog Nobelpriset i fysik 1920 för sin forskning på nickellegeringar. Guillaume blev 1915 föreståndare för Bureau international des poids et mesures. Han har utfört flera undersökningar över precisionsmätning av temperatur och tid. För sina undersökningar över anomalierna vid legeringar mellan nickel och järn, särskilt upptäckten av det märkliga nickelstålet invar, vars värmeutvidgning är ytterst liten, erhöll Guillaume 1920 års nobelpris i fysik. Guillaume invaldes 1919 som utländsk ledamot av Kungliga Vetenskapsakademien med ledamotsnummer 671. (sv)
Шарль Едуар Гійом (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 лютого 1861, , Швейцарія — 13 червня 1938, Севр, Франція) — швейцарсько-французький фізик.Лауреат Нобелівської премії 1920 року за відкриття сплавів з аномальною поведінкою коефіцієнта теплового розширення: Інвару і елінвару. (uk)
夏尔·纪尧姆（法语：Charles Guillaume ，1861年2月15日－1938年6月13日），瑞士物理學家。1920年，於瑞士辦事處任職的他，因發現鎳鋼合金於精密物理中的重要性，而獲得了該年度的諾貝爾物理學獎殊榮。 (zh)
Charles Édouard Guillaume fou un físic suís guardonat l'any 1920 amb el Premi Nobel de Física. (ca)
شارل ادوار غيوم (Charles Édouard Guillaume) (مواليد 15 فبراير، 1861 - 13 مايو، 1938) كان عالم فيزياء سويسري فرنسي. حصل على جائزة نوبل في الفيزياء عام 1920 عن أعماله في مجال القياسات الفيزيائية الدقيقة واكتشاف سبيلكة النيكل-فولاذ التي تدعى invar و elinvar، حيث أن لمعدن إنفار معامل تمدد حراري قريب جداً من الصفر مما يعطي نتائج قياس دقيقة بغض النظر عن تغيرات درجة الحرارة. (ar)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (15. února 1861 – 13. května 1938 Sèvres) byl francouzsko-švýcarský fyzik, nositel Nobelovy ceny za fyziku (1920), kterou obdržel za objev anomálií v niklové oceli (invar), což přispělo k rozvoji přesných měření. Vynalezl slitiny invar a . Ve 22 letech nastoupil do BIPM. (cs)
Ο Σαρλ Εντουάρ Γκιγιόμ (Charles Édouard Guillaume, 15 Φεβρουαρίου 1861 - 13 Ιουνίου 1938) ήταν Ελβετός φυσικός στον οποίο απονεμήθηκε το βραβείο Νόμπελ Φυσικής το 1920 για τη συμβολή του σε πειράματα ακριβείας, μέσω της ανακάλυψης ανωμαλιών στα κράματα νικελίου - ατσαλιού. Ο Γκιγιόμ είναι γνωστός για την ανακάλυψη των κραμάτων του νικελίου - σιδήρου και χάλυβα τα οποία ονόμασε Ινβάρ και . (el)
Charles Édouard GUILLAUME (15-an de februaro 1861, Fleurier, Svislando – 13-an de junio 1938, Sèvres, Francio) estis franca fizikisto, kiu ricevis la Nobel-premion pri fiziko en 1920 pro la malkovro de invaro (specifa fer-nikela alojo). Guillaume en 1883 iĝis kunlaboranto de la Internacia Mezurafera Ofico en Sèvres, poste en 1915 ties direktoro. Li ekzamenis dum esploroj la hidrargan termometron kaj la litron kiel volumenan unuon. Li konstatis pri tiu lasta, ke ĝi egalas ne al 1.000.000 cm3 sed al 1.000.028 cm3. Li fokisis ekde 1890 je la alojoj kaj malkovris, ellaboris la invarton kaj elinvarton. La termodilatiĝa valoro de la invarto (volumena ŝanĝiĝo je ŝanĝiĝo de la temperaturo), la malgranda elasteca valoro de la elinvarto estis uzata en diversaj sciencaj mezuriloj. (eo)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (* 15. Februar 1861 in Fleurier, NE; † 13. Juni 1938 in Sèvres) war ein französisch-schweizerischer Physiker und Nobelpreisträger. (de)
Charles Édouard Guillaume suitzar fisikaria izan zen. 1920ko Fisikako Nobel Saria jaso zuen nikel eta altzairu aleazioetan izandako anomalien aurkikuntzagatik. ETH Zürich-en doktoratu zen. Pisuen eta Neurrien Nazioarteko Bulegoa zuzendu zuen eta esperimentuak egin zituen neurri termostatikoekin. Nikel eta altzairuzko aleazioak aurkitu zituen, "invar" eta "" deituak. Izarren erradiazioa aztertzen ere aitzindaria izan zen eta itsas kronometroez interesatu zen. (eu)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, cantón de Neuchâtel, Suiza, 15 de febrero de 1861-Sèvres, Francia, 13 de mayo de 1938) fue un físico suizo galardonado en 1920 con el Premio Nobel de Física. Descubrió la aleación de acero y níquel denominada invar, muy utilizada en instrumentos de precisión por su bajo coeficiente de dilatación térmica. (es)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 février 1861 à Fleurier, Suisse - 13 juin 1938 à Sèvres, France) est un physicien suisse. Il est lauréat du prix Nobel de physique de 1920 « en reconnaissance du service qu'il a rendu en métrologie en découvrant des anomalies dans les aciers de nickel ». Le plus célèbre des alliages qu'il invente est l'invar, au très faible coefficient de dilatation thermique, qui révolutionne la métrologie et la cryogénie, et qui contribue à l'invention de la télévision. (fr)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 Februari 1861 – 13 Juni 1938) adalah seorang fisikawan berkebangsaan Prancis. Dia meraih Penghargaan Nobel Fisika pada tahun 1920. Ia dikenal akan "" dan ""-nya. (in)
シャルル・エドゥアール・ギヨーム （Charles Edouard Guillaume、1861年2月15日 - 1938年6月13日）はフランス系スイス人の物理学者である。 (ja)
샤를 에두아르 기욤(독일어: Charles Édouard Guillaume, 1861년 ~ 1938년)은 스위스의 실험물리학자이다. 취리히 연방 공과대학을 졸업하였다. 1897년에는 열팽창 계수가 실내 온도에 가까워지면 거의 0인 인바(invar) 합금(36% 니켈 철합금)을 발견했다. 은 값싼 미터 표준기 외에 각종의 물리 정밀 측정 기기나 시계의 추 등에 널리 쓰여, 길이 측정의 정밀도를 두드러지게 향상시켰다. 그 중에서도 인바선(線)에 의한 기선 측정에 의해 종래의 측정법이 새롭게 바뀌었다. 또한 시간 측정의 정밀도를 높이기 위해서 합금의 탄성률을 연구하여, 1919년에 탄성률의 온도 계수가 실내 온도 가까이에서 거의 0인 엘린바(elinvar) 합금(36% 니켈, 12% 크롬, 철합금)을 발견했다. 이 합금은 시계의 태엽 등에 이용되어, 시간 측정의 정밀도는 비약적으로 향상되었다. 이러한 업적으로 1920년 노벨 물리학상을 받았고, 프랑스 정부로부터는 레종도뇌르 훈장을 받았다. (ko)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 febbraio 1861 – Sèvres, 13 giugno 1938) è stato un fisico svizzero, nato in Svizzera nel canton Neuchâtel, Premio Nobel per la fisica nel 1920. (it)
Charles-Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 februari 1861 – Sèvres, 13 juni 1938) was een Zwitserse natuurkundige. Hij werd bekend als de ontdekker van diverse bijzondere ijzer-nikkel legeringen, waaronder Invar, waarvoor hij in 1920 de Nobelprijs voor Natuurkunde ontving. (nl)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (ur. 15 lutego 1861 w Fleurier, Szwajcaria, zm. 13 maja 1938 w Sèvres, Francja) – szwajcarski fizyk, laureat Nagrody Nobla w dziedzinie fizyki w roku 1920 za wkład jaki wniósł w precyzyjne pomiary w fizyce dzięki odkryciu anomalii w wysokoniklowych stalach stopowych, Wielki Oficer Legii Honorowej. Odkrył m.in. dwa stopy nazwane przez niego inwar i elinwar, które używane były przy budowaniu precyzyjnych instrumentów pomiarowych. Pracował w Observatoire de Paris w Paryżu. Jako pierwszy prawidłowo przewidział temperaturę przestrzeni kosmicznej. (pl)
Шарль Эдуа́р Гийо́м (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 февраля 1861, , Швейцария — 13 июня 1938, Севр, Франция) — швейцарско-французский физик. Лауреат Нобелевской премии 1920 года за открытие сплавов с аномальным поведением коэффициента теплового расширения: инвара и элинвара. (ru)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 de fevereiro de 1861 — Sèvres, 13 de maio de 1938) foi um físico suíço. Recebeu em 1920 o Nobel de Física, pela melhora na precisão de medições na física e pela descoberta de anomalias em ligas de aço-níquel. (pt)
Charles Édouard Guillaume, född i Fleurier 15 februari 1861, död i Sèvres 13 maj 1938, var en schweizisk-fransk fysiker som mottog Nobelpriset i fysik 1920 för sin forskning på nickellegeringar. Guillaume blev 1915 föreståndare för Bureau international des poids et mesures. Han har utfört flera undersökningar över precisionsmätning av temperatur och tid. För sina undersökningar över anomalierna vid legeringar mellan nickel och järn, särskilt upptäckten av det märkliga nickelstålet invar, vars värmeutvidgning är ytterst liten, erhöll Guillaume 1920 års nobelpris i fysik. Guillaume invaldes 1919 som utländsk ledamot av Kungliga Vetenskapsakademien med ledamotsnummer 671. (sv)
Шарль Едуар Гійом (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 лютого 1861, , Швейцарія — 13 червня 1938, Севр, Франція) — швейцарсько-французький фізик.Лауреат Нобелівської премії 1920 року за відкриття сплавів з аномальною поведінкою коефіцієнта теплового розширення: Інвару і елінвару. (uk)
夏尔·纪尧姆（法语：Charles Guillaume ，1861年2月15日－1938年6月13日），瑞士物理學家。1920年，於瑞士辦事處任職的他，因發現鎳鋼合金於精密物理中的重要性，而獲得了該年度的諾貝爾物理學獎殊榮。 (zh)
rdfs:comment
Charles Édouard Guillaume fou un físic suís guardonat l'any 1920 amb el Premi Nobel de Física. (ca)
شارل ادوار غيوم (Charles Édouard Guillaume) (مواليد 15 فبراير، 1861 - 13 مايو، 1938) كان عالم فيزياء سويسري فرنسي. حصل على جائزة نوبل في الفيزياء عام 1920 عن أعماله في مجال القياسات الفيزيائية الدقيقة واكتشاف سبيلكة النيكل-فولاذ التي تدعى invar و elinvar، حيث أن لمعدن إنفار معامل تمدد حراري قريب جداً من الصفر مما يعطي نتائج قياس دقيقة بغض النظر عن تغيرات درجة الحرارة. (ar)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (15. února 1861 – 13. května 1938 Sèvres) byl francouzsko-švýcarský fyzik, nositel Nobelovy ceny za fyziku (1920), kterou obdržel za objev anomálií v niklové oceli (invar), což přispělo k rozvoji přesných měření. Vynalezl slitiny invar a . Ve 22 letech nastoupil do BIPM. (cs)
Ο Σαρλ Εντουάρ Γκιγιόμ (Charles Édouard Guillaume, 15 Φεβρουαρίου 1861 - 13 Ιουνίου 1938) ήταν Ελβετός φυσικός στον οποίο απονεμήθηκε το βραβείο Νόμπελ Φυσικής το 1920 για τη συμβολή του σε πειράματα ακριβείας, μέσω της ανακάλυψης ανωμαλιών στα κράματα νικελίου - ατσαλιού. Ο Γκιγιόμ είναι γνωστός για την ανακάλυψη των κραμάτων του νικελίου - σιδήρου και χάλυβα τα οποία ονόμασε Ινβάρ και . (el)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (* 15. Februar 1861 in Fleurier, NE; † 13. Juni 1938 in Sèvres) war ein französisch-schweizerischer Physiker und Nobelpreisträger. (de)
Charles Édouard Guillaume suitzar fisikaria izan zen. 1920ko Fisikako Nobel Saria jaso zuen nikel eta altzairu aleazioetan izandako anomalien aurkikuntzagatik. ETH Zürich-en doktoratu zen. Pisuen eta Neurrien Nazioarteko Bulegoa zuzendu zuen eta esperimentuak egin zituen neurri termostatikoekin. Nikel eta altzairuzko aleazioak aurkitu zituen, "invar" eta "" deituak. Izarren erradiazioa aztertzen ere aitzindaria izan zen eta itsas kronometroez interesatu zen. (eu)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, cantón de Neuchâtel, Suiza, 15 de febrero de 1861-Sèvres, Francia, 13 de mayo de 1938) fue un físico suizo galardonado en 1920 con el Premio Nobel de Física. Descubrió la aleación de acero y níquel denominada invar, muy utilizada en instrumentos de precisión por su bajo coeficiente de dilatación térmica. (es)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 février 1861 à Fleurier, Suisse - 13 juin 1938 à Sèvres, France) est un physicien suisse. Il est lauréat du prix Nobel de physique de 1920 « en reconnaissance du service qu'il a rendu en métrologie en découvrant des anomalies dans les aciers de nickel ». Le plus célèbre des alliages qu'il invente est l'invar, au très faible coefficient de dilatation thermique, qui révolutionne la métrologie et la cryogénie, et qui contribue à l'invention de la télévision. (fr)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 Februari 1861 – 13 Juni 1938) adalah seorang fisikawan berkebangsaan Prancis. Dia meraih Penghargaan Nobel Fisika pada tahun 1920. Ia dikenal akan "" dan ""-nya. (in)
シャルル・エドゥアール・ギヨーム （Charles Edouard Guillaume、1861年2月15日 - 1938年6月13日）はフランス系スイス人の物理学者である。 (ja)
샤를 에두아르 기욤(독일어: Charles Édouard Guillaume, 1861년 ~ 1938년)은 스위스의 실험물리학자이다. 취리히 연방 공과대학을 졸업하였다. 1897년에는 열팽창 계수가 실내 온도에 가까워지면 거의 0인 인바(invar) 합금(36% 니켈 철합금)을 발견했다. 은 값싼 미터 표준기 외에 각종의 물리 정밀 측정 기기나 시계의 추 등에 널리 쓰여, 길이 측정의 정밀도를 두드러지게 향상시켰다. 그 중에서도 인바선(線)에 의한 기선 측정에 의해 종래의 측정법이 새롭게 바뀌었다. 또한 시간 측정의 정밀도를 높이기 위해서 합금의 탄성률을 연구하여, 1919년에 탄성률의 온도 계수가 실내 온도 가까이에서 거의 0인 엘린바(elinvar) 합금(36% 니켈, 12% 크롬, 철합금)을 발견했다. 이 합금은 시계의 태엽 등에 이용되어, 시간 측정의 정밀도는 비약적으로 향상되었다. 이러한 업적으로 1920년 노벨 물리학상을 받았고, 프랑스 정부로부터는 레종도뇌르 훈장을 받았다. (ko)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 febbraio 1861 – Sèvres, 13 giugno 1938) è stato un fisico svizzero, nato in Svizzera nel canton Neuchâtel, Premio Nobel per la fisica nel 1920. (it)
Charles-Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 februari 1861 – Sèvres, 13 juni 1938) was een Zwitserse natuurkundige. Hij werd bekend als de ontdekker van diverse bijzondere ijzer-nikkel legeringen, waaronder Invar, waarvoor hij in 1920 de Nobelprijs voor Natuurkunde ontving. (nl)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (ur. 15 lutego 1861 w Fleurier, Szwajcaria, zm. 13 maja 1938 w Sèvres, Francja) – szwajcarski fizyk, laureat Nagrody Nobla w dziedzinie fizyki w roku 1920 za wkład jaki wniósł w precyzyjne pomiary w fizyce dzięki odkryciu anomalii w wysokoniklowych stalach stopowych, Wielki Oficer Legii Honorowej. Odkrył m.in. dwa stopy nazwane przez niego inwar i elinwar, które używane były przy budowaniu precyzyjnych instrumentów pomiarowych. Pracował w Observatoire de Paris w Paryżu. Jako pierwszy prawidłowo przewidział temperaturę przestrzeni kosmicznej. (pl)
Шарль Эдуа́р Гийо́м (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 февраля 1861, , Швейцария — 13 июня 1938, Севр, Франция) — швейцарско-французский физик. Лауреат Нобелевской премии 1920 года за открытие сплавов с аномальным поведением коэффициента теплового расширения: инвара и элинвара. (ru)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 de fevereiro de 1861 — Sèvres, 13 de maio de 1938) foi um físico suíço. Recebeu em 1920 o Nobel de Física, pela melhora na precisão de medições na física e pela descoberta de anomalias em ligas de aço-níquel. (pt)
Шарль Едуар Гійом (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 лютого 1861, , Швейцарія — 13 червня 1938, Севр, Франція) — швейцарсько-французький фізик.Лауреат Нобелівської премії 1920 року за відкриття сплавів з аномальною поведінкою коефіцієнта теплового розширення: Інвару і елінвару. (uk)
夏尔·纪尧姆（法语：Charles Guillaume ，1861年2月15日－1938年6月13日），瑞士物理學家。1920年，於瑞士辦事處任職的他，因發現鎳鋼合金於精密物理中的重要性，而獲得了該年度的諾貝爾物理學獎殊榮。 (zh)
Charles Édouard GUILLAUME (15-an de februaro 1861, Fleurier, Svislando – 13-an de junio 1938, Sèvres, Francio) estis franca fizikisto, kiu ricevis la Nobel-premion pri fiziko en 1920 pro la malkovro de invaro (specifa fer-nikela alojo). Guillaume en 1883 iĝis kunlaboranto de la Internacia Mezurafera Ofico en Sèvres, poste en 1915 ties direktoro. Li ekzamenis dum esploroj la hidrargan termometron kaj la litron kiel volumenan unuon. Li konstatis pri tiu lasta, ke ĝi egalas ne al 1.000.000 cm3 sed al 1.000.028 cm3. (eo)
Charles Édouard Guillaume, född i Fleurier 15 februari 1861, död i Sèvres 13 maj 1938, var en schweizisk-fransk fysiker som mottog Nobelpriset i fysik 1920 för sin forskning på nickellegeringar. Guillaume blev 1915 föreståndare för Bureau international des poids et mesures. Han har utfört flera undersökningar över precisionsmätning av temperatur och tid. För sina undersökningar över anomalierna vid legeringar mellan nickel och järn, särskilt upptäckten av det märkliga nickelstålet invar, vars värmeutvidgning är ytterst liten, erhöll Guillaume 1920 års nobelpris i fysik. (sv)
Charles Édouard Guillaume fou un físic suís guardonat l'any 1920 amb el Premi Nobel de Física. (ca)
شارل ادوار غيوم (Charles Édouard Guillaume) (مواليد 15 فبراير، 1861 - 13 مايو، 1938) كان عالم فيزياء سويسري فرنسي. حصل على جائزة نوبل في الفيزياء عام 1920 عن أعماله في مجال القياسات الفيزيائية الدقيقة واكتشاف سبيلكة النيكل-فولاذ التي تدعى invar و elinvar، حيث أن لمعدن إنفار معامل تمدد حراري قريب جداً من الصفر مما يعطي نتائج قياس دقيقة بغض النظر عن تغيرات درجة الحرارة. (ar)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (15. února 1861 – 13. května 1938 Sèvres) byl francouzsko-švýcarský fyzik, nositel Nobelovy ceny za fyziku (1920), kterou obdržel za objev anomálií v niklové oceli (invar), což přispělo k rozvoji přesných měření. Vynalezl slitiny invar a . Ve 22 letech nastoupil do BIPM. (cs)
Ο Σαρλ Εντουάρ Γκιγιόμ (Charles Édouard Guillaume, 15 Φεβρουαρίου 1861 - 13 Ιουνίου 1938) ήταν Ελβετός φυσικός στον οποίο απονεμήθηκε το βραβείο Νόμπελ Φυσικής το 1920 για τη συμβολή του σε πειράματα ακριβείας, μέσω της ανακάλυψης ανωμαλιών στα κράματα νικελίου - ατσαλιού. Ο Γκιγιόμ είναι γνωστός για την ανακάλυψη των κραμάτων του νικελίου - σιδήρου και χάλυβα τα οποία ονόμασε Ινβάρ και . (el)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (* 15. Februar 1861 in Fleurier, NE; † 13. Juni 1938 in Sèvres) war ein französisch-schweizerischer Physiker und Nobelpreisträger. (de)
Charles Édouard Guillaume suitzar fisikaria izan zen. 1920ko Fisikako Nobel Saria jaso zuen nikel eta altzairu aleazioetan izandako anomalien aurkikuntzagatik. ETH Zürich-en doktoratu zen. Pisuen eta Neurrien Nazioarteko Bulegoa zuzendu zuen eta esperimentuak egin zituen neurri termostatikoekin. Nikel eta altzairuzko aleazioak aurkitu zituen, "invar" eta "" deituak. Izarren erradiazioa aztertzen ere aitzindaria izan zen eta itsas kronometroez interesatu zen. (eu)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, cantón de Neuchâtel, Suiza, 15 de febrero de 1861-Sèvres, Francia, 13 de mayo de 1938) fue un físico suizo galardonado en 1920 con el Premio Nobel de Física. Descubrió la aleación de acero y níquel denominada invar, muy utilizada en instrumentos de precisión por su bajo coeficiente de dilatación térmica. (es)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 février 1861 à Fleurier, Suisse - 13 juin 1938 à Sèvres, France) est un physicien suisse. Il est lauréat du prix Nobel de physique de 1920 « en reconnaissance du service qu'il a rendu en métrologie en découvrant des anomalies dans les aciers de nickel ». Le plus célèbre des alliages qu'il invente est l'invar, au très faible coefficient de dilatation thermique, qui révolutionne la métrologie et la cryogénie, et qui contribue à l'invention de la télévision. (fr)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (15 Februari 1861 – 13 Juni 1938) adalah seorang fisikawan berkebangsaan Prancis. Dia meraih Penghargaan Nobel Fisika pada tahun 1920. Ia dikenal akan "" dan ""-nya. (in)
シャルル・エドゥアール・ギヨーム （Charles Edouard Guillaume、1861年2月15日 - 1938年6月13日）はフランス系スイス人の物理学者である。 (ja)
샤를 에두아르 기욤(독일어: Charles Édouard Guillaume, 1861년 ~ 1938년)은 스위스의 실험물리학자이다. 취리히 연방 공과대학을 졸업하였다. 1897년에는 열팽창 계수가 실내 온도에 가까워지면 거의 0인 인바(invar) 합금(36% 니켈 철합금)을 발견했다. 은 값싼 미터 표준기 외에 각종의 물리 정밀 측정 기기나 시계의 추 등에 널리 쓰여, 길이 측정의 정밀도를 두드러지게 향상시켰다. 그 중에서도 인바선(線)에 의한 기선 측정에 의해 종래의 측정법이 새롭게 바뀌었다. 또한 시간 측정의 정밀도를 높이기 위해서 합금의 탄성률을 연구하여, 1919년에 탄성률의 온도 계수가 실내 온도 가까이에서 거의 0인 엘린바(elinvar) 합금(36% 니켈, 12% 크롬, 철합금)을 발견했다. 이 합금은 시계의 태엽 등에 이용되어, 시간 측정의 정밀도는 비약적으로 향상되었다. 이러한 업적으로 1920년 노벨 물리학상을 받았고, 프랑스 정부로부터는 레종도뇌르 훈장을 받았다. (ko)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 febbraio 1861 – Sèvres, 13 giugno 1938) è stato un fisico svizzero, nato in Svizzera nel canton Neuchâtel, Premio Nobel per la fisica nel 1920. (it)
Charles-Édouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 februari 1861 – Sèvres, 13 juni 1938) was een Zwitserse natuurkundige. Hij werd bekend als de ontdekker van diverse bijzondere ijzer-nikkel legeringen, waaronder Invar, waarvoor hij in 1920 de Nobelprijs voor Natuurkunde ontving. (nl)
Charles Édouard Guillaume (ur. 15 lutego 1861 w Fleurier, Szwajcaria, zm. 13 maja 1938 w Sèvres, Francja) – szwajcarski fizyk, laureat Nagrody Nobla w dziedzinie fizyki w roku 1920 za wkład jaki wniósł w precyzyjne pomiary w fizyce dzięki odkryciu anomalii w wysokoniklowych stalach stopowych, Wielki Oficer Legii Honorowej. Odkrył m.in. dwa stopy nazwane przez niego inwar i elinwar, które używane były przy budowaniu precyzyjnych instrumentów pomiarowych. Pracował w Observatoire de Paris w Paryżu. Jako pierwszy prawidłowo przewidział temperaturę przestrzeni kosmicznej. (pl)
Шарль Эдуа́р Гийо́м (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 февраля 1861, , Швейцария — 13 июня 1938, Севр, Франция) — швейцарско-французский физик. Лауреат Нобелевской премии 1920 года за открытие сплавов с аномальным поведением коэффициента теплового расширения: инвара и элинвара. (ru)
Charles Edouard Guillaume (Fleurier, 15 de fevereiro de 1861 — Sèvres, 13 de maio de 1938) foi um físico suíço. Recebeu em 1920 o Nobel de Física, pela melhora na precisão de medições na física e pela descoberta de anomalias em ligas de aço-níquel. (pt)
Шарль Едуар Гійом (фр. Charles Édouard Guillaume; 15 лютого 1861, , Швейцарія — 13 червня 1938, Севр, Франція) — швейцарсько-французький фізик.Лауреат Нобелівської премії 1920 року за відкриття сплавів з аномальною поведінкою коефіцієнта теплового розширення: Інвару і елінвару. (uk)
夏尔·纪尧姆（法语：Charles Guillaume ，1861年2月15日－1938年6月13日），瑞士物理學家。1920年，於瑞士辦事處任職的他，因發現鎳鋼合金於精密物理中的重要性，而獲得了該年度的諾貝爾物理學獎殊榮。 (zh)
Charles Édouard GUILLAUME (15-an de februaro 1861, Fleurier, Svislando – 13-an de junio 1938, Sèvres, Francio) estis franca fizikisto, kiu ricevis la Nobel-premion pri fiziko en 1920 pro la malkovro de invaro (specifa fer-nikela alojo). Guillaume en 1883 iĝis kunlaboranto de la Internacia Mezurafera Ofico en Sèvres, poste en 1915 ties direktoro. Li ekzamenis dum esploroj la hidrargan termometron kaj la litron kiel volumenan unuon. Li konstatis pri tiu lasta, ke ĝi egalas ne al 1.000.000 cm3 sed al 1.000.028 cm3. (eo)
Charles Édouard Guillaume, född i Fleurier 15 februari 1861, död i Sèvres 13 maj 1938, var en schweizisk-fransk fysiker som mottog Nobelpriset i fysik 1920 för sin forskning på nickellegeringar. Guillaume blev 1915 föreståndare för Bureau international des poids et mesures. Han har utfört flera undersökningar över precisionsmätning av temperatur och tid. För sina undersökningar över anomalierna vid legeringar mellan nickel och järn, särskilt upptäckten av det märkliga nickelstålet invar, vars värmeutvidgning är ytterst liten, erhöll Guillaume 1920 års nobelpris i fysik. (sv)
|
||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 57 |
https://neuchateleconomie.ch/en/neuchatel-nobel-prize-winner-watchmaking/
|
en
|
The unassuming Neuchâtel Nobel Prize winner who revolutionised watchmaking
|
[
"https://neuchateleconomie.matomo.cloud/matomo.php?idsite=1&rec=1",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/logo-ne.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/logo-ne.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/logo-ne.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/logo-ne.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/CEG.jpg",
"https://u57cpxgeg.preview.infomaniak.website/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/CEG-285x300.jpg",
"https://u57cpxgeg.preview.infomaniak.website/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/cuve-méthanier-300x202.jpg",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/unoffical_logo_negatif.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/instagram.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/linkedinIcon.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/youtube-2.png",
"https://px.ads.linkedin.com/collect/?pid=3239801&fmt=gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Adm1n1str@t10n"
] |
2019-09-19T08:46:48+00:00
|
Charles-Edouard Guillaume received the ultimate recognition for all his discoveries in 1920, the famous Nobel Prize in Physics.
|
en
|
Service de l'Économie du canton de Neuchâtel
|
https://neuchateleconomie.ch/en/neuchatel-nobel-prize-winner-watchmaking/
|
If you walk through the streets of Chaux-de-Fonds, there is every chance you will encounter the name of Charles-Edouard Guillaume. It may mean nothing to you, yet in the 19th century this lesser-known Neuchâtel researcher played a crucial role in the development of precision watchmaking. As the inventor of two families of alloy still used today, this Fleurier native received the ultimate recognition for all his discoveries in 1920, winning the famous Nobel Prize in Physics.
An unexpected but flawless career path
In the heart of the Neuchâtel valley region, Charles-Edouard Guillaume (CEG) spent his childhood in his watchmaker father’s workshop. Predestined for the family watchmaking business, the young man turned instead to physics upon leaving high school. After a doctorate at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, he then developed a passion for metrology, the science of measurement.
Directly employed at the International Bureau of Weights and Measures in Sèvres, near Paris, it was his work on thermometry, how temperature is measured, and his attention to detail which would establish his reputation.
While, back then, units of time, sizes and temperatures varied from country to country or from region to region, CEG proposed simple comparators, available to everyone, such as water.
notes François Goetz, Professor at the HE-Arc School of Engineering in Neuchâtel
Faced with real shortcomings in the field of measurement units, Charles-Edouard Guillaume and the International Bureau of Weights and Measures provided solutions, including the introduction of master standards. This world-renowned organisation, where CEG worked for over fifty years, subsequently appointed him as its director from 1915 to 1936.
This desire to produce highly precise measurements led CEG to carry out the research on alloys which would make him famous,
explains François Goetz.
Revolutionary discoveries
Indeed, it was essentially to resolve problems of metrology that Charles-Edouard Guillaume would undertake his tireless quest for materials resistant to temperature change. Before his discoveries, if you took a metal bar in Switzerland, for example, and you observed that it measured one metre, the same object in Africa would expand due to the heat, changing its size.
In order to measure these units uniformly, CEG therefore tested more than 600 alloys and finally, in 1896, developed the Invar (short for invariable). An alloy of iron and nickel, this material was finally able to resist any expansion, or at least proved to be ten times less expandable than the metals of the era. Obsessed by perfect measurement, CEG then created a second nickel-chrome alloy endowed with invariable elasticity, known as Elinvar (short for elastically invariable).
These findings ultimately brought him closer to the world of horology. The rhythm of pendulum clocks, which depends on the length of the pendulum, notably benefited from these advances. Since these metal rods were sensitive to heat, they would become longer on very hot days and therefore run more slowly than usual. The advent of Invar was a revolution for the clockmaking sector, which could now offer rods no longer requiring frequent adjustment.
And wristwatches were also able to benefit from Elinvar. Since the rhythm of these timepieces was provided by a coil balance (a sort of wheel connected to the dial by a steel coil moving back and forth), when variations in temperature occurred, the coil would weaken. Thanks to the use of Elinvar, the elasticity of the coil no longer changed and the watch’s time-keeping mechanism could retain its constant rhythm. The invention of Elinvar thus enabled timepieces to become 10 to 50 times more precise. Today, most mechanical watches are still equipped with alloy coils similar to those used by CEG.
Alloys still present in our daily lives
In addition to watches, Charles-Edouard Guillaume’s work can be found in a wide range of applications. Formerly useful for lighting, non-expanding metal found its function in incandescent lamps, counteracting temperature rises caused by the electric current, as well as in cathode-ray tubes inside old-generation television sets.
Invar was also notably used to resolve an engineering problem in the Eiffel Tower, wire was suspended from the ground to the second floor of the monument to analyse its deformation due to temperature and see how it behaved in the wind.
explains François Goetz. In the field of geodesy, Invar in turn proved invaluable for determining the shape of the Earth with even greater precision.
Today, one of the major applications of CEG’s research, apart from mechanical watches, is in methane tankers. These ships carry liquid methane at minus 162 degrees, a bit like a giant thermos flask, and must therefore resist any form of expansion. Ultimately, all these concrete examples reflect the genius shown by the unassuming scientist known as Charles-Edouard Guillaume.
His work achieved a level of perfection almost unrivalled today,
observes François Goetz. Despite his anonymity, CEG’s work continues to be honoured by the Foundation of the same name, a name you may encounter along the narrow streets of Chaux-de-Fonds.
Key dates :
1861 : Birth of CEG in the canton of Neuchâtel
1878 : Enters the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich
1883 : Joins the International Bureau of Weights and Measures
1895 : Development of Invar
1919 : Development of Elinvar
1920 : CEG wins the Nobel Prize in Physics
1938 : Death of CEG in Sèvres, France
Article written by Julie Müller
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 3 |
https://www.fhs.swiss/eng/guillaume_charles_edouard.html
|
en
|
Watchmakers' and Inventors' Hall of Fame
|
https://www.fhs.swiss/favicon.ico
|
https://www.fhs.swiss/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://www.fhs.swiss/images/logo_fh_swiss.png",
"https://www.fhs.swiss/images/banner_faq.jpg",
"https://www.fhs.swiss/images/fleche_gris.png",
"https://www.fhs.swiss/images/fleche_gris.png",
"https://www.fhs.swiss/pictures/631/guillaume.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
/favicon.ico
| null |
Physicists, astronomers, architects, geometricians, mathematicians, chronometer-makers, watchmakers: these are just some of the interested people who, through the years, have displayed a passion for the measurement of time. Their research led to major discoveries and inventions that are still relevant today. Whether physical or geometrical theories, natural laws or mechanical applications, their fundamental contributions have all made it possible to measure time with greater accuracy, to create timepieces to ever higher specifications while allowing aesthetic qualities to become more refined, and even to design increasingly efficient and modern production methods.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 55 |
https://github.com/lhcb/opendata-project/blob/master/Data/nobel.csv
|
en
|
opendata-project/Data/nobel.csv at master · lhcb/opendata-project
|
https://opengraph.githubassets.com/927fe6f4cc1eff06d65a24cfef944ce8181b5f054567321f33a765747a520606/lhcb/opendata-project
|
https://opengraph.githubassets.com/927fe6f4cc1eff06d65a24cfef944ce8181b5f054567321f33a765747a520606/lhcb/opendata-project
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Contribute to lhcb/opendata-project development by creating an account on GitHub.
|
en
|
GitHub
|
https://github.com/lhcb/opendata-project/blob/master/Data/nobel.csv
|
Skip to content
Navigation Menu
|
|||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 19 |
https://history.aip.org/phn/11710005.html
|
en
|
Guillaume, Ch.
|
https://history.aip.org/phn/favicon.ico
|
https://history.aip.org/phn/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://history.aip.org/phn/AIP-Logo.png",
"https://history.aip.org/phn/Photos/guillaume_charles_a4.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
favicon.ico
|
https://history.aip.org/phn/11710005.html
| ||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 14 |
https://neuchateleconomie.ch/en/neuchatel-nobel-prize-winner-watchmaking/
|
en
|
The unassuming Neuchâtel Nobel Prize winner who revolutionised watchmaking
|
[
"https://neuchateleconomie.matomo.cloud/matomo.php?idsite=1&rec=1",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/logo-ne.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/logo-ne.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/logo-ne.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/logo-ne.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/CEG.jpg",
"https://u57cpxgeg.preview.infomaniak.website/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/CEG-285x300.jpg",
"https://u57cpxgeg.preview.infomaniak.website/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/cuve-méthanier-300x202.jpg",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/unoffical_logo_negatif.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/instagram.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/linkedinIcon.png",
"https://neuchateleconomie.ch/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/youtube-2.png",
"https://px.ads.linkedin.com/collect/?pid=3239801&fmt=gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Adm1n1str@t10n"
] |
2019-09-19T08:46:48+00:00
|
Charles-Edouard Guillaume received the ultimate recognition for all his discoveries in 1920, the famous Nobel Prize in Physics.
|
en
|
Service de l'Économie du canton de Neuchâtel
|
https://neuchateleconomie.ch/en/neuchatel-nobel-prize-winner-watchmaking/
|
If you walk through the streets of Chaux-de-Fonds, there is every chance you will encounter the name of Charles-Edouard Guillaume. It may mean nothing to you, yet in the 19th century this lesser-known Neuchâtel researcher played a crucial role in the development of precision watchmaking. As the inventor of two families of alloy still used today, this Fleurier native received the ultimate recognition for all his discoveries in 1920, winning the famous Nobel Prize in Physics.
An unexpected but flawless career path
In the heart of the Neuchâtel valley region, Charles-Edouard Guillaume (CEG) spent his childhood in his watchmaker father’s workshop. Predestined for the family watchmaking business, the young man turned instead to physics upon leaving high school. After a doctorate at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, he then developed a passion for metrology, the science of measurement.
Directly employed at the International Bureau of Weights and Measures in Sèvres, near Paris, it was his work on thermometry, how temperature is measured, and his attention to detail which would establish his reputation.
While, back then, units of time, sizes and temperatures varied from country to country or from region to region, CEG proposed simple comparators, available to everyone, such as water.
notes François Goetz, Professor at the HE-Arc School of Engineering in Neuchâtel
Faced with real shortcomings in the field of measurement units, Charles-Edouard Guillaume and the International Bureau of Weights and Measures provided solutions, including the introduction of master standards. This world-renowned organisation, where CEG worked for over fifty years, subsequently appointed him as its director from 1915 to 1936.
This desire to produce highly precise measurements led CEG to carry out the research on alloys which would make him famous,
explains François Goetz.
Revolutionary discoveries
Indeed, it was essentially to resolve problems of metrology that Charles-Edouard Guillaume would undertake his tireless quest for materials resistant to temperature change. Before his discoveries, if you took a metal bar in Switzerland, for example, and you observed that it measured one metre, the same object in Africa would expand due to the heat, changing its size.
In order to measure these units uniformly, CEG therefore tested more than 600 alloys and finally, in 1896, developed the Invar (short for invariable). An alloy of iron and nickel, this material was finally able to resist any expansion, or at least proved to be ten times less expandable than the metals of the era. Obsessed by perfect measurement, CEG then created a second nickel-chrome alloy endowed with invariable elasticity, known as Elinvar (short for elastically invariable).
These findings ultimately brought him closer to the world of horology. The rhythm of pendulum clocks, which depends on the length of the pendulum, notably benefited from these advances. Since these metal rods were sensitive to heat, they would become longer on very hot days and therefore run more slowly than usual. The advent of Invar was a revolution for the clockmaking sector, which could now offer rods no longer requiring frequent adjustment.
And wristwatches were also able to benefit from Elinvar. Since the rhythm of these timepieces was provided by a coil balance (a sort of wheel connected to the dial by a steel coil moving back and forth), when variations in temperature occurred, the coil would weaken. Thanks to the use of Elinvar, the elasticity of the coil no longer changed and the watch’s time-keeping mechanism could retain its constant rhythm. The invention of Elinvar thus enabled timepieces to become 10 to 50 times more precise. Today, most mechanical watches are still equipped with alloy coils similar to those used by CEG.
Alloys still present in our daily lives
In addition to watches, Charles-Edouard Guillaume’s work can be found in a wide range of applications. Formerly useful for lighting, non-expanding metal found its function in incandescent lamps, counteracting temperature rises caused by the electric current, as well as in cathode-ray tubes inside old-generation television sets.
Invar was also notably used to resolve an engineering problem in the Eiffel Tower, wire was suspended from the ground to the second floor of the monument to analyse its deformation due to temperature and see how it behaved in the wind.
explains François Goetz. In the field of geodesy, Invar in turn proved invaluable for determining the shape of the Earth with even greater precision.
Today, one of the major applications of CEG’s research, apart from mechanical watches, is in methane tankers. These ships carry liquid methane at minus 162 degrees, a bit like a giant thermos flask, and must therefore resist any form of expansion. Ultimately, all these concrete examples reflect the genius shown by the unassuming scientist known as Charles-Edouard Guillaume.
His work achieved a level of perfection almost unrivalled today,
observes François Goetz. Despite his anonymity, CEG’s work continues to be honoured by the Foundation of the same name, a name you may encounter along the narrow streets of Chaux-de-Fonds.
Key dates :
1861 : Birth of CEG in the canton of Neuchâtel
1878 : Enters the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich
1883 : Joins the International Bureau of Weights and Measures
1895 : Development of Invar
1919 : Development of Elinvar
1920 : CEG wins the Nobel Prize in Physics
1938 : Death of CEG in Sèvres, France
Article written by Julie Müller
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 58 |
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/charles-guillaume-nobel.html
|
en
|
res stock photography and images
|
[
"https://s.alamy.com/logos/1.68.0/alamy.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/logos/1.68.0/alamy-black.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/logos/1.68.0/alamy-black.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/logos/1.68.0/alamy.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/mastercard.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/visa.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/amex.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/paypal.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/apple-pay.svg",
"https://s.alamy.com/assets/latest/footer/google-pay.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Alamy Limited"
] | null |
Find the perfect charles guillaume nobel stock photo, image, vector, illustration or 360 image. Available for both RF and RM licensing.
|
en
|
Alamy
|
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/charles-guillaume-nobel.html
|
Alamy and its logo are trademarks of Alamy Ltd. and are registered in certain countries. Copyright © 22/07/2024 Alamy Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 38 |
https://ram02ram.wordpress.com/2020/06/16/heart-of-watches/
|
en
|
Heart of Watches
|
[
"https://defaultcustomheadersdata.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/city1.jpg?resize=984,242",
"https://0.gravatar.com/avatar/6ac9d81dc93c73af9ede73fd55a1dc092e9791edc46b23ec50441563069f24d4?s=45&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://ram02ram.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/16-c.jpg?w=570",
"https://ram02ram.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/16-a.jpg?w=475",
"https://ram02ram.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/16-b.jpg?w=900",
"https://0.gravatar.com/avatar/6ac9d81dc93c73af9ede73fd55a1dc092e9791edc46b23ec50441563069f24d4?s=45&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://ram02ram.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/01cover-2.jpg?w=300",
"https://ram02ram.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/MOH3446.jpg",
"https://ram02ram.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/MOH3446.jpg",
"https://ram02ram.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/cropped-cosmos-e1349763365929.jpg?w=50",
"https://ram02ram.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/cropped-cosmos-e1349763365929.jpg?w=50",
"https://pixel.wp.com/b.gif?v=noscript"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"ram H singhal"
] |
2020-06-16T00:00:00
|
Charles-Edouard Guillaume made a Paper Knife by using an alloy of steel and nickel which he had developed himself. there was something revolutionary and it changed the "Heart of Watches " for ever. Clockmakers struggled for years to find a solution to the impact of heat and cold on metals – in other words on…
|
en
|
Mind of Zero
|
https://ram02ram.wordpress.com/2020/06/16/heart-of-watches/
|
Charles-Edouard Guillaume made a Paper Knife by using an alloy of steel and nickel which he had developed himself. there was something revolutionary and it changed the “Heart of Watches ” for ever.
Clockmakers struggled for years to find a solution to the impact of heat and cold on metals – in other words on clock movements and thus their accuracy.
Well, Guillaume was the man who solved the problem, when he invented invar, an alloy that does not react to changes in temperature.
This alloy is still used today, even in electronics.
Charles Édouard Guillaume ( 1861- 1938 ) won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1920, “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys.”
His discovery of alloy ‘Invar’, that was impervious to thermal changes was regarded path-breaking in the field of science at that point. This was followed by his development of the alloy ‘Elinvar’.
Charles Édouard Guillaume was also the first to determine the ” Precise Temperature of Space “. He also authored several books related to his field of study.
Love all
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 74 |
https://www.kva.se/en/prize-laureate/charles-edouard-guillaume-2/
|
en
|
Kungl. Vetenskapsakademien
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] |
2022-06-08T21:19:21+00:00
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume
|
en
|
Kungl. Vetenskapsakademien
|
https://www.kva.se/en/prize-laureate/charles-edouard-guillaume-2/
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume
Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (International Bureau of Weights and Measures), Sèvres
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 1 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/summary/
|
en
|
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920
|
[
"https://www.nobelprize.org/images/guillaume-12918-portrait-medium.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2023/10/nobelprizes_2023-1024x676.jpg",
"https://www.nobelprize.org/wp-content/themes/nobelprize/assets/images/spinner.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920 was awarded to Charles Edouard Guillaume "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys"
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/summary/
|
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920 was awarded to Charles Edouard Guillaume "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys"
To cite this section
MLA style: The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach AB 2024. Mon. 22 Jul 2024. <https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1920/summary/>
Back to top Back To Top Takes users back to the top of the page
Nobel Prizes and laureates
Eleven laureates were awarded a Nobel Prize in 2023, for achievements that have conferred the greatest benefit to humankind. Their work and discoveries range from effective mRNA vaccines and attosecond physics to fighting against the oppression of women.
See them all presented here.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 62 |
https://everything-everywhere.com/how-many-nobel-prizes-should-albert-einstein-have-won/
|
en
|
How Many Nobel Prizes Should Albert Einstein Have Won?
|
[
"https://everything-everywhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/NewLogo200Trans.png",
"https://everything-everywhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/NewLogo200Trans.png",
"https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/n-hRFP2/Podcast-Images/i-SNSFG3K/0/2d885a7e/L/einstein%20nobel%20prizes-L.png",
"https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/n-hRFP2/Misc/i-zGqp5HM/0/d41c466a/400x400/EverythingEverywherePodcastLarge-400x400.jpg"
] |
[
"about:blank",
"https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/how-many-nobel-prizes-should-einstein-have-won/id1521870190?i=1000501377801"
] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Gary Arndt",
"www.facebook.com"
] |
2020-12-04T22:44:36+00:00
|
How Many Nobel Prizes Should Albert Einstein Have Won?
|
en
|
Everything Everywhere
|
https://everything-everywhere.com/how-many-nobel-prizes-should-albert-einstein-have-won/
|
Subscribe
Apple | Spotify | Amazon | iHeart Radio | Player.FM | TuneIn
Castbox | Podurama | Podcast Republic | RSS | Patreon
Transcript
In the 120 year history of the Nobel Prize, there have been four people who have been given an award twice.
One of them is not Albert Einstein.
Yet, when you look at his list of accomplishments and the different fields of physics which he has touched, he arguably deserved more than one Nobel prize.
Join me as I play fantasy physics and try to figure out how many Nobel Prizes Albert Einstien should have won on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily.
The history of Albert Einstein and the Nobel Prize is a rather complex one.
By the year 1920, Einstein was unquestionably the most famous scientist in the world. Yet, he had not won a Nobel Prize.
He had developed the Special and General theories of Relativity, he had set the equivalence of mass and energy in his famous E=mc2 equation, and had contributed to many other areas of physics.
His work on relativity had been nominated by many physicists over several years, but the Nobel committee never gave him a prize.
There were a bunch of reasons why Einstein was never given a Nobel Prize. Being Jewish and pacifist were big ones. The Nobel committee didn’t want to honor someone who was so outside the mainstream. The biggest reason, however, was that he was a theoretical physicist. The prize had, up until this point, primarily been given to people who proved things through experimentation.
In 1919, evidence for the General Theory of Relativity was finally found during a solar eclipse when British astronomer Arthur Stanley Eddington detected light from stars which was bent by the gravity of the sun.
Everyone figured that 1920 would be the year when Einstein finally won his Nobel Prize. Instead, the award was given to Charles Edouard Guillaume “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”.
Yeah, Guillaume was just as surprised as everyone else that he won.
Well, OK. Maybe there wasn’t enough time for the result to sink in. Surely, 1921 would be the year that Einstien would win, right?
In 1921, they gave the Nobel Prize in Physics to no one. Yeah, they decided to give it to no one, rather than give it to Einstein.
The attitude of the Nobel committee was summed up by one Allvar Gullstrand, a Swedish ophthalmologist who sat on the physics committee. In his diaries, found long after his death, he wrote of the 1921 physics prize, “Einstein must never receive a Nobel Prize, even if the whole world demands it.”
By 1922, the Nobel Committee was looking ridiculous in the eyes of the world and in the eyes of the physics community for not giving Einstein a prize.
The rules of the prize stipulate that if no one were given an award in the sciences, it would roll over to the next year. So in 1922, they could retroactively give the 1921 prize.
The committee determined that they had to give the award to Einstein to maintain their respectability in the scientific world. It was just a matter of what they were going to give it to him for. This was probably the only time in the history of the Nobel when the winner was determined before the reason for the award.
In 1922 the nominations poured in again, and again there were dozens of nominations for Einstein and the General Theory of Relativity. However, there was one nomination for Einstein which wasn’t for relativity. Carl Wilhelm Oseen, a Swedish physicist, nominated Einstein for his work in discovering the photoelectric effect.
The photoelectric effect basically holds that photons of light will have more energy at shorter wavelengths.
The committee decided to give Einstein the 1921 award, which wasn’t given out the previous year and give the 1922 award to Niels Bohr who developed the theory of the atom. By giving an award to Einstein and Bohr at the same time, it eliminated having to give one to Einstein by himself.
So Einstein won his Nobel Prize, but it explicitly was not for relativity. In fact, when he was notified by the Nobel Committee they stated:
… the Royal Academy of Sciences has decided to award you last year’s Nobel Prize for physics, in consideration of your work in theoretical physics and in particular your discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect, but without taking into account the value which will be accorded your relativity and gravitation theories after these are confirmed in the future.
They left the door open for a future prize, but none was ever given.
Einstein didn’t really care much about the prize. He didn’t attend the prize ceremony because he was lecturing in Japan. All the money he won went to his ex-wife in a previous divorce settlement. Later in his life when he was asked which honors he was more proud of, he put the German Physical Society’s Max Planck Medal first and didn’t mention the Nobel Prize at all.
Given that we now have 120 years of Nobel Prizes under our belt, it is an interesting question to ask, how many Nobel Prizes should or could Einstein have won?
For the purposes of this theoretical discussion on theoretical physics, I’ll set a few rules:
Any prize he might share with someone else will count as a prize for Einstein. After all, if you share a prize with someone, you are still considered a Nobel laureate, and you still get the medal. You only split the prize money.
The Nobel committee does not award posthumous prizes. So for the purposes of this discussion, we’ll either assume that they do, or that Einstein is now 141 years old, and that he didn’t do any more physics after 1955, which was the year he died.
Before we dive in, how many people have ever won more than one Nobel prize?
The answer is four.
They are Marie Curie, who won in Physics in 1903 and Chemistry in 1911.
Linus Pauling, who won in Chemistry in 1954 and Peace in 1962.
John Bardeen, who won in Physics in 1956 and 1972.
And Frederick Sanger, who won in Chemistry in 1958 and 1980.
So with that, let’s start the Einstein count. For this I’ll basically count any scientific contributions which were at a Nobel Prize level, based on previous awards.
Number one is of course the prize he did win for the photoelectric effect. There is an argument that the 1921 and 1922 prizes that Einstein and Bohr received were really a single shared prize for the same thing, but it makes no difference for our purposes.
Number two would be for special relativity. He developed this in 1905 and he would probably end up sharing this prize with Hendrik Lorentz who developed some of the equations for it.
Number three would be for General Relativity which he published in 1915. This was all his and he would have gotten this alone.
Number four would be sharing in the 1929 prize with Louis de Broglie, for wave-particle duality. De Broglie freely admitted Einstein’s contribution to this, but Einstein was never given credit by the Nobel Committee.
Number five would be from his 1916 paper on spontaneous emission of light from atoms. This was the first time the idea of randomness was put in quantum mechanics, and it is now a pillar of science. This paper also developed the idea of stimulated emission, which was the theoretical basis for lasers. The 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics was given for the invention of the laser.
Number six would be the work he did with Indian physicist, Satyendra Bose in developing what became known as the Bose-Einstein Condensate. This is a state of matter at extremely low temperatures. The 2001 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded for proving and creating a Bose-Einstein Condensate, and Bose also never received a Nobel Prize.
Number seven would be for figuring out Browning Motion. The 1926 prize in physics was given to Jean Baptiste Perrin for experimentally proving the theory which Einstein established in 1905.
A possible eight prize could have been given for his work with quantum entanglement. The theoretical basis was set by Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen. They published a paper in 1935 titled “Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete?”. This was the theoretical basis that led to the 2012 Nobel Prize.
A possible ninth prize could be a share of the 1933 prize which went to Erwin Schrödinger. Einstein was involved in the creation of Schrödinger’s equations and contributed enough to jointly share in the prize.
A possible tenth prize could be his theory of gravity waves, which was finally proven true and awarded a Nobel prize in 2017.
So far we are at ten, and these are just things which actually did win Nobel Prizes, for which Einstein played a major part in the development of the theories which made winning the prize possible for someone else, or for his theories of relativity, which were obviously overlooked and ignored by the committee.
There is an 11th thing for which he could have won a prize for which is often overlooked. Peace. In his later years, Einstein was a big advocate for nuclear disarmament. Given his role in the development of the atomic bomb, he felt it was his duty.
Given that Chemist Linus Pauling won a peace prize in 1962 for basically the same thing, and Einstein was far more famous and influential, it is not at all out of the question that he could have shared the 1962 Nobel Peace Prize if he had lived that long.
So, 11 theoretical Nobel Prizes isn’t too shabby.
It is hard to overstate the impact Einstein had on almost every area of physics in the 20th century.
Yet, believe it or not, Einstein might not be the greatest of all time in physics. I’ll investigate that in a future episode when I dish out the theoretical Nobel prizes for one Isaac Newton.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 60 |
https://www.fleurier-quality.com/watchmaking-fleurier.html
|
en
|
Watchmaking in Fleurier, Switzerland
|
[
"https://www.fleurier-quality.com/images/logo-fqf-01-02.png",
"https://www.fleurier-quality.com/images/logo-fqf-02-02.png",
"https://www.fleurier-quality.com/images/watchmaking-in-fleurier.jpg",
"https://www.fleurier-quality.com/images/fleurier-quality-foundation-headquarters.jpg",
"https://www.fleurier-quality.com/images/fleurier-switzerland.jpg",
"https://www.fleurier-quality.com/images/fqf-swiss-manufactured.jpg",
"https://www.fleurier-quality.com/images/fqf-exclusive-aesthetic-quality-of-finish.jpg",
"https://www.fleurier-quality.com/images/fqf-cosc.jpg",
"https://www.fleurier-quality.com/images/fqf-chronofiable.jpg",
"https://www.fleurier-quality.com/images/fqf-fleuritest-02.jpg",
"https://www.fleurier-quality.com/images/fqf-footer-logo.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
We owe the introduction of watchmaking in Fleurier (Switzerland) to David-Jean-Jacques-Henri Vaucher, as early as 1730.
|
en
|
/apple-touch-icon.png
| null |
We owe the introduction of watchmaking in Fleurier to David-Jean-Jacques-Henri Vaucher, as early as 1730. This sector grew rapidly and there were already 15 watchmakers in Fleurier by 1750. The figure soared to 106 in 1794, representing a little over 13% of the population.
From 1820 onwards, and thanks to improved trade with China (Canton), Edouard Bovet and his brothers gave a spectacular boost to the watchmaking business thanks to the production of Chinese calibres. They held a virtual monopoly over watches imported into China. Their example was subsequently followed by other companies based in Fleurier: Vaucher Frères (1848); Edouard Juvet from Buttes, who transferred his workshop to Fleurier in 1844; and the Dimier brothers, who had come from Geneva. After China, other export outlets opened up for the manufacturers of Fleurier, who adapted their production to the demands of these new markets.
1851: Opening of the first watchmaking school in Fleurier.
1872: Over 600 people are employed in watchmaking, meaning 23% of the population.
1887: Fleurier is home to around thirty watch companies, employing 634 watchmakers who produce watches for many different countries: China, Egypt, Turkey, the United States, England, Spain and France are their main markets.
1905: Fleurier asserts itself as the watch production centre of the Val-de-Travers region: its population has doubled in the second half of the 19th century.
1920: Charles-Edouard Guillaume, a native of Fleurier, wins the Nobel Prize for Physics, in reward for his work on iron and nickel alloys. He is the inventor of invar and elinvar, alloys subsequently used for making springs and balance-springs.
1940: After the severe economic crisis of the 1930s, there are still eight watch manufacturers in Fleurier, including Fleurier Watch Co SA, Bovet frères et Cie SA, and Numa Jeannin SA. Several other factories handle the production of movement blanks, hands, dials, watch glasses, springs, etc.
1975: Michel Parmigiani founds the company Parmigiani Mesure et Art du Temps SA.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 4 |
https://abakcus.com/directory/charles-edouard-guillaume/
|
en
|
Charles Edouard Guillaume
|
[
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Abakcus_Logo.png",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Charles-Edouard-Guillaume.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Charles-Edouard-Guillaume.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/newtons-college-notebook-768x432.png",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/newtons-college-notebook-768x432.png",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Paul-Diracs-PhD-thesis-768x432.png",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Paul-Diracs-PhD-thesis-768x432.png",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Andrea-Ghez.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Andrea-Ghez.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Reinhard-Genzel.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Reinhard-Genzel.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Roger-Penrose.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Roger-Penrose.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Didier-Queloz.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Didier-Queloz.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Michel-Mayor.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Michel-Mayor.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/James-Peebles.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/James-Peebles.jpg",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Abakcus-Logo.png",
"https://abakcus.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Abakcus-Logo.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Ali Kaya"
] |
2021-06-13T10:43:29-04:00
|
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920 was awarded to Charles Edouard Guillaume "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys."
|
en
|
Abakcus
|
https://abakcus.com/directory/charles-edouard-guillaume/
|
Newton’s College Notebook
Newton's College Notebook was filled with Newton's personal annotations, mathematical formulas, and discoveries that paved the way for modern science. The notebook gave way to his groundbreaking discoveries in calculus,…
Paul Dirac’s PhD Thesis: the First Ever Written on Quantum Mechanics
Paul Dirac's PhD thesis is an unparalleled masterpiece in the field of science. At the incredibly young age of 24, Dirac submitted a revolutionary dissertation laying the foundational ideas of…
Andrea Ghez
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020 was divided, one half awarded to Roger Penrose “for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of…
Reinhard Genzel
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020 was divided, one half awarded to Roger Penrose “for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of…
Roger Penrose
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020 was divided, one half awarded to Roger Penrose “for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of…
Didier Queloz
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2019 was awarded “for contributions to our understanding of the evolution of the universe and Earth’s place in the cosmos” with one half to James…
Michel Mayor
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2019 was awarded “for contributions to our understanding of the evolution of the universe and Earth’s place in the cosmos” with one half to James…
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 17 |
https://www.nndb.com/people/557/000099260/
|
en
|
Charles Édouard Guillaume
|
[
"https://www.nndb.com/title.gif",
"https://www.nndb.com/red-profile-2.gif",
"https://www.nndb.com/people/557/000099260/charles-edouard-guillaume-1.jpg",
"https://www.nndb.com/man.gif"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
/silly-nndb-icon.png
| null |
Born: 15-Feb-1861
Birthplace: Fleurier, Switzerland
Died: 13-Jun-1938
Location of death: Sèvres, France
Cause of death: unspecified
Gender: Male
Race or Ethnicity: White
Sexual orientation: Straight
Occupation: Physicist
Nationality: Switzerland
Executive summary: Invented alloys Invar and Elinvar
Military service: Swiss Army
Swiss physicist and metrologist Charles Édouard Guillaume spent his career at the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, where he worked on setting scientifically precise standards for the metric system of measurement. To establish exact international standards it was necessary to send meter-length bars to agencies in every civilized nation, but due to the expansion and contraction of metals in heat or cold, the same meter-bars would be of different lengths in warmer nations than in cooler nations. In studying the way numerous metals expand and contract, Guillaume developed a new nickel-steel alloy in 1896, which was named invar for its invariability under extremes of heat or cold — its coefficient of expansion is 15 times lower than that of steel. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1920.
In 1922 he developed a second valuable alloy, called elinvar (for elasticity invariable), with even less thermoelasticity, and less affected by magnetism and oxidation. Invar and elinvar are still used in the design of watches, precision scientific instruments, and devices subject to great heat or cold, including toasters and freezers. Guillaume also studied the physics and chemistry of mercury thermometers, and corrected the precise measurement of the volume of the liter. He frequently used a shortened version of his name, Ch-Ed Guillaume, in authoring his many papers and books.
Father: Édouard Guillaume (clockmaker)
Mother: Marianne Emilie Lebet.
Wife: Emilie Marie Anne Taufflieb (m. 1888, three children)
High School: Neuchâtel Gymnasium, Neuchâtel, Switzerland (1878)
University: DSc Physics, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (1882)
Nobel Prize for Physics 1920
French Legion of Honor Grand Officer
French Physical Society
International Bureau of Weights and Measures Thermometry research (1883-1902)
International Bureau of Weights and Measures Associate Director (1902-15)
International Bureau of Weights and Measures Director (1915-36)
Russian Academy of Sciences Foreign Member
Lunar Crater Guillaume (45.4° N, 173.4° W , 57 km. diameter)
French Ancestry
Swiss Ancestry
Author of books:
Études Thermométriques (Studies on Thermometry) (1886, non-fiction)
Traité de Thermométrie (Treatise on Thermometry) (1889, non-fiction)
Unités et Étalons (Units and Standards) (1894, non-fiction)
Les Rayons X (X-Rays) (1896, non-fiction)
Recherches sur le Nickel et ses Alliages (Investigations on Nickel and its Alloys) (1898, non-fiction)
La Vie de la Matière (The Life of Matter) (1899, non-fiction)
La Convention du Mètre et le Bureau international des Poids et Mesures (Metrical Convention and the International Bureau of Weights and Measures) (1902, non-fiction)
Les Applications des Aciers au Nickel (Applications of Nickel-Steels) (1904, non-fiction)
Des États de la Matière (States of Matter) (1907, non-fiction)
Les Récent Progrès du Système Métrique (Recent progress in the Metric System) (1907, non-fiction)
Initiation à la Mécanique (Introduction to Mechanics) (1912, non-fiction)
La Crèation du Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (Creation of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures) (1927, non-fiction)
New!
NNDB MAPPER Create a map starting with Charles Édouard Guillaume
Requires Flash 7+ and Javascript.
Do you know something we don't?
Submit a correction or make a comment about this profile
|
|||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 15 |
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123026
|
en
|
Charles Édouard Guillaume
|
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/Guillaume_1920.jpg/220px-Guillaume_1920.jpg",
"https://login.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAutoLogin/start?type=1x1",
"https://www.wikidata.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.svg",
"https://www.wikidata.org/static/images/footer/poweredby_mediawiki.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Swiss physicist (1861-1938)
|
en
|
/static/apple-touch/wikidata.png
|
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123026
|
in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys (English)
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 40 |
https://iopscience.iop.org/page/nobel-prize
|
en
|
Radware Bot Manager Captcha
|
[
"https://cdn.images.iop.org/website-logos/IOP-Publishing-300x83.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null | null |
We apologize for the inconvenience...
To ensure we keep this website safe, please can you confirm you are a human by ticking the box below.
If you are unable to complete the above request please contact us using the below link, providing a screenshot of your experience.
|
||||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 56 |
https://everything-everywhere.com/how-many-nobel-prizes-should-albert-einstein-have-won/
|
en
|
How Many Nobel Prizes Should Albert Einstein Have Won?
|
[
"https://everything-everywhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/NewLogo200Trans.png",
"https://everything-everywhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/NewLogo200Trans.png",
"https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/n-hRFP2/Podcast-Images/i-SNSFG3K/0/2d885a7e/L/einstein%20nobel%20prizes-L.png",
"https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/n-hRFP2/Misc/i-zGqp5HM/0/d41c466a/400x400/EverythingEverywherePodcastLarge-400x400.jpg"
] |
[
"about:blank",
"https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/how-many-nobel-prizes-should-einstein-have-won/id1521870190?i=1000501377801"
] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Gary Arndt",
"www.facebook.com"
] |
2020-12-04T22:44:36+00:00
|
How Many Nobel Prizes Should Albert Einstein Have Won?
|
en
|
Everything Everywhere
|
https://everything-everywhere.com/how-many-nobel-prizes-should-albert-einstein-have-won/
|
Subscribe
Apple | Spotify | Amazon | iHeart Radio | Player.FM | TuneIn
Castbox | Podurama | Podcast Republic | RSS | Patreon
Transcript
In the 120 year history of the Nobel Prize, there have been four people who have been given an award twice.
One of them is not Albert Einstein.
Yet, when you look at his list of accomplishments and the different fields of physics which he has touched, he arguably deserved more than one Nobel prize.
Join me as I play fantasy physics and try to figure out how many Nobel Prizes Albert Einstien should have won on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily.
The history of Albert Einstein and the Nobel Prize is a rather complex one.
By the year 1920, Einstein was unquestionably the most famous scientist in the world. Yet, he had not won a Nobel Prize.
He had developed the Special and General theories of Relativity, he had set the equivalence of mass and energy in his famous E=mc2 equation, and had contributed to many other areas of physics.
His work on relativity had been nominated by many physicists over several years, but the Nobel committee never gave him a prize.
There were a bunch of reasons why Einstein was never given a Nobel Prize. Being Jewish and pacifist were big ones. The Nobel committee didn’t want to honor someone who was so outside the mainstream. The biggest reason, however, was that he was a theoretical physicist. The prize had, up until this point, primarily been given to people who proved things through experimentation.
In 1919, evidence for the General Theory of Relativity was finally found during a solar eclipse when British astronomer Arthur Stanley Eddington detected light from stars which was bent by the gravity of the sun.
Everyone figured that 1920 would be the year when Einstein finally won his Nobel Prize. Instead, the award was given to Charles Edouard Guillaume “in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”.
Yeah, Guillaume was just as surprised as everyone else that he won.
Well, OK. Maybe there wasn’t enough time for the result to sink in. Surely, 1921 would be the year that Einstien would win, right?
In 1921, they gave the Nobel Prize in Physics to no one. Yeah, they decided to give it to no one, rather than give it to Einstein.
The attitude of the Nobel committee was summed up by one Allvar Gullstrand, a Swedish ophthalmologist who sat on the physics committee. In his diaries, found long after his death, he wrote of the 1921 physics prize, “Einstein must never receive a Nobel Prize, even if the whole world demands it.”
By 1922, the Nobel Committee was looking ridiculous in the eyes of the world and in the eyes of the physics community for not giving Einstein a prize.
The rules of the prize stipulate that if no one were given an award in the sciences, it would roll over to the next year. So in 1922, they could retroactively give the 1921 prize.
The committee determined that they had to give the award to Einstein to maintain their respectability in the scientific world. It was just a matter of what they were going to give it to him for. This was probably the only time in the history of the Nobel when the winner was determined before the reason for the award.
In 1922 the nominations poured in again, and again there were dozens of nominations for Einstein and the General Theory of Relativity. However, there was one nomination for Einstein which wasn’t for relativity. Carl Wilhelm Oseen, a Swedish physicist, nominated Einstein for his work in discovering the photoelectric effect.
The photoelectric effect basically holds that photons of light will have more energy at shorter wavelengths.
The committee decided to give Einstein the 1921 award, which wasn’t given out the previous year and give the 1922 award to Niels Bohr who developed the theory of the atom. By giving an award to Einstein and Bohr at the same time, it eliminated having to give one to Einstein by himself.
So Einstein won his Nobel Prize, but it explicitly was not for relativity. In fact, when he was notified by the Nobel Committee they stated:
… the Royal Academy of Sciences has decided to award you last year’s Nobel Prize for physics, in consideration of your work in theoretical physics and in particular your discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect, but without taking into account the value which will be accorded your relativity and gravitation theories after these are confirmed in the future.
They left the door open for a future prize, but none was ever given.
Einstein didn’t really care much about the prize. He didn’t attend the prize ceremony because he was lecturing in Japan. All the money he won went to his ex-wife in a previous divorce settlement. Later in his life when he was asked which honors he was more proud of, he put the German Physical Society’s Max Planck Medal first and didn’t mention the Nobel Prize at all.
Given that we now have 120 years of Nobel Prizes under our belt, it is an interesting question to ask, how many Nobel Prizes should or could Einstein have won?
For the purposes of this theoretical discussion on theoretical physics, I’ll set a few rules:
Any prize he might share with someone else will count as a prize for Einstein. After all, if you share a prize with someone, you are still considered a Nobel laureate, and you still get the medal. You only split the prize money.
The Nobel committee does not award posthumous prizes. So for the purposes of this discussion, we’ll either assume that they do, or that Einstein is now 141 years old, and that he didn’t do any more physics after 1955, which was the year he died.
Before we dive in, how many people have ever won more than one Nobel prize?
The answer is four.
They are Marie Curie, who won in Physics in 1903 and Chemistry in 1911.
Linus Pauling, who won in Chemistry in 1954 and Peace in 1962.
John Bardeen, who won in Physics in 1956 and 1972.
And Frederick Sanger, who won in Chemistry in 1958 and 1980.
So with that, let’s start the Einstein count. For this I’ll basically count any scientific contributions which were at a Nobel Prize level, based on previous awards.
Number one is of course the prize he did win for the photoelectric effect. There is an argument that the 1921 and 1922 prizes that Einstein and Bohr received were really a single shared prize for the same thing, but it makes no difference for our purposes.
Number two would be for special relativity. He developed this in 1905 and he would probably end up sharing this prize with Hendrik Lorentz who developed some of the equations for it.
Number three would be for General Relativity which he published in 1915. This was all his and he would have gotten this alone.
Number four would be sharing in the 1929 prize with Louis de Broglie, for wave-particle duality. De Broglie freely admitted Einstein’s contribution to this, but Einstein was never given credit by the Nobel Committee.
Number five would be from his 1916 paper on spontaneous emission of light from atoms. This was the first time the idea of randomness was put in quantum mechanics, and it is now a pillar of science. This paper also developed the idea of stimulated emission, which was the theoretical basis for lasers. The 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics was given for the invention of the laser.
Number six would be the work he did with Indian physicist, Satyendra Bose in developing what became known as the Bose-Einstein Condensate. This is a state of matter at extremely low temperatures. The 2001 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded for proving and creating a Bose-Einstein Condensate, and Bose also never received a Nobel Prize.
Number seven would be for figuring out Browning Motion. The 1926 prize in physics was given to Jean Baptiste Perrin for experimentally proving the theory which Einstein established in 1905.
A possible eight prize could have been given for his work with quantum entanglement. The theoretical basis was set by Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen. They published a paper in 1935 titled “Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete?”. This was the theoretical basis that led to the 2012 Nobel Prize.
A possible ninth prize could be a share of the 1933 prize which went to Erwin Schrödinger. Einstein was involved in the creation of Schrödinger’s equations and contributed enough to jointly share in the prize.
A possible tenth prize could be his theory of gravity waves, which was finally proven true and awarded a Nobel prize in 2017.
So far we are at ten, and these are just things which actually did win Nobel Prizes, for which Einstein played a major part in the development of the theories which made winning the prize possible for someone else, or for his theories of relativity, which were obviously overlooked and ignored by the committee.
There is an 11th thing for which he could have won a prize for which is often overlooked. Peace. In his later years, Einstein was a big advocate for nuclear disarmament. Given his role in the development of the atomic bomb, he felt it was his duty.
Given that Chemist Linus Pauling won a peace prize in 1962 for basically the same thing, and Einstein was far more famous and influential, it is not at all out of the question that he could have shared the 1962 Nobel Peace Prize if he had lived that long.
So, 11 theoretical Nobel Prizes isn’t too shabby.
It is hard to overstate the impact Einstein had on almost every area of physics in the 20th century.
Yet, believe it or not, Einstein might not be the greatest of all time in physics. I’ll investigate that in a future episode when I dish out the theoretical Nobel prizes for one Isaac Newton.
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 18 |
https://www.bipm.org/en/-/guillaume-symposium
|
en
|
guillaume
|
https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/favicon.ico
|
https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/favicon.ico
|
[
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/logo.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-burger-white.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-burger-blue.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/search-blue.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/search-white.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-user-blue.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-user-white.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-close.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/search-blue.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/search-white.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-user-blue.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-user-white.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/BIPM-logo-midi-white.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/BIPM-logo-midi-yellow.png",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-metrology-white.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-links-white.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-close.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-close.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/picto/picto-close.svg",
"https://www.bipm.org/documents/53968/39300004/2020-03-guillaume.jpg/c09c2a44-60eb-c2e3-e87a-688d873f6238?t=1597071723360",
"https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/BIPM-logo-name.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"2020",
"meeting/event (bipm)",
"staff",
"news",
"director's office"
] | null |
[] | null |
On 17 October 2020, the BIPM will celebrate the life and work of Charles-Édouard Guillaume with a symposium that will consider his legacy.
|
en
|
https://www.bipm.org/o/bipm-theme/images/favicon.ico
|
BIPM
|
https://www.bipm.org/en/-/guillaume-symposium
|
On 17 October 2020, the BIPM celebrated the life and work of Charles-Édouard Guillaume with a symposium, both online and at the BIPM, considering his legacy.
The year 2020 marks the centenary of the award of the Nobel Prize in Physics to Charles-Édouard Guillaume (1861-1938). He was born into a watchmaking family in Fleurier (Switzerland), and dedicated more than half a century to metrology through his work at the BIPM. His major study of the properties of nickel-iron alloys spanned more than twenty-five years and not only revolutionized geodesy measurements but also chronometry and precision horology; numerous applications still exist for these alloys. In 1915, he became Director of the BIPM, a position he held until his retirement in 1936.
Guillaume was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1920 "in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys".
|
||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 36 |
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123026
|
en
|
Charles Édouard Guillaume
|
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/Guillaume_1920.jpg/220px-Guillaume_1920.jpg",
"https://login.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAutoLogin/start?type=1x1",
"https://www.wikidata.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.svg",
"https://www.wikidata.org/static/images/footer/poweredby_mediawiki.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Swiss physicist (1861-1938)
|
en
|
/static/apple-touch/wikidata.png
|
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123026
|
in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys (English)
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 63 |
http://www.alloynickel.com/Article/indusrynewste.html
|
en
|
What is Invar alloy?
|
[
"http://www.alloynickel.com/uploadfiles/pictures/setting/20160528160645_9218.png",
"http://www.alloynickel.com/uploadfiles/pictures/others/20160530173053_4843.jpg",
"http://www.alloynickel.com/skins/default/template/news/news01/img/common/article_btn.gif",
"http://nswcode.nsw88.com/?qc=8dd84307afe274a5&url=http://www.alloynickel.com/Mobile/MArticles/indusrynewste.html",
"http://www.alloynickel.com/Skins/Default/Img/common/f1.jpg",
"http://www.alloynickel.com/Skins/Default/Img/common/f2.jpg",
"http://www.alloynickel.com/Skins/Default/Img/common/f_22.gif",
"http://www.alloynickel.com/Skins/Default/Img/common/f_24.gif",
"http://www.alloynickel.com/Skins/Default/Img/common/f_26.gif",
"http://www.alloynickel.com/Skins/Default/Img/common/f_28.gif",
"http://www.alloynickel.com/Skins/Default/Img/common/f_30.gif",
"http://www.alloynickel.com/Skins/Default/Img/common/f3.jpg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
"invar alloy"
] | null |
[] | null |
Invar alloy, also known generically as FeNi36 (64FeNi in the US), is a nickel–iron alloy notable for its uniquely low coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE or α). The name Invar comes from the word invariable, referring to its relative lack of expansion or contraction with temperature changes.
|
zh
| null |
Invar alloy, also known generically as FeNi36 (64FeNi in the US), is a nickel–iron alloy notable for its uniquely low coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE or α). The name Invar comes from the word invariable, referring to its relative lack of expansion or contraction with temperature changes.
It was invented in 1896 by Swiss physicist Charles édouard Guillaume. He received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1920 for this discovery, which enabled improvements in scientific instruments.
Like other nickel/iron compositions, Invar alloy is a solid solution; that is, it is a single-phase alloy, consisting of around 36% nickel and 64% iron.
|
||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 61 |
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020AmJPh..88.1140A/abstract
|
en
|
Complete and commented translation of Guillaume's 1896 paper on the temperature of space
|
[
"https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/styles/img/transparent_logo.svg",
"https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/styles/img/nasa.svg",
"https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/styles/img/smithsonian.svg",
"https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/styles/img/cfa.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"A. K. T",
"M. C. D"
] |
2020-12-22T00:00:00
|
Charles Édouard Guillaume (1861-1928) was a Swiss physicist who received the 1920 Nobel Prize in physics for his precision measurements and discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys. In this work, we present a complete and commented translation of his remarkable article of 1896 on the temperature of interstellar space. The importance of this work is that it is the oldest estimate known to us of the temperature acquired by a black body, which is in interstellar space far from other stars. This temperature was presumed to be due to an equilibrium state in which the radiation received by this body from the stars around it would be equal to the radiation emitted by the body. He arrived at a temperature of 5.6 K , regarding this figure as an upper limit on the effect he was seeking to estimate. In 1926, Arthur Eddington (1882-1944) arrived at a temperature of 3.18 K , utilizing essentially the same procedure but with better data.
|
en
|
//styles/favicon/apple-touch-icon.png
|
NASA/ADS
|
http://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020AmJPh..88.1140A/abstract
|
Abstract
Charles Édouard Guillaume (1861-1928) was a Swiss physicist who received the 1920 Nobel Prize in physics for his precision measurements and discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys. In this work, we present a complete and commented translation of his remarkable article of 1896 on the temperature of interstellar space. The importance of this work is that it is the oldest estimate known to us of the temperature acquired by a black body, which is in interstellar space far from other stars. This temperature was presumed to be due to an equilibrium state in which the radiation received by this body from the stars around it would be equal to the radiation emitted by the body. He arrived at a temperature of 5.6 K , regarding this figure as an upper limit on the effect he was seeking to estimate. In 1926, Arthur Eddington (1882-1944) arrived at a temperature of 3.18 K , utilizing essentially the same procedure but with better data.
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 97 |
https://metalsandalloysblog.wordpress.com/2016/04/11/i-is-for-invar/
|
en
|
I is for Invar
|
[
"https://1.gravatar.com/avatar/45db3d56a246090acb64a018e1aac5870ebece4df96e3df596790fbffc7bb953?s=49&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://2.gravatar.com/avatar/5d69c742067d72a34197da83694816f416c6b87f572fe53064b320523b7e7e66?s=48&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://1.gravatar.com/avatar/45db3d56a246090acb64a018e1aac5870ebece4df96e3df596790fbffc7bb953?s=48&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://1.gravatar.com/avatar/a61dc4ee30587fc4855becee5f60480568b0042af79bf29c2991e6e2fb5fdc7f?s=48&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://1.gravatar.com/avatar/45db3d56a246090acb64a018e1aac5870ebece4df96e3df596790fbffc7bb953?s=48&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://2.gravatar.com/avatar/ea67749c9d088bb482e7e015b57dc0435a629500ee107bbb768b1bbd81ff948c?s=48&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://2.gravatar.com/avatar/5d69c742067d72a34197da83694816f416c6b87f572fe53064b320523b7e7e66?s=48&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://1.gravatar.com/avatar/45db3d56a246090acb64a018e1aac5870ebece4df96e3df596790fbffc7bb953?s=48&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://1.gravatar.com/avatar/a61dc4ee30587fc4855becee5f60480568b0042af79bf29c2991e6e2fb5fdc7f?s=48&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://1.gravatar.com/avatar/45db3d56a246090acb64a018e1aac5870ebece4df96e3df596790fbffc7bb953?s=48&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://2.gravatar.com/avatar/ea67749c9d088bb482e7e015b57dc0435a629500ee107bbb768b1bbd81ff948c?s=48&d=identicon&r=G",
"https://s2.wp.com/i/logo/wpcom-gray-white.png",
"https://s2.wp.com/i/logo/wpcom-gray-white.png",
"https://pixel.wp.com/b.gif?v=noscript"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Author DrMarkJWhiting"
] |
2016-04-11T00:00:00
|
Invar is the popular name given to a binary (two metal) alloy of iron with 36 wt% nickel. It is one a family of alloys of iron and nickel which have very low coefficients of thermal expansion (CTE). It is this low CTE which gives Invar its name—it refers to its 'invariable' length. One of…
|
en
|
https://s1.wp.com/i/favicon.ico
|
MetalsAndAlloysBlog
|
https://metalsandalloysblog.wordpress.com/2016/04/11/i-is-for-invar/
|
Invar is the popular name given to a binary (two metal) alloy of iron with 36 wt% nickel. It is one a family of alloys of iron and nickel which have very low coefficients of thermal expansion (CTE). It is this low CTE which gives Invar its name—it refers to its ‘invariable’ length. One of the things common to all pure metals, and the majority of alloys, are their moderate values of CTE. The majority have a value of 10–30 × 10-6 K-1. This means that a one metre length of a typical metal, heated up by 100 K (which is 100°C or 180°F), will increase its length by 1–3 mm. The CTE can often be a problem in diverse applications due to the resulting stress build-up if a metal is constrained. Most famously with train track (rail roads) buckling in hot weather. It is also a challenge when precision of geometry is required in components used in measuring devices. It is this problem that Invar was developed to address. A Swiss physicist, Charles Édouard Guillaume, received the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1920 for its discovery, which he had made more than twenty years earlier. The award of the Noble Prize acknowledged the unique science behind the low CTE of Invar as well as its commercial value for the improvement of scientific instruments.
Invar is a solid solution like other alloys we have already met on our A–Z journey. It has a face-centered cubic crystal (fcc) structure like the aluminium, copper and gold we have already encountered. In effect the nickel ‘persuades’ the iron to adopt a different crystal structure—pure iron being fcc only at temperature greater than 910°C. It is informative to compare the CTE of Invar with the two metals from which it is made:
CTE of Fe is 12 × 10-6 K-1 (this implies a 0.12% increase in length over 100°C)
CTE of Ni is 13 × 10-6 K-1
CTE of Invar is 1.2 × 10-6 K-1
[these values are approximate values for the temperature range 0°C to 100°C.]
This shows that Invar has around a 90% lower CTE than nickel and iron. With a combination of small additions of cobalt and careful control of impurities it is possible to lower the CTE still further, or to make it slightly negative. The alloy known as Inovco, which is iron-based with 33 wt% nickel and 4–5 wt% cobalt has a CTE of 0.6 × 10-6 K-1.
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 78 |
https://www.elgintime.com/Home/museum/documents/guillaume
|
en
|
Elgintime
|
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/wxlaF9zevVG5HQaahkAXsfKUELEu0bi-SXyyAlmkTHTuOvkZ6_R5x6mLrDsWcRsKBUdEILDTlC2QhqQvsn-qOtax-zalUMdQyKLmA0AbL70=w1280
|
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/wxlaF9zevVG5HQaahkAXsfKUELEu0bi-SXyyAlmkTHTuOvkZ6_R5x6mLrDsWcRsKBUdEILDTlC2QhqQvsn-qOtax-zalUMdQyKLmA0AbL70=w1280
|
[
"https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/wxlaF9zevVG5HQaahkAXsfKUELEu0bi-SXyyAlmkTHTuOvkZ6_R5x6mLrDsWcRsKBUdEILDTlC2QhqQvsn-qOtax-zalUMdQyKLmA0AbL70=w1280",
"https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/m97Wa5z7gTBnpkDnbCvwdiUvFvWZSNUrrwczxEVXI-wqebR4RXQ46Xn-QTLpFItqhaO3_yCAjEvyoys2XL7iXmiBHbnbebMWRgOL2PpZP1o=w1280",
"https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/2dALp8McRVZhAudKIIyd9eyzhhmGGKk3zJ8Sa0I5WvZmSQj81vac_txj0NVsoTWX=w1280",
"https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/0cQ3GGUfufPSwPfxyqSvRy-JQzqBbIEYZ0GOvmTegXyL_-L1VSVR4VrfRgQndtlLnK7HYN1_KQ6m4um1ZtvBEqhrnKKHH3kjPYR7th36l5s=w1280",
"https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/UQd6bk1zz40mXA5PQEQNNfQGqgRbxobnxNgnA32Zg2WeaFj3wchUjMT6xrn9ZtrLcrzabGD6EgZkSi2BYPKGAkugx2-Ozl84FFvNo-aB2Gs=w1280",
"https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/LkIr-fkxBhTtdEYzNX26ID7UU0qi_jdLT5-qdYue0Dvv5eOZzj7mzPJjNpbt4LC0FDxo5YCUQrtFBkpCrLKNe-yd4iN2jiePT72yCUIDfys=w1280",
"https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/E7XJUF2F1CzLsC_gdWPVctKIAIT_dxxmSLMNdLTttMlYM8zrVZPp8wDr4BIzIXmuIJ6VeFT4_gcjuQKmfcDj710tH3-k8fhy5VWbQZSEGSI=w1280",
"https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/x2kNtPEIxeaeqfdaYHb0hajD-jTtqL4PFKWRXWv7h4GETOUztj_HKf_WgJ6sDd9L4s7V5v3_56hmyiFlMWPRyUqjEO5b0lp_lVTfM8MD-mE=w1280",
"https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/nxKFdXmUO9HWeFfesM6NZFrLv5lSt0jYq4Aqi92-K7IXSgv9A233XBLhaHp62xphG5JECdp2gMpfRptaW-j5YKBSCBXaFnLtefZC7O1me7I=w1280",
"https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/S5JK83GBsmlNdO7-nn_KwaxQSVsazGSOhKqbUzVB69IWHRzqyE11mbafSm29JjwprmgyDU2Qy2b-n6-27gGHEmLnnWS7vhl0KTsPDPZ5YBo=w1280"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Jeff Sexton
|
en
|
https://ssl.gstatic.com/atari/images/public/favicon.ico
|
https://www.elgintime.com/Home/museum/documents/guillaume
|
Years later at a luncheon given by Paul Ditisheim following a session of the French Academy of Sciences, Dr. Guillaume recalled with a not displeased memory that I had said to him at that first meeting. that as I had not had the honor of having known Hooke, Huyghens, Earnshaw or Breguet it was a consolation to meet the man now foremost in the world in his contributions to precision timekeeping. It was an hour to be prized. An audience of one, I sat before the master's blackboard as he sketched the history of his vast number of experiments leading to the final success in producing the nickel-steel alloy whose dimensions remained invariable under different temperatures, or Invar, a name proposed by Professor Marc Thury in an article in the JOURNAL SUISSE D'HORLOGERIE in 1897.
Charles-Edouard Guillaume was born the 15th of February, 1861, at Fleurier in the upper valley of the Swiss .T ura Mountains, a region which gave birth also to Berthoud and Breguet. For centuries the inhabitants of this locality had for the most part farmed in summer and worked at watchwork in winter. His grandfather Charles- Frederic- Alexandre Guillaume, after the French Revolution and out of sympathy with the ruling Prince, removed to London and established an important horolagical business which was successively presided aver by his three sons. The son Edouard returned to Fleurier and became the father of Charles-Edouard.
On the medal, struck off an the occasion of Dr. Guillaume's resignation as active Directer of the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures, shown in HOROLOGY of January this year, is an imprint of the house in which he was born and where he spent his youth and early schaaling, surrounded by men and women working at and discussing horological problems. At the age of fifteen years he was put in the upper classes af the Gymnasium, or Academy, at Neuchatel where, after two years, he was prepared to enter the Polytechnicum at Zurich, one of the foremast technical schools of Europe. In addition to the usual higher mathematics and sciences he devoted much time ta the languages and literature of bath Germany and France. His bent, however, was far physics. On finishing his schooling he became an officer of artillery and developed a passion far ballistics. It was then that he wrote "l'Initiatian a la Mecanique," a most clear and admirable work in mathematics. After graduation in 1883, at the recommendation of Dr. Adolphe Hirsch, Director of the Observatory of Neuchatel and Secretary of the Committee of the Bureau International des Paids et Mesures, the young engineer was given a position at the Pavilion de Breteuil at Sevres, France. The Bureau had been in existence for a few years. I t was engaged in making the meter standards and many accessories were necessary. It fell to Dr.Guillaume to study the mercury thermometer in the most profound manner. The Bureau was at this time searching for a metal better adapted and less costly for the standard lengths than that formerly used.
In 1891 a primary research was conducted by Dr. Guillaume to reconnoiter the qualities of nickel from the metrological point of view. About 1895 observations of the Director J. R. Benoit fixed attention upon certain alloys of iron and nickel. Here was for Dr. Guillaume his opportunity to carry out his experiments which have since become classic. The term experiments might mean making a great number of combinations of alloys and testing each product and thereby finding the one which was satisfactory, but research involved a much more difficult and profound system. Without going into the problem at all closely, for two very good reasons, the first of which being that I am not familiar enough with it to do so, and the second that it would require pages of mathematics, I can point out that there is involved in alloys the element of action quite different from the action of each component metal by itself. These actions closely observed are found to follow laws which can be expressed only in complicated mathematical formula. The determination of these laws and their mathematical expression involve not only vast numbers of trials but a genius for inventing modes of measurement and exact observation coupled with the mathematical ability necessary to reason out the next step.
During the previous century there was discovered the reason why a bimetal compensated chronometer or watch balance could be adjusted to only two places on the scale of temperatures. If it was correct at temperatures of say fifty degrees and eighty degrees it was found to gain two seconds or more per day at sixtyfive degrees. This was known as the middle temperature error and unknown numbers of inventive minds searched for a mechanical correction. We find the well known names of Molyneaux, Ullrich, Poole, Hardy, Dent, Kullberg, Bliss, Lund, Loseby, and many others. I have even in my small collection, more than twenty forms of auxiliary balances. Some of the forms gave good results under intelligent care but none were found sufficiently successful under existing conditions to warrant general use and were finally excluded by several governments far naval use. The difficulty in mechanically salving the problem was due to. the fact that while the balance spring grew weaker proportionately to, the increase of heat, which could be represented by a straight line if plotted an paper, the change in distance of the mass of the balance rim from the axis affected the rate not proportionately but as the square of the radius, which platted would approximate the arc of a circle. The two. platted wauld show a straight line cutting two. paints an the arc, at which paints the rate is the same. Between these two, paints there would show a gaining rate and beyond them a lasing rate.
It was Dr. Guillaume's skill, patience and persistence, which gave to. the horological world Invar for unchangeable dimensions of pendulums and balances, and Elinvar, which keeps constant strength under different temperatures far balance springs.
Many honors have came to. Dr. Guillaume among which was the Nobel Prize in 1920, corresponding member of the French Academy af Science, the Gold Medal of the Horological Society in London and the occasion in January when many scientific associations paid homage to. him and marked it with the striking of a medal aforementioned.
More
|
|||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 34 |
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes-in-physics/1929-1920/
|
en
|
All Nobel Prizes in Physics
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
All Nobel Prizes in Physics
|
en
|
NobelPrize.org
|
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes-in-physics
|
The Nobel Prize in Physics has been awarded 117 times to 225 Nobel Prize laureates between 1901 and 2023. John Bardeen is the only laureate who has been awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics twice, in 1956 and 1972. This means that a total of 224 individuals have received the Nobel Prize in Physics. Click on the links to get more information.
Find all prizes in | physics | chemistry | physiology or medicine | literature | peace | economic sciences | all categories
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2024
The Nobel Prize in Physics 2024 will be announced on Tuesday 8 October, 11:45 CEST at the earliest.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1929
“for his discovery of the wave nature of electrons”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1928
“for his work on the thermionic phenomenon and especially for the discovery of the law named after him”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1927
“for his discovery of the effect named after him”
“for his method of making the paths of electrically charged particles visible by condensation of vapour”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1926
“for his work on the discontinuous structure of matter, and especially for his discovery of sedimentation equilibrium”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1925
“for their discovery of the laws governing the impact of an electron upon an atom”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1924
“for his discoveries and research in the field of X-ray spectroscopy”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1923
“for his work on the elementary charge of electricity and on the photoelectric effect”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1922
“for his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1921
“for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect”
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1920
“in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys”
To cite this section
MLA style: All Nobel Prizes in Physics. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach AB 2024. Mon. 22 Jul 2024. <https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists/all-nobel-prizes-in-physics>
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
1
| 77 |
https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/einstein-vs-the-nobel-prize
|
en
|
Einstein vs. the Nobel Prize
|
[
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/globalAssets/DSC_white_small.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/facebook.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/instagram.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/twitter.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/youtube.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/soundcloud.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/rss.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Virginia Hughes"
] |
2006-09-28T05:00:00+00:00
|
Why the Nobel Committee repeatedly dissed this "world-bluffing Jewish physicist"
|
en
|
/assets/favicon/favicon16.png
|
Discover Magazine
|
https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/einstein-vs-the-nobel-prize
|
When Albert Einstein listed the most important honors of his life, he began with the German Physical Society's Max Planck Medal, named for a physicist he revered. He went on from there to list the prizes and honorary doctorate degrees awarded him in many nations. Conspicuously absent was the plaudit with the highest profile and payout: the Nobel Prize. But in context this omission isn't so surprising. The Nobel nod—17 years after Einstein published his special theory of relativity—came long after recognition by the physics world and even the general public. Even more bizarre, the prize was awarded to Einstein not for his relativity revolution, but for the comparatively obscure discovery of the photoelectric effect. Why? After years of sifting through letters and diaries of the Scandinavian archives, science historian Robert Marc Friedman says it was an intentional snub fueled by the biases of the day—a prejudice against pacifists, Jews, and, most of all, theoretical physics.
In 1905, while working as a patent clerk in Switzerland, 26-year-old Albert Einstein published five seminal papers on the nature of space, light, and motion. One paper introduced the special theory of relativity, which dramatically broke with Newton's universally accepted description of how physics worked. Special relativity did away with the notion of absolute space and time—Einstein said they were instead "relative" to the observer's conditions—effectively flipping the Newtonian model on its apple-bruised head. In 1915, Einstein expanded the theory by incorporating gravity: it was not just a force of attraction between bodies, he said, but the result of distortions in space itself. This new, more robust version was called the theory of general relativity.
Today, general relativity is celebrated as Einstein's most impressive work. But as Friedman wrote in his 2001 book, The Politics of Excellence, in post-War Germany Einstein was despised as a pacifist Jew who renounced his German citizenship, went to meetings of radical groups, and publicly supported socialism. His theories were dismissed as "world-bluffing Jewish physics" by some prominent German physicists, who claimed to practice "true" German science based on observations of the natural world and hypotheses that could be tested in a laboratory.
Luckily for Einstein, British astronomer Arthur Stanley Eddington believed there was a way to test the general theory. If massive objects curved space itself, as Einstein proposed, then they should bend nearby rays of light, as well. During six minutes of a total solar eclipse on May 29, 1919, Eddington measured the positions of stars that appeared next to the blotted-out sun. Sure enough, they followed the predictions of Einstein's general theory.
Eddington revealed the results of his eclipse experiment on November 6, and Einstein became a household name throughout the world practically overnight—literally overnight in some places; the next day, the London Times ran the headline, "Revolution in Science, New Theory of the Universe." Within a month, the news traveled through the American press; a New York Times headline declared, "Given the Speed, Time Is Naught."
The nominations for Einstein that poured into the laps of the Nobel Committee members as they were reviewing candidates for the 1920 prize were not exactly well received. The committee did not want a "political and intellectual radical, who—it was said—did not conduct experiments, crowned as the pinnacle of physics," says Friedman. So the 1920 prize was given to the Swiss Charles-Edouard Guillaume for his ho-hum discovery of an inert nickel-steel alloy. When the announcement was made, Friedman says the previously unknown Guillaume "was as surprised as the rest of the world."
By the next year, "Einstein-mania" was in full bloom. During his first trip to the United States he gave many public lectures on relativity, and received the prestigious Barnard Medal from the National Academy of Sciences. After one particularly crowded lecture at Princeton, legend has it that Einstein said wryly to the chairman, "I never realized that so many Americans were interested in tensor analysis."
As his quirky personality and untamed tresses gained more popularity with the general public, his momentous theory gained more credibility in the scientific community. In 1921, swarms of both theoreticians and experimentalists again nominated Einstein for his work on relativity. Reporters kept asking him, to his great annoyance, if this would be the year that he received a Nobel Prize.
But 1921 was not the year, thanks to one stubborn senior member of the prize committee, ophthalmologist Allvar Gullstrand. "Einstein must never receive a Nobel Prize, even if the whole world demands it," said Gullstrand, according to a Swedish mathematician's diary dug up by Friedman. Gullstrand's arguments, however biased, convinced the rest of the committee. In 1921, the Swedish Academy of Sciences awarded no physics prize.
Two prizes were thus available in 1922. By this time, Einstein's popularity was so great that many members of the committee feared for their international reputations if they didn't recognize him in some way. As in the previous two years, Einstein received many nominations for his relativity theory. But this year there was one nomination—from Carl Wilhelm Oseen—not for relativity, but for the discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect. In another of his 1905 papers, Einstein had proposed that light, which had been thought to act only as a wave, sometimes acted as a particle—and laboratory experiments conducted in 1916 showed he was right.
In his exhaustive research, Friedman realized that Oseen lobbied the committee to recognize the photoelectric effect not as a "theory," but as a fundamental "law" of nature–not because he cared about recognizing Einstein, but because he had another theoretical physicist in mind for that second available prize: Niels Bohr. Bohr had proposed a new quantum theory of the atom that Oseen felt was "the most beautiful of all the beautiful" ideas in recent theoretical physics. In his report to the committee, Oseen exaggerated the close bond between Einstein's proven law of nature and Bohr's new atom. "In one brilliant stroke," Friedman says, "he saw how to meet the objections against both Einstein and Bohr."
The committee was indeed won over. On November 10, 1922, they gave the 1922 prize to Bohr and the delayed 1921 prize to Einstein, "especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect." Einstein, en route to Japan (and perhaps huffy after the committee's long delay) did not attend the official ceremony. According to Friedman, Einstein didn't care much about the medal, anyway, though he did care about the money. As the German mark decreased in value after the war, Einstein needed a hard foreign currency for alimony payments to his ex-wife. Moreover, under the terms of his 1919 divorce settlement, she was already entitled to all the money "from an eventual Nobel Prize." Bruce Hunt, an Einstein historian at the University of Texas at Austin, says that calling attention to these financial arrangements "brings out the fact that Einstein was a much more worldly and savvy man than his later public image would suggest."
Of course, Einstein isn't the only player who emerges as being not quite angelic. "The decisions of the Nobel Committees are often treated by the press and public as the voice of god," Hunt says. But Friedman's research brought to light "how political the deliberations of the Nobel Committees sometimes were—and presumably still are."
|
||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
2
| 22 |
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123026
|
en
|
Charles Édouard Guillaume
|
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/Guillaume_1920.jpg/220px-Guillaume_1920.jpg",
"https://login.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAutoLogin/start?type=1x1",
"https://www.wikidata.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.svg",
"https://www.wikidata.org/static/images/footer/poweredby_mediawiki.svg"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Swiss physicist (1861-1938)
|
en
|
/static/apple-touch/wikidata.png
|
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123026
|
in recognition of the service he has rendered to precision measurements in Physics by his discovery of anomalies in nickel steel alloys (English)
|
|||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
3
| 39 |
https://m.facebook.com/980680772704078/
|
en
|
Bei Facebook anmelden
|
[
"https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/rsrc.php/v3/y8/r/k97pj8-or6s.png",
"https://facebook.com/security/hsts-pixel.gif?c=3.2"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Melde dich bei Facebook an, um dich mit deinen Freunden, deiner Familie und Personen, die du kennst, zu verbinden und Inhalte zu teilen.
|
de
|
Facebook
|
https://www.facebook.com/login/
| ||||||
correct_award_00023
|
FactBench
|
0
| 83 |
https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/einstein-vs-the-nobel-prize
|
en
|
Einstein vs. the Nobel Prize
|
[
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/globalAssets/DSC_white_small.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/facebook.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/instagram.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/twitter.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/youtube.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/soundcloud.png",
"https://www.discovermagazine.com/assets/socialIcons/rss.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"Virginia Hughes"
] |
2006-09-28T05:00:00+00:00
|
Why the Nobel Committee repeatedly dissed this "world-bluffing Jewish physicist"
|
en
|
/assets/favicon/favicon16.png
|
Discover Magazine
|
https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/einstein-vs-the-nobel-prize
|
When Albert Einstein listed the most important honors of his life, he began with the German Physical Society's Max Planck Medal, named for a physicist he revered. He went on from there to list the prizes and honorary doctorate degrees awarded him in many nations. Conspicuously absent was the plaudit with the highest profile and payout: the Nobel Prize. But in context this omission isn't so surprising. The Nobel nod—17 years after Einstein published his special theory of relativity—came long after recognition by the physics world and even the general public. Even more bizarre, the prize was awarded to Einstein not for his relativity revolution, but for the comparatively obscure discovery of the photoelectric effect. Why? After years of sifting through letters and diaries of the Scandinavian archives, science historian Robert Marc Friedman says it was an intentional snub fueled by the biases of the day—a prejudice against pacifists, Jews, and, most of all, theoretical physics.
In 1905, while working as a patent clerk in Switzerland, 26-year-old Albert Einstein published five seminal papers on the nature of space, light, and motion. One paper introduced the special theory of relativity, which dramatically broke with Newton's universally accepted description of how physics worked. Special relativity did away with the notion of absolute space and time—Einstein said they were instead "relative" to the observer's conditions—effectively flipping the Newtonian model on its apple-bruised head. In 1915, Einstein expanded the theory by incorporating gravity: it was not just a force of attraction between bodies, he said, but the result of distortions in space itself. This new, more robust version was called the theory of general relativity.
Today, general relativity is celebrated as Einstein's most impressive work. But as Friedman wrote in his 2001 book, The Politics of Excellence, in post-War Germany Einstein was despised as a pacifist Jew who renounced his German citizenship, went to meetings of radical groups, and publicly supported socialism. His theories were dismissed as "world-bluffing Jewish physics" by some prominent German physicists, who claimed to practice "true" German science based on observations of the natural world and hypotheses that could be tested in a laboratory.
Luckily for Einstein, British astronomer Arthur Stanley Eddington believed there was a way to test the general theory. If massive objects curved space itself, as Einstein proposed, then they should bend nearby rays of light, as well. During six minutes of a total solar eclipse on May 29, 1919, Eddington measured the positions of stars that appeared next to the blotted-out sun. Sure enough, they followed the predictions of Einstein's general theory.
Eddington revealed the results of his eclipse experiment on November 6, and Einstein became a household name throughout the world practically overnight—literally overnight in some places; the next day, the London Times ran the headline, "Revolution in Science, New Theory of the Universe." Within a month, the news traveled through the American press; a New York Times headline declared, "Given the Speed, Time Is Naught."
The nominations for Einstein that poured into the laps of the Nobel Committee members as they were reviewing candidates for the 1920 prize were not exactly well received. The committee did not want a "political and intellectual radical, who—it was said—did not conduct experiments, crowned as the pinnacle of physics," says Friedman. So the 1920 prize was given to the Swiss Charles-Edouard Guillaume for his ho-hum discovery of an inert nickel-steel alloy. When the announcement was made, Friedman says the previously unknown Guillaume "was as surprised as the rest of the world."
By the next year, "Einstein-mania" was in full bloom. During his first trip to the United States he gave many public lectures on relativity, and received the prestigious Barnard Medal from the National Academy of Sciences. After one particularly crowded lecture at Princeton, legend has it that Einstein said wryly to the chairman, "I never realized that so many Americans were interested in tensor analysis."
As his quirky personality and untamed tresses gained more popularity with the general public, his momentous theory gained more credibility in the scientific community. In 1921, swarms of both theoreticians and experimentalists again nominated Einstein for his work on relativity. Reporters kept asking him, to his great annoyance, if this would be the year that he received a Nobel Prize.
But 1921 was not the year, thanks to one stubborn senior member of the prize committee, ophthalmologist Allvar Gullstrand. "Einstein must never receive a Nobel Prize, even if the whole world demands it," said Gullstrand, according to a Swedish mathematician's diary dug up by Friedman. Gullstrand's arguments, however biased, convinced the rest of the committee. In 1921, the Swedish Academy of Sciences awarded no physics prize.
Two prizes were thus available in 1922. By this time, Einstein's popularity was so great that many members of the committee feared for their international reputations if they didn't recognize him in some way. As in the previous two years, Einstein received many nominations for his relativity theory. But this year there was one nomination—from Carl Wilhelm Oseen—not for relativity, but for the discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect. In another of his 1905 papers, Einstein had proposed that light, which had been thought to act only as a wave, sometimes acted as a particle—and laboratory experiments conducted in 1916 showed he was right.
In his exhaustive research, Friedman realized that Oseen lobbied the committee to recognize the photoelectric effect not as a "theory," but as a fundamental "law" of nature–not because he cared about recognizing Einstein, but because he had another theoretical physicist in mind for that second available prize: Niels Bohr. Bohr had proposed a new quantum theory of the atom that Oseen felt was "the most beautiful of all the beautiful" ideas in recent theoretical physics. In his report to the committee, Oseen exaggerated the close bond between Einstein's proven law of nature and Bohr's new atom. "In one brilliant stroke," Friedman says, "he saw how to meet the objections against both Einstein and Bohr."
The committee was indeed won over. On November 10, 1922, they gave the 1922 prize to Bohr and the delayed 1921 prize to Einstein, "especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect." Einstein, en route to Japan (and perhaps huffy after the committee's long delay) did not attend the official ceremony. According to Friedman, Einstein didn't care much about the medal, anyway, though he did care about the money. As the German mark decreased in value after the war, Einstein needed a hard foreign currency for alimony payments to his ex-wife. Moreover, under the terms of his 1919 divorce settlement, she was already entitled to all the money "from an eventual Nobel Prize." Bruce Hunt, an Einstein historian at the University of Texas at Austin, says that calling attention to these financial arrangements "brings out the fact that Einstein was a much more worldly and savvy man than his later public image would suggest."
Of course, Einstein isn't the only player who emerges as being not quite angelic. "The decisions of the Nobel Committees are often treated by the press and public as the voice of god," Hunt says. But Friedman's research brought to light "how political the deliberations of the Nobel Committees sometimes were—and presumably still are."
|
||||
8929
|
dbpedia
|
2
| 7 |
https://www.app.com/story/entertainment/music/2016/08/05/eryn-shewell-whiskey-devils-playing-long-branch/88065070/
|
en
|
Eryn Shewell and her Whiskey Devils playing Long Branch
|
[] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[
"RICHARD SKELLY, Asbury Park Press"
] |
2016-08-05T00:00:00
|
Jersey Shore siren performing in West End Park
|
en
|
AsburyPark
|
https://www.app.com/story/entertainment/music/2016/08/05/eryn-shewell-whiskey-devils-playing-long-branch/88065070/
|
One of the most gifted and compelling blues and soul vocalists at the Jersey Shore performs, for free, this Sunday in Long Branch’s West End Park, when Eryn Shewell and her Whiskey Devils take the bandshell stage at 7 p.m.
But if your tastes lie more with traditional and contemporary jazz, there’s plenty of that going on, too.
Shewell and her Whiskey Devils perform as part of the Bands on the Beach series underwritten by the Long Branch Urban Enterprise Zone funds. Her free-wheeling sets typically include some blues, some classic R&B, some soul and some New Orleans rock ’n’ roll and funk. Shewell also sprinkles originals into her sets. They can be found on her independently released albums, 2009’s “4th and Broadway” and a self-titled release.
Patrons who attend Sunday evening will enjoy the classic songs she and her band interpret their own way, including tunes like Bill Withers’ “Aint’ No Sunshine,” Otis Redding’s “(Sittin’ On) the Dock of the Bay,” and classic blues fare from Elmore James, Aaron “T-Bone” Walker, Freddie King and Junior Wells. She also does justice to the great women of classic R&B, singing tunes by Etta James, Ann Peebles, Aretha Franklin, Betty Wright and others.
Other concerts in the Bands by the Beach series this month include Citizens Band Radio, who serve up an artful blend of blues and country standards on Aug. 14; Jane Lee Hooker, an all-woman blues-rock band based in Maplewood and New York City who just had their debut released on the German-based Ruf Records and are known for their high-energy live shows, perform Aug. 21, and on Aug. 28, the VooDUDES will conclude the series of shows in West End Park.
Shewell and her Whiskey Devils perform at 7 p.m. promptly this Sunday in West End Park, on the corner of Brighton and Ocean Avenues in Long Branch. In the event of rain, the show moves indoors to Jack’s Goal Line Srabd, 149 Brighton Ave.
Free contemporary jazz in the park
The Red Bank-based Jazz Arts Project continues its Thursday night Jazz in the Park series at Riverside Gardens Park off West Front Street in Red Bank. Shows begin at 7 p.m. there, and the lineup for August includes some Garden State-based heavy-hitters.
Next Thursday, Aug. 11, Brooklyn-based trumpeter and composer Eddie Allen and his quartet perform.
Montclair-based soul-jazz guitarist Bob Devos performs with his quartet on Aug. 18, which usually includes a Hammond B-3 organist.
Several of DeVos’ critically acclaimed albums were recorded for a local label, BluesLeaf Records in Ocean Township. The series wraps up Aug. 25 when Oscar Perez performs with his group, Latin Jazz Explosion.
Jazz on Sunday morning at Bethany
The Bethany Baptist Church, 275 W. Market St., Newark, home to the successful Jazz Vespers series on the first Saturday of the month during most months of the year, has put together a special series of shows for August, all during the regular Sunday morning worship services.
Vocalist and composer Ruth Naomi Floyd joins the service this Sunday at 10 a.m., and vocalist-piano player Dee Daniels will be there on Aug. 14. Saxophonist Marcus Miller performs there on Aug. 21 and the series ends with guest pianist-composer Cyrus Chestnut on Aug. 28.
The shows are free, all denominations are welcome, and donations to the church and its Jazz at Bethany series are always welcome. Call 973-623-8161 for more information or visit their website, www.bethany-newark.org.
Jazz at the Sanctuary
in Ewing
The New Jersey Jazz Society is co-sponsor of a series of concerts held at the 1867 Sanctuary on Scotch Road in Ewing, not far from the Mercer County Airport.
The series of shows continues tomorrow night, Aug. 6, at 7 p.m. with Big Soul Chicken, a Trenton/New Hope area band that plays blues and jazz standards. Other shows at the historic church in West Trenton include McMillan and Company on Aug. 13 and Crescent City piano stylist Tom McDermott on Friday, Aug. 19 at 8 p.m.
The 1867 Sanctuary at Ewing boasts more than 200 seats, beautiful wood-based acoustics and organizers from Preservation New Jersey, Inc. promise good sound.
Ticket prices and directions to the facility, located at 101 Scotch Road in Ewing, are posted online at www.1867sanctuary.org, or call 609-392-6409.
|
|||||
8929
|
dbpedia
|
3
| 41 |
https://frit.indiana.edu/news-events/news/news-archive/2011/index.html
|
en
|
Department of French and Italian
|
[
"https://assets.iu.edu/brand/2.x/trident-large.png",
"https://assets.iu.edu/search/2.x/search.png",
"https://frit.indiana.edu/images/news/2011-jillbehrmanrun-news.jpg",
"https://frit.indiana.edu/images/news/2011-berkvam-news.jpg",
"https://assets.iu.edu/brand/2.x/trident-large.png",
"https://assets.iu.edu/brand/2.x/trident-small.png"
] |
[] |
[] |
[
""
] | null |
[] | null |
Department of French and Italian news from 2011.
|
en
|
https://assets.iu.edu/favicon.ico
|
Department of French and Italian
|
https://frit.indiana.edu/news-events/news/news-archive/2011/index.html
|
We congratulate Erin Patrick (B.A. French and Political Science, 1998), who has been awarded the Outstanding Young Alumni Award by the College of Arts and Sciences Alunni Association. She is head of the Fuel and Firewood Initiative of the Women's Refugee Commission, a non-profit organization dedicated to helping improve the lives and protect the rights of women, children, and young people who are refugees. In particular, the Fuel and Firewood program helps refugee women obtain access to safe cooking fuel and works to mitigate safety and health risks associated with the collection and use of firewood. Ms. Patrick has made a significant impact on the lives of hundreds of our most vulnerable global citizens through her work with the WRC, and she well-deserves the Outstanding Young Alumni Award.
The Department of French and Italian congratulates three French majors recently inducted into the "Gamma of Indiana" chapter of the Phi Beta Kappa Society. Sarah Chestnut (Religious Studies, French), Katelyn Colvin (French, English), and Melissa Thompson (French), along with 136 other inductees, were celebrated at a banquet held in Alumni Hall on December 6. These may be familiar names to friends of the Department, as all three students have previously won departmental honors. Sarah Chestnut was awarded the John K. Hyde Award at the annual departmental student award ceremony on April 8, 2011. Melissa Thompson and Katelyn Colvin both received Grace P. Young Undergraduate Awards for excellence in French studies at the same event.
Phi Beta Kappa is one of oldest and most respected academic honor societies in the United States. Founded in 1776 at the College of William and Mary, it has chapters at 280 American colleges and universities. The "Gamma of Indiana" chapter was founded at Indiana University over 100 years ago.
The Department of French and Italian proudly continued the tradition of fielding a team for the annual Jill Behrman 5K Walk/Run sponsored by IU Recreational Sports. The team from the Department called itself "We are F(R)IT" and included graduate students Michael Dow, Amy Conrad, Mark Black, Amber Panwitz, and Krista Williams, as well as Professors Margaret (Margot) Gray and Oana Panaïté, and Visiting Lecturer Rebecca Petrush. Professor Gray was joined by her husband, Professor Emeritus Oscar Kenshur from the Department of Comparative Literature, and her son Joseph Kenshur. Professor Panaïté was joined by her partner Craig Dethloff, who is Chief of Staff for the IUB Faculty Council. Rounding out the team was alumna Kate Miller, who received her Ph.D. in French linguistics this summer and now holds a tenure-track faculty position at Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis.
This 5K walk/run was established twelve years ago in honor of Jill Behrman, an IU student and employee of Recreational Sports, who went missing while on a bike ride in May 2000. Three years later, her body was found in a southern Indiana field – she had been murdered. The IU community keeps Jill's memory alive through this annual event, which includes a competitive 5K run and a 1 mile walk for families and those not quite as F(R)IT.
This year, we are happy to report two top finishers from the FRIT team. Rebecca Petrush, who is Acting Director of the French Language Program this year and also a Ph.D. candidate in French linguistics, placed first in her age group, as did Margot Gray, a tenured professor who specializes in 20th and 21st-century French literature, especially women authors. Félicitations!
The Department is pleased to announce the creation of a new fund through the IU Foundation to support graduate students in French and Italian, the Professor Michael Berkvam Graduate Student Fund. This fund was established by Michael Berkvam's widow, Mirka Berkvam, in memory of her husband, a faculty member in the Department of French and Italian from 1971 until his retirement in 2006. Although Professor Berkvam started his scholarly career in the field of 18th-century French literature, mainly Voltaire, he later turned his emphasis to the literature and cinema of France during and after World War II. Thus, in awarding funds from the new IU Foundation account, preference will be given to students studying French film in its literary cultural context or contemporary French fiction.
Michael Berkvam passed away on August 21, 2011 in Bloomington after a short illness. He had been very active since his retirement in 2006, and he was scheduled to teach a course on recent French writing by women for the Hutton Honors College this fall. Professor Berkvam received his Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin in 18th century French studies, and joined the Department of French and Italian at IU as a Lecturer in 1971. He was appointed Assistant Professor after completing his Ph.D. in 1973. After having worked and published on 18th century literature, mainly Voltaire, and on the cultural aspects of the French Revolution, he turned his scholarly attention to the culture and literature of France during and shortly after World War II. Professor Berkvam's lengthy volume Writing the Story of France in World War II: Literature and Memory, 1942-1958 was published by the University of the South Press in 2000, the same year he was promoted to Full Professor. The monograph deals with the cultural and political interpretation of WWII in the French novel of the 1940's and 50's. Professor Berkvam was one of the most beloved and appreciated teachers in the College of Arts and Sciences, as his affiliation with the Hutton Honors College and his two Teaching Excellence Recognition Awards show. He will be greatly missed. Online condolences may be made to the family at pdcfuneralchapel.com. A memorial service celebrating the life of Michael Berkvam will be held on Saturday, September 24, at 1:00 pm in the Frangipani Room of the Indiana Memorial Union on the Indiana University-Bloomington campus.
Brett Bowles joins the Department of French and Italian as an Associate Professor in Fall 2011. He received his Ph.D. in French civilization from Pennsylvania State University in 1998, served as Assistant and Associate Professor at Iowa State University 1998-2005, and most recently was Associate Professor of French Studies at the State University of New York at Albany. Professor Bowles' primary research field is twentieth-century social, political, and cultural history through film (fiction and documentary). He is author of Marcel Pagnol, forthcoming this year in the French Film Directors series from Manchester University Press, and editor of Cinema, Society, and Politics in France and Germany, 1930-1945, due for publication by Berghahn Books in 2012. Professor Bowles has a wide range of teaching experience, from an undergraduate class in French composition to graduate seminars on the French New Wave. In addition, he serves on the editorial boards of several important scholarly journals, including Modern and Contemporary France (North American Editor), French History, and French Historical Studies.
In Fall 2011, we welcome several new visiting faculty to our French and Italian programs. In French, Marc Schachter (Ph.D., University of California, Santa Cruz) joins us as Visiting Assistant Professor. Professor Schachter is the author of Voluntary Servitude and the Erotics of Friendship: From Classical Antiquity to Early Modern France (Ashgate, 2008) and comes to IU after several years at Duke University and a post-doctoral fellowship at the Folger Shakespeare Library. Joining our French language program team as Visiting Lecturers are Audrey Dobrenn and Marie-Line Brunet, but advanced doctoral students at IU completing their dissertations in French literature. In Italian, we also welcome two new Visiting Lecturers: Karolina Serafin (Ph.D., University of Warsaw) and Anthony Nussmeier (ABD, Indiana), who will help coordinate our Italian language program.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.