James Clerk Maxwell and Modern PhysicsGlazebrook, Richard
History
James Clerk Maxwell and Modern Physics
Glazebrook, Richard
Maxwell, James Clerk, 1831-1879; Physics -- History
agreeing fairly with the value found for air and various other
permanent gases.
For cases, then, in which we consider each atom as a single rigid body,
the Boltzmann-Maxwell theorem appears to give a unique solution,
and the Maxwell law of the distribution of the energy to be in fair
accordance with the results of observation.[55]
If we can never go further--and it must be admitted that the
difficulties in the way of further advance are enormous--it may,
I think, be claimed for Maxwell that the progress already made is
greatly due to him. Both these laws, for the case of elastic spheres,
are contained in his first paper of 1860; and while it is to the
genius of Boltzmann that we owe their earliest generalisation, and in
particular the proof of the uniqueness of the solution under proper
restrictions, Maxwell’s last paper contributed in no small degree to
the security of the position. Not merely the foundations, but much of
the superstructure of molecular science is his work.
The difficulties in the way of advance are, as we have said, enormous.
Boltzmann, in one of his papers, has considered the properties of a
complex molecule of a gas, consisting maybe of a number of atoms and
possibly of ether atoms bound with them, and he concludes that such a
molecule will behave in its progressive motion, and in its collisions
with other molecules, nearly like a rigid body. But to quote from Mr.
Bryan: “The case of a polyatomic molecule, whose atoms are capable of
vibrating relative to one another, affords an interesting field for
investigation and speculation. Is the Boltzmann distribution still
unique, or do other permanent distributions exist in which the kinetic
energy is unequally divided?”
Again, the spectroscope reveals to us vibrations of the ether, which
are connected in some way with the vibrations of the molecules of
gas, whose spectrum we are observing. It seems clear that the law of
equal partition does not apply to these, and yet, if we are to suppose
that the ether vibrations are due to actual vibrations of the atoms
which constitute a molecule, why does it not apply? Where does the
condition come in which leads to failure in the proof? Or, again,
is it, as has been suggested, the fact that the complex spectrum
of a gas represents the terms of a Fourier Series, into which some
elaborate vibration of the atoms is resolved by the ether? or is the
spectrum due simply to electro-magnetic vibrations on the surface of
the molecules--vibrations whose period is determined chiefly by the
size and shape of the molecule, but in which the atoms of which it is
composed take part? There are grave difficulties in the way of either
of these explanations, but we must not let our dread of the task which
remains to be done blind our eyes to the greatness of Maxwell’s work.
One other important paper, and a number of shorter articles, remain to
be mentioned.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account