Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T13:51:57.294Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Shot Effect for Showers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

J. M. Whittaker
J. M. Whittaker
Affiliation:
Pembroke College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. A well-known theorem on probability may be stated as follows. Let λdt be the chance that a certain event will happen in time dt, so that λT is the average number of occurrences of the event in an interval T. If we take a large number of repetitions of the interval T the actual numbers of occurrences will fluctuate about the mean λT, being say λT + x′, λT + x″,…. Then the theorem states that

The ejection of an α-particle by a radioactive substance is an event of the type contemplated and the theorem was applied to this physical problem by von Schweidler in 1905. Much similar work, both theoretical and experimental, has been done at intervals since then*.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , October 1937 , pp. 451 - 458
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Philosophical Society 1937

Access options

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

References

* For the theory see especially Campbell, N. R., Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 15 (1909), 117 and 310Google Scholar; Bateman, H., Phil. Mag. 20 (1910), 704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar For recent experimental work and numerous references see Moullin, E. B., Proc. Roy. Soc. 147 (1934), 107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

* Cf. Ince, E. L., Ordinary differential equations (Longmans, 1927), p. 408.Google Scholar

* The discussion of Campbell's theorem by Rowland, E. N. (Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 32 (1936), 580Google Scholar, §§ 1–6) seems to me mistaken. If I understand him rightly, Rowland seeks to prove the theorem on the hypothesis that it is most probable that, in the mean for the set, there are Ndr, events in an interval (Tv, Tv + dTv), and he calculates and for this distribution, ignoring the fluctuations altogether. Now the existence of the shot effect is entirely due to the fact that there are fluctuations, and that the mean square fluctuation is not negligible. Rowland's method should therefore lead to the conclusion that there is no shot effect at all, i.e. that = 0. I think that his method will in fact give this result, if correctly worked out. In his equation (22) he separates a sum Σr, s into a sum , (with r = s omitted) and a sum Σr (over r = s), and the latter terms give the shot effect. He gives no reason for using (i.e. for omitting the terms r = s when forming the mean value), and if, as I believe, it should be replaced by Σr, s, the extra terms which give the shot effect disappear.