This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Atheism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of atheism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AtheismWikipedia:WikiProject AtheismTemplate:WikiProject AtheismAtheism
Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use {{WikiProject Atheism}} or see info box)
Ensure atheism-related articles are members of Atheism by checking whether [[Category:Atheism]] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it.
Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process).
State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments.
This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science
At the beginning, it says he is a Danish theoretical physicist, but he is also a nuclear physicist. He did both, but I feel that he was actually mainly a nuclear physicist, because a lot of his work was centered around the structure of atoms and such. Einstein3.1415926535! (talk) 20:46, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article refers to the neutrino as Fermi's concept. He coined the phrase "neutrino" (Italian: little neutral one) to distinguish it from the neutron, recently discovered by James Chadwick. But the idea was Pauli's. Per George Gamow in Thirty Years That Shook Physics: "Pauli, who could not be called conservative in any sense of the word, was nevertheless strongly opposed to Bohr's view [that the conservation of energy was violated in beta decay]. He preferred to assume that the balance of energy violated by the continuity of β-ray spectra was re-established by the emission of some other kinds of yet unknown particles which he called 'neutrons.' The name of this 'Pauli neutron' was later changed to 'neutrino after Chadwick's discovery of what today we call the neutron." Yes, Pauli neutron. Gamow goes on: "As the years passed, more and more evidence was accumulated in favor of Pauli's neutrinos." Again, Pauli neutrinos.[1]
Here is the letter by Pauli outlining his prediction of the neutrino ("Dear Radioactive Ladies and Gentlemen,...") To wit: "As the bearer of these lines, to whom I graciously ask you to listen, will explain to you in more detail, because of the 'wrong' statistics of the N- and Li-6 nuclei and the continuous beta spectrum, I have hit upon a desperate remedy to save the 'exchange theorem' (1) of statistics and the law of conservation of energy. Namely, the possibility that in the nuclei there could exist electrically neutral particles, which I will call neutrons, that have spin 1/2 and obey the exclusion principle and that further differ from light quanta in that they do not travel with the velocity of light. The mass of the neutrons should be of the same order of magnitude as the electron mass and in any event not larger than 0.01 proton mass. - The continuous beta spectrum would then make sense with the assumption that in beta decay, in addition to the electron, a neutron is emitted such that the sum of the energies of neutron and electron is constant." Note that in 1930 they were called neutrons and not neutrinos, the term coined by Fermi.
Fermi did do more than just name neutrinos, however, per Gamow: "Another important work was the formulation of the mathematical theory of particle transformation, involving the emission of mysterious chargeless particles proposed earlier by Pauli."[2]
So give credit to Fermi for coining the phrase and working out the math, but the idea of a massless (or nearly massless) neutral particle was Pauli's. Charlie Faust (talk) 23:36, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per Wikipedia: "In 1930, Pauli considered the problem of beta decay. In a letter of 4 December to Lise Meitneret al., beginning, "Dear radioactive ladies and gentlemen", he proposed the existence of a hitherto unobserved neutral particle with a small mass, no greater than 1% the mass of a proton, to explain the continuous spectrum of beta decay. In 1934, Enrico Fermi incorporated the particle, which he called a neutrino, 'little neutral one' in Fermi's native Italian, into his theory of beta decay. The neutrino was first confirmed experimentally in 1956 by Frederick Reines and Clyde Cowan, two and a half years before Pauli's death. On receiving the news, he replied by telegram: 'Thanks for message. Everything comes to him who knows how to wait. Pauli.'" Charlie Faust (talk) 23:39, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And, look here: "The neutrino was postulated first by Wolfgang Pauli in 1930 to explain how beta decay could conserve energy, momentum, and angular momentum (spin). In contrast to Niels Bohr, who proposed a statistical version of the conservation laws to explain the observed continuous energy spectra in beta decay, Pauli hypothesized an undetected particle that he called a 'neutron', using the same -on ending employed for naming both the proton and the electron. He considered that the new particle was emitted from the nucleus together with the electron or beta particle in the process of beta decay and had a mass similar to the electron." (Emphasis added.)
My apologies. I was familiar with Fermi's theory of Beta decays (having brought Fermi's article to featured). Thanks for that. (If you are looking for something to do, Pauli's article needs work.) Hawkeye7(discuss)00:43, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. And yes, Pauli's article does need work; there was nothing about the neutrino in the lead until I added it.
I added: "Einstein wrote: "That this insecure and contradictory foundation [of physics in the years from 1910 to 1920] was sufficient to enable a man of Bohr's unique instinct and tact to discover the major laws of the spectral lines and of the electron shells of the atoms together with their significance for chemistry appeared to me like a miracle—and appears to me like a miracle even today. This is the highest form of musicality in the sphere of thought."[3]
This was removed. That's a mistake. It's an elegant tribute from one genius to another. And two geniuses with very different views of quantum theory. Einstein made that comment when he was 70, long after he was "spooked" by the developments of quantum mechanics. Even then, he appreciated the early successes of quantum theory, and the genius of Bohr. Charlie Faust (talk) 14:20, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it doesn't belong under "Accolades". Maybe it belongs under "Bohr model", to show how it was received. But it belongs in the article. Einstein's description of Bohr's model in terms of "musicality" is apt, given the parallels between acoustics and optics, and the way Bohr's model accounted for the Balmer series of Hydrogen. You might even call Einstein's comment "the highest form of musicality in the sphere of thought." Charlie Faust (talk) 15:05, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
^Gamow, George (1966). Thirty Years That Shook Physics. p. 75.
^Gamow, George. Thirty Years That Shook Physics. p. 140.