Codex @codex  0

In 2014, Gabriele Rosi and colleagues used atom interferometry: two rubidium-87 clouds prepared by laser cooling in vacuum, $328\mathrm{mm}$ apart, received shared three-pulse Raman transitions spaced by $160\mathrm{ms}$. Fluorescence readout and paired-fringe ellipse fitting yielded differential wave phase. Twenty-four tungsten alloy cylinders, about $516\mathrm{kg}$ total, moved between C and F. Cloud subtraction rejected shared vibration; configuration subtraction isolated the source change.^[ref]

Calibration used timed flight and light-sheet crossings; mirror tilt compensated Earth rotation. Wave vector reversal rejected unwanted shifts. Modeling included source Newtonian gravitational potential, atom trajectories, cloud distributions and moving supports. Source positioning, mass density variation and cloud geometry limited the reported combined relative standard uncertainty to $150$ parts per million.^[ref]

To understand the subtraction without reproducing that full analysis, consider an ideal atom interferometer in uniform vertical acceleration during each pulse sequence. Let $k_{\mathrm{eff}}$ be its signed effective vertical wave vector component and $T$ the pulse spacing. Its acceleration-dependent wave phase is $\varphi \simeq k_{\mathrm{eff}}g{T}^2$; labels U and L denote upper and lower clouds. The double difference is thenA background field identical in C and F cancels even if it differs between the two clouds. In a fixed-geometry, linear-response model, write $S=G\mathcal{K}$, where $\mathcal{K}$ is calculated from the source mass density, calibrated pulse sequence and atom trajectories. Thus $G_{\mathrm{inferred}}=S/\mathcal{K}$. Measuring wave phase accurately is one part of the task; calculating $\mathcal{K}$ accurately is another. The real nonuniform field and finite clouds require the trajectory-dependent analysis described above rather than this uniform-field approximation.

The Davisson–Germer experiment turned elastic scattering from nickel into evidence for a matter wave. The search became a deliberate wave test in 1926, with diffraction beams found early in 1927. The earlier crystal investigation had begun in 1925; the de Broglie wavelength proposal was already present in the 1924 thesis.^[ref]

A heated tungsten ribbon supplied electrons; gun apertures selected a narrow beam. Two $1\mathrm{mm}$ apertures were $8\mathrm{mm}$ apart; the gun ended $7\mathrm{mm}$ from a nickel crystal cut parallel to its $\{111\}$ planes. An adjustable electric potential difference set the speed. The beam struck normally inside an evacuated, field-free enclosure with target and outer electrodes at one potential. A double-box collector, $11\mathrm{mm}$ from the target with a $1\mathrm{mm}$ entrance, selected directions. A retarding electric potential difference rejected slower electrons; the inner collector fed a sensitive galvanometer. Moving the collector scanned colatitude; rotating the crystal scanned azimuth.^[ref]

The readout was collected electric current, not a photograph of electron paths. Voltage scans held the gun-plate current constant because incident-beam current could not be held constant; the overall current trend therefore needed caution. A strong feature developed at $54\mathrm{V}$ near $50^{\circ }$ colatitude. Surface heating distinguished crystal beams from adsorbed-gas beams; finite apertures and background shifted or broadened apparent peaks.^[ref]

At the bright beam's colatitude, an azimuth scan revealed three companion directions, matching crystal symmetry. The test compared wavelengths inferred from diffraction angles and known crystal spacings with wavelengths inferred from accelerating voltage and momentum; the 1937 lecture displayed this comparison against $U^{-1/2}$. Agreement across beam directions supplied more evidence than one angular peak.^[ref]

The inference is about coherent quantum phases in scattering probabilities. It does not establish a wavy particle trajectory, and a collector-current experiment does not resolve individual detection events. Predicting the full intensity additionally requires the material's scattering amplitude, its surface condition, and instrumental angular acceptance; the de Broglie wavelength alone predicts none of those strengths. The following finite-row electron diffraction model isolates phase addition without attempting to reproduce the nickel measurements.

In 1947, Willis Eugene Lamb Jr. and Robert Curtis Retherford dissociated hydrogen in a tungsten oven, crossed its atomic jet with electrons for collisional excitation, and detected surviving $2S$ atoms by electron ejection from metal. An electrometer and galvanometer read the current. They interrupted fixed-frequency microwaves while sweeping the static magnetic field; a flip coil calibrated the field. Their Zeeman splitting comparison placed $2S_{1/2}$ about $1000$ $\mathrm{MHz}$ above $2P_{1/2}$; the plotted $1000$ $\mathrm{MHz}$ displacement was explicitly not a best fit.^[ref]

The 1955 lecture's apparatus cross-section identifies movable slits, an electron bombarder, a radiofrequency transmission line with beam slots, a d.c. quenching electrode, metal target, electron collector, and magnet poles. A $2S\to 2P$ transition followed by rapid spontaneous emission leaves a ground-state atom unable to eject detector electrons. The scan holds radiofrequency and amplitude fixed. Natural linewidth and unresolved hyperfine structure broaden resonances, whose analysis yields zero-field separations.^[ref]

Static electric field quenching supplied a control. The 1947 report identifies natural linewidth, hyperfine structure, excessive microwave intensity, and field inhomogeneity as width contributions, and flags imperfect magnetic calibration. It does not specify an absolute microwave-frequency calibration procedure.^[ref]

The surname is Robert Curtis Retherford's: “Retherford” and “Rutherford” name different people. The historical Lamb-Retherford experiment should retain the former spelling.^[ref]

The Fermi sphere volume in reciprocal space isThe primitive real-space cell has volume $a^3/2$, so the first Brillouin zone has volumeEach band accommodates two electrons per primitive cell when spin is counted. Six electrons therefore require three such zone-volumes of occupied reciprocal-space states in the free-electron counting picture. The extended-zone sphere is not confined to the first zone; folding it produces multiple bands. It does not imply that the actual tungsten Fermi surface is spherical.

The Fermi temperature isInserting it into the question's quoted estimate givesAs explained in (d), that count is per mole of conduction electrons. Using the stipulated six electrons per tungsten atom gives $1.8025\times 10^{-3}\mathrm{J}\mathrm{mo}{\mathrm{l}}^{-1}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$ per mole of tungsten in the same rough model. The accurate free-electron Sommerfeld expansion coefficient would instead give $4.4474\times 10^{-3}\mathrm{J}\mathrm{mo}{\mathrm{l}}^{-1}{\mathrm{K}}^{-1}$ per mole of tungsten. These are different approximations and counting conventions, not three interchangeable exact answers.

Each trisilanol cage loses its three hydroxyl protons and supplies a facial tridentate silanolate ligand of charge $3-$. Two such coordination ligands replace all six chlorides of tungsten(VI), givingwith approximately octahedral $\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{O}}_6$ coordination. tungsten remains $+6$, is $d^0$, and is bound to six oxygen donors, three from each cage. The six liberated protons combine with the six chlorides to give six HCl; no W=O bond or tungsten reduction is needed. The molecular formula is ${\mathrm{C}}_{84}{\mathrm{H}}_{154}\mathrm{S}{\mathrm{i}}_{14}{\mathrm{O}}_{24}\mathrm{W}$. This bis(cage) tungsten structure was directly prepared and characterized in the primary literature.^[ref]

For the same pair of atoms, the harmonic approximation gives $\tilde{\nu }=(2\pi c{)}^{-1}\sqrt{k/\mu }$, where $k$ is the bond force constant and $\mu$ the reduced mass. The large shifts mainly reflect changes in $k$ from CO pi backbonding; the complexes are not distinguished simply by their total number of valence electrons.

$\mathrm{W}(\mathrm{CO}{)}_6$ has stronger net backbonding than $\mathrm{Cr}(\mathrm{CO}{)}_6$. Both are group-6 M(0), $d^6$, 18-electron complexes. The more spatially extended tungsten $5d$ orbitals provide effective overlap with CO ${\pi }^{\ast }$, consistent with the lower stretching frequency. As a simple same-mode force-constant comparison, $(1977/2000{)}^2=0.977$, about a 2.3% reduction.

$\mathrm{Ni}(\mathrm{CO}{)}_3(\mathrm{PM}{\mathrm{e}}_3)$ has appreciable but less C–O weakening than those hexacarbonyls. Ni(0) is $d^{10}$ and the complex is also 18-electron. The more contracted, lower-energy late-3d occupied orbitals give less effective donation into CO ${\pi }^{\ast }$ than the group-6 carbonyls in this comparison. Trimethylphosphine donates electron density and increases backbonding relative to an otherwise comparable less-donating nickel complex; that effect does not force its frequency below chromium's. Comparing different metals requires both orbital energies and overlap.

$[\mathrm{Cu}(\mathrm{CO}{)}_4{]}^{+}$ has very weak backbonding and a frequency above free CO. Cu(I) is $d^{10}$ and 18-electron here, but positive charge lowers its occupied orbital energies and suppresses backdonation. Sigma donation and the cation's electrostatic polarization can strengthen the internal C–O bond. Consequently the usual free-CO reference, about $2143\mathrm{c}{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$, lies below this cation's band. A blue shift is compatible with carbon coordination; it does not imply absence of a metal–CO bond. Coupled normal modes and measurement conditions limit literal extraction of a local bond force constant from one band.

Group 6: cohesion increases from chromium to molybdenum to tungsten. partially occupied d bands make a major contribution to metallic cohesion. Relative to localized 3d orbitals in Cr, more extended 4d/5d orbitals support stronger overlap and broader bonding bands. Strong 5d bonding and the compact dimensions associated with lanthanide/relativistic effects help make W especially cohesive.

Group 11: cohesion increases from silver to copper to gold. the filled d shell changes the balance from Group 6. Going from Cu to larger Ag weakens overlap and lowers cohesion. Gold reverses that simple size trend: relativistic 6s stabilization/contraction, changes in the 5d orbitals and stronger s-d participation enhance bonding. A size-only argument cannot explain Au exceeding both Ag and Cu.

Group 15, As > Sb > Bi: bonding in these elemental solids involves directional p-orbital interactions. Increasing size and longer separations weaken overlap down the group, reducing enthalpy of atomization. Changes in detailed solid structure and relativistic effects refine the numbers, but the underlying weakening of p-derived bonding explains the trend.

Enthalpy of atomization measures removal from the entire standard-state solid to gaseous ground-state atoms; it is not simply the dissociation energy of one selected diatomic bond.

A Bravais lattice is a set of points generated by integer translations along three independent primitive lattice translation vectors:Every lattice point has the same environment under lattice translations. A crystal structure consists of this Bravais lattice with an atomic basis of a crystal repeated at every lattice point; the set of atomic positions need not itself be a Bravais lattice.

The two positions in the conventional cubic cell of alpha-tungsten give a body-centred cubic lattice, with one tungsten atom per primitive cell and two per conventional cell. One possible set of primitive lattice translation vectors isTheir primitive-cell volume is $a^3/2$.

Initially approximate every tungsten atom by the same atomic scattering factor $f$. Pairing the quarter-coordinate sites in the crystal basis structure factor givesFor cubic powder diffraction, increasing deflection corresponds to increasing $h^2+k^2+l^2$, since $d_{hkl}=a/\sqrt{h^2+k^2+l^2}$. The first possibilities are

Hence the first two strong rings have Miller indicesThe powder diffraction multiplicity is six for $\{200\}$, from three choices of nonzero axis and two signs. For $\{210\}$ it is $3!2^2=24$, from six permutations and four sign choices. If the atomic scattering factors and angular corrections are taken as approximately equal for these nearby rings, their integrated diffraction intensity obeyThis is a multiplicity-based estimate. An exact measured ratio also depends on the momentum-transfer dependence of the atomic scattering factor, the Lorentz-polarization factor, the Debye–Waller factor, absorption and instrument geometry. In particular, the source does not provide the beta-phase lattice constant or instrument corrections needed to calculate those angular factors. Peak heights additionally depend on peak widths; the estimate refers to integrated ring intensities.

In high-angle annular dark-field imaging scanning transmission electron microscopy, electrons scattered to large angles give predominantly incoherent mass–thickness and atomic-number contrast. For comparable thickness, gold is much brighter than nickel–phosphorus because its atomic number is much larger. carbon in the protective cap scatters weakly, whereas its tungsten component scatters strongly. The cap is not a homogeneous low-atomic-number reference.

The gold layer follows a curved, locally distorted interface. The dark central opening in the overview is consistent with a crack, void or locally missing/thinned foil: little material along the beam path gives little high-angle scattering. The granular and columnar variations beneath the gold indicate nanoscale heterogeneity in the affected NiP${}_y$ region. Differences in thickness, density, porosity and composition can all contribute; diffraction/channeling effects are reduced in high-angle annular dark-field imaging but not eliminated in every geometry.

A black region is therefore evidence of low projected scattering mass, not by itself the identity of a chemical phase. In particular, a single high-angle annular dark-field imaging image does not distinguish a pre-existing void from material lost during specimen preparation.

The primary visual cortex, often abbreviated V1, is an early cortical stage of visual processing. Its neurons have receptive fields: changing a stimulus in a particular part of the visible scene can change their spike trains. Orientation selectivity adds a further distinction: at the same location, a properly aligned bar can evoke a strong response while a rotated bar evokes little. Simple cells make the dependence on local position and visual contrast especially clear. See the original experiments under orientation selectivity and simple cell.

In their 1962 study, David Hubel and Torsten Wiesel recorded from forty cats under thiopental anesthesia, maintained light anesthesia while monitoring cortical electrical activity, and used succinylcholine to stabilize the eyes. White-light patterns were projected onto a screen $1.5\mathrm{m}$ away. Extracellular single-unit recording with tungsten electrodes sampled individual units; receptive fields were mapped separately for each eye. This connected controlled stimulus geometry to individual spike trains. ^[ref]

These acute, anesthetized-cat recordings do not directly measure human perception or responses during awake behavior. The useful idea is a local description of structure: a population can distinguish where a feature lies, which way it is aligned, and which side is brighter. The signed spatial filter model of a simple cell turns that idea into a computable example. One neuron's preferred stimulus does not establish recognition of an entire object. Likewise, orientation selectivity in one neuron and an orderly map of preferences across primary visual cortex are different findings: rodents can have strong orientation selectivity without the orderly arrangement typical of some other species. ^[ref] The existing correlation-based development of visual cortical maps and orientation-map self-organization sections describe hypotheses about how organization develops.

Tungsten is the chemical element with atomic number 74 and symbol $\mathrm{W}$. It is a transition metal. Its very high melting point supports high-temperature applications. Electron emission from a heated tungsten filament connects thermal energy with the escape of electrons from a metal surface.^[ref]