Il Nuovo Cimento (1955-1965)

, Volume 3, Issue 5, pp 930–955 | Cite as

Observations on the multiply charged particles of the cosmic radiation

  • C. J. Waddington


A nuclear emulsion technique has been used to measure the fluxes of the α-particles of the primary cosmic radiation at three different geographical positions. Two of these determinations were made on the same geomagnetic latitude, one over America, which has been previously reported (1), and the other over England. The two flux values found were unexpectedly significantly different, and this difference could be entirely attributed to the absence over England of those α-particles with energies of less than about 0.65 GeV per nucleon. Measurements on the protons and heavy primary particles detected in those two stacks of emulsions also indicated that the cut-off energy over England at the time of the exposure was between 0.60 and 0.70 GeV per nucleon, instead of the 0.33 GeV per nucleon calculated from the known geomagnetic latitude. Similarly, the data from the American stack suggest that when this was exposed the cut-off energy was less than 0.15 GeV per nucleon. An analysis has been made of the various experimental flux values obtained at different points on the earth’s surface, and it is concluded that the cut-off energies should be calculated, not from the geomagnetic latitudes, but from latitudes which are from four to six degrees lower over Europe, and three or more degrees higher over America.


Una tecnica basata sull’impiego di emulsioni nucleari è stata usata per misurare il flusso delle particelle a della radiazione cosmica primaria in tre posizioni geografiche differenti. Due di tali determinazioni furono fatte alla stessa latitudine geomagnetica, una in America già precedentemente riferita (1), e l’altra in Inghilterra. I due valori del flusso trovati furono, contrariamente alle aspettative, significativamente differenti e tale differenza potè essere interamente attribuita alla assenza sull’Inghilterra di particelle α con energie inferiori a circa 0.65 GeV per nucleone. Misure sui protoni e sulle particelle primarie pesanti scoperte in questi due pacchi di emulsioni indicarono anche che l’energia di taglio sull’Inghilterra era all’epoca dell’esposizione tra 0. 60 e 0.70 GeV per nucleone invece dei 0.33 GeV per nucleone calcolati dalla latitudine geomagnetica nota. Similmente, i dati del pacco americano indicano che, all’epoca in cui fu esposto, l’energia di taglio era inferiore a 0.15 GeV per nucleone. Si è eseguita un’analisi dei vari valori sperimentali del flusso ottenuti in diversi luoghi della superficie terrestre e si conclude che le energie di taglio si debbono calcolare non in base alla latitudine geomagnetica, bensi a latitudini di quattro gradi inferiori sull’Europa e di tre o più gradi superiori in America.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. (1).
    C. J. Waddington:Phil. Mag.,1, 105 (1956).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. (2).
    C. J. Waddington:Phil. Mag.,1, 105 (1956).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. (3).
    M. F. Kaplon, B. Peters, H. L. Reynolds andD. M. Ritson:Phys. Rev.,85, 295 (1952).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. (4).
    P. H. Fowler andD. H. Perkins:Phil. Mag.,46, 587 (1955).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. (5).
    R. E. Daniel andD. H. Perkins:Proc. Boy. Soc., A221, 351 (1954).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. (6).
    P. H. Fowler:Phil. Mag.,41, 169 (1950).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. (7).
    H. L. Bradt andB. Peters:Phys. Rev:,77, 54 (1950).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. (8).
    M. F. Kaplon, J. H. Noon andG. W. Racette:Phys. Rev.,95, 1408 (1954).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. (9).
    K. Gottstein:Phil. May.,45, 347 (1954).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. (10).
    E. P. Ney andD. M. Thon:Phys. Rev.,81, 1068 (1951).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. (11).
    L. R. Davis, H. M. Caulk andC. Y. Johnson:Phys. Rev.,91, 431 (1953).Google Scholar
  12. (12).
    S. Biswas, B. Peters andRama:Proc. Ind. Acad.,41, 154 (1955).Google Scholar
  13. (13).
    A. D. Dainton, P. H. Fowler andD. W. Kent:Phil. Mag.,43, 729 (1952).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. (14).
    B. Rossi:Suppl. Nuovo Cimento,2, 275 (1955).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. (15).
    J. Linsley:Phys. Rev.,93, 899 (1954).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. (16).
    L. Goldfaeb, H. L. Bradt andB. Peters:Phys. Rev.,77, 751 (1950).Google Scholar
  17. (17).
    G. J. Perlow, L. R. Davis, C. W. Kissinger andJ. D. Shipman {jrJr.}:Phys. Rev.,88, 321 (1952).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. (18).
    N. Horwitz:Phys. Rev.,98, 165 (1955).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. (19).
    L. Bohl:Ph.D. Thesis, University of Minnesota (1954).Google Scholar
  20. (20).
    B. Peters:Progress in Cosmic Bay Physics, vol. I (1952).Google Scholar
  21. (21).
    M. A. Pomerantz:Journ. Frank. Inst.,258, 443 (1954).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. (23).
    G. W. McClure:Phys. Rev.,96, 1391 (1954).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. (23).
    H. Fay:Zeits. f. Naturf.,10a, 572 (1955).ADSGoogle Scholar
  24. (24).
    E. F. Hourd, J. R. Fleming andJ. J. Lord:Phys. Rev.,95, 647 (1954).Google Scholar
  25. (25).
    D. Lal, Yash Pal, M. F. Kaplon andB. Peters:Phys. Rev.,86, 569 (1952).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. (26).
    E. E. Danielson:Ph. D. Thesis, university of Minnesota (1954).Google Scholar
  27. (27).
    J. A. Simpson, D. C. Rose, K. B. Fenton andJ. Katzman (to be published) (1955).Google Scholar
  28. (28).
    F. A. Brisbout, C. Dahanayake, A. Engler, P. H. Fowler andP. B. Jones (to be published).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Società Italiana di Fisica 1956

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. J. Waddington
    • 1
  1. 1.H. H. Wills Physical LaboratoryUniversity of BristolEngland

Personalised recommendations