李政道 (1957)諾貝爾獎致答謝辭
1983.3 讀者文摘
Award ceremony speech
Presentation Speech by Professor O.B. Klein, member of the Nobel Committee for Physics
Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, Ladies and Gentlemen.
The Nobel Prize in Physics to Professor Tsung Dao Lee and Professor Chen Ning Yang for this year is concerned with some of the fundamental physical principles, the so-called parity laws – in the first place the symmetry of Nature with respect to right and left – in their application to elementary particles and their reactions.
When during this century the old dream about atoms came true, it soon became clear not only that reality is by far richer than was the dream but also considerably different from it. The atoms that were found and which one learnt to count and to measure did by no means correspond to the ideal of indivisibility and unchangeability of the old atomists. But instead, there appeared a hitherto unknown, strangely unvisualizable feature of indivisibility in all atomic processes and therefore also behind all usual physical events, without which everything in the world would be in flux. The new edifice of laws, which was the consequence of these discoveries – it is called quantum theory – contains the laws of earlier physics as a correct but greatly simplified limiting case. They have a similar relationship to the laws of atomic physics as an airphoto to a near-picture of the same landscape.
The lesson learnt from quantum theory made that the literally unchangeable atoms of the old philosophers were hardly seriously sought in those particles-electrons, protons, and neutrons – from which atoms are made. As the name elementary particles under which they are summarized would seem to indicate, there was nevertheless a certain inclination towards this direction. But already the ordinary elementary particles are by no means unchangeable, which is still more strongly the case with the lot of new, similar particles discovered during later years, the transformations of which now stand at the centre of interest of atomic physicists. In our attempts to find a theory which comprehends all the new facts concerning old and new elementary particles, certain wittingly unreal, symbolic particles appear in our equations, which with a little good will could be regarded as the eternally immutable atoms of philosophers. Of the real elementary particles we could then, following Lao-tse, the old Chinese thinker, say: “The elementary particles, which could be defined, are not the eternal elementary particles”. Lao-tse did not talk of elementary particles, of course, but of Tao, the deepest principle of life. And physics is certainly considerably simpler than human life. And there we have powerful auxiliaries in the art of experimentation and mathematics.
As to mathematics and elementary particles it has, in the first place, led to two theories, each of which has been developed by a Nobel Prize winner in Physics, Dirac and Fermi. Hereby the former theory is the outermost wing of the edifice of quantum mechanics, while the latter may be regarded as the first, still unfinished room in the new edifice of elementary particle laws. But they are both concerned with electrons and thus border on one another.
But what has the question of right and left to do with elementary particle physics? Well, in the first place only in a negative way, in that it was assumed almost tacitly, that elementary particle reactions are symmetric with respect to right and left. This assumption was to play an important part in the elaboration of Fermi’s theory. That this assumption was made was very natural, not least in view of the mentioned theory of Dirac, according to which it looked as if the electrons, the best known elementary particles, possessed no feature which would permit a distinction between right and left. In fact, most of us were inclined to regard the symmetry of elementary particles with respect to right and left as a necessary consequence of the general principle of right-left symmetry of Nature. Thanks to Lee and Yang and the experimental discoveries inspired by them we now know that this was a mistake.
The starting-point of Lee and Yang in their revision of the whole question of right-left symmetry in elementary particle reactions were certain strange observations concerning a kind of new particles called K mesons, which looked as if they were in contrast with the assumption mentioned. Even if these observations puzzled greatly many physicists, it was only Lee and Yang who seriously took the consequences of them, in that they asked themselves what kind of experimental support there was for the assumption that all elementary particle processes are symmetric with respect to right and left. The result of their investigation was unexpected, namely that the validity of the symmetry assumption even in the best known processes had no experimental support whatsoever, the reason being that all experiments had been so arranged as to give the same result whether the assumption was valid or not. As if one had thought that Olav Tryggveson had his heart in the middle of the body because he was equally skilled with the left as with the right hand. Lee and Yang did not confine themselves to this negative statement but devised a number of experiments which would make it possible to test the right-left symmetry in different elementary particle transformations, and proposed them to their experimental colleagues. The first of these experiments was carried out by the Chinese physicist, Mrs. C.S. Wu and her collaborators. Very schematically it consisted in the following. Atomic nuclei of a radioactive isotope of the metal cobalt were exposed at very low temperature to a magnetic field – they are themselves small magnets – whereby they became directed just like compass needles. The distribution as to direction of the electrons due to radioactivity was then investigated.
Let us assume that the magnetic field is created by means of a coil placed like a spool of thread on a table, and that the electric current is flowing counterclockwise in the wire. Then the north poles of the cobalt nuclei will be directed upwards. The experiment, now, gave the result that the electrons from the radioactive process with this arrangement were preferentially thrown downwards towards the floor. From this it follows unambiguously that the process lacks that right-left symmetry, which one had earlier assumed. Thus, by means of this experiment it could be explained to a person, who did not know it – let us say an inhabitant of a distant stellar system – what we mean by right and left. In fact, it would be sufficient to ask him to arrange the experiment so as to make the preferential direction of the electrons point downwards. The current will then have the same direction as that in which he has to turn at the command “left face”.
However – and this is a thing of the utmost importance for the incorporation of the new discoveries into our edifice of physical laws – the person on the distant planet will be able to follow our prescriptions only if he knows what we mean by the direction of an electric current. And to know this he must know that our atoms and his are made up of the same elementary particles. We know, however, that not only are there double sets of electrons – positive and negative – but that the same holds for protons and neutrons, the building stones of atomic nuclei. It is therefore possible that his atoms contrary to ours would consist of positive electrons and negative nuclei. If they did, he would judge the direction of the current opposite to what we would do, with the result that he would call right left and left right. In stating this we have tacitly made an assumption which is not quite confirmed as yet but which, as far as the experiments go, seems probable, namely that the results of all experiments performed with the opposite kind of elementary particles would be just such as to reestablish the right-left symmetry. With other words, one should be able to regard the antiparticles not only as the electric opposites of the particles but also as their mirror images.
Professor Lee and Professor Yang. In the very incomplete sketch of your new work I have just made in Swedish, time has not allowed me to mention the many other beautiful contributions to theoretical physics made by each one of you, nor could I at all do justice to the enthusiasm your new achievement has aroused among physicists. Through your consistent and unprejudiced thinking you have been able to break a most puzzling deadlock in the field of elementary particle physics where now experimental and theoretical work is pouring forth as the result of your brilliant achievement.
It is with great satisfaction, therefore, that The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award you this year’s Nobel Prize for Physics for your fundamental contributions to this branch of science.
On behalf of the Academy I wish to extend to you our heartiest congratulations and now ask you to receive from the hands of His Majesty the King the Nobel Prize for Physics for the year 1957.From Nobel Lectures, Physics 1942-1962, Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1964
Copyright © The Nobel Foundation 1957
To cite this section
MLA style: Award ceremony speech. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach AB 2023. Thu. 8 Jun 2023. <https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1957/ceremony-speech/>
| 堯樂博士 يۇلبارس خان | |
|---|---|
 | |
| 中華民國政治人物 | |
| 個人資料 | |
| 性別 | 男 |
| 出生 | 1889年8月13日 大清新疆省巴楚縣 |
| 逝世 | 1971年7月27日（81歲） 臺灣臺北市 |
| 國籍 | 中華民國 |
| 政黨 |  中國國民黨 |
| 軍事背景 | |
| 軍階 | 中將 |
堯樂博士（維吾爾語：يۇلبارس خان，拉丁維文：Yulbars Khan；1889年8月13日－1971年7月27日），也譯作堯樂博斯·汗，漢名黃景福，經名馬木提·烏守爾，曾用名堯樂娃子，初名約勒瓦斯，維吾爾族[1]，新疆省巴楚縣人。曾任新疆省政府主席。
生平[編輯]
堯樂博斯兒時父母雙亡，8歲時被姐夫、喀什噶爾道黃光達收為養子，更名黃景福。兩年後黃光達因處理塔什庫爾干邊境糾紛不力，被清政府處斬。堯樂博斯的姐姐改嫁哈密回王沙木胡索特的親信艾則孜哈孜，堯樂博斯隨之進入哈密回王府。一年不到，堯樂博斯的姐姐又改嫁伊不拉音伯克（哈密大台吉玉素甫的表弟），此後堯樂博斯逐漸從事經商活動。1910年，堯樂博斯任哈密回王府通事（翻譯）及掌事（商務幫辦）。[2]
1911年辛亥革命爆發，此後哈密的維吾爾族農民於1912年組織了農民軍，在鐵木爾·尼牙孜的帶領下奪取哈密附近的三堡，進攻駐守巴里坤的新疆省軍隊並生擒總兵易盛富。堯樂博斯暗中資助了農民軍。楊增新任新疆都督後，殺害了鐵木爾尼牙孜，農民軍解體，堯樂博斯向哈密回王沙木胡索特告密，幫助哈密回王捕殺殘餘的農民軍成員。後來堯樂博斯被楊增新任命為新設於哈密的官車局的佐辦。[2]
1928年楊增新遇刺身亡後，金樹仁任新疆督辦。1930年6月6日，哈密回王沙木胡索特病逝，此後金樹仁實行「改土歸流」，廢除哈密回王的特權，此舉引發了哈密起義，起義軍領導人為和加尼牙孜。堯樂博斯暗中資助起義軍並通風報信。和加尼牙孜派堯樂博斯前往南京，在甘肅遇到回族軍閥馬仲英，遂引馬仲英進入新疆。1931年，馬仲英進入新疆，遭張培元部重創退回甘肅後，堯樂博斯與和加尼牙孜退入山中。 [2]
1933年，金樹仁出逃，劉文龍任新疆省政府主席，盛世才任臨時督辦。1933年5月，堯樂博斯與和加尼牙孜前往鄯善、吐魯番一帶活動。後來馬仲英部在紫泥泉戰役中遭盛世才大敗，馬仲英退出新疆。堯樂博斯則自任哈密縣縣長，通電擁護劉文龍和盛世才，其縣長位獲得盛世才承認。[2]
1937年，中國工農紅軍西路軍左支隊到達星星峽，盛世才同意該部隊進入新疆，但堯樂博斯反對。盛世才遂進攻哈密，堯樂博斯逃到甘肅敦煌，後來又到青海，獲得青海軍閥馬步芳歡迎。1937年，堯樂博斯在南京會見蔣介石。1938年，蔣介石任堯樂博斯為中國國民黨中央軍事委員會中將參議。後來堯樂博斯又任中國國民黨中央監察委員。[2]
1946年秋，堯樂博斯回到哈密，其當年被盛世才沒收的家產被新任新疆省政府主席張治中發還。1947年，堯樂博斯任哈密區督察專員兼哈密區保安司令、哈密區中國國民黨黨務指導員。1949年9月新疆和平解放後，新疆臨時政府留用堯樂博斯任哈密專員、公署專員，其子堯道昌也被留用為縣長。
1950年3月，烏斯滿成為新疆反共復國軍總司令，組織起義，抵抗新政權。堯樂博斯亦成為其中一員，參與襲擊中國人民解放軍。同年4月，中華民國政府任命其為新疆省政府主席。後，其領導的軍隊被解放軍進剿。1951年，堯樂博斯逃到中印邊界後轉赴台北。1971年7月27日，82歲的堯樂博斯在台北病逝。[2] 著有《堯樂博士回憶錄》。
6994.jpg)
6995.jpg)
沒有留言:
張貼留言