Tesla’s Latest Roentgen Ray Investigations
Further investigations concerning the behavior of the various metals in regard to reflection of these radiations have given additional support to the opinion which I have before expressed; namely, that Volta’s electric contact series in air is identical with that which is obtained when arranging the metals according to their powers of reflection, the most electro-positive metal being the best reflector. Confining myself to the metals easily experimented upon, this series is magnesium, lead, tin, iron, copper, silver, gold and platinum. The lastnamed metal should be found to be the poorest, and sodium one of the best, reflectors. This relation is rendered still more interesting and suggestive when we consider that this series is approximately the same which is obtained when arranging the metals according to their energies of combination with oxygen, as calculated from their chemical equivalents.
Should the above relation be confirmed by other physicists, we shall be justified to draw the following conclusions: First, the highly exhausted bulb emits material streams which, impinging on a metallic surface, are reflected; second, these streams are formed of matter in some primary or elementary condition; third, these material streams are probably the same agent which is the cause of the electro-motive tension between metals in close proximity or actual contact, and they may possibly, to some extent, determine the energy of combination of the metals with oxygen; fourth, every metal or conductor is more or less a source of such streams; fifth, these streams or radiations must be produced by some radiations which exist in the medium; and sixth, streams resembling the cathodic must be emitted by the sun and probably also by other sources of radiant energy, such as an arc light or Bunsen burner.
The first of these conclusions, assuming the above-cited fact to be correct, is evident and uncontrovertible. No theory of vibration of any kind would account for this singular relation between the powers of reflection and electric properties of the metals. Streams of projected matter coming in actual contact with the reflecting metal surface afford the only plausible explanation.
The second conclusion is likewise obvious, since no difference whatever is observed by employing various qualities of glass for the bulb, electrodes of different metals and any kind of residual gases. Evidently, whatever the matter constituting the streams may be, it must undergo a change in the process of expulsion, or, generally speaking, projection — since the views in this regard still differ — in such a way as to lose entirely the characteristics which it possessed when forming the electrode, or wall of the bulb, or the gaseous contents of the latter.
The existence of the above relation between the reflecting and contact series forces us likewise to the third conclusion, because a mere coincidence of that kind is, to say the least, extremely improbable. Besides, the fact may be cited that there is always a difference of potential set up between two metal plates at some distance and in the path of the rays issuing from an exhausted bulb.
Now, since there exists an electric pressure of difference of potential between two metals in close proximity or contact, we must, when considering all the foregoing, come to the fourth conclusion, namely, that the metals emit similar streams, and I therefore anticipate that, if a sensitive film be placed between two plates, say, of magnesium and copper, a true Roentgen shadow picture would be obtained after a very long exposure in the dark. Or, in general, such picture could be secured whenever the plate is placed near a metallic or conducting body, leaving for the present the insulators out of consideration. Sodium, one of the first of the electric contact series, but not yet experimented upon, should give out more of such streams than even magnesium.
Obviously, such streams could not be forever emitted, unless there is a continuous supply of radiation from the medium in some other form; or possibly the streams which the bodies themselves emit are merely reflected streams coming from other sources. But since all investigation has strengthened the opinion advanced by Roentgen that for the production of these radiations some impact is required, the former of the two possibilities is the more probable one, and we must assume that the radiations existing in the medium and giving rise to those here considered partake something of the nature of cathodic streams.
But if such streams exist all around us in the ambient medium, the question arises, whence do they come? The only answer is: From the sun. I infer, therefore, that the sun and other sources of radiant energy must, in a less degree, emit radiations or streams of matter similar to those thrown off by an electrode in a highly exhausted inclosure. This seems to be, at this moment, still a point of controversy. According to my present convictions a Roentgen shadow picture should, with very long exposures, be obtained from all sources of radiant energy, provided the radiations are permitted first to impinge upon a metal or other body.
The preceding considerations tend to show that the lumps of matter composing a cathodic stream in the bulb are broken up into incomparably smaller particles by impact against the wall of the latter, and, owing to this, are enabled to pass into the air. All evidence which I have so far obtained points rather to this than to the throwing off of particles of the wall itself under the violent impact of the cathodic stream. According to my convictions, then, the difference between Lenard and Roentgen rays, if there be any, lies solely in this, that the particles composing the latter are incomparably smaller and possess a higher velocity. To these two qualifications I chiefly attribute the non-deflectibility by a magnet which I believe will be disproved in the end. Both kinds of rays, however, affect the sensitive plate and fluorescent screen, only the rays discovered by Roentgen are much more effective. We know now that these rays are produced under certain exceptional conditions in a bulb, the vacuum being extremely high, and that the range of greatest activity is rather small.
I have endeavored to find whether the reflected rays possess certain distinctive features, and I have taken pictures of various objects with this purpose in view, but no marked difference was noted in any case. I therefore conclude that the matter composing the Roentgen rays does not suffer further degradation by impact against bodies. One of the most important tasks for the experimenter remains still to determine what becomes of the energy of these rays. In a number of experiments with rays reflected from and transmitted through a conducting of insulating plate, I found that only a small part of the rays could be accounted for. For instance, through a zinc plate, one-sixteenth of an inch thick, under an incident angle of 45 degrees, about two and one-half per cent were reflected and about three per cent transmitted through the plate, hence over 94 per cent of the total radiation remain to be accounted for. All the tests which I have been able to make have confirmed Roentgen’s statement that these rays are incapable of raising the temperature of a body. To trace this lost energy and account for it in a plausible way will be equivalent to making a new discovery.
Since it is now demonstrated that all bodies reflect more or less, the diffusion through the air is easily accounted for. Observing the tendency to scatter through the air, I have been led to increase the efficiency of reflectors by providing not one, but separated successive layers for reflection, by making the reflector of thin sheets of metal, mica or other substances. The efficiency of mica as a reflector I attribute chiefly to the fact that it is composed of many superimposed layers which reflect individually. These many successive reflections are, in my opinion, also the cause of the scattering through the air.
In my communication to you of April 1, I have for the first time stated that these rays are composed of matter in a “primary” or elementary condition or state. I have chosen this mode of expression in order to avoid the use of the word “ether,” which is usually understood in the sense of the Maxwellian interpretation, which would not be in accord with my present convictions in regard to the nature of the radiations.
An observation which might be of some interest is the following: A few years ago I described on one occasion a phenomenon observed in highly exhausted bulbs. It is a brush or stream issuing from a single electrode under certain conditions, which rotates very rapidly in consequence of the action of the earth’s magnetism. Now I have recently observed this same phenomenon in several bulbs which were capable of impressing the sensitive film and fluorescent screen very strongly. As the brush is rapidly twirling around I have conjectured that perhaps also the Lenard and Roentgen streams are rotating under the action of the earth’s magnetism, and I am endeavoring to obtain an evidence of such motion by studying the action of a bulb in various positions with respect to the magnetic axis of the earth.
In so far as the vibrational character of the rays is concerned, I still hold that the vibration is merely that which is conditioned by the apparatus employed. With the ordinary induction coil we have almost exclusively to deal with a very low vibration impressed by the commutating device or brake. With the disruptive coil we usually have a very strong superimposed vibration in addition to the fundamental one, and it is easy to trace sometimes as much as the fourth octave of the fundamental vibration. But I can not reconcile myself with the idea of vibrations approximating or even exceeding those of light, and think that all these effects could be as well produced with a steady electrical pressure as from a battery, with the exclusion of all vibration which may occur, even in such instance, as has been pointed out by De La Rive. In my experiments I have tried to ascertain whether a greater difference between the shadows of the bones and flesh could be obtained by employing currents of extremely high frequency; but I have been unable to discover any such effect which would be dependent on the frequency of the currents, although the latter were varied between as wide limits as was possible. But it is a rule that the more intense the action the sharper the shadows obtained, provided that the distance is not too small. It is furthermore of the greatest importance for the clearness of the shadows that the rays should be passed through some tubular reflector, which renders them sensibly parallel.
In order then to bring out as much detail as possible on a sensitive plate, we have to proceed in precisely the same way as if we had to deal with flying bullets hitting against a wall composed of parts of different density with the problem before us of producing as large as possible a difference in the trajectories of the bullets which pass through the various parts of the wall. Manifestly, this difference will be the greater the greater the velocity of the bullets; hence, in order to bring out detail, very strong radiations are required. Proceeding on this theory I have employed exceptionally thick films and developed very slowly, and in this way clearer pictures have been obtained. The importance of slow development has been first pointed out by Professor Wright, of Yale. Of course, if Professor Henry’s suggestion of the use of a fluorescent body in contact with the sensitive film is made use of, the process is reduced to an ordinary quick photographic procedure, and the above consideration does not apply.
I have obtained some results with this apparatus which clearly show the advantage of such disposition. For instance, at a distance of 45 feet from the end of the bulb my assistants and myself could observe clearly the fingers of the hand through a screen of tungstate of calcium, the rays traversing about two and one half inches of oil and the diaphragm d. It is practicable with such apparatus to make photographs of small objects at a distance of 40 feet, with only a few minutes exposure, by the help of Professor Henry’s method. But, even without the use of a fluorescent powder, short exposures are practicable, so that I think the use of the above method is not essential for quick procedure. I rather believe that in the practical development of this principle, if it shall be necessary, Professor Salvioni’s suggestion of a fluorescent emulsion, combined with a film, will have to be adopted. This is bound to give better results than an independent fluorescent screen, and will very much simplify the process. I may say, however, that, since my last communication, considerable improvement has been made in the screens. The manufacturers of Edison’s tungstate of calcium are now furnishing screens which give fairly clean pictures. The powder is fine and it is more uniformly distributed. I consider, also, that the employment of a softer and thicker paper than before is of advantage. It is just to remark that the tungstate of calcium has also proved to be an excellent fluorescent in the bulb. I tested its qualities for such use immediately and find it so far unexcelled. Whether it will be so for a long time remains to be seen. News reaches us that several fluorescent bodies, better than the cyanides, have been discovered abroad.
Another improvement with a view of increasing the sharpness of the shadows has been proposed to me by Mr. E. R. Hewitt. He assumed that the absence of sharpness of the outlines in the shadows on the screen was due to the spread of the fluorescence from crystal to crystal. He proposed to avoid this by using a thin aluminum plate with many parallel grooves. Acting on this suggestion, I made some experiments with wire gauze and, furthermore, with screens made of a mixture of a fluorescent with a non-fluorescent powder. I found that the general brightness of the screen was diminished, but that with a strong radiation the shadows appeared sharper. This idea might be found capable of useful application.
By the use of the above apparatus I have been enabled to examine much better than before the body by means of the fluorescent screen. Presently the vertebral column can be seen quite clearly, even in the lower part of the body. I have also clearly noted the outlines of the hip bones. Looking in the region of the heart I have been able to locate in unmistakably. The background appeared much brighter, and this difference in the intensity of the shadow and surrounding has surprised me. The ribs I could now see on a number of occasions quite distinctly, as well as the shoulder bones. Of course, there is no difficulty whatever in observing the bones of all limbs. I noted certain peculiar effects which I attribute to the oil. For instance, the rays passed through plates of metal over one-eighth of an inch thick, and in one instance I could see quite clearly the bones of my hand through sheets of copper, iron and brass of a thickness of nearly one-quarter of an inch. Through glass the rays seemed to pass with such freedom that, looking through the screen in a direction at right angles to the axis of the tube, the action was most intense, although the rays had to pass through a great thickness of glass and oil. A glass slab nearly one-half of an inch thick, held in front of the screen, hardly dimmed the fluorescence. When holding the screen in front of the tube at a distance of about three feet, the head of an assistant, thrust between the screen and the tube, cast but a feeble shadow. It appeared some times as if the bones and the flesh were equally transparent to the radiations passing through the oil. When very close to the bulb, the screen was illuminated through the body of an assistant so strongly that, when a hand was moved in, front, I could clearly note the motion of the hand through the body. In one instance I could even distinguish the bones of the arm.
Having observed the extraordinary transparence of the bones in some instances, I at first surmised that the rays might be vibrations of high pitch, and that the oil had in some way absorbed a part of them. This view, however, became untenable when I found that at a certain distance from the bulb I obtained a sharp shadow of the bones. This latter observation led me to apply usefully the screen in taking impressions on the plate. Namely, in such case it is of advantage to first determine by means of the screen the proper distance at which the object is to be placed before taking the impression. It will be found that often the image is much clearer at a greater distance. In order to avoid any error when observing with the screen, I have surrounded the box with thick metal plates, so as to prevent the fluorescence, in consequence of the radiations, reaching the screen from the sides. I believe that such an arrangement is absolutely necessary if one wishes to make correct observations.
During my study of the behavior of oils and other liquid insulators, which I am still continuing, it has occurred to me to investigate the important effect discovered by Prof. J. J. Thomson. He announced some time ago that all bodies traversed by Roentgen radiations become conductors of electricity. I applied a sensitive resonance test to the investigation of this phenomenon in a manner pointed out in my earlier writings on high frequency currents. A secondary, preferably not in very close inductive relation to the primary circuit, was connected to the latter and to the ground, and the vibration through the primary was so adjusted that true resonance took place. As the secondary had a considerable number of turns, very small bodies attached to the free terminal produced considerable variations of potential on the latter. Placing a tube in a box of wood filled with oil and attaching it to the terminal, I adjusted the vibration through the primary so that resonance took place without the bulb radiating Roentgen rays to an appreciable extent. I then changed the conditions so that the bulb became very active in the production of the rays. The oil should have now, according to Prof. J. J. Thomson’s statement, become a conductor and a very marked change in the vibration should have occurred. This was found not to be the case, so that we must see in the phenomenon discovered by J. J. Thomson only a further evidence that we have to deal here with streams of matter which, traversing the bodies, carry away electrical charges. But the bodies do not become conductors in the common acceptance of the term. The method I have followed is so delicate that a mistake is almost an impossibility.