Abstract

PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |

  1. Nichols and Snow; Phil. Mag., 5, 33, p. 21; 1892.
  2. Rogers; Am. Jour. Sci., 43, p. 301; 1892.
  3. Nichols and Crehore; Physical Review, 2, p. 161; 1894.
  4. Nichols and Howes; Physical Review, 2, 19, p. 315; 1922.
  5. Nichols and Wilber; Physical Review, 2, 17, p. 453; 1921.
  6. Howes; Physical Review, 2, 17, p. 469; 1921.
  7. Nichols, Howes and Wilber; Physical Review, 2, 12, p. 364; 1918.
  8. Nichols; Am. Philos. Soc., 56, p. 258; 1917.
  9. Tanaka; J. O. S. A. & R. S. I., 8, p. 314; 1924.
  10. Nichols; Physical Review, (2), 22, p. 420; 1923.
  11. Nichols; Physical Review, (2), 25, p. 376; 1925.
  12. Nichols; Proc. Nat. Acad. Sc., 11, p. 47; 1925.
  13. Nichols; J. O. S. A. & R. S. I., 13, p. 573, 1926.
  14. Henri Becquerel; C. R., 146, p. 154, 1908.
  15. Nicliols and Howes; Physical Review, (2), 19, p. 307; 1922.
  16. Frances G. Wick; Physical Review, (2), 24, p. 272; 1924
  17. Another striking instance of the effect of an activator was observed in the luminescence of columbium oxide. This sample was known to be impure. It did not agree as to melting point with the columbium oxide described in the writer's recent paper on this oxide. (Physical Review, 25, p. 376. The blue glow of this material was so intense as to be measurable at 560°C at which temperature the value of I:/IBB for .45µ was 85200. (see Nichols and Howes; Physical Review, (2), 19, p. 311.) At 655° the ratio was 2150 or nearly 40% greater than for the ruby depicted in Figs. 6 to 9. The nature of the activator is unfortunately unknown.
  18. Nichols and Howes, I. c., Phys. Rev., 19, p. 310.

Becquerel, Henri

Henri Becquerel; C. R., 146, p. 154, 1908.

Wick, Frances G.

Frances G. Wick; Physical Review, (2), 24, p. 272; 1924

Other (18)

Nichols and Snow; Phil. Mag., 5, 33, p. 21; 1892.

Rogers; Am. Jour. Sci., 43, p. 301; 1892.

Nichols and Crehore; Physical Review, 2, p. 161; 1894.

Nichols and Howes; Physical Review, 2, 19, p. 315; 1922.

Nichols and Wilber; Physical Review, 2, 17, p. 453; 1921.

Howes; Physical Review, 2, 17, p. 469; 1921.

Nichols, Howes and Wilber; Physical Review, 2, 12, p. 364; 1918.

Nichols; Am. Philos. Soc., 56, p. 258; 1917.

Tanaka; J. O. S. A. & R. S. I., 8, p. 314; 1924.

Nichols; Physical Review, (2), 22, p. 420; 1923.

Nichols; Physical Review, (2), 25, p. 376; 1925.

Nichols; Proc. Nat. Acad. Sc., 11, p. 47; 1925.

Nichols; J. O. S. A. & R. S. I., 13, p. 573, 1926.

Henri Becquerel; C. R., 146, p. 154, 1908.

Nicliols and Howes; Physical Review, (2), 19, p. 307; 1922.

Frances G. Wick; Physical Review, (2), 24, p. 272; 1924

Another striking instance of the effect of an activator was observed in the luminescence of columbium oxide. This sample was known to be impure. It did not agree as to melting point with the columbium oxide described in the writer's recent paper on this oxide. (Physical Review, 25, p. 376. The blue glow of this material was so intense as to be measurable at 560°C at which temperature the value of I:/IBB for .45µ was 85200. (see Nichols and Howes; Physical Review, (2), 19, p. 311.) At 655° the ratio was 2150 or nearly 40% greater than for the ruby depicted in Figs. 6 to 9. The nature of the activator is unfortunately unknown.

Nichols and Howes, I. c., Phys. Rev., 19, p. 310.

Cited By

OSA participates in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.