DOC.
14
101
of the solar
spectrum
toward
the
ultraviolet)
and
ß
=
4.866
x
10-11.
We
[42]
obtain
II.107
=
4.3
volt,
a
result that
agrees
in order of
magnitude
with the
results
of
Mr.
Lenard.1
If the formula
derived is
correct,
then
II,
presented
as a
function of
the
frequency
of the
exciting
light
in
Cartesian
coordinates,
must be
a
straight line
whose slope
is
independent
of
the
nature
of the substance
[44]
investigated.
As
far
as
I
can
see,
our
conception does not
conflict with the
proper-
ties
of
the
photoelectric
effect observed
by
Mr.
Lenard.
If
each
energy
quantum
of the
exciting
light transmits its
energy
to
electrons
independent
of
all
others,
then the velocity
distribution
of
the electrons, i.e., the
quality
of the cathode
rays
produced,
will
be
independent
of
the intensity
of
the
exciting
light;
on
the other
hand,
under
otherwise identical
circumstances,
the
number
of electrons
leaving
the
body
will
be
proportional
to
the
intensity
of the
exciting
light.2
Remarks
similar
to
those
regarding
the
expected
deviations
from
Stokes'
rule
apply
to
the
expected
limits of validity of the
laws mentioned
above.
In the
foregoing
it
has been assumed
that the
energy
of at
least
some
of
the
energy
quanta
of the
producing
light is transmitted
completely
to
one
single
electron each.
If
this
obvious assumption
is
not
made,
instead of the
above equation
one
obtains the
following
one:
HE +
Pl
$
Rßv
.
For
the cathode luminescence,
which
constitutes the inverse
process
of
that discussed above,
one
obtains
by
a
consideration
analogous
to
that
above
[45]
HE
+
r
I
Rßv
.
For
the
substances
investigated
by
Mr. Lenard,
PE
is
always
considerably
[46]
larger
than
Rßv
because the potential difference the cathode
rays
must
1P.
Lenard,
Ann. d.
Phys.
8
(1902):
165
and
184,
Table
I,
Fig.
2.
2P.
Lenard,
loc.
cit.,
p.
150
and
pp.
166-168.
[43]