Editing N-ray

{{short description|Hypothetical form of radiation}}
{{About|the hypothetical form of radiation described in 1903|the genuine nuclear decay product|neutron radiation}}

[[File:Blondlot N-rays.png|thumb|right|Fig. 6,7 from Prosper-René Blondlot: "Registration by Photography of the Action Produced by N Rays on a Small Electric Spark". Nancy, 1904.]] 
'''N-rays''' (or '''N rays''') were a hypothesized form of [[radiation]] described by [[:Category:French physicists|French physicist]] [[Prosper-René Blondlot]] in 1903. They were initially confirmed by others, but subsequently found to be illusory.

== Background ==
The N-ray affair occurred shortly after a series of major breakthroughs in experimental physics. [[Victor Schumann]] discovered [[vacuum ultraviolet]] radiation in 1893, [[Wilhelm Röntgen]] discovered [[X-ray]]s in 1895, [[Henri Becquerel]] discovered [[nuclear radiation|radioactivity]] in 1896, and, in 1897, [[J.&nbsp;J. Thomson]] discovered [[electron]]s, showing that they were the constituents of [[cathode ray]]s.<ref name = nye>
{{cite journal
 |last=Nye |first=M.J.
 |year=1980
 |title=N-rays: An episode in the history and psychology of science
 |journal=Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences
 |volume=11
 |issue=1
 |pages=125–156
 |doi=10.2307/27757473
|jstor=27757473
 |url=http://hsns.ucpress.edu/content/ucphsns/11/1/125.full.pdf
 }}</ref> This created an expectation within the scientific community that other forms of radiation might be discovered.<ref name = klotz>
{{cite journal
 |last=Klotz |first=I.M.
 |date=May 1980
 |title=The N-Ray Affair
 |journal=[[Scientific American]]
 |volume=242
 |issue=5
 |pages=168–175
 |doi=10.1038/scientificamerican0580-168
 |jstor=24966330
|bibcode=1980SciAm.242e.168K
 }}</ref>

At this time, Prosper-René Blondlot was a professor of physics at the [[Nancy-Université|University of Nancy]] studying [[electromagnetic radiation]].<ref name = nye /> Blondlot was a respected member of the scientific community: he was one of eight physicists who were corresponding members of the [[French Academy of Sciences]] and was awarded the Academy's Gaston Planté prize in 1893 and the LaCaze prize in 1899.<ref name=Lagemann>
{{cite journal
 |last=Lagemann |first=R.T.
 |year=1977
 |title=New light on old rays: N rays
 |journal=[[American Journal of Physics]]
 |volume=45 |issue=3 |pages=281–284
 |doi=10.1119/1.10643
|bibcode = 1977AmJPh..45..281L }}</ref> His attempts to measure the [[speed of light|speed of electromagnetic waves]] were commended by Thomson and [[Henri Poincaré]].<ref name = nye /> Blondlot began investigating the nature of X-rays shortly after their discovery, trying to determine whether they behaved as particles or electromagnetic waves. (This was before [[wave-particle duality]] became widely accepted among scientists.)<ref name = klotz />

== Discovery ==
In 1903, Blondlot announced his discovery while working at the University of Nancy and attempting to [[polarization (waves)|polarize]] X-rays. He had perceived changes in the brightness of an [[electric spark]] in a [[spark gap]] placed in an X-ray beam which he photographed, and he later attributed to the novel form of [[radiation]], naming this the ''N-rays'' for the University of Nancy.<ref name=Blondlot>
{{Cite book
 |author=Prosper-René Blondlot
 |year=1905
 |title="N" Rays
 |url=https://archive.org/details/nrayscollectiono00blonrich
 |publisher=[[Longmans, Green & Co.]]
 |location=[[London]]
 |others=translated by Garcin, J.
 |author-link=Prosper-René Blondlot
}}</ref> Blondlot, [[Augustin Charpentier]], [[Arsène d'Arsonval]], and approximately 120 other scientists in 300 published articles<ref name=Lagemann /> claimed to be able to detect N-rays emanating from most substances, including the human body, with the peculiar exceptions that they were not emitted by [[green wood]] and by some treated metals.<ref name=skepdic>
{{cite web
 |last=Carroll |first=R.T.
 |title=The Skeptic's Dictionary
 |url=http://skepdic.com/blondlot.html
}}</ref> Most researchers of the subject at the time used the perceived light of a dim phosphorescent surface as "detectors", although work in the period clearly showed the change in brightness to be a physiological phenomenon rather than some actual change in the level of illumination.<ref>
{{cite journal
 |last=Guilleminot |first=H.
 |title="N" rays do not influence the resistivity of selenium nor modify the influence of light upon that resistivity
 |journal=[[Archives d'électricité médicale]]
 |pages=243–244
}}</ref> Physicists [[Gustave le Bon]] and [[P. Audollet]] and [[Spiritualism (beliefs)|spiritualist]]<!--(Phrenologist?)--> [[Carl Huter]] even claimed the discovery as their own,<ref name = klotz /> leading to a commission of the [[French Academy of Sciences|Académie des sciences]] to decide priority.<ref>
{{cite journal
 |author=M. d’Arsonval
 |title = Remarques à propos des Communications de M. A. Charpentier et des revendications de priorité auxquelles elles ont donné lieu
 |date=11 April 1904
 |journal=Comptes rendus de l'Académie des sciences
 |pages=884–885
 |language = fr
}}</ref>

==Response==
The "discovery" excited international interest and many physicists worked to replicate the effects. However, the notable physicists [[Lord Kelvin]], [[William Crookes]], [[Otto Lummer]], and [[Heinrich Rubens]] failed to do so. Following his own failure, self-described as "wasting a whole morning",<ref>{{Cite web |title=Robert W. Wood: Photographing the Invisible, Debunking the Incredible |url=http://boole.stanford.edu/Wood/ |access-date=2023-07-14 |website=boole.stanford.edu}}</ref> the American physicist [[Robert W. Wood]], who had a reputation as a popular "debunker" of nonsense during the period, was prevailed upon by the [[United Kingdom|British]] journal ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' to travel to Blondlot's laboratory in France to investigate further. Wood suggested that Rubens should go since he had been the most embarrassed when [[Wilhelm II, German Emperor|Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany]] asked him to repeat the French experiments and, after two weeks, Rubens had to report his failure to do so. Rubens, however, felt it would look better if Wood went since Blondlot had been most polite in answering his many questions.{{Citation needed|date=March 2021}}

In the darkened room during Blondlot's demonstration, Wood surreptitiously removed an essential [[prism (optics)|prism]] from the experimental apparatus, yet the experimenters still said that they observed N-rays. Wood also stealthily swapped a large [[File (tool)|file]] that was supposed to be giving off N-rays with an inert piece of wood, yet the N-rays were still "observed". His report on these investigations were published in ''Nature'',<ref>
{{Cite journal |last=Wood |first=R.W. |date=29 September 1904 |title=The N-Rays |journal=[[Nature (journal)|Nature]] |volume=70 |issue=1822 |pages=530–531 |doi=10.1038/070530a0 |quote=After spending three hours or more in witnessing various experiments, I am not only unable to report a single observation which appeared to indicate the existence of the rays, but left with a very firm conviction that the few experimenters who have obtained positive results, have been in some way deluded. A somewhat detailed report of the experiments which were shown to me, together with my own observations, may be of interest to the many physicists who have spent days and weeks in fruitless efforts to repeat the remarkable experiments which have been described in the scientific journals of the past year. |bibcode = 1904Natur..70..530W |s2cid=4063030 |url=https://zenodo.org/record/1429443}}</ref>
and they suggested that the N-rays were a purely subjective phenomenon, with the scientists involved having recorded data that matched their expectations. There is reason to believe that Blondlot in particular was misled by his laboratory assistant, who confirmed all observations.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Weart |first1=Spencer |title=A Little More Light on N-Rays |journal=American Journal of Physics |date=1978 |volume=46 |issue=3 |page=306 |bibcode = 1978AmJPh..46..306W |doi = 10.1119/1.11342}}</ref> By 1905, no one outside of Nancy believed in N-rays, but Blondlot himself is reported to have still been convinced of their existence in 1926.<ref name=Lagemann /> [[Martin Gardner]], making reference to Wood's biographer [[William Seabrook]]'s account of the affair, attributed a subsequent decline in mental health and eventual death of Blondlot to the resulting scandal,<ref>{{cite book |author=Martin Gardner |year=1957 |title=Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science |location=New York |publisher=[[Dover Publications]] |page=345 |author-link=Martin Gardner |title-link=Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science}}</ref> but there is evidence that this is at least some exaggeration of the facts.<ref name=Lagemann />

The term "N-ray" was added to dictionaries upon its announcement and was described as a real phenomenon until at least the 1940s. For instance, the 1946 Webster's Dictionary defined it as "An emanation or radiation from certain hot bodies which increases the luminosity without increasing the temperature: as yet, not fully determined."<ref name="Webster's Dictionary">{{cite book |last1=Devlin |first1=Joseph |title=Webster's New School and Office Dictionary |date=1946 |publisher=The New World Publishing Company |page=496 |url=http://www.informationism.org/index.php?title=File:Nrays.jpeg |access-date=13 October 2014}}</ref>

==Significance==

The incident is used as a [[cautionary tale]] among scientists on the dangers of error introduced by [[experimenter bias]]. N-rays were cited as an example of [[pathological science]] by [[Irving Langmuir]]. Nearly identical properties of an equally unknown radiation had been recorded about 50 years before in another country by [[Carl Reichenbach]] in his treatise ''Researches on Magnetism, Electricity, Heat, Light, Crystallization, and Chemical Attraction in their relations to the Vital Force'' in 1850, and before that in Vienna by [[Franz Mesmer]] in his ''Mémoire on the Discovery of Animal-Magnetism'' in 1779. It is clear that Reichenbach was aware of Mesmer's work and that researchers in Paris working with Blondlot were aware of Reichenbach's work,<ref>
{{cite journal
 |title=None
 |journal=[[Revue Scientifique]]
 |series=Series 5
 |volume=2 |issue=22 
}}</ref> although there is no proof that Blondlot was personally aware of it.

A park in central [[Nancy, France|Nancy]] is named after Blondlot.<ref>
{{cite web
 |url=http://maps.google.be/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=nancy,+blondlot&sll=50.805935,4.432983&sspn=3.853333,8.140869&ie=UTF8&ll=48.695422,6.176312&spn=0.007861,0.0159&z=16&iwloc=A
 |title=Parc Blondlot, Nancy
}}</ref> He left his house and garden to the city, which transformed it into a public park. [[James Randi]] reported that many citizens of Nancy and members of the faculty at the university did not remember having heard about N-rays or of Blondlot.<ref name=skepdic /><ref>
{{cite book
 |author=James Randi
 |title=Flim-Flam! Psychics, ESP, Unicorns, and Other Delusions
 |year=1982
 |chapter=Chapter 10
|title-link=Flim-Flam! Psychics, ESP, Unicorns, and Other Delusions
 }}</ref>

In the 2018 book ''[[The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe (book)|The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe]]'', the section titled "Iconic Cautionary Tales from History" recounts the story of the "discovery" of N-rays. A review of the book in ''[[Skeptical Inquirer]]'' reported that the book uses the N-rays incident to reveal the danger of "scientists insufficiently applying skepticism", because "Three hundred scientific papers were published by one hundred experimenters over three years, all declaring this imaginary phenomenon to be real."<ref>{{cite web |last1=Palmer |first1=Rob |title=The Skeptics' Guide To The Universe: A Book Review |url=https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/the-skeptics-guide-to-the-universe-a-book-review/ |website=skepticalinquirer.org |publisher=CFI |access-date=21 March 2021 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20210321030748/https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/the-skeptics-guide-to-the-universe-a-book-review/#selection-683.0-683.36 |archive-date=21 March 2021 |date=2 November 2018 |url-status=live}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[List of experimental errors and frauds in physics]]
* [[List of topics characterized as pseudoscience]]
* [[Pathological science]]
* [[Retractions in academic publishing|Retraction]]
* [[Scientific misconduct]]

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==Further reading==
*{{cite journal |last=Ashmore |first=M. |title=The Theatre of the Blind: Starring a Promethean Prankster, a Phoney Phenomenon, a Prism, a Pocket, and a Piece of Wood |journal=Social Studies of Science |volume=21 |issue=1 |year=1993 |pages=67–106 |doi=10.1177/030631293023001003 |s2cid=143770755 }}

== External links ==
{{Wikisource|"N" Rays}}
* {{cite web |url= http://skepdic.com/blondlot.html |title= Blondlot and N-Rays |publisher= [[Skeptic's Dictionary]] }}
* {{Cite journal |author = Klotz, I M |title= The ''N''-Ray Affair |journal= Scientific American |date= May 1980 |volume= 242 |issue= 5 |page= 130|doi= 10.1038/scientificamerican0580-168 |bibcode= 1980SciAm.242e.168K }}
* {{cite journal |title= 50, 100 and 150 years ago |date= Feb 2004 |page= 14 |orig-year= Feb 1904 |journal= Scientific American }}
* {{Cite book |last= Seabrook |first= William |title= Doctor Wood, Modern Wizard of the Laboratory |date= 1941 |publisher= Harcourt, Brace and Company |location= New York |chapter= Chp 17 ''Wood as a Debunker of Scientific Cranks and Frauds'' |author-link= William Seabrook }}
* {{cite web |url= http://www.spectrometer.org/path/nrays.html |date= Apr 30, 1999 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20061212115153/http://216.247.205.102/path/nrays.html |archive-date= 2006-12-12 |title= The Rise and Fall of N-Rays |first= Mike |last= Epstein |url-status= dead }}
* {{cite journal |last= Randi |first= James |url= http://www.skeptic.com/01.1.randi-paranormal.html |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20031210233227/http://www.skeptic.com/01.1.randi-paranormal.html |archive-date= December 10, 2003 |title= Randi at Caltech: A report from the Paranormal Trenches |journal= Skeptic |volume= 1 |issue= 1 |date= Spring 1992 |pages= 22–31 }}<!-- archive/reprint Aug 31, 2011 http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/11-08-31/#feature --><!-- alternative  http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/randi01.htm -->
*{{IMDb title|qid=Q129207163|id=tt2421410|title=Season 2 Episode 7 "Tuskegee STD, Do You See What I See?, Cold War, Cold Case"(2012)}}, TV series [[Dark Matters: Twisted But True]], ''Do You See What I See?'' segment is a dramatisation of the N-Rays story

{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:N-Ray}}
<!--[[Category:Pseudophysics]] don't restore without good sources-->
[[Category:Obsolete theories in physics]]
[[Category:X-rays]]