Ernest Rutherford

Record year1911

M rationaleQuantitatively inferred concentrated atomic charge from large-angle scattering, forming a structural model usable across generations; stability and spectra are outside scope.

attribution rationaleRetains the complete budget including Geiger's and Marsden's measurements; changing M does not erase the measurers or count measurement again.

Record year1919

M rationaleThe completed empirical observation and conditional transmutation interpretation constitute a new nuclear experimental discovery; later product identification and reaction theory are not retroactively counted.

attribution rationaleRutherford authored the report and interpreted the observations, while Kay assisted with scintillation counting; Blackett's later verification is not retroactively assigned a share.

Evidence gapsPublic sources currently include histories of science and the journal record from the year; later identification of the specific products is not counted in this item.

Record year1902

M rationaleQuantitative explanation of separation, recovery, and decay created reusable research capability; modern decay chains and the energy industry are not counted.

attribution rationaleRutherford and Soddy each receive 0.40 for their joint experimental and theoretical work; this is a normative attribution, not a measurement of working time.

Record year1905–1906

M rationaleMade the age of minerals open to conditional quantitative inference; uncertainty in the constants and helium loss precludes crediting the precision of modern absolute dating.

attribution rationaleRutherford made a conditional inference from named chemical and mineral data; Boltwood's later lead method is not included.

Record year1909

M rationaleIsolation and spectral identification established a specific radiation-matter relation; it is not extrapolated to the structure of all nuclear particles.

attribution rationaleRutherford and Royds jointly carried out and interpreted the experiment; Baumbach's contribution and inputs from prior work are retained.

Record year1899

M rationaleEstablished a usable experimental classification through foil-absorption comparisons; gamma rays and later particle explanations are not counted.

attribution rationaleRutherford has the main direct share in the absorption comparisons, while Becquerel's prior work remains retained.

Record year1908

M rationaleMade individual emissions countable and comparable with optical counting; the later Geiger-Muller tube is not counted.

attribution rationaleRutherford and Geiger are substantial collaborators; the slight asymmetry is only a normative judgment of leadership.

Record year1913

M rationaleThe first paper explains the hydrogen spectrum using stationary states and transitions and addresses the spectrum of singly ionized helium. This is foundational knowledge in the discipline; later revisions and modern quantum mechanics are not included.

attribution rationaleThe frozen attribution budget is Bohr 60%, Rutherford 10%, earlier quantum work 12%, spectral observations 10%, and unallocated 8%; these are not measured proportions.

Record year1934

M rationaleAdopts only the emission observation clearly reported in the original communication; ambiguous groups, later explanations, and applications are excluded.

attribution rationaleThe three substantial joint authors each receive 0.30; coequal status is a normative point, not evidence of equal labor.

Evidence gapsThe original short communication link provides a visible abstract; full experimental interpretation beyond the abstract and later applications are not counted.

Record year1914

M rationaleEarly diffraction measurement created new measurement capability; the Laue/Bragg discoveries and later spectral industry are not counted.

attribution rationaleRutherford and Andrade's joint experiment is treated as a normative tie; methodological prior work remains retained.

Record year1895–1897

M rationaleA verified receiver/detection method for distant electromagnetic waves, not an operating communications network.

attribution rationaleRutherford built and demonstrated the detector; Henry's principles and laboratory inputs are retained.

Evidence gapsThe current link is Marconi's account of earlier work; a full-text link to Rutherford's original paper remains to be added.

Record year1913

M rationaleReplaced arbitrary treatment with physically constrained electron response, creating a reusable method within a limited domain; later quantum stopping theory is not included.

attribution rationaleBohr independently developed the treatment of bound electrons, delivering this method of classical electron response within its limited scope. Charles Galton Darwin's earlier treatment and Rutherford's measurements and dissemination are retained as explicit inputs. Rutherford's share is attributed only once and is not also counted toward his 1911 scattering outcome. The pool of dispersion and measured inputs, support for research and publication, and unresolved remainder of the account are retained separately as prerequisites not apportioned to individuals, institutional conditions, and responsibilities not yet established.

Evidence gapsThis item relies on a reviewed collected-works introduction and a translation of the 1912 lecture; the full text of the 1913 original paper remains to be checked.

Record yearFrom 1911

summaryMarie Curie prepared a pure radium-chloride reference material; Otto Hönigschmid prepared comparison and distribution standards, and sample comparison, international custody, transnational certification, and United States national-laboratory calibration formed a bounded international radium-metrology chain.

M rationaleThe reference material, independent comparison and distribution, international custody, transnational certification, and actual national-laboratory calibration together constitute an internationally important metrological method and platform.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Marie Curie (22.00%): prepared 21.99 milligrams of pure radium chloride reference material and participated in certification of a United States secondary standard; the share does not expand to the whole international system or add credit merely on the strength of an institutional name. Complete budget: Marie Curie (22.00%): prepared 21.99 milligrams of pure radium chloride reference material and participated in certification of a United States secondary standard; the share does not expand to the whole international system or add credit merely on the strength of an institutional name; Otto Hönigschmid (20.00%): explicitly prepared comparison and distribution standards, the direct key action that turned a single reference material into a transferable metrology chain; Stefan Meyer (7.00%): participated in certification of United States Standard No. 6 and receives limited responsibility for transnational certification; Ernest Rutherford (5.00%): Rutherford participated in certification of a United States secondary standard and receives only the certification action, not his other radioactivity research; International Bureau of Weights and Measures reference-material custody (12.00%): BIPM undertook institutional custody of the international reference material and a verifiable interface; United States National Bureau of Standards calibration service (10.00%): in 1914, NBS actually used the standard to calibrate submitted preparations, completing delivery of national metrology service; Curie Institute radium-content measurement service (8.00%): institute staff provided radium-content measurement service, and that institutional labor is not assigned entirely to Marie Curie's personal contribution; unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (12.00%): other participants in the commission, four-sample comparison laboratories, and distribution chain are not fully named, retaining shared institutional and experimental responsibility; unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (4.00%): the original certificate and complete custody chain have not been read, leaving a residual account for unknown direct operations.

overlap boundaryCounts only the reference material, comparison, custody, certification, and calibration; it does not count radium purification again or combine later nuclear metrology, medical demand, or therapeutic outcomes.

Evidence gapsThe original certificate, committee records, comparison-experiment details, custody chain, and the time range of the institute's measurement service remain to be read and checked.

Record yearAround 1900 (original paper awaiting verification)

summaryThe Curies verified through electrical and field-deflection-related experiments that beta rays from radioactive substances carry negative charge, limiting the conclusion to the experimental range then comparable with electrons and cathode rays.

M rationaleThis is a specialized experimental judgment that continues to hold in radiation physics and established the negative electrical nature of beta radiation.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Pierre Curie (28.00%): completed the negative-charge verification jointly with Marie; the share is limited to this experimental judgment and does not claim all radiation classification. Complete budget: Marie Curie (28.00%): a 1905 lecture explicitly says that Marie and Pierre jointly verified that beta rays carry negative charge; as the specific internal actions are not separately clear, a symmetrical estimate of central responsibility is used; Pierre Curie (28.00%): completed the negative-charge verification jointly with Marie, with the share limited to this experimental judgment and not all radiation classification; Ernest Rutherford (8.00%): Rutherford's classification of alpha/beta rays and research on their field behavior provide explicit background for this item, not joint completion of the Curies' negative-charge verification; Henri Becquerel (4.00%): Becquerel's discovery of uranium radiation and subsequent ray research form prior work and receive only the limited input connected to this experimental question; Joseph John Thomson (4.00%): the electron/cathode-ray framework is explicit theoretical and experimental prior work for explaining beta rays' negative charge and does not receive credit for radioactive-ray verification; publication of the original research (4.00%): limited institutional responsibility for public delivery of the original experiment, and journal identity does not replace experimental contribution; unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (24.00%): the original paper and division of work have not been read, retaining unassigned direct inputs from apparatus, experimental assistance, and contemporary ray research rather than filling the budget with names from a review.

overlap boundaryCounts only the joint verification of beta rays and keeps it separate from secondary X-ray experiments and the discovery of the electron.

Evidence gapsThe original paper, apparatus, quantitative conclusion, and relation to contemporary work have not yet been directly read and checked.

Record yearBefore 1911 (lecture retrospective)

summaryMarie Curie and Debierne concentrated subsequent polonium samples into experimental material suitable for spectral observation and comparison of radioactive particles and helium amounts, forming a post-discovery chain of polonium characterization and measurement.

M rationaleSpecified sample handling, candidate spectral lines, and experimental measurements constitute a bounded specialized experimental chain beyond early element identification.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Marie Curie (40.00%): the stated actions of joint concentration and spectral characterization; the entire particle-counting work described passively below is not assigned to Marie as sole implementer. Complete budget: Marie Curie (40.00%): the stated actions of joint concentration and spectral characterization; the entire particle-counting work described passively below is not assigned to Marie as sole implementer; André-Louis Debierne (35.00%): joint sample preparation, and verification that polonium produces helium, which the lecture explicitly attributes to Debierne; he is not treated merely as an assistant; Ernest Rutherford (8.00%): the lecture explicitly says particle counting used Rutherford's electrical method, and this share covers only that specific methodological premise; unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (14.00%): unresolved inputs from factory processing, samples, spectra, and recording apparatus; publication of the original research (3.00%): public delivery of experimental knowledge.

overlap boundaryKeeps this separate from the 1898 identification and the maturation of radium's chemical identity; it does not combine transmutation theory or the discovery of helium.

Evidence gapsThe joint experimental paper, author actions, spectral-line attribution, and division of particle-counting work remain to be verified.

Record year1910

summaryOn the basis of her recent Sorbonne course on radioactivity, Marie Curie published as sole author the two-volume Treatise on Radioactivity, systematically organizing ions and electrons, experiment and measurement, radioactive substances, emanation, induced radioactivity, transmutation theory, and radiation properties.

M rationaleThe two-volume work was actually published and explicitly derived from a course already taught, producing a sustainably reusable systematic text beyond a one-time lecture or unimplemented teaching intent.

attribution rationaleAttribution to this person: Pierre Curie (5.00%): Pierre died in 1906 and receives no direct share for the 1910 course or writing; only his joint early research synthesized in the work is retained as limited knowledge prior work. Complete budget: Marie Curie (52.00%): the title page and introduction explicitly identify Marie as author and say the work arose from her Sorbonne course; the share is limited to course organization, synthesis, and book production; Pierre Curie (5.00%): Pierre died in 1906 and receives no direct share for the 1910 course or writing, retaining only his joint early research synthesized in the work as limited knowledge prior work; Ernest Rutherford (6.00%): content such as transmutation theory has explicit Rutherford knowledge prior work, and this share does not recast his theory as an original result of Marie's book; unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (17.00%): the two volumes synthesize broad physics and chemistry research, and as a chapter-by-chapter source map is not complete, other researchers' knowledge inputs are retained; Sorbonne course organization and delivery (8.00%): the Sorbonne course provided an actually occurring teaching setting and organizational vehicle, without substituting the school's prestige for authorial labor; Gauthier-Villars publishing house (8.00%): the publisher undertook editing, printing, and public delivery of the two-volume text; unnamed direct research, implementation, or support inputs (4.00%): specific editors, proofreaders, illustrators, and printers are unnamed, retaining a limited residual account.

overlap boundaryCounts only course-based organization and book delivery; the original research restated in the book, other researchers' theories, and Pierre's early teaching are not combined.

Evidence gapsCourse dates, student range, sales, editions, translations, reviews, adoption history, and a chapter-by-chapter attribution map are still absent.