One of the most important characteristics of modern science is its replicability and objectivity. This means that a scientific result is taken as such only when it has been reproduced by other scientists. Indeed, the replicability of a scientific result in an objective and independent way by members of a scientific community is the cornerstone of science. Experimental laser physics is an example of “normal” science, where it is no doubt that the phenomenon could be replicated; however, the replication process may not be straightforward since it requires a good understanding of the physics behind it, as well as good technical skills. In this article, two laboratory cases of experiments on laser physics are presented: the first one deals with a Nitrogen N2 laser with a Polloni excitation circuit, and the second one deals with a transversally excited TEA carbon dioxide laser. For the nitrogen laser, it will be shown that reproducibility failed, and therefore, the reported experiment cannot be taken as a valid contribution to the advancement and understanding of nitrogen laser physics and technology. On the other hand, for the case of the TEA carbon dioxide laser, several comments are presented on the development of this finally successful experiment. Both cases show the importance of being technically up-dated in order to reproduce or improve the results reported by other researchers. Finally, a discussion about: What can we learn about the research practice from these two cases? It is presented, as well as the conclusions about the case studies; we hope they may be useful to philosophers of science and young scientists alike.
References
[1]
Apollonov, V. V., & Yamshchikov, V. A. (1997). Efficiency of an Electic-Discharge N2 Laser. Quantum Electronics, 27, 469-442. https://doi.org/10.1070/QE1997v027n06ABEH000987
[2]
Baker, M. (2016). 1,500 Scientists Lift the Lid on Reproducibility. Nature, 533, 452-454. https://doi.org/10.1038/533452a
[3]
Beaulieu, A. J. (1970). Transversely Excited Atmospheric Pressure CO2 Lasers. Applied Physics Letters, 16, 504-505. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1653083
[4]
Chalmers, A. F. (1999). What Is This Thing Called Science? Open University Press.
[5]
Collins, H. M., & Harrison, R. G. (1975). Building a TEA Laser: The Caprices of Communication. Social Studies of Science, 5, 441-450. http://www.jstor.org/stable/284807 https://doi.org/10.1177/030631277500500404
[6]
Collins, H.M., (1985). Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice. The University of Chicago Press.
[7]
Curd, M., & Cover, J. A. (1998). Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues. W. W. Norton & Company.
[8]
Fitzsimmons, W. A., Anderson, L. W., Riedhauser, C. E., & Vrtilek, J. M. (1976). Experimental and Theoretical Investigation of the Nitrogen Laser. IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics, 12, 624-633. https://doi.org/10.1109/JQE.1976.1069059
[9]
Foster, H. (1972). High Power CO2 Lasers—A Review. Optics & Laser Technology, 4, 121-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-3992(72)90018-7
[10]
Iwasaki, C., & Jitsuno, T. (1982). An Investigation of the Effects of the Discharge Parameters on the Performance of a TEA N2 Laser. IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics, 18, 423-427. https://doi.org/10.1109/JQE.1982.1071537
[11]
Klemke, E. D., Hollinger, R., & Wyss, D. (1998). Philosophy of Science (pp. 32-34). Prometheus Books.
[12]
Newton-Smith, W. H. (2002). The Rationality of Science. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203046159
[13]
Oliveira dos Santos, B., Fellows, C. E., de Oliveira e Souza, J. B. et al. (1986). A 3% Efficiency Nitrogen Laser. Applied Physics B, 41, 241-244. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00697405
[14]
Papineau, D. (1996). The Philosophy of Science (Oxford Readings in Philosophy). Oxford University Press.
[15]
Patel, C. K. N. (1964). Interpretation of CO2 Optical Maser Experiments. Physical Review Letters, 12, 588-590. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.12.588
[16]
Pearson, P., & Lamberton, H. (1972). Atmospheric Pressure CO2 Lasers Giving High output Energy per Unit Volume. IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics, 8, 145-149. https://doi.org/10.1109/JQE.1972.1076905
[17]
Pinto, V. J., Aboites V., & De la Rosa, J. (1991). High Efficient Nitrogen Laser. Revista Mexicana de Física, 37, 391-395. https://rmf.smf.mx/ojs/index.php/rmf/article/view/2187
[18]
Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge. Routlege
[19]
Popper, K. R. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Harper & Row.
[20]
Psillos, S., & Curd, M. (2014). The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Science. Routledge.
[21]
Riordan, M. (1992). The Discovery of Quarks. Science, 256, 1287-1293. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.256.5061.1287
[22]
Schwab, A. J., & Hollinger, F. W. (1976). Compact High-Power N2 Laser: Circuit Theory and Design. IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics, 12, 183-188. https://doi.org/10.1109/JQE.1976.1069121
[23]
Smith, D. R., Padilla, W. J., Vier, D. C., Nemat-Nasser, S. C., & Schultz, S. (2000). Composite Medium with Simultaneously Negative Permeability and Permittivity. Physical Review Letters, 84, 4184-4187. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.4184
[24]
Thagard, P. (1998). Why Astrology Is a Pseudoscience. In E. D. Klemke, R. Hollinger, & D. Wyss (Ed.), Philosophy of Science (p. 71). Prometheus Books.
[25]
Vazquez-Martínez, A., & Aboites, V. (1993). High-Efficiency Low-Pressure Blumlein Nitrogen Laser. IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics, 29, 2364-2370. https://doi.org/10.1109/3.245567
[26]
Veselago, V. G. (1968). The Electrodynamics of Substances with Simultaneously Negatives ε and μ. Soviet Physics Uspekhi, 10, 509-514. https://doi.org/10.1070/PU1968v010n04ABEH003699
