Discover
/
Article

Agreement Between Theory and Experiment

JUN 01, 1995
Sometimes theory and experiment are both correct but do not agree with each other; sometimes a wrong theory agrees with experiment. One must therefore be careful not to jump to conclusions.
Amikam Aharoni

A theory is usually expected to explain existing experimental results and to predict new results, while an experiment is usually expected to check the validity of existing theories and to gather data for modifying them. This approach is normally presented to students as foolproof as if it were one of the basic laws of “good” science. In practice these goals are achieved in some cases, but sometimes the comparison between a theory and an experiment can be very misleading. Here I am going to discuss these unusual cases, to warn against the possible pitfalls. They may or may not be rare, but in any event it is important to bear in mind that they do exist.

This article is only available in PDF format

References

  1. 1. W. J. de Haas, P. M. van Alphen, Commun. Phys. Lab. Univ. of Leiden, report 212a (1930).

  2. 2. C. Guillaud, J. Phys. Radium 12, 492 (1951).https://doi.org/JPRAAJ

  3. 3. M. Prutton, Philos. Mag. 5, 625 (1960).https://doi.org/PHMAA4

  4. 4. A. Aharoni, J. de Phys. (Paris) 32, suppl. C‐1, 966 (1971).

  5. 5. M. Prutton, Thin Ferromagnetic Films, Butterworth, London (1964), figure 3.18, p. 52.

  6. 6. A. E. LaBonte, J. Appl. Phys. 40, 2450 (1969).https://doi.org/JAPIAU

  7. 7. A. Aharoni, J. Appl. Phys. 41, 186 (1970).https://doi.org/JAPIAU

  8. 8. R. W. De Blois, C. P. Bean, J. Appl. Phys. 30, 225S (1959).https://doi.org/JAPIAU

  9. 9. A. Aharoni, E. Neeman, Phys. Lett. 6, 241 (1963).https://doi.org/PHLTAM

  10. 10. A. Aharoni, Rev. Mod. Phys. 34, 227 (1962).https://doi.org/RMPHAT

  11. 11. M. A. Pinto, Phys. Rev. B 38, 6824 (1988).https://doi.org/PRBMDO

  12. 12. A. Aharoni, Phys. Rev. B 43, 8670 (1991).https://doi.org/PRBMDO

  13. 13. M. A. Pinto, Phys. Rev. B 43, 8671 (1991).https://doi.org/PRBMDO

  14. 14. J. Ferré, J. Rajchenbach, H. Maletta, J. Appl. Phys. 52, 1697 (1981).https://doi.org/JAPIAU

  15. 15. W. Kinzel, Phys. Rev. B 19, 4595 (1979).https://doi.org/PRBMDO

  16. 16. E. C. Stoner, Rep. Prog. Phys. 13, 83 (1950), see p. 140.https://doi.org/RPPHAG

  17. 17. A. Aharoni, E. P. Wohlfarth, J. Appl. Phys. 55, 1664 (1984).https://doi.org/JAPIAU

  18. 18. M. el‐Hilo, K. O’Grady, IEEE Trans. Magn. 26, 1807 (1990).https://doi.org/IEMGAQ

More about the authors

Amikam Aharoni, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovoth, Israel.

Related content
/
Article
A half century after the discovery of Hawking radiation, we are still dealing with the quantum puzzle it exposed.
/
Article
Since the discovery was first reported in 1999, researchers have uncovered many aspects of the chiral-induced spin selectivity effect, but its underlying mechanisms remain unclear.
/
Article
Metrologists are using fundamental physics to define units of measure. Now NIST has developed new quantum sensors to measure and realize the pascal.
/
Article
Nanoscale, topologically protected whirlpools of spins have the potential to move from applications in spintronics into quantum science.
This Content Appeared In
pt-cover_1995_06.jpeg

Volume 48, Number 6

Get PT newsletters in your inbox

pt_newsletter_card_blue.png
PT The Week in Physics

A collection of PT's content from the previous week delivered every Monday.

pt_newsletter_card_darkblue.png
PT New Issue Alert

Be notified about the new issue with links to highlights and the full TOC.

pt_newsletter_card_pink.png
PT Webinars & White Papers

The latest webinars, white papers and other informational resources.

By signing up you agree to allow AIP to send you email newsletters. You further agree to our privacy policy and terms of service.