Length—Evolution
from Measurement Standard to a Fundamental Constant
Howard P. Layer
Introduction
The meter had its origin in August of 1793 when the Republican
Government of France decreed the unit of length to be 10-7
of the earth's quadrant passing through Paris and that the unit
be called the meter.[ 1 ] Five years
later, the survey of the arc was completed and three platinum
standards and several iron copies of the meter were made. Subsequent
examination showed the length of the earth's quadrant had been
wrongly surveyed, but instead of altering the length of the meter
to maintain the 10-7 ratio, the meter was redefined
as the distance between the two marks on a bar.
In 1875, the Treaty of the Meter established the General Conference
on Weights Measures (Conférence Général des
Poids et Mésures, CGPM) as a formal diplomatic organization
responsible for the maintenance of an international system of
units in harmony with the advances in science and industry. This
organization uses the latest technical developments to improve
the standards system through the choice of the definition, the
method to experimentally realize the definition, and the means
to transfer the standard to practical measurements. The international
system of units (Système Intérnational d'Unités,
SI) is constructed using seven base units for independent quantities
and two supplementary units for angles and is a modern metric
system.[ 2 ] Within the United States, the
National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST) has the responsibility for realizing
the values of the SI units and disseminating them by means of
calibrations to domestic users, as well as engaging in international
research with other national laboratories and with the International
Bureau of Weights and Measures (Bureau Intérnational des
Poids et Mésures, BIPM).
Definition
|
| Figure 1. Historical
standard platinum iridium meter bar. |
The meter (m) is the Si unit of length and is defined as the
length of the path traveled by light in vacuum during the time
interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.[ 3 ]
This replaces the two previous definitions of the meter: the original
adopted by CGPM in 1889 based on a platinum-iridium prototype
bar, and a definition adopted in 1960 based on a krypton86 radiation
from an electrical discharge lamp. In each case, the change in
definition achieved not only an increase in accuracy, but also
progress toward the goal of using fundamental physical quantities
as standards, in particular, the quantum mechanical characteristics
of atomic systems.
In 1889, there was one prototype meter, a bar made of a platinum
iridium alloy with lines inscribed at each end; the distance between
them defined the meter (see Figure 1). The length standard
was disseminated to the national laboratories through the use
of artifact meters, which were accurate (but not identical) replicas
of the prototype meter. Each artifact meter was calibrated against
the prototype for use as a national standard. A serious problem
with a prototype standard results from the fact that there is
no method to detect a change in its value due to aging or misuse.
As a consequence, it is not possible to state the accuracy or
stability of the prototype meter, although calibration uncertainties
of the artifact meters can be assigned.
The development of the Michelson interferometer, which measures
physical displacement in terms of optical wavelengths, and the
realization that certain atoms and molecules have precisely defined
and reproducible emission frequencies (and, thus, wavelengths)
brought about the transition from a mechanical to an optical length
standard. The krypton86 electrical discharge lamp was designed
to produce the Doppler-broadened wavelength of the 2p10 5d5transition
of the unperturbed atom. The two dominant wavelength shifts, one
caused by the DC Stark effect and the other by the gas pressure
in the discharge lamp, were opposite in sign and could be made
equal in magnitude by the proper choice of operating conditions.
Different krypton86 lamps reproduced the same wavelength to about
4 parts in 109, but had the disadvantage
that the coherence length of its radiation was shorter than the
meter, complicating the changeover from the older standard.
The ability to measure atomic wavelengths with higher accuracy
and reproducibility has been further enhanced by the invention
of the laser, along with techniques that permit the direct observation
of the natural linewidth of atomic and molecular transitions without
Doppler broadening. By using saturated absorption spectroscopy,
which employs high-intensity counter-propagating laser beams,
previously unresolved hyperfine transitions are measured to high
accuracy.
Faced with the possibility that further advances in laser spectroscopy
would lead to proposals for new length standards based on more
precise atoms or molecules, a new concept for the length standard
definition was developed. The second (which is equivalent to 9,129,631,770
oscillations of the 133Cs atom) and the meter are independent
base units. Traditionally, the speed of light was measured in
terms of their ratio. By contrast, the present standard defines
the meter in terms of the SI second and a defined (i.e., conventional)
value for the speed of light in vacuum which fixes it to 299 792 458 m/s1
exactly and the meter is determined experimentally. Since it is
not based on a particular radiation, this definition opens the
way to major improvements in the precision with which the meter
can be realized using laser techniques without redefining the
length standard.[ 4 ]
Realization
The BIPM stipulates that the meter can be realized by the following
three methods. In these descriptions, c is the speed of
light. The meter can be realized
-
By a direct measurement of the distance L that light
travels in vacuum in the time interval t, using the
relation
L = (c)(t);
-
By a direct measurement of the frequency f of radiation
and calculating the wavelength L in vacuum λ
using the relation λ = c/f;
-
By means of one or the radiations from a list provided by
the BIPM whose frequency and vacuum wavelength can be used
with a stated uncertainty.
|
| Figure 2. Iodine
stablized HeNe laser. |
Method 1 follows directly from the definition, but cannot achieve
the accuracy possible with the other two, and so is not used for
practical purposes.
Method 2 measures laser frequencies in terms of the cesium clock.
A complicated series of measurements is required because of the
large difference between the microwave clock (9 GHz) and
visible frequencies (500 THz), and because different regions
of the electromagnetic spectrum require different measurement
technologies. The general technique is to detect the beat frequency
generated by focusing two or more laser beams, for example, the
harmonic of one oscillator or laser and the fundamental of another,
on nonlinear detector diodes, and adding or subtracting microwaves,
to reduce the frequency of the beat signal so that it is within
range of the counter. In the microwave region, commercial diodes
are used. In the infrared region, specially constructed metal-insulator-metal
diodes are used because of their ability to rectify signals at
optical frequencies. In the visible region, parametric up-conversion
is used to convert infrared radiation into visible light that
is compared to a visible stabilized laser using a photo diode.[ 5 ]
The accuracy of the chain of frequency measurements from the cesium
clock to the red helium-neon line (633 nm) is about 7.2 parts in 1012
and has an advantage over interferometry because corrections do
not have to made for diffraction effects, reflective phase shifts,
or the index of refraction.
Method 3 establishes practical length standards by using the
frequencies of certain stabilized lasers whose performance has
been carefully measured using Method 2 and calculating the
wavelengths. In this way, a laboratory standard of known frequency
can be constructed using the specifications and operating conditions
provided by the BIPM. These descriptions also indicate the error
associated with this method of realization. For length metrology,
the iodine stabilized HeNe laser operating at 633 nm is the
most common because it is convenient to operate, accurate to 2.5 parts in 1011,
and is used to calibrate commercial displacement measuring interferometer
systems (see Figure 2).
Transfer
The ability to transfer the length standard to practical measurements
is influenced by the index of refraction (n) of the beam path
of the measuring instrument since the wavelength of the HeNe laser
(633 nm) is air is smaller than its vacuum wavelength by
2.7 parts in 104 for standard atmospheric
conditions. If the system is in a vacuum, the frequency of the
length standard stipulated by the BIPM is used to calibrate the
working laser and no further adjustments need to be made. If the
system is not in a vacuum, an additional wavelength adjustment
must be made for the index of refraction of the measurement environment.
This can be done by a direct measurement of n or it can be calculated
using an empirically derived formula whose input variables are
temperature, barometric pressure, relative humidity, and CO2content.[ 6 ]
The accuracy of the calculation using the empirical formula is
about 1 part in 107 when state-of-the-art
technology is used for measuring the four input variables, so
the index of refraction adjustment results in a reduction in accuracy
by a factor of 500 compared to the accuracy in vacuum.
Summary
The modern length standard has evolved over a period of 200 years
which has brought it to a point where it can be continually improved
without the necessity of changing its definition. We may suspect
that the developers of the first length standard were as unprepared
to predict present day developments as we are to predict the advances
that will be made in the next century. Such developments will,
no doubt, cause great excitement for those who make precision
measurements.
References
[ 1 ] H.G. Jarrard, D.B. McNeill, A Dictionary
of Scientific Units, Chapman and Hall, 1964, p. 85.
[ 2 ] Arthur O. McCoubrey, NIST Special Publication
811 - Guide for the Use of the International System of Units,
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg,
MD, 1991.
[ 3 ] Barry N. Taylor, NIST Special Publication
330 - The International System of Units (SI), National Institute
of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, 1991.
[ 4 ] D.A. Jennings, C.R. Pollock, F.R. Peterson,
R.E. Drullinger, K.M. Evenson, J.S. Wells, J.L. Hall, and H.P.
Layer, Optics Letters 8(3); 1983.
[ 5 ] T.J. Quinn, Mise en Pratique, Metrologia
30(5); 1994.
[ 6 ] H.P. Layer, IEEE Trans. On Instrumentation
and Measurements IM29(4); 1980.
[ 7 ] F.E. Jones, J. Res. Nat. Bur. Stand.
(U.S.) 86: 27-32; 1981.
A contribution by the Precision
Engineering Division of the Manufacturing
Engineering Lab at the National
Institute of Standards and Technology.
|