Measure the outgoing spectrum at an angle
Compton compared incident X-rays with the radiation scattered from graphite. The scattered spectrum contained a component at a longer wavelength, and the shift changed when the observation direction changed. What he measured was a wavelength distribution, not a photograph of a photon hitting an electron.
The angle is what makes this evidence strong. Saying that some energy was lost is a weak claim; a relation that predicts the wavelength change for each scattering direction is a much stronger one. Testing it depends on the source lines, the spectrometer calibration and how well the spectral components are separated.
Read the evidence: A. H. Compton (1923), A Quantum Theory of the Scattering of X-rays by Light Elements, Phys. Rev. 21, 483
Conserve both energy and momentum
Take one incident photon and a free electron at rest. Conserving total energy and vector momentum, with relativistic energy for the recoiling electron, gives the shift below. The angle is between the incoming and outgoing photon directions, and the wavelength difference is outgoing minus incoming.
The scale is Planck’s constant divided by the electron mass and the vacuum speed of light, about 2.43 picometres. Forward scattering gives no shift, scattering at a right angle gives one such unit, and backscattering gives two. These are limits of the ideal kinematics, not new measurements.
Read the evidence: A. H. Compton (1923), A Quantum Theory of the Scattering of X-rays by Light Elements, Phys. Rev. 21, 483NIST, 2022 CODATA recommended constants — Compton wavelength
What the simple wave picture cannot explain
In the simple classical Thomson picture, a free electron at rest, driven by weak monochromatic radiation, reradiates at the incident frequency. That elastic response cannot produce the shifted component. Compton’s model links the lower energy of the outgoing photon to the electron’s recoil and also conserves momentum.
The argument targets this specific competing description. Classical fields do carry momentum, so radiation pressure alone would not establish Compton’s kinematics. What decides the case is the relation between wavelength and angle, together with the energy balance of the collision.
Read the evidence: A. H. Compton (1923), A Quantum Theory of the Scattering of X-rays by Light Elements, Phys. Rev. 21, 483
Not every electron in graphite is free
The derivation treats the electron as unbound and at rest, and Compton explicitly limited his argument by neglecting binding forces. In a real solid, the electron’s initial momentum, binding, coherent elastic scattering and instrumental resolution all shape the spectrum. A component that stays near the original wavelength does not make the shifted one go away.
The shift formula also does not predict all the intensities or multiple scattering. The peak position, the line shape and the differential scattering rate are separate tests, and improving a model on one of them does not validate the others.
Read the evidence: A. H. Compton (1923), A Quantum Theory of the Scattering of X-rays by Light Elements, Phys. Rev. 21, 483
Photoemission and Compton scattering test different things
Photoemission asks how incoming light frees an electron from a material, so its energy balance includes a work function. Compton scattering follows an outgoing photon as well as the electron. A work function cannot replace the electron’s recoil energy in the free-electron derivation.
The photoemission Lab is useful for comparing energy balances. It is not a Compton spectrometer: it records no angle-resolved X-ray spectra and cannot supply the historical graphite data. Keep the dates apart as well: the paper appeared in 1923 and the prize came in 1927.
Read the evidence: A. H. Compton (1923), A Quantum Theory of the Scattering of X-rays by Light Elements, Phys. Rev. 21, 483Nobel Prize in Physics 1927 — official award record