. The London, Edinburgh and Dublin philosophical magazine and journal of science. NTLEMEN,— Sept> 6? ly]() IX the Philosophical Magazine for August (p. 350)Sir J. Larmor gives reasons for supposing that myconclusion, that his modification of Plancks theory ofnatural radiation does not evade the main difficulty that anatomic constitution of radiation must be implied, need notfollow. Sir J. Larmor states that on his theory k need not beequal to the gas constant for one molecule but is make this clear it ought to be shown that the calculationsof k given by Boltzmann, Planck, a
. The London, Edinburgh and Dublin philosophical magazine and journal of science. NTLEMEN,— Sept> 6? ly]() IX the Philosophical Magazine for August (p. 350)Sir J. Larmor gives reasons for supposing that myconclusion, that his modification of Plancks theory ofnatural radiation does not evade the main difficulty that anatomic constitution of radiation must be implied, need notfollow. Sir J. Larmor states that on his theory k need not beequal to the gas constant for one molecule but is make this clear it ought to be shown that the calculationsof k given by Boltzmann, Planck, and others can be modifiedso as to leave k indeterminate. This I think has not yetbeen done, and until it has been done the conclusion that kmust have a definite value cannot be regarded as disposed only reason why Planck wras obliged to introduce theidea of finite elements of energy was that he found the onlypossible value of k to be that of the gas constant for onemolecule. Yours very truly, Harold A. Wilson. MAKOWEE & EYANS. Phil. Mag. Ser. 6, Vol. 20, PL 7fe543ZIOI2345fc7DISTANCE IN MMS Fig. 4.
Size: 1853px × 1348px
Photo credit: © Reading Room 2020 / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1800, bookdecade1840, booksubjectscience, bookyear1840
