Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nmvwc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-05T04:30:15.069Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Suicidal Success of Radiochemistry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2009

Lawrence Badash
Lawrence Badash
Affiliation:
Department of History, University of California Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California 93106, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his presidential address to the chemistry section of the British Association in 1907, Arthur Smithells pointed to work in radioactivity with wonder, calling it the ‘chemistry of phantoms’. Indeed, the transitory nature of the radioelements, coupled with the exceedingly small quantities commonly handled, made many a traditional chemist hesitant to accept these unusual substances as real elements worthy of insertion into the periodic table. Besides, there were too many of them: by 1913 over thirty radioelements were known, but there were no more than twelve boxes in the periodic table in which to house them. Moreover, there was much confusion about radioelements that had different physical properties such as half-life and range of emitted alpha particle, but which could not be separated chemically. Small wonder then that Alexander Russell, the only person who worked with both Ernest Rutherford and Frederick Soddy, recalled the prevalent attitude of chemists as discouraging of interpretative attempts: theirs was, so they claimed, ‘an experimental science. No good ever came from pontificating on the ways of Nature from the comfort of an armchair. The laboratory bench, not the sofa, … was where the truth would be found’.

Type
Research Article
Information
The British Journal for the History of Science , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , November 1979 , pp. 245 - 256
Copyright
Copyright © British Society for the History of Science 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1 Smithells, A., ‘Presidential address to Section B’, Nature, 8 08 1907, 76, 352–7.Google Scholar

2 Russell, A. S., ‘Lord Rutherford: Manchester, 1907–19: a partial portrait’, Proceedings of the Physical Society of London, 1951, 64, 224–5.Google Scholar

3 Ibid.

4 Perkins, P. B., ‘A determination of the molecular weight of radium emanation by the comparison of its rate of diffusion with mercury vapor’, American journal of science, 1908, 25, 461–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 Strömholm, D. and Svedberg, T., ‘Untersuchungen über die Chemie der radioaktiven Grundstoffe’, Zeitschrift für anorganische Chemie, 1909, 61, 338–46; 1909, 63, 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 von Lerch, F., ‘Die physikalischen und chemischen Eigenschaften der Umwandlungsprodukte des Thoriums’, Jahrbuch der Radioaktivität und Elektronik, 1905, 2, 461–75Google Scholar. Lucas, R., ‘Über das elektrochemische Verhalten der radioaktiven Elemente’, Physikalische Zeitschrift, 1906, I, 340–2.Google Scholar

7 von Hevesy, G., ‘The electrochemistry of radioactive bodies’, Philosophical magazine, 1912, 23, 628–46.Google Scholar

8 Strömholm, D. and Svedberg, T., op. cit. (5).Google Scholar

9 Russell, A. S., letter to Rutherford, E., 14 09 1912Google Scholar, Rutherford collection, Cambridge University Library (hereafter cited as RCC). Russell, A. S., conversation with the author, 20 04 1970Google Scholar. Chadwick, James, conversation with the author, 19 02 1970.Google Scholar

10 von Hevesy, G., letter to Rutherford, E., 7 12 1912, RCC.Google Scholar

11 von Hevesy, G., ‘The valency of the radioelements’, Philosophical magazine, 1913, 25, 390–414Google Scholar; ‘Die Valenz der Radioelemente’, Physikalische geitschrift, 1913, 14, 49–62Google Scholar; Hevesy, letters to Rutherford, E., 7 12 1912 and 3 01 1913, RCC.Google Scholar

12 Russell, A. S., ‘The periodic System and the radio-elements‘, Chemical news, 31 01 1913, 107, 49–52.Google Scholar

13 Fajans, K., ‘Über eine Beziehung zwischen der Art einer radioaktiven Umwandlung und dem elektrochemischen Verhalten der betreffenden Radioelemente’, Physikalische Zeitschrift, 1913, 14, 131–6Google Scholar; ‘Die Stellung der Radioelemente im periodischen System’, ibid., pp. 136–42.

14 von Hevesy, G., letter to Eve, A. S., 28 12 1937, RCC.Google Scholar

15 Soddy, F., ‘The radio-elements and the periodic law’, Chemical news, 28 02 1913, 107, 97–9.Google Scholar

16 Fleck, A., ‘The periodic System and the radio-elements’, Chemical news, 21 02 1913, 107, 95.Google Scholar

17 Fleck, A., conversation with the author, 25 01 1966.Google Scholar

18 Soddy, F., ‘The origins of the conception of isotopes’, Les Prix Nobel en 1921–1922, Stockholm, 1923, p. 17.Google Scholar

19 Fajans, K. and Göhring, O., ‘Über die komplexe Natur des Ur X’, Naturwissenschaften, 4 04 1913, 14, 339CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘Über das Uran X2—das neue Element der Uranreihe’, Physikalische Zeitschrift, 1913, 14, 877–84Google Scholar. Fajans, K., ‘Discovery and naming of the isotopes of the element 91’, remarks prepared for the Third International Protactinium Conference, 15 04 1969.Google Scholar

20 Fleck, A., ‘The chemical nature of some radioactive disintegration products. Part II’, Chemical news, 6 06 1913, 107, 273Google Scholar; same title, Journal of the Chemical Society, 1913, 103, 1052–61Google Scholar. The Fajans-Soddy priority question has been discussed in much the same fashion as here by Hurwic, Jozef, ‘Kasimir Fajans (1887–1975); souvenirs sur sa vie et ses activités’, L'Actualite chimique, 01 1976, pp. 28–32Google Scholar. For more extensive information on the entire subject, see Badash, L., Radioactivity in America: growth and decay of a science, Baltimore, 1979.Google Scholar

21 Fajans, K., conversation with the author, 16–17 07 1966Google Scholar. Fajans, K., letter to Conant, James B., 30 10 1969Google Scholar, Fajans collection, University of Michigan Library. Richards, T. W., letter to Boltwood, B., 10 01 1917Google Scholar, Boltwood collection, Yale University Library.

22 K. Fajans, ibid. See also, Richards, T. W., letter to Fajans, K., 8 06 1914Google Scholar, Fajans collection, University of Michigan Library.

23 Richards, T. W. and Lembert, M., ‘The atomic weight of lead of radioactive origin’, Science, 5 06 1914, 39, 831–2Google Scholar; same title, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 1914, 36, 1329–44Google Scholar. Richards, T. W., letter to Boltwood, B., 30 04 1914Google Scholar; and reply, 1 May 1914, Boltwood collection, Yale University Library.

24 Soddy, F. and Hyman, H., ‘The atomic weight of lead from Ceylon thorite’, Journal of the Chemical Society, 1914, 105, 1402–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25 Le Matin, 9 06 1914Google Scholar. Curie, Maurice, ‘Sur les écarts de poids atomiques obtenus avec le plomb provenant de divers minéraux’, Comptes rendus, 8 06 1914, 158, 1676–9.Google Scholar

26 Richards, T. W., letters to Hönigschmid, O., 17 12 1912 and 24 02 1913Google Scholar, Harvard University Archives.

27 Hönigschmid, O. and Horovitz, S., ‘Sur le poids atomique du plomb de la pechblende’, Comptes rendus, 15 06 1914, 158, 1796–8Google Scholar. Soddy, F., ‘Radioactivity’, Annual reports on the progress of chemistry (Chemical Society of London), 1914, II, 266–9.Google Scholar

28 Glasstone, S., letter to the author, 5 09 1966.Google Scholar

29 Conant, James B., ‘Theodore William Richards and the periodic table’, Science, 24 04 1970, 168, 425–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

30 Aston, F. W., ‘The mass-spectrum of uranium lead and the atomic weight of protactinium’, Nature, 2 03 1929, 123, 313CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Rutherford, E., ‘Origin of actinium and age of the earth’Google Scholar, ibid., pp. 313–14.

31 Soddy, F., op. cit. (18), p. 2.Google Scholar

32 Russell, A. S., conversation with the author, 20 04 1970.Google Scholar

33 Fajans, K., Radioactivity, London, 1923, p. xii.Google Scholar

34 Fajans, K., ‘Die radioaktiven Umwandlungen und die Valenzfrage vom Standpunkte der Struktur der Atome’, Verhandlungen der Deutschen physikalischen Gesellschaft, 1913, 15, 240–59.Google Scholar

35 Soddy, F., ‘Intra-atomic charge’, Nature, 4 12 1913, 92, 399–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar