URANIUM* 271 



of course, Clarke puts them into his Olla, and intimates that 

 it had no appreciable influence on the odor (p. 193). Very 

 natural. 



By silver chloride, Rose's 55 were brought down by 

 Thorpe, 60 years later, to 17; in atomic weights, 48.3 to 48.1. 

 Hence, it seemed proper to leave the old hero's name, who 

 devised both processes, and did so much other work in the 

 spirit of his teacher, Berzelius. 



The work of Thorpe is very excellent, as it is for Si. By 

 the change the departure is easily estimated; generally 

 above o.i. 



Tl 204. THALLIUM. CROOKES, 1873. 



See pp. 120-137 for details on this most sensational case 

 of atomic weight determinations. 



Ur 240. URANIUM. EBELMEN, 1842. 



O2 : 3 Ur Oz = 32 : 816 = 0.03 916. Change 15 low. 

 Ebelmen, 1842, 5 Det., 949 867582. Mean 3 low. 



Zimmermann, 1886, 10 Det., 929 925; 4. " 12 high. 



Here we have the contrast between the " old " and the 

 " new." Great fear of lack of concordance, due to whip of 

 " probable error," which in turn is to give " high weight " 

 to the work of the chemist. 



Then the oracle (Clarke p. 266) will say: "In short, 

 " Ebelmen's mean vanishes when combined with Zimmer- 

 " mann's;" for we find the probable error of the first 0.0090, 

 of the latter 0.0003, or one-thirtieth only. 



Hence, Zimmermann is 30X30 = 900 times more 

 weighty as a chemist, and one of his data counts as much as 

 900 of Ebelmen! How simple and how scientific the work 

 of this oracle. In these proportions everything goes into 

 his olla podrida. 



Has any modern chemist ever protested against this 

 horrible treatment meted out to our predecessors by that 

 scientific pasha at Washington? Has Crookes protested, 

 that Ebelmen is dead? 



