December 30, 1922] 



NA TURE 



*73 



Letters to the Editor. 



[The Editor does not hold himself responsible for 

 opinions expressed by his correspondents. Neither 

 can he undertake to re/urn, or to correspond with 

 the writers of, rejected manuscripts in/ended for 

 this or any other part of Nature. No notice is 

 taken of anonymous communications^ 



A Type of Ideal Electric Atoms. 



The Philosophical Magazine for December contains 

 a long and interesting mathematical paper by R. 

 Hargreaves, in which he explores possibilities of 

 constructing self-subsisting orbital systems out of 

 free massive positive ions combined with free negative 

 electrons, held together by a rotation common to all. 

 The solutions at which he arrives give a possible 

 structure for an ideal atomic nucleus of the Rutherford 

 type, namely, a revolving ring of alternate positive 

 ions and negative electrons, with or without a 

 positive ion at the centre or a number of ions lying 

 along the central axis of the ring transverse to its 

 plane. It is found that a limited number of structures 

 of this type can subsist, stability requiring that the 

 central charge shall be positive. 



Analysis of the deformation of such a free ring 

 by a field of electric or magnetic force yields striking 

 results as regards the polarisations thereby produced, 

 recalling cognate classical results obtained by Lord 

 Kelvin and others long ago, relating to vortex rings 

 in fluid. Around such a ring-nucleus outer electrons 

 can describe orbits as satellites, either a few of them 

 or many arranged in rings in the manner now familiar 

 in illustrations of the outlying structure of atoms : 

 their reactions on the ring-nucleus are analysed. 

 So also are the reactions on the whole system of 

 stray electrons or ions coming within its range from 

 without, which may even combine with it in definite 

 ways : interesting analogies to phenomena of ionisation 

 and of emission of electrons come to light. The 

 scale of magnitude of the system remains open to 

 satisfy other conditions. 



The author modestly disclaims authority to judge 

 whether the properties he discovers have any sub- 

 stantial analogy with the radio-active and spectro- 

 scopic phenomena of actual atoms. But, apart from 

 the mathematical interest, there can be no question 

 that the result of such a systematic rigorous analysis 

 of the dynamical behaviour of a definite group of 

 free systems, proved to be possible and stable, is 

 calculated to expand the range of ideas in this field 

 of physical speculation, and so is well worth the labour 

 it has entailed. The alternating arrangement of 

 ions and electrons in the nuclear ring calls to mind 

 recent theories in the very different domain of 

 crystalline structure and conductance in metals, 

 based on space-lattices in which metallic ions and 

 electrons occur alternately. J. L. 



Cambridge and the Royal Commission. 



Kindly permit me to reply to the criticisms in 

 Nature of November 25, p. 689, on my article in the 

 Quarterly Review. (1) I note with satisfaction that 

 my critic admits that " many of those who do not 

 share [my] fears will agree with [me] " on the import- 

 ance of having the proposed grants " charged on the 

 Consolidated Fund." My fears arise from (a) the 

 declaration made to the Commission by the Labour 

 Party that the " control of the Universities merely 

 bv statute assisted by occasional Royal Commissions 

 has now definitely failed and that something in the 

 nature of a continuous administrative control by the 

 State must be undertaken," and (b) from the imperious 

 demand that this control should be exercised " by 



NO. 2774, VOL. I IO] 



representatives of Trades Unions, Elementary School 

 Teachers, Women's Organisations, County Councils, 

 the Board of Education, etc." (Report, p. 72, Q.R., 

 pp. 350-351). Are my fears groundless in view of the 

 fate which has befallen the Universities of France, 

 Germany, and Holland, under State control ? 



(2) My critic tries to defend the proposal to hand 

 over the control of all teaching and research to the 

 Council, a political body, largely composed of men 

 whose interests are in administration rather than in 

 the advancement of knowledge, and seeks to justify 

 this by the vague statement that " the electorate 

 which chooses both bodies is the same," leaving out 

 of sight the fact that the elections to the Council are 

 almost wholly on very clearly defined party lines with 

 little regard to educational questions. It is proposed 

 to supersede the General Board of Studies (composed 

 of representatives of the 14 Special Boards of Studies 

 and 8 nominated by the Council chiefly from their 

 own members) by a new Board of Studies and Re- 

 search subordinate to the Council, to consist of 1 2 : 

 6 appointed by the Council and 6 only by the whole 

 body of University and College teachers. As the 

 General Board has on it representatives of all the 

 Special Boards the co-ordination of the various 

 studies and a proper standard for the higher Doctor- 

 ates can thus be, and is, well maintained. The 

 bureaucrats hate the General Board because they 

 cannot prevent the Special Boards from placing on 

 it their leading men, no matter what their politics 

 may be. The General Board is charged with being 

 " unwieldy," and at the same time not wholly 

 representative of all branches of study, and that " its 

 co-ordinating functions seem to be impeded to some 

 extent by the fact that it is largely composed of 

 specialists." The animus shown against " specialists" 

 gives the key. 



My critic does not attempt to meet my statements 

 that it is not " unwieldy " since it has the same 

 number as the Oxford Council (23), that it does its 

 work excellently, while the Council, when it interferes 

 with education, deals badly with it and is slovenly in 

 its routine business. If the General Board is "not 

 wholly representative of all branches of study," then 

 the new Board of 12 will be much less so, and the 

 evil effects of such a Board are already felt in the 

 new Board of Research set up by the Council to deal 

 with applicants for the Ph.D. 



(3) With regard to the disfranchisement of the 

 Senate, my critic says that " In his criticism of detail 

 Sir William Ridgeway is not happy. When he says 

 ' The Cambridge Commissioners know perfectly well 

 that it would not be easy to get fifty signatures 

 to any appeal within a week,' the obvious answer 

 is that Sir William Ridgeway knows perfectly well 

 that in any issue of importance where an appeal to 

 the Senate is likely, fifty signatures could be collected 

 in the Senate-House from the defeated minority," 

 etc. Here are my actual words : "It would not be 

 easy to get fifty signatures to any appeal within a 

 week, and to get those of one-third of the House of 

 Residents within 14 days would be impossible in 

 view of the further proposal that if a Grace passed by 

 the House of Residents were rejected by the Senate, 

 that Grace could be re-affirmed within two terms and 

 become final." No one would think of getting up, 

 or signing, an appeal to the Non-Residents to waste 

 their time and money in coming to oppose a measure 

 (nor if asked would they come) which even if defeated 

 by the Senate would become law in two terms. As 

 my critic has not dared to challenge any of my facts, 

 his only resort was to impugn my honesty by 

 garbling my statement, an attempt as futile as dis- 

 ingenuous. He repeats the charge that the control 

 of the Senate is " capricious," because " its interven- 



