SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXXVIII. No. 991 



known as the quantum. In one of his very- 

 last papers published in January, 1912, in 

 the Journal de Physique, Poincare submits 

 the theory of quanta to a searching exami- 

 nation and as a conclusion announces that 

 it is impossible to arrive at Planck's law ex- 

 cept under the assumption that resonators 

 can acquire or lose energy only in discon- 

 tinuous amounts. If this is true we have an 

 extraordinary departure from received 

 ideas and it will be necessary to suppose 

 that natural phenomena do not obey dif- 

 ferential equations. 



Enough has been said to show the extra- 

 ordinary variety of the subjects treated by 

 this commanding intellect in the subject of 

 mathematical physics alone. In repeating 

 what I stated at the outset that the strik- 

 ing quality displayed by Poincare is his 

 extraordinary skill in analysis, I do not 

 mean for a moment to imply anything 

 against his intense receptivity for all 

 physical ideas, for which he had a very 

 great penetration. It is true that he some- 

 times met severe criticism from physicists. 

 In particular Professor Tait made a bitter 

 attack on his treatise on thermodynamics, 

 but in my opinion Poincare was well able 

 to defend himself. It has sometimes been 

 doubted whether he thoroughly appreci- 

 ated Maxwell's ideas as to the theory of 

 electricity, but this is of small moment, 

 seeing that he so well understood their con- 

 sequences. It must be said that Poincare 

 was not one who contributed fundamental 

 new ideas to our stock of physical concep- 

 tions, such as the ideas put forth by Car- 

 not, Eelvin, Maxwell, Lorentz with his 

 principle of local time or Planck with his 

 quanta. 



I may in conclusion be permitted to state 

 my opinion that the best persons to appoint 

 to chairs of mathematical physics and those 

 most likely to enrich our conceptions are 

 those who have themselves had experience 



in dealing with nature with their own 

 hands in the laboratory, and who may be 

 expected to have more feeling for her modes 

 of action than skill in analysis. Thus I be- 

 lieve Helmholtz, Kelvin, Maxwell, and Lord 

 Rayleigh to have been more important con- 

 tributors to mathematical physics than 

 Poincare, but this is not to say that the 

 latter was not an intellect of superlative 

 greatness. 



Arthur Gordon Webster 

 Claek University 



UNIVERSITY OBGANIZAIIOm 



This subject has become in recent years 

 one of intense interest. In most utterances 

 on the subject the prominent feature is the 

 statement that our universities are un- 

 democratic, that they are monarchical insti- 

 tutions in a democratic country. This 

 criticism takes various forms. When a 

 university president speaks, the shortcom- 

 ings of the university are due to the fact 

 that the governing board are ignorant, 

 shallow-minded, arrogant and headstrong; 

 that they insist upon deciding matters be- 

 yond their knowledge and will not be 

 guided by the president. When a univer- 

 sity professor speaks it is the university 

 presidency which is at fault. Autocracy, 

 blindness, willfulness, prejudice, partial- 

 ity, lofty-mindedness, oratorical ability, 

 money-getting talents, piety and many 

 other virtues and vices are ascribed to our 

 presidents, but in the minds of nearly all 

 writers the presidency is an unsatisfactory 

 tool. When an outsider speaks, both 

 president and governing board are parts of 

 a vicious organization. 



Let us grant that there is much truth in 

 this. Boards may be unwise; the presi- 

 dency may be unequal to its responsibili- 



iWith especial reference to state universities. 

 An address delivered before a body of university 

 men at Minneapolis, November 10, 1913. 



