232 



SCIENCE- GOSSIP. 



Though there is little room to doubt that nitro- 

 gen does form the stepping-stone by which oxygen 

 leaves carbon and hydrogen, the exact nature of the 

 reactions is still within the realm of speculation, 

 so that I answer Mr. Martin's " how " with caution. 

 The matter may be elucidated some day by labora- 

 tory experiment. Many details could be suggested; 

 but the following must suffice in the present cir- 

 cumstances. The action in question is an anabolic ' 

 one, the kinetic energy being derived from sun- 

 shine, heat, or electric disturbance. This energy, 

 acting on the mixture of compounds of N, O, C, EL 

 etc., disturbs their equilibrium, and the lability of 

 the nitrogen compounds leads to the rearrange- 

 ment of the elements. The first change is probably 

 the assumption of oxidized carbon and hydrogen 

 into a nitrogen compound, and from this compound 

 oxygen is eliminated subsequently. The oxygen 

 is not removed with a wrench, but by easy steps. 

 In the intermediate stages the following groups may 

 be expected to exist : 



= N— 0— C 



= N— 0-H. 



If this theory is not satisfactory, no one is more 

 ready than myself to welcome a better. 



Whether performed in this way or any other, 

 this deoxidation with absorption of energy, and 

 the converse action of oxidation with the disper- 

 sion of energy, are the main physical pheno- 

 mena of life. The formation of complex compounds 

 may be regarded as a collateral feature which has 

 become more and more pronounced in the course 

 of evolution. In other words, life is not the result 

 of chemical complexity, but complex N, 0, C, and H 

 compounds are produced by the accumulation of 

 energy. 



I referred to Professor Lapworth as the leading 

 exponent of earth-movements — i.e. geological up- 

 heavals, depressions, overriding, etc., and the pro- 

 duction of igneous rocks. Mr. Martin quotes 

 Lord Kelvin as if he were an opposing 'authority ; 

 but since Professor Lapworth demonstrates what 

 is still occurring, while Lord Kelvin speculates as 

 to what may have occurred in the past, they mostly 

 cover different ground. If their results clash in 

 any way, if we have to choose between geological 

 evidence and a brilliant speculation, the former 

 has a stronger claim. I do not presume to 

 criticise Lord Kelvin's theory, and can only echo 

 the opinions of those who have a right to speak. 

 There are many geologists to whom his calculated 

 results seem irreconcilable with geological evi- 

 dence ; and if that be so, something must have 

 been overlooked in his premises. What, indeed, 

 can be more excusable ? Few tasks could be more 

 difficult than to recall correctly all the con- 



(1) Anabolic=iavoiviag accumulation oE energy; catabolic 

 = involving dispersion of energy. 



ditions that have ruled in the moulding of the 

 solar system during unknown millions of years. 

 It has been suggested as a possible correc- 

 tion that the conduction of heat through the 

 earth's substance has not been uniform in 

 place or time. Then it is difficult to estimate the 

 real loss of heat from the earth by radiation, 

 owing to the corrections necessitated by solar 

 heat, presence of water in the atmosphere, etc. 

 Again, while the interior may be very hot, the 

 surface exposed to cold space will be comparatively 

 cool, its temperature depending chiefly upon the 

 sun's heat, and this is the matter that concerns us 

 most. 



It has been said that the oblate form of the 

 earth is not sufficient evidence of fluidity ; for, if 

 the globe were as rigid as steel, it would still 

 assume the same general shape as a fluid, so great 

 are the pressures concerned. In geological move- 

 ments hard limestones are folded like paper, solid 

 granite is rolled out like dough, and diamond 

 itself, under the weight of a few miles of rock r 

 would be moulded like wax. 



Mr. Martin asks if I am " aware that there is 

 only one theory generally accepted among physicists 

 to account for the origin of nebulae ? — namely, 

 that they are produced by the impact of two 

 colliding suns." No : I have observed that physicists 

 find this theory inadequate. The collision of two 

 suns requires such a remarkable coincidence of 

 orbits and of time that its occurrence may be 

 regarded as exceptional. If, however, they happen 

 to collide, and their substance is converted into 

 incandescent vapour, what then ? The vapour, 

 owing to its tenuity, will lose heat very fast, and 

 its constituents will condense into solid particles 

 of low temperature. 



In my opinion the collision theory seems not 

 to account for the rotary movement of a nebula. 

 Then there exist groups of stars in the same 

 stage of evolution, e.g. the Pleiades, also certain 

 stars in Orion. It seems as if the members of 

 such groups had originated simultaneously in the 

 same event, in which case an explanation is re- 

 quired more comprehensive than the collision of 

 suns. The encounter of broad streams of meteoric 

 matter is more probable ; but whence do the streams 

 originate 1 



Mr. Martin asks my authority for the " remark- 

 able statement " that the changes in the silicates 

 involve a comparatively small change of energy. 

 No authority is needed for a fact under common 

 observation. The chemistry of the silicates is seen 

 in the manufacture of glass, porcelain, and earthen- 

 ware, and is comparable, so far as energy is con- 

 cerned, with the chemistry of such salts as sul- 

 phates, the main difference being that the former 

 is carried on in a fused medium at high tempera- 

 ture, whereas the latter occurs in aqueous solution 

 at low temperature. 



In the August issue of this magazine (page 74) 





