498 Dr. J. E. Mills on the 



the distance between the molecules. I have in this paper 

 extended the investigation to the inverse seventh power law. 

 It is likewise not in accord with the facts. The inverse 

 second power law gives an equation which is in accord with 

 the facts. This it is impossible to deny. Those who seek 

 to give another interpretation to the equation should 

 remember that all of the other attractive forces follow a 

 similar law as regards their variation with the distance apart 

 of the attracting bodies. It is perfectly true that the 

 numerator factors of these laws now appear to differ. My 

 own idea is that this difference is due to a misconception. 

 I think that the total attraction (molecular, gravitational, 

 electrical or magnetic) could be expressed by the law 



f=. 1 , the constant varying with the nature of the body 



s 



and the attractive force — perhaps being ultimately identical 



if its primary origin were understood. I think the usual 



numerator factors of the attractive force laws, mm' for 



gravitational, ee' for electrical, etc deal with the distribution 



of a perfectly definite attraction. 



9. Kleeman further attempts to disprove " Mills' law " by 

 substituting in a formula he has deduced from surf ace tension 

 considerations *. It seems to me that in this particular case 

 Kleeman is trying to make my law conform to his ideas. 

 I am not surprised at its failure to conform to these ideas. 

 I disagree with Kleeman's formulae and conclusions at many 

 points, as I do here. 



Kleeman attempts further to show f that the inverse square 

 law of the molecular attraction cannot be true, pointing out 

 the fact long ago recognized, that the gravitational attraction 

 is not great enough to account for molecular cohesion. 

 Sutherland % made the same criticism of the author's point 

 of view. The criticism has already been answered §. The 



molecular attraction obeys the law f= ^ — ( or ~2~ » ^ 



you prefer, where /x is a constant depending upon the nature 

 of the substance, and M is a number identical with or 

 proportional to ordinary mass), and not the law which 



* Phil. Mag. Jan. 1911, p. 90. 



t Phil. Mag. Jan. 1911, p. 89 ; Aug., p. 356 ; also vol. xx. p. 902 

 (1910). 



t Phil. Mag. xvii. p. 664 (1909). 



§ Journ.Phys. Chem. xi. pp. 145-153 (1907) ; xv.p.417 (1911); Phil. 

 Mag. October 1910, p. 629. 



