<h2><SPAN name="CHAPTER_XIV" id="CHAPTER_XIV"></SPAN>CHAPTER XIV.</h2>
<h3>THE MODERN FORM OF THE ALCHEMICAL QUEST OF THE ONE THING.</h3>
<p>The study of the properties of the elements
shows that these substances fall into groups, the
members of each of which are like one another,
and form compounds which are similar. The
examination of the properties and compositions
of compounds has shown that similarity of properties
is always accompanied by similarity of
composition. Hence, the fact that certain elements
are very closely allied in their properties
suggests that these elements may also be allied
in their composition. Now, to speak of the composition
of an element is to think of the element
as formed by the union of at least two different
substances; it implies the supposition that some
elements at any rate are really compounds.</p>
<p>The fact that there is a very definite connexion
between the values of the atomic weights,
<SPAN name="Page_180" id="Page_180"></SPAN>and the properties, of the elements, lends some
support to the hypothesis that the substances we
call, and are obliged at present to call, elements,
may have been formed from one, or a few, distinct
substances, by some process of progressive
change. If the elements are considered in the
order of increasing atomic weights, from hydrogen,
whose atomic weight is taken as unity because it
is the lightest substance known, to uranium, an
atom of which is 240 times heavier than an atom
of hydrogen, it is found that the elements fall
into periods, and the properties of those in one
period vary from element to element, in a way
which is, broadly and on the whole, like the
variation of the properties of those in other
periods. This fact suggests the supposition—it
might be more accurate to say the speculation—that
the elements mark the stable points in a
process of change, which has not proceeded continuously
from a very simple substance to a very
complex one, but has repeated itself, with certain
variations, again and again. If such a process
has occurred, we might reasonably expect to find
substances exhibiting only minute differences in
their properties, differences so slight as to make
it impossible to assign the substances, definitely
and certainly, either to the class of elements or
to that of compounds. We find exactly such
substances among what are called the <i>rare earths</i>.
There are earth-like substances which exhibit no
differences of chemical properties, and yet show
minute differences in the characters of the light
which they emit when they are raised to a very
high temperature.<SPAN name="Page_181" id="Page_181"></SPAN></p>
<p>The results of analysis by the spectroscope of
the light emitted by certain elements at different
temperatures may be reasonably interpreted by
supposing that these elements are separated
into simpler substances by the action on them of very
large quantities of thermal energy. The spectrum
of the light emitted by glowing iron heated by a
Bunsen flame (say, at 1200° C. = about 2200° F.)
shows a few lines and flutings; when iron is
heated in an electric arc (say, to 3500° C. = about
6300° F.) the spectrum shows some two thousand
lines; at the higher temperature produced by
the electric spark-discharge, the spectrum shows
only a few lines. As a guide to further investigation,
we may provisionally infer from these
facts that iron is changed at very high temperatures
into substances simpler than itself.</p>
<p>Sir Norman Lockyer's study of the spectra of
the light from stars has shown that the light from
those stars which are presumably the hottest,
judging by the general character of their spectra,
reveals the presence of a very small number of
chemical elements; and that the number of
spectral lines, and, therefore, the number of
elements, increases as we pass from the hottest
to cooler stars. At each stage of the change
from the hottest to cooler stars certain substances
disappear and certain other substances take their
places. It may be supposed, as a suggestive
hypothesis, that the lowering of stellar temperature
is accompanied by the formation, from simpler
forms of matter, of such elements as iron, calcium,
manganese, and other metals.</p>
<p>In the year 1896, the French chemist Becquerel
<SPAN name="Page_182" id="Page_182"></SPAN>discovered the fact that salts of the metal uranium,
the atomic weight of which is 240, and is greater
than that of any other element, emit rays which
cause electrified bodies to lose their electric
charges, and act on photographic plates that are
wrapped in sheets of black paper, or in thin
sheets of other substances which stop rays of
light. The <i>radio-activity</i> of salts of uranium was
proved not to be increased or diminished when
these salts had been shielded for five years
from the action of light by keeping them in
leaden boxes. Shortly after Becquerel's discovery,
experiments proved that salts of the rare
metal thorium are radio-active. This discovery
was followed by Madame Curie's demonstration
of the fact that certain specimens of <i>pitchblende</i>,
a mineral which contains compounds of uranium
and of many other metals, are extremely radio-active,
and by the separation from pitchblende,
by Monsieur and Madame Curie, of new substances
much more radio-active than compounds
of uranium or of thorium. The new substances
were proved to be compounds chemically very
similar to salts of barium. Their compositions
were determined on the supposition that they
were salts of an unknown metal closely allied to
barium. Because of the great radio-activity of
the compounds, the hypothetical metal of them
was named <i>Radium</i>. At a later time, radium
was isolated by Madame Curie. It is described
by her as a white, hard, metal-like solid, which
reacts with water at the ordinary temperature,
as barium does.</p>
<p>Since the discovery of radium compounds,
<SPAN name="Page_183" id="Page_183"></SPAN>many radio-active substances have been isolated.
Only exceedingly minute quantities of any of
them have been obtained. The quantities of
substances used in experiments on radio-activity
are so small that they escape the ordinary methods
of measurement, and are scarcely amenable to the
ordinary processes of the chemical laboratory.
Fortunately, radio-activity can be detected and
measured by electrical methods of extraordinary
fineness, methods the delicacy of which very
much more exceeds that of spectroscopic methods
than the sensitiveness of these surpasses that of
ordinary chemical analysis.</p>
<p>At the time of the discovery of radio-activity,
about seventy-five substances were called elements;
in other words, about seventy-five different
substances were known to chemists, none
of which had been separated into unlike parts,
none of which had been made by the coalescence
of unlike substances. Compounds of only two
of these substances, uranium and thorium, are
radio-active. Radio-activity is a very remarkable
phenomenon. So far as we know at present,
radio-activity is not a property of the substances
which form almost the whole of the rocks, the
waters, and the atmosphere of the earth; it is
not a property of the materials which constitute
living organisms. It is a property of some
thirty substances—of course, the number may
be increased—a few of which are found widely
distributed in rocks and waters, but none of
which is found anywhere except in extraordinarily
minute quantity. Radium is the most abundant
of these substances; but only a very few grains
<SPAN name="Page_184" id="Page_184"></SPAN>of radium chloride can be obtained from a couple
of tons of pitchblende.</p>
<p>In Chapter X. of <i>The Story of the Chemical
Elements</i> I have given a short account of the
outstanding phenomena of radio-activity; for the
present purpose it will suffice to state a few
facts of fundamental importance.</p>
<p>Radio-active substances are stores of energy,
some of which is constantly escaping from them;
they are constantly changing without external
compulsion, and are constantly radiating energy:
all explosives are storehouses of energy which,
or part of which, can be obtained from them;
but the liberation of their energy must be started
by some kind of external shock. When an explosive
substance has exploded, its existence as
an explosive is finished; the products of the
explosion are substances from which energy
cannot be obtained: when a radio-active substance
has exploded, it explodes again, and again,
and again; a time comes, sooner or later, when
it has changed into substances that are useless
as sources of energy. The disintegration of an
explosive, started by an external force, is generally
completed in a fraction of a second; change
of condition changes the rate of explosion: the
"half-life period" of each radio-active substance
is a constant characteristic of it; if a gram of
radium were kept for about 1800 years, half of it
would have changed into radio-inactive substances.
Conditions may be arranged so that an
explosive remains unchanged—wet gun-cotton is
not exploded by a shock which would start the
explosion of dry gun-cotton—in other words, the
<SPAN name="Page_185" id="Page_185"></SPAN>explosion of an explosive can be regulated: the
explosive changes of a radio-active substance,
which are accompanied by the radiation of energy,
cannot be regulated; they proceed spontaneously
in a regular and definable manner which is not
influenced by any external conditions—such as
great change of temperature, presence or absence
of other substances—so far as these conditions
have been made the subject of experiment:
the amount of activity of a radio-active substance
has not been increased or diminished by any
process to which the substance has been subjected.
Explosives are manufactured articles;
explosiveness is a property of certain arrangements
of certain quantities of certain elements:
so far as experiments have gone, it has not been
found possible to add the property of radio-activity
to an inactive substance, or to remove the property
of radio-activity from an active substance;
the cessation of the radio-activity of an active
substance is accompanied by the disappearance
of the substance, and the production of inactive
bodies altogether unlike the original active body.</p>
<p>Radio-active substances are constantly giving
off energy in the form of heat, sending forth <i>rays</i>
which have definite and remarkable properties,
and producing gaseous <i>emanations</i> which are very
unstable, and change, some very rapidly, some
less rapidly, into other substances, and emit <i>rays</i>
which are generally the same as the rays emitted
by the parent substance. In briefly considering
these three phenomena, I shall choose radium
compounds as representative of the class of
radio-active substances.<SPAN name="Page_186" id="Page_186"></SPAN></p>
<p>Radium compounds spontaneously give off
energy in the form of heat. A quantity of
radium chloride which contains 1 gram of radium
continuously gives out, per hour, a quantity of
heat sufficient to raise the temperature of 1 gram
of water through 100° C., or 100 grams of water
through 1° C. The heat given out by 1 gram of
radium during twenty-four hours would raise the
temperature of 2400 grams of water through
1° C.; in one year the temperature of 876,000
grams of water would be raised through 1° C.;
and in 1800 years, which is approximately the
half-life period of radium, the temperature of
1,576,800 <i>kilograms</i> of water would be raised
through 1° C. These results may be expressed
by saying that if 1 gram (about 15 grains) of
radium were kept until half of it had changed
into inactive substances, and if the heat spontaneously
produced during the changes which
occurred were caused to act on water, that quantity
of heat would raise the temperature of about
15½ tons of water from its freezing- to its boiling-point.</p>
<p>Radium compounds send forth three kinds of
rays, distinguished as <i>alpha</i>, <i>beta</i>, and <i>gamma</i>
rays. Experiments have made it extremely
probable that the α-rays are streams of very
minute particles, somewhat heavier than atoms
of hydrogen, moving at the rate of about 18,000
miles per second; and that the β-rays are streams
of much more minute particles, the mass of each
of which is about one one-thousandth of the mass
of an atom of hydrogen, moving about ten times
more rapidly than the α-particles, that is, moving
<SPAN name="Page_187" id="Page_187"></SPAN>at the rate of about 180,000 miles per second.
The γ-rays are probably pulsations of the ether,
the medium supposed to fill space. The emission
of α-rays by radium is accompanied by the production
of the inert elementary gas, helium;
therefore, the α-rays are, or quickly change into,
rapidly moving particles of helium. The particles
which constitute the β-rays carry electric charges;
these electrified particles, each approximately a
thousand times lighter than an atom of hydrogen,
moving nearly as rapidly as the pulsations of the
ether which we call light, are named <i>electrons</i>.
The rays from radium compounds discharge
electrified bodies, ionise gases, that is, cause
them to conduct electricity, act on photographic
plates, and produce profound changes in living
organisms.</p>
<p>The radium emanation is a gas about 111
times heavier than hydrogen; to this gas
Sir William Ramsay has given the name <i>niton</i>.
The gas has been condensed to a colourless
liquid, and frozen to an opaque solid which glows
like a minute arc-light. Radium emanation gives
off α-particles, that is, very rapidly moving
atoms of helium, and deposits exceedingly minute
quantities of a solid, radio-active substance
known as radium A. The change of the emanation
into helium and radium A proceeds fairly
rapidly: the half-life period of the emanation is
a little less than four days. This change is
attended by the liberation of much energy.</p>
<p>The only satisfactory mental picture which
the facts allow us to form, at present, of the
emission of β-rays from radium compounds is
<SPAN name="Page_188" id="Page_188"></SPAN>that which represents these rays as streams of
electrons, that is, particles, each about a thousand
times lighter than an atom of hydrogen, each
carrying an electric charge, and moving at the
rate of about 180,000 miles per second, that is,
nearly as rapidly as light. When an electric
discharge is passed from a plate of metal, arranged
as the kathode, to a metallic wire arranged
as the anode, both sealed through the walls of a
glass tube or bulb from which almost the whole
of the air has been extracted, rays proceed from
the kathode, in a direction at right angles thereto,
and, striking the glass in the neighbourhood
of the anode, produce a green phosphorescence.
Facts have been gradually accumulated which
force us to think of these <i>kathode rays</i> as streams
of very rapidly moving electrons, that is, as
streams of extraordinarily minute electrically
charged particles identical with the particles
which form the β-rays emitted by compounds
of radium.</p>
<p>The phenomena of radio-activity, and also the
phenomena of the kathode rays, have obliged
us to refine our machinery of minute particles
by including therein particles at least a
thousand times lighter than atoms of hydrogen.
The term <i>electron</i> was suggested, a good many
years ago, by Dr Johnstone Stoney, for the unit
charge of electricity which is carried by an atom
of hydrogen when hydrogen atoms move in a
liquid or gas under the directing influence of the
electric current. Some chemists speak of the
electrons, which are the β-rays from radium, and
the kathode rays produced in almost vacuous
<SPAN name="Page_189" id="Page_189"></SPAN>tubes, as non-material particles of electricity.
Non-material means devoid of mass. The method
by which approximate determinations have been
made of the charges on electrons consists in
measuring the ratio between the charges and the
masses of these particles. If the results of the
determinations are accepted, electrons are not
devoid of mass. Electrons must be thought of as
material particles differing from other minute
material particles in the extraordinary smallness
of their masses, in the identity of their properties,
including their mass, in their always carrying
electric charges, and in the vast velocity of their
motion. We must think of an electron either as
a unit charge of electricity one property of which
is its minute mass, or as a material particle
having an extremely small mass and carrying a
unit charge of electricity: the two mental pictures
are almost, if not quite, identical.</p>
<p>Electrons are produced by sending an electric
discharge through a glass bulb containing a
minute quantity of air or other gas, using
metallic plates or wires as kathode and anode.
Experiments have shown that the electrons are
identical in all their properties, whatever metal
is used to form the kathode and anode, and of
whatever gas there is a minute quantity in the
bulb. The conclusion must be drawn that
identical electrons are constituents of, or are
produced from, very different kinds of chemical
elements. As the facts about kathode rays, and
the facts of radio-activity are (at present) inexplicable
except on the supposition that these
phenomena are exhibited by particles of extraordinary
<SPAN name="Page_190" id="Page_190"></SPAN>minuteness, and as the smallest particles
with which chemists are concerned in their everyday
work are the atoms of the elements, we seem
obliged to think of many kinds of atoms as structures,
not as homogeneous bodies. We seem
obliged to think of atoms as very minute material
particles, which either normally are, or under
definite conditions may be, associated with electrically
charged particles very much lighter than
themselves, all of which are identical, whatever
be the atoms with which they are associated or
from which they are produced.</p>
<p>In their study of different kinds of matter,
chemists have found it very helpful to place in
one class those substances which they have not
been able to separate into unlike parts. They
have distinguished this class of substances from
other substances, and have named them <i>elements</i>.
The expression <i>chemical elements</i> is merely a
summary of certain observed facts. For many
centuries chemists have worked with a conceptual
machinery based on the notion that matter
has a grained structure. For more than a
hundred years they have been accustomed to
think of atoms as the ultimate particles with
which they have had to deal. Working with
this order-producing instrument, they have regarded
the properties of elements as properties
of the atoms, or of groups of a few of the atoms,
of these substances. That they might think
clearly and suggestively about the properties of
elements, and connect these with other chemical
facts, they have translated the language of sense-perceptions
into the language of thought, and,
<SPAN name="Page_191" id="Page_191"></SPAN>for <i>properties of those substances which have not been
decomposed</i>, have used the more fertile expression
<i>atomic properties</i>. When a chemist thinks of an
atom, he thinks of the minutest particle of one
of the substances which have the class-mark <i>have-not-been-decomposed</i>,
and the class-name <i>element</i>.
The chemist does not call these substances
elements because he has been forced to regard
the minute particles of them as undivided, much
less because he thinks of these particles as indivisible;
his mental picture of their structure
as an atomic structure formed itself from the
fact that they had not been decomposed. The
formation of the class <i>element</i> followed necessarily
from observed facts, and has been justified by
the usefulness of it as an instrument for forwarding
accurate knowledge. The conception of the
elementary atom as a particle which had not
been decomposed followed from many observed
facts besides those concerning elements, and has
been justified by the usefulness of it as an instrument
for forwarding accurate knowledge. Investigations
proved radio-activity to be a property
of the very minute particles of certain
substances, and each radio-active substance to
have characteristic properties, among which were
certain of those that belong to elements, and to
some extent are characteristic of elements.
Evidently, the simplest way for a chemist to
think about radio-activity was to think of it as
an atomic property; hence, as atomic properties
had always been regarded, in the last analysis,
as properties of elements, it was natural to place
the radio-active substances in the class <i>elements</i>,
<SPAN name="Page_192" id="Page_192"></SPAN>provided that one forgot for the time that these
substances have not the class-mark <i>have-not-been-decomposed</i>.</p>
<p>As the facts of radio-activity led to the conclusion
that some of the minute particles of radio-active
substances are constantly disintegrating,
and as these substances had been labelled <i>elements</i>,
it seemed probable, or at least possible, that the
other bodies which chemists have long called
elements are not true elements, but are merely
more stable collocations of particles than the substances
which are classed as compounds. As
compounds can be changed into certain other
compounds, although not into any other compounds,
a way seemed to be opening which might
lead to the transformation of some elements into
some other elements.</p>
<p>The probability that one element might be
changed into another was increased by the
demonstration of the connexions between
uranium and radium. The metal uranium has
been classed with the elements since it was
isolated in 1840. In 1896, Becquerel found that
compounds of uranium, and also the metal itself,
are radio-active. In the light of what is now
known about radio-activity, it is necessary to
suppose that some of the minute particles of
uranium emit particles lighter than themselves,
and change into some substance, or substances,
different from uranium; in other words, it is
necessary to suppose that some particles of
uranium are spontaneously disintegrating. This
supposition is confirmed by the fact, experimentally
proved, that uranium emits α-rays,
<SPAN name="Page_193" id="Page_193"></SPAN>that is, atoms of helium, and produces a substance
known as uranium X. Uranium X is
itself radio-active; it emits β-rays, that is, it
gives off electrons. Inasmuch as all minerals
which contain compounds of uranium contain
compounds of radium also, it is probable that
radium is one of the disintegration-products of
uranium. The rate of decay of radium may be
roughly expressed by saying that, if a quantity
of radium were kept for ten thousand years, only
about one per cent. of the original quantity would
then remain unchanged. Even if it were assumed
that at a remote time the earth's crust contained
considerable quantities of radium compounds, it
is certain that they would have completely disappeared
long ago, had not compounds of radium
been reproduced from other materials. Again,
the most likely hypothesis is that compounds of
radium are being produced from compounds of
uranium.</p>
<p>Uranium is a substance which, after being
rightly classed with the elements for more than
half a century, because it had not been separated
into unlike parts, must now be classed with
the radium-like substances which disintegrate spontaneously,
although it differs from other radio-active
substances in that its rate of change is
almost infinitively slower than that of any of
them, except thorium.<SPAN name="FNanchor_12_12" id="FNanchor_12_12"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_12_12"><sup>12</sup></SPAN> Thorium, a very rare
metal, is the second of the seventy-five or eighty
elements known when radio-activity was discovered,
which has been found to undergo spontaneous
<SPAN name="Page_194" id="Page_194"></SPAN>disintegration with the emission of rays.
The rate of change of thorium is considerably
slower than that of uranium.<SPAN name="FNanchor_13_13" id="FNanchor_13_13"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_13_13"><sup>13</sup></SPAN> None of the
other substances placed in the class of elements
is radio-active.</p>
<p>On <SPAN href="#Page_192"></SPAN> I said, that when the radio-active
substances had been labelled <i>elements</i>, the facts of
radio-activity led some chemists to the conclusion
that the other bodies which had for long been
called by this class-name, or at any rate some of
these bodies, are perhaps not true elements, but
are merely more stable collocations of particles
than the substances called compounds. It seems
to me that this reasoning rests on an unscientific
use of the term <i>element</i>; it rests on giving to that
class-name the meaning, <i>substances asserted to be
undecomposable</i>. A line of demarcation is drawn
between <i>elements</i>, meaning thereby forms of matter
said to be undecomposable but probably capable
of separation into unlike parts, and <i>true elements</i>,
meaning thereby groups of identical undecomposable
particles. If one names the radio-active
substances <i>elements</i>, one is placing in this class
substances which are specially characterised by a
property the direct opposite of that the possession
of which by other substances was the reason
for the formation of the class. To do this may
be ingenious; it is certainly not scientific.</p>
<p>Since the time of Lavoisier, since the last
decade of the eighteenth century, careful chemists
have meant by an element a substance which
has not been separated into unlike parts, and
<SPAN name="Page_195" id="Page_195"></SPAN>they have not meant more than that. The term
<i>element</i> has been used by accurate thinkers as a
useful class-mark which connotes a property—the
property of not having been decomposed—common
to all substances placed in the class, and
differentiating them from all other substances.
Whenever chemists have thought of elements as
the ultimate kinds of matter with which the
physical world is constructed—and they have
occasionally so thought and written—they have
fallen into quagmires of confusion.</p>
<p>Of course, the elements may, some day, be
separated into unlike parts. The facts of radio-activity
certainly suggest some kind of inorganic
evolution. Whether the elements are decomposed
is to be determined by experimental
inquiry, remembering always that no number of
failures to simplify them will justify the assertion
that they cannot be simplified. Chemistry
neither asserts or denies the decomposability of
the elements. At present, we have to recognise
the existence of extremely small quantities,
widely distributed in rocks and waters, of some
thirty substances, the minute particles of which
are constantly emitting streams of more minute,
identical particles that carry with them very
large quantities of energy, all of which thirty
substances are characterised, and are differentiated
from all other classes of substances wherewith
chemistry is concerned, by their spontaneous mutability,
and each is characterised by its special rate
of change and by the nature of the products of
its mutations. We have now to think of the
minute particles of two of the seventy-five or
<SPAN name="Page_196" id="Page_196"></SPAN>eighty substances which until the other day had
not been decomposed, and were therefore justly
called elements, as very slowly emitting streams
of minuter particles and producing characteristic
products of their disintegration. And we have
to think of some eighty substances as particular
kinds of matter, at present properly called
elements, because they are characterised, and
differentiated from all other substances, by the
fact that none of them has been separated into
unlike parts.</p>
<p>The study of radio-activity has introduced
into chemistry and physics a new order of
minute particles. Dalton made the atom a
beacon-light which revealed to chemists paths
that led them to wider and more accurate knowledge.
Avogadro illuminated chemical, and also
physical, ways by his conception of the molecule
as a stable, although separable, group of atoms
with particular properties different from those of
the atoms which constituted it. The work of
many investigators has made the old paths
clearer, and has shown to chemists and physicists
ways they had not seen before, by forcing them
to think of, and to make use of, a third kind of
material particles that are endowed with the
extraordinary property of radio-activity. Dalton
often said: "Thou knowest thou canst not cut
an atom"; but the fact that he applied the term
<i>atom</i> to the small particles of compounds proves
that he had escaped the danger of logically
defining the atom, the danger of thinking of it as
a particle which never can be cut. The molecule
of Avogadro has always been a decomposable
<SPAN name="Page_197" id="Page_197"></SPAN>particle. The peculiarity of the new kind of particles,
the particles of radio-active bodies, is, not
that they can be separated into unlike parts
by the action of external forces, but that they
are constantly separating of their own accord
into unlike parts, and that their spontaneous
disintegration is accompanied by the production
of energy, the quantity of which is enormous
in comparison with the minuteness of the
material specks which are the carriers of it.</p>
<p>The continued study of the properties of the
minute particles of radio-active substances—a
new name is needed for those most mutable of
material grains—must lead to discoveries of
great moment for chemistry and physics. That
study has already thrown much light on the
phenomena of electric conductivity; it has
given us the electron, a particle at least a
thousand times lighter than an atom of hydrogen;
it has shown us that identical electrons are given
off by, or are separated from, different kinds of
elementary atoms, under definable conditions; it
has revealed unlooked-for sources of energy; it
has opened, and begun the elucidation of, a new
department of physical science; it has suggested
a new way of attacking the old problem of the
alchemists, the problem of the transmutation of the
elements.</p>
<p>The minute particles of two of the substances
for many years classed as elements give off
electrons; uranium and thorium are radio-active.
Electrons are produced by sending an electric
discharge through very small traces of different
gases, using electrodes of different metals. Electrons
<SPAN name="Page_198" id="Page_198"></SPAN>are also produced by exposing various
metals to the action of ultra-violet light, and by
raising the temperature of various metals to
incandescence. Electrons are always identical,
whatever be their source. Three questions
suggest themselves. Can the atoms of all the
elements be caused to give off electrons? Are
electrons normal constituents of all elementary
atoms? Are elementary atoms collocations of
electrons? These questions are included in the
demand—Is it possible "to imagine a model
which has in it the potentiality of explaining"
radio-activity and other allied phenomena, as
well as all other chemical and physical properties
of elements and compounds? These questions
are answerable by experimental investigation,
and only by experimental investigation. If
experimental inquiry leads to affirmative answers
to the questions, we shall have to think of atoms
as structures of particles much lighter
than themselves; we shall have to think of the atoms
of all kinds of substances, however much the
substances differ chemically and physically, as
collocations of identical particles; we shall have
to think of the properties of atoms as conditioned,
in our final analysis, by the number and the
arrangement of their constitutive electrons.
Now, if a large probability were established in
favour of the view that different atoms are collocations
of different numbers of identical particles,
or of equal numbers of differently arranged
identical particles, we should have a guide which
might lead to methods whereby one collocation
of particles could be formed from another collocation
<SPAN name="Page_199" id="Page_199"></SPAN>of the same particles, a guide which
might lead to methods whereby one element
could be transformed into another element.</p>
<p>To attempt "to imagine a model which has in
it the potentiality of explaining" radio-activity,
the production of kathode rays, and the other
chemical and physical properties of elements and
compounds, might indeed seem to be a hopeless
undertaking. A beginning has been made in the
mental construction of such a model by Professor
Sir J.J. Thomson. To attempt a description of
his reasoning and his results is beyond the scope
of this book.<SPAN name="FNanchor_14_14" id="FNanchor_14_14"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_14_14"><sup>14</sup></SPAN></p>
<p>The facts that the emanation from radium
compounds spontaneously gives off very large
quantities of energy, and that the emanation
can easily be brought into contact with substances
on which it is desired to do work,
suggested to Sir William Ramsay that the
transformation of compounds of one element into
compounds of another element might possibly be
effected by enclosing a solution of a compound
along with radium emanation in a sealed tube,
and leaving the arrangement to itself. Under
these conditions, the molecules of the compound
would be constantly bombarded by a vast
number of electrons shot forth at enormous
velocities from the emanation. The notion was
that the molecules of the compound would break
down under the bombardment, and that the
atoms so produced might be knocked into
simpler groups of particles—in other words,
<SPAN name="Page_200" id="Page_200"></SPAN>changed into other atoms—by the terrific, silent
shocks of the electrons fired at them incessantly
by the disintegrating emanation. Sir William
Ramsay regards his experimental results as
establishing a large probability in favour of the
assertion that compounds of copper were transformed
into compounds of lithium and sodium,
and compounds of thorium, of cerium, and of
certain other rare metals, into compounds of
carbon. The experimental evidence in favour
of this statement has not been accepted by
chemists as conclusive. A way has, however,
been opened which may lead to discoveries of
great moment.</p>
<p>Let us suppose that the transformation of one
element into another element or into other elements
has been accomplished. Let us suppose that
the conception of elementary atoms as very stable
arrangements of many identical particles, from
about a thousand to about a quarter of a million
times lighter than the atoms, has been justified
by crucial experiments. Let us suppose that
the conception of the minute grains of radio-active
substances as particular but constantly changing
arrangements of the same identical
particles, stable groups of which are the atoms
of the elements, has been firmly established.
One result of the establishment of the electronic
conception of atomic structure would be an
increase of our wonder at the complexity of
nature's ways, and an increase of our wonder
that it should be possible to substitute a simple,
almost rigid, mechanical machinery for the ever-changing
flow of experience, and, by the use of
<SPAN name="Page_201" id="Page_201"></SPAN>that mental mechanism, not only to explain very
many phenomena of vast complexity, but also
to predict occurrences of similar entanglement
and to verify these predictions.</p>
<p>The results which have been obtained in the
examination of radio-activity, of kathode rays,
of spectra at different temperatures, and of phenomena
allied to these, bring again into prominence
the ancient problem of the structure of what we
call matter. Is matter fundamentally homogeneous
or heterogeneous? Chemistry studies
the relations between the changes of composition
and the changes of properties which happen
simultaneously in material systems. The burning
fire of wood, coal, or gas; the preparation of
food to excite and to satisfy the appetite; the
change of minerals into the iron, steel, copper,
brass, lead, tin, lighting burning and lubricating
oils, dye-stuffs and drugs of commerce; the
change of the skins, wool, and hair of animals,
and of the seeds and fibres of plants, into
clothing for human beings; the manufacture
from rags, grass, or wood of a material fitted to
receive and to preserve the symbols of human
hopes, fears, aspirations, love and hate, pity and
aversion; the strange and most delicate processes
which, happening without cessation, in
plants and animals and men, maintain that
balanced equilibrium which we call life; and,
when the silver cord is being loosed and the
bowl broken at the cistern, the awful changes
which herald the approach of death; not only
the growing grass in midsummer meadows, not
only the coming of autumn "in dyed garments,
<SPAN name="Page_202" id="Page_202"></SPAN>travelling in the glory of his apparel," but
also the opening buds, the pleasant scents,
the tender colours which stir our hearts in
"the spring time, the only pretty ring time,
when birds do sing, ding-a*—dong-ding": these,
and a thousand other changes have all their
aspects which it is the business of the chemist to
investigate. Confronted with so vast a multitude
of never-ceasing changes, and bidden to
find order there, if he can—bidden, rather
compelled by that imperious command which
forces the human mind to seek unity in variety,
and, if need be, to create a cosmos from a chaos;
no wonder that the early chemists jumped at
the notion that there must be, that there is, some
<i>One Thing</i>, some <i>Universal Essence</i>, which binds
into an orderly whole the perplexing phenomena
of nature, some <i>Water of Paradise</i> which is for
the healing of all disorder, some "Well at the
World's End," a draught whereof shall bring
peace and calm security.</p>
<p>The alchemists set forth on the quest. Their
quest was barren. They made the great mistake
of fashioning <i>The One Thing, The Essence, The
Water of Paradise</i>, from their own imaginings
of what nature ought to be. In their own
likeness they created their goal, and the road
to it. If we are to understand nature,
they cried, her ways must be simple; therefore, her
ways are simple. Chemists are people of a
humbler heart. Their reward has been greater
than the alchemists dreamed. By selecting a
few instances of material changes, and studying
these with painful care, they have gradually
<SPAN name="Page_203" id="Page_203"></SPAN>elaborated a general conception of all those
transformations wherein substances are produced
unlike those by the interaction of which
they are formed. That general conception is
now both widening and becoming more definite.
To-day, chemists see a way opening before them
which they reasonably hope will lead them to a
finer, a more far-reaching, a more suggestive, at
once a more complex and a simpler conception of
material changes than any of those which have
guided them in the past.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />