Abstract
I HAVE read the letters of Dr. Bohr and Mr. Moseley with great interest, and would like to make a few remarks in reply which may serve to render the meaning of my first letter more clear. Dr. Bohr says that we have no right to consider nNe2, m, r, and h as independent variables and that we must eliminate r, in which case we find his formula. I am not convinced that this is necessary a priori, as Dr. Bohr would seem to consider it. In some cases it leads to conclusions which are obviously erroneous. Supposing, for instance, that we calculate the period of a pendulum by this method. If we eliminate h we find t = const. √l/g, but if we eliminate l we find t = const. 3√h/mg2. We have just as much or just as little reason, a priori, to eliminate h or r, or any of the quantities involved in one case as in the other. In the case of the pendulum, h can only appear as a corrective term, perhaps of a form similar to √1-hv/E, where E is the energy. Possibly the same is true in atomic models.
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
LINDEMANN, F. Atomic Models and X-Ray Spectra. Nature 92, 631 (1914). https://doi.org/10.1038/092631a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/092631a0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.