In 1905 Strutt pointed out that in all the minerals he had examined, thorium was never present unless accompanied by uranium and radium, whilst uranium and radium often occurred without thorium. He suggested that the present atomic weight of thorium, 232·5, was too low, and that it was really the parent of uranium (at. weight 238·5); he further supposed that the next permanent member in the line of descent was one of the cerium metals. These suggestions have been negatived by later work of Boltwood and Holmes. The former pointed out[139] that it was far more likely that thorium is a disintegration product of uranium of considerably longer life. On the whole, however, there is very little positive evidence to connect thorium with uranium. [139] Boltwood, _Amer. J. Sci._ 1905, [iv.], ~20~, 256. In the same year Boltwood (_loc. cit._) drew attention to the persistent appearance of traces of lead, bismuth, barium, etc., in the radioactive minerals, and also pointed out that the variations of the ratio of helium to uranium in pitchblende might be used to determine the age of the mineral. In 1907 he suggested[140] that lead was the final product of the degradation of uranium, from which it follows that the ratio of uranium to lead should be constant for minerals of the same age (since, lead decays, if at all, at an infinitely slower rate than uranium). He collected all the available analyses, and classified the minerals dealt with into six groups according to the value of the ratio. The order given by the ratio was declared to be in accordance with the order of age as given by geological evidence. [140] _Amer. J. Sci._ 1907, [iv.], ~23~, 77. Holmes[141] has further extended this work. He examined a number of rare earth and allied minerals from the Christiania district, which Brögger considers to be of approximately Lower Devonian age, and found the ratio of lead to uranium to approximate quite closely, for almost all the minerals examined, to 0·045. Representing the change in the usual way as U → 8He + Pb 238·5 → 31·92 + 207·1 and using the data calculated by Rutherford and others for the rates of decay, he gives the age of Lower Devonian strata as about 370 million years. This figure is about twice as great as that deduced by palæontologists from the flora and fauna, and greater still than the times based on physical data, _e.g._ rates of cooling, precession and nutation, etc. His figures for pre-Cambrian rocks, based on the same ratio, range between 1000 and 1640 million years, the later being deduced from a thorianite from the Archæan rocks of Ceylon. Strutt’s figure for Archæan rocks is about 700 million years; this was derived from work on the helium ratio, which must now be considered.[142] [141] _Proc. Roy. Soc._ 1911, A, ~85~, 248. [142] See Strutt, _Proc. Roy. Soc._ 1908, A, ~82~, 166; 1909, ~83~, 96; 1909, ~83~, 298; 1910, ~84~, 194.