The electron, its isolation and measurement and the determination of some of its properties
John Stuart Mill · en
In 1914 Dr. Fletcher, assuming the value of which I had
published[90] for oil drops moving through air, made new and improved
Brownian-movement measurements in this medium and solved for the
original Einstein equation, which, when modified precisely as above by
replacing by
and
becomes
He took, all told, as many as 18,837 ’s, not less than
5,900 on a single drop, and obtained .
This cannot be regarded as an altogether independent determination
of , since it involves my value. Agreeing, however,
[Pg 156] of
as well as it does with my value of , it does show with much
conclusiveness that both Einstein’s equation and my corrected form of
Stokes’s equation apply accurately to the motion of oil drops of the
size here used, namely, those of radius from
cm. to cm. .
In 1915 Mr. Carl Eyring tested by equation (29) the value of on
oil drops, of about the same size, in hydrogen and came out within .6
per cent of the value found in electrolysis, the probable error being,
however, some 2 per cent.
Precisely similar tests on substances other than oils were made by
Dr. E. Weiss[91] and Dr. Karl Przibram.[92] The former worked with
silver particles only half as large as the oil particles mentioned
above, namely, of radii between 1 and . and
obtained instead of 9,650, as in
electrolysis. This is indeed 11 per cent too high, but the limits of
error in Weiss’s experiments were in his judgment quite as large as
this. K. Przibram worked on suspensions in air of five or six different
substances, the radii varying from 200 to 600 ,
and though his results varied among themselves by as much as 100 per
cent, his mean value came within 6 per cent of 9,650. Both of the last
two observers took too few displacements on a given drop to obtain a
reliable mean displacement, but they used so many drops that their mean
still has some significance.
It would seem, therefore, that the validity of Einstein’s
Brownian-movement equation had been pretty thoroughly established
[Pg 157]
in gases. In liquids too it has recently been subjected to much more
precise test than had formerly been attained. Nordlund,[93] in 1914,
using minute mercury particles in water and assuming Stokes’s Law of
fall and Einstein’s equations, obtained .
While in 1915 Westgren at Stockholm[94] by a very large number of
measurements on colloidal gold, silver, and selenium particles, of
diameter from 65 to 130
(), obtained a result which
he thinks is correct to one-half of 1 per cent, this value is
, which agrees perfectly
with the value which I obtained from the measurements on the isolation
and measurement of the electron.
It has been because of such agreements as the foregoing that the last
trace of opposition to the kinetic and atomic hypotheses of matter has
disappeared from the scientific world, and that even Ostwald has been
willing to make such a statement as that quoted on p. 10.
[Pg 158]
CHAPTER VIII
IS THE ELECTRON ITSELF DIVISIBLE?