122
DOCS.
162,
163 MAY 1909
I
was
recently at Torquay
and
had several
conversations with Dr. Oliver
Heaviside[13]
on
electrical
matters.
I
think he would be
interested
to
have
a
copy
of
your
paper.
His
address
is
Homefield
Lower
Warberry
Road
Torquay.
With
renewed thanks for
your
paper I
remain
yours
truly,
G.F.C.
Searle
163.
To
Hendrik
A.
Lorentz
Bern, 23
May
1909
Highly
esteemed
Sir:
I cannot
tell
you
how
very delighted
I
was
with
your
detailed
letter,[1]
and
how much
I
enjoy returning
again
and
again
to
your
clear
and
beautiful
expositions. Only
it
is
well
nigh a pity
that the letter
will
not
be
read
by
all
of
those who
are
working
on
this
matter.
First,
as
far
as van
der
Waals's[2]
objection
is concerned,
it
seems
to
me
too
that
it
does
not
touch
upon
any
point
of essential
importance,
since
the
energy
exchange
between
matter and
cavity always
leads to
the
same
distribution
of
radiation,[3]
regardless
of whether
this
exchange
is
mediated
by
electrons
or by
ponderable
ions. Moreover,
as
you
are
telling me, you
have avoided this
slight
nuisance
by
a
small
modification
in
your
line
of
argumentation.
Now
we come
to
a
point
in
your
letter
with
respect
to
which
our
opinions
do
not
seem
to
agree
completely.
You
perceive
it
as a
difficulty
that
with
Planck's
approach
the
state
of the
radiation
in the
ether
comes
out
differently
depending
on
whether the
energy
exchange
is
mediated
by
resonators
or by
free
electrons.
I
look
at
the
matter
differently,
insofar
as
in
my
view Planck's
approach
does
not
work in the
latter
case
at
all.
When
Mr. Planck
introduces
the
quanta
hv,
he arrives
at
statistical laws
for
the
resonators
that
are
not
compatible
with the
current
theoretical foundations of
the
theory.
He
thus
(implicitly) dispenses
with
the
consistent
application
of
electromagnetics
and molecular
mechanics. But if
one
abandons
our
theoretical foundations
when
considering resonators,
one
must
also
abandon
them
for
free
electrons,
and this
removes
the
foundation
from
your
proof
of
Jeans's
law for this
case as
well.[4]
For
me
the
only difficulty
consists in the
fact
that Planck's foundation
(the
introduction of
the
hv-quanta)
does not
apply
to
the
elementary
foundation of the
theory
but
only
to
the
special case
of
monochromatically
oscillating
structures. We do not know
therefore,
and cannot
deduce,
for
the
time
being,
what kind of
basic
electrical
and
mechanical
laws
we
have to
introduce for the free
electron
and
empty
space
in
order
to
remain
in
agreement
with
Planck's
theory.
Thus,
it
seems
to
me
that there
is
no
contradiction
here,
but
only
the
difficulty
of
generalizing
Planck's
approach.-
I
liked
your
modification of
Gibbs's treatment
of
the canonical
ensemble
very
much.
In this
way
one sees very nicely
in what
respect
the
theory
demanded
by
the radiation
Previous Page Next Page