Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-05-03
J. Butler Burke
Replies to Critics


BUTLER BURKE, the Cambridge
/. physicist, whose astonishing ex-
y periments with radium have craat-
ed such stir. has had showers of critl-
clsm poured on him from all quarters
out hitherto has paid no attention TO
tEem' Your correspondent asked him
yesterday. however. IL he would not he
willing to make a statement for publica-
uon concerning the subject. and he has
now responded as follows:
The criticisms which have been urged
OF the results OF my observations on Tho
enects OF radium salts on gelatlne bouillon
do not. as 1 think. appear SO far TO have
direct bearing, IL may say so. upon tho
real points at Issue, although those offered
by Sir William Ramsay have certainly
been most fruitful and suggestive I'm en-
ab!ing theory to be formed OF the phvsi-
cal causes Of the subdivision OF such arti-
fetal cells and possibly of natural cells
generally.
1T would take too long to describe here
the details of this theory of segregation
or cells, but II might perhaps be possible TO
INDICATE IN outline the principle upon which
TINS theory rests. Namely, that the radium
salt produces minute. almost ultra-inicro-
scopic cellular bubbles due to the gaseous
emanation which 1t emits. And these act
as the nuclei of the larger aggregates due
no doubt, to direct chemical action on The
surrounding radum. or TO Indirect ones
brought about by the intense electro-mag-
netic disturbance from the radium atoms,
as In the case of Photographic action The
cellular bulb of emanation will multiply.
as the emanation increases, since IL will
force its way through the walls at the
lines of least resistance. Their mode OF
subdivision, however would be different
from that of radiobes, which divide up into
clean-cut segments sections. while
"emanative" cells always retain their
smooth surface due to surface tension. The
cellular bubbles. however, IL acting
nuclei, will force the subdivision OF the
larger aggregates and tear II asunder. and
thus produce the mysterious effect OF an in
dividual subdividing of its own accord by
apparently tearing Itself asunder without
any external cause.
1T seems not improbable. shown in
my book. that the subdivision of natural
cells is accomplished in some similar way,
although the nucleus substance Is not
necessarily radium. 1t seems probable that
there is in the ultimate-nucleus an emana-
ton from radium In a more or less marked
degree. I have called that hypothetical
substance radio-carbon. Amongst those
others who have been experimenting upon
the subject of these experiments / might
mention NJ. Dubois OF Lyons and Mr. Ridge
of Woodbridge School.
-.
M Dubois observations in many ways
agree wl.h mine He has had no difficulty
in observing the effects of subdivision. Mr..
Rudge on the other hand. has completely
failed to see any such effects; and ne has
gone go far as to suggest that these effects,
il they did occur, were due to aggregation.
not to segre CATION. a glance at the photo
graphs and drawings in my book Will indl-
cate that the subdivision cannot be due 10
mere aggregation of cells, as Mr.. Rucge
imagines.
M. Dubois CODES and my radiobes, al
though they differ In some respects, nave,
-, .v,a.aV RGHE al
Mr. Ridges experiments and observations.
through some cause not easily TO be dis
covered, are somehow not altogether 10 me
point. Various reasons have occurred TO
me- as t. why Mr.. Ridge should have fs1I-
ed to get the same results
In the first place. his 'bouillon, which he
frequently, If not always called 'gelatine,'
may have been slightly different, and upon
that little more, so much depends.
Secondly II seems extremely probable
that the salts used may have been In ex-
cess so that only large colonies or aggre-
gates would be visible. 1t is well known
that when a tiny crystal of salt is placed
In solution of the same salt the solution
may become crystalized en- masse; When
If a large quantity OF the sat be us9d,
nothing happens. So likewise, Is II possible
that Mr. Ridge has missed the mark by
using too much salt.
Thirdly. 1 have used throughout
twelve-inch oil-immersion lens. whilst Mr.
Rudge has not. He confined mself TO
smaller powers, circumstance wnlch
would further diminish his opportunities
of SEEING the effects. He has quite re-
Gently l understand, procured some higher
powers but II Is not yet quite clear what
he has obtained with them. These consid-
erations are only questions of technique.
They do not touch upon matters OF prlnci-
pie or knowledge OF the actual correlatlons,
which are obviously necessary for the sue
cessfuI repetition of these experiments,
apart from their technique
Next 1t may be said that whatever
chemical effects may be produced by ra-
dunn with it, may be expected likewise TO
be produced I'm an initiative sort OF way
by barium Though they may differ In
some respects, they are sure also to re-
sembIe each other In others.
But, further It has been apparently In
ferred that since barium does produce ag-
gregatlon by itself. and since il is the pre-
dominant factor in radium and bariUm re-
suits. the effects produced in the latter case
are merely due to barium. This is an in
ferehce for which there is no foundation
whatever Nay, rather since barium and
radium have similar chemical properties,
should It be inferred that as barium does
IT, that radiuIn does II. too? And just prob
able IS II once more that the more remark
able effects are those which are due to
radium, owing to its still more varied quail
ties.