Abstract
{VII} Ten years ago, when I began work on the first edition of this book, I was guided by the intention and hope of making a modest contribution by its publication towards eliminating the unclarity and doubt regarding the many viewpoints and theories that were then contending for domination in chemistry. I was of the opinion that the confusing polemics of that time had their major source in false conceptions of the significance of hypotheses and theories, to which some were inclined to attribute much too great, others far too little value. The principal goal of my undertaking was to portray hypotheses and the theories based on them as necessary aids to chemical research, but to limit their validity to the degree that has long been attributed to them in theoretical physics. I hoped thereby to pave the way for the further development of theoretical chemistry, and simultaneously to make its more recent results accessible to a wider circle. Two years later, when I sent the thrice-revised manuscript to the press, I believed I was indeed providing a service to scientists who were less familiar with chemistry; but my hope to bring a benefit to chemistry itself and to many of its representatives gave way to uneasy misgivings. My small book appeared to me to provide so little detail {VIII} and positive content that I no longer ventured to dedicate it to my honored mentor, as I had intended.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This refers to the annual series Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der Chemie, edited by Hermann Kopp and others from 1849, a continuation of the series that Berzelius began in 1821 (Eds.).]
- 2.
So, for example, in his New System of Chemical Philosophy, German translation by F. Wolff (Berlin, 1812), vol. 1, p. 164.
- 3.
W. Thomson, “The Size of Atoms,” Nature 1 (31 March 1870), 551–53; “On the Size of Atoms,” American Journal of Science and Arts [2] 50 (1870), 38–44; “Ueber die Grösse der Atome,” Annalen der Chemie 157 (1871), 54–66.
- 4.
Stas, “Nouvelles recherches sur les lois des proportions chimiques: I,” Mémoires de l’Académie Royale des Sciences des lettres et de beaux-arts de Belgique 35 (1865), 27–108; Untersuchungen über die Gesetze der chemischen Proportionen, über die Atomgewichte und ihre gegenseitigen Verhältnisse, trans. L. Aronstein (Leipzig, 1867), pp. 29–107.
- 5.
Ibid., “Nouvelles recherches,” 68–77; German translation 69–77.
- 6.
On the history of Prout’s hypothesis and its examination see especially Kopp, Geschichte der Chemie, vol. 2 (Braunschweig, 1844), pp. 391–93; Berzelius, Lehrbuch der Chemie, op. cit., fifth ed., vol. 3, pp. 1173–79; Stas, Recherches sur les rapports réciproques des poids atomiques (Brussels, 1860), pp. 6–13 and 131–34 (the introduction to this book is fully translated in Annalen der Chemie, suppl. vol. 4 (1866), 168–201); Marignac’s reviews of Stas’s work in Bibliothèque universelle 9 (1860), 97–107, on 101, and ibid., 24 (1865), 371–76, on 375; and Marignac, “Ueber die Atomgewichte der Elemente,” Annalen der Chemie, suppl. vol. 4 (1866), 201–6.
- 7.
See references in the previous footnote.
- 8.
J. W. Döbereiner, “Versuch zu einer Gruppirung der elementaren Stoffen nach ihrer Analogie,” Annalen der Physik 15 (1829): 301–7.
- 9.
Gmelin, Handbuch der Chemie, third ed., vol. 1 (Heidelberg: Winter, 1826), p. 35; fourth ed., vol. 1 (1843), pp. 50–53; fifth ed., vol. 1 (1852), pp. 47–50.
- 10.
For literature references see Kopp and Will, Jahresbericht for 1851, pp. 291–92; for 1852, p. 294; for 1853, p. 312; for 1854, pp. 284–85; for 1857, pp. 27–30, 36; for 1858, pp. 13–14; for 1859, pp. 1 and 7; for 1860, p. 5; for 1862, p. 7; for 1863, p. 13; for 1864, p. 16; and for 1865, p. 17.
- 11.
See §32, p. {73} [of this second edition], above.
- 12.
Meyer, Moderne Theorien, first edition, p. 137. [The following table was reprinted exactly as it appeared in the first edition, with two exceptions, as noted in the next two footnotes.]
- 13.
The numerical values of the atomic weights have been adjusted from the first edition, according to the above-cited work by Stas and others, but without significantly changing the essential nature of the relationships.
- 14.
[The following note corresponds to the triple asterisk in the last row of the following figure:] In the alkali metal series, at that time the final member was denoted conjecturally as “(Tl = 204?).” The parentheses and question mark indicated doubt in the correctness of this assignment, and in fact today it appears even less justified than at that time.
- 15.
Mendeleev, “Ueber die Beziehungen der Eigenschaften zu den Atomgewichten der Elemente,” Zeitschrift für Chemie, 12 (1869), 405–6, on 405; “Sootnoshenie svoistv s atomnym vesom elementov,” Zhurnal Russkogo Khimicheskogo Obshchestva 1(1869), 60–77.
- 16.
[The following note corresponds to the single asterisk in the table:] Al [is] apparently trivalent; see §132 and §137.
- 17.
[The following note corresponds to the double asterisk in the table:] Or: Mn = 54.8.
- 18.
Meyer, “Die Natur der chemischen Elemente als Function ihrer Atomgewichte,” Annalen der Chemie, suppl. vol. 7 (1870), 354–64, on 357.
- 19.
Meyer did not mention here that manganese did not appear in either of the two partial tables displayed on pp. {297} and {299}, except as a possible replacement in the position indicated for iron, in which case iron would not have appeared (see his fn. 17 above). His full table resulting from the union of these partial tables was not explicitly portrayed, but can easily be constructed by following Meyer’s instruction on p. {299}, and is reproduced in our Commentary (reformatted) as Fig. 4. He also did not mention some other important differences between this preliminary full table comprising the combined arrays of pp. {297} and {299}, and his final “systematic overview” that immediately follows this passage. See our Commentary for a discussion of these points (Eds.).]
- 20.
Actually only 55, since the specific heat of Be is unknown.
- 21.
By contrast to this simple and naturally-derived spiral arrangement, H. Baumhauer has recently published such a spiral portrayed on the plane of the paper: H. Baumhauer, Die Beziehungen zwischen dem Atomgewichte und der Natur der chemischen Elemente (Braunschweig, 1870); however, it contains too much arbitrariness to qualify as an impartial expression of facts. Much more artificial yet, and very difficult to understand, is an even earlier graphic portrayal of the atomic weights of the elements by P. Kremers: Physikalisch-chemische Untersuchungen (Wiesbaden, 1869–70).
- 22.
Meyer, “Natur der chemischen Elemente,” op. cit., 354–64.
- 23.
[The following are the footnote references within the table:] (1) Diamond; for graphite D = 2.15, V = 5.58. (2) Black, crystallized. (3) Two-part, crystallized. (4) Density of liquid chlorine. (5) Density of liquid bromine at 4° C. (6) The densities of niobium and tantalum were determined by H. Rose using impure materials; therefore D is probably too small and V too large.
- 24.
Regarding the first row of Meyer’s table, inspection reveals that for the first four elements in the row the density goes from a smaller to a larger value, and the atomic volume goes from a larger to a smaller value. Since the last three elements in the row, namely N, O, and F, had unknown solid-state densities and atomic volumes, it appears odd that Meyer would choose to include the entire first row in this generalization. But in his atomic volumes line chart that was appended to the last page of the volume, Meyer constructed a “conjecturally completed curve segment” created in part by proposing approximate values assigned to these three elements (as he wrote further down on p. {306}). The resulting curve exhibits rising values in this segment, towards a local maximum at sodium. This atomic volumes curve is nearly identical to the line chart that he had published two and a half years earlier, exhibiting only minor revisions (cf. Figs. 1 and 2 below) (Eds.).]
- 25.
Meyer, “Ueber die Molecularvolumina chemischer Verbindungen,” Annalen der Chemie, suppl. vol. 5 (1867), 129–47.
- 26.
The volume of the elements in compounds is likewise undoubtedly a function of their atomic weight, but it is not possible at this time to specify the form of this function in general. But as uncertain as our knowledge of the volumes of the various atoms in compounds may be, we can nevertheless assume with some confidence that the differences between the volumes of the various elements are as a rule smaller in compounds than in the isolated state. To cite just a single example, the oxides of the light metals occupy a smaller volume, and oxides of the heavier metals a larger volume, than the quantity of metal contained in them. The volumes of the oxides of the light metals differ from each other far less than do the volumes of the isolated metals among each other. For the heavy metals the difference in volume of the respective oxides is often equal to the difference in the volume of the metals.
- 27.
Assuming, as we did in §158, p. 300, and §159, p. 302, that the atomic weight of platinum is somewhat greater than that of osmium and iridium, as also that of palladium is somewhat greater than that of ruthenium and rhodium.
- 28.
The generally assumed atomic weight of iridium has been calculated by a single experiment performed long ago by Berzelius, in which he determined only the loss of weight experienced by the compound IrK2Cl6 when reduced by hydrogen gas.
- 29.
Once again, this is presuming that the atomic weight of gold is somewhat greater than that of Os, Ir, and Pt.
- 30.
Stas, Nouvelles recherches, op.cit., p. 165.
- 31.
Ibid., p. 140. These observations by Stas, made using the purest samples of bromine and iodine ever prepared, were not included in the Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der Chemie, and probably for this reason have also not been mentioned in recent textbooks, the sole exception being Roscoe’s so meticulously written book.
- 32.
Regnault, Relation des expériences … pour déterminer les lois et données physiques …, vol. 2 (Paris, 1862), p. 527. On p. 658 the boiling point of sulfur is erroneously cited as 490°, which is also taken into the Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der Chemie für 1863, p. 70.
- 33.
Regarding the distillation of silver, see Stas, Nouvelles recherches, pp. 36–38.
- 34.
S. W. Johnson and O. D. Allen, “On the Equivalent and Spectrum of Caesium,” American Journal of Science, [2] 35 (1863), 94–98.
- 35.
Calculated for Ag = 107.66 and Cl = 35.37; Johnson and Allen used the numbers Ag = 107.94 and Cl = 35.46, which gave them Cs = 133.0.
- 36.
Bunsen, “Zur Kenntniss des Cäsiums,” Annalen der Physik 119 (1863), 1–11.
- 37.
Liebig, quoted from a letter to Thomas Andrews, in Andrews, “Ueber die Aequivalentgewichte von Platin und Baryum,” Annalen der Chemie 85 (1853), 255–56, on 256.
- 38.
See A. Strecker, Theorien und Experimente zur Bestimmung der Atomgewichte der Elemente (Braunschweig, 1859), p. 41; also Handwörterbuch der Chemie, second ed., “Atomgewichte.”
- 39.
Strecker, ibid., p. 124.
- 40.
Dumas, “Mémoire sur les équivalents des corps simples,” Annales de chimie [3] 55 (1859), 129–210, on 177.
- 41.
I. Avdeev, “Ueber das Beryllium und dessen Verbindungen,” Annalen der Physik, 56 (1842), 101–24.
- 42.
Winkler, “Beiträge zur Kenntniss des Indiums,” Journal für praktische Chemie 102 (1867), 273–97.
- 43.
Mendeleev, “Ueber die Beziehungen der Eigenschaften zu den Atomgewichten der Elemente,” Zeitschrift für Chemie, 12 (1869), 405–6.
- 44.
Meyer, “Natur der chemischen Elemente,” op. cit., p. 362.
- 45.
Bunsen, “Calorimetrische Untersuchungen,” Annalen der Physik 141 (1870), 1–31, on 28–29.
- 46.
The first group comprises the future elements scandium (Sc, whose atomic weight is 45), gallium (Ga = 70), yttrium (Y = 89), and lanthanum (La = 139); the second group comprises the future elements germanium (Ge = 72) and hafnium (Hf = 178); and the third group comprises the future elements technetium (Tc = 98) and rhenium (Rh = 186). With the exception of lanthanum, Meyer’s eight predictions of new elements with their atomic weights proved to be remarkably accurate (Eds.).]
- 47.
Mendeleev, “Die periodische Gesetzmässigkeit der chemischen Elemente,” Annalen der Chemie, suppl. vol. 8 (1871), 133–229.
- 48.
The full intent of this sentence is obscure. See our discussion in sect. 12 of the Commentary (Eds.).]
- 49.
Despite this indecision, Meyer clearly favored the second grouping, for he reproduced it without qualification in each of the two substantively identical versions of his full table, on pp. {301} and {305}, and also in the two-part table on pp. {297–99}. It is also interesting to note that the placements of ruthenium and osmium in the array on p. {347} are inconsistent with that final full table. Meyer appears to have been adjusting his preferences even while writing this edition of his book, creating some internal inconsistencies. See above, n. 19, for additional instances of vacillation or internal conflict, p. {IX} of the preface for Meyer’s apology for such inconsistencies, and our discussion in sections 12 and 13 of the Commentary (Eds.).]
- 50.
Mendeleev, op. cit., p. 198.
- 51.
This is demonstrated particularly in the repeated rearrangements of the elements in Mendeleev’s various above-cited papers, as well as in the convoluted lines on Baumhauer’s spiral table.
- 52.
F. Bacon, Novum organum, vol. 1, aphorism XX. [“For the mind is fond of beginning with generalities, in order to avoid labour, and after a short time scorns experiment.”]
- 53.
As the reader of this edition will be able to confirm, in the first edition Meyer’s concluding thoughts comprise §§92, 93, and 94 (pp. {139–47}) of that volume; these reflections were not grouped under the heading “Schlusswort” but rather were silently integrated as part of the main text. In the second edition, pp. {352–58}, Meyer reprinted these three sections without change (merely omitting section numbers), under the heading “Schlusswort zur ersten Auflage.” (Eds.)]
- 54.
Bacon, Novum organum I, aphorism LIV [“Moreover, from a few furnace-experiments the tribe of chymists have constructed a fantastical philosophy looking at only a few things.”].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Dedicated by the author in grateful devotion to Dr. R. W. Bunsen, Privy Councilor of the Grand Duchy of Baden in Heidelberg
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Boeck, G., Rocke, A.J. (2022). Lothar Meyer, Modern Theories of Chemistry, Second Edition (1872), Selections. In: Lothar Meyer. Classic Texts in the Sciences. Birkhäuser, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78342-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78342-6_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Birkhäuser, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-78341-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-78342-6
eBook Packages: Chemistry and Materials ScienceChemistry and Material Science (R0)