George Gabriel Stokes an W. C. Röntgen (03.01.1896)
author: Sir George Stokes, 1st Baronet
edition published: 2023-10-05
availability: CC BY-NC-SA (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title type="main">81048</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><publisher>tranScriptorium</publisher></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><bibl><publisher>TRP document creator: Marcel Michels M.A.</publisher></bibl></sourceDesc></fileDesc></teiHeader><facsimile xml:id="facs_1"><surface lrx="2271" lry="3061" ulx="0" uly="0"><graphic height="3061px" url="81048_1.jpg" width="2271px"/><zone points="113,213 113,2961 2129,2961 2129,213" rendition="TextRegion" xml:id="facs_1_r1"> </zone></surface></facsimile><text><body><pb facs="#facs_1" n="1"/><p facs="#facs_1_r1"> <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l1" n="N001"/>Lensfield Cottage, Cambridge, 3 Jan. 1896. <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l2" n="N002"/>Dear Sir, <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l3" n="N003"/> I write to thank you most sincerely for your paper on a new kind <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l4" n="N004"/>of rays, a copy of which I received by this morning's post. <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l5" n="N005"/>I found it intensly interesting, and I do not know what to think <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l6" n="N006"/>of the nature of these rays, as you name them, though you guard <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l7" n="N007"/>yourself from inplying thereby that they are necessarily of the <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l8" n="N008"/>nature of rays properly so called. <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l9" n="N009"/> I had often seen the expression "Kathodenstrahlen", but till <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l10" n="N010"/>lately took for granted that the expression was intended to be <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l11" n="N011"/>understood in a metaphorical sense. It never entered into my <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l12" n="N012"/>head to suppose that anyone imagined them to be rays in the <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l13" n="N013"/>sense in which we speak of rays of light or of heat; that is, an <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l14" n="N014"/>isolated small portion of undulations propagated in the ether. <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l15" n="N015"/>I thought that they were called rays merely as a convenient term, <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l16" n="N016"/>recalling some of the aspects in which they have a superficial <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l17" n="N017"/>appearance resembling rays. But it seemed to me that an <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l18" n="N018"/>actual transfer of ponderable molecules was an essential part of <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l19" n="N019"/>them. But not long ago Professor J.J. Thomson told me that <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l20" n="N020"/>he thought that some physicists believed them to be actual rays. <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l21" n="N021"/>I do not know what your opinion on this subject is. Whichever view <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l22" n="N022"/>of the nature of the so-called Kathodenstrahlen be taken, your <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l23" n="N023"/>remarkable experiments show that the influence which you are <lb facs="#facs_1_r1l24" n="N024"/>studying is altogether different in its nature from the Kathoden- <lb facs="#facs_1_line_1605263987608_67" n="N001"/>strahlen.</p><p facs="#facs_1_region_1605263965659_56"/><pb facs="#facs_2" n="2"/><p facs="#facs_2_r1"/><p facs="#facs_2_r2"> <lb facs="#facs_2_r2l1" n="N001"/> I remain with admiration for your researches <lb facs="#facs_2_r2l2" n="N002"/> Yours faithfully, <lb facs="#facs_2_r2l3" n="N003"/> G. G. Stokes <lb facs="#facs_2_r2l4" n="N004"/>Professor W. C. Röntgen. <lb facs="#facs_2_r2l5" n="N005"/>Herrn Professor W. C. Röntgen <lb facs="#facs_2_r2l6" n="N006"/>Physikalisches Institut der Universität <lb facs="#facs_2_r2l7" n="N007"/> Würzburg <lb facs="#facs_2_r2l8" n="N008"/> Germany</p></body></text></TEI>