Letter | Published:

The Structure of the Atom

Nature volume 92, page 452 (18 December 1913) | Download Citation



I CONCUR with Prof. Rutherford (NATURE, December 11, p. 423) that the work by Moseley in the current number of the Philosophical Magazine, which was not published, and was quite unknown to me when I wrote my letter (NATURE, December 4, p. 399), is an important independent confirmation by new physical methods of van der Broek's suggestion. As, however, in a paper published eight months previously (jahr. Radioaktivitt und Elektronik., 1913, ×., 193), I had represented in a diagram the places in the periodic table from uranium to thallium, with the mass as the ordinate and the charge as the abscissa, showing that there is unit difference of charge between successive places, I wish to take exception to Prof. Rutherford's statement “that the strongest and most convincing evidence” in support of van der Broek's hypothesis will be found in Moseley's paper. The view had already been far more simply and convincingly established from the chemical examination of the properties of the radio-elements, notably by A. Fleck in this laboratory. Moseley's conclusions are a welcome confirmation, by an independent method, for another part of the periodic table. It can only be described as the strongest and most convincing evidence if the prior chemical evidence is altogether ignored.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Author information


  1. Physical Chemistry Laboratory, University of Glasgow, December 12.



  1. Search for FREDERICK SODDY in:

About this article

Publication history





By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.