Professor Gibbs's criticism of the illustration of water-mixture is

evidently just. Another might well have been used where the things mixed

are not material--for instance, the value of money deposited in a bank. If

A and B each deposits $100 to C's credit and C then draws $10, there is

evidently no way of determining what part of it came from A and what from

B. The structure of "value", in other words, is perfectly continuous.

Professor Gibbs's objections to an "atomic" theory of the structure of

energy are most interesting. The difficulties that it involves are not

overstated. In 1897 they made it unnecessary, but since that time

considerations have been brought forward, and generally recognized, which

may make it necessary to brave those difficulties.

Planck's theory was suggested by the apparent necessity of modifying the

generally accepted theory of statistical equilibrium involving the so

called "law of equipartition," enunciated first for gases and extended to

liquids and solids.

In the first place the kinetic theory fixes the number of degrees of

freedom of each gaseous molecule, which would be three for argon, for

instance, and five for oxygen. But what prevents either from having the

six degrees to which ordinary mechanical theory entitles it? Furthermore,

the oxygen spectrum has more than five lines, and the molecule must

therefore vibrate in more than five modes. "Why," asks Poincaré, "do

certain degrees of freedom appear to play no part here; why are they, so

to speak, 'ankylosed'?" Again, suppose a system in statistical

equilibrium, each part gaining on an average, in a short time, exactly as

much as it loses. If the system consists of molecules and ether, as the

former have a finite number of degrees of freedom and the latter an

infinite number, the unmodified law of equipartition would require that

the ether should finally appropriate all energy, leaving none of it to the

matter. To escape this conclusion we have Rayleigh's law that the radiated

energy, for a given wave length, is proportional to the absolute

temperature, and for a given temperature is in inverse ratio to the fourth

power of the wave-length. This is found by Planck to be experimentally

unverifiable, the radiation being less for small wave-lengths and low

temperatures, than the law requires.

Still again, the specific heats of solids, instead of being sensibly

constant at all temperatures, are found to diminish rapidly in the low

temperatures now available in liquid air or hydrogen and apparently tend

to disappear at absolute zero. "All takes place," says Poincaré, "as if

these molecules lost some of their degrees of freedom in cooling--as if

some of their articulations froze at the limit."

Planck attempts to explain these facts by introducing the idea of what he

calls "quanta" of energy. To quote from Poincaré's paper:

"How should we picture a radiating body? We know that a Hertz resonator

sends into the ether Hertzian waves that are identical with luminous

waves; an incandescent body must then be regarded as containing a very

great number of tiny resonators. When the body is heated, these resonators

acquire energy, start vibrating and consequently radiate.

"Planck's hypothesis consists in the supposition that each of these

resonators can acquire or lose energy only by abrupt jumps, in such a way

that the store of energy that it possesses must always be a multiple of a

constant quantity, which he calls a 'quantum'--must be composed of a whole

number of quanta. This indivisible unit, this quantum, is not the same for

all resonators; it is in inverse ratio to the wave-length, so that

resonators of short period can take in energy only in large pieces, while

those of long period can absorb or give it out by small bits. What is the

result? Great effort is necessary to agitate a short-period resonator,

since this requires at least a quantity of energy equal to its quantum,

which is great. The chances are, then, that these resonators will keep

quiet, especially if the temperature is low, and it is for this reason

that there is relatively little short-wave radiation in 'black

radiation'... The diminution of specific-heats is explained similarly:

When the temperature falls, a large number of vibrators fall below their

quantum and cease to vibrate, so that the total energy diminishes faster

than the old theories require."

Here we have the germs of an atomic theory of energy. As Poincaré now

points out, the trouble is that the quanta are not constant. In his study

of the matter he notes that the work of Prof. Wilhelm Wien, of Würzburg,

leads by theory to precisely the conclusion announced by Planck that if we

are to hold to the accepted ideas of statistical equilibrium the energy

can vary only by quanta inversely proportional to wave-length. The

mechanical property of the resonators imagined by Planck is therefore

precisely that which Wien's theory requires. If we are to suppose atoms of

energy, therefore, they must be variable atoms. There are other objections

which need not be touched upon here, the whole theory being in a very

early stage. To quote Poincaré again:

"The new conception is seductive from a certain standpoint: for some time

the tendency has been toward atomism. Matter appears to us as formed of

indivisible atoms; electricity is no longer continuous, not infinitely

divisible. It resolves itself into equally-charged electrons; we have also

now the magneton, or atom of magnetism. From this point of view the quanta

appear as _atoms_ of _energy_. Unfortunately the comparison may not be

pushed to the limit; a hydrogen atom is really invariable.... The

electrons preserve their individuality amid the most diverse vicissitudes,

is it the same with the atoms of energy? We have, for instance, three

quanta of energy in a resonator whose wave-length is 3; this passes to a

second resonator whose wave-length is 5; it now represents not 3 but 5

quanta, since the quantum of the new resonator is smaller and in the

transformation the number of atoms and the size of each has changed."

If, however, we replace the atom of energy by an "atom of action," these

atoms may be considered equal and invariable. The whole study of

thermodynamic equilibrium has been reduced by the French mathematical

school to a question of probability. "The probability of a continuous

variable is obtained by considering elementary independent domains of

equal probability.... In the classic dynamics we use, to find these

elementary domains, the theorem that two physical states of which one is

the necessary effect of the other are equally probable. In a physical

system if we represent by _q_ one of the generalized coordinates and by

_p_ the corresponding momentum, according to Liouville's theorem the

domain [double integral]_dpdq_, considered at given instant, is invariable

with respect to the time if _p_ and _q_ vary according to Hamilton's

equations. On the other hand _p_ and _q_ may, at a given instant take all

possible values, independent of each other. Whence it follows that the

elementary domain is infinitely small, of the magnitude _dpdq_.... The new

hypothesis has for its object to restrict the variability of _p_ and _q_

so that these variables will only change by jumps.... Thus the number of

elementary domains of probability is reduced and the extent of each is

augmented. The hypothesis of quanta of action consists in supposing that

these domains are all equal and no longer infinitely small but finite and

that for each [double integral]_dpdq_ equals _h_, _h_ being a constant."

Put a little less mathematically, this simply means that as energy equals

action multiplied by frequency, the fact that the quantum of energy is

proportional to the frequency (or inversely to the wave-length as stated

above) is due simply to the fact that the quantum of action is constant--a

real atom. The general effect on our physical conceptions, however, is the

same: we have a purely discontinuous universe--discontinuous not only in

matter but in energy and the flow of time. M. Poincaré thus puts it: "A

physical system is susceptible only of a finite number of distinct states;

it leaps from one of these to the next without passing through any

continuous series of intermediate states."

He notes later:

"The universe, then, leaps suddenly from one state to another; but in the

interval it must remain immovable, and the divers instants during which it

keeps in the same state can no longer be discriminated from one another;

we thus reach a conception of the discontinuous variation of time--the

atom of _time_."

I quote in conclusion, Poincaré's final remarks:

"The present state of the question is thus as follows: the old theories,

which hitherto seemed to account for all the known phenomena, have met

with an unexpected obstacle. Seemingly a modification becomes necessary. A

hypothesis has presented itself to M. Planck's mind, but so strange a one

that one is tempted to seek every means of escaping it; these means,

however, have been sought vainly. The new theory, however, raises a host

of difficulties, many of which are real and not simply illusions due to

the indolence of our minds, unwilling to change their modes of thought....

"Is discontinuity to reign through out the physical universe, and is its

triumph definitive? Or rather shall we find that it is but apparent and

hides a series of continuous processes?... To try to give an opinion just

now on these questions would only be to waste ink."

It only remains to call attention again to the fact that this conception

of the discontinuity of energy, the acceptance of which Poincaré says

would be "the most profound revolution that natural philosophy has

undergone since Newton" was suggested by the present writer fifteen years

ago. Its reception and serious consideration by one of the first

mathematical physicists of the world seems a sufficient justification of

its suggestion then as a legitimate scientific hypothesis.

THE ADVERTISEMENT OF IDEAS

Writing is a device for the storage of ideas--the only device for this

purpose prior to the invention of the phonograph, and not now likely to be

generally superseded. A book consists of stored ideas; sometimes it is

like a box, from which the contents must be lifted slowly and with more or

less toil; sometimes like a storage battery where one only has to make the

right kind of contact to get a discharge. At any rate, if we want people

to use books or to use them more, or to use them better, or to use a

different kind from that which they now use, we must lose sight for a

moment of the material part of the book, which is only the box or the lead

and acid of the storage battery, and fix our attention on the stored

ideas, which are what everybody wants--everybody, that is, except those

who collect books as curiosities. The subject of this lecture is thus only

library advertising, about which we have heard a good deal of late, but we

shall try to confine its applications to this inner or ideal substance

which it is our special business as librarians to purvey. And first, in

considering the matter, it may be worth while to say a word about

advertising in general. Practically an advertisement is an announcement by

somebody who has something to distribute. Announcements of this kind may

be classified, it seems to me, as economic, uneconomic and illegitimate.

The most elementary form is that of the person who tells you where you can

get something that you want--a simple statement that someone is a barber

or an inn-keeper, or gives music lessons, or has shoes for sale. This may

be accompanied by an effort to show that the goods offered are of

specially good quality or have some feature that makes them particularly

desirable, either to consumers in general or to those of a certain class.

This is all surely economic, so long as nothing but the truth is told.

Next we have an effort not only to supply existing wants and to direct

them into some particular channel, but to create a new field, to make

people realize a lack previously not felt; in other words to make people

want something that they need. This may be done simply by exhibiting or

describing the article or it may require long and skillful presentation of

the matter. All this is still economic. But it requires only a step to

carry us across the line. Next the enthusiastic advertiser strives to make

someone want that which he does not need. As may be seen, the line here is

difficult to determine, but this sort of advertising is surely not

economic. So long as the thing not needed is not really injurious,

however, the advertising cannot be called illegitimate. It is simply

uneconomic. The world would be better off without it, but we may look for

its abolition only to the increase of good judgment and intelligence among

consumers. When an attempt however, is made to cause a man to want

something that is really injurious, then the act becomes illegitimate and

should be prevented. Another class of illegitimate advertising is that

which would be perfectly allowable if it were truthful and becomes

objectionable only because its representations are false. It may be

ostensibly of any of the types noted above.

As we have already noted, the material objects distributed by the

librarian are valued not for their physical characteristics but for a

different reason altogether, the fact that they contain stored ideas.

Ideas which, according to some, are merely the relative positions of

material particles in the brain, and which are indisputably accompanied

and conditioned by such positions, here subsist in the form of peculiar

and visible arrangements of particles of printer's ink upon paper, which

are capable under certain conditions of generating in the human brain

ideas precisely similar to those that gave them birth. And although the

book cannot think for itself, but must merely preserve the idea intrusted

to it, without change, it is vastly superior in stability to the brain

that gave it birth, so that thousands of years after that brain has

mouldered into dust it is capable of reproducing the original ideas in a

second brain where they may germinate and bear fruit. How familiar all

this is, and yet how perennially wonderful! The miracle of it is

sufficient excuse for this digression.

Now books, beside this modern form of distribution by loan, are widely

distributed commercially both by loan and by sale, and especially in the

latter form advertisement is now very extensively used in connection with

the distribution. In fact we have all the different types specified

above--economic, uneconomic and illegitimate, both through

misrepresentation and the harmful character of the subject matter. The

reason for all illegitimate forms of advertising is of course not a desire

to misrepresent or to do harm per se, but to make money, the profit to the

distributor being proportioned to the amount of distribution done and not

at all dependent on its economic value. Distribution by public officers is

of course not open to this objection, nor are the distributors subject to

temptation, since their compensation does not depend on the amount of

distribution. If they are capable and interested, furthermore, they are

particularly desirous to increase the economic value of the work that they

are doing. Since this is so and since the danger of uneconomic or harmful

forms of advertising is thus reduced to a minimum, there would seem to be

special reason why the economic forms should be employed very freely. But

the fact is that they have been used sparingly, and by some librarians

shunned altogether.

Let us see what library advertising of the economic types may mean. In the

first place it means telling those who want books where they may get them.

This simple task is rarely performed completely or satisfactorily. It is

astonishing how many inhabitants of a large town do not even know where

the public library is. Everyone realizes this who has ever tried to find a

public library in a strange place. I once asked repeatedly of passers-by

in a crowded city street a block distant from a library (in this case not

architecturally conspicuous) before finding one who knew its whereabouts;

in another city I inquired in vain of a conductor who passed the building

every few hours in his car. In the latter case the library was a beautiful

structure calculated to move the curiosity of a less stolid citizen. In

New York inquiry would probably cause you to reach the nearest branch

library, anything more remote than that being beyond the local

intelligence. Sometimes I think we had better drop all our far-reaching

plans for civic betterment and devote our time for a few years to causing

citizens, lettered and unlettered alike to memorize some such simple

formula as this: "There is a Public Library. It is on Blank street. We may

borrow books there, free."

You will notice that I have inserted in this formula one item of

information that pertains to use, not location. For of those who know of

the existence and location of the Public Library there are many whose

ideas of its contents and their uses, and of the conditions and value of

such uses, are limited and crude. The advertising that succeeds in

bettering this state of things is surely doing an economic service. All

these things the self-respecting citizen should know. But beyond and above

all this there is the final economic service of advertising--the causing a

man to want that which he needs but does not yet desire. Every man, woman

and child in every town and village needs books in some shape, degree,

form or substance. And yet the proportion of those who desire them is yet

outrageously small, though encouragingly on the increase. Here no

memorizing of a formula, even could we compass it, could suffice. This

kind of advertising means the realization of something lacking in a life.

Is the awakening of such a realization too much for us? Are we to stand by

and see our neighbors all about us awakening to the undoubted fact that

they need telephones in their houses, and electric runabouts, and

mechanical fans in hot weather, and pianolas, and new kinds of breakfast

food, while we despair of awakening them to their needs of books--quite as

undoubted? Are we to admit that personal gain, which was the victorious

motive that spurred on the commercial advertisers in these and countless

other instances, is to be counted more mighty than the desire to do a

service to our fellowmen and to fulfill the duties of our positions--which

should spur us on?

I am not foolish enough to suppose that by placarding the fences with the

words "Books! Books!" as the patent medicine man does with "Curoline!

Curoline!" we shall make any progress. The patent medicine man is right;

he wants to excite curiosity and familiarize the public with the name of

his nostrum. They all know what a book is--and alas the name is not even

unknown and mysterious--would that it were! It calls up in many minds

associations which, if we are to be successful we must combat, overthrow,

and replace by others. To many--sad it is to say it--a book is an

abhorrent thing; to more still, it is a thing of absolute indifference. To

some a book is merely a collection of things, having no ascertainable

relationships, that one is required to memorize; to others it is a

collection of statements, difficult to understand, out of which the

meaning must be extracted by hard study; to very few indeed does the book

appear to be what it really is--a message from another mind. People will

go to a seance and listen with thrills to the silliest stuff purporting to

proceed from Plato or Daniel Webster or Abraham Lincoln, when in the

Public Library, a few blocks away are important and authentic messages

from those same persons, to which they have never given heed. Such a

message derives interest and significance from circumstances outside

itself. Very few books create their own atmosphere unaided. They

presuppose a system of abilities, opinions, prejudices, likes and

dislikes, intellectual connections and what not, that is little less than

appalling, if we try to follow it up. Dislike of books or indifference

toward them is often simply the result of a lack of these things or of

some component part of them. We must supply what is lacking if we are to

arouse a desire for books in those who do not yet possess it. I say that

such a labor is difficult enough to interest him whose pleasure it is to

essay hard tasks; it is noble enough to attract him who loves his

fellow-man; success in it is rare enough and glorious enough to stimulate

him who likes to succeed where others have failed. Advertising may be good

or bad, noble or ignoble, right or wrong, according to what is advertised

and our methods of advertising it. He who would scorn to announce the

curative powers of bottled spring-water and pink aniline dye; he who

regards it as a commonplace task to urge upon the spendthrift public the

purchase of unnecessary gloves and neckties, may well feel a thrill of

satisfaction and of anticipation in the task of advertising ideas and of

persuading the unheeding citizen to appropriate what he has been

accustomed to view with indifference.

To get at the root of the matter, let us inquire why it is that so many

persons do not care for books. We may divide them, I think, into two

classes--those who do not care, or appear not to care for ideas at all,

whether stored in books or not; and those who do care for ideas but who

either do not easily get them out of storage or do not realize that they

can be and are stored in books. Absolute carelessness of ideas is, it

seems to me, rather apparent than real. It exists only in the idiot. There

are those to be sure that care about a very limited range of ideas; but

about some ideas they always care.

A Librarian's Open Shelf: Essays on Various Subjects · 第 8 / 23 段