Letters

Textbook Errors, by Stanley Kirschner Pigs in Space, by Charles Ditlow Archaeopteryx Arguments, by Fred Hoyle Japan and The United States , by Kenneth M. Matsumura I would like to comment on "Let's Put an End to Textbook Nonsense" (November 30, 1987, p. 11) by Stephen J. Hawkes. Basically, Hawkes is right. We should make a determined effort to put an end to textbook errors. Hawkes also points out that it is no easy matter to correct errors-even well- known ones-in textbooks, and he cites some of the reasons. However, it is also true that errors are sometimes promulgated because authors find it difficult to tell "the whole truth" in introductory textbooks, since the whole truth is sometimes rather complicated and lengthy. An illustration of this is Hawkes' own example of MgCl, which most certainly does not exist in aqueous solution as the simple ion-pair MgCl, but as MgCl combined with three, four or (most likely) five water molecules. But it would be difficult indeed for a text book author to include the basic concepts of ions and their charges, ion-pair formation. covalent and coordinate covalent bonds, solvation, coordination compounds and coordination numbers, and the like all in the first few weeks of an introductory chemistry course or in the first few chapters of an introductory text. So the question of how to avoid textbook errors, while still writing a useful book for introductory chemistry courses, is a difficult one. The American Chemical Society's Division of Chemical Education is creating a new Committee on Introductory Chemistry that undoubtedly will examine the introductory curricula at both the high school and college levels. (Is the near duplication of the curricula at these two levels essential or even desirable?) I am pleased that Hawkes has accepted membership on this committee and I am optimistic that a coordinated effort in this area has a reasonable chance of producing significant progress soon. -Stanley Kirschner Chemistry Dept. Wayne State University Detroit, Ml 48202 In reference to the successful miniaturization of the pig and the British hopes for experimenting with this new creature in space (November 16, 1987, p. 24): The investigators should plan to orbit a large group of mini-pigs. It will be the herd shot 'round the world. Charles Ditlow Hygeia Sciences 330 Nevada St. Newton, MA 02160-1432 In connection with the ongoing Archaeopteryx exhibition at the British Museum (Natural History), several statements have been made to the effect that we have an ulterior motive for maintaining this fossil to be a fake, and that the facts are clearly in support of a genuine fossil (see &"It's a Fake! It's Genuine!--You Decide" by John Durant, November 2, 1987, p. 20). In particular, it is alleged that our theory of evolution controlled by viruses from space excludes the possibility of a genuine Archaeopteryx or of similar transitional forms. This assertion is plainly incorrect. We have not once referred to the relevance of such forms to our theory, and the false statements we have seen in this regard cast doubt, in our view, on the veracity of some of our critics' other, more technical assertions. As Durant has hinted in his review, the statement that the London and Berlin Archaeopteryx specimens are instantly vindicated by the existence of feathers in other specimens that were discovered recently, is invalidated because we do not think there is any evidence of feather impressions in these later specimens. An earlier claim that the dendritic patterns on the slab and the counterslab match to an extent that no cement layer could have been superposed is also demonstrably incorrect. The match of dendritic patterns exists only over the so-called "unfeathered" regions; striking mismatches do indeed occur where the suspect feathered regions are involved (British Journal of Photography, vol. 134, 1987, p. 682). The most recent claim that the lack of ultraviolet fluorescence in the wing areas vindicates the fossil is again open to challenge on several counts. While it is true that most organic glues fluoresce when exposed to UV light, the fluorescent behavior of organic materials is known to be highly variable, and it could also be sensitively dependent on solvent or matrix interactions, as in the case of a glue-limestone mixture. Furthermore, the application of a thin layer of a protective varnish (thickness comparable to wavelength) over the whole slab would undoubtedly affect its overall appearance in fluorescent radiation that originates mainly in the cement but is subsequently scattered through the superficial layer. We note in this connection that a photograph of the slab using UV illumination was taken in the 1950s and published as plate II of G. de Beer's classic monograph "Archaeopteryx Lithographica." Here we find that the wings may be showing a fluorescent effect, although admittedly considerably weaker than in the bones. Finally, we note that in July 1986 the museum supplied us with a minute sample of feathered material from an elevated blob on the counterslab of the fossil, and also a small sample of matrix limestone for comparison. These samples were analyzed using a scanning electron microscope by L.M. Spetner and M. Margaritz at the Weitzmann Institute in Israel. While the limestone matrix was resolved into a collection of calcite crystals, as expected, the feathered material turned out to be a mixture of calcite and glue-like strands. The abundance of chemical elements in the feathered material was also consistent with the forgery hypothesis. Clearly, the only satisfactory way to resolve this problem in a convincing way will be to repeat the analysis we have carried out in more samples from the fossil. We find it quite amazing that weak and often ambiguous verbal arguments are given precedence over such direct sample testing. -Fred Hoyle Chandra Wickramsinghe University College Cardiff CF1 1XL, Wales, UK Eugene Garfield's article "What Tonegawa's Nobel Doesn't Mean" (November 16, 1987, p. 9) was a cogent rebuttal to Stephen Kreider Yoder's article in the Wall Street Journal entitled "Native Son's Nobel Award Is Japan's Loss: Scientist's Prize Points Up Research System's Failings" (October 14, 1987, p. 30). I had found Yoder's viewpoints dangerously smug. Garfield was right to point out Japan's "recent superior performance, which seems to foreshadow a dominant role... in the future" [in basic re search]. However, I thought it might be worthwhile to relate my personal experience that also sheds light on this subject. I came from Japan when I turned 10, old enough to make some intelligent comparisons between the educational systems of Japan and the United States. I vividly remember an incredible feeling of liberation. The daily pressures of regimentation in the Japanese schools, the long bouts and piles of homework that left no time to pursue one's interests had left me a nervous child of a mere 58 pounds. While we in the United States encourage independence and extol one's being a goat among the sheep, Japan encourages self-effacy humility and "hammers down any nail that sticks up." This type of fundamental difference is deep-rooted and not likely to change much in the near future. Look at the difference in the history of the two countries. On the one hand, our pioneers, alone in vast lands, had to be inventive and self-reliant to survive; those who immigrated to this country sought freedom of thought. On the other hand, the Japanese have lived in crowds for centuries and those who survived had to learn to get along with others and to cooperate; they were careful not to elicit jealousy, a sure cause of disharmony. They dressed and acted like everyone else. I believe these fundamental historical differences will keep the innovation emerging from Japan and the United States unique to each country. The lack of regimentation in the United States may allow more ideas that are truly different, while the Japanese may excel in equally important ideas that result from meticulous analysis and well-grounded extrapolation. Only history will tell. I am quite disturbed by the recent trend in the United States to emulate Japanese education by extending school hours and cramming the curriculum. Let's leave our young some time to sit thoughtfully under an apple tree. -Kenneth N. Matsumura Aim Foundation Institute 1 Alin Plaza 2107 Dwight/Shattuck Berkeley, CA 94704-2062

Letters

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of