A Bouquet of Numbers and Other

Scientific Offerings Jeremy Bernstein

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/a-bouquet-of-numbers-and-other-scientific-offerings-j
eremy-bernstein/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Quantum Profiles 2nd Edition Jeremy Bernstein

https://textbookfull.com/product/quantum-profiles-2nd-edition-
jeremy-bernstein/

Museums A Visual Anthropology Mary Bouquet

https://textbookfull.com/product/museums-a-visual-anthropology-
mary-bouquet/

A History of Modern Oman Jeremy Jones

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-history-of-modern-oman-jeremy-
jones/

Asthma, COPD, and Overlap: A Case-Based Overview of

Similarities and Differences 1st Edition Jonathan A.
Bernstein

https://textbookfull.com/product/asthma-copd-and-overlap-a-case-
based-overview-of-similarities-and-differences-1st-edition-
jonathan-a-bernstein/
A History of Britain: 1945 through Brexit Jeremy Black

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-history-of-
britain-1945-through-brexit-jeremy-black/

A Spinster for a Spy A Duke s Daughters The Elbury

Bouquet 1 1st Edition Arietta Richmond

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-spinster-for-a-spy-a-duke-s-
daughters-the-elbury-bouquet-1-1st-edition-arietta-richmond/

The Essence of Numbers Frédéric Patras

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-essence-of-numbers-frederic-
patras/

Breaking and Entering The Extraordinary Story of a

Hacker Called Alien Jeremy Smith

https://textbookfull.com/product/breaking-and-entering-the-
extraordinary-story-of-a-hacker-called-alien-jeremy-smith/

Science Without Numbers: A Defense of Nominalism Second

Edition Hartry H. Field

https://textbookfull.com/product/science-without-numbers-a-
defense-of-nominalism-second-edition-hartry-h-field/
 A Bouquet of
Numbers and Other
Scientific Offerings

9975hc_9789814759762_tp.indd 1 19/5/16 9:06 AM

May 2, 2013 14:6 BC: 8831 - Probability and Statistical Theory PST˙ws

This page intentionally left blank

 A Bouquet of
Numbers and Other
Scientific Offerings

Jeremy Bernstein
Stevens Institute of Technology, USA

World Scientific
NEW JERSEY • LONDON • SINGAPORE • BEIJING • SHANGHAI • HONG KONG • TAIPEI • CHENNAI • TOKYO

9975hc_9789814759762_tp.indd 2 19/5/16 9:06 AM

 Published by
World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
5 Toh Tuck Link, Singapore 596224
USA office: 27 Warren Street, Suite 401-402, Hackensack, NJ 07601
UK office: 57 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9HE

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Bernstein, Jeremy, 1929– author.
Title: A bouquet of numbers and other scientific offerings / Jeremy Bernstein,
Stevens Institute of Technology, USA.
Description: Singapore ; Hackensack, NJ : World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., [2016] | 2016 |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2016003720 | ISBN 9789814759762 (hardcover ; alk. paper) |
ISBN 9814759767 (hardcover ; alk. paper) | ISBN 9789814759779 (softcover ; alk. paper) |
ISBN 9814759775 (softcover ; alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Science--Miscellanea.
Classification: LCC Q173 .B525 2016 | DDC 500--dc23
LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2016003720

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Copyright © 2016 by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

All rights reserved. This book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval
system now known or to be invented, without written permission from the publisher.

For photocopying of material in this volume, please pay a copying fee through the Copyright Clearance
Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. In this case permission to photocopy
is not required from the publisher.

In-house Editor: Christopher Teo

Typeset by Stallion Press

Email: enquiries@stallionpress.com

Printed in Singapore

Christopher - A Bouquet of Numbers and Other Scientific Offerings.indd 1 11/2/2016 1:40:35 PM

 Contents

Chapter 1 A Bouquet of Numbers for Olivia 1

Chapter 2 Was Einstein Smart? 13
Chapter 3 A Love Story 25
Chapter 4 Deuteronomy 35
Chapter 5 An Unsolved Mystery 47
Chapter 6 Einstein and His Teacher 67
Chapter 7 Einstein versus Einstein 75
Chapter 8 Wien’s Law 87
Chapter 9 A Quantum of Education 95
Chapter 10 Sommerfeld’s Footnote 103
Chapter 11 Quantum Mechanics 107
Chapter 12 A Song for Molly 133
Chapter 13 An Encore Song for Molly 147
Chapter 14 A Schrödinger Equation 163
Chapter 15 The Life of a Cell 177
Chapter 16 Who Was Hall? 189
Chapter 17 An Entropic Story 195
Chapter 18 Dear Fellow Quantum Mechanicians 217

b2384_FM.indd v 12-May-16 12:57:36 PM

 vi A Bouquet of Numbers and Other Scientific Offerings

Some time ago a very intelligent young lady about to enter high school
asked me about the work of Archimedes as it is related to his calcula-
tion of the areas of polynomials. I had to admit that I did not know but
said that I would look into it. This led me to write a whole bouquet of
numbers which is the first essay in this collection. It is typical in the
sense of how I work. Something strikes my fancy and I am off. I am only
satisfied when I understand enough so that I can explain it usually by
writing an essay. The subject matter of these essays is very diverse but
I will explain how I got to write them as we go along.

b2384_FM.indd vi 12-May-16 12:57:46 PM

 A Bouquet of Numbers for Olivia 1
H
ere are some things that I have learned about numbers. I don’t
know what kids learn about these things now. Maybe you al-
ready know everything I am going to describe but I didn’t
learn about them until I went to college.
I am going to stick to the decimal system 1,2,3…. by and large.
We have this system because we have ten fingers. But it is not the only
system that is possible. The Babylonians used a wonderful system based
on 60.

Image on Wikimedia.

b2384_Ch-01.indd 1 12-May-16 12:25:05 PM

 2 A Bouquet of Numbers for Olivia

How would you like to do division in that system?

Computers use “bits” — ones and zeros. Here is a short list
1 1
2 10
3 11
4 100
5 101
6 110
7 111
8 1000
9 1001
10 1010
11 1011
12 1100
13 You do it.
Adding binary numbers we have to carry the ones. Suppose we
add 11 + 11 which should give us six which is 110. So 11 + 11 gives us
adding from the right 0 and if we carry the 1 the left hand 1 become 10
to which we add 1 to give 11 and hence the 110. Why don’t you try to add
7 to 6 once you get the binary for 13.

It is fun to think of the trinomial system with 0,1,2

0 0
1 1
2 2
3 10
4 11
5 12
6 20
7 21
8 22
9 100
10 101

b2384_Ch-01.indd 2 12-May-16 12:25:16 PM

 A Bouquet of Numbers and Other Scientific Offerings 3

Now let us stick to ordinary positive decimal integers. How many

are there? Put another way is there a biggest one? Here we use a proof
by contradiction of which we shall see several examples.
Let us assume there is a biggest one. Call it m. But m + 1 is big-
ger so the claim that there is a biggest one is false. The number of pos-
itive integers is infinite. This form of infinity is given a name “ aleph0.”
ℵ0 . Aleph is the first letter in the Hebrew alphabet. Now we shall see
the first of the paradoxes of infinity. We considered the positive integers.
Now let us look at the negative ones — 1, −2, −3 and so on. The same
argument as before tells us that there is no largest negative integer. To
each positive integers there is a negative one so their total number is also
ℵ0 . So the total number is 2ℵ0 . But if you add ℵ0 to ℵ0 you still get
ℵ0 . This is one of the properties of infinity. If you add them you get the
same infinity and likewise if you multiply them together. This plays a role
when we consider fractions — ratios of integers 5/3,3/4,7/8 and so on.
Each one of them corresponds to a pair of integers. How many pairs are
there? If you think about it there are
(ℵ0 )2 = ℵ0 pairs. It looks like we can never get away from ℵ0 .
We will later see that we can. But before we get to that I want to discuss
“prime” numbers.
A prime number is only divisible by itself and one. Thirteen is a
prime. So is seven. No even number is a prime since they can be divided
by two. Some odd numbers are primes and some are not. Nineteen is a
prime by twenty one which is 7 × 3 is not. All numbers can be factored
into products of primes. For example 100 = 25 × 4 = 52 × 22. If you
don’t have a computer program which you can find on the web finding
the prime factorization of large numbers is not easy. I will tell you a
story. I used to work from time to time at a big physics laboratory in Ge-
neva called CERN. When I first went there, there was a famous mental
calculator named Wim Klein. He could do unbelievable calculations in
his head. He loved prime factorization. Once he called me and told me
the prime factorization of my phone number 2129827489. It is equal to

b2384_Ch-01.indd 3 12-May-16 12:25:21 PM

 4 A Bouquet of Numbers for Olivia

59 × 36098771. If you don’t believe me do the multiplication. When I

was going to tell this story here I could not find the piece of paper on
which Mr. Klein had written down this answer. So I looked up a prime
factorization program on the web. There are several. The one I chose
found this factorization almost as fast as I could write the phone number.
Mr. Klein was beaten by the computer. Try to find the prime factoriza-
tion of your own phone number.
How many positive prime numbers are there? I will give you an
argument which is attributed to Euclid. I do not think that Euclid was
a person. There was a think tank of Greeks on an Island in the Aegean.
They wore togas and ate grapes and olives. When they decided to go
public with their work they made up the name “Euclid” and we have
been stuck with it ever since. Here is how the argument goes.
Suppose we could make a finite list of all primes p1….pm where
pm is the biggest one. We could now consider the number

p1 × p2 × … pm + 1.

Thus number is bigger than pm so it cannot be a prime. Thus

it must be divisible by one of the primes in the list. But this is impos-
sible because that prime would divide the product but not the one. Thus
there is no such finite list. The positive primes are a subset of all positive
integers. We have seen that there are ℵ0 positive integers so this must be
the number of primes since ℵ0 is the smallest infinity.
Now I am going to tell you about another discovery due to the
Greeks. The story goes that this bothered them so much that they took
the man who discovered it out on a boat and pushed him overboard.
We have discussed fractions that are ratios of integers such as 3/4 or
7/8. I am now going to show you a number that cannot be written as a
ratio of integers. For the Greeks this number appeared in the Pythag-
orean theorem. Suppose we have a right triangle both of whose sides
are 1. Thus 1^2 + 1^2 = 2. Thus there must be a number whose square
is 2. This is of course the square root of 2. But what kind of number is
this? Can we write it as the ratio of integers like any decent number?

b2384_Ch-01.indd 4 12-May-16 12:25:26 PM

 A Bouquet of Numbers and Other Scientific Offerings 5

Let us suppose we do it. 2 = p/q where p and q are nice decent

integers. The first thing we can do is to divide out any common factors
in the ratio. We know for example that 8/10 = 4/5 where we have di-
vided out the common factor of 2. If we square the equation above we
have 2 = p2/q2. The square of any even number is an even number and
the square of any odd number is an odd number. To see this second
statement remember that any odd number cam be written as 2n + 1
so the square is 4(n2 + n) + 1 which is again an odd number. So p and
q cannot both be odd. In fact p2 = 2q2 so p2 is even and then so is p. It
is divisible by 2 so that p2 is divisible by 4. Therefore q2 must be even
and so must q. So the ratio has a common factor of 2 which contradicts
the assumption we made that all the common factors were divided out.
This is a simple argument to write down but it is tricky so make sure
you understand it. Numbers like the square root of 2 are called “irra-
tional” maybe because they drove the Greeks crazy, I next want to turn
to the decimal expansion of numbers. I will begin with a few examples.

1/3 = .3333333333…….

1/4 = .2500000000….

1/2 = .50000000……
2 = 1.4142135623730950488016887242096980785696718753769480
731766797379907324784621

0703885038753432764157273501384623091229702492483605585073
7212644121497099935831

4132226659275055927557999505011527820605714701095599716059
7027453459686201472857

7418640889198609552329230484308714321450839762603627995251
4079896872533965463318

0882964062061525835239505474575028775996172983557522033753
1857011354374603408498

b2384_Ch-01.indd 5 12-May-16 12:25:31 PM

 6 A Bouquet of Numbers for Olivia

8471603868999706990048150305440277903164542478230684929369
1862158057846311159666

8713013015618568987237235288509264861249497715421833420428
5686060146824720771435

8548741556570696776537202264854470158588016207584749226572
2600208558446652145839

8893944370926591800311388246468157082630100594858704003186
4803421948972782906410

4507263688131373985525611732204024509122770022694112757362
7280495738108967504018

3698683684507257993647290607629969413804756548237289971803
2680247442062926912485

9052181004459842150591120249441341728531478105803603371077
3091828693147101711116

8391658172688941975871658215212822951848847208969463386289
1562882765952635140542

267653239……..

I am not trying to snow you but to make a point. This decimal expansion
goes on forever and there is never a repeating pattern. On the other
hand fractions of integers always lead to a repeating pattern if you wait
long enough and vice versa. To see how this works take

1.063636363… = x

Now

10x = 10.636363 while 1000x = 1063.636363. 1000x−10x = 990x = 1053.

So x = 1053/990. Try it and see that it works.

The ratio of the circumference of a circle to the diameter as you

know is called π — pi. The first digits in the expansion are

b2384_Ch-01.indd 6 12-May-16 12:25:37 PM

 A Bouquet of Numbers and Other Scientific Offerings 7

3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974
944592307816406286

2089986280348253421170679821480865132823066470938446095505
82231725359408128481

1174502841027019385211055596446229489549303819644288109756
65933446128475648233

7867831652712019091456485669234603486104543266482133936072
60249141273724587006

6063155881748815209209628292540917153643678925903600113305
30548820466521384146

9519415116094330572703657595919530921861173819326117931051
18548074462379962749

5673518857527248912279381830119491298336733624406566430860
21394946395224737190

7021798609437027705392171762931767523846748184676694051320
00568127145263560827

7857713427577896091736371787214684409012249534301465495853
71050792279689258923

5420199561121290219608640344181598136297747713099605187072
11349999998372978049

9510597317328160963185950244594553469083026425223082533446
85035261931188171010

0031378387528865875332083814206171776691473035982534904287
55468731159562863882

3537875937519577818577805321712268066130019278766111959092
16420198938095257201

0654858632788659361533818279682303019520353018529689957736
22599413891249721775

b2384_Ch-01.indd 7 12-May-16 12:25:41 PM

 8 A Bouquet of Numbers for Olivia

2834791315155748572424541506959508295331168617278558890750
98381754637464939319255060…..

To show that the expansion never repeats requires more sophisticated

mathematics than we are doing here. But I will tell you another story.
When I was in Geneva I got to know a friend of Klein’s named Hans
Eberstark. He could do all the mathematical tricks that Klein could do.
Sometimes they gave shows together. But he was also a linguist and knew
about thirty languages. He worked as an interpreter. The first time I met
him is was at an apartment of friend. He had a Philippine cook. Eber-
stark asked what her language was. It turned out to be a language he did
not know. He asked her to give him twelve words and to be sure to write
them down so she would remember them. At the end of the evening she
came back in and not only did he tell us the twelve words but he was
able to say something about them. The word for “apple” was “manzana”.
Eberstark noted that this was a Spanish word because the Spaniards
had imported apples to the Philippines. For the fun of it he memorized
11,944 digits of pi. He chose this number to beat some kind of record.
The next thing I want to tell you about is the infinity of Georg
Cantor. Cantor was a German mathematician whose dates were 1845–
1918. He did a number of important works in mathematics but I want
to tell you about his “diagonal” argument. Suppose all the numbers with
decimal expansions could be arrayed as the figure below.

b2384_Ch-01.indd 8 12-May-16 12:25:46 PM

 A Bouquet of Numbers and Other Scientific Offerings 9

These numbers could then be enumerated and the total would

be ℵ0 . But there is at least one number missing. You take the first row
and replace the first 0 by a 1. Then you take the second row and replace
second 4 by a 5 and you go down the diagonal making these replace-
ments. When you get done you have the decimal expansion of a num-
ber that was not in our enumeration. The full set of these numbers is a
larger infinity than ℵ0 . When I first learned about this I thought that it
was wonderful and that I wanted to study more mathematics. Maybe
you will feel the same. In the meanwhile here is something about pi that
you might like. You need to know that if you have a right triangle then
sine(α) = a/c. This is trigonometry.

Regular Octagon

b2384_Ch-01.indd 9 12-May-16 12:25:52 PM

 10 A Bouquet of Numbers for Olivia

A triangle divided into two right triangles.

The first thing we need is not something I can provide a simple
proof for. It is actually follows from a theorem of Euclid — him again!
Here is a web site where you can find the details.
www.themathpage.com/aTrig/circle.htm
The question we need to answer, and this theorem does it for us,
is the following. We know that for any circle the circumference is pro-
portional to the radius. That is C = ar. But is a the same for any circle?
The answer — and the theorem helps us to get there — is yes. This is
how pi is defined. Pi is a constant that applies to any circle. The equation
C = 2πr applies to any circle. This is what Euclid understood and this
is why pi is so important. Now I want to use an argument that in some
form was invented by Archimedes to find the numerical value at least
approximately for pi. But I will end up with a formula involving the sine
function which is not what Archimedes did as far as I know. He was such
a genius that God knows what he ended up with.
The first drawing above is of a regular octagon. Note that it is
inscribed inside a circle. Archimedes also studied the case of a regu-
lar octagon and other regular polygons drawn outside the circle. I will
explain why later. We are only going to discuss in detail the first case. Let
me call a side of the octagon S. Then the perimeter of the octagon P is
8S. But P is less than the circumference of the circle. So

8S < 2πr

or

π > 4S/r.

So if we could find S we would have an upper bound for π. Here is where

the trigonometry comes in. Look again at the drawing of the octagon
with its circumscribed triangles. The angle formed where the sides hit
the center of the octagon is 360/8 = 45. But these triangles are not right
triangles so I will replace each of them by two right triangles a shown
in the next drawing. This splits the angle in two so it is now 22.5. But

b2384_Ch-01.indd 10 12-May-16 12:25:57 PM

 A Bouquet of Numbers and Other Scientific Offerings 11

this gives the base of the triangles S/2. Now we can use our sine formula
sine(22.5) = r/S/2 or S = sine(22.5)2r. Thus we have π > 8sine(22.5). Now
we can out in the numbers and find that in the case of the octagon π >
3.061467458. This is true but we are still a little far off. You can gener-
alize this to the n-gon and show that π > nsine(180/n). Why don’t you
take n = 96 and see what happens. This is what Archimedes did. How
he did the arithmetic no one knows. Maybe he was like Mr. Klein. As
n approaches infinity the answer is more and more exact. That is the
calculus limit.

b2384_Ch-01.indd 11 12-May-16 12:26:03 PM

 12 A Bouquet of Numbers for Olivia

Here is a second essay I wrote for the same young lady.

b2384_Ch-01.indd 12 12-May-16 12:26:08 PM

 Was Einstein Smart? 2
S
ome years ago my then New Yorker colleague John McPhee was in
the process of writing a profile of the physicist Ted Taylor. Taylor
had begun his career as a nuclear weapons designer a Los Alamos.
One of his creations was the largest purely fission bomb ever detonated —
the so-called Ivy King — which was exploded in November of 1952, in the
Pacific. By 1956, he had become disillusioned with working on nuclear
weapons for military purposes and he allowed himself to be recruited to
lead a new, visionary, indeed incredible, project — the Orion — to design
a space ship to be used for planetary exploration that would be powered
by a sequence of small nuclear explosions. This enterprise — which ended
unsuccessfully in 1965 — was located at the then new General Atomics
Company in La Jolla, California. Taylor, in turn, began recruiting other
scientists to join him in La Jolla. One of his early, and most important,
recruits was Freeman Dyson. Dyson, who was a professor at the Institute
for Advanced Study in Princeton, was known throughout the physics com-
munity as a mathematical genius. This was McPhee’s dilemma.
He had been told by everyone that Dyson was a genius, and
he had interviewed him several times, but, as a good reporter, McPhee
wanted his own evidence that this was true. That is why he approached
me. He knew that I had worked with Dyson on the Orion and that we
had remained good friends, so he thought I might have an idea of how
he could go about this. The problem was that McPhee did not know any
mathematics. He was in the position of someone who wanted to write

b2384_Ch-02.indd 13 12-May-16 12:31:46 PM

 14 Was Einstein Smart?

about Bach, but was tone deaf. Such an individual would have to take
the word of others that Bach was a great musician. I gave the matter
some thought and finally came up with a suggestion. I would give McPhee
a mathematics problem he could understand, one that I thought was
pretty tricky. He could then try to solve it and, after in all likelihood,
failing, he could go to Dyson and ask for help. He could first find out if
Dyson had heard of the problem — hopefully not — then he could give
him it to him and watch what happened. The problem I gave McPhee
was that of the twelve balls. You have twelve balls that appear to be
identical. However one of them — the “guilty” ball — is either lighter or
heavier than the others. You also have a balance scale — a scale in which
you have platforms on either side of a balance on which you can put
some of the balls. For example you might try to balance two balls against
two balls. If the scale was, say, unbalanced, you would know the guilty
ball was among the four. The problem is to devise a method by which, in
at most three weighings, you can find which ball is guilty and whether it
is heavier or lighter. I told McPhee my history with this problem. I had
heard of it when I was a junior in college. I was up most of the night until
I finally solved it. I was very pleased with myself. I had a date the next
day to play chess with the most brilliant undergraduate in mathematics
and physics in my class. As we were setting up the pieces I gave him
the problem. Not only did he solve it before we finished setting up the
pieces but he was generalizing it. Suppose you have m balls how many
weighings n would it take. You can’t do it with two balls and, with three,
it takes two weighings, and so on. There is smart, and there is smart.
As far as I know, McPhee never tried this so I don’t know
what would have happened. Historically speaking, it would have been
interesting to see what Einstein would have done with such a problem.
I am not aware that he had much interest in puzzles like this. I don’t
think he played chess and I doubt that he played bridge. Besides, there
is always the difference between being smart and seeming smart. For
example, Niels Bohr who was after Einstein the greatest physicist of the

b2384_Ch-02.indd 14 12-May-16 12:31:55 PM

 A Bouquet of Numbers and Other Scientific Offerings 15

20th century, was certainly smart — but he did not seem smart. He may
even have been dyslexic. He had a ponderous intelligence which he used
to crush problems like a bull-dozer running over rocks. Would Einstein
have seemed smart? I never met Einstein so I do not have first-hand
knowledge. But I can offer two witnesses. The first is Philipp Frank.
He was my first great physics teacher.
Professor Frank, who died in 1966, at the age of eighty-two, was
born in Vienna in 1884. He took his Ph.D in theoretical physics at the
University of Vienna in 1907. Even then he was as much interested in
the philosophy of science as he was in physics and the year of his doctor-
ate he wrote a paper on the meaning of the law of causality. Einstein read
the paper and wrote Frank a note to the effect that while he thought the
paper’s logic was all right, it did not completely satisfy him. This began a
friendship that lasted until Einstein’s death in April of 1955. One conse-
quence was that when Einstein left the German University in Prague in
1912, he recommended Professor Frank as his successor. Frank remained
there until 1938, when he emigrated to the United States, eventually ending
up at Harvard, which is where I met him in 1948.
When I first knew him, Professor Frank had just published a
biography of Einstein, Einstein, His Life and Times. I spent a good deal
of time talking with him about Einstein, much of it in the Hayes Bick-
ford Coffee shop in Harvard Square, which was the closest Cambridge
equivalent to the Viennese coffee houses of his youth. I once asked
him, if I had met Einstein when he did — both men were still in their
twenties — would Einstein have seemed smart. Professor Frank told
me that he would have seemed very smart. He added that Einstein was
much given to what Professor Frank called “kreks” — cracks-jokes —
some of which got him in trouble. This was not the image of Einstein
I had — as a sort of Jewish saint. It was during this sainthood period,
indeed at the end of it, that my second witness saw Einstein. This was
T.D. Lee who won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1957. He shared the
prize with his collaborator C.N. Yang who was a professor at the Institute

b2384_Ch-02.indd 15 12-May-16 12:32:00 PM

 16 Was Einstein Smart?

for Advanced Study as was Lee. They won it for a discovery they had
made involving elementary particles, but this work was almost a distrac-
tion from what they were spending most of their time on — statistical
mechanics. This is the discipline that was created in the 19th century that
studies the average behavior of systems of particles so numerous that it
is a practical impossibility to describe them individually. It was a field
that Einstein was particularly fond of. His first papers in physics — the
ones that preceded the relativity paper of 1905 — concerned its founda-
tions. This work was never especially recognized because what followed
it overshadowed it, and because others did more or less the same thing.
But throughout his life Einstein kept returning to statistical mechanics.
Lee, who told me about it, and Yang decided that they would call on
Einstein and tell him what they had done in that field. Lee was not sure
what to expect. This was, although they did not know it, close to the
time of Einstein’s death. He was in his mid-seventies and Lee was not
sure if he still had any interest in the subject. Two things surprised him
about the visit. The first was Einstein’s hands. To Lee they seemed very
large and very powerful. He seemed like a physically strong man. The
second thing he did not expect was Einstein’s almost instantaneous grasp
of what he and Yang had been doing. The subject had evolved tremen-
dously since Einstein’s work on it, but he nonetheless understood the
new developments and even asked some searching questions.
This persuades me that Einstein was smart, but I have the
advantage of having studied his physics for decades. I already knew he
was smart. To fully convince you, I would have to give you a course in
modern physics. I would have to explain to you that Einstein’s foot print
is everywhere. To give a few examples: in 1916, he published a paper on
the emission and absorption of radiation which is the basis of the laser.
This was a year after he had published his paper on the general theory of
relativity and gravitation which replaced Newton’s theory of gravitation.
It was the year before he published a codicil to the theory that introduced
the idea of a “cosmological constant” which may be the basis of the dark

b2384_Ch-02.indd 16 12-May-16 12:32:05 PM

 A Bouquet of Numbers and Other Scientific Offerings 17

energy that is presently accelerating the expansion of the universe. And

this was just part of the work of those three years! It does not even touch
on the papers he published in 1905, his “miracle year”, in which he laid
the foundations of modern physics. As I said, to understand the scope of
this I would need to give you a course in modern physics. I think, how-
ever, if I focus on one thing, you may get the idea. I am going to explain
to you how Einstein changed our notion of time. I will need only one
bit of mathematics — the Pythagorean theorem of Euclidean geometry.

Below is a diagram of a right triangle.

a c

As you know, the Pythagorean theorem tells us that a2 + b2 = c2. When

he was a school boy Einstein found his own proof of it, which is better
than solving the problem of the twelve balls. We will use the theorem in
due course.
In so far as I understand the creative process that led Einstein to
formulate his theory of relativity in 1905, the most difficult step had to
do with the nature of time. If we think about it at all, I suspect that our
notion of time is about the same as Newton’s. He distinguished between
“absolute” time and “common” time. Absolute time, which Newton also
called “duration”, flows on without any reference to clocks or observers
or anything else. On the other hand, common time is what we measure

b2384_Ch-02.indd 17 12-May-16 12:32:09 PM

 18 Was Einstein Smart?

with clocks. It is subject to the vagaries of the clocks we have at hand.

Newton formulated his physics in terms of absolute time. He published
his detailed theory in 1686, in the Principia, and for the next two cen-
turies it went pretty much unchallenged. People simply accepted this
notion of an absolute time common to all observers. We now come to
1905. Einstein was twenty-six and working in the Swiss National Patent
Office in Berne. This was a serious job — examining patents — which he
took seriously. The physics he did on the side.
For about a decade he had been puzzling over the following.
In Newton’s physics there is a principle of relativity. It had been
emphasized first by Galileo. As far as I know, it was Professor Frank who
introduced the term “Galilean relativity” to describe it. Suppose, Galileo
noted, you are on a sailing ship which is at rest with respect to the sea.
Furthermore, suppose you drop an object from the mast so that it falls
straight down. The object will land at the base of the mast. Now suppose
the ship is in motion and that this motion is perfectly uniform — no
acceleration — and you perform the same experiment, where will the
object land? The answer is in exactly the same place. We might think of
this by imagining that the ship is stationary and the sea is somehow being
moved underneath it with a uniform motion. In this case we are not sur-
prised at the result above. Galilean relativity, which is built into Newton’s
laws, is the proposition that we can never distinguish by any mechanical
experiment of this kind between a moving ship and a stationary sea and
a stationary ship and a moving sea providing that these motions do not
involve accelerations. But Einstein realized that there is more to phys-
ics than Newtonian mechanics. In particular, there is electromagnetism
which included the propagation of light, which is an electromagnetic wave.
He imagined an experiment with light. For this one, we will use
a train. Our train is, in the beginning, at rest with respect to the tracks.
I want to shave in my compartment, so I rig up a mirror and a bulb
behind my head. From its reflection I can see myself. Now we imagine
that the train is set into uniform motion and we perform the same activity.

b2384_Ch-02.indd 18 12-May-16 12:32:14 PM

 A Bouquet of Numbers and Other Scientific Offerings 19

What do we expect to happen? We know that light moves with a huge,

but finite speed. If we call this speed c then, experimentally, c = 2.9979
… × 1010 centimeters a second which transforms into about a hundred
and eighty six thousand miles a second — a huge speed. This is the speed
of light in the vacuum. Light moving in matter is slowed down. In this
shaving experiment, light is emitted by the bulb, then travels in a fraction
of a second to the mirror and then bounces back to my eye. That is how
I see my face. So far so good. Now let us imagine that just as the light is
emitted the train is set into motion and begins moving uniformly on the
rails with the speed of light. You get the picture. The light is now trying to
catch up with the mirror. Can it do so? If we are Newtonians the answer
is no. The mirror is moving at a speed equal to that of light and the light
will never gain on it. You will never see your reflection. Why did this
bother Einstein? It bothered him because it was a violation of the princi-
ple of relativity according to which the laws of physics were the same in a
system at rest and a system moving uniformly no matter what the speed.
It seemed as if once the train moved with the speed of light the laws
changed since you could no longer see your face in the mirror. If this does
not trouble you, you are in good company. None of Einstein’s contem-
poraries were troubled either. They didn’t mind, if they noticed, that on
the one hand you had Newtonian mechanics in which the relativity prin-
ciple held and, on the other, you had electromagnetism where apparently
it didn’t, something that Einstein found profoundly disturbing. All of this
does not seem to have much to do with time, but I am coming to that.
In his relativity theory of 1905, the so-called “special” theory
because it dealt only with uniform motions — the general theory of 1915
dealt with all motions — Einstein solved mirror problem by fiat. One of
the postulates of the theory is that any observer will measure, in the vac-
uum, the same speed of light c, no matter at what speed the light source
is moving with respect to the observer. This is what is called the principle
of “constancy” — the constancy of the speed of light with respect to these
observers. Let us digest this for a moment by comparing it to sound.

b2384_Ch-02.indd 19 12-May-16 12:32:19 PM

 20 Was Einstein Smart?

If I emit a sound wave by, say, banging on a drum, I can catch up to it by

moving faster than the speed of sound. That is what supersonic airplanes
do. Einstein’s postulate says that you can never have a superluminous
airplane. The speed of light c is the universal speed limit. Once a light
wave is emitted you can never catch up to it. At the time that Einstein
made this assumption there was no direct experimental evidence to
support it. Now we have elementary particles produced in accelerators
that move almost at the speed of light so we can observe what happens.
But there was no direct evidence against it. It was even suggested by
the theory of electricity and magnetism that had been invented in the
mid-nineteenth century by the Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell.
On the other hand, if you believed in Newton’s dynamical theory this
speed limit was impossible. According to Newton, if you applied a force
to an object long enough you could accelerate it to any speed you liked.
Thus Einstein had to choose between Newton and Maxwell and he
chose Maxwell. Many years ago I had the chance to visit Einstein’s house
in Princeton. It was soon enough after his death so that his study was
about the same as when he used it. He had an etching of Maxwell on the
wall. There had been an etching of Newton, but it had come out of its
frame and had been replaced by a bit of modern art.
A radical assumption like this must have radical consequences.
It does and I would like to explore what it implies about time. The only
kind of time that interests me is what Newton called “common” time —
the kind that is measured by clocks. In truth, I can make no precise
sense out of what Newton meant by “absolute” time. Common time is
good enough for me: clock time. A clock is any mechanism that has a
periodic behavior. This can be the oscillating of an atom or the beating
of a human heart. There are good clocks and bad clocks depending on
how dependable the periodic behavior is. Time is measured in terms of
the number of these oscillations that occur between events. I am going
to analyze in detail a particularly simple clock — a so-called “light clock.”
We will make use of the figure below.

b2384_Ch-02.indd 20 12-May-16 12:32:24 PM

 A Bouquet of Numbers and Other Scientific Offerings 21

The Light Clock

Wikimedia

We start with the figure on the left. We have a light source which
emits light that travels in a straight line to a mirror. The light is then
reflected back to a detector located at the source. If this detector is a
mirror then the light will just bounce back and forth. We will call the
time it takes to go from the source to the upper mirror the basic unit of
time for this clock — the equivalent of the second. If we call this time t0,
and the distance between the two mirrors d, then we have d = ct0 — or
equivalently, t0 = d/c. Simple enough. Now we put this device in motion.
We can suppose the clock is transported to the right with a speed v. We
observe the clock from our stationary onlooking post. The light now, as
we observe it, follows a different path. It moves along the hypotenuses
of the right triangles in the figure whose length I will call h. The side
of the triangle across from the hypotenuse is still d. This requires some
commentary because in relativity there is funny business with lengths.
Moving rulers become shorter as viewed by a resting observer. But that
does not happen if the ruler is at right angles to the direction of motion.
That is sort of plausible. The ruler would not “know” in which direction
to contract. From the figure it is very clear that h is greater than d. Thus
the time interval t = h/c is greater than t0 = d/c. Let us stop here and
contemplate this. Putting it graphically, it says that a clock in motion is
slower than an identical clock at rest. We see that this is true for the light

b2384_Ch-02.indd 21 12-May-16 12:32:28 PM

 22 Was Einstein Smart?

clock and Einstein’s theory predicts that it is true of any clock. Further-
more, it does not matter if we are moving past the clock, or the clock is
moving past us, the moving clock is slower. This is important because
you might think that something odd has happened to the clock because
it is moving. The same effect is observed if you are moving. How big
is this effect? To answer this we need to know h and here Pythagoras
comes in at last. Look at the third figure. If the moving clock is moving
with a speed v during the time t then the distance the mirror is dis-
placed is vt. Thus we have h2 = v2t2 + d2 = c2t2 or solving for t we have
1 1
t=d / c× = t0 . This is one of the most famous
2 2
1−ν / c 1 − ν 2 / c2
formulae in the theory of relativity. You see that it has the remarkable
property that when v = c the denominator is zero which means that the
moving clock is now infinitely slower than the resting clock. Time comes
to a stop. You also see that when v is zero the two times are identical.
Because c is so huge compared to any v we encounter in daily life, this
effect escaped observation prior to Einstein’s calling attention to it.
Before concluding, I am going to present two applications of this
“time dilation”. The first is a laboratory application and, indeed, was one
of the first that measured, more or less directly, the effect of time dila-
tion. Most elementary particles are unstable. After being created they
“live” on the average for a certain time, the particle’s “life time”. Usually
one gives the lifetime as measured by a clock that is moving with the
particle. But this clock appears slow if the particle is in motion and one
compares it to a clock at rest. To such an observer the particle lives lon-
ger than its resting lifetime. This results in the particle’s leaving a longer
track in a detector than you would predict if you ignored time dilation.
This effect has been observed countless times. The second application
is a little science fictional. It is usually referred to as the traveling twins.
It is something that was implicit in Einstein’s 1905 paper, but it was
only put in these terms a few years later. You have two identical twins
one of whom goes on a round trip in space while the other stays home.

b2384_Ch-02.indd 22 12-May-16 12:32:33 PM

Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
tons, was launched in December of 1907, and is one of the most
notable productions of recent years. She is spar-decked throughout,
with magnificent lines and a handsome appearance, whilst retaining
the more conventional stem-plus-bowsprit. She has exceptional
accommodation, all connected by corridors and vestibules with no
fewer than a dozen state-rooms for guests. She is driven by two sets
of triple-expansion engines actuating twin-screws, which, to minimise
vibration, are at a different pitch, and run at varying speeds. She can
carry sufficient coal to allow her to cruise for 6,000 miles, and both in
internal and external appearance is as handsome as she is capable.

THE S.Y. “SAGITTA.”

From a Photograph. By permission of Messrs. Camper & Nicholson, Ltd.
 THE S.Y. “TRIAD.”
From a Photograph. By permission of the Caledon Shipbuilding Co., Ltd.

With the capabilities of which the motor has shown itself to be

possessed, the future of the steam yacht is perhaps a little uncertain.
Economy would seem to indicate that the former has numerous
merits in that it enables sail power to be utilised more readily, and
thus may arrest the fashion which is advancing in the direction of
steam. For long passages the extreme comfort which is now
obtainable in the modern liner leaves no choice in the matter. To
keep up a steam yacht for the usual summer season of four months
is a very serious item of expenditure. If we reckon £10 per ton as the
average cost—and this is the accepted estimate—it will be seen that
such a yacht as the Wakiva, for instance, leaves but little change out
of £10,000 per year, and for this expenditure most men would expect
to get a very large return in the way of sport and travel. Whether or
not a like proportionate return is made, at least in giving employment
to thousands of shipbuilding and yacht-hands, this special branch of
sea sport is deserving of the high interest with which it is regarded.
 CHAPTER XI
THE BUILDING OF THE STEAMSHIP

We propose in the present chapter, now that we have seen the

evolution of the steamship through all its various vicissitudes and in
its special ways, to set forth within the limited space that is now left
to us some general idea of the means adopted to create the great
steamship from a mass of material into a sentient, moving being.
Around the building of a ship there is encircling it perhaps far
more sentiment than in the activity of almost any other industry.
Poets and painters have found in this a theme for their imagination
not once, but many times. Making a ship is something less prosaic, a
million times more romantic, than making a house, for the reason
that whilst the ship, as long as she remains on the stocks, is just so
many thousand tons of material, yet from the very moment when she
first kisses the water she becomes a living thing, intelligent, with a
character of her own, distinct and recognisable. In the whole
category of man-made things there is nothing comparable to this.

Fig. 1.—FLUSH-DECKED TYPE.

 Fig. 2.—“THREE ISLAND,” TYPE.

Fig. 3.—TOP-GALLANT FORECASTLE TYPE.

Fig. 4.—TOP-GALLANT FORECASTLE TYPE, WITH

RAISED QUARTER-DECK.

Fig. 5.—EARLY “WELL-DECK” TYPE.

Her genesis begins when the future owners resolve to have her
built. Before any plans are drawn out there must first be decided the
dimensions, the displacement and the general features which she is
to possess, whether she is to be a slow ship, a fast ship, engaged in
passenger work, cargo-carrying, on the North Atlantic route, for the
East through the Suez Canal, and so on; for all these factors
combine to determine the lines on which she is to be built. Before we
progress any farther, let us get into our minds the nine different types
which separate the generic class of steamships. If the reader will
follow the accompanying illustrations, we shall not run the risk of
being obscure in our argument. Fig. 1, shows the steamship in its
elementary form, just a flush-decked craft, with casings for the
protection of the engines as explained on an earlier page. This
represents the type of which the coasting steamer illustrated
opposite page 134 is an example. This casing in the diagram before
us is, so to speak, an island on the deck, but presently it was so
developed that it extended to the sides of the ship, and, rising up as
a continuation of the hull, became a bridge. At the same time a
monkey forecastle and a short poop were added to make her the
better protected against the seas. This will be seen in Fig. 2. This is
known as the “three-island” type for obvious reasons. It must be
understood that on either side a passage leads beneath the bridge-
deck so as to allow the crew to get about the ship. But from being
merely a protection for the bows of the ship, the monkey forecastle
became several feet higher, so that it could accommodate the
quarters of the crew, and this “top-gallant” forecastle, as it is known,
will be seen in Fig. 3. At the same time, the short poop or hood at the
stern has now become lengthened into something longer. But in Fig.
4 we find the lengthened poop becoming a raised quarter-deck—that
is, not a mere structure raised over the deck, but literally a deck
raised at the quarter. This raised quarter-deck was the better able to
withstand the violent force of the sea when it broke over the ship. In
Fig. 5 we have a still further development in which the topgallant
forecastle is retained as before, but the long poop and the after end
of the bridge are lengthened until they meet and form one long
combination. This is one of the “well-deck” types, the “well” being
between the after end of the forecastle and the forward end of the
bridge-deck. This well was left for the reason that it was not required
for carrying cargo, because it was not desirable to load the ship
forward lest she might be down at the head (which in itself would be
bad), whilst at the same time it would raise the stern so that the
propeller was the more likely to race. But in the modern evolution of
the steamship it is not only a question of trim and seaworthiness that
have been taken into consideration, but also there are the rules and
regulations which have been made with regard to the steam vessel.
Now, this well-space not being reckoned in the tonnage of the ship
(on which she has to pay costly dues) if kept open, it was good and
serviceable in another way. Considered from the view of
seaworthiness, this well, it was claimed, would allow the prevention
of the sweeping of the whole length of the ship by whatever water
that broke aboard the bows (which would be the case if the well were
covered up). If left open, the water could easily be allowed to run out
through the scuppers. But this type in Fig. 5 is rather midway in the
transition between the “three-island” type and the shelter-deck type.
The diagram in Fig. 6 is more truly a well-decker, and differs from the
ship in Fig. 5, in that the one we are now considering has a raised
quarter-deck instead of a poop. She has a top-gallant forecastle, a
raised quarter-deck and bridge combined, and this type was largely
used in the cargo ships employed in crossing the Atlantic Ocean. It is
now especially popular in ships engaged in the coal trade. The
advantages of this raised quarter-deck are that it increases the cubic
capacity of the ship, and makes up for the space wasted by the shaft
tunnel. By enabling more cargo to be placed aft, it takes away the
chance of the ship being trimmed by the head.

Fig. 6.—“WELL-DECK” TYPE.

 Fig. 7.—“SPAR-DECK” TYPE.

Fig. 8.—“AWNING-DECK” TYPE.

Fig. 9.—“SHADE-DECK” TYPE.

Fig. 7 shows a “spar-decker,” which is the first of the three-

deckers that we shall now mention. This was evolved for the purpose
of carrying passengers between decks. It has a continuous upper
deck of fairly heavy construction, the bridge deck, of course, being
above the spar deck. In Fig. 8 we have the “awning-decker,” which
has a continuous deck lighter in character than the last-mentioned
type, and like the latter, the sides are completely enclosed above the
main deck. Because of this lightness of construction, it is not
customary to add further erections above that are of any weight. Its
origin was due to the desire to provide a shelter for the ships
employed in carrying Oriental pilgrims. Later on this type was
retained in cargo-carriers. Finally, we have the “shade-decker” as in
Fig. 9, which is provided with openings at the side for ventilation.
This type is so well known to the reader from posters and
photographs, that it is scarcely essential to say much. But we may
remark that the lightly constructed deck fitted between the poop and
forecastle is supported by round stanchions, open at the sides (as
shown herewith), but sometimes closed by light plates. It is built just
of sufficient strength to provide a promenade for passengers, or
shelter for cattle, on the upper deck. This is still a very popular type
for intermediate and large cargo steamers.

THE BUILDING OF THE “MAURETANIA.”

Showing Floor and part of Frames.
From a Photograph. By permission of the Cunard Steamship Co.

With these different types before us, we may now go on with our
main subject. Having settled the question as to the type and
character of the steamship to be built, the next thing is to design the
midship section, which shows the general structural arrangements
and scantlings of the various parts. In the drawing-office the plans
are prepared, and the various sections of the ship worked out by
expert draughtsmen attached to the shipbuilding yard. This
necessitates the very greatest accuracy, and the building is usually
specially guarded against those who might like to have an
opportunity of obtaining valuable secrets. The plans having been
worked out on paper, there follows the “laying off” on the floor of an
immense loft, called the “mould floor,” where the plans are
transferred according to the exact dimensions that are to be
embodied in the ship. In many cases the future owner insists on a
wooden model being submitted in the first instance, by the builder,
so that a fair idea may be obtained of the hull of the proposed ship.
Each vessel is known at the shipbuilder’s by a number and not
by her name. The keel is the first part of her to be laid, which
consists of heavy bars of iron laid on to blocks of wood called
“stocks,” and the line of these slants gently down to the water’s
edge, so that when, after many months, the time arrives for the
launching of the great ship, she may slide down easily into the sea
that is, for the future, to be her support. After these bars have been
fastened together, then the frames or ribs are erected, the ship being
built with her stern nearest to the water, and her bow inland, except
in the few cases (as, for example, that of the Great Eastern), where
a vessel, owing to her length in proportion to the width of the water-
space available, has to be launched sideways. These ribs are bent
pieces of steel, which have been specially curved according to the
pattern already worked out. Let us now turn to the accompanying
illustrations which show the steamship in course of construction.
These have been specially selected in order that the reader might be
able to have before him only those which are of recent date, and
show ships whose names, at least, are familiar to him.
 THE “GEORGE WASHINGTON” IN COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Showing Framing from the Stern.
From a Photograph. By permission of the Norddeutscher Lloyd Co.

The photograph opposite page 286 represents the Mauretania

being built on the Tyne. This striking photograph shows the floor and
the double cellular bottom of the leviathan in the foreground; whilst in
the background the frames of the ship have been already set up.
Some idea of the enormous proportions may be obtained from the
smallness of the men even in the foreground. The next illustration
represents the Norddeutscher Lloyd liner, George Washington, and
exhibits the framing of the ship and bulkheads before the steel-
plating had been put on. The photograph was taken from the stern,
looking forward, and one can see already the “bulge” which is left on
either side to allow for the propeller shafts. Opposite page 290 is
shown the bow end of the Berlin (belonging to the same company) in
frame, and on examining her starboard side it will be seen that
already some of her lower plates have been affixed. Finally, opposite
page 292 is shown one of the two mammoth White Star liners in
course of construction. This picture represents the stern frame of the
Titanic as it appeared on February 9th, 1910. No one can look at
these pictures without being interested in the numerous overhead
cranes, gantries and scaffolding which have to be employed in the
building of the ship. The gantries, for instance, now being used at
Harland and Wolff’s Belfast yard are much larger than were used
even for the Celtic and Cedric, and have electric cranes, for handling
weights at any part of the berths where the ships are being built.
Cantilever and other enormous cranes are also employed. Cranes
are also now used in Germany fitted with very strong electro-
magnets which hold the plates by the power of their attraction, and
contribute considerably to the saving of labour.
Whilst the hull of the ship is being built, the engines are being
made and put together in the erecting-shop—which also must needs
have its powerful cranes—and after being duly tested, the various
parts of the engines are taken to pieces again and erected
eventually in the ship after she has been launched. After the frames
and beams are “faired” the deck-plating is got in hand. Besides
affording many advantages, such as promenades and supports for
state-rooms, the deck of a ship is like the top of a box, and gives
additional strength to a ship. The illustration opposite page 292
shows the shelter deck of the Orient liner Orsova. The photograph
was taken looking aft, on August 1st, 1908, whilst the ship was being
built at Messrs. John Brown & Co.’s yard, Clydebank. The
photograph is especially interesting as showing the enormous
amount of material which has to go to the making of the steamship.
But even still more significant is the next illustration, which shows
one of the decks of the Lusitania whilst in course of construction. To
the average man it seems to be well-nigh impossible ever to get
such masses into the water.
BOWS OF THE “BERLIN” IN COURSE OF
CONSTRUCTION.
From a Photograph. By permission of the Norddeutscher
Lloyd Co.
 THE “BERLIN” JUST BEFORE HER
LAUNCH.
From a Photograph. By permission of the
Norddeutscher Lloyd Co.

After the plates have been all fastened by rivets to the frames,
and the outside of the ship has been given a paint of conventional
salmon pink, the time approaches for her to be launched. During her
building the ship has been resting on the keel blocks where her
centre touches, but her bilges have been supported by blocks and
shores. These latter will be seen in the illustration of the Mauretania
already considered. As the day for launching approaches, so also
does the anxiety of the builders increase, for at no time in her career
is the ship so seriously endangered. On the day of the launch the
weight of the vessel is gradually transferred from the stocks on which
she has been built, to the cradle, being lifted bodily from the keel-
blocks by means of an army of men driving wedges underneath her
bottom. This cradle is constructed on the launching ways, and the
ship herself, being now “cradle-borne,” is held in place only by a
number of props called “dog-shores.” At the right moment the signal
is given for these to be knocked aside, and at the first symptoms of
the ship in her cradle showing an inclination to glide, the bottle of
wine is broken against her bows by the lady entrusted with so
pleasant an honour. With a deep roar the ship goes down the ways,
and as soon as the vessel becomes waterborne the cradle floats.
The ship herself is taken in charge by a tug, whilst numerous small
boats collect the various pieces of timber which are scattered over
the surface of the water. Two or three days before the launch, the
cradle which has been fitted temporarily in place, is taken away and
smeared with Russian tallow and soft soap. The ways themselves
are covered with this preparation after they have been well scraped
clean. In case, however, the ship should fail to start at the critical
moment after the dog-shores have been removed, it is usual now to
have a hydraulic starting ram (worked by a hand-pump) under the
forefoot of the ship. This will give a push sufficiently powerful to start
the great creature down her short, perilous journey into the world of
water which is to be her future abiding-place.
But it can readily be imagined that such a ponderous weight as
this carries a good deal of impetus with it, and since in most cases
the width of the water is confined, precautions have to be taken to
prevent the ship running ashore the other side and doing damage to
herself—perhaps smashing her rudder and propellers, or worse.
Therefore, heavy anchors have been buried deep into the ground,
and cables or hawsers are led from the bows and quarters and
attached thereto, or else to heavy-weights composed of coils of
chain, whose friction over the ground gradually stops the vessel. Not
infrequently the cables break through the sudden jerk which the
great ship puts on them, and the anchors tear up the slip-way.
Perhaps as many as eight cables may be thus employed, each being
made fast to two or three separate masses of about five to fifteen
tons, but with slack chain between so that only one at a time is
started. As soon as the ship has left the ways, all the cables become
taut, and they put in motion the first lot of drags. Further on, the next
lot of drags receive their strain, then the third, so that no serious jerk
may have been given, and the ship gradually brings up owing to the
powerful friction. Lest the force of the ship going into the water
should damage the rudder or the propeller, these, if they have been
placed in position, are locked so as to prevent free play. After this the
ship is towed round to another part of the yard where her engines
are slung into her by means of powerful cranes. The upper
structures are completed, masts stepped and an army of men work
away to get her ready for her builders’ trials. Carpenters are busy
erecting her cabins, painters and decorators enliven her internal
appearance, and upholsterers add the final touches of luxury to her
saloons and lounges.
 STERN FRAME OF THE “TITANIC,” FEB. 9, 1910.
From a Photograph. By permission of Messrs. Ismay, Imrie & Co.

Turning now to the illustration facing page 290, we see the

Norddeutscher Lloyd Berlin just before she was launched. The
anchors and cables which will be dropped as soon as she has
floated will be seen along her port side, and the platform for her
christening is already in place. In the illustration facing page 294,
which shows the launch of the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company’s
Araguaya, we have a good view afforded of the ship as she is just
leaving the ways and becoming water-borne. The other illustration
on the same page shows the launch of one of those turret-ships to
which reference was made in an earlier chapter. In the picture of the
Berlin will be seen the system of arranging the steel plates in the
construction of the ship, and the rivets which hold them in place.

THE SHELTER DECK OF THE “ORSOVA” IN COURSE OF

CONSTRUCTION.
From a Photograph. By permission of Messrs. Anderson, Anderson & Co.
 ONE OF THE DECKS OF THE “LUSITANIA” IN COURSE
OF CONSTRUCTION.
From a Photograph. By permission of the Cunard Steamship Co.

One of the most important events of the ship’s life is her trial trip.
Before this occurs the ship’s bottom must be cleaned, for a foul
underwater skin will deaden the speed, and give altogether
erroneous data. The weather should be favourable also, the sea
calm, and the water not too shallow to cause resistance to ships of
high speed, while a good steersman must be at the helm so as to
keep the ship on a perfectly straight course. Around our coasts at
various localities are noticeable posts erected in the ground to
indicate the measured mile. To obtain the correct data as to the
speed of the ship, she may be given successive runs in opposite
directions over this measured mile; a continuous run at sea, the
number of revolutions being counted during that period, and a
continuous run past a series of stations of known distances apart,
the times at which these are passed being recorded as the ship is
abreast with them. For obtaining a “mean” speed over the measured
mile, one run with the tide and one against the tide supply what is
required. During these trials, the displacement and trim of the ship
should be as nearly as possible those for which she has been
designed. But besides affording the data which can only show
whether or not the ship comes up to her contract, these trials are
highly valuable as affording information to the builder for subsequent
use, in regard both to the design of the ship herself and the amount
of horsepower essential for sending her along at a required speed.
The amount of coal consumption required is also an important item
that is discovered. This is found as follows: Let there be used two
bunkers. The first one is not to be sealed, but the latter is. The
former is to be drawn upon for getting up steam, taking the ship out
of the harbour, and generally until such time as she enters upon her
trial proper. This first bunker is then sealed up, and the other one
unsealed, and its contents alone used during the trial. After the trial
is ended, the fires being left in ordinary condition, the second bunker
is again sealed up, and the first bunker drawn upon. By reckoning up
the separate amounts it is quite easy afterwards to determine the
exact quantity which the ship has consumed during a given number
of knots in a given time. Finally, after every detail has been
completed, the ship is handed over to her owners and steams away
from the neighbourhood of her birth. Presently she arrives at her
port, whence she will run for the next ten or twenty years, and before
long she sets forth with her first load of passengers, mails and cargo
on her maiden trip across the ocean. To begin with, she may not
establish any new records for speed; for a ship takes time to find
herself, and her officers to understand her individualities. “Know your
ship” is one of the mottoes which an ambitious officer keeps ever
before him, and if this is true on the navigation bridge, it is even still
more true down below, where the engines will not show their full
capabilities for several passages at least.
 LAUNCH OF THE “ARAGUAYA.”
From a Photograph. By permission of the Royal Mail Steam Packet Co.

LAUNCH OF A TURRET-SHIP.
From a Photograph. By permission of Messrs. Doxford & Sons, Sunderland.