Skip to content

Please be aware that some material may contain words, descriptions or illustrations which will not reflect current scientific understanding and may be considered in today's context inaccurate, unethical, offensive or distressing.

Description

A joint report with Arthur William Rucker was sent to the Royal Society three weeks ago, but does not seem to have reahced its destination. Can write another, but wonders if this is necessary, as the opinion on the paper was clearly given when the paper was read. Refers to Ettrick William Creak.

Subject: Physics and Chemistry

[Not published]

Reference number
RR/10/393
Earliest possible date
13 February 1891
Physical description
Letter on paper
Page extent
4 pages
Format
Manuscript

Creator name

William Edward Ayrton

View page for William Edward Ayrton

Use this record

Citation

William Edward Ayrton, Second letter from William Edward Ayrton, to Herbert Rix, regarding a paper 'On the asymmetrical distribution of terrestrial magentism' by Henry Wilde, 13 February 1891, RR/10/393, The Royal Society Archives, London, https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/items/rr_10_393/second-letter-from-william-edward-ayrton-to-herbert-rix-regarding-a-paper-on-the-asymmetrical-distribution-of-terrestrial-magentism-by-henry-wilde, accessed on 23 May 2024

Link to this record

Embed this record

<iframe src="https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/embed/items/rr_10_393/second-letter-from-william-edward-ayrton-to-herbert-rix-regarding-a-paper-on-the-asymmetrical-distribution-of-terrestrial-magentism-by-henry-wilde" title="Second letter from William Edward Ayrton, to Herbert Rix, regarding a paper 'On the asymmetrical distribution of terrestrial magentism' by Henry Wilde" allow="fullscreen" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>

Related Fellows

Explore the collection

  • Referee Reports

    Date: 1832-1949

    This collection contains reports on scientific papers submitted for publication to the Royal Society. Started in 1832 when the system was formalised, it is a record of the origins of peer review publishing in practice.

    View collection