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

Sectional committee: not stated

The paper and diagrams very interesting and a portion of them containing the essential features should at least be published in the 'Phil Proc' [presumably Proceedings of the Royal Society]. The paper might appear in full as it is short. Discusses which diagrams ought to be omitted as they are excessive in number and should be reduced by one half or one third. Whether the tables should be cut down should also be carefully considered; they seem to contain more statistics than are essential to give a general summary of the conclusions.

Details of a purely technical character might well, with the omitted figures, be placed in the archives of the Society for reference. On the other hand the details seem to him to be defective. Each of the curves, figures seven to eleven, seems to have been plotted by measuring only the average induction over three sections. In his opinion the very form of the curves shows that a much larger number of sections should be considered. Notes this objection will be largely removed if a more general theoretical discussion of the maxima and minima is made available and the results are shown to accord with the theory so far as they go. It would be well to ascertain how far this matter will be dealt with in the second part of the paper. If the present objection does detract from the fact that the results, so far as they go, are of considerable interest, and Bryan thinks this most decidedly the case, it is a strong argument for not loading the paper with more data than necessary in some directions, when the data in one of the most important directions is so very meagre.

[Published in Proceedings of the Royal Society, 1901].

Endorsed on verso as received 17 January 1902.

Reference number
RR/15/408
Earliest possible date
15 January 1902
Physical description
Report on paper
Page extent
4 pages
Format
Manuscript

Creator name

George Hartley Bryan

View page for George Hartley Bryan

Use this record

Citation

George Hartley Bryan, Referee's report by George Hartley Bryan, on a paper 'The distribution of magnetism as affected by induced currents in an iron cylinder when rotated in a magnetic field' by Ernest Wilson, 15 January 1902, RR/15/408, The Royal Society Archives, London, https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/items/rr_15_408/referees-report-by-george-hartley-bryan-on-a-paper-the-distribution-of-magnetism-as-affected-by-induced-currents-in-an-iron-cylinder-when-rotated-in-a-magnetic-field-by-ernest-wilson, accessed on 12 April 2024

Link to this record

Embed this record

<iframe src="https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/embed/items/rr_15_408/referees-report-by-george-hartley-bryan-on-a-paper-the-distribution-of-magnetism-as-affected-by-induced-currents-in-an-iron-cylinder-when-rotated-in-a-magnetic-field-by-ernest-wilson" title="Referee's report by George Hartley Bryan, on a paper 'The distribution of magnetism as affected by induced currents in an iron cylinder when rotated in a magnetic field' by Ernest Wilson" 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