[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
May 2, 1942


Author Affiliations

Medical College of Virginia, Richmond, Va.

JAMA. 1942;119(1):100-101. doi:10.1001/jama.1942.02830180102022

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


To the Editor:—  In The Journal, January 17, page 248, there appears a communication from H. G. Barbour and S. F. Hamilton criticizing falling drop technic other than the one which they developed.My calculations and procedure (J. Clin. Investigation17: 369, 373 [July] 1938; J. Lab. & Clin. Med.26:1681 [July] 1941) were based on Stokes's law for the fall of a sphere through a viscous medium, which was proved in 1851; though no author until I myself applied Stokes's great contribution, many contributed to the evolution of this determination.The application of Stokes's law eliminated Barbour and Hamilton's "vagaries" of oils "under different conditions of temperature." It also greatly simplified the calculations and eliminated the complex logarithmic expression and the admittedly unsatisfactory nomogram required in their technic. Barbour and Hamilton themselves point out (J. Biol. Chem.69: 639 [Aug.] 1926) that expansion and contraction of the paper

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview