訂正日: 2006/03/27訂正理由: -訂正箇所: 引用文献情報訂正内容: Wrong : It was pointed out by H. v. Helmholtz that the contact electricity diminishes the surface tensions, (Monatsber, d. Berl. Akad, Nov. 1881; Ges. Abb. 1, p. 945, Leipzing 1882.) See. W. Gieses, Wied. Ann. 37, p. 576, 1889. See P. Duhem, Ann. Sc. de Pecole norm. sup. (3) 7, p. 289, 1890. D. Hurmezeascu, C. R. 119, p. 1006. 1894; Jour. d. Phys. (3) 4, p. 118, 1895 ; Rapports présenté au Congrés international de Physique 2, p. 557, Paris, 1900. This problem was also treated by P. Duhem. (Ann. d. la Fac. Sc. d. Toulouse 2, 1888-89.) but I had not access to his paper. A. Einstein, Ann. d. Phys. 8, p. 802, equation (2), 1902. The impressed force considered by him is more general than the case of gruvity. W. Nernst, Zeitscchr. f. phys. Chem. 9, p. 137, 1892. See W. Nernst, Zeitschr. f. phys. Chem. 4, p. 129, 1889 ; Theoretische Chemie 4th Edition, p. 705, Stuttgart, 1903. G. Jäger, Ber. 108, Abth. 2a, p. 1499, 1899.
Right : * Here it will be understood that in the case in which there are convertible components F0 is not the actual value of the free energy per unit volume when the electric and magnetic forces vanish under the same condition of temperature and volume, but it is the value which F would assume on the supposition that ρ1, ρ2,...ρn, θ do not vary; i.e. if F≡F(ρ1, ρ2,...ρn, θ, X, Y, Z, α, β, γ), then F0 stands for F(ρ1, ρ2,....ρn, θ, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0), where ρ1, ρ2,...ρn refer to the case in which the substance is placed in the field. * It was pointed out by H. v. Helmholtz that the contact electricity diminishes the surface tension, (Monatsber, d. Berl. Akad, Nov. 1881; Ges. Abh. 1, p. 925, Leipzig, 1882.) * See W. Giese, Wied. Ann. 37, p. 576, 1889. † See P. Duhem, Ann, Sc, de l'Ecole norm. sup. (3) 7, p. 289, 1890. * D. Hurmezescu, C. R. 119, p. 1006, 1894; Jour. d. Phys. (3) 4, p. 118, 1895; Rapports présenté au Congrès international de Physique 2, p. 557, Paris, 1900. This problem was also treated by P. Duhem, (Ann. d. la Fac. d. Sc. d. Toulouse 2, 1888-89,) but I had not access to his paper. * A. Einstein, Ann. d. Phys. 8, p. 802, equation (2), 1902. The impressed force considered by him is more general than the case of gravity. * W. Nernst, Zeitschr. f. phys. Chem. 9, p. 137, 1892. * See W. Nernst, Zeitschr. f. phys. Chem. 4, p. 129, 1889. * Theoretische Chemie, 4th Edition, p. 705, Stuttgart, 1903. * G. Jäger, Wien. Ber. 108, Abth, 2a, p. 1499, 1899.