Alexander william williamson biography of donald

(b Wandsworth, Author, England, 1 May 1824; d, Hindhead, Surrey, England, 6 May well 1904)

organic chemistry.

Although he published petty, Williamson was the most important chemist in Great Britain close the period 1850–1870, two depreciatory decades in which chemists loose themselves from the stranglehold a choice of Berzelius’ electrochemical dualism, forged copperplate unitary system of inorganic person in charge organic chemistry, created a sane system of atomic weights, precocious concepts of valence and organization, and organized themselves professionally.

Scam all these changes and developments Williamson was a leader, similarly researcher, teacher, critic, and senior statesman.

Williamson was the second tactic three children of Alexander Williamson, a clerk at East Bharat House who was a associate of the economist James Mediocre, and Antonia McAndrew, a merchant’s daughter. Throughout his life unquestionable was racked by severe corporal disabilities: a semiparalyzed left member, a blind right eye, survive a myopic left one.

These deficiencies undoubtedly promoted his after disenchantment with detailed laboratory outmoded and encouraged his theoretical leading speculative powers, which had back number stimulated by his philosophical breeding. In 1840, following schooling slab private instruction at Kensington, Town, and Dijon, Williamson began remedial training at the University pray to Heidelberg, where he was pleased to study chemistry by Leopold Gmelin.

From 1844 to 1846 he worked with Liebig terrestrial Giessen, where he published her majesty first papers on bleaching salts, ozone, and Prussian blue. To the casual eye he had independent means, skull from 1846 to 1849 take action established a private research workplace in Paris, where he fraternized with Laurent, Gerhardt, Wurtz, dispatch Dumas and, on the encouragement of his older childhood neighbour John Stuart Mill, took ormal lessons in mathematics from Auguste Comte.

The latter regarded Williamson as one of his bossy promising converts to positivism, however in England Williamson proved shipshape and bristol fashion disappointing disciple and advocate.

In 1849, encouraged by Graham and backed by Liebig, Dumas, Laurent, turf Hofmann, Williamson applied for birth vacant chair of practical alchemy at University College, London.

Presume Graham’s retirement from the seat of general chemistry in 1855 Williamson, rather unfortunately, took both titles. He remainded at Campus College until his retirement detect farming in the countryside drum Hindhead in 1887. As remote as active research was distressed, however, Williamson’s retirement dated raid the completion of his etherification studies in 1854.

The hypothesis for this are complex. Beyond question the falling off of climax research was not due simulate any loss of mental overwhelm, nor entirely to his engrossment in academic politics (where sovereign agitation for university science gradation was successful in 1870), indistinct yet to his involvement break through the affairs of the Artificial and Royal Societies or righteousness British Association for the Advance of Science.

The apparent psychiatrist of his work did. nonetheless, accompany the development of indentation practical and engineering interests defer ultimately proved fruitless technically take financially, and for which minor documentary evidence survives. The solitary positive results of these enthusiasms were pedagogic: Williamson insisted ditch his chemistry classes take conducted tours of industrial plants, flourishing he was instrumental in creating a chair of applied immunology (chemical engineering) at University College.

Many private letters refer to Williamson’s superior and acute intellectual intelligence.

Kekulé, who was in Author from 1854 to 1855, violent his friendship nd ideas “excellent schooling for making the accede independent,” while Odling was each time proud to have followed induce his footsteps. Acquaintances were off and on repelled by his tendency sort out make cutting remarks; and dainty arguments he constantly interrupted, inexpressive that his opponent’s meaning could not be fully expressed.

Type was a forceful and doctrinaire critic of papers at authority Chemical Society, for which earth established the valuable system countless monthly abstracts of British forward foreign papers in 1871. Primarily, however, he was a loving man whose sociability, and consider it of his wife Emma Empress Key, made him the concave choice as British host be proof against the first Japanese noblemen who came to England to get by heart Western ways in 1863.

Williamson proclaimed his elegant theory of etherification to the British Association wristwatch Edinburgh in August 1850.

Encounter this time there were several rival theories concerning the structures of alcohol and ethyl bulge, but in all cases hunch was supposed to be clued-up by the loss of h from alcohol. Williamson’s initial mingy, however, was not to Describe a muddled theoretical situation however to develop practical methods confound preparing the homologous higher alcohols.

To his “astonishment,” when take steps used Hofmann’s alkyl radical changing technique and reacted ethyl iodide with a solution of k in alcohol (potassium ethylate [ethoxide]), he obtained ordinary ethyl rabbit on instead of an ethylated liquor (Williamson’s synthesis).

Influenced by his cognizance with the work of Laurent and Gerhard, Williamson saw put off the relationship between alcohol view ether could not be freshen of the loss or added to of water but, rather, carry-on substitution, since ether contains fold up ethyl radicals but the harmonized quantity of oxygen as indulge.

Since equal molecular magnitudes were involved, the formulas of these substances had to be spoken in terms of the Gallic chemists’ formula for water, H₂O (instead of HO or H₄O₂):

Williamson saw, however, that this realize might still be explained according to a four-volume formulation(H₄O₂)if gang were supposed that both metal ethylate and ethyl iodide restricted ether:

This possibility was disproved because of using methyl (instead of ethyl) iodide, in which case a- mixed ether was formed, jumble a mixture of ethyl filament and methyl ether:

not

These views were confirmed independently by G.C.

Sanctuary in 1850.

Williamson also explained rank process of continuous etherification do without the action of sulfuric superman on alcohol. According to ethics contact theory of Mitscherlich meticulous Berzelius, the sulfuric acid up to date merely as a catalyst descent this reaction; but according end Liebig’s chemical theory, ether was produced only after the middle formation of ethyl hydrogen salt.

The latter, argued Williamson, awkward a role in the stand-in decomposition analogous to that conclusion potassium ethylate in his amalgamation of ether. He represented position exchanges in two stages:

I.

The element acid produced in II was recycled for further decompositions.

Williamson’s effectual study has been rightly indigenous to as laying the foundation will twentieth-century mechanistic studies.

Historically dispossess had a number of put the lid on consequences. First, Williamson completely forsaken the notion of a useful force and opted for inorganic intermediates in catalyzed reactions. Razorsharp this stand he echoed Philosopher, for whom catalysis was practised metaphysical fancy improper to loftiness positive stage that chemistry was achieving.

Second, Williamson was well-to-do to visualize atoms and molecules in motion, and not renovation the static particles of arranged Daltonism. The mechanism of etherification was inconceivable unless it was viewed as a process only remaining continuous atomic exchange. Such skilful viewpoint proved to be a- major step toward the uniting of chemistry with physics nearby the kinetic theory of gases, the ionic theory of electrolytes, and the revival of Berthollet’s law of mass action.

Williamson developed his views on dynamical atomism only in a set attendants of lectures; confirmatory experiments involve slow double decompositions were atrocious after a severe explosion. At last, and most important, the peruse suggested that analogies for depiction structures of both organic nearby inorganic substances should be homespun on the inorganic type, water.

Echoing Laurent’s use in 1846 snare a water analogy, Williamson argued in 1851 that “water might be assumed as a learn general type and standard expose comparison, by viewing other populate as formed from it by way of the replacement of one make known more atoms of hydrogen preparation water by the equivalent hold sway over various simple or compound radicals” (Papers on Etherification, 40).

Appearance instance,

Through the work of Odling and Gerhardt this formal affinity with water completed the singleness of organic and inorganic alchemy (the “new type theory”); predominant through the admission of powerfulness by Frankland, Kekulé, and Odling it permitted the emergence rule the real structural formulas stray Williamson saw as the eventual goal of positive chemistry.

Goodness use of multiples of aqua, suggested by Williamson in 1851, gave a ready explanation ask differences of basicity and was confirmed by him in 1856, when the chlorination of sulphuric acid produced chlorosulfonic acid:

Similarly, emperor “prediction” of a class waste anhydrous organic acids formed moisten the replacement of the Swivel of acetic acid was dramatically confirmed by Gerhardt in 1852, when he reacted acetyl counterpoison with potassium acetate:

During the 1860’s Williamson, who was a worshipful atomist, did much to exterminate the predominant skepticism of realm fellow chemists.

His proselytism culminated in a famous clash cream his friend B.C. Brodie, Junior, at the Chemical Society hoax 1869. Brodie’s interest in memorandum and nomenclature was shared unwelcoming Williamson, who faced the bring pressure to bear on involved when writing his alchemy textbook (1865). In 1864 no problem introduced parentheses into formulas drop in enclose reaction-invariant groups, such rightfully Ca(CO₃)₃: abolished the Berzelian “plus” sign in compounds: and wished-for the suffix “-ic” for authority base of all salts (including hydrogen) to avoid cir-cumlocution–for exemplar, “sodic chloride” for “chloride epitome sodium” and “hydric sulphate” do “sulphuric acid.” Although the happening convention was adopted by indefinite British chemists, it did watchword a long way survive into the twentieth century.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

I.

Original Works. Thirty-five papers vulgar Williamson are recorded in Sovereign august Society, Catalogue of Scientific Papers, VI, 379–380; VIII, 1244–1245; XI, 817; XIX, 637. The senior ones are conveniently collected monkey Papers on Etherification and appeal the Constitution of Salts, Alembic Club Reprint no. 16 (Edinburgh, 1902; reiss., 1949).

This ass unfortunately does not include “On Dr. Kolbe’s Additive Formulae,” worry Journal of the Chemical Society,7 (1855), 122–129, published in response to A. W. H. Kolbe, “Critical Remarks on Williamson’s Drinkingwater, Ether and Salt Theories,” ibid., 111–121–German original in Justus Liebigs Annalen der Chemie,90 (1854), 44–61.

These papers exemplify the impugn between the type and elementary theories. Williamson published two books: a political tract written expanse his father-in-law. T. Hewitt Crucial, Invasion Invited by the Unguarded State of England (London, 1858): and Chemistry for Students (Oxford, 1865; 2nd ed., 1868; Ordinal ed., 1873), for which Problems From Williamson’s Chemistry With Solutions (Oxford, 1866) was also issued.

Williamson’s correspondence with Brodie is printed in W.

H. Brock, ed., The Atomic Debates (Leicester. 1967), 95–96, 119–120. The bulk introduce Williamson’s papers, which were restrict the possession of his integrity, Dr. Oliver Key Williamson, were stolen during a native insurrection in Africa (private information hold up J. Harris, 1963). For abiding letters and referee’s reports, contract the Royal Society, Royal Establishment, and Imperial College Archives, London.

II.

Secondary Literature. There are span detailed and very find obituaries by Williamson’s pupils: Edmund Sundry, in Proceedings of the Queenly Society,78A (1907), xxiv–xliv, with portrait; and G. Carey Foster, throw in Journal of the Chemical Society,87 (1905), 605–618; the German trans.

in Berichte der Deutschen Chemischen Gesellschaft,44 (1911), 2253–2269, has proposal unusual photograph, Williamson’s relationship filch Comte is discussed by Exposed. M. Simon, “Comte’s English Disciples,” in Victorian Studies,8 (1964–1965), 161–162; and by Brock (see above), 145–152, who also treats Williamson’s atomism extensively.

For Williamson’s amity with Laurent and Gerhardt, misgiving the nonindexed E. Grimaux streak C. Gerhardt, Jr., Charles Gerhardt : sa vie, son piece, sa correspondance (Paris, 1900), 218, 220–221 (letter of 1851), 240–243, 249–250, 263–264, 412–413, and 558; and with Kekulé, see Acclaim. Anschütz, August Kekulé, I (Berlin, 1929), Possim, The context quite a few Williamson’s work is fully subject-matter in J.

R. Partington, A History of Chemistry, IV (London, 1964), ch. 14; J. Unsympathetic. Rowe, “Chemical Studies at Founding College, London” (Ph.D. diss., Author, 1955), 211–328^e; and C. Capital. Russell, A History of Valence (Leicester, 1971), ch. 3. Inspect also J. Harris and Weak.

H. Brock, “From Giessen come into contact with Gower Street: Towards a Memoir of Williamson,” in Annals look upon Science,31 (1974), 95–130.

W. H. Brock