Remarks on Professor Newcomb's "Rejoinder"

Clicks: 4
ID: 306565
1884
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #4,665 of 8,486 articles by views in american journal of science

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 8,486 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
regard to this Rejoinder of his, I regret that I must repeat what I said about his Review, viz: that nearly all his objections are based on ;;:trange, and to me unaccountable, misapprehensions of my reasoning and of the views which I actually hold.I [lave no desire to contillue this controversy, but may be allowed briefly to refer to those points on which I have been so thol"Oughly misunderstood.Of course 1 fully concur in Pl'ofessor Newcomb's opening remarks as to the desirability of "a purely mathematical investigation of the subject."SllCh an investigation, however, is,
Reference Key
openalex_W2316888998 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors James Croll
Journal american journal of science
Year 1884
DOI
10.2475/ajs.s3-27.161.343
URL
https://doi.org/10.2475/ajs.s3-27.161.343
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.