ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
EDITORIAL
May 1960, Vol. 32, No. 6 APPLIED JOURNALS, ACS Director of Publications, C. 8. Larrabee Editorial Director, Richard 1. Kenyan Executive Edrtor, James M. Crowe Assidant to the Director of Publications, Joseph H. Kuney Assistant to the Editorial Director, Robert F. Gould ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY Editor, Lawrence 1.Hallett Managing Editor, Robert G. Gibbs EDITORIAL HEADQUARTERS WASHINGTON 6, D. C. 11 55 Sixteenth St., N.W. Teletype W A 23 Phone REpublic 7-3337 Associate Editors: G. Gladys Gordon, Stella Anderson, Katherine I , Biggs, Robert J. Riley, Sue M. Solliday, Ruth Reynard Assistant Editors: Robert J. Kelley, Malvina 8. Preiss Editorial Assistants: Katherine H. Ginnanet Virginia E. Stewart, S. S. Rogers, Lorraine M. Bertuzzi layout and Produclion: Joseph Jacobs (Art Director), Melvin D. Buckner (Art); Betty V. Kieffer, John V. Sinnett BRANCH EDITORIAL OFFICES CHICAGO 3, ILL. Room 9 2 6 , 3 6 South Wabosh Ave. Teletype CG 725 Phone Slate 2-5148 Associate Editors: A i l h u r Poulos, Chester Placek, James H. Krieger HOUSTON 2, TEX. 718 Melrose Bldg. Teletype HO 72 Phone FAirfax 3-7107 Associate Editors: Bruce F. Greek, Earl V. Anderson NEW YORK 16, N. Y. 2 Park Ave. Phone ORegon 9-1646 Telelype NY 1-4726 Associate Editors: William 0. Hull, Harry Stenerron, D. Gray Weaver, Walter S. Fedor, Laurence J. White, Louis A. Agnello SAN FRANCISCO 4, CALIF. 703 Mechanics' Institute Bldg., 57 Post SI. Phone EXbrook 2-2895 Teletype SF 549 Associate Editor: Richard G. Newhall Assistant Editor: Joseph Sturchia EASTON, PA. 20th a n d Northampton Sts. Phone Blackburn 8-91 1 1 Teletype ESTN Pa 7048 Associate Editor: Charlotte C. Sayre Assistant Editor: Joyce A. Richards Editorial Assistant: Barbara A. Conover EUROPEAN OFFICE Bush House, Aldwych, London Phone Temple Bar 3605 Cable JIECHEM Associate Editor: Albert S. Hester Assistant Edifor: Brendan F. Somerville Contributing Editor:
Fashions in Science As I N D I ~ I D U A L Sour actions are influenced by what is fashionable and acceptable t o the majority of those with whom we associate. I n many human activities the acceptance of the majority opinion is harmless and contributes to our sense of well-being. Similarly) in science, opinion of the majority determines what is fashionable and what are the accepted norms. Very often, this is good and helps science to progress. I n some cases, hoxever, it has adverse effects, as we have detected in reading manuscripts submitted for publication. Today, for example, it is fashionable to carry out analyses v i t h expensive instruments such as infrared spectrophotometers and mass spectrometers. This may sa-\-e much time and money. However, in some cases these analyses could be done jiist as fast and with sufficient precision b y "wet" chemical methods. And where considerable time is involved in standardizing instrumental procedures, the chemical method may be cheaper. Or if only a given piece of information is needed-for example, a small section of a curve-the instrumental method may in\-olve drawing a complete curve. Here the chemical method saves time. Field methods, such as those involved in air and stream pollution studies, in examining mineral specimens, or in agricultural tests, require simple chemical procedures. Elaborate and costly instrumentation cannot be justified. Have we not come full circle within a generation? Thirty years ago a proposed expenditure of several thousand dollars for a new analytical instrument to do a job traditionally done by classical methods was often considered a luxury. Perhaps today we should more often apply such a yardstick. We do not decry the importance of the versatile instruments and instrumental methods now available, but we do insist that burets and standard solutions still play an important role in the scheme of analysis. We must not forget, for example, that classical methods must be used in many cases to develop instrumental procedures and to prepare instrumental standards. I n teaching instrumental analysis, the professor often demonstrates basic principles without elaborate instrumentation. H e should also emphasize that there is still a place for the clasPical approach to some of today's analytical problems. Let's be u p to date in our thinking but let's not allow the dictates of fashion to cloud our judgment so that we cannot see a simple and direct approach to the solution of our analytical problems.
R. H. Muller
Advisory Board: W. H. Beamer, F. E. Beamirh, C. E. Bricker, W. D. Cooke, D. D. DeFord, M. T. Kelley, C. 1. Luke, W. M. MacNevin, W. J. Mader, W. B. Mason, F. W. Mitchell, Jr., N. H. Nachtrieb, E. J. Rosenbourn, B. F. Scribner, F. H. Stross Advertising Management REINHOLD PUBLISHING CORP. (For eranch Offices see p a g e 141 A )
e VOL. 32, NO. 6 MAY 1960
a
575
