The high-vacuum X-ray tube: Technological change in social context

Technology and Culture

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 852-889

  Arns, Robert G ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038909533     PISSN: 0040165X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3106952     Document Type: Article

References (168)

1. Henry Hulst, "Joys and Sorrows of an X-ray Worker," Physician and Surgeon (Detroit-Ann Arbor) 24 (1902): 492-98.
2. Paul C. Hodges, "Development of Diagnostic X-ray Apparatus during the First Fifty Years," Radiology 45 (November 1945): 438-48.
3. A. E. Barclay, "The Old Order Changes," British Journal of Radiology 22 (1949): 300-308.
4. Joel D. Howell, Technology in the Hospital (Baltimore, 1995), p. 111, table 4.1, gives 1920 data on the Pennsylvania and New York Hospitals.
5. Hodges, p. 441.
6. A. E. Barclay, "The Organization and Equipment of an X-ray Department," Journal of the Röntgen Society 19 (April 1923): 55-77, quotation on p. 66.
7. Nancy Knight, "'The New Light': X Rays and Medical Futurism," in Imagining Tomorrow: History, Technology, and the American Future, ed. Joseph J. Corn (Cambridge, Mass., 1986), pp. 10-34.
8. Wiebe Bijker, Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs (Cambridge, Mass., 1995), pp. 48-50. For earlier work by Bijker and his coworkers, see papers in The Social Construction of Technological Systems, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch (Cambridge, Mass., 1987) , and in Shaping Technology/Building Society, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker and John Law (Cambridge, Mass., 1992). This approach to technological history, known as the "social construction of technology" (SCOT), has been questioned by some investigators, e.g., Stewart Russell, "The Social Construction of Artefacts: A Response to Pinch and Bijker," Social Studies of Science 16 (1986): 331-46; Hughie Mackay and Gareth Gillespie, "Extending the Social Shaping of Technology Approach: Ideology and Appropriation," Social Studies of Science 22 (1992): 685-716; Paul Rosen, "The Social Construction of Mountain Bikes: Technology and Postmodernity in the Cycle Industry," Social Studies of Science 23 (1993): 479-513; and Stuart S. Blume, Insight and Industry: On the Dynamics of Technological Change in Medicine (Cambridge, Mass., 1992), especially pp. 52-60. These critics have drawn attention to issues such as the role of ideology in the social shaping of technology, as revealed by functional and symbolic encoding, the importance of marketing among various social processes, ways in which users tend to appropriate technologies, and relationships between users and manufacturers. The present case study is not in-tended as a test of the SCOT methodology; however, Bijker's approach provides a useful set of heuristics for bringing this example of technology-in-society into relief.
9. Wiebe Bijker, Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs (Cambridge, Mass., 1995), pp. 48-50. For earlier work by Bijker and his coworkers, see papers in The Social Construction of Technological Systems, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch (Cambridge, Mass., 1987) , and in Shaping Technology/Building Society, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker and John Law (Cambridge, Mass., 1992). This approach to technological history, known as the "social construction of technology" (SCOT), has been questioned by some investigators, e.g., Stewart Russell, "The Social Construction of Artefacts: A Response to Pinch and Bijker," Social Studies of Science 16 (1986): 331-46; Hughie Mackay and Gareth Gillespie, "Extending the Social Shaping of Technology Approach: Ideology and Appropriation," Social Studies of Science 22 (1992): 685-716; Paul Rosen, "The Social Construction of Mountain Bikes: Technology and Postmodernity in the Cycle Industry," Social Studies of Science 23 (1993): 479-513; and Stuart S. Blume, Insight and Industry: On the Dynamics of Technological Change in Medicine (Cambridge, Mass., 1992), especially pp. 52-60. These critics have drawn attention to issues such as the role of ideology in the social shaping of technology, as revealed by functional and symbolic encoding, the importance of marketing among various social processes, ways in which users tend to appropriate technologies, and relationships between users and manufacturers. The present case study is not in-tended as a test of the SCOT methodology; however, Bijker's approach provides a useful set of heuristics for bringing this example of technology-in-society into relief.
10. Wiebe Bijker, Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs (Cambridge, Mass., 1995), pp. 48-50. For earlier work by Bijker and his coworkers, see papers in The Social Construction of Technological Systems, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch (Cambridge, Mass., 1987) , and in Shaping Technology/Building Society, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker and John Law (Cambridge, Mass., 1992). This approach to technological history, known as the "social construction of technology" (SCOT), has been questioned by some investigators, e.g., Stewart Russell, "The Social Construction of Artefacts: A Response to Pinch and Bijker," Social Studies of Science 16 (1986): 331-46; Hughie Mackay and Gareth Gillespie, "Extending the Social Shaping of Technology Approach: Ideology and Appropriation," Social Studies of Science 22 (1992): 685-716; Paul Rosen, "The Social Construction of Mountain Bikes: Technology and Postmodernity in the Cycle Industry," Social Studies of Science 23 (1993): 479-513; and Stuart S. Blume, Insight and Industry: On the Dynamics of Technological Change in Medicine (Cambridge, Mass., 1992), especially pp. 52-60. These critics have drawn attention to issues such as the role of ideology in the social shaping of technology, as revealed by functional and symbolic encoding, the importance of marketing among various social processes, ways in which users tend to appropriate technologies, and relationships between users and manufacturers. The present case study is not in-tended as a test of the SCOT methodology; however, Bijker's approach provides a useful set of heuristics for bringing this example of technology-in-society into relief.
11. Wiebe Bijker, Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs (Cambridge, Mass., 1995), pp. 48-50. For earlier work by Bijker and his coworkers, see papers in The Social Construction of Technological Systems, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch (Cambridge, Mass., 1987) , and in Shaping Technology/Building Society, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker and John Law (Cambridge, Mass., 1992). This approach to technological history, known as the "social construction of technology" (SCOT), has been questioned by some investigators, e.g., Stewart Russell, "The Social Construction of Artefacts: A Response to Pinch and Bijker," Social Studies of Science 16 (1986): 331-46; Hughie Mackay and Gareth Gillespie, "Extending the Social Shaping of Technology Approach: Ideology and Appropriation," Social Studies of Science 22 (1992): 685-716; Paul Rosen, "The Social Construction of Mountain Bikes: Technology and Postmodernity in the Cycle Industry," Social Studies of Science 23 (1993): 479-513; and Stuart S. Blume, Insight and Industry: On the Dynamics of Technological Change in Medicine (Cambridge, Mass., 1992), especially pp. 52-60. These critics have drawn attention to issues such as the role of ideology in the social shaping of technology, as revealed by functional and symbolic encoding, the importance of marketing among various social processes, ways in which users tend to appropriate technologies, and relationships between users and manufacturers. The present case study is not in-tended as a test of the SCOT methodology; however, Bijker's approach provides a useful set of heuristics for bringing this example of technology-in-society into relief.
12. Wiebe Bijker, Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs (Cambridge, Mass., 1995), pp. 48-50. For earlier work by Bijker and his coworkers, see papers in The Social Construction of Technological Systems, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch (Cambridge, Mass., 1987) , and in Shaping Technology/Building Society, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker and John Law (Cambridge, Mass., 1992). This approach to technological history, known as the "social construction of technology" (SCOT), has been questioned by some investigators, e.g., Stewart Russell, "The Social Construction of Artefacts: A Response to Pinch and Bijker," Social Studies of Science 16 (1986): 331-46; Hughie Mackay and Gareth Gillespie, "Extending the Social Shaping of Technology Approach: Ideology and Appropriation," Social Studies of Science 22 (1992): 685-716; Paul Rosen, "The Social Construction of Mountain Bikes: Technology and Postmodernity in the Cycle Industry," Social Studies of Science 23 (1993): 479-513; and Stuart S. Blume, Insight and Industry: On the Dynamics of Technological Change in Medicine (Cambridge, Mass., 1992), especially pp. 52-60. These critics have drawn attention to issues such as the role of ideology in the social shaping of technology, as revealed by functional and symbolic encoding, the importance of marketing among various social processes, ways in which users tend to appropriate technologies, and relationships between users and manufacturers. The present case study is not in-tended as a test of the SCOT methodology; however, Bijker's approach provides a useful set of heuristics for bringing this example of technology-in-society into relief.
13. Wiebe Bijker, Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs (Cambridge, Mass., 1995), pp. 48-50. For earlier work by Bijker and his coworkers, see papers in The Social Construction of Technological Systems, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch (Cambridge, Mass., 1987) , and in Shaping Technology/Building Society, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker and John Law (Cambridge, Mass., 1992). This approach to technological history, known as the "social construction of technology" (SCOT), has been questioned by some investigators, e.g., Stewart Russell, "The Social Construction of Artefacts: A Response to Pinch and Bijker," Social Studies of Science 16 (1986): 331-46; Hughie Mackay and Gareth Gillespie, "Extending the Social Shaping of Technology Approach: Ideology and Appropriation," Social Studies of Science 22 (1992): 685-716; Paul Rosen, "The Social Construction of Mountain Bikes: Technology and Postmodernity in the Cycle Industry," Social Studies of Science 23 (1993): 479-513; and Stuart S. Blume, Insight and Industry: On the Dynamics of Technological Change in Medicine (Cambridge, Mass., 1992), especially pp. 52-60. These critics have drawn attention to issues such as the role of ideology in the social shaping of technology, as revealed by functional and symbolic encoding, the importance of marketing among various social processes, ways in which users tend to appropriate technologies, and relationships between users and manufacturers. The present case study is not in-tended as a test of the SCOT methodology; however, Bijker's approach provides a useful set of heuristics for bringing this example of technology-in-society into relief.
14. Wiebe Bijker, Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs (Cambridge, Mass., 1995), pp. 48-50. For earlier work by Bijker and his coworkers, see papers in The Social Construction of Technological Systems, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch (Cambridge, Mass., 1987) , and in Shaping Technology/Building Society, ed. Wiebe E. Bijker and John Law (Cambridge, Mass., 1992). This approach to technological history, known as the "social construction of technology" (SCOT), has been questioned by some investigators, e.g., Stewart Russell, "The Social Construction of Artefacts: A Response to Pinch and Bijker," Social Studies of Science 16 (1986): 331-46; Hughie Mackay and Gareth Gillespie, "Extending the Social Shaping of Technology Approach: Ideology and Appropriation," Social Studies of Science 22 (1992): 685-716; Paul Rosen, "The Social Construction of Mountain Bikes: Technology and Postmodernity in the Cycle Industry," Social Studies of Science 23 (1993): 479-513; and Stuart S. Blume, Insight and Industry: On the Dynamics of Technological Change in Medicine (Cambridge, Mass., 1992), especially pp. 52-60. These critics have drawn attention to issues such as the role of ideology in the social shaping of technology, as revealed by functional and symbolic encoding, the importance of marketing among various social processes, ways in which users tend to appropriate technologies, and relationships between users and manufacturers. The present case study is not in-tended as a test of the SCOT methodology; however, Bijker's approach provides a useful set of heuristics for bringing this example of technology-in-society into relief.
15. Bijker, Bicycles, Bakelites and Bulbs, pp. 122-27.
16. See, for example, Geoffrey C. Bowker, "What's in a Patent?" in Bijker and Law, pp. 53-74, and Science on the Run: Information Management and Industrial Geophysics at Schlumberger, 1920-1940 (Cambridge, Mass., 1994).
17. See, for example, Geoffrey C. Bowker, "What's in a Patent?" in Bijker and Law, pp. 53-74, and Science on the Run: Information Management and Industrial Geophysics at Schlumberger, 1920-1940 (Cambridge, Mass., 1994).
18. The concepts of closure and stabilization, as used here, are described by Bijker, Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs, pp. 84-88.
19. Joel D. Howell, Technology in the Hospital (n. 4 above), and "Early Use of X-ray Machines and Electrocardiographs at the Pennsylvania Hospital, 1897 through 1927," Journal of the American Medical Association 255 (May 2, 1986): 2320-23.
20. Joel D. Howell, Technology in the Hospital (n. 4 above), and "Early Use of X-ray Machines and Electrocardiographs at the Pennsylvania Hospital, 1897 through 1927," Journal of the American Medical Association 255 (May 2, 1986): 2320-23.
21. The discovery and announcement are recounted by Otto Glasser, Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen and the Early History of Röntgen Rays (Springfield, Ill., 1934), and Dr. W. C. Röntgen, 2d ed. (Springfield, Ill., 1958), which includes a translation of the first papers. See also E. Posner, "Reception of Röntgen's Discovery in Britain and U.S.A.," British Medical Journal 4 (1970): 357-60.
22. The discovery and announcement are recounted by Otto Glasser, Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen and the Early History of Röntgen Rays (Springfield, Ill., 1934), and Dr. W. C. Röntgen, 2d ed. (Springfield, Ill., 1958), which includes a translation of the first papers. See also E. Posner, "Reception of Röntgen's Discovery in Britain and U.S.A.," British Medical Journal 4 (1970): 357-60.
23. The discovery and announcement are recounted by Otto Glasser, Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen and the Early History of Röntgen Rays (Springfield, Ill., 1934), and Dr. W. C. Röntgen, 2d ed. (Springfield, Ill., 1958), which includes a translation of the first papers. See also E. Posner, "Reception of Röntgen's Discovery in Britain and U.S.A.," British Medical Journal 4 (1970): 357-60.
24. See, for example, Peter K. Spiegel, "The First Clinical X-Ray Made in America -100 Years," American Journal of Roentgenology 164 (January 1995): 241-43; Lynne Allien Leopold, Radiology at the University of Pennsylvania, 1890-1975 (Philadelphia, 1981), pp. 5-10; and E. H. Burrows, Pioneers and Early Years: A History of British Radiology (Alderney, Channel Islands, 1986), pp. 24-38.
25. See, for example, Peter K. Spiegel, "The First Clinical X-Ray Made in America - 100 Years," American Journal of Roentgenology 164 (January 1995): 241-43; Lynne Allien Leopold, Radiology at the University of Pennsylvania, 1890-1975 (Philadelphia, 1981), pp. 5-10; and E. H. Burrows, Pioneers and Early Years: A History of British Radiology (Alderney, Channel Islands, 1986), pp. 24-38.
26. See, for example, Peter K. Spiegel, "The First Clinical X-Ray Made in America - 100 Years," American Journal of Roentgenology 164 (January 1995): 241-43; Lynne Allien Leopold, Radiology at the University of Pennsylvania, 1890-1975 (Philadelphia, 1981), pp. 5-10; and E. H. Burrows, Pioneers and Early Years: A History of British Radiology (Alderney, Channel Islands, 1986), pp. 24-38.
27. Applied work by academic physicists was valued both in the United States, where physics was still very much under a European shadow, and in Germany, where theoretical physics had already achieved considerable strength. U.S. physics at the end of the 19th century has been described by Daniel J. Kevles, Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America (New York, 1978), and by Albert E. Moyer, American Physics in Transition (Los Angeles, 1983). Paul Forman, John L. Heilbron, and Spencer Weart, "Physics circa 1900," Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 5 (1975), describe the part played by applied work in physicists' income. Respect for applied work in Germany and the role of major German figures such as Hermann von Helmholtz and Ernst Mach in medical education and medical applications are described, for example, by Christa Jungnickel and Russell McCormmach, Intellectual Mastery of Nature, vol. 2, The Now Mighty Theoretical Physics, 1870-1925 (Chicago, 1986).
28. Applied work by academic physicists was valued both in the United States, where physics was still very much under a European shadow, and in Germany, where theoretical physics had already achieved considerable strength. U.S. physics at the end of the 19th century has been described by Daniel J. Kevles, Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America (New York, 1978), and by Albert E. Moyer, American Physics in Transition (Los Angeles, 1983). Paul Forman, John L. Heilbron, and Spencer Weart, "Physics circa 1900," Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 5 (1975), describe the part played by applied work in physicists' income. Respect for applied work in Germany and the role of major German figures such as Hermann von Helmholtz and Ernst Mach in medical education and medical applications are described, for example, by Christa Jungnickel and Russell McCormmach, Intellectual Mastery of Nature, vol. 2, The Now Mighty Theoretical Physics, 1870-1925 (Chicago, 1986).
29. Applied work by academic physicists was valued both in the United States, where physics was still very much under a European shadow, and in Germany, where theoretical physics had already achieved considerable strength. U.S. physics at the end of the 19th century has been described by Daniel J. Kevles, Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America (New York, 1978), and by Albert E. Moyer, American Physics in Transition (Los Angeles, 1983). Paul Forman, John L. Heilbron, and Spencer Weart, "Physics circa 1900," Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 5 (1975), describe the part played by applied work in physicists' income. Respect for applied work in Germany and the role of major German figures such as Hermann von Helmholtz and Ernst Mach in medical education and medical applications are described, for example, by Christa Jungnickel and Russell McCormmach, Intellectual Mastery of Nature, vol. 2, The Now Mighty Theoretical Physics, 1870-1925 (Chicago, 1986).
30. Applied work by academic physicists was valued both in the United States, where physics was still very much under a European shadow, and in Germany, where theoretical physics had already achieved considerable strength. U.S. physics at the end of the 19th century has been described by Daniel J. Kevles, Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America (New York, 1978), and by Albert E. Moyer, American Physics in Transition (Los Angeles, 1983). Paul Forman, John L. Heilbron, and Spencer Weart, "Physics circa 1900," Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 5 (1975), describe the part played by applied work in physicists' income. Respect for applied work in Germany and the role of major German figures such as Hermann von Helmholtz and Ernst Mach in medical education and medical applications are described, for example, by Christa Jungnickel and Russell McCormmach, Intellectual Mastery of Nature, vol. 2, The Now Mighty Theoretical Physics, 1870-1925 (Chicago, 1986).
31. The history of electrotherapy has been described by John S. Coulter, Physical Therapy (New York, 1932), pp. 68-98; Trying S. Cutter, "History of Physical Therapy and its Relation to Medicine," in Principles and Practice of Physical Therapy, vol. 1, Physiology and Medicine, ed. Ralph Pemberton (Hagerstown, Md., 1933), pp. 1-84; and Margaret Rowbottom and Charles Susskind, Electricity and Medicine: History of Their Interaction (San Francisco, 1984).
32. The history of electrotherapy has been described by John S. Coulter, Physical Therapy (New York, 1932), pp. 68-98; Trying S. Cutter, "History of Physical Therapy and its Relation to Medicine," in Principles and Practice of Physical Therapy, vol. 1, Physiology and Medicine, ed. Ralph Pemberton (Hagerstown, Md., 1933), pp. 1-84; and Margaret Rowbottom and Charles Susskind, Electricity and Medicine: History of Their Interaction (San Francisco, 1984).
33. The history of electrotherapy has been described by John S. Coulter, Physical Therapy (New York, 1932), pp. 68-98; Trying S. Cutter, "History of Physical Therapy and its Relation to Medicine," in Principles and Practice of Physical Therapy, vol. 1, Physiology and Medicine, ed. Ralph Pemberton (Hagerstown, Md., 1933), pp. 1-84; and Margaret Rowbottom and Charles Susskind, Electricity and Medicine: History of Their Interaction (San Francisco, 1984).
34. David E. Nye, Electrifying America: Social Meanings of a New Technology, 1880-1940 (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), p. 153; see also Carolyn Marvin, When Old Technologies Were New (New York, 1988), pp. 129-33.
35. David E. Nye, Electrifying America: Social Meanings of a New Technology, 1880-1940 (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), p. 153; see also Carolyn Marvin, When Old Technologies Were New (New York, 1988), pp. 129-33.
36. Lisa Rosner, "The Professional Context of Electrotherapeutics," Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 43 (January 1988): 64-82; Lawrence D. Longo, "Electrotherapy in Gynecology: The American Experience," Bulletin of the History of Medicine 60 (1986): 343-66; and Paul A. Nelson, "History of the Once Close Relationship between Electrotherapeutics and Radiology," ca. 1970. I am indebted to Nancy Knight. Center for the American History of Radiology, Reston, Virginia for making this manuscript available to me.
37. Lisa Rosner, "The Professional Context of Electrotherapeutics," Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 43 (January 1988): 64-82; Lawrence D. Longo, "Electrotherapy in Gynecology: The American Experience," Bulletin of the History of Medicine 60 (1986): 343-66; and Paul A. Nelson, "History of the Once Close Relationship between Electrotherapeutics and Radiology," ca. 1970. I am indebted to Nancy Knight. Center for the American History of Radiology, Reston, Virginia for making this manuscript available to me.
38. Lisa Rosner, "The Professional Context of Electrotherapeutics," Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 43 (January 1988): 64-82; Lawrence D. Longo, "Electrotherapy in Gynecology: The American Experience," Bulletin of the History of Medicine 60 (1986): 343-66; and Paul A. Nelson, "History of the Once Close Relationship between Electrotherapeutics and Radiology," ca. 1970. I am indebted to Nancy Knight. Center for the American History of Radiology, Reston, Virginia for making this manuscript available to me.
39. Howell, Technology in the Hospital (n. 4 above), p. 112.
40. S. Cochrane Shanks, "Fifty Years of Radiology," British Medical Journal 1 (January 7, 1950): 44-48.
41. Barclay, "Organization and Equipment" (n. 6 above).
42. See also Barclay quotation in Burrows (n. 14 above), p. 80.
43. James T. Case, "Teaching of Radiology," in The Science of Radiology, ed. Otto Glasser (Springfield, Ill., 1933), pp. 344-53. Arthur U. Desjardins, "The Status of Radiology in America," Journal of the American Medical Association 92 (March 30, 1929): 1035-39, reported that, as late as 1929, "there are only one or two schools in this country in which anything approaching a thorough course of instruction in radiology is given." The quotation is from p. 1037.
44. James T. Case, "Teaching of Radiology," in The Science of Radiology, ed. Otto Glasser (Springfield, Ill., 1933), pp. 344-53. Arthur U. Desjardins, "The Status of Radiology in America," Journal of the American Medical Association 92 (March 30, 1929): 1035-39, reported that, as late as 1929, "there are only one or two schools in this country in which anything approaching a thorough course of instruction in radiology is given." The quotation is from p. 1037.
45. Bernike Pasveer, "Knowledge of Shadows: The Introduction of X-ray Images in Medicine," Sociology of Health and Illness 11 (1989): 360-81.
46. The slow development of x-ray diagnosis can be seen by comparing the various editions of Alban Kohler, Grenzen des Normalen und Anfänge des Pathologischen im Röntgenbilde, 1st-5th German ed. (Hamburg, 1910-1928).
47. See also Howell, Technology in the Hospital, esp. pp. 105-9;
48. and Leo G. Rigler, "The Development of Roentgen Diagnosis," Radiology 45 (November 1945): 467-502.
49. Barclay, "Old Order Changes" (n. 3 above).
50. Hodges (n. 2 above); Burrows, p. 131; and Cuthbert Andrews as quoted in Barclay, "Old Order Changes," p. 302.
51. Hodges (n. 2 above); Burrows, p. 131; and Cuthbert Andrews as quoted in Barclay, "Old Order Changes," p. 302.
52. Hodges (n. 2 above); Burrows, p. 131; and Cuthbert Andrews as quoted in Barclay, "Old Order Changes," p. 302.
53. Thomas Glover Lyon, "Roentgen's Rays as a Cure for Disease," Lancet 1 (February 1, 1896): 326; Emil H. Grubbé, "Priority in the Therapeutic Use of X-rays," Radiology 21 (1933): 156-62.
54. Thomas Glover Lyon, "Roentgen's Rays as a Cure for Disease," Lancet 1 (February 1, 1896): 326; Emil H. Grubbé, "Priority in the Therapeutic Use of X-rays," Radiology 21 (1933): 156-62.
55. Many of the early gas tubes had two positive electrodes, the anode, described above, and an anticathode or target, located closer to the cathode, which was the principal source of the x rays and which was usually electrically connected to the anode. See Paul Rønne and Arnold B. W. Nielsen, Development of the Ion X-ray Tube (Copenhagen, 1986).
56. See, for example, Howard R. Raper, Elementary and Dental Radiography (New York, 1913), pp. 55-57,
57. and E. R. N. Grigg, The Trail of the Invisible Light (Springfield, Ill., 1965), pp. 63-66.
58. See Mihran K. Kassabian, Röntgen Rays and Electrotherapeutics (Philadelphia, 1907), or Sinclair Tousey, Medical Electricity and Röntgen Rays (New York, 1910), for color reproductions, intended for the use of physicians, of tubes in various states of proper and improper operation.
59. See Mihran K. Kassabian, Röntgen Rays and Electrotherapeutics (Philadelphia, 1907), or Sinclair Tousey, Medical Electricity and Röntgen Rays (New York, 1910), for color reproductions, intended for the use of physicians, of tubes in various states of proper and improper operation.
60. Percy Brown, American Martyrs to Science through the Roentgen Rays (Springfield, Ill., 1936); Burrows (n. 14 above), pp. 220-40.
61. Percy Brown, American Martyrs to Science through the Roentgen Rays (Springfield, Ill., 1936); Burrows (n. 14 above), pp. 220-40.
62. The firm C. H. F. Müller (Hamburg, Germany) introduced the use of hygroscopic potassium hydroxide (KOH) in 1897. The KOH held water when sealed in place and would give up some of the water as vapor if heated by holding an alcohol flame near the side tube in which it was contained. Other substances were also used in this fashion, e.g., calcium carbonate, asbestos, mica, and carbon See Rønne and Nielsen, pp. 21-22, 25-27.
63. Howell, Technology in the Hospital (n. 4 above), pp. 114-17; N. Thorne Griscom, "History of Pediatric Radiology in the United States and Canada: Images and Trends," Radio Graphics 15 (1995): 1399-422.
64. Howell, Technology in the Hospital (n. 4 above), pp. 114-17; N. Thorne Griscom, "History of Pediatric Radiology in the United States and Canada: Images and Trends," Radio Graphics 15 (1995): 1399-422.
65. Ruth and Edward Brecher, The Rays: A History of Radiology in the United States and Canada (Baltimore, 1969), p. 110. The additional role of nonphysician technical assistants has been described by Gerald Larkin, Occupational Monopoly and Modern Medicine (London and New York, 1983), pp. 60-91.
66. Ruth and Edward Brecher, The Rays: A History of Radiology in the United States and Canada (Baltimore, 1969), p. 110. The additional role of nonphysician technical assistants has been described by Gerald Larkin, Occupational Monopoly and Modern Medicine (London and New York, 1983), pp. 60-91.
67. A. Wehnelt, "Ueber den Austritt negativer Ionen aus glühenden Metallverbindungen und damit zusammenhängenden Erscheinungen," Annalen der Physik 14 (1904): 425-68,
68. and "On the Discharge of Negative Ions by Glowing Metallic Oxides and Allied Phenomena," Philosophical Magazine 10 (1905): 80-90.
69. J. E. Lilienfeld, "Die Hochvakuum-Röntgenröhren," Jahrbuch der Radioaktivität und Elektronik 16, no. 2 (1920), 105-89; quote from pp. 111-12; all translations are the author's.
70. Lilienfeld, Kaiserliches Patentschrift No. 256534, "Verfahren zur Erzeugung von Röntgenstrahlen beliebig einstellbaren Härtegrades unabhängig vom Vakuum," submitted October 11, 1911, and issued February 14, 1913; see also a statement by Lilienfeld quoted in Heinrich E. Albers-Schönberg, Die Röntgentechnik, 5th ed., vol. 1 (Hamburg, 1919), p. 230.
71. Lilienfeld, "Vorrichtung zum Betrieben von Entladungsröhren," Kaiserliches Patentschrift No. 268107, submitted December 22, 1911, and issued December 9, 1913; "Röntgenröhre," No. 268597, submitted January 9, 1912, and issued December 22, 1913; "Röntgenröhre," No. 268598, submitted October 27, 1912, and issued December 22, 1913.
72. J. E. Lilienfeld and W. J. Rosenthal, "Eine Röntgenröhre von beliebig und momentan einstellbarem, vom Vakuum unabhängigem Härtegrad," Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Röntgenstrahlen 18 (1912): 256-63: the first part, describing the tube and its operation, pp. 256-59, by Lilienfeld; the second part, describing the clinical trials, pp. 260-63, by Rosenthal, a Leipzig surgeon.
73. J. E. Lilienfeld and W. J. Rosenthal, "Eine Röntgenröhre von beliebig und momentan einstellbarem, vom Vakuum unabhängigem Härtegrad," Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Röntgenstrahlen 18 (1912): 256-63: the first part, describing the tube and its operation, pp. 256-59, by Lilienfeld; the second part, describing the clinical trials, pp. 260-63, by Rosenthal, a Leipzig surgeon.
74. Lilienfeld, "Process and Apparatus for Producing Roentgen Rays," U.S. Patent No. 1,122,011, submitted October 2, 1912, and issued December 22, 1914; and this patent's file in the National Archives Branch Depository, Suitland, Md.
75. Lilienfeld, "Eine von der Erhöhung des Zündpotentials freie Röntgenröhre," Berichte über die Verhandlungen der königlich Sächsischer Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig 66 (1914): 76-79; "Roentgen Ray Tube," U.S. Patent No. 1,218,423, submitted April 17, 1914, and issued March 6, 1917.
76. Lilienfeld, "Eine von der Erhöhung des Zündpotentials freie Röntgenröhre," Berichte über die Verhandlungen der königlich Sächsischer Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig 66 (1914): 76-79; "Roentgen Ray Tube," U.S. Patent No. 1,218,423, submitted April 17, 1914, and issued March 6, 1917.
77. Lilienfeld, file for U.S. Patent No. 1,218,423, National Archives Branch Depository, Suitland, Md.
78. Lilienfeld, "Die Hochvakuum-Röntgenröhren" (n. 35 above), p. 113.
79. Paul Ludewig, Die physikalischen Grundlagen des Betriebes von Röntgenröhren mit dem Induktorium (Berlin and Vienna, 1923), esp. pp. 94-113, describes the operation of x-ray tubes with induction coils, demonstrating the complexity of this combination in language very similar to that used by Lilienfeld.
80. Albers-Schönberg (n. 36 above), p. 229.
81. Assignment Deed Liber U109 (National Archives Branch Depository, Suitland, Md.), pp. 252-57, contains a photocopy of this contract between Lilienfeld and Wappler.
82. W. D. Coolidge, "Tungsten and Method of Making the Same for Use as Filaments of Incandescent Lamps and for Other Purposes," U.S. Patent No. 1,082,933, granted December 30, 1913. Herman A. Liebhafsky, William David Coolidge: A Centenarian and His Work (New York, 1974), gives a brief description of the ductile tungsten work.
83. W. D. Coolidge, "Tungsten and Method of Making the Same for Use as Filaments of Incandescent Lamps and for Other Purposes," U.S. Patent No. 1,082,933, granted December 30, 1913. Herman A. Liebhafsky, William David Coolidge: A Centenarian and His Work (New York, 1974), gives a brief description of the ductile tungsten work.
84. Coolidge, "Metallic Tungsten and Some of Its Applications," Transactions of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers (June 1912): 1219-28.
85. John Anderson Miller, Yankee Stientist: William David Coolidge (Schenectady, N.Y., 1963) pp. 87-89. Thomas Alva Edison was the first to observe the phenomenon that became known as thermionic emission; hence the reference to the "Edison effect" in this quotation.
86. Coolidge, "Vacuum Tube," U.S. Patent No. 1,203,495, filed May 9, 1913, and issued October 31, 1916; W. D. Coolidge, "A Powerful Röntgen Ray Tube with a Pure Electron Discharge," Physical Review, 2d ser., 2 (December 1913): 409-30.
87. Coolidge, "Vacuum Tube," U.S. Patent No. 1,203,495, filed May 9, 1913, and issued October 31, 1916; W. D. Coolidge, "A Powerful Röntgen Ray Tube with a Pure Electron Discharge," Physical Review, 2d ser., 2 (December 1913): 409-30.
88. Coolidge, U.S. Patent No. 1,203,495, pp. 1-2.
89. Coolidge, file of U.S. Patent No. 1,203,495, National Archives Branch Depository, Suitland, Md.
90. U.S. Patent No. 1,251,388, issued December 25, 1917, to Irving Langmuir.
91. Coolidge, "A Powerful Röntgen Ray Tube," pp. 412-13; Lilienfeld and Rosenthal, "Eine Röntgenröhre" (n. 38 above).
92. Coolidge, "A Powerful Röntgen Ray Tube," pp. 412-13; Lilienfeld and Rosenthal, "Eine Röntgenröhre" (n. 38 above).
93. Lilienfeld, "A Reply to Mr. W. D. Coolidge's Paper, 'A Powerful Röntgen Ray Tube with a Pure Electron Discharge,' " Physical Review, 2d. ser., 3 (May 1914): 366.
94. Lilienfeld, "Die Elektrizitätsleitung im extremum Vakuum," Annalen der Physik, 4th ser., 32 (1910): 673-738; this paper constituted Lilienfeld's Habilitationsschrift (inaugural dissertation) at the University of Leipzig. Earlier reports on portions of the work, which appeared from 1906 to 1908, are referenced therein. Langmuir, "The Effect of Space Charge and Residual Gases on Thermionic Currents in High Vacuum," Physical Review, 2d. ser., 2 (December 1913): 450-86; quotations pp. 483-84.
95. Lilienfeld, "Die Elektrizitätsleitung im extremum Vakuum," Annalen der Physik, 4th ser., 32 (1910): 673-738; this paper constituted Lilienfeld's Habilitationsschrift (inaugural dissertation) at the University of Leipzig. Earlier reports on portions of the work, which appeared from 1906 to 1908, are referenced therein. Langmuir, "The Effect of Space Charge and Residual Gases on Thermionic Currents in High Vacuum," Physical Review, 2d. ser., 2 (December 1913): 450-86; quotations pp. 483-84.
96. Lilienfeld, "A Reply to Mr. Irving Langmuir's Paper, 'The Effect of Space Charge and Residual Gases on Thermionic Currents in High Vacuum,' " Physical Review, 2d. ser., 3 (May 1914): 364-65.
97. Frederick Soddy, "The Wehnelt Kathode in a High Vacuum," Nature 77 (November 21, 1907): 53-54. A. Wehnelt, "Über die Wehnelt-Kathode im hochgradigen Vakuum," Physikalische Zeitschrift 9 (1908): 134-35, subsequently pointed out that Soddy's argument was erroneous. As noted by H. D. Arnold, "Phenomena in Oxide-Coated Filament Electron Tubes," Physical Review, 2nd ser., 16 (January 1920): 70-82, experimental evidence that the Wehnelt cathode emitted electrons "due to thermal action and not to chemical action" was not in hand in 1913.
98. Frederick Soddy, "The Wehnelt Kathode in a High Vacuum," Nature 77 (November 21, 1907): 53-54. A. Wehnelt, "Über die Wehnelt-Kathode im hochgradigen Vakuum," Physikalische Zeitschrift 9 (1908): 134-35, subsequently pointed out that Soddy's argument was erroneous. As noted by H. D. Arnold, "Phenomena in Oxide-Coated Filament Electron Tubes," Physical Review, 2nd ser., 16 (January 1920): 70-82, experimental evidence that the Wehnelt cathode emitted electrons "due to thermal action and not to chemical action" was not in hand in 1913.
99. Frederick Soddy, "The Wehnelt Kathode in a High Vacuum," Nature 77 (November 21, 1907): 53-54. A. Wehnelt, "Über die Wehnelt-Kathode im hochgradigen Vakuum," Physikalische Zeitschrift 9 (1908): 134-35, subsequently pointed out that Soddy's argument was erroneous. As noted by H. D. Arnold, "Phenomena in Oxide-Coated Filament Electron Tubes," Physical Review, 2nd ser., 16 (January 1920): 70-82, experimental evidence that the Wehnelt cathode emitted electrons "due to thermal action and not to chemical action" was not in hand in 1913.
100. Lee De Forest, "Device for Amplifying Feeble Electrical Currents," U.S. Patent No. 841,387, granted January 15, 1907. For a succinct summary of the path between the Edison effect and early radio tubes, see Hugh G. J. Aitken, The Continuous Wave: Technology and American Radio, 1900-1932 (Princeton, 1985), pp. 205-22.
101. Lee De Forest, "Device for Amplifying Feeble Electrical Currents," U.S. Patent No. 841,387, granted January 15, 1907. For a succinct summary of the path between the Edison effect and early radio tubes, see Hugh G. J. Aitken, The Continuous Wave: Technology and American Radio, 1900-1932 (Princeton, 1985), pp. 205-22.
102. Langmuir, "Electrical Discharge Apparatus and Process of Preparing and Using the Same," U.S. Patent No. 1,558,436, granted October 20, 1925.
103. Aitken, pp. 244-48.
104. Bijker, Bicycles, Bakelites and Bulbs (n. 8 above), pp. 123, 192, and 303, nn. 35 and 36.
105. Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. (Chicago, 1970), quotations pp. 148-50,
106. and "Commensurability, Comparability, Communicability," in PSA 1982 [Proceedings of the 1982 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association], ed. Peter D. Asquith and Thomas Nickles, vol. 2 (East Lansing, Mich., 1983), pp. 669-88.
107. See Paul Hoyningen-Huene, Reconstructing Scientific Revolutions, trans. Alexander T. Levine (Chicago, 1993), pp. 208-22, for a critique and discussion of the evolution of the incommensurability concept.
108. Preston M. Hickey, "The Effect of the War on the Development of Roentgenology," American Journal of Roentgenology 10 (January 1923): 70-75; Willis F. Manges, "Military Roentgenology," in Glasser, Science of Radiology (n. 22 above), pp. 187-97; and Lawrence Reynolds, "The History of the Use of the Roentgen Ray in Warfare," American Journal of Roentgenology 54 (1945); 649-72.
109. Preston M. Hickey, "The Effect of the War on the Development of Roentgenology," American Journal of Roentgenology 10 (January 1923): 70-75; Willis F. Manges, "Military Roentgenology," in Glasser, Science of Radiology (n. 22 above), pp. 187-97; and Lawrence Reynolds, "The History of the Use of the Roentgen Ray in Warfare," American Journal of Roentgenology 54 (1945); 649-72.
110. Preston M. Hickey, "The Effect of the War on the Development of Roentgenology," American Journal of Roentgenology 10 (January 1923): 70-75; Willis F. Manges, "Military Roentgenology," in Glasser, Science of Radiology (n. 22 above), pp. 187-97; and Lawrence Reynolds, "The History of the Use of the Roentgen Ray in Warfare," American Journal of Roentgenology 54 (1945); 649-72.
111. W. D. Coolidge and C. N. Moore, "A Portable Roentgen-Ray Generating Outfit," General Electric Review 21 (January 1918): 60-67; W. D. Coolidge, "The Radiator Type of Tube," American Journal of Roentgenology 6 (April 1919): 175-79.
112. W. D. Coolidge and C. N. Moore, "A Portable Roentgen-Ray Generating Outfit," General Electric Review 21 (January 1918): 60-67; W. D. Coolidge, "The Radiator Type of Tube," American Journal of Roentgenology 6 (April 1919): 175-79.
113. Leonard S. Reich, The Making of American Industrial Research (Cambridge and New York), p. 91.
114. Hickey, p. 72.
115. See, for example, A. W. Crane, "An X-Ray Clinic," American Journal of Roentgenology 1 (March 1914): 217-19. Between 1914 and 1923, the number of hospitals in the United States increased from 5,037 to 6,830; the number of beds from 532,481 to 755,722. "Hospital Service in the United States," Journal of the American Medical Association 94 (March 29, 1930): 921-88, table on p. 926.
116. See, for example, A. W. Crane, "An X-Ray Clinic," American Journal of Roentgenology 1 (March 1914): 217-19. Between 1914 and 1923, the number of hospitals in the United States increased from 5,037 to 6,830; the number of beds from 532,481 to 755,722. "Hospital Service in the United States," Journal of the American Medical Association 94 (March 29, 1930): 921-88, table on p. 926.
117. Blume (n. 8 above), p. 24; Howell, Technology in the Hospital (n. 4 above), pp. 122-26. In contrast to the growth of diagnostic use, x-ray therapy was slow to develop in the United States during this period. As James Ewing reported ("Early Experiences in Radiation Therapy," American Journal of Roentgenology 31 [February 1934]: 153-63) regarding Dr. Henry H. Janeway's experiences at the time: "Roentgenologists who engaged in therapy were looked upon with suspicion. . . . In cancer the atmosphere of roentgen therapy was quite obnoxious to conservative minds. The noisy racket of the transformer, the noxious gases exhaled from the tubes in illventilated rooms, and the retching of nauseated patients, created a repulsive contrast to the solemn ceremonies of the surgical amphitheater."
118. Blume (n. 8 above), p. 24; Howell, Technology in the Hospital (n. 4 above), pp. 122-26. In contrast to the growth of diagnostic use, x-ray therapy was slow to develop in the United States during this period. As James Ewing reported ("Early Experiences in Radiation Therapy," American Journal of Roentgenology 31 [February 1934]: 153-63) regarding Dr. Henry H. Janeway's experiences at the time: "Roentgenologists who engaged in therapy were looked upon with suspicion. . . . In cancer the atmosphere of roentgen therapy was quite obnoxious to conservative minds. The noisy racket of the transformer, the noxious gases exhaled from the tubes in illventilated rooms, and the retching of nauseated patients, created a repulsive contrast to the solemn ceremonies of the surgical amphitheater."
119. Blume (n. 8 above), p. 24; Howell, Technology in the Hospital (n. 4 above), pp. 122-26. In contrast to the growth of diagnostic use, x-ray therapy was slow to develop in the United States during this period. As James Ewing reported ("Early Experiences in Radiation Therapy," American Journal of Roentgenology 31 [February 1934]: 153-63) regarding Dr. Henry H. Janeway's experiences at the time: "Roentgenologists who engaged in therapy were looked upon with suspicion. . . . In cancer the atmosphere of roentgen therapy was quite obnoxious to conservative minds. The noisy racket of the transformer, the noxious gases exhaled from the tubes in illventilated rooms, and the retching of nauseated patients, created a repulsive contrast to the solemn ceremonies of the surgical amphitheater."
120. See Manges (n. 63 above), p. 187.
121. G. E. Pfahler, "Notes from Some Roentgen Laboratories of Europe," American Quarterly of Roentgenology 2 (1909): 15-26; Merrill C. Sosman, "Medicine as a Science: Roentgenology," New England Journal of Medicine 244 (April 12, 1951): 552-63, quotation p. 555.
122. G. E. Pfahler, "Notes from Some Roentgen Laboratories of Europe," American Quarterly of Roentgenology 2 (1909): 15-26; Merrill C. Sosman, "Medicine as a Science: Roentgenology," New England Journal of Medicine 244 (April 12, 1951): 552-63, quotation p. 555.
123. L. K. Poyntz, "A Symposium of Observations on Radiotherapy," Journal of Radiotherapy 2 (October 1921): 11-25, quotation p. 19. See also Ludwig Seitz and Hermann Wintz, Unsere Methode der Röntgen-Tiefentherapie und ihre Erfolge (Berlin, 1920), which describes the clinical research that led to this school of x-ray therapy; single dose treatment times of ten to thirteen hours are described on pp. 342-43. Other accounts are given by W. H. Stewart, "The Present Status of Deep Roentgen Therapy in Europe," American Journal of Roentgenology 9 (1922): 315-18; and Josef Wetterer, Handbuch der Röntgen-und Radiumtherapie, vol. 1 (Leipzig and Munich, 1922), pp. 470-85.
124. L. K. Poyntz, "A Symposium of Observations on Radiotherapy," Journal of Radiotherapy 2 (October 1921): 11-25, quotation p. 19. See also Ludwig Seitz and Hermann Wintz, Unsere Methode der Röntgen-Tiefentherapie und ihre Erfolge (Berlin, 1920), which describes the clinical research that led to this school of x-ray therapy; single dose treatment times of ten to thirteen hours are described on pp. 342-43. Other accounts are given by W. H. Stewart, "The Present Status of Deep Roentgen Therapy in Europe," American Journal of Roentgenology 9 (1922): 315-18; and Josef Wetterer, Handbuch der Röntgen-und Radiumtherapie, vol. 1 (Leipzig and Munich, 1922), pp. 470-85.
125. L. K. Poyntz, "A Symposium of Observations on Radiotherapy," Journal of Radiotherapy 2 (October 1921): 11-25, quotation p. 19. See also Ludwig Seitz and Hermann Wintz, Unsere Methode der Röntgen-Tiefentherapie und ihre Erfolge (Berlin, 1920), which describes the clinical research that led to this school of x-ray therapy; single dose treatment times of ten to thirteen hours are described on pp. 342-43. Other accounts are given by W. H. Stewart, "The Present Status of Deep Roentgen Therapy in Europe," American Journal of Roentgenology 9 (1922): 315-18; and Josef Wetterer, Handbuch der Röntgen-und Radiumtherapie, vol. 1 (Leipzig and Munich, 1922), pp. 470-85.
126. L. K. Poyntz, "A Symposium of Observations on Radiotherapy," Journal of Radiotherapy 2 (October 1921): 11-25, quotation p. 19. See also Ludwig Seitz and Hermann Wintz, Unsere Methode der Röntgen-Tiefentherapie und ihre Erfolge (Berlin, 1920), which describes the clinical research that led to this school of x-ray therapy; single dose treatment times of ten to thirteen hours are described on pp. 342-43. Other accounts are given by W. H. Stewart, "The Present Status of Deep Roentgen Therapy in Europe," American Journal of Roentgenology 9 (1922): 315-18; and Josef Wetterer, Handbuch der Röntgen-und Radiumtherapie, vol. 1 (Leipzig and Munich, 1922), pp. 470-85.
127. Poyntz, p. 15.
128. German patents of Coolidge tubes granted to AEG include Nos. 302790, 308137, 313957, 316554. German Coolidge tube patents were issued in the period 1917-20 but in accordance with German patent law carried protection from the application dates, which were close to the dates of the corresponding U.S. applications. Robert Furstenau, a Berlin radiologist, following Lilienfeld's announcement of his first x-ray tube, articulated the notion of producing electrons solely through thermionic emission before Lilienfeld did so in his second-generation designs, and before Coolidge started to work on the topic. (Robert Furstenau, German patents 271306, submitted April 30, 1912, and 274258, submitted May 2, 1912.) His idea was never developed commercially, perhaps an indication that it was not regarded as being sufficiently superior to the existing gas tubes or the first-generation Lilienfeld tube.
129. Seitz and Wintz, pp. 68-69.
130. Stewart, p. 315.
131. Lilienfeld, "Die Hochvakuum-Röntgenröhren" (n. 35 above), figs. 3 and 10.
132. Fritz Kirchner, Allgemeine Physik der Röntgenstrahlen (Leipzig, 1930), p. 11.
133. Assignment of patent rights by Lilienfeld to Wappler (n. 45 above).
134. Trading With the Enemy Act, U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1917): 411-27. The reasons for adoption of this law are described by James A. Gathings, International Law and American Treatment of Alien Enemy Property (Washington, D.C., 1940), pp. 64-71. The amendment provided for purchase of alien property or, failing that, seizure; U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1918): 459-60. A subsequent presidential proclamation declared seizure necessary; Woodrow Wilson,
135. Trading With the Enemy Act, U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1917): 411-27. The reasons for adoption of this law are described by James A. Gathings, International Law and American Treatment of Alien Enemy Property (Washington, D.C., 1940), pp. 64-71. The amendment provided for purchase of alien property or, failing that, seizure; U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1918): 459-60. A subsequent presidential proclamation declared seizure necessary; Woodrow Wilson, Proclamation, U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1918): 1804-5.
136. Trading With the Enemy Act, U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1917): 411-27. The reasons for adoption of this law are described by James A. Gathings, International Law and American Treatment of Alien Enemy Property (Washington, D.C., 1940), pp. 64-71. The amendment provided for purchase of alien property or, failing that, seizure; U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1918): 459-60. A subsequent presidential proclamation declared seizure necessary; Woodrow Wilson, Proclamation, U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1918): 1804-5.
137. Trading With the Enemy Act, U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1917): 411-27. The reasons for adoption of this law are described by James A. Gathings, International Law and American Treatment of Alien Enemy Property (Washington, D.C., 1940), pp. 64-71. The amendment provided for purchase of alien property or, failing that, seizure; U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1918): 459-60. A subsequent presidential proclamation declared seizure necessary; Woodrow Wilson, Proclamation, U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1918): 1804-5.
138. U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1918): 1020-21. Administrative activities under these laws are described in the Annual Reports of the Alien Property Custodian (Washington, D.C., 1918-26). See also Gathings, pp. 72-101.
139. U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1918): 1020-21. Administrative activities under these laws are described in the Annual Reports of the Alien Property Custodian (Washington, D.C., 1918-26). See also Gathings, pp. 72-101.
140. U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1918): 1020-21. Administrative activities under these laws are described in the Annual Reports of the Alien Property Custodian (Washington, D.C., 1918-26). See also Gathings, pp. 72-101.
141. Woodrow Wilson, Executive Order No. 3016, U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1918): 1914-18, and especially orders issued under that executive order by Frank L. Polk, acting secretary of state, on February 26, 1919, while President Wilson was abroad; A. Mitchell Palmer, Report of the Alien Property Custodian (Washington, D.C., 1919), pp. 549-50.
142. Woodrow Wilson, Executive Order No. 3016, U.S. Statutes at Large 40 (1918): 1914-18, and especially orders issued under that executive order by Frank L. Polk, acting secretary of state, on February 26, 1919, while President Wilson was abroad; A. Mitchell Palmer, Report of the Alien Property Custodian (Washington, D.C., 1919), pp. 549-50.
143. Francis P. Garvan, the alien property custodian from March 4, 1919, until March 16, 1921, also served as president of the Chemical Foundation when these sales were: made and for many years thereafter.
144. License by the Federal Trade Commission to Green & Bauer, Inc., on March 17, 1919, canceled on September 20, 1920; no royalties had accrued up to the time of cancellation. Record of Assignments of Patents, Patent Applications, Trademarks and Copyrights, 1919-1934, National Archives Branch Depository, Trust 46650. According to the Corporation Index Record for Green &Bauer, Office of the Connecticut Secretary of State, the firm went out of business in 1922 or 1923.
145. Seizures, August 25, 1919, recorded in Assignment Deed Liber, Y-107, p. 473, National Archives. The sale to the Chemical Foundation, October 17, 1919, Assignment Deed Liber, P-108, pp. 441-43, was unusual in that it was not part of the principal sale, which included more than five thousand patents, trademarks, and copyrights and which occurred on April 10, 1919. Lilienfeld's two x-ray tube patents, which were sold on October 17, 1919, were in a group of twenty-one patents whose sale appears to have been requested by specific firms; it is not known who requested the sale of Lilienfeld's patents. The lawsuit is reported in Chemical Foundation v General Electric Co. and Victor X-Ray Corp., 49 Federal Reporter 2d 697-99 (2d Cir. 1931); 285 U.S. Supreme Court Reports 649 (1931) records the Supreme Court's refusal to intervene in the circuit court decision.
146. See, for example, the recitation of advantages of the Lilienfeld tube over the Coolidge tube by I. Seth Hirsch, The Principles and Practice of Roentgen Therapy (New York, 1925), pp. 63-64, 69-70.
147. American Journal of Roentgenology 1 (July 1914). Note, in this language, the attempt to escape the temperamental tube image.
148. Rønne and Nielsen (n. 27 above), p. 231; advertisement dating from about 1920.
149. Edwin W. Kelly, "The Hydrogen X-ray Tube," American Journal of Roentgenology 2 (December 1914): 552-59.
150. George Gaulois, "X-ray Tubes by the Hundreds," Scientific American, January 8, 1921, pp. 28, 38.
151. Howard R. Raper, "Notes on the Early History of Radiodontia," Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Oral Pathology 6 (1952): 70-81.
152. Coolidge, "Oil-immersed X-ray Generating Outfits," American Journal of Roentgenology 7 (April 1920): 181-90. H. F. Waite held the patent on the oil-immersion enclosure (U.S. Patent No. 1,334,936, issued March 23, 1920), and both GE and Waite & Bartlett marketed 56,000-volt dental units using Coolidge tubes.
153. This was only one of some twenty patent interferences between AT&T and GE in the period 1912-26; see, for example, W. Rupert Maclaurin, Invention and Innovation in the Radio Industry (New York, 1949), pp. 97-98.
154. Grigg (n. 28 above), p. 158. According to Nelson (n. 18 above), p. 54, the Radiological Society of North America, one of two major national organizations serving radiologists, was originally founded in 1915 as the Western Roentgen Society in reaction to the restrictive membership policy of the American Roentgen Ray Society, whose membership was largely drawn from the eastern United States.
155. Grigg (n. 28 above), p. 158. According to Nelson (n. 18 above), p. 54, the Radiological Society of North America, one of two major national organizations serving radiologists, was originally founded in 1915 as the Western Roentgen Society in reaction to the restrictive membership policy of the American Roentgen Ray Society, whose membership was largely drawn from the eastern United States.
156. 283 U.S. Supreme Court Reports 664-86 (1931); the references to Lilienfeld's prior work appear on pp. 676, 679-685. Reports on earlier phases of these lawsuits appear in 23 Federal Reporter 2d. 698-713 (District Court, Delaware, 1928) and 44 Federal Reporter 2d. 931-46 (3d Cir. 1930).
157. Langmuir, "Fundamental Phenomena in Electron Tubes Having Tungsten Cathodes," parts 1 and 2, General Electric Review 23 (June/July 1920): 503-13, 589-96; "The effect of space charge and initial velocities on the potential distribution and thermionic current between parallel plane electrodes," Physical Review, 2nd ser., 21 (May 1923): 419-35. Langmuir's testimony is cited in 23 Federal Reporter 2d 705 (District Court, Delaware, 1928) .
158. Langmuir, "Fundamental Phenomena in Electron Tubes Having Tungsten Cathodes," parts 1 and 2, General Electric Review 23 (June/July 1920): 503-13, 589-96; "The effect of space charge and initial velocities on the potential distribution and thermionic current between parallel plane electrodes," Physical Review, 2nd ser., 21 (May 1923): 419-35. Langmuir's testimony is cited in 23 Federal Reporter 2d 705 (District Court, Delaware, 1928) .
159. See, for example, John P. Blewett, "The Properties of Oxide-Coated Cathodes," parts 1 and 2, Journal of Applied Physics 10 (October/December 1939): 669-79, 831-48.
160. General Electric Co. v De Forest Radio Co., 17 Federal Reporter 2d 90-105 (District Court, Delaware, 1927), and 28 Federal Reporter 2d 641-50 (3rd Cir. 1928). Maclaurin, pp. 275 and 281, reports that GE was the plaintiff in sixty-four suits involving this patent.
161. Howell, Technology in the Hospital (n. 4 above), pp. 126-28; Larkin (n. 33 above). The development of radiology as a specialty has been described by W. Edward Chamberlain, "Radiology as a Medical Specialty," Journal of the American Medical Association 92 (March 30, 1929): 1033-35; and Arthur W. Erskine, "Organized Roentgenology in America," Radiology 45 (November 1945): 549-54.
162. Howell, Technology in the Hospital (n. 4 above), pp. 126-28; Larkin (n. 33 above). The development of radiology as a specialty has been described by W. Edward Chamberlain, "Radiology as a Medical Specialty," Journal of the American Medical Association 92 (March 30, 1929): 1033-35; and Arthur W. Erskine, "Organized Roentgenology in America," Radiology 45 (November 1945): 549-54.
163. Howell, Technology in the Hospital (n. 4 above), pp. 126-28; Larkin (n. 33 above). The development of radiology as a specialty has been described by W. Edward Chamberlain, "Radiology as a Medical Specialty," Journal of the American Medical Association 92 (March 30, 1929): 1033-35; and Arthur W. Erskine, "Organized Roentgenology in America," Radiology 45 (November 1945): 549-54.
164. Howell, Technology in the Hospital (n. 4 above), pp. 126-28; Larkin (n. 33 above). The development of radiology as a specialty has been described by W. Edward Chamberlain, "Radiology as a Medical Specialty," Journal of the American Medical Association 92 (March 30, 1929): 1033-35; and Arthur W. Erskine, "Organized Roentgenology in America," Radiology 45 (November 1945): 549-54.
165. See, for example, Miller (n. 48 above); Liebhafsky (n. 46 above); Glasser, Science of Radiology (n. 22 above); Grigg (n. 28 above).
166. See, for example, Miller (n. 48 above); Liebhafsky (n. 46 above); Glasser, Science of Radiology (n. 22 above); Grigg (n. 28 above).
167. See, for example, Miller (n. 48 above); Liebhafsky (n. 46 above); Glasser, Science of Radiology (n. 22 above); Grigg (n. 28 above).
168. See, for example, Miller (n. 48 above); Liebhafsky (n. 46 above); Glasser, Science of Radiology (n. 22 above); Grigg (n. 28 above).