Like Haber, Robert had a reputation to protect, that of ‘professional chemist’,
and although yet modest, it was a reputation he had long aspired to, one
which he had proudly brought to Karlsruhe and one which he was minded to
preserve. The Hamburg paper was Robert’s first real professional test and he
could hardly have been thrown into a more difficult arena. On the one hand
he faced a persistently obstinate chemical problem and on the other a brilliant
opponent of world renown—and a curmudgeon. History has shown however,
that this young man’s work was equal to the challenge, indeed later, he even
regarded himself lucky to be presented with the challenge.
4
Prior to Hamburg, Robert could not have been more aware of Haber’s
attitude to the ammonia synthesis. In Lecture Five
5 of the ‘Thermodynamics
of Technical Gas Reactions’
6 Haber had announced ….
The peculiar inertness characteristic of nitrogen which appears so prominently
…. will always place a serious handicap on the cheap technical preparation of
ammonia …
However, Haber’s scepticism did not deter Robert from providing a comprehensive and professional experimental treatment of the problem, a treatment that both men felt must settle the matter. But after their public
humiliation in Hamburg they were forced to return to it. Convinced of the
efficacy of their procedures and once more in partnership, they began another
detailed investigation but this time—constrained by Nernst’s criticism—at a
modest elevated pressure of 30 atmospheres. This pressure was achieved by
utilising the ‘high pressure cylinders’ used for the commercial supply of
nitrogen, hydrogen and ammonia gases. The result of this investigation was
the paper ‘Bestimmung des Ammoniakgleichgewichtes unter Druck’ published in April 1908, and here—without the respect shown towards Nernst in
Hamburg—they provided closure and retribution.
If ever one aspired to become a professional chemist at the time, one
needed to look no further than ‘Bestimmung …’ for the standard required. In
surely one of the most exquisitely
7 crafted pieces of early 20th century
chemical practise and theory, Haber and Robert comprehensively responded
to Nernst’s criticisms of their Hamburg presentation. Their paper stood as an
open letter to the international chemical community proclaiming simply ‘we
told you so … here’s the proof .. ’ But exquisite or not, the paper didn’t
improve the prospects for the industrial synthesis of ammonia one jot—at
least from the perspective of the equilibrium. But then again, that was not its
purpose. Initially this paper should be seen as an act of pure scientific self
indulgence by the two men, an indulgence aimed squarely at restoring their
130
D. Sheppard
and although yet modest, it was a reputation he had long aspired to, one
which he had proudly brought to Karlsruhe and one which he was minded to
preserve. The Hamburg paper was Robert’s first real professional test and he
could hardly have been thrown into a more difficult arena. On the one hand
he faced a persistently obstinate chemical problem and on the other a brilliant
opponent of world renown—and a curmudgeon. History has shown however,
that this young man’s work was equal to the challenge, indeed later, he even
regarded himself lucky to be presented with the challenge.
4
Prior to Hamburg, Robert could not have been more aware of Haber’s
attitude to the ammonia synthesis. In Lecture Five
5 of the ‘Thermodynamics
of Technical Gas Reactions’
6 Haber had announced ….
The peculiar inertness characteristic of nitrogen which appears so prominently
…. will always place a serious handicap on the cheap technical preparation of
ammonia …
However, Haber’s scepticism did not deter Robert from providing a comprehensive and professional experimental treatment of the problem, a treatment that both men felt must settle the matter. But after their public
humiliation in Hamburg they were forced to return to it. Convinced of the
efficacy of their procedures and once more in partnership, they began another
detailed investigation but this time—constrained by Nernst’s criticism—at a
modest elevated pressure of 30 atmospheres. This pressure was achieved by
utilising the ‘high pressure cylinders’ used for the commercial supply of
nitrogen, hydrogen and ammonia gases. The result of this investigation was
the paper ‘Bestimmung des Ammoniakgleichgewichtes unter Druck’ published in April 1908, and here—without the respect shown towards Nernst in
Hamburg—they provided closure and retribution.
If ever one aspired to become a professional chemist at the time, one
needed to look no further than ‘Bestimmung …’ for the standard required. In
surely one of the most exquisitely
7 crafted pieces of early 20th century
chemical practise and theory, Haber and Robert comprehensively responded
to Nernst’s criticisms of their Hamburg presentation. Their paper stood as an
open letter to the international chemical community proclaiming simply ‘we
told you so … here’s the proof .. ’ But exquisite or not, the paper didn’t
improve the prospects for the industrial synthesis of ammonia one jot—at
least from the perspective of the equilibrium. But then again, that was not its
purpose. Initially this paper should be seen as an act of pure scientific self
indulgence by the two men, an indulgence aimed squarely at restoring their
130
D. Sheppard