Subject: Re: CCL:Spelling question

From: "Peter Shenkin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 10:20:11 -0500

On Mar 13,  2:10pm, Jeffrey L. Nauss wrote:
> Subject: CCL:Spelling question
>
> Sorry about the rather mundane question but...
>
> We have a minor controversy here.  What is the correct spelling
> for van der Waals parameters or forces?
...
> 	c. van der Waals parameters (lower case v and no apostrophy)

His name was "van der Waals".  If one wanted to use the possessive,
one would refer to "van der Waals' parameters", or, in England,
"van der Waals's parameters", but certainly not "van der Waal's
parameters".

Should the possessive be used?  Probably not.  Looking through
the index of Levine's "Physical Chemistry", I see "van der Waals
equation", "van der Waals force", etc., etc.  However, we also
have "Stokes' law" and "Trouton's rule", so a case can be made
for the possessive, I suppose.

A case can also be made for "van-der-Waals parameters" (by
analogy to "The New-York Historical Society", (complex noun
serving as an adjective) but this would probably be deemed
pedantic.  Then again, you do have a .edu address....

	-P.

-- 
************************ The secret of life: *************************
*Peter S. Shenkin, Box 768 Havemeyer Hall, Chemistry, Columbia Univ.,*
* New York, NY  10027;     [email-masked];     (212) 854-5143  *
************* If you find a loose thread, don't pull it. *************

---

From: "Slee,Tom" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 95 16:41:00 EST

|
| >His name was "van der Waals".
| >
| True, BUT when used standalone (e.g. without a first name) the "v" in 
"van"
| gets capitalized. So  "Van der Waals" is correct.
|
| Cheers, Pieter.
| Pieter Stouten, Senior Research Scientist

I am glad to hear this, as Bob LeRoy, with whom I did a  postdoc
and who knows his intermolecular forces very well, always uses
"Van der Waals interactions" (capital V) for just this reason.
In the intermolecular forces literature, however, "van der Waals
interactions" (lower case v) is ubiquitous.  Assuming Dr. Stouten
is correct, most of the intermolecular forces literature is wrong
in this.
     
     Tom Slee
     [email-masked]