Before I start this article proper I should like to point out that it is written not in an attempt to debunk rocketry generally, but to show that interplanetary rocket flight is not possible with present-day methods and materials.

Firstly, let us consider the mechanics of the problem of shooting a body off the earth. The energy required to do this is readily shown to be 6,375,000 kilogram-metres per kilogram of fuel. The most powerful fuel yet produced gives 1,600,000 kilogram-metres per kilogram, i.e. far less than the actual amount required to raise the, fuel itself. Furthermore, the bulk of the energy produced by the fuel combustion will be in the form of heat, (i.e. waste) and the remainder as mechanical energy, the process perhaps having an efficiency of ten per cent.(I should be interested to hear of any rocket yet constructed having a greater efficiency.) Also, all the mechanical energy is not used in driving the rocket, some is used in imparting energy to issuing gas molecules.

Thus the most powerful fuel is probably less than one fortieth as strong as it should be. The rocketers' reply to this common complaint is the fact that all the fuel is not being carried all the time. Quite. But it is carrying a necessarily substantially built metal structure, a pilot, and extra fuel for stopping the rocket when it is approaching the planet it is destined for, and the return journey (if any?) And so the rocket must necessarily be carrying far more dead weight than the weight of fuel which it loses during the first part of the journey, and is therefore by the above reasoning, incapable of getting outside the earth's sphere of influence.

If on the other hand we scrap pilot and hence the fuel for the return journey and also the fuel for retarding the speeding rocket when it approaches its destination, all practical purpose in rocket flight disappears, there being little point in sending a metallic rocket up into the Martian atmosphere to have it burnt out like our well-known meteorites.

Hymn Of Hate No. 1 by D.R.Smith

JOE W. SKIDMORE

The degeneration is best shown in his infamous Posi and Nega series. The first one was pleasantly novel, the second one was poor, and the sequels terrible. He starts them off with a prologue of sheer offensive bilge, whinings about his "impotent pen", that turn the stomach of the most hardened, capped with a several page precis of the previous stories which is entirely unnecesary. When the story finally commences, it is almost entirely obliterated under a shower of exclamation marks, used correctly perhaps once in fifty times. As soon as the story begins to come to life it is killed by a lengthy, pointless, discussion on elementary.

When the story appears again atoms are shattered to enable Posi to give a simple description of a new atom, the whole disfigured by ridiculously-placed exclamation marks. In a couple of pages the electrons "scream pulse, swish, twang, blink, rip, purr, beam, strumm, crackle, whine, twitch, blister, zipp, gleam, project" their information to each other, but never do they say anything conversationally. Here and there appears a quotation from some classic, hammered in apparently to impress the reader with the height of the author 's brow. Finally, to make sure that he has committed every possible blunder the author inserts more sickening apologies for himself.

The other stories by this author are quite as badly written. All his scientist heroes are `Donalds', all possessed of so many virtues that a right-minded parent would have strangled them in their childhood,

Although many prominent synthetic organic medicinal chemicals have no connection with coal-tar nevertheless, owing to the expansion of the coal-tar industry certain natural medicinal remedies have been supplemented by the synthetic production of a large number of antiseptics, anaesthetics, antipyrotics, and various disease-treatment requisites. An examination of those substances again shows the remarkable interdependence of the different classes of chemicals produced from coal-tar. Picric acid, mentionod in my first account as an explosive also figures as an antiseptic for burns, and certain of its synthetic yellow-dye derivatives are useful in the treatment of wounds. Similarly, chloramine T is made from a by-product in the manufacture of the already discussed saccharin. Cloramine T is widely used as an antiseptic.

Other coal-tar antiseptics include such organic chemicals as carbolic acid, lysol, salycylic acid and other derivatives. Most of the lower chloramines, and, as mentioned above, cloramine T in particular are used in disinfecting and washing wounds. They possess the beneficial properties of the commonly used hypochlorites without being at the same time toxic and corrosive.

Most anaesthetics are aliphatic compounds, consisting largely of ether and chloroform and hence are not derived from coal-tar. Hypnotics, nowadays increasingly frequently used centre around acetophenene, known otherwise as hypnone.

The best known natural antipyrotic is quinine, which besides lowering the body temperature is specifically useful against malaria. There are, however, certain synthetic compounds of this class such as antipyrin (phenazene) which only produces the first of these effects. The simplest and cheapest,

To those of you, especially in this country, who took heart at my remarks last month of the possibilities of a professional science fiction magazine in this section of the globe, I deeply regret to inform you that all negotiations are at a standstill and that the whole idea has been shelved indefinitely. Whether it will be re-opened at some future date rests in the lap of the gods, who we pray to be kind to us.

We in England, follow the activities of our American friends with the greatest of interest, but we deplore the many differences of opinion which they have among themselves. As enthusiasts far removed from the sphere of their movements, we can only view these arguments with impartial indifference as they mean little or nothing to us. It is for this reason that I apologise to both the readers of this and Messrs Wollheim and friends for a distortion of facts which was published in "Novae Terrae" No.2 (April) . To go into all the details again would fill a copy of "Novae Terrae", and as the incident referred to has long been forgotten, I think it wise not to re-open it.

If Science Fiction in this country was on the same scale as it is in America, the same thing would, no doubt, happen here. Fans would form into various groups and it would be impossible to avoid arguments owing to different factions thinking along different lines.

An interesting fan mag has just reached me from New Zealand entitled "Science Fiction Bulletin", first issue February 16. In it are laid out ideas for forming the N.Z. Science Fiction Association, the aims and hopes of making a first class Colonial League and above all, a totally unique treatise upon "Science Fiction, What it is", which sums up briefly for non s-f readers the whole ideas of both the

Kammerlingh Onnes, for example, who spent part of a lifetime proving that the liquefaction of helium was possible before he successfully brought about its accomplishment, whereas attempting rocket flight today with the materials at our disposal is like attempting to split the atom with an accumulator.

Again we may note the 'progress' of rocketry. When we try and find any really scientific or technical books on the subject we find that very few such books exist, indeed if any such books did exist rocketry might succeed in creating greater interest in the more intelligent sections of the public, to say nothing of gaining the support of governments and aviation companes. In fact the only experimennts which seem to be carried out are a number of uncoordinated efforts often of a very trifling character including such illuminating observations as the colours of exhaust gases. One might wonder if the rocket societies were contemplating a display of pyrotechny!

After getting all this off my chest, I now wait to be convinced that space rocket flight is a scientific possibility, not a scientifictional one.

EDITORS' NOTE: We should like to point out that this article states the opinions of the writer alone, not of the Editors of "Novae Terrae", and as it raises a number of controversial points an article pointing out, conclusively we believe, exactly how and where J. E. Barnes is in error will appear in the July "Novae Terrae". The two articles should help to clear the air considerably on certain angles of astronautics at which many people at present look askance.