Abstract
New x-ray diffraction data for gutta-percha and balata are given and considered in the light of von Susich's recent conclusion that these substances are identical and exist in two crystalline forms. The data also support the assumption that gutta-percha is a mixture of balata and another crystalline constituent, an assumption that is in some respects preferable to that of von Susich. Although the relation between gutta-percha and balata has been established and there may be no ultimate difference between them, it is pointed out that the majority of specimens examined of material classified commercially as balata produce a diffraction pattern different from that of gutta-percha, a fact of practical significance. THERE has been considerable disagreement as to the significance of x-ray diffraction data for gutta-percha and balata as reported by different investigators. The main point at issue has been the fundamental difference between gutta-percha and balata. Clark (1) and Hauser (2) have obtained different diffraction patterns for the two when unstretched, while Hauser has found them to be the same when stretched. Von Susich (3) has recently done much to clarify the problem. He reaches the conclusion, as a result of x-ray diffraction data, that gutta-percha and balata are identical, and that the substance exists in two different crystalline modifications, the alpha form being stable below about 60° C. and changing to the beta form when heated above this temperature. Of course, this at once explains Hauser's results, since the specimens were doubtless heated above 60° C. when stretched and would then show the beta pattern.
Synthesis, Molecular Structure from the X-ray Diffraction Data of the Powder (1E,1'E)-1,1'-(1,4-Phenylene)Bis(N-(Adamantan-1-yl)methanimine)
