March 20, 1953
Dear Dr. Pauling
I enclose a copy of the helical paper. You will note that I now include the αII ribbon among the possible structures. I found the version in the paper in a very
curious way: I set out to prove analytically that it couldn't be built, and as I
rotated the two residues the hydrogen bond gradually became "satisfactory!" I hope
we have time to discuss this when you are here next month, unless you wish to send
it off to the PNAS straight away.
Watson and Crick have constructed a very ingenious nucleic acid structure which they
have written (but not sent) a letter to Nature about. They will send you a copy at
the beginning of next week, as Bragg is now ill with flu, and they feel he should
see it before they send it anywhere. I have become (actively) interested in this
problem myself, although I find I lack the necessary background, a situation which
I am now remedying.
Have you heard any more about the grant for the nucleic acid program that you mentioned
in your letter to me on December 23, as I should certainly appreciate the "definite
offer" you wrote of, as I do not have any other firm prospects at the moment.
The EDSAC is at present being overhauled. When that job is finished I hope to be
able to run off the three Pattersons on sheep Hb, as the experimental part is finished.
I do not think this will be done until the end of next month, though.
Sincerely,
Jerry
P. S. The reason that the CS2S6 structure in the February Acta still shows the alternating S-S distances is that
the parameters differ from those in the MIT report you had. They differ in such a
way as to preserve the alternation when the correct conversion from triclinic to orthogonal
coordinates is made.
