Faraday, Michael, 1791-1867; Physicists -- Great Britain -- Biography
I have already once used the word 'discomfort' in reference to the
occasional state of Faraday's mind when experimenting. It was to him a
discomfort to reason upon data which admitted of doubt. He hated what he
called 'doubtful knowledge,' and ever tended either to transfer it
into the region of undoubtful knowledge, or of certain and definite
ignorance. Pretence of all kinds, whether in life or in philosophy, was
hateful to him. He wished to know the reality of our nescience as well
as of our science. 'Be one thing or the other,' he seemed to say to
an unproved hypothesis; 'come out as a solid truth, or disappear as a
convicted lie.' After making the great discovery which I have attempted
to describe, a doubt seemed to beset him as regards the identity of
electricities. 'Is it right,' he seemed to ask, 'to call this agency
which I have discovered electricity at all? Are there perfectly
conclusive grounds for believing that the electricity of the
machine, the pile, the gymnotus and torpedo, magneto-electricity and
thermo-electricity, are merely different manifestations of one and the
same agent?' To answer this question to his own satisfaction he formally
reviewed the knowledge of that day. He added to it new experiments
of his own, and finally decided in favour of the 'Identity of
Electricities.' His paper upon this subject was read before the Royal
Society on January 10 and 17, 1833.
After he had proved to his own satisfaction the identity of
electricities, he tried to compare them quantitatively together. The
terms quantity and intensity, which Faraday constantly used, need a word
of explanation here. He might charge a single Leyden jar by twenty turns
of his machine, or he might charge a battery of ten jars by the same
number of turns. The quantity in both cases would be sensibly the same,
but the intensity of the single jar would be the greatest, for here the
electricity would be less diffused. Faraday first satisfied himself that
the needle of his galvanometer was caused to swing through the same arc
by the same quantity of machine electricity, whether it was condensed
in a small battery or diffused over a large one. Thus the electricity
developed by thirty turns of his machine produced, under very variable
conditions of battery surface, the same deflection. Hence he inferred
the possibility of comparing, as regards quantity, electricities which
differ greatly from each other in intensity. His object now is to
compare frictional with voltaic electricity. Moistening bibulous paper
with the iodide of potassium--a favourite test of his--and subjecting
it to the action of machine electricity, he decomposed the iodide, and
formed a brown spot where the iodine was liberated. Then he immersed
two wires, one of zinc, the other of platinum, each 1/13th of an inch
in diameter, to a depth of 5/8ths of an inch in acidulated water during
eight beats of his watch, or 3/20ths of a second; and found that the
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account