It has been stated that, if Rumford had dissolved in acid the borings and the sawn strips of metal, the capacity for heat of which he determined, and had shown that the heat developed in the solution was the same in the two cases, his chain of argument would have been absolutely complete. Considering the amount of heat produced in the experiments, there are few minds whose conviction would be strengthened by this experiment, and it is only those who look for faultless logic that will refuse to Rumford the credit of having established the dynamical nature of heat. Davy afterwards showed that two pieces of ice could be melted by being rubbed against one another in a vacuum, but he does not appear to have made as much as he might of the experiment. Mayer calculated the mechanical equivalent of heat from the heat developed in the compression of air, but he _assumed_, what afterwards was shown by Joule to be nearly true, that the whole of the work done in the compression was converted into heat. It was Joule, however, who first showed that heat and mechanical energy are mutually convertible, so that each may be expressed in terms of the other, a _given_ quantity of heat always corresponding to the _same amount_ of mechanical energy, whatever may be the intermediate stages through which it passes, and that we may therefore define the mechanical equivalent of heat as _the number of units of energy which, when entirely converted into heat, will raise unit mass of water one degree from the freezing point_. THOMAS YOUNG. "We here meet with a man altogether beyond the common standard, one in whom natural endowment and sedulous cultivation rivalled each other in the production of a true philosopher; nor do we hesitate to state our belief that, since Newton, Thomas Young stands unrivalled in the annals of British science." Such was the verdict of Principal Forbes on one who may not only be regarded as one of the founders of the undulatory theory of light, but who was among the first to apply the theory of elasticity to the strength of structures, while it is to him that we are indebted in the first instance for all we know of Egyptian hieroglyphics, and for the vast field of antiquarian research which the interpretation of these symbols has opened up.