This passage, so clear, so precise, and logical, is taken from a letter
of Watt's, dated April 26, 1783. The letter was communicated by
Priestley to several of the scientific men in London, and was
transmitted immediately afterward to Sir Joseph Banks, the President of
the Royal Society, to be read at one of the meetings of that learned
body.
Watt had for many years entertained the opinion that air was a
modification of water. He writes Boulton, December 10, 1782:
You may remember that I have often said, that if water could be
heated red-hot or something more, it would probably be converted
into some kind of air, because steam would in that case have
lost all its latent heat, and that it would have been turned
solely into sensible heat, and probably a total change of the
nature of the fluid would ensue.
A month after he hears of Priestley's experiments, he writes Dr. Black
(April 21, 1783) that he "believes he has found out the cause of the
conversion of water into air." A few days later, he writes to Dr.
Priestley:
In the deflagration of the inflammable and dephlogisticated
airs, the airs unite with violence--become red-hot--and, on
cooling, totally disappear. The only fixed matter which remains
is _water_; and _water_, _light_, and _heat_, are all the
products. Are we not then authorised to conclude that water is
composed of dephlogisticated and inflammable air, or phlogiston,
deprived of part of their latent heat; and that
dephlogisticated, or pure air, is composed of water deprived of
its phlogiston, and united to heat and light; and if light be
only a modification of heat, or a component part of phlogiston,
then pure air consists of water deprived of its phlogiston and
of latent heat?
It appears from the letter to Dr. Black of April 21st, that Mr. Watt
had, on that day, written his letter to Dr. Priestley, to be read by him
to the Royal Society, but on the 26th he informs Mr. DeLuc, that having
observed some inaccuracies of style in that letter, he had removed them,
and would send the Doctor a corrected copy in a day or two, which he
accordingly did on the 28th; the corrected letter (the same that was
afterward embodied verbatim in the letter to Mr. DeLuc, printed in the
Philosophical Transactions), being dated April 26th. In enclosing it,
Mr. Watt adds, "As to myself, the more I consider what I have said, I am
the more satisfied with it, as I find none of the facts repugnant."
Thus was announced for the first time one of the most wonderful
discoveries recorded in the history of science, startling in its novelty
and yet so simple.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account