Faraday visualises with the utmost clearness the state of his
contiguous particles; one after another they become charged,
each succeeding particle depending for its charge upon its
predecessor. And now he seeks to break down the wall of
partition between conductors and insulators. “Can we not,” he
says, “by a gradual chain of association carry up discharge
from its occurrence in air through spermaceti and water to
solutions, and then on to chlorides, oxides, and metals,
without any essential change in its character?” Even copper, he
urges, offers a resistance to the transmission of electricity.
The action of its particles differs from those of an insulator
only in degree. They are charged like the particles of the
insulator, but they discharge with greater ease and rapidity;
and this rapidity of molecular discharge is what we call
conduction. Conduction, then, is always preceded by atomic
induction; and when through some quality of the body, which
Faraday does not define, the atomic discharge is rendered slow
and difficult, conduction passes into insulation.
Though they are often obscure, a fine vein of philosophic
thought runs through these investigations. The mind of the
philosopher dwells amid those agencies which underlie the
visible phenomena of induction and conduction; and he tries by
the strong light of his imagination to see the very molecules
of his dielectrics. It would, however, be easy to criticise
these researches, easy to show the looseness, and sometimes
the inaccuracy, of the phraseology employed; but this critical
spirit will get little good out of Faraday. Rather let those
who ponder his works seek to realise the object he set before
him, not permitting his occasional vagueness to interfere
with their appreciation of his speculations. We may see the
ripples, and eddies, and vortices of a flowing stream, without
being able to resolve all these motions into their constituent
elements; and so it sometimes strikes me that Faraday clearly
saw the play of fluids and ethers and atoms, though his
previous training did not enable him to resolve what he saw
into its constituents, or describe it in a manner satisfactory
to a mind versed in mechanics. And then again occur, I
confess, dark sayings, difficult to be understood, which
disturb my confidence in this conclusion. It must, however,
always be remembered that he works at the very boundaries of
our knowledge, and that his mind habitually dwells in the
“boundless contiguity of shade” by which that knowledge is
surrounded.
[Sidenote: CABLE RETARDATION PREDICTED.]
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