The Machinery of the Universe: Mechanical Conceptions of Physical PhenomenaDolbear, A. E. (Amos Emerson)
Science
The Machinery of the Universe: Mechanical Conceptions of Physical Phenomena
Dolbear, A. E. (Amos Emerson)
Force and energy
Suppose once more that, across the road from an engine-house, there was
another building, where all sorts of machines--lathes, planers, drills,
etc.--were running, but that the source of the power for all this was
out of sight, and that one could see no connection between this and the
engine on the other side of the street. Would one need to suppose there
was anything mysterious between the two--a force, a fluid, an immaterial
something? This question is put on the supposition that one should not
be aware of the shaft that might be between the two buildings, and that
it was not obvious on simple inspection how the machines got their
motions from the engine. No one would be puzzled because he did not know
just what the intervening mechanism might be. If the boiler were in the
one building, and the engine in the other with the machines, he could
see nothing moving between them, even if the steam-pipes were of glass.
If matter of any kind were moving, he could not see it there. He would
say there _must_ be something moving, or pressure could not be
transferred from one place to the other.
Substitute for the furnace and boiler a galvanic battery or a dynamo;
for the machines of the shop, one or more motors with suitable wire
connections. When the dynamo goes the motors go; when the dynamo stops
the motors stop; nothing can be seen to be turning or moving in any way
between them. Is there any necessity for assuming a mysterious agency,
or a force of a _nature_ different from the visible ones at the two ends
of the line? Is it not certain that the question is, How does the motion
get from one to the other, whether there be a wire or not? If there be a
wire, it is plain that there is motion in it, for it is heated its whole
length, and heat is known to be a mode of motion, and every molecule
which is thus heated must have had some antecedent motions. Whether it
be defined or not, and whether it be called by one name or another, are
quite immaterial, if one is concerned only with the _nature_ of the
action, whether it be matter or ether, or motion or abracadabra.
Once more: suppose we have a series of active machines. (Fig. 11.) An
arc lamp, radiating light-waves, gets its energy from the wire which is
heated, which in turn gets its energy from the electric current; that
from a dynamo, the dynamo from a steam-engine; that from a furnace and
the chemical actions going on in it. Let us call the chemical actions A,
the furnace B, the engine C, the dynamo D, the electric lamp E, the
ether waves F. (Fig. 12.)
[Illustration: FIG. 11.]
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