The Natural Philosophy of William Gilbert and His PredecessorsKing, W. James (William James)
History
The Natural Philosophy of William Gilbert and His Predecessors
King, W. James (William James)
Gilbert, William, 1544-1603; Magnetism -- History
[101] M: p. 90.
This humoric source of the effluvia was substantiated by Gilbert in a
number of ways. Electrics lose their power of electrical attraction
upon being heated, and this is because the humor has been driven
off.[102] Bodies that are about equally constituted of earth and
humor, or that are mostly earth, have been degraded and do not show
electrical attraction.[103] Bodies like pearls and metals, since they
are shiny and so must be made of humors, must also emit an effluvium
upon being rubbed, but it is a thick and vaporous one without any
attractive powers.[104] Damp weather and moist air can weaken or even
prevent electrical attraction, for it impedes the efflux of the humor
at the source and accordingly diminishes the attraction.[105] Charged
bodies retain their powers longer in the sun than in the shade, for in
the shade the effluvia are condensed more, and so obscure
emission.[106]
[102] M: pp. 84, 85.
[103] M: p. 84.
[104] M: p. 90. See also p. 95.
[105] M: pp. 78, 85-86, 91. (see particularly the heated
amber experiment described on p. 86).
[106] M: p. 87.
All these examples seemed to justify the hypothesis that the nature of
electrics is such that material effluvia are emitted when electrics
are rubbed, and that the effluvia are rarer than air. Gilbert realized
that as yet he had not explained electrical attraction, only that the
pull can be screened. The pull must be explained by contact
forces,[107] as Aristotle[108] and Aquinas[109] had argued.
Accordingly, he declared, the effluvia, or "spiritus,"[110] emitted
take "hold of the bodies with which they unite, enfold them, as it
were, in their arms, and bring them into union with the
electrics."[111]
[107] M: p. 92.
[108] Aristotle, _Physics_, translated by P. H. Wicksteed and
F. M. Cornford, Loeb Classical Library, London, 1934, bk. 7,
ch. 1, 242b25.
[109] St. Thomas Aquinas, _op. cit._ (footnote 19), vol. 2,
_Physicorum Aristotelis expositio_, lib. 7, lect. 2 (In
moventibus et motis non potest procedi in infinitum, sed
oportet devenire ad aliquid primum movens immobile), cap. d,
p. 96.
[110] M: p. 94.
[111] M: p. 95.
It can be seen how this uniting action is effected if objects floating
on water are considered, for solids can be drawn to solids through the
medium of a fluid.[112] A wet body touching another wet body not only
attracts it, but moves it if the other body is small,[113] while wet
bodies on the surface of the water attract other wet bodies. A wet
object on the surface of the water seeks union with another wet object
when the surface of the water rises between both: at once, "like drops
of water, or bubbles on water, they come together."[114] On the other
hand, "a dry body does not move toward a wet, nor a wet to a dry, but
rather they seem to go away from one another."[115] Moreover, a dry
body does not move to the dry rim of the vessel while a wet one runs
to a wet rim.[116]
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