CHAPTER IV.

ENERGY.

Energy of motion and of position—Energy can be

transformed, not created or destroyed—Not created by free

will—Conservation of mechanical power—Convertibility of

heat and work—Nature of heat—The steam-engine—Different

forms of energy—Gravity—Molecular energy—Chemical

energy—Dynamite—Chemical affinities—Electricity—Produced

by friction—By the voltaic battery—Electric currents—Arc

light—Induction—Magnetism—The magnetic needle—The electric

telegraph—The telephone—Dynamo-electric engine—Accumulator.

Those ultimate elements, however, atoms and ether, only give us what may

be called the dead half of the universe, which could not exist without

the constant presence of the animating principle of force or energy.

Energy is the term generally adopted in the language of science, for

force is apt to be associated with human effort and with actual motion

produced, while energy is a comprehensive term, embracing whatever

produces or is capable of producing motion. Thus, if we bend a cross-bow,

the force with which it is bent may either reappear at once in the flight

of the arrow, if we let go the string; or it may remain stored up, if we

fix the string in the notch, ready to reappear when we pull the trigger.

In the former case it is called energy of motion, in the latter energy of

position. It is important to realise this distinction clearly, for many

of the ordered and harmonious arrangements of the universe depend on the

polarity, or conflict with alternate victories and defeats, between those

two forms of energy.

[Illustration]

Thus if A B is a pendulum suspended at the point A, if we move it from

its position of rest A C to A B and hold it there, its whole energy

is that of position. If we let it go it swings backwards and forwards

between the positions _A B_ and _A D_, and but for the resistance of the

air and the friction at the point of suspension, it would so swing for

ever. But in thus swinging what happens? From A B to A C energy of motion

keeps gaining on energy of position, until when the pendulum reaches C,

it has annihilated it. Energy of position has entirely disappeared, and

the whole original force expended in raising the pendulum to A B exactly

reappears in the force or momentum of the pendulum at its lowest point.

But is this victory final? By no means; energy of position having touched

bottom, gathers, like Antæus, fresh vigour for the contest, and from the

position A C upwards it gains ground on its adversary until when the

pendulum reaches A D it is in its turn completely victorious.

The same alternation between energy of motion and of position takes place

in all rhythmical movements such as waves, which, whether in water, air,

or ether, are propagated, as in the case of the pendulum, by particles

forced out of their position of rest and oscillating between the two

energies.

[Illustration]

Thus if waves run along an elastic wire A B, the particle P, which has

been forced into the position _p_, oscillates backwards and forwards

between _p_ and _q_, beginning with nothing but energy of position

at _p_, losing it all for energy of motion at P, and regaining it at

_q_. All wave-motions therefore—that is to say, all sound, light, and

heat—depend on this primitive polarity.

If we have got this definition of the two forms of energy clearly

into our heads, we shall be the better prepared for this further

generalisation—the grandest, perhaps, in the whole range of modern

science—that energy, like matter, is indestructible, and can only be

transformed, but never created or annihilated.

This is at first sight a more difficult proposition to establish in

the case of energy than in that of matter. In the latter case we have

nothing in our experience that can lead us to suppose that we have ever

created something out of nothing; but in the former, our first impression

undoubtedly is that we do create force. If I throw a stone at a bird I

have an instinctive impression that the force which projects the stone

is the creation of my own conscious will; that I had the choice either

to throw or not to throw; and that if I had decided not to throw, the

impelling force would never have existed. But, if we look more closely at

the matter, it is not really so. The chain of events is this: the first

impulse proceeds from the visual rays, which, concentrated by the lens of

the eye on the retina, give an image of the bird; this sends vibrations

along the optic nerve to the brain, setting in motion certain molecules

of that organ; these again send vibrations along other nerves to certain

muscles of the arm and hand, which contract, and by doing so give out the

energy of movement which throws the stone. All this process is strictly

mechanical; the eye acts precisely like a camera obscura in forming the

image; the nerve-vibrations, though not identical with those of the wires

of an electric telegraph, are of the same nature, their velocity can be

measured, and their presence detected by the galvanometer; the energy of

the muscle is stored there by the slow combustion of the food we have

eaten, in the oxygen of the air we have breathed. Take any of these

conditions away, and no effort of the will can produce the result. If

the nerve is paralysed, or the muscle, from prolonged starvation, has no

energy left, the stone will not be thrown, however much we may desire to

kill the bird.

Again, precisely the same circle of events takes place in numerous

instances without any intervention of this additional factor of conscious

will. We breathe mechanically, the muscles of the chest causing it

to rise and fall like the waves of the ocean, without any deliberate

intention of taking air into the lungs and exhaling it. Nay more, there

are instances of what was at first accompanied by the sensation of

conscious will, ceasing to be so when the molecular movements had made

channels for themselves, as when a piano-player, who had learned his

notes with difficulty, ends by playing a complicated piece automatically.

The case of animals also raises another difficulty. Suppose a retriever

dog sees his master shoot at and miss a hare: shall he obey the

promptings of his animal instinct and give chase, or those of his higher

moral nature which tell him that it is wrong to do so without the word

of command? It is hard to see how this differs from the case of a man

resisting or yielding to temptation; and how, if we assign conscious will

to the man, we can deny it to the dog.

Reasoning from these premises, some philosophers have come to the

conclusion that man and all animals are but mechanical automata, cleverly

constructed to work in a certain way fitting in with the equally

preordained course of outward phenomena; and that the sensation of will

is merely an illusion arising as a last refinement in the adjustment

of the machinery. But here comes in that principle of duality or

polarity, by which a proposition may be at once true and untrue, and

two contradictory opposites exist together. No amount of philosophical

reasoning can make us believe that we are altogether machines and not

free agents; it runs off us like water from a duck’s back, and leaves us

in presence of the intuitive conviction that to a great extent

Man is man and master of his fate.

If this be an illusion, why not everything—evidence of the senses,

experiment, natural law, science, as well as morality and religion?

To pursue this farther would lead us far astray into the misty realm of

metaphysics, and I refer to it only as showing that the principle of the

conservation of energy, standing as it does in apparent contradiction to

our natural impressions, requires a fuller demonstration than the kindred

principle of the indestructibility of matter.

[Illustration]

In the case of ordinary mechanical power it had been long known that the

intervention of machinery did not create force, but only transformed it.

If a weight of 1 lb., A, just balances a weight of 2 lb., B, by aid of a

pulley, and by the addition of a minute fraction, such as a grain, raises

it 1 foot, it will be invariably found that A has descended 2 feet. In

other words, 1 lb. working through 2 feet does exactly the same work

as 2 lbs. working through 1 foot. And whatever may be the intervening

machinery the same thing holds good, and the work put in at one end comes

out, neither more nor less, at the other, except for a minute loss due

to friction and resistance of air. If a force equal to 1 lb. is made, by

multiplying the intermediate machinery, to raise a ton a foot from the

ground, exactly as much force must have been exerted as if the ton had

been divided into 2,240 parts of 1 lb. each, and each part separately

lifted.

But although energy cannot be created, at first sight it seems as if it

might be destroyed, as when the ton falls to the ground and seems to have

lost all its energy, whether of motion or of position. But here science

steps in and shows us that it is not destroyed, but simply transformed

into another sort of motion, which we call heat.

Some connection between mechanical work and heat had long been known, as

in the familiar experiment of rubbing our hands together to warm them;

and the practice known to most primitive races of obtaining fire by

twirling a stick rapidly in a hole drilled in a block of wood; a practice

described by the old Sanskrit word ‘pramantha,’ which means an instrument

for obtaining fire by pressure or friction, and which, translated into

Greek, has been immortalised by the legend of Prometheus. But it was

reserved for recent years, and for an English philosopher, Dr. Joule,

to give scientific precision and generality to this idea, by actually

measuring the amount of heat produced by a given amount of work, and

showing that they were in all cases convertible terms, so much heat for

so much work, and so much work for so much heat. He did this by measuring

accurately by a thermometer the heat added to a given amount of water by

the work done by a set of paddles revolving in it, set in rapid motion by

a known weight descending through a known space. The unit of work being

taken as that sufficient to raise 1 kilogramme through 1 metre, and that

of heat as that required to raise the temperature of one kilogramme of

water by 1° Centigrade, the relation between them, as found by a vast

number of careful experiments, is that of 424 to 1. That is, one unit of

heat is equal to 424 units of work.

In this, and all cases requiring scientific precision, it is better to

use the units of the metrical system than our clumsy English standards;

but it may be sufficient for the ordinary reader to take the metre,

which is about 39·37 inches, as practically a yard, and the kilogramme,

which is 15,432 English grains, as practically equal to 2 lbs. This is

sufficient to show the much greater energy of the invisible forces which

act at minute distances, than that of gravity and other forces which do

appreciable mechanical work, the energy of a weight falling from a height

of more than 1,300 feet being only sufficient to heat its own weight by

1°.

This proof of the convertibility of work into heat gives much greater

precision to our ideas respecting the real nature of heat and its kindred

molecular and atomic energies. Heat is clearly not a material substance,

for a body does not gain weight by becoming hotter. In the case of all

ponderable matter down to the atoms, which are only of the size of

cricket-balls compared to that of the earth, any combination which adds

matter adds weight, and the weight of the product exactly equals the

sum of the weights of the separate factors which have united to form

it. Thus, if iron is burnt in oxygen gas, the product, oxide of iron or

rust, weighs more than the original iron by just as much as the weight

of the oxygen which has been consumed. But heat, light, and electricity

add nothing to the weight of a body when they are added to it, and take

nothing away when they are subtracted. The inference is unavoidable that

heat, like light, is not ponderable matter, but an energy transmitted

by waves of the imponderable medium known as ether. This is confirmed

by finding that when a ray from the sun is analysed by passing through

a refracting prism, one part of the spectrum shows light of various

colours, while another gives heat. The hottest part of the spectrum lies

in the red and beyond it, showing that the heat-waves are longer, and

their oscillations slower, than those of light. Heat-waves also may be

made to interfere, and to become polarised, in a manner analogous to the

phenomena exhibited by those of light.

There can be no doubt, therefore, that heat, like light, is an energy

or mode of motion, transmitted by waves of an imponderable ether, and

that it acts on the molecules and atoms of matter by the accumulated

successive impulses of those waves on the molecules and atoms which are

floating in it, or rather which are revolving in it, in definite groups

and fixed orbits, like miniature solar systems or starry universes. We

can now see how heat performs work, and why work can be transformed into

it.

Heat performs work in two ways. First, it expands bodies—that is, it

draws their molecules farther apart against the force of cohesion which

binds them together or keeps them moving in definite orbits at definite

distances. It is as if it increased the velocity, and therefore the

centrifugal force of a system of planets, and so caused them to revolve

in wider orbits. The expansion of mercury in a thermometer affords a

familiar instance of this effect of heat and the readiest measure of its

amount. Secondly, it increases the energy of the molecular motions, so

that they dart about, collide, and vibrate with greater force. Thus, as

heat increases, evaporation increases, for molecules on the surface are

projected with so much force as to get beyond the sphere of the cohesive

attraction which binds them to the system, and they dart off like comets

into space. Finally, as heat increases, and more and more work is done,

against the centripetal force of cohesion, most substances, and doubtless

all if we could get heat enough, are converted from solids into fluids,

and ultimately into gases, in which latter state the molecules have got

altogether beyond the sphere of their mutual attraction, and tend to

dart off indefinitely in the direction of their own proper centrifugal

motions, unless confined, in which case they dart about, collide,

rebound, and exercise pressure on the containing surface.

Conversely, if heat expands bodies, it is given out when they contract.

Thus the enormous quantity of heat poured out for millions of years by

the sun, is probably owing mainly to the mechanical force of contraction

of the original cosmic matter condensing about the solar nucleus.

Again, when gases suddenly expand, their temperature falls, which is

the principle by which artificial ice is procured, and frozen beef and

mutton are brought from America and Australia, producing, such are the

complicated relations of modern society, agricultural depression, fall of

rents, and a serious aggravation of the Irish question.

As an example of the converse proposition of the transformation of heat

into mechanical work, the steam-engine affords the aptest illustration.

The original power came from the sun millions of years ago, and did work

by enabling the leaves of plants to overcome the strong mutual affinity

of carbon and oxygen in the carbonic dioxide in the air, and store up the

carbon in the plant, where it remained since the coal era in the form of

energy of position. By lighting the coal, or in other words separating

its molecules more widely by heat, we enable them to exert once more

their natural affinity for oxygen, and burn, that is recombine into

carbonic dioxide. The heat thus produced turns water into steam, which

passes through a cylinder, either into a condenser if the steam is at low

pressure, or into the outer air if it has been superheated and brought

to a higher pressure than that of the atmosphere. The difference of the

pressure or elasticity of the steam in the boiler, and of the same steam

when it is condensed or liberated, is available for doing work, and,

being admitted and released alternately at the two ends of the cylinder,

drives a piston up and down, which, by means of cranks and shafts,

turns a wheel or does whatever work is required of it. In doing this,

heat disappears, being converted into work, and the amount of heat would

exactly equal that into which the work would be converted according to

Joule’s law, if it could all be utilised without the loss necessarily

incurred by friction, radiation, and the still more important absorption

of latent heat required to convert water at boiling-point into vapour

of the same temperature. This latter is not really an annihilation of

the heat, but its conversion into work done in separating the molecules

against the force of cohesion. The whole heat, therefore, is transformed

into work, mainly molecular work in tearing molecules asunder, and the

residue into mechanical work turning spindles and driving locomotives and

steamboats.

The intermediate machinery here, including the water in the boiler, is

merely the means of applying the original energy in the particular way

we desire. The essential thing is the transformation of a certain amount

of heat into work by passing, in accordance with the laws of heat, from

a hotter to a colder body. The last condition is indispensable, for the

nature of heat is to seek an equilibrium by passing from hot to cold, and

no work can be got out of it in the reverse way. On the contrary, work

must be expended and turned into heat to restore the temperature which

has run down. The case is analogous to that of water, which, if raised by

evaporation or stored up in reservoirs at a level above the sea, can be

made to turn a wheel while it is running down; but when it has all run

down to the sea level, can do no more work, and can only be pumped up

again to a higher level by the expenditure of fresh work. Owing to this

tendency of heat we can see that, although matter and energy are to all

appearance indestructible, the present constitution of the universe is

not eternal. The animating energy of heat is always tending to obliterate

differences of temperature, and bring all energy down to one uniform dead

level of a common average, in which no further life, work, or motion are

possible. Fortunately this consummation is far off, and for many tens

or hundreds of millions of years the inhabitants of this tiny planet

may feel fairly secure, and need not, like the late Dr. Cumming, of

millenarian celebrity, introduce breaks in the leases of their houses to

provide against the contingency of the world coming to an end at an early

date.

Dismissing, then, to the remote future any speculations as to the failure

of this essential element of active energy, let us rather consider the

various protean forms in which it shows itself.

1. The energy of visible motion, which, as we have seen, may be

transformed into an equivalent amount of energy of position.

2. Molecular energy, which causes the cohesive attraction, repulsion, and

other proper motions of these minute and invisible particles of matter.

3. Energy of heat and light, which are transmitted by waves of the

assumed imponderable medium called ether.

4. Energy of chemical action, by which the small ultimate particles of

ponderable matter, called atoms, separate and combine into the various

combinations of molecules constituting visible matter, in obedience to

certain affinities, or inherent attractions and repulsions.

5. Electrical energy, which includes magnetism as a special instance.

All these forms of energy may exist, as in the case of visible energy,

either as energies of motion or of position, and the actual constitution

of the universe is due in a great measure to the alternation of these

two energies. Thus all wave-motion, whether it be of the waves of the

sea grinding down a rocky coast, of the air transmitting sound, or of

ether transmitting light and heat, are instances of energies of motion

and of position, conflicting with one another and alternately gaining

the victory. So also a pound of gunpowder or dynamite has an immense

energy of position, which, when its atoms are let loose from their

mutual unstable connection by heat or percussion, manifests itself in an

enormous energy of motion, which is more or less destructive according to

the rapidity with which the atoms rush into new combinations.

Let us consider these different energies a little more in detail. The

energy of visible motion is manifested principally by the law of gravity,

under which all matter attracts other matter directly as the mass and

inversely as the square of the distance. It is a universal and uniform

law of matter, and can be traced without change or variation from the

minutest atom up to the remotest double star. The energy of living force

might, at first sight, be considered as another of the commonest causes

of visible motion; but, when closely analysed, it will be found that what

appears as such is only the result of molecular energy of position stored

up in the living body by chemical changes during the slow combustion of

food, and that nothing has been added by any hypothetical vital force.

The conscious will seems to act in those cases simply as the signalman

who shows a white flag may act on a train which has been standing on the

line waiting for it. The energy which moves the train is due entirely

to the difference of heat, which has been developed by the combustion

of coal, between the steam in the boiler and the steam when allowed to

escape into the air; and this energy came originally from the sun, whose

rays enabled the leaves of growing plants to decompose carbonic dioxide

and store up the carbon in the coal. Of this force of gravity causing

visible motion we may say that it is comparatively a very weak force,

which acts uniformly over all distances great or small.

Molecular energies, on the other hand, act with vastly greater force, but

at very small distances, and appear sometimes as attractive and sometimes

as repulsive forces. Thus solid bodies are held together by a force of

cohesion which is very powerful, but acts only at very small distances,

as we may see if we break a piece of glass and try to mend it by pressing

the broken edges together. We cannot bring them near enough to bring the

molecular attraction again into play and make the broken glass solid.

But the same glass acts with repellent energy if another solid tries

to penetrate it, so that we can walk on a glass floor without sinking

into it. Heat also, by increasing the distance between the molecules,

first weakens the cohesive force so that the solid becomes fluid, and

finally overcomes it altogether, so that it passes into the state of gas

in which the centripetal attraction of the molecules is extinguished,

and they tend to recede further and further from each other under the

centrifugal force of their own proper velocities. The great energy of

molecular forces will be apparent from the fact that a bar of iron, in

cooling 10° Centigrade, contracts with a force equal to a ton for each

square inch of section, as exemplified in the tubular bridge across the

Menai Straits, where space has to be allowed for the free contraction and

expansion of the iron under changes of temperature.

Chemical energy, or the mutual attractions and repulsions of atoms, is

even more powerful than that of molecules. It displays itself in their

elective affinities, or what may be called the likes and dislikes,

or loves and hatreds, of these ultimate particles. Perhaps the best

illustration will be afforded by that ‘latest resource of civilisation,’

dynamite. This substance, or to give it its scientific name,

nitro-glycerine, is composed of molecules each of which is a complex

combination of nine atoms of oxygen, five of hydrogen, three of nitrogen,

and three of carbon. Of these, oxygen and hydrogen have a strong affinity

for one another, as is seen by their rushing together whenever they get

the chance, and by their union forming the very stable compound, water.

Oxygen and carbon have also a very strong affinity, and readily form

the stable product carbonic dioxide gas. Nitrogen, on the other hand,

is a very inert substance; its molecule consists of two atoms of itself

which are bound together by a strong affinity, and can only be coaxed

with difficulty into combinations with other elements, forming compounds

which are, as it were, artificial structures, and very unstable. We

see this in the air, which consists mainly of oxygen and nitrogen, but

not in chemical combination, the oxygen being simply diluted by the

nitrogen, as whisky is with water, with the same object of diluting the

too powerful oxygen or too potent alcohol, and enabling the air-breather

or whisky-drinker to take them into the system without burning up the

tissues too rapidly. If nitrogen had more affinity for oxygen it would

combine chemically with it, and we should live in an atmosphere of

nitrous oxide, or laughing gas.

The molecule, therefore, of nitro-glycerine resembles a house of cards,

so nicely balanced that it will just stand, but will fall to pieces at

the slightest touch. When this is supplied by a slight percussion the

molecule falls to pieces and is resolved into its constituent atoms,

which rush together in accordance with their natural affinities, forming

an immense volume of gas, partly of water in the form of steam where

oxygen has combined with hydrogen, and partly of carbonic dioxide where

it has combined with carbon, leaving the nitrogen atoms to pair off, and

revert to their original form of two-atom molecules of nitrogen gas.

It is as if ill-assorted couples, who had been united by matrimonial

bonds tied by the manœuvres of Belgravian mothers, found themselves

suddenly freed by a decree of divorce _a vinculo matrimonii_, and rushed

impetuously into each other’s arms, according to the laws of their

respective affinities. So striking is the similitude that one of Goethe’s

best-known novels, the ‘Wahlverwandschaften,’ takes its title from the

human play of these chemical reactions. The enormous energy developed

when these atomic forces are let loose and a vast volume of gas almost

instantaneously created, is attested by the destructive force by which

the hardest rocks are shattered to pieces and the strongest buildings

overthrown.

These loves and hatreds, or, as they are termed, chemical affinities and

repulsions of the atoms, are the principal means by which the material

structure of the universe is built up from the original elements.

The earth, or solid crust of the planet we inhabit, consists mainly

of oxidised bases, and is due to the affinity of oxygen for silicon,

calcium, aluminium, iron, and other primary elements of what are called

metals. This affinity enables them to make stable compounds, which, under

the existing conditions of temperature and otherwise, hold together and

are not readily decomposed. Water in like manner, in all its forms of

waves, seas, lakes, rivers, clouds, and invisible vapour, is due to the

affinity between oxygen and hydrogen forming a stable compound. Salt

again is owing to the affinity of chlorine for sodium, and so for nearly

all the various products with which we are familiar, oxygen and nitrogen

in the air we breathe being almost the only elements which exist in their

primary and uncombined state in any considerable quantities, and form

an essential part of the conditions which render our planet a habitable

abode for man and other forms of life.

We shall see presently something more of the nature of these affinities,

and the laws by which they act; but before entering on this branch

of the subject we must consider the remaining form in which the one

indestructible energy of the universe manifests itself, viz. that of

electricity.

Electricity is the most subtle and the least understood of these forms.

In its simplest form it appears as the result of friction between

dissimilar substances. Thus if we rub a glass rod with a piece of silk,

taking care that both are warm and dry, we find that the glass has

acquired the property of attracting light bodies, such as little bits

of paper, or balls of elder-pith. Other substances, such as sealing-wax

and amber, have the same property. Pursuing our research further we find

that this influence is not, like that of gravity, uniform and always

acting in the same direction, but of two kinds, equal and opposite. If we

touch the pith-ball by the excited glass rod, it will after contact be

repelled; but if we bring the ball which has been excited by contact with

the glass within the influence of a stick of sealing-wax which has been

excited by rubbing it with warm dry flannel, the ball instead of being

repelled is attracted.

Conversely, if the pith-ball has been first touched by excited

sealing-wax, it will afterwards be repelled by excited sealing-wax

and attracted by excited glass. It is clear, therefore, that there

are two opposite electricities, and that bodies charged with similar

electricities repel, and with unlike electricities attract, one another.

For convenience, one of these electricities, that developed in glass,

is called positive, and the other negative; and it has been clearly

proved that one cannot exist without the other, and that whenever

one electricity is produced, just as much is produced of an opposite

description. If positive electricity is produced in glass by rubbing it

with silk, just as much negative electricity is produced upon the silk.

Another primary fact is that some substances are able to carry away

and diffuse or neutralise this peculiar influence called electricity,

while others are unable to do so and retain it. The former are called

conductors, the latter non-conductors. Thus, glass is an insulator or

non-conductor, while metal is a conductor of electricity; and the reason

why the substances rubbed together, as glass and silk, must be dry is

that water, in all its forms, is a conductor which carries away the

electricity as fast as it is produced.

These facts have given rise to a theory—which is after all not so

much an explanation as a convenient mode of expressing the facts—of

the existence of two opposite electric fluids, which, in the ordinary

or unexcited body, are combined and neutralise one another, but are

separated by friction, and flow in opposite directions, accumulating at

opposite poles, or, it may be, one being accumulated at one pole, while

the other is diffused through some conducting medium and lost sight of.

The active electricity, be it positive or negative, thus accumulated at

one pole, and retained there by the substance in contact with it being a

non-conductor, disturbs by its influence the electrical equilibrium of

any body brought near to it, separates its two fluids, and attracts the

one opposite to itself. This attraction draws the light body towards it

until contact ensues, when the electric fluid of the excited body flows

into the smaller one, so that its opposite electricity is expelled, and

it is in the same condition as its exciter, and therefore liable to be

repelled by a similar exciter, or attracted by an opposite one which

formerly repelled it.

It is evident, without going further, that there is a great analogy

between electrical energy and those of heat and of chemical affinity.

The same mechanical work—viz. friction—which generates heat, generates

electricity. The chief difference seems to be that friction may be

transformed into heat when the same substances are rubbed together, as

in the case of obtaining fire by the friction of wood; but electricity

can only be obtained by friction between dissimilar substances. Thus

no electricity is obtained by rubbing glass upon glass, or silk upon

silk, or upon glass covered with silk, though a slight difference of

texture is sometimes sufficient to separate the electric fluids. Thus

if two pieces of the same silk ribbon are rubbed together, lengthways,

no electricity is produced, but if crossways, one is positively, and the

other negatively, electrified. In this respect the analogy is evident to

chemical affinity, which, in like manner, only acts between dissimilar

bodies.

In order, however, to carry the proof of the identity of these forms of

energy beyond the sphere of vague analogy, we must follow up electricity

far beyond the simple manifestations of the glass rod and sealing-wax,

and pursue it to its origin, in the transformations of chemical action

and mechanical work, in the voltaic battery, the electric telegraph, the

telephone, and the dynamo.

The voltaic battery, in its simplest form, is a trough containing an acid

liquid in which pairs of plates of different metals are immersed. It is

evident that if the action of the acid on each metal were precisely the

same, equal quantities of each would be dissolved in the acid, and the

equilibrium of chemical energies would not be affected. But, the action

being different, this equilibrium is disturbed, and if the sum of these

disturbances for a number of separate pairs of plates can be accumulated,

it will become considerable. This is done by connecting the plates of the

same metal in each cell by a metallic wire covered by some non-conducting

substance. There are, therefore, two wires, one to the right hand, the

other to the left, the loose extremities of which are called the poles

of the battery. If we test these poles as we did the glass rod and stick

of sealing-wax, we find that one pole is charged with positive and the

other with negative electricity. In other words, the chemical energy,

whose equilibrium was disturbed by the unequal action of the acid on the

plates of different metals, has been transformed into electrical energy

manifesting itself, as it always does, under the condition of two equal

and opposite polarities. If we connect these two poles with one another

the two electricities rush together and unite, and there is established

what is called an electrical current circulating round the battery.

As the chemical action of the acid on the metals is not momentary but

continuous, the acid taking up molecule after molecule of the metal,

so also the current is continuous. When we call it a current, the term

is used for the sake of convenience, for as the current, as we shall

presently see, will flow along the wire or other conducting substance

for immense distances, as across the Atlantic, with a velocity of many

thousands of miles per second, we can, no more than in the case of light,

figure it to ourselves as an actual transfer of material particles swept

along as by a river running with this enormous velocity, but necessarily

as a transmission of some form of motion travelling by waves or tremors

through the all-pervading ether in which the atoms of the conducting

wire are floating. Be this as it may, the effect of these electric

currents is very varied and very energetic. It can produce intense heat,

for if, instead of uniting the two poles, we connect them by a thin

platinum wire, it will, in a few seconds, become heated to redness. If

the connecting wire is thicker, heat will equally be generated but less

intense, thus maintaining the analogy to the current which rushes with

more impetuosity through a narrow than through a wide channel. If the

poles are tipped with a solid substance like carbon, whose particles

remain solid under great heat, when they are brought nearly together

intense light is produced and the carbon slowly burns away. This produces

what is called the arc light, which gives such a strong illuminating

power and is coming into general use for lighting up large spaces.

Another transformation is back again into chemical energy, which is shown

by the power of the electric current to decompose compound substances.

If, for instance, the poles of a battery are plunged into a vessel

containing water, the molecules of the water will be decomposed and

bubbles of oxygen gas will rise from the positive, and of hydrogen from

the negative, pole.

Another effect of electrical currents is that of attraction and repulsion

on one another. If two parallel wires, free to move, carry currents

flowing in the same direction as from positive to negative, or _vice

versâ_, they will attract one another; if in opposite directions, they

will repel. Electrical currents also work by way of induction, that is,

they disturb the electrical equilibrium of bodies brought within their

influence and induce currents in them. Thus, if we have two circular

coils of insulated wire placed near each other, one on the right hand,

the other on the left, and connect the extremities of the right-hand coil

with the poles of a battery, when the connection is first made and the

current begins to flow, a momentary current in the opposite direction

will pass through the left-hand coil. This will cease, and as long as

the current continues to flow through the right-hand coil there will be

no current through the other; but if we break the contact between the

right-hand coil and the battery, there will be again a momentary current

through the left-hand coil, but this time in the same direction as the

other. The same effect will be produced if, instead of making and

breaking contact in the right-hand coil, we keep the current constantly

flowing through it, and make the right-hand coil alternately approach

and recede from the other coil. In this case, when the right-hand coil

approaches, it induces an opposite current in the left-hand one; and when

it recedes, one in the same direction as that of the primary.

These phenomena of induction prepare us to understand the nature of

magnets, and the magnetic effects produced by electrical currents. If

an insulated wire is wrapped round a cylinder of soft or unmagnetic

iron, and a current passed through the wire, the cylinder is converted

into a magnet and becomes able to sustain weights. If the current

ceases, the cylinder is no longer a magnet, and drops the weight. A

magnet is therefore evidently a substance in which electric currents are

circulating at right angles to its axis, and a permanent magnet is one in

which such currents permanently circulate from the constitution of the

body without being supplied from without. The earth is such a magnet, and

also iron and other substances, under certain conditions.

This being established, it is easy to see why an electrical current

deflects the magnetic needle. If such a needle is suspended freely near

a wire parallel with it, on a current being passed through the wire it

must attract if similar, or repel if dissimilar, the currents which are

circulating at right angles to the axis of the needle, and thus tend to

make the needle swing into a position at right angles with the wire so

that its currents may be parallel to that of the needle. This is the

reason why the needle in its ordinary condition points to the north

and south, or rather to the magnetic poles of the earth, because its

currents are influenced by the earth currents which circulate parallel to

the magnetic equator. The deviation of the needle from this direction,

caused by any other current, like that passed along the wire, will depend

on the strength of the current, which may be measured by the amount of

deflection of the needle. The direction in which the needle deflects,

viz. whether the north pole swings to the right or to the left, will

depend on the direction of the current through the wire. The direction

of the circular currents which form a magnet is such that if you look

towards the north pole of a freely suspended cylindrical magnet—i.e. if

you stand on the north of it and look southwards—the positive current

will ascend on your right hand, or on the west side, and descend on the

east. It follows that unlike poles must necessarily attract, and like

poles repel one another, for in the former case the circular currents

which face each other are going in the same, and in the latter in

opposite directions.

The reader is now in a position to understand the principle of the

electric telegraph, that wonderful invention which has revolutionised

human intercourse and, to a great extent, annihilated space and time. It

originated in the discovery made by Oersted, a Danish _savant_, that the

effect of an electric current was to make a magnet swing round, in the

endeavour to place itself at right angles to it. The conducting power of

insulated copper wire is such that it practically makes no difference

whether one of the wires connected with the pole of a battery is two

feet or 2,000 miles in length, and the earth, being a conducting medium,

supplies an equal extension from the other pole, so that a closed

electric circuit may be established across the Atlantic as easily as

within the walls of a laboratory.

If, therefore, a magnetic needle is suspended at the American end, it

will respond to every electrical current, and to any interruption,

renewal, or reversal of that current established in England. The needle

may thus be made to swing to the right or left, by forming or reversing a

current through the wire; and it will return to its position whenever the

current is interrupted, and repeat its movement whenever the current is

renewed. In fact it may be made to move like the arm of the old-fashioned

telegraph, or of a railway signal. It only remains to have a machine by

which the operator can form and interrupt currents rapidly, and a code by

which certain movements of the needle stand for certain letters of the

alphabet, and you have the electric telegraph.

There are many ingenious applications of the machinery, but in principle

they all resolve themselves into transformations of energy. Chemical

energy is transformed into electric energy, and that again into

mechanical work in moving the needle.

The telephone is another instance of similar transformations. Here spoken

words create vibrations of the air, which cause corresponding vibrations

in a thin plate or disc of metal at one end, which are conveyed by

intermediate machinery to a similar disc at the other end, whose

vibrations cause similar vibrations in the air, reproducing the spoken

words at a distance which may be a great many miles from the speaker.

The great inventions of modern science which have so revolutionised

society are all instances of the laws of the conservation of energy. Man

makes the powers of nature available for his purposes by transforming

them backwards and forwards, now into one, now into another form of

energy, as required for the result he wishes to attain. He wants

mechanical power to pump water or drive a locomotive or steamboat: he

gets it from the steam-engine, by transforming the energy of heat in

coal, which came ages ago from the energy of chemical action produced

by the sun’s rays in the green leaves of growing plants. He wants to

send messages in a few seconds across the Atlantic: he does it by

transforming chemical energy into electricity in a voltaic battery,

sending its vibrations along a conducting wire, and converting it at

the far end into mechanical power, making a magnetic needle turn on its

axis and give signals. If, instead of sending a message, he wants to

hold a conversation at a distance, he invents the telephone, by which

sound-vibrations of air are transformed into vibrations of a disc, then

into electric currents, then into vibrations of a distant disc, and

finally back again to spoken words. Or, if he wants light, he turns

electricity into it by tipping the poles of his battery with carbon and

bringing them close together.

The latest inventions of electrical science—the dynamo and the

accumulator—afford remarkable instances of this convertibility of one

primitive energy into different forms. In the instance just quoted of

obtaining light from electricity by the voltaic battery, the cost has

hitherto proved an obstacle to its adoption. The electrical energy is

all obtained from the transformation of the heat produced in the cells

by the chemical action on the metal used, which is commonly zinc. Now,

the heat of combination of zinc with oxygen is only about one-sixth of

that of coal, while the cost of zinc is about twenty times as great.

Theoretically, therefore, energy got by burning zinc costs 120 times

as much as that got by burning coal. Practically the difference is not

nearly so great, for there is very little loss of energy in the battery

by the process of conversion, while the best steam-engine cannot convert

into work as much as twenty per cent, of the heat energy in the coal

consumed. Still, after making every allowance, the cost of energy from

zinc remains some twenty times as great as from coal, so that unless some

process is found for obtaining back the zinc as a residual product, there

is no prospect of this form of electricity being generally available for

light or for mechanical power.

The dynamo is an instrument invented for the mechanical generation of

electricity by taking advantage of the principle that electrical energy

is produced by moving magnets near coils of wire, or coils of wire near

magnets. A current is thus started by induction, and, once started,

the mechanical power exerted in making the magnet or coils revolve is

continually converted into electricity until the accumulated electrical

energy becomes very powerful. The original energy comes of course from

the coal burned in the steam-engine which makes the magnet or coils

revolve.

The principle of the conservation of energy is well illustrated by the

fact that as the dynamo generates an electric current if made to revolve,

conversely it may be made to revolve itself if an electric current is

sent through it from an exterior source. It is, therefore, available not

only as a source of light in the former case, but as a direct source of

mechanical power in the latter. It is on this principle that electric

engines are constructed and electric railways are worked. Here also it

is a question of cost and convenience, for you can only get electricity

enough either to light a street or to drive an engine, by an original

steam-engine or other motive power to work the dynamo, and a system of

conducting wires to convey the electricity to the place where the light

or power is wanted. Where the motive power is supplied by nature, as in

the case of tidal or river currents or waterfalls, it is quite possible

that power may be obtained in this way to compete with that obtained

directly from the steam-engine; but there are as yet considerable

practical difficulties to be overcome in the transmission of any large

amount of energy for long distances.

To overcome some of these difficulties the accumulator has been invented,

which affords yet another remarkable instance of the transformation of

energy. It consists of two lead plates immersed in acidulated water. When

a strong electrical current is sent through the water, it decomposes it,

the oxygen going to one lead plate and the hydrogen to the other. The

oxygen attacks the lead plate to which it goes, forming peroxide of lead;

while the hydrogen reduces any oxide in the other plate, producing pure

lead, and leaving a film of surplus hydrogen on the surface. The charging

current is then reversed, so that the latter plate is now attacked and

the former one reduced, when the current is again reversed. By continuing

this process the surfaces of both lead plates become porous, so that they

present a large surface, and can therefore hold a great deal of peroxide

of lead. The charging current being now broken, the oxygen which has been

forcibly separated from the liquid seeks to recombine with hydrogen;

and if the two lead plates are joined by a wire, this effort of the

oxygen generates an electrical current in the opposite direction to the

original one, which is the current utilised. Electricity is thus stored

up in a portable box, where it can be kept till wanted, when it is drawn

out by connecting the plates, and as a large amount of energy has been

accumulated the current which is produced lasts for a considerable time.

Unfortunately accumulators are bulky, heavy, and expensive, and nearly

half the energy of the original charging current is lost in obtaining the

reversed or working current. They are therefore not as yet adapted for

general use, though perfectly capable of supplying either light or motive

power, for both which purposes they have been successfully applied in

special cases. The future both of electric power and electric lighting

is now reduced entirely to a question of cost; and though it is hard to

beat gas and the steam-engine, with cheap coal, and air and water for

nothing, it is possible that by using natural sources of power to move

dynamos, and by obtaining zinc back as a residual product in batteries,

electricity may in certain cases carry the day.

A Modern Zoroastrian · 第 4 / 15 章