Chapter XIV: Some Recent Triumphs of Applied Science (5)

Another important practical experimenter in the construction of hot-air engines was John Ericsson, who in 1824 constructed an engine somewhat resembling the early one of Cayley, and in 1852 built caloric engines on such a scale as to be adapted to the propulsion of ships. Notwithstanding the genius of Ericsson, however, engines of this type did not prove commercially successful on a large scale, and in subsequent decades the hot-air motors constructed for practical purposes seldom exceeded one horse-power. Such small engines as these are comparatively efficient and absolutely safe, and they are thoroughly adapted for such domestic purposes as light pumping.

The great difficulty with all these engines operated with heated air has been, as already suggested, that their efficiency of action is limited by the difficulties incident to applying high temperatures to large masses of the gas. There is, however, no objection to the super-heating of small quantities of gas, and it was early suggested that this might be accomplished by exploding a gaseous mixture within a cylinder. It was observed by the experimenters of the seventeenth century that an ordinary gun constitutes virtually an internal-combustion engine; and such experimenters as the Dutchman Huyghens, and the Frenchmen Hautefeuille and Papin, attempted to make practical use of the power set free by the explosion of gunpowder, their experiments being conducted about the years 1678 to 1689. Their results, however, were not such as to give them other than an historical interest. About a century later, in 1794, the Englishman Robert Street suggested the use of inflammable gases as explosives, and ever since that time there have been occasional experimenters along that line. In 1823 Samuel Brown introduced a vacuum gas engine for raising water by atmospheric pressure. The first fairly practical gas engine, however, was that introduced by J. J. E. Lenoir, who in 1850 proposed an engine working with a cycle resembling that of a steam engine. His engine patented in 1860 proved to be a fairly successful apparatus. This engine of Lenoir prepared the way for gas engines that have since become so enormously important. Its method of action is this:

"To start the engine, the fly-wheel is pulled round, thus moving the piston, which draws into the cylinder a mixture of gas and air through about half its stroke; the mixture is then exploded by an electric spark, and propels the piston to the end of its stroke, the pressure meanwhile falling, by cooling and expansion, to that of the atmosphere when exhaust takes place. In the return stroke the process is repeated, the action of the engine resembling that of the double-acting steam engine, and having a one-stroke cycle. The cylinder and covers are cooled by circulating water. The firing electricity was supplied by two Bunsen batteries and an induction coil, the circuit being completed at the right intervals by contact pieces on an insulating disc on the crank-shaft; the ignition spark leaped across the space between two wires carried about one-sixth of an inch apart in a porcelain holder."

In 1865 Mons. P. Hugon patented an engine similar to that of Lenoir, except that ignition was accomplished by an external flame instead of by electricity. The ignition flame was carried to and fro in a cavity inside a slide valve, moved by a cam so as to get a rapid cut-off, and permanent lights were maintained at the ends of the valve to re-light the flame-ports after each explosion. The gas was supplied to the cylinder by rubber bellows, worked by an eccentric on the crank-shaft. This engine could be operated satisfactorily, except as to cost, but the heavy gas consumption made it uneconomical.

An important improvement in this regard was introduced by the Germans, Herrn. E. Langen and N. A. Otto, who under patents bearing date of 1866 introduced a so-called "free" piston arrangement--that is to say an arrangement by which the piston depends for its action partly upon the momentum of a fly-wheel. This principle had been proposed for a gas engine as early as 1857, but the first machine to demonstrate its feasibility was that of Langen and Otto. Their engine greatly decreased the gas consumption and hence came to be regarded as the first commercially successful gas engine. It was, however, noisy and limited to small sizes. The cycle of operations of an engine of this type is described as follows:

Lower right-hand figure, a very early type of commercially successful gas engine. It has a "free" piston, an arrangement that was first proposed for a gas engine in 1857, but only brought into practical form by Langen & Otto under their patent of 1866. Upper figure, the gas engine patented by Lenoir in 1860, one of the very first practically successful engines. Lower left-hand figure, a sectional view of a modern gas engine of the type used as the motor of the automobile.]

"(a) The piston is lifted about one-tenth of its travel by the momentum of the fly-wheel, thus drawing in a charge of gas and air.

"(b) The charge is ignited by flame carried in by a slide valve.

"(c) Under the impulse of the explosion, the piston shoots upward nearly to the top of the cylinder, the pressure in which falls by expansion to about 4 lbs. absolute, while absorbing the energy of the piston.

"(d) The piston descends by its own weight and the atmospheric pressure, and in doing so causes a roller-clutch on a spur-wheel gearing with a rack on the piston-rod to engage, so that the fly-wheel shaft shall be driven by the piston; during this down-stroke the pressure increases from 4 lbs. absolute to that of the atmosphere, and averages 7 lbs. per square inch effective throughout the stroke.

"(e) When the piston is near the bottom of the cylinder, the pressure rises above atmospheric, and the stroke is completed by the weight of the piston and rack, and the products of combustion are expelled.

"(f) The fly-wheel now continues running freely till its speed, as determined by a centrifugal governor, falls below a certain limit when a trip gear causes the piston to be lifted the short distance required to recommence the cycle.

"Ignition is performed by an external gas jet, near a pocket in the slide valve by which the charge is admitted; this pocket carries flame to the charge, thus igniting it without allowing any escape. The valve also connects the interior of the cylinder with the exhaust pipe, and a valve in the latter controlled by the governor throttles the discharge, and so defers the next stroke until the speed has fallen below normal. To run the engine empty about four explosions per minute are necessary, and at full power 30 to 35 are made, so that about 28 explosions per minute are available for useful work under the control of the governor."

The definitive improvement in this gas engine was introduced in 1876 by Dr. N. A. Otto, when he compressed the explosive mixture in the working cylinder before igniting it. This expedient--so all-important in its results--had been suggested by William Barnett in 1838, but at that time gas engines were not sufficiently developed to make use of the idea. Now, however, Dr. Otto demonstrated that by compressing the gas before exploding it a much more diluted mixture can be fired, and that this gives a quieter explosion, and a more sustained pressure during the working stroke, while as the engine runs at a high speed the fly-wheel action is generally sufficient to correct the fluctuations arising from there being but one explosion for four strokes of the piston.

In this perfected engine, then, the method of operation is as follows:

The piston is pulled forward with the application of some outside force, which in practice is supplied by the inertia of the fly-wheel, or in starting the engine by the action of a crank with which every user of an automobile is familiar. In being pulled forward, the piston draws gas into the cylinder; as the piston returns, this gas is compressed; the compressed gas, constituting an explosive mixture, is then ignited by a piece of incandescent metal or by an electric spark; the exploding gas expands, pushing the piston forward, this being the only thrust during which work is done; the returning piston expels the expanded gas, completing the cycle. Thus there are three ineffective piston thrusts to one effective thrust. Nevertheless, the engine has proved a useful one for many purposes.

This so-called Otto cycle has been adopted in almost all gas and oil engines, the later improvements being in the direction of still higher compression, and in the substitution of lift for slide valves. There has been a steady increase in the size and power of such engines, the large ones usually introducing two or more working cylinders so as to secure uniform driving. Cheap forms of gas have been employed such as those made by decomposing water by incandescent fuel, and it has been proved possible thus to operate gas-power plants on a commercial scale in competition with the most economical steam installations.

A practical modification of vast importance was introduced when it was suggested that a volatile oil be employed to supply the gas for operation in an internal combustion engine. There was no new principle involved in this idea, and the Otto cycle was still employed as before; but the use of the volatile oil--either a petroleum product or alcohol--made possible the compact portable engine with which everyone is nowadays familiar through its use in automobiles and motor boats. The oil commonly used is gasoline which is supplied to the cylinder through a so-called carburettor in which the vapors of gasoline are combined with ordinary air to make an explosive mixture. The introduction of this now familiar type of motor is to a large extent due to Herr G. Daimler, who in 1884 brought out a light and compact high-speed oil engine. About ten years later Messrs. Panhard and Levassor devised the form of motor which has since been generally adopted. Few other forms of mechanisms are better known to the general public than the oil engine with its two, four, six, or even eight cylinders, as used in the modern automobile. As everyone is aware, it furnishes the favorite type of motor, combining extraordinary power with relative lightness, and making it feasible to carry fuel for a long journey in a receptacle of small compass.

With the gas engines a complication arises precisely opposite to that which is met with in the case of the cylinder of the steam engine--the tendency, namely, to overheating of the cylinder. To obviate this it is customary to have the cylinder surrounded by a water jacket, though air cooling is used in certain types of machines. About fifty per cent. of the total heat otherwise available is lost through this unavoidable expedient.

The rapid introduction of the gas engine in recent years suggests that this type of engine may have a most important future. It has even been predicted that within a few years most trans-Atlantic steamers will be equipped with this type of engine, producing their own gas in transit. It is possible, then, that through this medium the old piston-and-cylinder engine may retain its supremacy, as against the turbine. For the moment, at any rate, the gas engine is gaining popularity, not merely in its application to the automobile, but for numerous types of small stationary engines as well.

In this connection it will be interesting to quote the report of the Special Agent of the Twelfth Census of the United States, as showing the status of gas engines and steam engines in the year 1902.

"The decade between 1890 and 1900," he says, "was a period of marked development in the use of gas engines, using that term to denote all forms of internal combustible engines, in which the propelling force is the explosion of gaseous or vaporous fuel in direct contact with a piston within a closed cylinder. This group embraces those engines using ordinary illuminating gas, natural gas, and gas made in special producers installed as a part of the power plant, and also vaporised gasoline or kerosene. This form of power for the first time is an item of consequence in the returns of the present census, and the very large increase in the horse-power in 1900 as compared with 1890 indicates the growing popularity of this class of motive power.

"In 1890 the number of gas engines in use in manufacturing plants was not reported, but their total power amounted to only 8,930 horse-power, or one-tenth of one per cent of the total power utilized in manufacturing operations. In 1900, however, 14,884 gas engines were reported, with a total of 143,850 horse-power, or 1.3 per cent of the total power used for manufacturing purposes. This increase from 8,930 horse-power to 143,850 horse-power, a gain of 134,920 horse-power, is proportionately the largest increase in any form of primary power shown by a comparison of the figures of the Eleventh and Twelfth censuses, amounting to 1,510.9 per cent.

"Within the past decade, and more particularly during the past five years, there has been a marked increase in the use of this power in industrial establishments for driving machinery, for generating electricity, and for other kindred uses. At the same time, internal-combustion engines have increased in popularity for uses apart from manufacturing, and the amount of this kind of power in use for all purposes in 1900 was, doubtless, very much larger than indicated by the figures relating to manufacturing plants alone.

"The average horse-power per gas engine in 1900 was 9.7 horse-power. There are no available statistics upon which to base a comparison of this average with the average for 1890, but it is doubtful if there has been any very material change in ten years; for while gas engines are built in much larger sizes than ever before, there has been also a great increase in the number of small engines for various purposes.

"The large increase in the use of internal-combustion engines has been due to the rapid improvements that have been made in them, their increased efficiency and economy, their decreased cost, and the wider range of adaptability that has been made practicable.

"Steam still continues to be preeminently the power of greatest importance, and the census returns indicate that the proportion of steam to the total of all powers has increased very largely in the past thirty years. In 1870 steam furnished 1,215,711 horse-power, or 51.8 per cent of a total of 2,346,142; in 1880 the amount of steam power used was 2,185,458 horse-power out of a total of 3,410,837, or 64.1 per cent; in 1890 out of an aggregate of 5,954,655 horse-power, 4,581,595, or 76.9 per cent was steam; while in 1900 steam figured to the extent of 8,742,416 horse-power, or 77.4 per cent, in a total of 11,300,081. This increase in thirty years, from 51.8 per cent to 77.4 per cent of the total power, shows how much more rapidly the use of steam power has increased than other primary sources of power.

"The tendency toward larger units in the use of steam power is shown inadequately by the increase in the average horse-power per engine from 39 horse-power in 1880, to 51 horse-power in 1890, and 56 horse-power in 1900.

"The tendency toward great operations which has been such a conspicuous feature of industrial progress during the past ten years, has shown itself strikingly in the use of units of larger capacity in nearly every form of machinery, and nowhere has this tendency been more marked than in the motive power by which the machinery is driven. At the same time there has been an increase in the use of small units, which tends to destroy the true tendency in steam engineering in these statistics. For example, a steam plant consisting of one or more units of several thousand horse-power may also embrace a number of small engines of only a few horse-power each, the use of which is necessitated by the magnitude of the plant, for the operation of mechanical stokers, the driving of draft fans, coal and ash conveyors, and other work requiring power in small units. On this account the average horse-power of steam engines in use at different census periods fails to afford a true basis for measuring progress toward larger units during the past ten years.

"Developments of the past few years in the distribution of power by the use of electric motors have served to accelerate the tendency toward larger steam units and the elimination of small engines in large plants and to change completely the conditions just described. For example: In one of the largest power plants in the world, which is now being installed, all the stokers, blowers, conveyors, and other auxiliary machinery are to be driven by electric motors. Such rapidly changing conditions tend to invalidate any comparisons of statistical averages deduced from figures for periods even but a few years apart.

"Comparison of two important industries will illustrate the foregoing. The average horse-power of the steam engine used in the cotton mills of the United States in 1890 was 198, and in 1900 it was 300.

"In the iron and steel industry the average horse-power per engine in 1890 was 171, and in 1900 it was 235. In the cotton mills the use of single large units of motive power, with few auxiliary engines of small capacity, gives the largest horse-power per engine of any industry; while in the iron and steel industry the average of the motive power proper, although probably larger than in the manufacture of cotton goods, is reduced by the large number of small engines which are used for auxiliary purposes in every iron and steel plant."

It will be understood that the object of exploding the mixed gases in the oil engine is to produce sudden heating of the entire gas. There is no reason whatever for introducing the gasoline beyond this. Could a better method of heating air be devised, the oil might be entirely dispensed with, and the safety of the apparatus enhanced, as well as the economy of operation. Efforts have been made for fifty years to construct a hot-air engine that would compete with steam successfully. In the early fifties, as already noted, Ericsson showed the feasibility of substituting hot air for steam, but although he constructed large engines, their power was so slight that he was obliged to give up the idea of competing with steam, and to use his engines for pumping where very small power was required.

The great difficulty was that it was not found practicable to heat the air rapidly. All subsequent experimenters have met with the same difficulty until somewhat recently. It is now claimed, however, that a means has been found of rapidly heating the air, and it is even predicted that the hot-air engine will in due course entirely supersede the steam engine. Mr. G. Emil Hesse, in an article in _The American Inventor_, for April 15, 1905, describes a Svea caloric engine as having successfully solved the problem of rapidly heating air. The methods consist in breaking up the air into thin layers and passing it over hot plates, where it rapidly absorbs heat. It passes from the heater to the power cylinder which resembles the cylinder of a steam engine; thence after expanding and doing its work it is exhausted into the atmosphere. Large engines may use the same air over and over again under pressure of one hundred pounds per square inch, alternately heating and cooling it. A six horse-power engine of this type is said to have a cylinder four and one-half inches in diameter and a stroke of four and seven-eighth inches, and makes four hundred and fifty revolutions per minute. The heater is twenty inches in diameter, sixteen inches long, and has a heating surface of sixty square feet. The total weight of heater and engine complete is four hundred pounds for a half horse-power Ericsson engine.

"The Svea heater," says Mr. Hesse, "absorbs the heat as perfectly as an ordinary steam boiler, and the heat-radiating surface of both heater and engine is not larger than that of a steam plant of the same power, thereby placing the two motors on the same basis, as far as the utilization of the heat in the fuel itself is concerned.

"The advantage which every hot-air engine has over the steam engine is the amount of heat saved in the vaporization of the water. It is now well known that one gas is as efficient as another for the conversion of heat into power. Air and steam at 100° C. are consequently on the same footing and ready to be superheated. The amount of heat required to bring the two gases to this temperature is, however, very different.

"With an initial temperature of 10° C. for both air and water, we find that one kilogram of steam requires 90 + 537 = 627 thermal units, and one kilogram of air 0.24 × 90 = 21.6 thermal units. Some heat is recovered if the feed water is heated and the steam condensed, but the difference is still so great as to altogether exclude steam as a competitor, provided air can be as readily handled.

"Having now the means to rapidly heat the air, the outlook for the external-combustion engine is certainly very promising.

"The saving of more than half the coal now used by the steam engine will be of tremendous importance to the whole world."

To what extent this optimistic prediction will be verified is a problem for the future to decide.

VIII

THE SMALLEST WORKERS

In our studies of the steam engine and gas engine we have been concerned with workers of infinitesimal size. Yet, if we are to believe the reports of the modern investigator, the molecules of steam or of ignited gas are small only in a relative sense, and there is a legion of workers compared with which the molecules are really gigantic in size. These workers are the atoms, and the yet more minute particles of which, according to the most recent theories, they are themselves composed.

These smallest conceivable particles, the constituents of the atoms, are called electrons. They are a discovery of the physicists of the most recent generation. According to the newest theories they account for most--perhaps for all--of the inter-molecular and inter-atomic forces; they are indeed the ultimate repositories of those stores of energy which are known to be contained in all matter. The theories are not quite as fully developed as could be wished, but it would appear that these minutest particles, the electrons, are the essential constituents of the familiar yet wonderful carrier of energy which we term electricity. In considering the share of electricity in the world's work, therefore, we shall do well at the outset to put ourselves in touch with recent views as to the nature of this most remarkable of workers.

On every side in this modern world we are confronted by this strange agent, electricity. The word stares us in the face on every printed page. The thing itself is manifest in all departments of our every-day life. You go to your business in an electric car; ascend to your office in an electric elevator; utilize electric call-bells; receive and transmit messages about the world and beneath the sea by electric telegraph. Your doctor treats you with an electric battery. Your dentist employs electric drills and electric furnaces. You ride in electric cabs; eat food cooked on electric stoves; and read with the aid of electric light. In a word, the manifestations of electricity are so obvious on every side that there can be no challenge to the phrasing which has christened this the Age of Electricity.

But what, then, is this strange power that has produced all these multifarious results? It would be hard to propound a scientific query that has been more variously answered. Ever since the first primitive man observed the strange effect produced by rubbing a piece of amber, thoughtful minds must have striven to explain that effect. Ever since the eighteenth-century scientist began his more elaborate studies of electricity, theories in abundance have been propounded. And yet we are not quite sure that even the science of to-day can give a correct answer as to the nature of electricity. At the very least, however, it is able to give some interesting suggestions which seem to show that we are in a fair way to solve this world-old mystery. And, curiously enough, the very newest explanations are not so very far away from some eighteenth-century theories which for a long time were looked at askance if not altogether discarded. In particular, the theory of Benjamin Franklin, which considered electricity as an immaterial fluid bearing certain curious relations to tangible matter, is found to serve singularly well as an aid to the interpretation of the very newest experiments.

FRANKLIN'S ONE-FLUID THEORY

Such being the case, we must consider this theory of Franklin's somewhat in detail. Perhaps we cannot do better than state the theory in the words of the celebrated physicist, Dr. Thomas Young, as given in his work on natural philosophy, published in 1807. By quoting from this old work we shall make sure that we are not reading any modern interpretations into the theory. "It is supposed," says Young, "that a peculiar ethereal fluid pervades the pores, if not the actual substance of the earth and of all other material bodies, passing through them with more or less facility, according to their different powers of conducting it; that particles of this fluid repel each other, and are attracted by particles of common matter; that particles of common matter also repel each other; and that these attractions and repulsions are equal among themselves, and vary inversely as to squares of the distances of the particles. The effects of this fluid are distinguished from those of all other substances by an attractive or repulsive quality, which it appears to communicate to different bodies, and which differs in general from other attractions and repulsions by its immediate diminution or cessation when the bodies, acting on each other, come into contact, or are touched by other bodies.... In general, a body is said to be electrified when it contains, either as a whole or in any of its parts, more or less of the electric fluid than is natural to it.... In this common neutral state of all bodies, the electrical fluid, which is everywhere present, is so distributed that the various forces hold each other exactly in equilibrium and the separate results are destroyed, unless we choose to consider gravitation itself as arising from a comparatively slight inequality between the electrical attractions and repulsions."

The salient and striking feature of this theory, it will be observed, is that the electrical fluid, under normal conditions, is supposed to be incorporated everywhere with the substance of every material in the world. It will be observed that nothing whatever is postulated as to the nature or properties of this fluid beyond the fact that its particles repel each other and are attracted by the particles of common matter; it being also postulated that the particles of common matter likewise repel each other under normal conditions.

At the time when Franklin propounded his theory, there was a rival theory before the world, which has continued more or less popular ever since, and which is known as the two-fluid theory of electricity. According to this theory, there are two uncreated and indestructible fluids which produce electrical effects. One fluid may be called positive, the other negative. The particles of the positive fluid are mutually repellent, as also are the particles of the negative fluid, but, on the other hand, positive particles attract and are attracted by negative particles. We need not further elaborate the details of this two-fluid theory, because the best modern opinion considers it less satisfactory than Franklin's one-fluid theory. Meantime, it will be observed that the two theories have much in common; in particular they agree in the essential feature of postulating an invisible something which is not matter, and which has strange properties of attraction and repulsion.

These properties of attraction and repulsion constituted in the early day the only known manifestations of electricity; and the same properties continue to hold an important place in modern studies of the subject. Electricity is so named simply because amber--the Latin _electrum_--was the substance which, in the experience of the ancients, showed most conspicuously the strange property of attracting small bodies after being rubbed. Modern methods of developing electricity are extremely diversified, and most of them are quite unsuggestive of the rubbing of amber; yet nearly all the varied manifestations of electricity are reducible, in the last analysis, to attractions and repulsions among the particles of matter.

As to the alleged immaterial fluids which, according to the theories just mentioned, make up the real substance of electricity, it was perfectly natural that they should be invented by the physicists of the elder day. All the conceptions of the human mind are developed through contact with the material world; and it is extremely difficult to get away, even in theory, from tangible realities. When the rubbed amber acquires the property of drawing the pith ball to it, we naturally assume that some change has taken place in the condition of the amber; and since the visible particles of amber appear to be unchanged--since its color, weight, and friability are unmodified--it seems as if some immaterial quality must have been added to, or taken from it. And it was natural for the eighteenth-century physicist to think of this immaterial something as a fluid, because he was accustomed to think of light, heat, and magnetism as being also immaterial fluids. He did not know, as we now do, that what we call heat is merely the manifestation of varying "modes" of motion among the particles of matter, and that what we call light is not a thing _sui generis_, but is merely our recognition of waves of certain length in the all-pervading ether. The wave theory of light had, indeed, been propounded here and there by a philosopher, but the theory which regarded light as a corpuscular emanation had the support of no less an authority than Sir Isaac Newton, and he was a bold theorist that dared challenge it. When Franklin propounded his theory of electricity, therefore, his assumption of the immaterial fluid was thoroughly in accord with the physical doctrines of the time.

MODERN VIEWS

But about the beginning of the nineteenth century the doctrine of imponderable fluids as applied to light and heat was actively challenged by Young and Fresnel and by Count Rumford and Humphry Davy and their followers, and in due course the new doctrines of light and heat were thoroughly established. In the light of the new knowledge, the theory of the electric fluid or fluids seemed, therefore, much less plausible. Whereas the earlier physicists had merely disputed as to whether we must assume the existence of two electrical fluids or of only one, it now began to be questioned whether we need assume the existence of any electrical fluid whatever. The physicists of about the middle of the nineteenth century developed the wonderful doctrine of conservation of energy, according to which one form of force may be transformed into another, but without the possibility of adding to, or subtracting from, the original sum total of energy in the universe. It became evident that electrical force must conform to this law. Finally, Clerk-Maxwell developed his wonderful electromagnetic theory, according to which waves of light are of electrical origin. The work of Maxwell was followed up by the German Hertz, whose experiments produced those electromagnetic waves which, differing in no respect except in their length from the waves of light, have become familiar to everyone through their use in wireless telegraphy. All these experiments showed a close relation between electrical phenomena, and the phenomena of light and of radiant heat, and a long step seemed to be taken toward the explanation of the nature of electricity.

The new studies associated electricity with the ether, rather than with the material substance of the electrified body. Many experiments seemed to show that electricity in motion traverses chiefly the surface of the conductor, and it came to be believed that the essential feature of the "current" consists of a condition of strain or stress in the ether surrounding a conductor, rather than of any change in the conductor itself. This idea, which is still considered valid, has the merit of doing away with the thought of action at a distance--the idea that was so repugnant to the mind of Faraday.

So far so good. But what determines the ether strain? There is surely _something_ that is not matter and is not ether. What is this something? The efforts of many of the most distinguished experimenters have in recent years been directed toward the solution of that question; and these efforts, thanks to the new methods and new discoveries, have met with a considerable measure of success. I must not attempt here to follow out the channels of discovery, but must content myself with stating briefly the results. We shall have occasion to consider some further details as to the methods in a later chapter.

Briefly, then, it is now generally accepted, at least as a working hypothesis, that every atom of matter--be it oxygen, hydrogen, gold, iron, or what not--carries a charge of electricity, which is probably responsible for all the phenomena that the atom manifests. This charge of electricity may be positive or negative, or it may be neutral, by which is meant that the positive and negative charges may just balance. If the positive charge has definite carriers, these are unknown except in association with the atom itself; but the negative charge, on the other hand, is carried by minute particles to which the name electron (or corpuscle) has been given, each of which is about one thousand times smaller than a hydrogen atom, and each of which carries uniformly a unit charge of negative electricity.

Electrons are combined, in what may be called planetary systems, in the substance of the atom; indeed, it is not certain that the atom consists of anything else but such combinations of electrons, held together by the inscrutable force of positive electricity. Some, at least, of the electrons within the atom are violently active--perhaps whirling in planetary orbits,--and from time to time one or more electrons may escape from the atomic system. In thus escaping an electron takes away its charge of negative electricity, and the previously neutral atom becomes positively electrified. Meanwhile the free electron may hurtle about with its charge of negative electricity, or may combine with some neutral atom and thus give to that neutral atom a negative charge. Under certain conditions myriads of these electrons, escaped thus from their atomic systems, may exist in the free state. For example, the so-called _beta_ (ß) rays of radium and its allies consist of such electrons, which are being hurtled off into space with approximately the speed of light. The cathode rays, of which we have heard so much in recent years, also consist of free electrons.

But, for that matter, all currents of electricity whatever, according to this newest theory, consist simply of aggregations of free electrons. According to theory, if the electrons are in uniform motion they produce the phenomena of constant currents of electricity; if they move non-uniformly they produce electromagnetic phenomena (for example, the waves used in wireless telegraphy); if they move with periodic motion they produce the waves of light. Meanwhile stationary aggregations of electrons produce the so-called electrostatic phenomena. All the various ether waves are thus believed to be produced by changes in the motions of the electrons. A very sudden stoppage, such as is produced when the cathode ray meets an impassable barrier, produces the X-ray.

With these explanations in mind, it will be obvious how closely this newest interpretation of electricity corresponds in its general features with the old one-fluid theory of Franklin. The efforts of the present-day physicist have resulted essentially in an analysis of Franklin's fluid, which gives to this fluid an atomic structure. The new theory takes a step beyond the old in suggesting the idea that the same particles which make up the electric fluid enter also into the composition--perhaps are the sole physical constituents--of every material substance as well. But while the new theory thus extends the bounds of our vision, we must not claim that it fully solves the mystery. We can visualize the ultimate constituent of electricity as an electron one thousand times smaller than the hydrogen atom, which has mass and inertia, and which possesses powers of attraction and repulsion. But as to the actual nature of this ultimate particle we are still in the dark. There are, however, some interesting theories as to its character, which should claim at least incidental attention.

We have all along spoken of the electron as an exceedingly minute particle, stating indeed, that in actual size it is believed to be about one thousand times smaller than the hydrogen atom, which hitherto had been considered the smallest thing known to science. But we have now to offer a seemingly paradoxical modification of this statement. It is true that in _mass_ or weight the electron is a thousand times smaller than the hydrogen atom, yet at the same time it may be conceived that the limits of space which the electron occupies are indefinitely large. In a word, it is conceived (by Professor J. J. Thomson, who is the chief path-breaker in this field) that the electron is in reality a sort of infinitesimal magnet, having two poles joined by lines or tubes of magnetic force (the so-called Faraday tube), which lines or tubes are of indefinite number and extent; precisely as, on a large scale, our terrestrial globe is such a magnet supplied with such an indefinite magnetic field. That the mass of the electron is so infinitesimally small is explained on the assumption that this mass is due to a certain amount of universal ether which is bound up with the tubes where they are thickest; close to the point in space from which they radiate, which point in space constitutes the focus of the tangible electron.

It will require some close thinking on the part of the reader to gain a clear mental picture of this conception of the electron; but the result is worth the effort. When you can clearly conceive all matter as composed of electrons, each one of which cobwebs space with its system of magnetic tubes, you will at least have a tangible picture in mind of a possible explanation of the forces of cohesion and gravitation--in fact, of all the observed cases of seeming action at a distance. If at first blush the conception of space as filled with an interminable meshwork of lines of force seems to involve us in a hopeless mental tangle, it should be recalled that the existence of an infinity of such magnetic lines joining the poles of the earth may be demonstrated at any time by the observation of a compass, yet that these do not in any way interfere with the play of other familiar forces. There is nothing unthinkable, then, in the supposition that there are myriads of minor magnetic centres exerting lesser degrees of force throughout the same space.

All that can be suggested as to the actual nature of the Faraday tubes is that they perhaps represent a condition of the ether. This, obviously, is heaping hypothesis upon hypothesis. Yet it should be understood that the hypothesis of the magnetic electron as the basis of matter, has received an amount of experimental support that has raised it at least to the level of a working theory. Should that theory be demonstrated to be true, we shall apparently be forced to conclude not merely that electricity is present everywhere in nature, but that, in the last analysis, there is absolutely no tangible thing other than electricity in all the universe.

HOW ELECTRICITY IS DEVELOPED

Turning from this very startling theoretical conclusion to the practicalities, let us inquire how electricity--which apparently exists, as it were, in embryo everywhere--can be made manifest. In so doing we shall discover that there are varying types of electricity, yet that these have a singular uniformity as to their essential properties. As usually divided--and the classification answers particularly well from the standpoint of the worker--electricity is spoken of as either statical or dynamical. The words themselves are suggestive of the essential difference between the two types. Statical electricity produces very striking manifestations. We have already spoken of it as theoretically due to the conditions of the electrons at rest. It must be understood, however, that the statical electricity will, if given opportunity, seek to escape from any given location to another location, under certain conditions, somewhat as water which is stored up in a reservoir will, when opportunity offers, flow down to a lower level. The pent-up static electricity has, like the water in the reservoir, a store of potential energy. The physicist speaks of it as having high tension. In passing to a condition of lower tension, the statical electricity may give up a large portion of its energy.

If, for example, on a winter day in a cold climate, you walk briskly along a wool carpet, the friction of your feet with the carpet generates a store of statical electricity, which immediately passes over the entire surface of your body. If now you touch another person or a metal conductor, such as a steam radiator or a gas pipe, a brilliant spark jumps from your finger, and you experience what is spoken of as an electrical shock. If the day is very cold, and the air consequently very dry, and if you will take pains to rub your feet vigorously or slide along the carpet, you may light a gas jet with the spark which will spring from your finger to the tip of the jet, provided the latter is of metal or other conducting substance; and even if you attempt to avoid the friction between your feet and the carpet as much as possible, you may be constantly annoyed by receiving a shock whenever you touch any conductor, since, in spite of your efforts, the necessary amount of friction sufficed to generate a store of statical electricity.

An illustration of the development of this same form of electricity, on a large scale, is supplied by the familiar statical machine, which consists of a large circle of glass, so adjusted that it may be revolved rapidly against a suitable friction producer. With such a machine a powerful statical current is produced, capable of generating a spark that may be many inches or even several feet in length,--a veritable flash of lightning. It is with such a supply of electricity conducted through a vacuum tube that the cathode ray and the Roentgen ray are produced.

Such effects as this suggest considerable capacity for doing work. Yet in reality, notwithstanding the very sporadical character of the result, the quantity of electricity involved in such a statical current may be very slight indeed. Even a lightning flash is held to represent a comparatively small amount of electricity. Faraday calculated that the amount of electricity that could be generated from a single drop of water, through chemical manipulation, would suffice to supply the lightning for a fair-sized thunder-storm. Nevertheless the destructive work that may be done by a flash of lightning may be considerable, as everyone is aware. But, on the other hand, while the visible effect of a stroke of lightning on a tree trunk, for example, makes it seem a powerful agency, yet the actual capacity to do work--the power to move considerable masses of matter--is extremely limited. The effect on a tree trunk, it will be recalled, usually consists of nothing more than the stripping off of a channel of bark. In other words, the working energy contained in a seemingly powerful supply of statical electricity commonly plays but an insignificant part.

The working agent, and therefore the form of electricity which concerns us in the present connection, is the dynamical current. This may be generated in various ways, but in practice these are chiefly reducible to two. One of these depends upon chemical action, the other upon the inter-relations of mechanical motion and magnetic lines of force. A common illustration of the former is supplied by the familiar voltaic or galvanic battery. The electromagnetic form has been rendered even more familiar in recent times by the dynamo. This newest and most powerful of workers will claim our attention in detail in the succeeding chapter. Our present consideration will be directed to the older method of generating the electric current as represented by the voltaic cell.

THE WORK OF THE DYNAMICAL CURRENT

Let us draw our illustration from a familiar source. Even should your household otherwise lack electrical appliances, you are sure to have an electric call-bell. The generator of the electric current, which is stored away in some out-of-the-way corner, is probably a small so-called "dry-cell" which you could readily carry around in your pocket; or it may consist of a receptacle holding a pint or two of liquid in which some metal plates are immersed. Such an apparatus seems scarcely more than a toy when we contrast it with the gigantic dynamos of the power-house; yet, within the limits of its capacities, one is as surely a generator of electricity as the other. If we are to accept the latest theory, the electrical current which flows from this tiny cell is precisely the same in kind as that which flows from the five-thousand-horse-power dynamo. The difference is only one of quantity.

To understand the operation of this common household appliance we must bear in mind two or three familiar experimental facts in reference to the action of the voltaic cell. Briefly, such a cell consists of two plates of metal--for example, one of copper and the other of zinc--with a connecting medium, which is usually a liquid, but which may be a piece of moistened cloth or blotting-paper. So long as the two plates of metal are not otherwise connected there is no electricity in evidence, but when the two are joined by any metal conductor, as, for example, a piece of wire--thus, in common parlance, "completing the circuit"--a current of electricity flows about this circuit, passing from the first metal plate to the second, through the liquid and back from the second plate to the first through the piece of wire. The wire may be of any length. In the case of your call-bell, for example, the wire circuit extends to your door, and is there broken, shutting off the current.

When you press the button you connect the broken ends of the wire, thus closing the circuit, as the saying is, and the re-established current, acting through a little electromagnet, rings the bell. In another case, the wire may be hundreds of miles in length, to serve the purposes of the telegrapher, who transmits his message by opening and closing the circuit, precisely as you operate your door-bell. For long-distance telegraphy, of course, large cells are required, and numbers of them are linked together to give a cumulative effect, making a strong current; but there is no new principle involved.

The simplest study of this interesting mechanism makes it clear that the cell is the apparatus primarily involved in generating the electric current; yet it is equally obvious that the connecting wire plays an important part, since, as we have seen, when the wire is broken there is no current in evidence. Now, according to the electron theory, as previously outlined, the electric current consists of an actual flow along the wire of carriers of electricity which are unable to make their way except where a course is provided for them by what is called a conductor. Dry air, for example, is, under ordinary circumstances, quite impervious to them. This means, then, that the electrons flow freely along the wire when it is continuous, but that they are powerless to proceed when the wire is cut. When you push the button of your call-bell, therefore, you are virtually closing the switch which enables the electrons to proceed on their interrupted journey.

THEORIES OF ELECTRICAL ACTION

But all this, of course, leaves quite untouched the question of the origin of the electrons themselves. That these go hurtling from one plate or pole of the battery to the other, along the wire, we can understand at least as a working theory; that, furthermore, the electrons have their origin either in the metal plates or in the liquid that connects them, seems equally obvious; but how shall we account for their development? It is here that the chemist with his atomic theory of matter comes to our aid. He assures us that all matter consists in the last analysis of excessively minute particles, and that these particles are perpetually in motion. They unite with one another to form so-called molecules, but they are perpetually breaking away from such unions, even though they re-establish them again. Such activities of the atoms take place even in solids, but they are greatly enhanced when any substance passes from the solid into the liquid state.

When, for example, a lump of salt is dissolved in water, the atoms of sodium and of chlorine which joined together make up the molecules of salt are held in much looser bondage than they were while the salt was in a dry or crystalline form. Could we magnify the infinitesimal particles sufficiently to make them visible we should probably see large numbers of the molecules being dissociated, the liberated atoms moving about freely for an instant and then reuniting with other atoms. Thus at any given instant our solution of salt would contain numerous free _atoms_ of sodium and of chlorine, although we are justified in thinking of this substance as a whole as composed of sodium-chlorine _molecules_. It is only by thus visualizing the activity of the atoms in a solution that we are able to provide even a thinkable hypothesis as to the development of electricity in the voltaic cell.

What puts us on the track of the explanation we are seeking is the fact that the diverse atoms are known to have different electrical properties. In our voltaic cell, for example, sodium atoms would collect at one pole and chlorine atoms at the other. Humphry Davy discovered this fact in the early days of electro-chemistry, just about a century ago. He spoke of the sodium atom as electro-positive, and of the chlorine atom as electro-negative, and he attempted to explain all chemical affinity as merely due to the mutual attraction between positively and negatively electrified atoms. The modern theorist goes one step farther, and explains the negative properties of the chlorine atom by assuming the presence of one negative electron or electricity in excess of the neutralizing charge. The assumption is, that the sodium atom has lost this negative electron and thus has become positively electrified. The chlorine atom, harboring the fugitive electron, becomes negatively electrified. Hence the two atoms are attracted toward opposite poles of the cell.

This disunion of atoms, be it understood, must be supposed to take place in the case of any solution of common salt, whether it rests in an ordinary cup or forms a part of the ocean. Here we have, then, material for the generation of the electrical current, if some means could be found to induce the chlorine atom to give up the surplus electron which from time to time it carries. And this means is provided when two pieces of metal of different kinds, united with a metal conductor, are immersed in the liquid. Then it comes to pass that the electrons associated with the chlorine atoms that chance to lie in contact with one of these plates of metal, find in this metal an avenue of escape. They rush off eagerly along the metal and the connecting wire, and in so doing establish a current which acts--if we may venture a graphic analogy from an allied field of physics--as a sort of suction, attracting other chlorine atoms from the body of the liquid against the metal plate that they also may discharge their electrons. In other words, the electrical current passes through the liquid as well as through the outside wire, thus completing the circuit.