The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1909-10-15
EItcrAlclrY.
WY II 10 DlfheUit For the Lsymsn 20
understand What II 10.

lie query with people who desire 10
get a rise" out of scientific man.
And when he fails 10 answer il in
the same simple fashion that he
might treat the question "What is
a biscuit" the questioner cries out
"Ahal You profess TO know all
about electricity. Why, you can Z
even tell what it isl"
Now, to "tell what thing is
that is, 10 define it's to state its
relations with something more IA
miliar. The particular familiar
thing that the questioner is think
ing Of in this case is ordinary mat
ter Heat has been explained TO
him as a vibration of material par
ticles. Light, he Aas been told, is
wave motion in the ether, and he
understands the ether to be kind
OF matter or a substance resem-
bling matter in some particulars.
1t is not TO be denied that no
such simple general relationship
can be stated between electricity
and matter. But, this being so, il
would be just as correct TO raw that
we do not know what matter is as
that We do not know what electrici-
" Is. As a matter of fact, we do
not know what matter is, and the
latest plausible theory of it builds
it up on an electric basis, so that on
this theory the idea Of electricity is
more fundamental than that Of
matter. Unfortunately our senses
have been evolved by contact with
matter and are trained TO detect
only matter. Electricity they know
only secondarily. through its action
upon matter-the light or heat that
1t causes matter to give out, the at
traction that il causes certain sub
stances 10 exert, and so or. To the
man In the street, therefore, matter
is familiar. and he demands a state
ment Of the latter in terms Of the
former, illogical though this may
be After the scientist has stated
all this the reply comes back, Eyes,
| understand all that, and il is
most clear, am sure, but tell me,
then, what is electricity anyway"
Another source Of confusion TO
the lay mind is that scientific men
do not always use the word "elec-
tricity" TO mean the same thing.
The engineer often employs it to
express the thing that the theoret-
ical electrician calls electric ener-
gy."
To find the energy Of electricity
that is, its ability TO do work
the electrician multiphes the guam
tty Of electricity BY the potential
or tension under which it exists.
But TO the engineer this product
itself measures the thing that he
calls electricity"
The work that a pound of water
may do BY falling a foot is one foot
pound. The water is the same after
falling as before, though its energy
is less. So TO the electrician a
quantity OF electricity at 100 volts
is precisely the same as at one volt,
though the former Is able TO do a
hundred times as much work.
This difference in meaning causes
thousands OF disputes among stu
dents. Electricity is form Of
energy" says one, Just like light
or heat" ooh, no" is the reply.
at is not energy at all, though it
NAV possess or convey energy" One
disputant is talking about the cleo
tricity Of the physical and the other
about that Of the engineer; hence
their dispute is merely a matter Of
definition. though they do not know
it. What wonder that some people
are still content 10 regard the whole
subject as a civilized Mumbo jun
bo?-St Louis Republic.