The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1910-02-04
ELECTRICITY.
Why II 10 Difficult For the Lsymsn ts
Understand What II Is.

UNDERSTAND What u ls.
what is electricity - is a favor
ite query with people who desire to
get rise" out Of scientific man
And when he fails to answer it in
the same simple fashion that he
might treat the question "What is
biscuit." the questioner cries out /:
Aha You profess TO know all
about electricity. Why, you can't
even tell what it is.'
Now, TO 'tell what a thing is"-
that is, 10 define its 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 has been told. is
aswave motion in the ether. and he
understands the ether TO be a kind
OF matter or substance resem-
bling matter in some particulars.
1t is not 10 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 say that
we do not know what matter is as
that We do not know what electrici-
ty is. As a matter of fact, we do
not know what matter Is, and ths
latest plausible theory of il 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
II causes matter TO give out, the at
traction that il causes certain sub
stances to exert, and so on. 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, "Yes,
/ understand all that, and it 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 il to
express the thing that the theoret-
ical electrician calls electric ener-
g."
To find the energy of electricity
that is, its ability to do work
the electrician mul,iplies the guam
tity Of electricity by the potential
or tension under which it exists.
But to the engineer tnis product
itself measures the thing that he
calls electricity"
The work that a pound Of water
nav do by falling 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 ia able to do a J
hundred times as much work. :
This difference in meaning causes /
thousands Of disputes among stu Z
tents. Electricity is a form Of !
snergy," says one, "iust like light I
Dr. heat" ooh, no" is the reply. :
Tt is not energy at all, though it /
nay possess or convey energy" One r
iisputant is talking about the cleo r
-ricity Of the physical and the other I
about that of the engineer; hence r
heir dispute is merely a matter Of /
definition, though they do not know
{. What wonder that some people !,
ire still content to regard the whole =
ubiect as a civilized Mumbo Jum- ;
,c7-St. Louis Republic. $
a setter