The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1913-09-19
ELECTRICITY.
Why IL ls Difficult For the layman &c
Understand What II Is.

Why IL is Difficult For the Layman &c
Understand What II Is.
"What is electricity ?" is a favor
ite query with people who desire to
"get a 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 thing is
that is, to define its to state its
relations with something more fa-
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
a wave motion in the ether, and he
understands the ether to be kind
Of matter or q substance resem-
bling matter in some particulars.
It is not to be denied that no
such simple general relationship
can be stated between electricity
and matter. But, this being so, it
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 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 secondarilv, through its action
upon matter-the light OF heat that
it causes matter to give out, the at
traction that it causes certain sub
stances to exert, and so on To the
man in the street, therefore, matter
is familiar, and he demands a state
J 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,
I understand all that, and it ID
most clear, l am sure, but tell me,
then, what is electricity anyway?"
Another source of confusion 10
the lay mind is that scientific men
do not always use the word "elsc-
} tricity" to mean the same thing.
, The engineer often employs it ia
} express the thing that the theorst-
ical electrician calls electric ener-
y."
, To find the energy of electricity
that is, its ability to do work.
the electrician multiplies the guam.
tity of electricity by the potential
or tension under which 1t exists
But to the engineer this product
itself measures the thing that be
calls Electricity"
The work that a pound of water
may do by falling foot is one foot
pound. The water is the same aftel
falling as before, though its energy
is less. So to the electrician {
quantity of electricity at 100 volt,
e is precisely the same as at ono volt
0 though the former is able to do
hundred times as much work.
This difference Ia meaning causes
thousands of disputes among stu
dents. Electricity is form o.
energy" says one, "just like igh'
or heat" ooh, no~ is the reply
'Tt is not energy at all, though i
may possess or convey energy" On
disputant is talking about the cleo
tricity of the physical and the othe
about that of the engineer; henc'
their dispute is merely matter o
definition, though they do not know
it. What wonder that some peopl
/, re still content to regard the who'll
subject es q civihz | Mnmbo Jr 70
o2- st. 10 is ler bli
lNMTRT9DM