The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1915-06-18
ELECTRICITY.
nfky II 10 Difficult For the laymsa -
lnderetand What IL IN.

lroeretsro what IL 10.
"p-hat : electricity p Is a favor
tie query with people who desire 10
"get a rise' out Of a scientific NAN.
And when he fails to answer 1t in
the same simple fashion that he
might treat the question "What is
q biscuit?" the questioner cries out:
"Aha! You profess to know all
about electricity. Why, you can't
even tell what it isf'
Now, TO tell what a thing is"-
that is, to define its to state its
relations with something more ia
miliar. The particular familiar
thing that the queationer is think
ing OF in this case Is ordinary mat
ter. Heat has been explained to
him as q vibration of material par
ticles. Light, nc has been told, Is
q wave motion in tho ether, and he
understands the ether to be a kind
OF matter or a substance resem-
bling matter IL 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, It
would be just as correct to say that
we Go not know what matter is as
that we do not know what electrici-
t. 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 secondariIy, through its action
upon matter-the light or heat that
II 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
ment Of the latter IN terms Of the
former, illogical though this may
be. After the scientist has stated
al this the reply comes back, eyes,
/ understand all that, and it is
most clear, I am sure, but tell me,
then, what ia electricity anyway
Another source Of confusion 20
the lay mind Is that scientific men
do not always use the word 'eleo-
tricity" to mean the same thing.
The engineer often employs it to
express the hing that the theoret-
ical electrician calls electric ener-
gy."
To find the energy of electricity
that is, its ability to do work.
the electrician multiplies the quas
tit Of electricity by the potential
or tension under which It EXISTS.
But to the engineer this product
itself measures the thing that he
coils electricity"
The work that q pound Of water
may DO by falling a foot is one foot
pound. The water Is the same after
falling IS before, though it's energy
Is less. So to the electrician Q
quantity of electricity at 100 volts
is precisely the same as at one volt,
though the former Il able 10 do q
hundred times as mach work.
This difference In meaning causes
thousands Of dispvA among stu
dents. Electricity Is . form Of
energy" says one, Gust like Light
or heat" "0h, mop is the reply.
cit is not energy at all, though it
may 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
re still content to regard - whole
49, .s1.-.-T NF T.