Experimental Researches in Electricity, Volume 1 — Reading Companion
Edition facts
Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.
Read the Text
out ten inches long, being included in the circuit. The needle was immediately deflected five divisions and a half, on the one side of the zero, and in vibrating passed as nearly as possible through five divisions and a half on the other side.
364. The other seven jars were then added to the eight, and the whole fifteen charged by thirty turns of the machine. The Henley's electrometer stood not quite half as high as before; but when the discharge was made through the galvanometer, previously at rest, the needle immediately vibrated, passing _exactly_ to the same division as in the former instance. These experiments with eight and with fifteen jars were repeated several times alternately with the same results.
365. Other experiments were then made, in which all the battery was used, and its charge (being fifty turns of the machine,) sent through the galvanometer: but it was modified by being passed sometimes through a mere wet thread, sometimes through thirty-eight inches of thin string wetted by distilled water, and sometimes through a string of twelve times the thickness, only twelve inches in length, and soaked in dilute acid (298.). With the thick string the charge passed at once; with the thin string it occupied a sensible time, and with the thread it required two or three seconds before the electrometer fell entirely down. The current therefore must have varied extremely in intensity in these different cases, and yet the deflection of the needle was sensibly the same in all of them. If any difference occurred, it was that the thin string and thread caused greatest deflection; and if there is any lateral transmission, as M. Colladon says, through the silk in the galvanometer coil, it ought to have been so, because then the intensity is lower and the lateral transmission less.
366. Hence it would appear that _if the same absolute quantity of electricity pass through the galvanometer, whatever may be its intensity, the dejecting force upon the magnetic needle is the same._
367. The battery of fifteen jars was then charged by sixty revolutions of the machine, and discharged, as before, through the galvanometer. The deflection of the needle was now as nearly as possible to the eleventh division, but the graduation was not accurate enough for me to assert that the arc was exactly double the former arc; to the eye it appeared to be so. The probability is, that _the deflecting force of an electric current is directly proportional to the absolute quantity of electricity passed_, at whatever intensity that electricity may be[A].
[A] The great and general value of the galvanometer, as an actual measure of the electricity passing through it, either continuously or interruptedly, must be evident from a consideration of these two conclusions. As constructed by Professor Ritchie with glass threads (see Philosophical Transactions, 1830, p. 218, and Quarterly Journal of Science, New Series, vol. i. p.29.), it apparently seems to leave nothing unsupplied in its own department.
368. Dr. Ritchie has shown that in a case where the intensity of the electricity remained the same, the deflection of the magnetic needle was directly as the quantity of electricity passed through the galvanometer[A]. Mr. Harris has shown that the _heating_ power of common electricity on metallic wires is the same for the same quantity of electricity whatever its intensity might have previously been[B].
[A] Quarterly Journal of Science, New Series, vol. i. p. 33.
[B] Plymouth Transactions, page 22.
369. The next point was to obtain a _voltaic_ arrangement producing an effect equal to that just described (367.). A platina and a zinc wire were passed through the same hole of a draw-plate, being then one eighteenth of an inch in diameter; these were fastened to a support, so that their lower ends projected, were parallel, and five sixteenths of an inch apart. The upper ends were well-connected with the galvanometer wires. Some acid was diluted, and, after various preliminary experiments, that adopted as a standard which consisted of one drop strong sulphuric acid in four ounces distilled water. Finally, the time was noted which the needle required in swinging either from right to left or left to right: it was equal to seventeen beats of my watch, the latter giving one hundred and fifty in a minute. The object of these preparations was to arrange a voltaic apparatus, which, by immersion in a given acid for a given time, much less than that required by the needle to swing in one direction, should give equal deflection to the instrument with the discharge of ordinary electricity from the battery (363. 364.); and a new part of the zinc wire having been brought into position with the platina, the comparative experiments were made.
370. On plunging the zinc and platina wires five eighths of an inch deep into the acid, and retaining them there for eight beats of the watch, (after which they were quickly withdrawn,) the needle was deflected, and continued to advance in the same direction some time after the voltaic apparatus had been removed from the acid. It attained the five-and-a-half division, and then returned swinging an equal distance on the other side. This experiment was repeated many times, and always with the same result.
371. Hence, as an approximation, and judging from _magnetic force_ only at present (376.), it would appear that two wires, one of platina and one of zinc, each one eighteenth of an inch in diameter, placed five sixteenths of an inch apart and immersed to the depth of five eighths of an inch in acid, consisting of one drop oil of vitriol and four ounces distilled water, at a temperature about 60°, and connected at the other extremities by a copper wire eighteen feet long and one eighteenth of an inch thick (being the wire of the galvanometer coils), yield as much electricity in eight beats of my watch, or in 8/150ths of a minute, as the electrical battery charged by thirty turns of the large machine, in excellent order (363. 364.). Notwithstanding this apparently enormous disproportion, the results are perfectly in harmony with those effects which are known to be produced by variations in the intensity and quantity of the electric fluid.
372. In order to procure a reference to _chemical action_, the wires were now retained immersed in the acid to the depth of five eighths of an inch, and the needle, when stationary, observed; it stood, as nearly as the unassisted eye could decide, at 5-1/3 division. Hence a permanent deflection to that extent might be considered as indicating a constant voltaic current, which in eight beats of my watch (369.) could supply as much electricity as the electrical battery charged by thirty turns of the machine.
373. The following arrangements and results are selected from many that were made and obtained relative to chemical action. A platina wire one twelfth of an inch in diameter, weighing two hundred and sixty grains, had the extremity rendered plain, so as to offer a definite surface equal to a circle of the same diameter as the wire; it was then connected in turn with the conductor of the machine, or with the voltaic apparatus (369.), so as always to form the positive pole, and at the same time retain a perpendicular position, that it might rest, with its whole weight, upon the test paper to be employed. The test paper itself was supported upon a platina spatula, connected either with the discharging train (292.), or with the negative wire of the voltaic apparatus, and it consisted of four thicknesses, moistened at all times to an equal degree in a standard solution of hydriodate of potassa (316.).
374. When the platina wire was connected with the prime conductor of the machine, and the spatula with the discharging train, ten turns of the machine had such decomposing power as to produce a pale round spot of iodine of the diameter of the wire; twenty turns made a much darker mark, and thirty turns made a dark brown spot penetrating to the second thickness of the paper. The difference in effect produced by two or three turns, more or less, could be distinguished with facility.
375. The wire and spatula were then connected with the voltaic apparatus (369.), the galvanometer being also included in the arrangement; and, a stronger acid having been prepared, consisting of nitric acid and water, the voltaic apparatus was immersed so far as to give a permanent deflection of the needle to the 5-1/3 division (372.), the fourfold moistened paper intervening as before[A]. Then by shifting the end of the wire from place to place upon the test paper, the effect of the current for five, six, seven, or any number of the beats of the watch (369.) was observed, and compared with that of the machine. After alternating and repeating the experiments of comparison many times, it was constantly found that this standard current of voltaic electricity, continued for eight beats of the watch, was equal, in chemical effect, to thirty turns of the machine; twenty-eight revolutions of the machine were sensibly too few.
[A] Of course the heightened power of the voltaic battery was necessary to compensate for the bad conductor now interposed.
376. Hence it results that both in _magnetic deflection_ (371.) and in _chemical force_, the current of electricity of the standard voltaic battery for eight beats of the watch was equal to that of the machine evolved by thirty revolutions.
377. It also follows that for this case of electro-chemical decomposition, and it is probable for all cases, that the _chemical power, like the magnetic force_ (36.), _is in direct proportion to the absolute quantity of electricity_ which passes.
378. Hence arises still further confirmation, if any were required, of the identity of common and voltaic electricity, and that the differences of intensity and quantity are quite sufficient to account for what were supposed to be their distinctive qualities.
379. The extension which the present investigations have enabled me to make of the facts and views constituting the theory of electro-chemical decomposition, will, with some other points of electrical doctrine, be almost immediately submitted to the Royal Society in another series of these Researches.
_Royal Institution, 15th Dec. 1832._
Note.--I am anxious, and am permitted, to add to this paper a correction of an error which I have attributed to M. Ampère the first series of these Experimental Researches. In referring to his experiment on the induction of electrical currents (78.), I have called that a disc which I should have called a circle or a ring. M. Ampère used a ring, or a very short cylinder made of a narrow plate of copper bent into a circle, and he tells me that by such an arrangement the motion is very readily obtained. I have not doubted that M. Ampère obtained the motion he described; but merely mistook the kind of mobile conductor used, and so far I described his _experiment_ erroneously.
In the same paragraph I have stated that M. Ampère says the disc turned "to take a position of equilibrium exactly as the spiral itself would have turned had it been free to move"; and further on I have said that my results tended to invert the sense of the proposition "stated by M. Ampère, _that a current of electricity tends to put the electricity of conductors near which it passes in motion in the same direction._" M. Ampère tells me in a letter which I have just received from him, that he carefully avoided, when describing the experiment, any reference to the direction of the induced current; and on looking at the passages he quotes to me, I find that to be the case. I have therefore done him injustice in the above statements, and am anxious to correct my error.
But that it may not be supposed I lightly wrote those passages, I will briefly refer to my reasons for understanding them in the sense I did. At first the experiment failed. When re-made successfully about a year afterwards, it was at Geneva in company with M.A. De la Rive: the latter philosopher described the results[A], and says that the plate of copper bent into a circle which was used as the mobile conductor "sometimes advanced between the two branches of the (horse-shoe) magnet, and sometimes was repelled, _according_ to the direction of the current in the surrounding conductors."
[A] Bibliothèque Universelle, xxi. p. 48.
I have been in the habit of referring to Demonferrand's _Manuel d'Electricité Dynamique_, as a book of authority in France; containing the general results and laws of this branch of science, up to the time of its publication, in a well arranged form. At p. 173, the author, when describing this experiment, says, "The mobile circle turns to take a position of equilibrium as a conductor would do in which the current moved in the _same direction_ as in the spiral;" and in the same paragraph he adds, "It is therefore proved _that a current of electricity tends to put the electricity of conductors, near which it passes, in motion in the same direction._" These are the words I quoted in my paper (78.).
Le Lycée of 1st of January, 1832, No. 36, in an article written after the receipt of my first unfortunate letter to M. Hachette, and before my papers were printed, reasons upon the direction of the induced currents, and says, that there ought to be "an elementary current produced in the same direction as the corresponding portion of the producing current." A little further on it says, "therefore we ought to obtain currents, moving in the _same direction_, produced upon a metallic wire, either by a magnet or a current. M. Ampère _was so thouroughly persuaded that such ought to be the direction of the currents by influence_, that he neglected to assure himself of it in his experiment at Geneva."
It was the precise statements in Demonferrand's Manuel, agreeing as they did with the expression in M. De la Rive's paper, (which, however, I now understand as only meaning that when the inducing current was changed, the motion of the mobile circle changed also,) and not in discordance with anything expressed by M. Ampère himself where he speaks of the experiment, which made me conclude, when I wrote the paper, that what I wrote was really his avowed opinion; and when the Number of the Lycée referred to appeared, which was before my paper was printed, it could excite no suspicion that I was in error.
Hence the mistake into which I unwittingly fell. I am proud to correct it and do full justice to the acuteness and accuracy which, as far as I can understand the subjects, M. Ampère carries into all the branches of philosophy which he investigates.
Finally, my note to (79.) says that the Lycée, No. 36. "mistakes the erroneous results of MM. Fresnel and Ampère for true ones," &c. &c. In calling M. Ampère's results erroneous, I spoke of the results described in, and referred to by the Lycée itself; but _now_ that the expression of the direction of the induced current is to be separated, the term _erroneous_ ought no longer to be attached to them.
April 29, 1833. M.F.]
§ 9. _On a new Law of Electric Conduction._ § 10. _On Conducting Power generally._
Received April 24,--Read May 23, 1833.
§ 9. _On a new Law of Electric Conduction._[A]
[A] In reference to this law see further considerations at 910. 1358. 1705.--_Dec. 1838._
380. It was during the progress of investigations relating to electro-chemical decomposition, which I still have to submit to the Royal Society, that I encountered effects due to a very _general law_ of electric conduction not hitherto recognised; and though they prevented me from obtaining the condition I sought for, they afforded abundant compensation for the momentary disappointment, by the new and important interest which they gave to an extensive part of electrical science.
381. I was working with ice, and the solids resulting from the freezing of solutions, arranged either as barriers across a substance to be decomposed, or as the actual poles of a voltaic battery, that I might trace and catch certain elements in their transit, when I was suddenly stopped in my progress by finding that ice was in such circumstances a non-conductor of electricity; and that as soon as a thin film of it was interposed, in the circuit of a very powerful voltaic battery, the transmission of electricity was prevented, and all decomposition ceased.
382. At first the experiments were made with common ice, during the cold freezing weather of the latter end of January 1833; but the results were fallacious, from the imperfection of the arrangements, and the following more unexceptionable form of experiment was adopted.
383. Tin vessels were formed, five inches deep, one inch and a quarter wide in one direction, of different widths from three eighths to five eighths of an inch in the other, and open at one extremity. Into these were fixed by corks, plates of platina, so that the latter should not touch the tin cases; and copper wires having previously been soldered to the plate, these were easily connected, when required, with a voltaic pile. Then distilled water, previously boiled for three hours, was poured into the vessels, and frozen by a mixture of salt and snow, so that pure transparent solid ice intervened between the platina and tin; and finally these metals were connected with the opposite extremities of the voltaic apparatus, a galvanometer being at the same time included in the circuit.
384. In the first experiment, the platina pole was three inches and a half long, and seven eighths of an inch wide; it was wholly immersed in the water or ice, and as the vessel was four eighths of an inch in width, the average thickness of the intervening ice was only a quarter of an inch, whilst the surface of contact with it at both poles was nearly fourteen square inches. After the water was frozen, the vessel was still retained in the frigorific mixture, whilst contact between the tin and platina respectively was made with the extremities of a well-charged voltaic battery, consisting of twenty pairs of four-inch plates, each with double coppers. Not the slightest deflection of the galvanometer needle occurred.
385. On taking the frozen arrangement out of the cold mixture, and applying warmth to the bottom of the tin case, so as to melt part of the ice, the connexion with the battery being in the mean time retained, the needle did not at first move; and it was only when the thawing process had extended so far as to liquefy part of the ice touching the platina pole, that conduction took place; but then it occurred effectually, and the galvanometer needle was permanently deflected nearly 70°.
386. In another experiment, a platina spatula, five inches in length and seven eighths of an inch in width, had four inches fixed in the ice, and the latter was only three sixteenths of an inch thick between one metallic surface and the other; yet this arrangement insulated as perfectly as the former.
387. Upon pouring a little water in at the top of this vessel on the ice, still the arrangement did not conduct; yet fluid water was evidently there. This result was the consequence of the cold metals having frozen the water where they touched it, and thus insulating the fluid part; and it well illustrates the non-conducting power of ice, by showing how thin a film could prevent the transmission of the battery current. Upon thawing parts of this thin film, at _both_ metals, conduction occurred.
388. Upon warming the tin case and removing the piece of ice, it was found that a cork having slipped, one of the edges of the platina had been all but in contact with the inner surface of the tin vessel; yet, notwithstanding the extreme thinness of the interfering ice in this place, no sensible portion of electricity had passed.
389. These experiments were repeated many times with the same results. At last a battery of fifteen troughs, or one hundred and fifty pairs of four-inch plates, powerfully charged, was used; yet even here no sensible quantity of electricity passed the thin barrier of ice.
Faraday's own preface immediately clarifies the nature of this volume: it is a reprint of fourteen series of papers published in the Philosophical Transactions between 1831 and 1838, assembled at the request of readers. He emphasizes that the work was written in parts, with earlier portions rarely anticipating later ones, and that he has made only typographical or grammatical alterations, adding footnotes dated December 1838 to correct errors. This editorial note sets the expectation that the text proceeds as a chronological record of discovery rather than a unified treatise.
The excerpts show Faraday's characteristic method: numbered paragraphs (e.g., 990–994) build arguments from experimental evidence, with careful definitions of terms like 'intensity' and 'quantity' of electricity. His reasoning is quantitative, linking the amount of zinc oxidized to the electricity produced, and he explicitly connects his findings to earlier work by others, as in paragraph 992.
A Chronological Record, Not a Unified Treatise
Faraday's preface is essential for a first-time reader. He states plainly that the volume was not written as a whole, but in parts, and that earlier portions rarely had any known relation to later ones. This means the reader should expect shifts in focus and terminology as Faraday's understanding evolved. He also notes that he has added footnotes (dated Dec. 1838) to correct errors, which are distinct from the original notes. These footnotes provide a retrospective view, showing where Faraday later revised his earlier claims. The preface thus functions as a roadmap: the text is a faithful reprint, not a polished monograph, and the reader should attend to the dates of each series.
Numbered Paragraphs and Experimental Precision
The excerpts reveal Faraday's systematic use of numbered paragraphs (e.g., 990–994) to build arguments step by step. Each paragraph often contains a single experimental result or logical inference, making the reasoning easy to follow. For example, paragraph 990 explains that the quantity of electricity in a current cannot be increased by adding more cells, only the intensity. This is supported by a concrete experiment in paragraph 991, where ten pairs of plates produced the same quantity of hydrogen at each platina plate as a single pair. Faraday also references earlier paragraphs (e.g., 868, 924, 949) to connect his findings, creating a dense web of cross-references. Readers should be prepared to follow these links to understand the full argument.
The Central Concept: Definite Electro-chemical Action
A recurring theme in the excerpts is the principle of definite electro-chemical action. Faraday states in paragraph 990 that 'the quantity of electricity passed and the quantity of electrolyte decomposed, must be the equivalents of each other.' This is a quantitative law, and he supports it with experimental evidence: a single pair of zinc and platina plates throws as much electricity into a current by oxidizing 32.5 grains of zinc as would be circulated by a thousand times that quantity in a battery. The excerpts do not reveal the full derivation of this law, but they show Faraday's method of measuring and comparing quantities. The reader should watch for how this principle is applied to explain the behavior of batteries and electrolysis throughout the series.
Intensity vs. Quantity: A Key Distinction
Faraday carefully distinguishes between the 'intensity' and 'quantity' of electricity. In paragraph 990, he explains that adding more cells in a battery increases intensity without increasing quantity beyond that proportionate to the zinc oxidized in a single cell. This distinction is crucial for understanding why a battery can decompose electrolytes that a single pair cannot (paragraph 993). The excerpts do not define intensity explicitly, but Faraday's usage suggests it relates to the ability to overcome chemical affinities. Readers should note that this terminology may differ from modern usage, and that Faraday is developing these concepts as he goes. The experimental proof in paragraph 991, using a magnetic needle, shows that the deflecting power of a single pair equals that of the whole battery, confirming the quantity is the same.
Approach this volume as a series of research papers rather than a textbook. Faraday's preface encourages the reader to see the work as a faithful record of his investigation's course and results. Pay attention to the dates of each series and the footnotes, which offer later corrections. The numbered paragraphs and cross-references reward careful reading, and the quantitative experiments provide concrete anchors for the theoretical arguments. This is a work of discovery in progress, and the reader is invited to follow Faraday's reasoning as it unfolds.
Reading Faraday’s numbered proofs, I remembered the quiet thrill of holding a magnet to my grandmother’s old compass—how order emerged from chaos. Gilbert’s world, so patiently mapped in The Natural Philosophy of William Gilbert and His Predecessors — Background and Themes, carried that same unhurried wonder, as if discovery were simply a matter of listening closely enough to the stones and skies.
Record your reading impressions
A brief reflection can help important ideas stay with you longer.
Mia Campbell
2 weeks ago