were regarded as not the results of two entirely different fluids but of the addition or subtraction of one electric fluid from matter, so that positive electrification was to be looked upon as the result of increase or addition of something to ordinary matter and negative as a subtraction. The positive and negative electrifications of the two coatings of the Leyden jar were therefore to be regarded as the result of a transformation of something called electricity from one coating to the other, by which process a certain measurable quantity became so much less on one side by the same amount by which it became more on the other. A modification of this single fluid theory was put forward by F. U. T. Aepinus which was explained and illustrated in his Tentamen theoriae electricitatis et magnetismi, published in St Petersburg in 1759. This theory was founded on the following principles:—(1) the particles of the electric fluid repel each other with a force decreasing as the distance increases; (2) the particles of the electric fluid attract the atoms of all bodies and are attracted by them with a force obeying the same law; (3) the electric fluid exists in the pores of all bodies, and while it moves without any obstruction in conductors such as metals, water, &c., it moves with extreme difficulty in so-called non-conductors such as glass, resin, &c.; (4) electrical phenomena are produced either by the transference of the electric fluid of a body containing more to one containing less, or from its attraction and repulsion when no transference takes place. Electric attractions and repulsions were, however, regarded as differential actions in which the mutual repulsion of the particles of electricity operated, so to speak, in antagonism to the mutual attraction of particles of matter for one another and of particles of electricity for matter. Independently of Aepinus, Henry Cavendish put forward a single-fluid theory of electricity (Phil. Trans., 1771, 61, p. 584), in which he considered it in more precise detail.
Two-fluid Theory.—In the elucidation of electrical phenomena, however, towards the end of the 18th century, a modification of the two-fluid theory seems to have been generally preferred. The notion then formed of the nature of electrification was something as follows:—All bodies were assumed to contain a certain quantity of a so-called neutral fluid made up of equal quantities of positive and negative electricity, which when in this state of combination neutralized one another’s properties. The neutral fluid could, however, be divided up or separated into its two constituents, and these could be accumulated on separate conductors or non-conductors. This view followed from the discovery of the facts of electric induction of J. Canton (1753, 1754). When, for instance, a positively electrified body was found to induce upon another insulated conductor a charge of negative electricity on the side nearest to it, and a charge of positive electricity on the side farthest from it, this was explained by saying that the particles of each of the two electric fluids repelled one another but attracted those of the positive fluid. Hence the operation of the positive charge upon the neutral fluid was to draw towards the positive the negative constituent of the neutral charge and repel to the distant parts of the conductor the positive constituent.
C. A. Coulomb experimentally proved that the law of attraction and repulsion of simple electrified bodies was that the force between them varied inversely as the square of the distance and thus gave mathematical definiteness to the two-fluid hypothesis. It was then assumed that each of the two constituents of the neutral fluid had an atomic structure and that the so-called particles of one of the electric fluids, say positive, repelled similar particles with a force varying inversely as a square of the distance and attracted those of the opposite fluid according to the same law. This fact and hypothesis brought electrical phenomena within the domain of mathematical analysis and, as already mentioned, Laplace, Biot, Poisson, G. A. A. Plana (1781–1846), and later Robert Murphy (1806–1843), made them the subject of their investigations on the mode in which electricity distributes itself on conductors when in equilibrium.
Faraday’s Views.—The two-fluid theory may be said to have held the field until the time when Faraday began his researches on electricity. After he had educated himself by the study of the phenomena of lines of magnetic force in his discoveries on electromagnetic induction, he applied the same conception to electrostatic phenomena, and thus created the notion of lines of electrostatic force and of the important function of the dielectric or non-conductor in sustaining them. Faraday’s notion as to the nature of electrification, therefore, about the middle of the 19th century came to be something as follows:—He considered that the so-called charge of electricity on a conductor was in reality nothing on the conductor or in the conductor itself, but consisted in a state of strain or polarization, or a physical change of some kind in the particles of the dielectric surrounding the conductor, and that it was this physical state in the dielectric which constituted electrification. Since Faraday was well aware that even a good vacuum can act as a dielectric, he recognized that the state he called dielectric polarization could not be wholly dependent upon the presence of gravitative matter, but that there must be an electromagnetic medium of a supermaterial nature. In the 13th series of his Experimental Researches on Electricity he discussed the relation of a vacuum to electricity. Furthermore his electrochemical investigations, and particularly his discovery of the important law of electrolysis, that the movement of a certain quantity of electricity through an electrolyte is always accompanied by the transfer of a certain definite quantity of matter from one electrode to another and the liberation at these electrodes of an equivalent weight of the ions, gave foundation for the idea of a definite atomic charge of electricity. In fact, long previously to Faraday’s electrochemical researches, Sir H. Davy and J. J. Berzelius early in the 19th century had advanced the hypothesis that chemical combination was due to electric attractions between the electric charges carried by chemical atoms. The notion, however, that electricity is atomic in structure was definitely put forward by Hermann von Helmholtz in a well-known Faraday lecture. Helmholtz says: “If we accept the hypothesis that elementary substances are composed of atoms, we cannot well avoid concluding that electricity also is divided into elementary portions which behave like atoms of electricity.”[1] Clerk Maxwell had already used in 1873 the phrase, “a molecule of electricity.”[2] Towards the end of the third quarter of the 19th century it therefore became clear that electricity, whatever be its nature, was associated with atoms of matter in the form of exact multiples of an indivisible minimum electric charge which may be considered to be “Nature’s unit of electricity.” This ultimate unit of electric quantity Professor Johnstone Stoney called an electron.[3] The formulation of electrical theory as far as regards operations in space free from matter was immensely assisted by Maxwell’s mathematical theory. Oliver Heaviside after 1880 rendered much assistance by reducing Maxwell’s mathematical analysis to more compact form and by introducing greater precision into terminology (see his Electrical Papers, 1892). This is perhaps the place to refer also to the great services of Lord Rayleigh to electrical science. Succeeding Maxwell as Cavendish professor of physics at Cambridge in 1880, he soon devoted himself especially to the exact redetermination of the practical electrical units in absolute measure. He followed up the early work of the British Association Committee on electrical units by a fresh determination of the ohm in absolute measure, and in conjunction with other work on the electrochemical equivalent of silver and the absolute electromotive force of the Clark cell may be said to have placed exact electrical measurement on a new basis. He also made great additions to the theory of alternating electric currents, and provided fresh appliances for other electrical measurements (see his Collected Scientific Papers, Cambridge, 1900).
Electro-optics.—For a long time Faraday’s observation on the rotation of the plane of polarized light by heavy glass in a
- ↑ H. von Helmholtz, “On the Modern Development of Faraday’s Conception of Electricity,” Journ. Chem. Soc., 1881, 39, p. 277.
- ↑ See Maxwell’s Electricity and Magnetism, vol. i. p. 350 (2nd ed., 1881).
- ↑ “On the Physical Units of Nature,” Phil. Mag., 1881, [5], 11, p. 381. Also Trans. Roy. Soc. (Dublin, 1891), 4, p. 583.
