The Physical Sciences in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century: Problems and Sources

Strictly speaking, there was no general theory, as such, but the theories of the separate imponderables all followed a general pattern and were clearly modelled upon one another.

The two-fluid theory, by the end of the eighteenth century, appears to have won the day over Franklin's one-fluid theory. Franklin's theory could not explain why a lack of electric fluid in two masses of ponderable matter should produce repulsion.

Cohen's I. Bernard Franklin and Newton (Philadelphia, 1956) is the starting point for any study of electricity and magnetism in the eighteenth century.

I am deeply indebted to Dr Joseph Agassi of the University of Hong Kong for his most original suggestions on Coulomb. It was he who first called my attention to Coulomb's views on the interaction (or lack thereof) of imponderable fluids.

van Swinden J. H. , Recueil de mémoires sur l'analogie de l'electricité et du magnétisme, couronnés et publié par l'Académie de Bavière, traduits du Latin et de l'Allemand, augmentés de notes, et de quelques dissertations nouvelles (3 vols., La Haye, 1784).

Ibid., i, 254 and 267.

Coulomb's mémoires on electrostatic and magnetic attraction are most conveniently consulted in Collection de mémoires relatifs à la physique publiés par la Société française de Physique; Tome i, Mémoires de Coulomb (Paris, 1884).

Joseph Priestley was one of the few ‘electricians’ in the eighteenth century to suggest a chemical role for electricity. See his The history and present state of electricity (3rd ed., 2 vols., London, 1775), ii, 79. Dr Robert Schofield of the Case Institute of Technology is preparing an eagerly awaited biography of Priestley.

Both men are being worked upon, but I am sure there is still room for other researches. Fourier is being studied by Dr J. R. Ravetz of the University of Leeds; Carnot is the subject of research of Professor Milton Kerker of Clarkson Institute of Technology, Potsdam, N.Y.

“On the Electricity excited by the mere Contact of conducting Substances of different kinds. In a Letter from Mr Alexander Volta, F.R.S., Professor of Natural Philosophy in the University of Pavia, to the Rt. Hon. Sir Joseph Banks, Bart., K.B., P.R.S., Read June 26, 1800”, Philosophical transactions, xc (1800), pt. ii.

The only full-scale biography of which I am aware is by Polvani Giovanni , Alessandro Volta (Pisa, 1942). Because of the date of publication, this work is fairly rare and, as a rather pious tribute to a famed countryman, it tends to be somewhat uncritical. It certainly cannot be described as a definitive work.

For a summary account of Faraday's work see Williams L. Pearce , “Faraday and the structure of matter”. Contemporary physics, ii (1960) and “Michael Faraday and the evolution of the concept of the electric and magnetic fields”, Nature, clxxxvii (1960) and Proceedings of the Royal Institution, xxxviii (1960). The subject is treated in greater detail in my forthcoming Michael Faraday, a biography.

Davy J. (editor), The collected works of Sir Humphry Davy, Bart. (9 vols., London, 1839–40), viii, 348.

See his Metaphysiche Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft (Riga, 1786, and many later editions), and the Kritik der reinen Vernunft (many editions). Dr Mary Hesse's recent book, Forces and Fields (London, 1961), gives an excellent account of Kant's ideas on forces.

It would be interesting to discover why the influence of Kant was so slight in France and Italy. Was it because of his turgid style? or because of his essentially Protestant point of view? or simply because the Latin world dismissed the Germans as barbarians?.

A step in this direction has been taken by Gerhard Hennemann whose Naturphilosophie im 19 Jahrhundert (Freiburg and Munich, 1959) can be recommended. This is but a slight essay, however, and the whole area should be explored in depth.

There are many studies, such as René Wellek's Kant in England (Princeton, 1931), which describe the importation of Kant's philosophy to England, but none that deals with Kant's influence on English science. Muirhead J. H. in his Coleridge as philosopher (London, 1930) devotes a chapter to science, but deals only summarily with the problem.

Two biographies of Humphry Davy are in preparation. One is by Sir Harold Hartley, F.R.S., and the other by Professor J. Z. Fullmer of Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Graves R. P. , Life of Sir William Rowan Hamilton (3 vols., Dublin and London, 1882–89).

A recent article by Russell Colin A. , “The electrochemical theory of Sir Humphry Davy, pts. I and II” (Annals of science, xv, 1959, 1 sqq.) deals with this subject. It relies exclusively on printed sources. As I shall make clear at the end of this article, I feel this is inadequate. It is most certainly so when Davy is concerned. Injured by his flights of fancy when still a youth, Davy was careful ever after to conceal his speculations. These can be found only in the notebooks now at the Royal Institution.

Avogadro A. , “Second mémoir sur l'électricité”, Journal de physique, lxv (1807), 130 sqq.

Again, it must be noted that no first-rate biography of Dalton exists. The task of writing one is complicated by the fact that the archives of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society were destroyed during World War II. Mr Frank Greenaway of the Science Museum, South Kensington, has written an excellent monograph on the materials for and problems of a life of Dalton, “The biographical approach to John Dalton”, Memoirs of the Manchester Literary & Philosophical Society, c (1958–59). One can hope that he, as the person most clearly qualified to undertake the task, will present us with one.

Nash Leonard K. , “The origin of Dalton's chemical atomic theory”, Isis, xlvii (1956), 101 sqq.

Buchdahl G. , “Sources of scepticism in atomic theory”, British journal for the philosophy of science, x (1960), 120 sqq.

In an article entitled “Boscovich and the British chemists”, in a volume on Boscovich edited by Whyte L. L. (London, 1961), I have attempted to trace the influence of Boscovich's atomic views on British chemists from Joseph Priestley through Michael Faraday.

See n. 12.

Private communication.

“Energy conservation as an example of simultaneous discovery” in Clagett M. (editor), Critical problems in the history of science (Madison, Wisc., 1959).

See, for example, Biot J. B. , “Sur une nouvelle propriété qu'acquirent les lames de verre quand elles executent des vibrations longitudinales”, Annales de chimie, xiii (1820), 151. The history of sound is one of the most neglected areas in the history of science. A study of the work of such men as Chladni, Savart, Oersted, Biot and Faraday from the standpoint of the use of sound as a molecular probe would be of considerable value.