Part 24

With respect to your letters on electricity, * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *. Your hypothesis in particular for explaining the phenomena of lightning is very ingenious. That some clouds are highly charged with electrical fire, and that their communicating it to those that have less, to mountains and other eminencies, makes it visible and audible, when it is denominated lightning and thunder, is highly probable: but that the sea, which you suppose the grand source of it, can collect it, I think admits of a doubt: for though the sea be composed of salt and water, an electric _per se_ and non-electric, and though the friction of electrics _per se_ and non-electrics, will collect that fire, yet it is only under certain circumstances, which water will not admit. For it seems necessary, that the electrics _per se_ and non-electrics rubbing one another, should be of such substances as will not adhere to, or incorporate with each other. Thus a glass or sulphur sphere turned in water, and so a friction between them, will not collect any fire; nor, I suppose, would a sphere of salt revolving in water; the water adhering to, or incorporating with those electrics _per se_. But granting that the friction between salt and water would collect the electrical fire, that fire, being so extremely subtle and active, would be immediately communicated, either to those lower parts of the sea from which it was drawn, and so only perform quick revolutions; or be communicated to the adjacent islands or continent, and so be diffused instantaneously through the general mass of the earth. I say instantaneously, for the greatest distances we can conceive within the limits of our globe, even that of the two most opposite points, it will take no sensible time in passing through: and therefore it seems a little difficult to conceive how there can be any accumulation of the electrical fire upon the surface of the sea or how the vapours arising from the sea should have a greater share of that fire than other vapours.

That the progress of the electrical fire is so amazingly swift, seems evident from an experiment you yourself (not out of choice) made, when two or three large glass jars were discharged through your body. You neither heard the crack, was sensible of the stroke, nor, which is more extraordinary, saw the light; which gave you just reason to conclude, that it was swifter than sound, than animal sensation, and even light itself. Now light (as astronomers have demonstrated) is about six minutes passing from the sun to the earth; a distance, they say, of more than eighty millions of miles. The greatest rectilinear distance within the compass of the earth is about eight thousand miles, equal to its diameter. Supposing then, that the velocity of the electric fire be the same as that of light, it will go through a space equal to the earth's diameter in about 2/60 of one second of a minute. It seems inconceivable then, that it should be accumulated upon the sea, in its present state, which, as it is a non-electric, must give the fire an instantaneous passage to the neighbouring shores, and they convey it to the general mass of the earth. But such accumulation seems still more inconceivable when the electrical fire has but a few feet depth of water to penetrate, to return to the place from whence it is supposed to be collected.

Your thoughts upon these remarks I shall receive with a great deal of pleasure. I take notice that in the printed copies of your letters several things are wanting which are in the manuscript you sent me. I understand by your son, that you had writ, or was writing, a paper on the effect of the electrical fire on loadstones, needles, &c. which I would ask the favour of a copy of, as well as of any other papers on electricity, written since I had the manuscript, for which I repeat my obligations to you.

I am, &c.

J. B.

FOOTNOTES:

[72] Mr. Badouin. _Editor._

[73] This is most easily observed in large strong sparks taken at some inches distance.

TO J. B. AT BOSTON.

_Observations on the Subjects of the preceding Letter.--Reasons for supposing the Sea to be the grand source of Lightning.--Reasons for doubting this hypothesis.--Improvement in a Globe for raising the Electric Fire._

Read at the Royal Society, May 27, 1756.

_Philadelphia, Jan. 24, 1752._

SIR,

I am glad to learn, by your favour of the 21st past, that Mr. Kinnersley's lectures have been acceptable to the gentlemen of Boston, and are like to prove serviceable to himself.

I thank you for the countenance and encouragement you have so kindly afforded my fellow-citizen.

I send you enclosed an extract of a letter containing the substance of what I observed concerning the communication of magnetism to needles by electricity. The minutes I took at the time of the experiments are mislaid. I am very little acquainted with the nature of magnetism. Dr. Gawin Knight, inventor of the steel magnets, has wrote largely on that subject, but I have not yet had leisure to peruse his writings with the attention necessary to become master of his doctrine.

Your explication of the crooked direction of lightning appears to me both ingenious and solid. When we can account as satisfactorily for the electrification of clouds, I think that branch of natural philosophy will be nearly complete.

The air, undoubtedly, obstructs the motion of the electric fluid. Dry air prevents the dissipation of an electric atmosphere, the denser the more, as in cold weather. I question whether such an atmosphere can be retained by a body _in vacuo_. A common electrical phial requires a non-electric communication from the wire to every part of the charged glass; otherwise, being dry and clean, and filled with air only, it charges slowly, and discharges gradually, by sparks, without a shock: but, exhausted of air, the communication is so open and free between the inserted wire and surface of the glass, that it charges as readily, and shocks as smartly as if filled with water: and I doubt not, but that in the experiment you propose, the sparks would not only be near strait _in vacuo_, but strike at a greater distance than in the open air, though perhaps there would not be a loud explosion. As soon as I have a little leisure, I will make the experiment, and send you the result.

My supposition, that the sea might possibly be the grand source of lightning, arose from the common observation of its luminous appearance in the night, on the least motion; an appearance never observed in fresh water. Then I knew that the electric fluid may be pumped up out of the earth, by the friction of a glass globe, on a non-electric cushion; and that, notwithstanding the surprising activity and swiftness of that fluid, and the non-electric communication between all parts of the cushion and the earth, yet quantities would be snatched up by the revolving surface of the globe, thrown on the prime conductor, and dissipated in air. How this was done, and why that subtle active spirit did not immediately return again from the globe, into some part or other of the cushion, and so into the earth, was difficult to conceive; but whether from its being opposed by a current setting upwards to the cushion, or from whatever other cause, that it did not so return was an evident fact. Then I considered the separate particles of water as so many hard spherules, capable of touching the salt only in points, and imagined a particle of salt could therefore no more be wet by a particle of water, than a globe by a cushion; that there might therefore be such a friction between these originally constituent particles of salt and water, as in a sea of globes and cushions; that each particle of water on the surface might obtain from the common mass, some particles of the universally diffused, much finer, and more subtle electric fluid, and forming to itself an atmosphere of those particles, be repelled from the then generally electrified surface of the sea, and fly away with them into the air. I thought too, that possibly the great mixture of particles electric _per se_, in the ocean water, might, in some degree, impede the swift motion and dissipation of the electric fluid, through it to the shores, &c.--But having since found, that salt in the water of an electric phial does not lessen the shock; and having endeavoured in vain to produce that luminous appearance from a mixture of salt and water agitated; and observed, that even the sea-water will not produce it after some hours standing in a bottle; I suspect it to proceed from some principle yet unknown to us (which I would gladly make some experiments to discover, if I lived near the sea) and I grow more doubtful of my former supposition, and more ready to allow weight to that objection (drawn from the activity of the electric fluid, and the readiness of water to conduct) which you have indeed stated with great strength and clearness.

In the mean time, before we part with this hypothesis, let us think what to substitute in its place. I have sometimes queried whether the friction of the air, an electric _per se_, in violent winds, among trees, and against the surface of the earth, might not pump up, as so many glass globes, quantities of the electric fluid, which the rising vapours might receive from the air, and retain in the clouds they form? on which I should be glad to have your sentiments. An ingenious friend of mine supposes the land-clouds more likely to be electrified than the sea-clouds. I send his letter for your perusal, which please to return me.

I have wrote nothing lately on electricity, nor observed any thing new that is material, my time being much taken up with other affairs. Yesterday I discharged four jars through a fine wire, tied up between two strips of glass: the wire was in part melted, and the rest broke into small pieces, from half an inch long, to half a quarter of an inch. My globe raises the electric fire with greater ease, in much greater quantities, by the means of a wire extended from the cushion, to the iron pin of a pump handle behind my house, which communicates by the pump spear with the water in the well.

By this post I send to ****, who is curious in that way, some meteorological observations and conjectures, and desire him to communicate them to you, as they may afford you some amusement, and I know you will look over them with a candid eye. By throwing our occasional thoughts on paper, we more readily discover the defects of our opinions, or we digest them better and find new arguments to support them. This I sometimes practise: but such pieces are fit only to be seen by friends.

I am, &c.

B. FRANKLIN.

FROM J. B. ESQ. OF BOSTON, TO BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, ESQ. AT PHILADELPHIA.

_Effect of Lightning on Captain Waddel's Compass, and the Dutch Church at New York._

Read at the Royal Society, June 3, 1756.

_Boston, March 2, 1752._

SIR,

I have received your favour of the 24th of January past, inclosing an extract from your letter to Mr. Collinson, and ****'s letter to yourself, which I have read with a great deal of pleasure, and am much obliged to you for. Your extract confirms a correction Mr. Kinnersley made a few days ago, of a mistake I was under respecting the polarity given to needles by the electrical fire, "that the end which receives the fire always points north;" and, "that the needle being situated east and west, will not have a polar direction." You find, however, the polarity strongest when the needle is shocked lying north and south; weakest when lying east and west; which makes it probable that the communicated magnetism is less, as the needle varies from a north and south situation. As to the needle of Captain Waddel's compass, if its polarity was reversed by the lightning, the effect of lightning and electricity, in regard of that, seems dissimilar; for a magnetic needle in a north and south situation (as the compass needle was) instead of having its power reversed, or even diminished, would have it confirmed or increased by the electric fire. But perhaps the lightning communicated to some nails in the binnacle (where the compass is placed) the magnetic virtue, which might disturb the compass.

This I have heard was the case; if so, the seeming dissimilarity vanishes: but this remarkable circumstance (if it took place) I should think would not be omitted in Captain Waddel's account.

I am very much pleased that the explication I sent you, of the crooked direction of lightning, meets with your approbation.

As to your supposition about the source of lightning, the luminous appearance of the sea in the night, and the similitude between the friction of the particles of salt and water, as you considered them in their original separate state, and the friction of the globe and cushion, very naturally led you to the ocean, as the grand source of lightning: but the activity of lightning, or the electric element, and the fitness of water to conduct it, together with the experiments you mention of salt and water, seem to make against it, and to prepare the way for some other hypothesis. Accordingly you propose a new one, which is very curious, and not so liable, I think, to objections as the former. But there is not as yet, I believe, a sufficient variety of experiments to establish any theory, though this seems the most hopeful of any I have heard of.

The effect which the discharge of your four glass jars had upon a fine wire, tied between two strips of glass, puts me in mind of a very similar one of lightning, that I observed at New-York, October, 1750, a few days after I left Philadelphia. In company with a number of gentlemen, I went to take a view of the city from the Dutch church steeple, in which is a clock about twenty or twenty-five feet below the bell. From the clock went a wire through two floors, to the clock-hammer near the bell, the holes in the floor for the wire being perhaps about a quarter of an inch diameter. We were told, that in the spring of 1750, the lightning struck the clock hammer, and descended along the wire to the clock, melting in its way several spots of the wire, from three to nine inches long, through one-third of its substance, till coming within a few feet of the lower end, it melted the wire quite through, in several places, so that it fell down in several pieces; which spots and pieces we saw. When it got to the end of the wire, it flew off to the hinge of a door, shattered the door, and dissipated. In its passage through the holes of the floors it did not do the least damage, which evidences that wire is a good conductor of lightning (as it is of electricity) provided it be substantial enough, and might, in this case, had it been continued to the earth, have conducted it without damaging the building.[74]

Your information about your globe's raising the electric fire in greater quantities, by means of a wire extended from the cushion to the earth, will enable me, I hope, to remedy a great inconvenience I have been under, to collect the fire with the electrifying glass I use, which is fixed in a very dry room, three stories from the ground. When you send your meteorological observations to ****, I hope I shall have the pleasure of seeing them.

I am, &c.

J. B.

FOOTNOTE:

[74] The wire mentioned in this account was re-placed by a small brass chain. In the summer of 1763, the lightning again struck that steeple, and from the clock-hammer near the bell, it pursued the chain as it had before done the wire, went off to the same hinge, and again shattered the same door. In its passage through the same holes of the same floors, it did no damage to the floors, nor to the building during the whole extent of the chain. But the chain itself was destroyed, being partly scattered about in fragments of two or three links melted and stuck together, and partly blown up or reduced to smoke, and dissipated. [See an account of the same effect of lightning on a wire at Newbury, p. 311.] The steeple, when repaired, was guarded by an iron conductor, or rod, extending from the foot of the vane-spindle down the outside of the building, into the earth. The newspapers have mentioned, that in 1765, the lightning fell a third time on the same steeple, and was safely conducted by the rod; but the particulars are not come to hand.

_Proposal of an Experiment to measure the Time taken up by an Electric Spark, in moving through any given Space. By J. A.[75] Esq. of New-York._

Read at the Royal Society, Dec 26, 1756.

If I remember right, the Royal Society made one experiment to discover the velocity of the electric fire, by a wire of about four miles in length, supported by silk, and by turning it forwards and backwards in a field, so that the beginning and end of the wire were at only the distance of two people, the one holding the Leyden bottle and the beginning of the wire, and the other holding the end of the wire and touching the ring of the bottle; but by this experiment no discovery was made, except that the velocity was extremely quick.

As water is a conductor as well as metals, it is to be considered whether the velocity of the electric fire might not be discovered by means of water; whether a river, or lake, or sea, may not be made part of the circuit through which the electric fire passes? instead of the circuit all of wire, as in the above experiment.

Whether in a river, lake, or sea, the electric fire will not dissipate and not return to the bottle? or, will it proceed in strait lines through the water the shortest courses possible back to the bottle?

If the last, then suppose one brook that falls into Delaware doth head very near to a brook that falls into Schuylkil, and let a wire be stretched and supported as before, from the head of the one brook to the head of the other, and let the one end communicate with the water, and let one person stand in the other brook, holding the Leyden bottle, and let another person hold that end of the wire not in the water, and touch the ring of the bottle.--If the electric fire will go as in the last question, then will it go down the one brook to Delaware or Schuylkill, and down one of them to their meeting, and up the other and the other brook; the time of its doing this may possibly be observable, and the further upwards the brooks are chosen, the more observable it would be.

Should this be not observable, then suppose the two brooks falling into Sasquehana and Delaware, and proceeding as before, the electric fire may, by that means, make a circuit round the North Cape of Virginia, and go many hundreds of miles, and in doing that, it would seem it must take some observable time.

If still no observable time is found in that experiment, then suppose the brooks falling the one into the Ohio, and the other into Sasquehana, or Potomack, in that the electric fire would have a circuit of some thousands of miles to go down Ohio to Mississippi, to the Bay of Mexico, round Florida, and round the South Cape of Virginia; which, I think, would give some observable time, and discover exactly the velocity.

But if the electric fire dissipates, or weakens in the water, as I fear it does, these experiments will not answer.

_Answer to the foregoing_.

Read at the Royal Society, Dec. 25, 1756.

Suppose a tube of any length open at both ends, and containing a moveable wire of just the same length, that fills its bore. If I attempt to introduce the end of another wire into the same tube, it must be done by pushing forward the wire it already contains; and the instant I press and move one end of that wire, the other end is also moved; and in introducing one inch of the same wire, I extrude, at the same time, an inch of the first, from the other end of the tube.

If the tube be filled with water, and I inject an additional inch of water at one end, I force out an equal quantity at the other, in the very same instant.

And the water forced out at one end of the tube is not the very same water that was forced in at the other end at the same time, it was only in motion at the same time.

The long wire, made use of in the experiment to discover the velocity of the electric fluid, is itself filled with what we call its natural quantity of that fluid, before the hook of the Leyden bottle is applied to one end of it.

The outside of the bottle being at the time of such application in contact with the other end of the wire, the whole quantity of electric fluid contained in the wire is, probably, put in motion at once.

For at the instant the hook, connected with the inside of the bottle, _gives out_; the coating, or outside of the bottle, _draws in_ a portion of that fluid.

If such long wire contains precisely the quantity that the outside of the bottle demands, the whole will move out of the wire to the outside of the bottle, and the over quantity which the inside of the bottle contained, being exactly equal, will flow into the wire, and remain there, in the place of the quantity the wire had just parted with to the outside of the bottle.

But if the wire be so long as that one-tenth (suppose) of its natural quantity is sufficient to supply what the outside of the bottle demands, in such case the outside will only receive what is contained in one-tenth of the wire's length, from the end next to it; though the whole will move so as to make room at the other end for an equal quantity issuing, at the same time, from the inside of the bottle.

So that this experiment only shews the extreme facility with which the electric fluid moves in metal; it can never determine the velocity.

And, therefore, the proposed experiment (though well imagined, and very ingenious) of sending the spark round through a vast length of space, by the waters of Susquehannah, or Potowmack, and Ohio, would not afford the satisfaction desired, though we could be sure that the motion of the electric fluid would be in that tract, and not under ground in the wet earth by the shortest way.

B. FRANKLIN.

FOOTNOTE:

[75] James Alexander. _Editor._

FROM MR. KINNERSLEY TO B. FRANKLIN, ESQ.

_Experiments on boiling Water, and Glass heated by boiling Water.--Doctrine of Repulsion in electrised Bodies doubted.--Electricity of the Atmosphere at different Heights.--Electrical Horse-race.--Electrical Thermometer.--In what Cases the electrical Fire produces Heat.--Wire lengthened by Electricity.--Good Effect of a Rod on the House of Mr. West, of Philadelphia._

_Philadelphia, March 12, 1761._

SIR,

Having lately made the following experiments, I very chearfully communicate them, in hopes of giving you some degree of pleasure, and exciting you to further explore your favorite, but not quite exhausted subject, _electricity_.

I placed myself on an electric stand, and, being well electrised, threw my hat to an unelectrised person, at a considerable distance, on another stand, and found that the hat carried some of the electricity with it; for, upon going immediately to the person who received it, and holding a flaxen thread near him, I perceived he was electrised sufficiently to attract the thread.

I then suspended, by silk, a broad plate of metal, and electrised some boiling water under it at about four feet distance, expecting that the vapour, which ascended plentifully to the plate, would, upon the principle of the foregoing experiment, carry up some of the electricity with it; but was at length fully convinced, by several repeated trials, that it left all its share thereof behind. This I know not how to account for; but does it not seem to corroborate your hypothesis, That the vapours of which the clouds are formed, leave their share of electricity behind, in the common stock, and ascend in the negative state?