brought in contact with DC so as to communicate its electricity to the cylinder*. Now I found that if the wire W was 29 inches long, and in diameter, and its electricity was twice communicated in this manner to the cylinder, the pith balls would separate as much positively as they before did negatively, consequently the cylinder AB and the wires DC and W together, when electrified to such a degree as to make the pith balls separate one diameter, contain as much electricity as the wire W alone does when electrified in the usual degree. The cylinder AB was then removed, and the two glass plates D and E placed under the wire DC in its room, their upper coatings communicating with DC, and their lower coatings with the ground, and the operation performed as before. I found that I was obliged to change the wire W for one of the same thickness, and only 22 inches long, in order that the pith balls should separate the same as before. 360] Therefore the charge of the two plates D and E and the wire DC together is to that of the tin cylinder and wire DC together as the charge of a wire & inch thick and 22 inches long. to that of a wire of the same thickness and 29 inches long, that is, as 1 to 1.26, and consequently, as the charge of the wire DC is but small in comparison of that of the two plates, the charge of the two plates will be to that of the tin cylinder pretty nearly in the same proportion of 1 to 1·26†. Having thus found what proportion the charges of the plates and cylinder bear to each other when electrified in a very weak degree, I tried what proportion they bore with the usual degree of electrification. 361] To this purpose I placed the two plates on the machine represented in fig 20 between M and m in the usual manner, and on the other side I placed a sliding coated plate, and found as usual what size must be given to the coating of this plate that * [See plan at Art. 539.] I believe the true proportion is between that of 1 to 1.28 and that of 1 to 1.37, but as the experiment is not capable of much accuracy, I think it needless to trouble the reader with the computation. [See Art. 666 and Note 25.] the pith balls should just separate positively, and what size must be given to it that they should just separate negatively. I then removed the two plates and suspended the tin cylinder so as to touch the wire Mm, but without touching any other part of the machine, and found what size it was necessary to give to the coating of the sliding plate that the pith balls should separate as before. By this means the charge of the tin cylinder was found to be to that of the two plates as 1:33 to 1. Therefore the charge of the two plates seems to bear pretty nearly the same proportion to that of the cylinder whether the electricity is of the usual strength or very weak. But if we suppose that the electricity spreads 07 inches on [the] surface of glass with the usual degree of electrification, and that it does not spread sensibly with the weak degree of electrification, then the proportion which the charge of the glass plates bears to that of the cylinder should be less with the usual degree of electrification than with the weak one, and that by about part. This difference, however, is not more than what might very well proceed from the error of the experiment. 362] On the whole, I am uncertain whether the charge of a glass plate would really bear a rather less proportion to that of a globe or other body when the electricity is strong than when it is weak, provided the electricity was prevented from spreading on the surfaces as it should seem by these experiments, or whether it was not rather owing partly to the error of the experiment, and partly to there not being so much difference in the distance to which the electricity spreads on the surface of the glass according to the different degree in which it is electrified, as I imagined. If the first of these suppositions is true, I do not know how to reconcile it with the theory, except by supposing that the greater the force with which the plate is electrified the less is the depth to which the electricity penetrates into the glass, or the less is the thickness of the spaces in which we supposed the fluid to be moveable. Though it seemed natural to expect that the electric fluid should penetrate further into the glass, or that the fluid within the glass should move through a greater space when the glass was strongly electrified than when weakly, that is, when the force with which the fluid was impelled was great than when it was small, yet it is not strange that it should be otherwise, as it is very possible that the electric fluid may penetrate with great freedom to a certain depth within the glass, and that no ordinary force shall be able to impel it sensibly further, and in like manner it is very possible that the fluid may be able to move with perfect ease in the space ae (Fig. 27) and yet that no ordinary force shall be able to move the fluid at all beyond that space. But it would be very strange that the fluid should penetrate to a less depth within the glass, or that the fluid within the glass should move through a less space when the glass is strongly electrified than when weakly. 363] The reader perhaps may be tempted from this circumstance to think that the reason of the actual charge of the glass plates so much exceeding their computed charge is not owing to the electric fluid penetrating into the glass, or to any motion of the fluid within the glass, but to some error in the theory. But I think the experiments on the plate of air [Art. 344] form a strong argument in favour of its being owing to the penetration of the electric fluid into, or its motion within the glass, for it appears plainly from these experiments that the electric fluid does not penetrate into the air, and on account of the fluidity of the air it seems very improbable that the electric fluid within the air should be able to move in the manner we supposed it to do within the glass; whereas it appears plainly from Dr Franklin's analysis of the Leyden vial, that the electric fluid does actually penetrate into the glass. Therefore as this excess of the observed charge above the computed does not take place in the plate of air, where it could not do it consistently with the theory, but does in the glass plate, where it may do so consistently with the theory, I think there seems great reason to think that it is not owing to any defect in the theory, but to some such motion of the electricity as we have supposed. 364] I could not find that there was any difference in the proportion which the charge of a glass plate bore to that of another body whether they were electrified positively or negatively*. 365] It was said in Art. [331], that there seemed no reason to think that the charge of the plate D, or of any other of those glass plates was sensibly greater than it would be if the electricity was spread uniformly on their surfaces, whereas the charge of most of the plates of air was found very considerably greater than it would be on that supposition. But this is by no means inconsistent, for according to the first way of accounting for the great excess of the real charge of those plates above the computed, namely supposing that the electricity penetrates into the glass to the depth of of its thickness, the increase of its charge on account of the electricity being not spread uniformly, should be not greater than it would be if the glass was only of its real thickness, and the electricity was unable to penetrate into it at all, and therefore should not be greater than it is in a plate of air in which the thickness is of the diameter, and should therefore in all probability be quite imperceptible. And by Prop. XXXVI. [Art. 170], the increase of charge should hardly be much, if at all, greater according to the second or third way of accounting for this phenomenon. 366] In order to try† whether the charge of coated glass is the same when hot as when cold, I made use of the apparatus in Fig, 28, where ABCba represents a short thermometer tube with a ball BCb blown at the end and another smaller ball near the top. This is filled with mercury as high as the bottom of the upper ball, and placed in an iron vessel FGMN filled with mercury as high as FN. Consequently the ball BCb was coated as a Leyden vial, the mercury within it forming the inside coating, and that in the vessel FGMN the outer one. In trying it, I set the vessel FGMN on the wooden bars of the machine represented in Fig. 20, near the end NP, and dipt a small iron wire bound round the wire Mm into the mercury within the tube, so as to make a communication between the wire Mm and the inside coating, the outside coating, or the mercury in FGMN, being made to communicate with the ground. [Art. 463.] [Art. 556, March 21, 1773. See also Arts. 548, 549, 680.] ર in the Tatratat oster the charge of glass plate hose the proportion to that of another body whether they were electrified pontives of eregstudy For P.116 Forder to try or hither the charge of abated play, is the same when hot as when cold I made use of the appar. in fig.28 where ABC6 a reporting, a that thermom перечить tube with a ball Blb blown at the and & another smaller ball near the top This is filled with of as high as the bottom of the upper ball & placed in iron vessel FGM filled with off as & high as FN conseguently, the ball BCb was charged as a s veal the of within To face p. 180. an |