No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
X.—On Wollaston's Argument from the Limitation of the Atmosphere, as to the Finite Divisibility of Matter
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 January 2013
Extract
In the year 1822, Dr Wollaston published a remarkable paper “on the finite extent of the atmosphere.” Its object is to establish, by observations on the motions of certain of the heavenly bodies, that our atmosphere does not extend into free space, and to deduce from this limitation in its extent, the conclusion, that the air necessarily consists of particles “no longer divisible by repulsion of their parts;” i. e. of true atoms. From this there is the further inference, that, “since the law of definite proportions discovered by chemists, is the same for all kinds of matter, whether solid or fluid, or elastic, if it can be ascertained that any one body consists of particles no longer divisible, we then can scarcely doubt that all other bodies are similarly constituted.” In other words, the existence of a limit to the earth's atmosphere is declared to supply a demonstration of the finite divisibility of matter.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , 1845 , pp. 79 - 86
- Copyright
- Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1845
References
page 79 note * Philosophical Transactions, 1822, p. 89.
page 81 note * Introduction to the Atomic Theory, 1831, pp. 103–5.
page 81 note † Supplement to Introduction, &c., 1840, p. 11.
page 81 note ‡ Dumas' assent was entirely negative, but was strongly manifested, and is the more remarkable, that he has directed special attention to the phenomena presented by those gases which combine without undergoing diminution of their volume, as irreconcilable with the idea of the chemical equivalents of these bodies being represented by single atoms, such as Dalton assumed, (Leçons sur la Philosophie Chimique, p. 263). Had this view been carried out and applied to the atmosphere, it would have struck at the root of Wollaston's whole train of reasoning, and would have obviated the necessity of appeal to the questionable views of Poisson, as to the cause of the limitation of the atmosphere. As Whewell's discussion of Wollaston's speculations, which was specially intended to meet the argument of Dumas, has appeared since the latter published his views, it may have led to some modification of his opinion. But that distinguished chemist has not had occasion, so far as I am aware, to refer again to the subject in public; so that, in the meanwhile, I include hinvamong the acknowledged supporters of the intrinsic validity of Wollaston's views.
page 81 note § On the existence of a limit to vaporisation, Phil. Trans., 1826, p. 492.
page 81 note ∥ Elements of Chemistry, pp. 68 and 273.
page 81 note ¶ Elements of Chemistry, 7th edition, p. 207.
page 82 note * Leçons, &c., p. 239.
page 82 note † Supplement to the Introduction to the Atomic Theory, p. 11.
page 82 note ‡ Elements of Chemistry, p. 441.
page 82 note § Leçons, &c., p. 241.
page 82 note ∥ Report of British Association, 1841, p. 79.
page 82 note ¶ Op. cit., p. 77.
page 82 note ** Elements of Chemistry, pp. 15 and 358.
page 83 note * Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, vol. i., p. 420, and Athenæum, 1839, pp. 724-7.