Full text: Vol. I (1)

NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS. 
545 
tracts it as well as B, and that B also attracts D. Then, in the mixture we have two 
other forces, one connecting A with C, and the other connecting B with D. We may 
express these forces by the symbols AXB, CXD, AXC, BXD. 
The two first may be called maintaining forces, because they tend to keep things in their 
present condition. The forces AXC and BXD may be called divellent, because they 
are conceived to have a tendency to separate A from B, and C from D. This supposition 
is founded on the authority of the general fact of separation of two ingredients by pre 
senting a third substance which has affinity to one of them. 
From this manner of conceiving the subject, it is inferred that if the sum of the forces 
AXC and BXD, exceed that of the forces AXB and CXD, we ſhall have a double ex 
change, and two new compounds. This may happen, therefore, although the attraction 
of A for B ſhould exceéd its attraction for C, provided it do not exceed it so much as 
the attraction of D for B exceeds its attraction for C. 
Since it is a general fact in chemistry, that substances act most powerfully in their 
simple state, it may appear strange that C, when already united with D, ſhould overcome 
the stronger attraction of A for B, which it cannot do alone. This ſhews us, by the way, 
that the prevalence in chemical action depends rather on the manner and concomitant cir 
cumstances of the action, than on the measurable intensity or magnitude of a particular 
force. Dr. Cullen used to represent this chemical fact by the diagram in the margin, 
where the numbers placed between the substances express the supposed attractive forces 
exerted between the substances. This diagram suggests the notion of bodies attached to 
the ends of two rods or levers A D and B C, moveable round their intersection E. Were 
this the case, it is certain that the attraction of A for C, and of B for D, tend to separate 
A from B, and C from D ; and what is afserted above will happen, —the levers will close 
between A C and B D, and A will apply itself to C, and B to D. Dr. Black first em 
ployed this diagram,—but he gave it up, because it suggested a notion not chemical, but 
mechanical. Levers can have no place here. It suggests also an erroneous notion. The 
levers produce the effect, only in consequence of a connection which they establish be 
tween A and D, and between B and C. Now, in by far the greatest number of cases in 
which a double exchange is observed, we know of no such connection. He used to ex 
press the cases more in the stile of chemical phenomena, by faying that, in order to have a 
double exchange, the partiality of D for B must exceed that of A for B. But still this is 
merely a figurative expression of an unknown cause. 
It is not easy to conceive any mode of operation which will clearly produce the ob 
served effect. It confirms, I think, the considerations mentioned in note 21. p. 276. and 
it receives some illustration from the magnetical phenomena mentioned there. 
When we say that a double exchange happens when AXCBXD exceeds 
AXB+CXD, we seem to say something like instruction. But, in truth, it is only an 
inference of this greater partiality from the observed effect. We have generally no other 
32 
VoL. I.
	        
Waiting...

Note to user

Dear user,

In response to current developments in the web technology used by the Goobi viewer, the software no longer supports your browser.

Please use one of the following browsers to display this page correctly.

Thank you.

powered by Goobi viewer