THE NEW UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS AT STRASSBURG.
The buildings of the University of Strassburg are arranged in two groups; one in the northern and the other in the southern part of the city. All the buildings of the medical department were erected in the neighborhood of the hospital, which is located between the south wall of the city and the River Ill.
In front of the old "Fischerthor," or Fishergate, the college house, or college building proper, in which are located the offices, lecture rooms, etc., was erected. A front perspective view of this building is shown in the lower part of the annexed cut, taken from the Illustrirte Zeitung. Behind this main building, and between the Universitäts and Goethe Strasse, the buildings of the Chemical Institute, the Physical Institute, with its tower; the Botanical Institute, with the gardens and hothouses, and the Astronomical Institute, with its observatory and movable dome, are located. These buildings were designed by the architects Hermann, Eggert, Brion, and Salomon, all of Strassburg.
GENERAL VIEW OF THE STRASSBURG UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS.
THE COLLEGE HOUSE OF THE STRASSBURG UNIVERSITY.
The main building was designed by Prof. Warth, of Karlsruhe, and the style of the same is a noble Italian renaisance of the early period. Upon a base of red sandstone the basement is erected in freestone rustic masonry, upon which the first story is erected in smooth stone with conspicuous joints. The top story is constructed with arched windows separated by Ionic columns or pilasters. The central portion, which projects from the front of the building, has a grand staircase and two corner pavilions. The upper part of the central portion is constructed with fluted Corinthian columns, between which niches are provided, in which busts of the ideal representatives of the faculties are placed, viz., Homer, Paulus, Solon, Hippocrates, Aristotle, and Archimedes. Above the cornice, in the tympanum, is placed a group, of which Athene, with the torch of science, is the main figure. In the niches in the pavilions at the corners of the middle portion are the statues of Germania and Argentina, the representative of the free city of Strassburg. The pavilions at the ends of the building are ornamented by thirty-six statues of German scientists. The middle portion of the building directly beyond the grand staircase is occupied by a large open court, having a rich glass roof. The left part of the lower story is divided into lecture rooms, and the right side into rooms for the officers, etc. The collections are in the upper story, and the chapel, or main hall, is in the middle of the building.
THE WAVE THEORY OF LIGHT.[1]
By Sir William Thomson, F.R.S., LL.D., etc.
The subject upon which I am to speak to you this evening is happily for me not new in Philadelphia. The beautiful lectures on light which were given several years ago by President Morton, of the Stevens Institute, and the succession of lectures on the same subject so admirably illustrated by Prof. Tyndall, which many now present have heard, have fully prepared you for anything I can tell you this evening in respect to the wave theory of light.
It is indeed my humble part to bring before you some mathematical and dynamical details of this great theory. I cannot have the pleasure of illustrating them to you by anything comparable with the splendid and instructive experiments which many of you have already seen. It is satisfactory to me to know that so many of you now present are so thoroughly prepared to understand anything I can say, that those who have seen the experiments will not feel their absence at this time. At the same time I wish to make them intelligible to those who have not had the advantages to be gained by a systematic course of lectures. I must say in the first place, without further preface, as time is short and the subject is long, simply that sound and light are both due to vibrations propagated in the manner of waves; and I shall endeavor in the first place to define the manner of propagation and mode of motion that constitute those two subjects of our senses, the sense of sound and the sense of light.
Each is due to vibrations. The vibrations of light differ widely from the vibrations of sound. Something that I can tell you more easily than anything in the way of dynamics or mathematics respecting the two classes of vibrations is, that there is a great difference in the frequency of the vibrations of light when compared with the frequency of the vibrations of sound. The term "frequency," applied to vibrations, is a convenient term, applied by Lord Rayleigh in his book on sound to a definite number of full vibrations of a vibrating body per unit of time. Consider, then, in respect to sound, the frequency of the vibrations of notes, which you all know in music represented by letters, and by the syllables for singing the do, re, mi, etc. The notes of the modern scale correspond to different frequencies of vibrations. A certain note and the octave above it correspond to a certain number of vibrations per second and double that number.
I may explain in the first place conveniently the note called "C;" I mean the middle "C." I believe it is the C of the tenor voice, that most nearly approaches the tones used in speaking. That note corresponds to two hundred and fifty-six full vibrations per second, two hundred and fifty-six times to and fro per second of time.
Think of one vibration per second of time. The seconds pendulum of the clock performs one vibration in two seconds, or a half vibration in one direction per second. Take a 10-inch pendulum of a drawing-room clock, which vibrates twice as fast as the pendulum of an ordinary eight-day clock, and it gives a vibration of one per second, a full period of one per second to and fro. Now think of three vibrations per second. I can move my hand three times per second easily, and by a violent effort I can move it to and fro five times per second. With four times as great force, if I could apply it, I could move it twice five times per second.
Let us think, then, of an exceedingly muscular arm that would cause it to vibrate ten times per second, that is, ten times to the left and ten times to the right. Think of twice ten times, that is, twenty times per second, which would require four times as much force; three times ten, or thirty times a second, which require nine times as much force. If a person were nine times as strong as the most muscular arm can be, he could vibrate his hand to and fro thirty times per second, and without any other musical instrument could make a musical note by the movement of his hand which would correspond to one of the pedal notes of an organ.
If you want to know the length of a pedal pipe, you can calculate it in this way. There are some numbers you must remember, and one of them is this. You, in this country, are subjected to the British insularity in weights and measures; you use the foot and inch and yard. I am obliged to use that system, but I apologize to you for doing so, because it is so inconvenient, and I hope all Americans will do everything in their power to introduce the French metrical system. I hope the evil action performed by an English minister whose name I need not mention, because I do not wish to throw obloquy on any one, may be remedied. He abrogated a useful rule, which for a short time was followed and which I hope will soon be again enjoined, that the French metrical system be taught in all our national schools. I do not know how it is in America. The school system seems to be very admirable, and I hope the teaching of the metrical system will not be let slip in the American schools any more than the use of the globes.
I say this seriously. I do not think any one knows how seriously I speak of it. I look upon our English system as a wickedly brain-destroying piece of bondage under which we suffer. The reason why we continue to use it is the imaginary difficulty of making a change, and nothing else; but I do not think that in America any such difficulty should stand in the way of adopting so splendidly useful a reform.
I know the velocity of sound in feet per second. If I remember rightly, it is 1,089 feet per second in dry air at the freezing point, and 1,115 feet per second in air of what we call moderate temperature, 59 or 60 degrees (I do not know whether that temperature is ever attained in Philadelphia or not; I have had no experience of it, but people tell me it is sometimes 59 or 60 degrees in Philadelphia, and I believe them); in round numbers let us call it 1,000 feet per second. Sometimes we call it a thousand musical feet per second, it saves trouble in calculating the length of organ pipes; the time of vibration in an organ pipe is the time it takes a vibration to run from one end to the other and back. In an organ pipe 500 feet long the period would be one per second; in an organ pipe 10 feet long the period would be 50 per second; in an organ pipe 20 feet long the period would be 25 per second at the same rate. Thus 25 per second and 50 per second of frequencies correspond to the periods of organ pipes of 20 feet and 10 feet.
The period of vibration of an organ pipe, open at both ends, is approximately the time it takes sound to travel from one end to the other and back. You remember that the velocity in dry air in a pipe 10 feet long is a little more than 50 periods per second; going up to 256 periods per second, the vibrations correspond to those of a pipe 2 feet long. Let us take 512 periods per second; that corresponds to a pipe about a foot long. In a flute, open at both ends, the holes are so arranged that the length of the sound wave is about 1 foot, for one of the chief "open notes." Higher musical notes correspond to greater and greater frequency of vibration, viz., 1,000, 2,000, 4,000 vibrations per second; 4,000 vibrations per second correspond to a piccolo flute of exceedingly small length; it would be but one and a half inches long. Think of a note from a little dog call, or other whistle one and a half inches long, open at both ends, or from a little key having a tube three-quarters of an inch long, closed at one end; you will then have 4,000 vibrations per second.
A wave length of sound is the distance traversed in the period of vibration. I will illustrate what the vibrations of sound are by this condensation traveling along our picture on the screen. Alternate condensations and rarefactions of the air are made continuously by a sounding body. When I pass my hand vigorously in one direction, the air before it becomes dense, and the air on the other side becomes rarefied. When I move it in the other direction, these things become reversed; there is a spreading out of condensation from the place where my hand moves in one direction and then in the reverse. Each condensation is succeeded by a rarefaction. Rarefaction succeeds condensation at an interval of one-half what we call "wave lengths." Condensation succeeds condensation at the full interval of what we call wave lengths.
We have here these luminous particles on this scale,[2] representing portions of the air close together, dense; a little higher up, portions of air less dense. I now slowly turn the handle of the apparatus in the lantern, and you see the luminous sectors showing condensation traveling slowly upward on the screen; now you have another condensation; making one wave length.
This picture or chart represents a wave length of four feet. It represents a wave of sound four feet long. The fourth part of a thousand is 250. What we see now of the actual scale represents the lower note C of the tenor voice. The air from the mouth of a singer is alternately condensed and rarefied just as you see here.
But that process shoots forward at the rate of one thousand feet per second; the exact period of the motion is 256 vibrations per second for the actual case before you. Follow one particle of the air forming part of a sound wave, as represented by these moving spots of light on the screen; now it goes down, then another portion goes down rapidly; now it stops going down; now it begins to go up; now it goes down and up again.
As the maximum of condensation is approached, it is going up with diminishing maximum velocity. The maximum of rarefaction has now reached it, and the particle stops going up and begins to move down. When it is of mean density the particles are moving with maximum velocity, one way or the other. You can easily follow these motions, and you will see that each particle moves to and fro, and the thing that we call condensation travels along.
I shall show the distinction between these vibrations and the vibrations of light. Here is the fixed appearance of the particles when displaced but not in motion. You can imagine particles of something, the thing whose motion constitutes light. This thing we call the luminiferous ether. That is the only substance we are confident of in dynamics. One thing we are sure of, and that is the reality and substantiality of the luminiferous ether. This instrument is merely a method of giving motion to a diagram designed for the purpose of illustrating wave motion of light. I will show you the same thing in a fixed diagram, but this arrangement shows the mode of motion.
Now follow the motion of each particle. This represents a particle of the luminiferous ether, moving at the greatest speed when it is at the middle position.
You see two modes of vibration,[3] sound and light now moving together—the traveling of the wave of condensation and rarefaction, and the traveling of the wave of transverse displacement. Note the direction of propagation. Here it is from your left to your right, as you look at it. Look at the motion when made faster. We have now the direction reversed. The propagation of the wave is from right to left, again the propagation of the wave is from left to right; each particle moves perpendicularly to the line of propagation.
I have given you an illustration of the vibration of sound waves, but I must tell you that the movement illustrating the condensation and rarefaction represented in that moving diagram are necessarily very much exaggerated to let the motion be perceptible, whereas the greatest condensation in actual sound motion is not more than one or two per cent, or a small fraction of a per cent. Except that the amount of condensation was exaggerated in the diagram for sound, you have a correct representation of what actually takes in the low note C.
On the other hand, in the moving diagram representing light waves what had we? We had a great exaggeration of the inclination of the line of particles. You must first imagine a line of particles in a straight line, and then you must imagine them disturbed into a wave curve, the shape of the curve corresponding to the disturbance. Having seen what the propagation of the wave is, look at this diagram and then look at that one. This, in light, corresponds to the different sounds I spoke of at first. The wave length of light is the distance from crest to crest of the wave, or from hollow to hollow. I speak of crests and hollows, because we have a diagram of ups and downs as the diagram is placed.
Waves of Red Light.
Waves of Violet Light.
Here, then, you have a wave length.[4] In this lower diagram you have the wave length of violet light. It is but one-half the length of the upper wave of red light; the period of vibration is but half as long. Now, on an enormous scale, exaggerated not only as to slope, but immensely magnified as to wave length, we have an illustration of the waves of light. The drawing marked "red" corresponds to red light, and this lower diagram corresponds to violet light. The upper curve really corresponds to something a little below the red ray of light in the spectrum, and the lower curve to something beyond the violet light. The variation in length between the most extreme rays is in the proportion of four and a half of red to eight of the violet, instead of four and eight; the red waves are nearly as one to two of the violet.
To make a comparison between the number of vibrations for each wave of sound and the number of vibrations constituting light waves, I may say that 30 vibrations per second is about the smallest number which will produce a musical sound; 50 per second give one of the grave pedal notes of an organ, 100 or 200 per second give the low notes of the bass voice, higher notes with 250 per second, 300 per second, 1,000, 4,000, up to 8,000 per second, give about the shrillest notes audible to the human ear.
Instead of the numbers, which we have, say, in the most commonly used part of the musical scale, i. e., from 200 or 300 to 600 or 700 per second, we have millions and millions of vibrations per second in light waves; that is to say, 400 million million per second, instead of 400 per second. That number of vibrations is performed when we have red light produced.
An exhibition of red light traveling through space from the remotest star is due to the propagation by waves or vibrations, in which each individual particle of the transmitting medium vibrates to and fro 400 million million times in a second.
Some people say they cannot understand a million million. Those people cannot understand that twice two makes four. That is the way I put it to people who talk to me about the incomprehensibility of such large numbers. I say finitude is incomprehensible, the infinite in the universe is comprehensible. Now apply a little logic to this. Is the negation of infinitude incomprehensible? What would you think of a universe in which you could travel one, ten, or a thousand miles, or even to California, and then find it come to an end? Can you suppose an end of matter, or an end of space? The idea is incomprehensible. Even if you were to go millions and millions of miles, the idea of coming to an end is incomprehensible.
You can understand one thousand per second as easily as you can understand one per second. You can go from one to ten, and ten times ten and then to a thousand without taxing your understanding, and then you can go on to a thousand million and a million million. You can all understand it.
Now 400 million million vibrations per second is the kind of thing that exists as a factor in the illumination by red light. Violet light, after what we have seen and have illustrated by that curve, I need not tell you corresponds to vibrations of 800 million million per second. There are recognizable qualities of light caused by vibrations of much greater frequency and much less frequency than this. You may imagine vibrations having about twice the frequency of violet light and one fifteenth the frequency of red light, and still you do not pass the limit of the range of continuous phenomena only a part of which constitutes visible light.
Everybody knows the "photographer's light," and has heard of invisible light producing visible effects upon the chemically prepared plate in the camera. Speaking in round numbers, I may say that, in going up to about twice the frequency I have mentioned for violet light, you have gone to the extreme end of the range of known light of the highest rates of vibration; I mean to say that you have reached the greatest frequency that has yet been observed.
When you go below visible red light, what have you? We have something we do not see with the eye, something that the ordinary photographer does not bring out on his photographically sensitive plates. It is light, but we do not see it. It is something so closely continuous with light visible, that we may define it by the name of invisible light. It is commonly called radiant heat; invisible radiant heat. Perhaps, in this thorny path of logic, with hard words flying in our faces, the least troublesome way of speaking of it is to call it radiant heat. The heat effect you experience when you go near a bright, hot coal fire, or a hot steam boiler; or when you go near, but not over, a set of hot water pipes used for heating a house; the thing we perceive in our face and hands when we go near a boiling pot and hold the hand on a level with it, is radiant heat; the heat of the hands and face caused by a hot fire, or a hot kettle when held under the kettle, is also radiant heat.
You might readily make the experiment with an earthen teapot; it radiates heat better than polished silver. Hold your hands below, and you perceive a sense of heat; above the teapot you get more heat; either way you perceive heat. If held over the teapot, you readily understand that there is a little current of air rising. If you put your hand under the teapot, you get cold air; the upper side of your hand is heated by radiation, while the lower side is fanned and is actually cooled by virtue of the heated kettle above it.
That perception by the sense of heat is the perception of something actually continuous with light. We have knowledge of rays of radiant heat perceptible down to (in round numbers) about four times the wave length, or one-fourth the period of visible or red light. Let us take red light at 400 million million vibrations per second; then the lowest radiant heat, as yet investigated, is about 100 million million per second in the way of frequency of vibration.
I had hoped to be able to give you a lower figure. Prof. Langley has made splendid experiments on the top of Mount Whitney, at the height of 1,500 feet above the sea level, with his "bolometer," and has made actual measurements of the wave lengths of radiant heat down to exceedingly low figures. I will read you one of the figures; I have not got it by heart yet, because I am expecting more from him.[5] I learned a year and a half ago that the lowest radiant heat observed by the diffraction method of Prof. Langley corresponded to 28 one-hundred-thousandths of a centimeter for wave length, 28 as compared with red light, which is 7.3, or nearly fourfold. Thus wave lengths of four times the amplitude or one-fourth the frequency per second of red light have been experimented on by Prof. Langley, and recognized as radiant heat.
Photographic or actinic light, as far as our knowledge extends at present, takes us to a little less than one-half the wave length of violet light. You will thus see that while our acquaintance with wave motion below the red extends down to one-quarter of the slowest rate which affects the eye, our knowledge of vibrations at the other end of the scale only comprehends those having twice the frequency of violet light. In round numbers, we have four octaves of light, corresponding to four octaves of sound in music. In music the octave has a range to a note of double frequency. In light we have one octave of visible light, one octave above the visible range, and two octaves below the visible range. We have one hundred per second, two hundred per second, four hundred per second (million million understood) for invisible radiant heat, eight hundred per second for visible light, and one thousand six hundred per second for invisible light.
One thing in common to the whole is the heat effect. It is extremely small in moonlight, so small that nobody until recently knew there was any heat in the moon's rays. Herschel thought it was perceptible in our atmosphere by noticing that it dissolved away very light clouds, an effect which seemed to show in full moonlight more than when we have less than full moon. Herschel, however, pointed this out as doubtful, but now, instead of its being a doubtful question, we have Prof. Langley giving as a fact that the light from the moon drives the indicator of his sensitive instrument clear across the scale, and with a comparatively prodigious heating effect!
I must tell you that if any of you want to experiment with the heat of the moonlight, you must compare the heat with whatever comes within the influence of the moon's rays only. This is a very necessary precaution; if, for instance, you should take your bolometer or other heat detecter from a comparatively warm room into the night air, you would obtain an indication of a fall in temperature owing to this change. You must be sure that your apparatus is in thermal equilibrium with the surrounding air, then take your burning glass, and first point it to the moon and then to space in the sky beside the moon; you thus get a differential measurement in which you compare the radiation of the moon with the radiation of the sky. You will then see that the moon has a distinctly heating effect.
To continue our study of visible light, that is, undulations extending from red to violet in the spectrum (which I am going to show you presently), I would first point out on this chart that in the section from letter A to letter D, we have visual effect and heating effect only; but no ordinary chemical or photographic effect.
The Solar Spectrum.
Photographers can leave their usual sensitive, chemically prepared plates exposed to yellow light and red light without experiencing any sensible effect; but when you get toward the blue end of the spectrum, the photographic effect begins to tell, more and more as you get toward the violet end. When you get beyond the violet, there is the invisible light known chiefly by its chemical action. From yellow to violet we have visual effect, heating effect, and chemical effect, all three; above the violet, only chemical and heating effect, and so little of the heating effect that it is scarcely perceptible.
The prismatic spectrum is Newton's discovery of the composition of white light. White light consists of every variety of color from red to violet. Here, now, we have Newton's prismatic spectrum produced by a prism. I will illustrate a little in regard to the nature of color by putting something before the light which is like colored glass; it is colored gelatin. I will put in a plate of red gelatin which is carefully prepared of chemical materials, and see what that will do. Of all the light passing to it from violet to red, it only lets through the red and orange, giving a mixed reddish color.
Here is another plate of green gelatin. The green absorbs all the red, giving only green. Here is another plate absorbing something from each portion of the spectrum, taking away a great deal of the violet and giving a yellow or orange appearance to the light. Here is another absorbing out the green, leaving red, orange, and a very little faint green, and absorbing out all the violet.
When the spectrum is very carefully produced, far more perfectly than Newton knew how to show it, we have a homogeneous spectrum. It must be noticed that Newton did not understand what we call a homogeneous spectrum; he did not produce it, and does not point out in his writings the conditions for producing it. With an exceedingly fine line of light we can bring it out as in sunlight, like this upper picture, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet according to Newton's nomenclature. Newton never used a narrow beam of light, and so could not have had a homogeneous spectrum.
This is a diagram painted on glass and showing the colors as we know them. It would take two or three hours if I were to explain the subject of spectrum analysis to-night. We must tear ourselves away from it. I will just read out to you the wave lengths corresponding to the different positions in the sun's spectrum of certain dark lines commonly called "Fraunhofer's lines." I will take as a unit the one-hundred-thousandth of a centimeter. A centimeter is 0.4 of an inch; it is a rather small half an inch. I take the thousandth of a centimeter and the hundred of that as a unit. At the red end of the spectrum the light in the neighborhood of that black line A has for its wave length 7.6; B has 6.87; D has 5.89; the "frequency" for A is 3.9 times 100 million million; the frequency of D light is 5.1 times 100 million million per second.
Now, what force is concerned in those vibrations as compared with sound at the rate of 400 vibrations per second? Suppose for a moment the same matter was to move to and fro through the same range but 400 million million times per second. The force required is as the square of the number expressing the frequency. Double frequency would require quadruple force for the vibration of the same body. Suppose I vibrate my hand again, as I did before. If I move it once per second, a moderate force is required; for it to vibrate ten times per second, 100 times as much force is required; for 400 vibrations per second, 160,000 times as much force.
If I move my hand once per second through a space of a quarter of an inch; a very small force is required; it would require very considerable force to move it ten times a second, even through so small a range; but think of the force required to move a tuning fork 400 times a second; compare that with the force required for a motion of 400 million million times a second. If the mass moved is the same, and the range of motion is the same, then the force would be one million million million million times as great as the force required to move the prongs of the tuning fork. It is as easy to understand that number as any number like 2, 3, or 4.
Consider gravely what that number means, and what we are to infer from it. What force is there in space between my eye and that light? What forces are there in space between our eyes and the sun and our eyes and the remotest visible star! There is matter and there is motion, but what magnitude of force may there be?
I move through this "luminiferous ether" as if it were nothing. But were there vibrations with such frequency in a medium of steel or brass, they would be measured by millions and millions and millions of tons action on a square inch of matter. There are no such forces in our air. Comets make a disturbance in the air, and perhaps the luminiferous ether is split up by the motion of a comet through it. So when we explain the nature of electricity, we explain it by a motion of the luminiferous ether. We cannot say that it is electricity. What can this luminiferous ether be? It is something that the planets move through with the greatest ease. It permeates our air; it is nearly in the same condition, so far as our means of judging are concerned, in our air and in the interplanetary space. The air disturbs it but little; you may reduce the air by air pumps to the hundred thousandth of its density, and you make little effect in the transmission of light through it. The luminiferous ether is an elastic solid. The nearest analogy I can give you is this jelly which you see.[6] The nearest analogy to the waves of light is the motion, which you can imagine, of this elastic jelly, with a ball of wood floating in the middle of it. Look there, when with my hand I vibrate the little red ball up and down, or when I turn it quickly round the vertical diameter, alternately in opposite directions; that is the nearest representation I can give you of the vibrations of luminiferous ether.
Another illustration is Scottish shoemaker's wax or Burgundy pitch, but I know Scottish shoemaker's wax better. It is heavier than water, and absolutely answers my purpose. I take a large slab of the wax, place it in a glass jar filled with water, place a number of corks on the lower side and bullets on the upper side. It is brittle like the Trinidad or Burgundy pitch which I have in my hand. You can see how hard it is, but if left to itself it flows like a fluid. The shoemaker's wax breaks with a brittle fracture, but it is viscous, and gradually yields.
What we know of the luminiferous ether is that it has the rigidity of a solid, and gradually yields. Whether or not it is brittle and cracks we cannot yet tell, but I believe the discoveries in electricity, and the motions of comets and the marvelous spurts of light from them, tend to show cracks in the luminiferous ether—show a correspondence between the electric flash and the aurora borealis and cracks in the luminiferous ether. Do not take this as an assertion, it is hardly more than a vague scientific dream; but you may regard the existence of the luminiferous ether as a reality of science, that is, we have an all-pervading medium, an elastic solid, with a great degree of rigidity; its rigidity is so prodigious in proportion to its density that the vibrations of light in it have the frequencies I have mentioned, with the wave lengths I have mentioned.
The fundamental question as to whether or not luminiferous ether has gravity has not been answered. We have no knowledge that the luminiferous ether is attracted by gravity; it is sometimes called imponderable because some people vainly imagine that it has no weight. I call it matter with the same kind of rigidity that this elastic jelly has.
Here are two tourmalines; if you look through them toward the light, you see the white light all around, i. e., they are transparent. If I turn round one of these tourmalines the light is extinguished, it is absolutely black, as though the tourmalines were opaque. This is an illustration of what is called polarization of light. I cannot speak to you about qualities of light without speaking of the polarization of light. I want to show you a most beautiful effect of polarizing light, before illustrating a little further by means of this large mechanical illustration which you have in the bowl of jelly. Now I put in the lantern another instrument called a "Nicol prism." What you saw first were two plates of the crystal tourmaline which came from Brazil, I believe, having the property of letting light pass when both plates are placed in one particular direction as regards their axes of crystallization, and extinguishing it when it passes through the first plate held in another direction. We have now an instrument which also gives rays of polarized light. A Nico prism is a piece of Iceland spar, cut in two and turned, one part relatively to the other, in a very ingenious way, and put together again, and cemented into one by Canada balsam. The Nicol prism takes advantage of the property which the spar has of double refraction, and produces the phenomenon which I now show you.
I turn one prism round in a certain direction and you get light, a maximum of light. I turn it through a right angle and you get blackness. I turn it one-quarter round again and get maximum light; one-quarter more, maximum blackness; one-quarter more, and bright light. We rarely have such a grand specimen of a Nicol prism as this.
There is another way of producing polarized light. I stand before that light, and look at its reflection in a plate of glass on the table through one of the Nicol prisms, which I turn round, so. Now I must incline that piece of glass at a particular angle, rather more than forty-five degrees; I find a particular angle in which, if I look at it and then turn the prism round in the hand, the effect is absolutely to extinguish the light in one position and to give it maximum brightness in another position. I use the term "absolute" somewhat rashly. It is only a reduction to a very small quantity of light, not an absolute annulment as we have in the case of the two Nicol prisms used conjointly. Those of you who have never heard of this before would not know what I am talking about. As to the mechanics of the thing, it could only be explained to you by a course of lectures on physical optics. The thing is this: vibrations of light must be in a definite direction relatively to the line in which the light travels.
Look at this diagram: the light goes from left to right; we have vibrations perpendicular to the line of transmission. There is a line up and down, which is the line of vibration. Imagine here a source of light, violet light, and here in front of it is the line of propagation. Sound vibrations are to and fro; this is transverse to the line of propagation. Here is another, perpendicular to the diagram, still following the law of transverse vibration; here is another circular vibration. Imagine a long rope: you whirl one end of it, and you send a screw-like motion running along; you can get the circular motion in one direction or in the opposite.
Plane polarized light is light with the vibrations all in a single plane, perpendicular to the plane through the ray, which is technically called the "plane of polarization." Circular polarized light consists of undulations of luminiferous ether having a circular motion. Elliptically polarized light is something between the two, not in a straight line, and not in a circular line; the course of vibration is an ellipse. Polarized light is light that performs its motions continually in one mode or direction. If in a straight line, it is plane polarized; if in a circular direction, it is circularly polarized light; when elliptical, it is elliptically polarized light.
With Iceland spar, one unpolarized ray of light divides on entering it into two rays of polarized light, by reason of its power of double refraction, and the vibrations are perpendicular to one another in the two emerging rays. Light is always polarized when it is reflected from a plate of unsilvered glass, or water, at a certain definite angle of fifty-six degrees for glass, fifty-two degrees for water, the angle being reckoned in each case from a perpendicular to the surface. The angle for water is the angle whose tangent is 1.4. I wish you to look at the polarization with your own eyes. Light from glass at fifty six degrees and from water at fifty-two degrees goes away vibrating perpendicularly to the plane of incidence and plane of reflection.
We can distinguish it without the aid of an instrument. There is a phenomenon well known in physical optics as "Haidinger's brushes." The discoverer is well known in Philadelphia as a mineralogist, and the phenomenon I speak of goes by his name. Look at the sky in a direction of ninety degrees from the sun, and you will see a yellow and blue cross, with the yellow toward the sun, and from the sun, spreading out like two foxes' tails with blue between, and then two red brushes in the space at right angles to the blue. If you do not see it, it is because your eyes are not sensitive enough, but a little training will give them the needed sensitiveness.
If you cannot see it in this way, try another method. Look into a pail of water with a black bottom; or take a clear glass dish of water, rest it on a black cloth and look down at the surface of the water on a day with a white cloudy sky (if there is such a thing ever to be seen in Philadelphia). You will see the white sky reflected in the basin of water at an angle of about fifty degrees. Look at it with the head tipped to one side, and then again with the head tipped to the other side, keeping your eyes on the water, and you will see Haidinger's brushes. Do not do it fast, or you will make yourself giddy. The explanation of this is the refreshing of the sensibility of the retina. The Haidinger's brush is always there, but you do not see it because your eye is not sensitive enough. After once seeing it, you always see it; it does not thrust itself inconveniently before you when you do not want to see it. You can readily see it in a piece of glass with dark cloth below it, or in a basin of water.
I am going to conclude by telling you how we know the wave lengths of light and how we know the frequency of the vibrations. We shall actually make a measurement of the wave length of the yellow light. I am going to show you the diffraction spectrum.
You see on the screen,[7] on each side of a central white bar of light, a set of bars of light variegated colors, the first one, on each side, showing blue or indigo color, about four inches from the central white bar and red about four inches farther, with vivid green between the blue and the red. That effect is produced by a grating with 400 lines to the centimeter, engraved on glass, which I now hold in my hand. The next grating has 3,000 lines on a Paris inch. You see the central space, and on each side a large number of spectrums, blue at one end and red at the other. The fact that, in the first spectrum, red is about twice as far from the center as the blue, proves that a wave length of red light is double that of blue light.
I will now show you the operation of measuring the length of a wave of sodium light, that is, a light like that marked D on the spectrum, a light produced by a spirit lamp with salt in it. The sodium vapor is heated up to several thousand degrees, when it becomes self-luminous, and gives such a light as we get by throwing salt upon a spirit lamp in the game of snap dragon.
I hold in my hand a beautiful grating of glass silvered by Liebig's process of metallic silver, a grating with 6,480 lines to the inch, belonging to my friend Prof. Barker, which he has kindly brought here for us this evening. You will see the brilliancy of color as I turn the light reflected from the grating toward you and pass the beam around the room. You have now seen directly with your own eyes these brilliant colors reflected from the grating, and you have also seen them thrown upon the screen from a grating placed in the lantern. With a grating of 17,000 lines, a much greater number of lines per inch than the other, you will see how much further from the central bright space the first spectrum is; how much more this grating changes the direction or diffraction of the beam of light. Here is the center of the grating, and there is the first spectrum. You will note that the violet light is least diffracted and the red light is most diffracted. This diffraction of light first proved to us definitely the reality of the undulatory theory of light.
You ask, Why does not light go round the corner as sound does? Light goes round a corner in these diffraction spectrums; it is shown going round a corner, it passes through these bars and is turned round an angle of thirty degrees. Light going round a corner by instruments adapted to show the result, and to measure the angles at which it is turned, is called the diffraction of light.
I can show you an instrument which will measure the wave lengths of light. Without proving the formula, let me tell it to you. A spirit lamp with salt sprinkled on the wick gives very nearly homogeneous light, that is to say, light all of one wave length, or all of the same period. I have a little grating that I take in my hand. I look through this grating, and see that candle before me. Close behind it you see a blackened slip of wood with two white marks on it ten inches asunder. The line on which they are marked is placed perpendicular to the line at which I shall go from it. When I look at this salted spirit lamp, I see a series of spectrums of yellow light. As I am somewhat short-sighted, I am making my eye see with this eye-glass and the natural lenses of the eye what a long-sighted person would make out without an eye-glass. On that screen you saw a succession of spectrums. I now look direct at the candle, and what do I see? I see a succession of five or six brilliantly colored spectrums on each side of the candle. But when I look at the salted spirit lamp, now I see ten spectrums on one side and ten on the other, each of which is a monochromatic band of light.
I will measure the wave lengths of light thus: I walk away to a considerable distance, and look at the candle and marks. I see a set of spectrums. The first white line is exactly behind the candle. I want the first spectrum to the right of that white line to fall exactly on the other white line, which is ten inches from the first. As I walk away from it, I see it is now very near it; it is now on it. Now the distance from my eye is to be measured, and the problem is again to reduce feet to inches. The distance from the spectrum of the flame to my eye is thirty-four feet nine inches. Mr. President, how many inches is that? Four hundred and seventeen inches, in round numbers 420 inches. Then we have the proportion, as 420 is to 10 so is the length from bar to bar of the grating to the wave length of sodium light—that is to say, as forty-two is to one. The distance from bar to bar is the four-hundredth of a centimeter; therefore the 42d part of the four-hundredth of a centimeter is the required wave length, or the 16,800th of a centimeter is the wave length according to our simple, and easy, and hasty experiment. The true wave length of sodium light, according to the most accurate measurement, is about a 17,000th of a centimeter, which differs by scarcely more than one per cent. from our result!
The only apparatus you see is this little grating; it is a piece of glass with four-tenths of an inch ruled with 400 fine lines. Any of you who will take the trouble to buy one may measure the wave lengths of a candle flame himself. I hope some of you will be induced to make the experiment for yourselves.
If I put salt on the flame of a spirit lamp, what do I see through this grating? I see merely a sharply defined yellow light, constituting the spectrum of vaporized sodium, while from the candle flame I see an exquisitely colored spectrum, far more beautiful than I showed you on the screen. I see, in fact, a series of spectrums on the two sides with the blue toward the candle flame and the red further out. I cannot get one definite thing to measure from in the spectrum from the candle flame as I can with the flame of a spirit lamp with the salt thrown on it, which gives, as I have said, a simple yellow light. The highest blue light I see in the candle flame is now exactly on the line. Now measure to my eye; it is forty-four feet four inches, or 532 inches. The length of this wave then is the 532d part of the four-hundredth of a centimeter, which would be the 21,280th of a centimeter, say the 21,000th of a centimeter. Then measure for the red, and you would find something like the 11,000th for the lowest of the red light.
Lastly, how do we know the frequency of vibration?
Why, by the velocity of light. How do we know that? We know it in a number of different ways, which I cannot explain now because time forbids. Take the velocity of light. It is 187,000 British statute miles per second. But it is much better to take a kilometer for the unit. That is about six-tenths of a mile. The velocity is very accurately 300,000 kilometers per second; that is, 30,000,000,000 centimeters per second. Take the wave length as the 17,000th of a centimeter, and you find the frequency of the sodium light to be 510 million million per second. There, then, you find a calculation of the frequency from a simple observation which you can all make for yourselves.
Vibrating Spherule Imbedded in an Elastic Solid.
Lastly, I must tell you about the color of the blue sky which was illustrated by the spherule embedded in an elastic solid. I want to explain to you in two minutes the mode of vibrations. Take the simplest plane-polarized light. Here is a spherule which is producing it in an elastic solid. Imagine the solid to extend miles horizontally and miles down, and imagine this spherule to vibrate up and down. It is quite clear that it will make transverse vibrations similarly in all horizontal directions. The plane of polarization is defined as a plane perpendicular to the line of vibration. Thus, light produced by a molecule vibrating up and down, as this red globe in the jelly before you, is polarized in a horizontal plane because the vibrations are vertical.
Here is another mode of vibrations. Let me twist this spherule in the jelly as I am doing it, and that will produce vibrations, also spreading out equally in all horizontal directions. When I twist this globe round, it draws the jelly round with it; twist it rapidly back, and the jelly flies back. By the inertia of the jelly the vibrations spread in all directions, and the lines of vibration are horizontal all through the jelly. Everywhere, miles away, that solid is placed in vibration. You do not see it, but you must understand that they are there. If it flies back it makes vibration, and we have waves of horizontal vibrations traveling out in all directions from the exciting molecule.
I am now causing the red globe to vibrate to and fro horizontally. That will cause vibrations to be produced which will be parallel to the line of motion at all places of the plane perpendicular to the range of the exciting molecule. What makes the blue sky? These are exactly the motions that make the blue light of the sky which is due to spherules in the luminiferous ether, but little modified by the air. Think of the sun near the horizon, think of the light of the sun streaming through and giving you the azure blue and violet overhead. Think first of any one particle of the sun, and think of it moving in such a way as to give horizontal and vertical vibrations and what not of circular and elliptic vibrations.
You see the blue sky in high pressure steam blown into the air; you see it in the experiment of Tyndall's blue sky, in which a delicate condensation of vapor gives rise to exactly the azure blue of the sky.
Now the motion of the luminiferous ether relatively to the spherule gives rise to the same effect as would an opposite motion impressed upon the spherule quite independently by an independent force. So you may think of the blue color coming from the sky as being produced by to and fro vibrations of matter in the air, which vibrates much as this little globe vibrates embedded in the jelly.
The result in a general way is this: The light coming from the blue sky is polarized in a plane through the sun, but the blue light of the sky is complicated by a great number of circumstances, and one of them is this: that the air is illuminated not only by the sun, but by the earth. If we could get the earth covered by a black cloth, then we could study the polarized light of the sky with simplicity, which we cannot do now. There are, in nature, reflections from seas, and rocks, and hills, and waters in an indefinitely complicated manner.
Let observers observe the blue sky not only in winter, when the earth is covered with snow, but in summer, when it is covered with dark green foliage. This will help to unravel the complicated phenomena in question. But the azure blue of the sky is light produced by the reaction on the vibrating ether of little spherules of water, of perhaps a fifty-thousandth or a hundred-thousandth of a centimeter diameter, or perhaps little motes, or lumps, or crystals of common salt, or particles of dust, or germs of vegetable or animal species wafted about in the air. Now what is the luminiferous ether? It is matter prodigiously less dense than air, millions and millions and millions of times less dense than air. We can form some sort of idea of its limitations. We believe it is a real thing, with great rigidity in comparison with its density, and it may be made to vibrate 400 million million times per second, and yet with such rigidity as not to produce the slightest resistance to any body going through it.
Going back to the illustration of the shoemaker's wax; if a cork will in the course of a year push its way up through a plate of that wax when placed under water, and if a lead bullet will penetrate downward to the bottom, what is the law of the resistance? It clearly depends on time. The cork slowly in the course of a year works its way up through two inches of that substance; give it one or two thousand years to do it, and the resistance will be enormously less; thus the motion of a cork or bullet, at the rate of one inch in 2,000 years, may be compared with that of the earth, moving at the rate of six times ninety-three million miles a year, or nineteen miles per second, through the luminiferous ether, but when we have a thing elastic like jelly and yielding like pitch, surely we have a large and solid ground for our faith in the speculative hypothesis of an elastic luminiferous ether, which constitutes the wave theory of light.
THE LIMITATIONS OF SUBMARINE TELEGRAPHY.[8]
The weight of the conductors, says Henry Vivarez in La Lumiere Electrique, plays an important part in submarine telegraphy, not merely as a heavy item in the outlay, but as one of the principal factors in laying down the lines, and in taking them up in case of damage. When the conductor is being raised, the grappling-irons which lift it have to resist not merely the vertical component of the weight of the cable, but also the considerable effects resulting from friction against the water. It thus frequently happens, when working at great depths, that the conductor may be exposed to a strain greater than it is able to bear, and we are forced to have recourse to stratagems to bring it to the surface. These artifices consist in the use of two or more ships in raising, which is done as shown in Figs. 2 and 3, or, in the most simple cases, with the aid of an auxiliary buoy, as in Fig. 4. In any event, we see that the difficulties, and of course the cost of raising, must be considerable.
Fig. 1.
Hence to decrease the weight of the cables would be an important step in advance. If the weight is in general very great, it is because the copper core does not take any part in the strain which the entire cable has to resist. We know, indeed, that copper cannot bear a breaking-strain greater, at most, than 28 kilos per square millimeter. Besides, it would be elongated by such a strain by a very considerable fraction of its initial length; and, if the core were made to take part in any manner whatever in the strain which the entire cable has to support, it would be drawn out beyond its limit of elasticity, and would remain permanently elongated, while the substances in which it is inclosed would return to their natural length. It would result that, being no longer able to find room in a sheath which had become too short, the copper wire would take a sinuous form in its gutta-percha envelope, and would occasion at certain points ruptures, the effect of which would be to decentralize the wire, to perforate the layer of insulating matter, and finally to open out a fault in the cable.
But there exists an alloy (silicium bronze) which can be drawn out into wires having a conductivity equal to that of copper, and a mechanical resistance equal to that of the best iron. The use of this alloy would render it possible to set free the coating of the cables from a part of the strain which it now has to resist, and to diminish, consequently, their dimensions and weight. Wires are now made of this alloy, having a conductivity of from ninety-seven to ninety-nine per cent. of the standard, which at 0°C., and with the diameter of a millimeter, have a resistance of 20.57 ohms per kilometer. These wires do not break with a less strain than from 45 to 48 kilos. per square millimeter, and, which is a very precious property, their increase in length at the moment of rupture does not exceed one or one and a half per cent.
Let us consider the deep-sea section of cable of the French company from Paris to New York—the so-called "Pouyer-Quertier" cable, constructed and laid in 1879 by Siemens Brothers of London.
The respective weight of each of its component elements is, per nautical mile, copper core, 220 kilos; gutta-percha, 180 kilos; hemp, or an equivalent, 80 kilos; 18 wires of galvanized iron of 2 millimeters in diameter, 860 kilos; external hemp and composition, 400 kilos; total, 1,740 kilos. Total diameter, 30 millimeters. Total mechanical strength, 3,000 kilos, the wires of the covering being supposed to be of iron. Weight under water, 450 kilos. It can support its own weight without breaking for a length of from six to seven miles.
Fig. 2.
The Atlantic presents from north to south, and at about an equal distance from each continent, a sort of longitudinal ridge, in which the depths vary from 300 to 400 meters. This ridge spreads out, in 50° north latitude, into the region which has received the principal wires connecting England and France with the United States. On both coasts there are depressions in which the bottom is at the depth of from 4,000 to 6,000 meters. The one on the east extends from the south point of Ireland to the latitude of the Cape of Good Hope, and its left-hand boundary follows the general outlines of the west coasts of Europe and Africa. The two others, the northwestern and the southwestern, form two basins, bordering respectively on the United States and the Antilles and South America.
In these depressions soundings have shown certain zones in which the depths exceed 6,000 meters, the principal of which are found to the west of the Canaries, to the south of Newfoundland, between Porto Rico and the Bermudas, and to the right of the Isle of Marten-Vaz.
Fig. 3.
The great depths of the Pacific are differently distributed. Between Japan and California, between 40° and 50° north latitude, there is the Tuscarora depression, which has depths of from 6,000 to 8,000 meters. Parallel to Japan and the Kuriles there is a depression in which has been found the greatest known depth—8,513 meters.
We see, therefore, that any new great submarine line, having to extend into another zone than that which has received the present Atlantic cables, must traverse depressions in which the bottom reaches a maximum depth of 4,000 meters. The possibility of raising a damaged cable would be very problematical under such conditions, and it would become certainly impossible in case of a cable from San Francisco to Japan.
Under these conditions, we are forced to conclude that the use of the present cables limits strikingly the progress of submarine telegraphy, which must remain confined to certain zones of the Atlantic, to inland seas, and to lines along the coasts. But if we consider the daily progress of applied science, and the constantly increasing demand for rapid communication between nations, it is certain that we must shortly undertake the study of new cables intended to traverse the greatest depths of the ocean for long distances. Necessity, therefore, compels us to investigate the new solutions of the problem, which may furnish us with light cables, easy to lay, and possible to repair.
Fig. 4.
A cable made by Mr. J. Richards is composed as follows: core of silicium bronze equal in weight to that of the Pouyer-Quertier cable, or, per nautical mile, 220 kilos; gutta-percha, 180 kilos; layer of hemp, 80 kilos. The sheathing is formed of 28 wires of galvanized iron of 1.25 millimeters in diameter, each covered with hemp, and all twisted into a rope around the dielectric; the wires, 500 kilos: the hemp covering them, 250 kilos. The weight of the cable is, therefore, 1,230 kilos in the air, and 320 kilos in the water. Its diameter is 25 centimeters, and its resistance to fracture 2,800 kilos, of which the core supports one-half. Under these conditions, the cable can support from eight to nine nautical miles of its length, and can be raised from the greatest depths. The results of this comparative examination are self-evident.
For an equal conductivity and an approximately equal mechanical strength, the new cable is in weight and bulk equal to about two-thirds of the Pouyer-Quertier cable. It would cost about $165 less per mile, and would require, for laying, a ship and engines of less power, and therefore cheaper. The reduced armature will suffice to resist friction and the attacks of animal life in the deep sea; but for the shore ends we must keep to the types generally employed. Such as it is, and although it may undergo modifications in detail from a more complete study and from experience, it merits the attention of competent engineers.