[93] The charge associated with a corpuscle is the same as that carried by a hydrogen atom. G. J. Stoney in 1881 (Phil. Mag., 1881, 11, 387) pointed out that this latter constituted the indivisible “atom of electricity” or natural unit charge. Later he proposed (Trans. Roy. Dub. Soc., 1891, 4, 583) that such unit charge should be called an “electron.” The application of this term to Thomson’s corpuscle implies, rightly or wrongly, that notwithstanding its apparent mass, the corpuscle is in fact nothing more than an atom of electricity. The question whether a corpuscle actually has a material gravitating nucleus is undecided, but there are strong reasons for believing that its mass is entirely due to the electric charge.
[94] Jour. de Phys., 1905, 4, 678; translated in Electrician, 1905, 56, 108 and 141.
[95] The quotations are from the translation published by the Gilbert Club, London, 1900.
[96] C. A. Coulomb, Mem. Acad. Roy. Paris, 1785, p. 578.
[97] Intensitas vis magneticae, § 21, C. F. Gauss’s Werke, 5, 79. See also J. J. Thomson, Electricity and Magnetism, § 132.
[98] S. D. Poisson, Mém. de l’Institut, 1821 and 1822, 5, 247, 488; 1823, 6, 441; 1838, 16, 479.
[99] For outlines of the mathematical theory of magnetism and references see H. du Bois, Magnetic Circuit, chs. iii. and iv.
[100] Gilbert’s Ann. d. phys., 1820, 6, 295.
[101] Ann. de chim. et de phys., 1820, 15, 59, 170; Recueil d’observations électrodynamiques, 1822; Théories des phénomènes électrodynamiques, 1826.
[102] Ann. de chim. et de phys., 1820, 15, 93.