« AnteriorContinuar »
The lectures now published were delivered before the Lowell Institute, in Boston, in the autumn of 1872. They aimed to present the modern theories of chemistry to an intelligent but not a professional audience, and to give to the philosophy of the science a logical consistency, by resting it on the law of Avogadro. Since many of the audience had studied the elements of chemistry, as they were formerly taught under the dualistic system, it was also made an object to point out the chief characteristics by which the new chemistry differed from the old. The limitations of a course of popular lectures necessarily precluded a full presentation of the subject, and only the more prominent and less technical features of the new system were discussed. In writing out his notes for the press, the author has retained the lecture style, because it is so well adapted for the popular exposition of scientific subjects; but he is painfully conscious that any description of experiments must necessarily fall far short of giving that force of impression which the phenomena of Nature produce when they speak for themselves, and, in weighing the arguments presented, he must beg his readers to make allowances for this fact.
THE NEW CHEMISTRY.
MOLECULES AND AVOGADRO'S LAW.
In every physical science we have carefully to distinguish between the facts which form its subject-matter and the theories by which we attempt to explain these facts, and group them in our scientific systems. The first alone can be regarded as absolute knowledge, and such knowledge is immutable, except in so far as subsequent observation may correct previous error. The last are, at best, only guesses at truth, and, even in their highest development, are subject to limitations, and liable to change.
But this distinction, so obvious when stated, is often overlooked in our scientific text-books, and not without reason, for it is the sole aim of these elementary treatises to teach the present state of knowledge, and they might fail in their object if they attempted, by a too critical analysis, to separate the phenomena from the systems by which alone the facts of Nature are correlated and rendered intelligible.
When, however, we come to study the history of science, the distinction between fact and theory obtrudes itself at once upon our attention. We see that, while the prominent facts of science have re
by which intelligib study th