322 Analyus of Scientific Books. 



hy K S* + 2 MS + 3 A S + 4 F S meaning that it is 

 composed of one atom of trisilicate of potassa, two atoms of sili- 

 cate of manganese, three atoms of silicate of alumina, and four 

 atoms of silicate of iron! Now we beg to dissent in toto from 

 the assertion that these or any other signs are at all necessary, 

 and we contend that they are calculated rather to mislead and 

 mystify, than facilitate our progress, or elucidate our results. If 

 we gain any thing in brevity, (and very little do we even in that 

 respect) it is at the expense of great risk of confusion, both from 

 that misinterpretation which all symbols are liable to, as well as 

 from the inaccuracies they are likely to introduce, by errors in 

 transcribing, or of the press. Even in point of brevity, the ad- 

 vantage is merely in the act of committing them to paper, for 

 when they are to be deciphered, we must, mentally at least, 

 read them at full length, if we would perfectly comprehend 

 their import. It is not with these symbols as with the figures in 

 arithmetic, for they are connected with the various operations of 

 addition, subtraction, and multiplication; which could hardly 

 be performed, were the quantities expressed by words. A pe- 

 culiar method of abbreviated notation therefore in that case is 

 absolutely necessary, but the chemical and mineralogical sym- 

 bols, are mere expressions of simple aggregates, and when once 

 noted down are capable of no further operation. Hence com- 

 mon language is amply sufficient for every purpose these sym- 

 bols can be applied to. There is, besides, a certain air of ma- 

 thematical parade in these symbols which is not pleasing ; the 

 connecting sign +, with their coefficients and exponents, gives 

 them so strong a resemblance to algebraical formulae, that on 

 opening at some of the pages of the Nouveau Systeme, we might 

 almost fancy we had taken up a volume of Bonnycastle's 

 Algebra. 



Before we quit the subject of mystification, we shall say a few 

 words on a propensity which has sprung up since the establish- 

 ment of the atomic theory, to entangle chemical calculations in 

 unnecessary algebraical formulae. In the sixth volume of the 

 Annals of Philosophy, p. 321, there is a highly interesting and 

 valuable paper on the relation between the specific gravities of 

 bodies in their gaseous state, and the weights of their atoms. 

 The name of the author is not annexed, but it is now well known 

 to be by Dr. Prout. We select this paper as a case in point, 

 (though similar instances are but too numerous) because its ex- 

 cellence demands that it should be universally known and under- 

 stood, which, as the calculations whence the results are derived 

 are algebraical, it can hardly be by all who cultivate the science 

 of chemistry. These calculations are not, indeed, absolutely 

 necessary to render the general object of the essay intelligible, 

 and are therefore subjoined in the form of notes ; but, however 

 confidently the reader may rely on the accuracy of an author's 



