in reply to Professor Whewell. 107 



the symbols are severally constructed for the occasion, free 

 from the restrictions of any rule of intelligibility ; lime, com- 

 posed of an atom of calcium and one of oxygen, being signified 

 by L ; whilst oxide of silver, also of an atom of each ingre- 

 dient, is made (5 -j- O) : sulphuric acid, one atom sulphur and 

 three oxygen, is (S + 3 O); whilst nitric acid, of five atoms 

 oxygen to one nitrogen, is only N. The chemistry is in fact 

 sunk in the mathematics, simple as they are ; and the scheme, 

 without the text, is totally unintelligible. 



Berzelius would express it thus: Ag N with Ca S^ 



gives Ca N, AgS and S 



Ca being lime ; Ag, oxide of silver ; S^, two atoms hyposul- 

 phurous acid, &c. 



Here you have the whole process (its chemical probability 

 being not in question) in the symbols, as well as the proxi- 

 mate and ultimate analyses of each ingredient. 



We may now contrast the proposed notation with the ex- 

 amples before given of the symbols. 



Berzelius. Whewell. 



Nitrate of potash K N (-t + o) + (n + 5 0) 



Hydrocyanate\ ^H^HC^N (^n + Sh) + (^r^+h) 



01 ammonia J \ / \ 



^alumT.!!!} 3A1S+NH»S {SC^o+T+I^l + U+SA+T+S^) 



Do. contracted. 



Nitrate of potash K + «' 



Hydrocyanate of ammonia Ain + hdn 



Ammoniacal alum (3 AZ + s') + (Am + 5') 



The multiplication of lines and brackets in the proposed 

 notation gives it, in my view, a comparatively perplexed ap- 

 pearance, though algebraically just. The unvarying sign + 

 alternating with every letter, loses the distinctive property, in 

 which consists its value. The increased length of the formula 

 destroys its graphic character : and in the contracted notation 

 this graphic property and the analytical expression are both 

 incon)plete. 



'J'o apply this notation in the case quoted from Herschel, 



{(c + o) + 2(5 + o)} + {(« + 5o) + (,ag + o)} 



= {{c-\-o) + {71 + 5 o)} +{s + ag) + (s + 30). 



or, contracted, (C + 2s') + (A^' + 11') 



= (C + n) + (A;;r + s) + s'. 



Here the full notation appears confused by the needless 

 P2 multiplicity 



