336 Intelligence and Miscellaneous Article*. 



viz. economy of the electric light, practicability and efficiency of the 

 electric light for certain ilhuninaiing-pur-poses, and best means of 

 distribution of the electric light, Mr. Schwendler proceeded : — 



You all have heard, no doubt, a great deal about the division of 

 the electric light. During the last two years this question has been 

 before the public almost permanently. This is not to be wondered 

 at, if we consider that on the solution of this problem it will ulti- 

 mately depend whether the new mode of lighting becomes a success- 

 ful and general rival to the illumination by gas or other combustive 

 means. But before entering on the subject, it will be best to for- 

 mulate the question definitely, to avoid any misunderstanding with 

 respect to the answer I am about to give. The question is : — A 

 given permanent current (C), no matter how produced, does work 

 in a closed single circuit of total resistance (R), of which a part (r) 

 represents the resistance of one electric arc. This electric arc pro- 

 duces an electric light of measured intensity (I). Now, if we 

 introduce, instead of one arc, two arcs of resistance r and r" and 

 measured light-intensities i' and i" respectively, and suppose the 

 current to be the same as before, or the E.M.F. and total resis- 

 tance in the single circuit the same, then a priori we should con- 

 clude that I=i' + i" for r=r -\-r" . Experiments, however, show 

 that this not the case ; i. e. the sum of the measured intensities of 

 two small lights is perceptibly smaller than the measured intensity of 

 one large light ; and this difference becomes larger and larger as we 

 increase the number of lights produced by the same current, i. e. 

 by the same E.M.F. with the same total resistance in circuit. 

 This appears at first sight an inconsistency with the known laws 

 of cause and effect. How is it possible that the same current 

 through the same resistance should produce more light in one point 

 than in two points, although the total amount of work done by the 

 given and constant current is exactly the same in one point as in 

 two points ? 



That the measured intensity of one light is invariably greater 

 than the sum of the measured intensities of n lights, is an un- 

 doubted fact proved by my own experiments very conclusively. 

 But we may well ask, What has become of the energy which is 

 expended and does not appear as light ? 



A careful analysis of all the physical facts connected with the 

 subject will, however, show easily enough how this apparent loss 

 of energy is to be accounted for, without reverting to far-fetched 

 explanations, and without the necessity of making such statements 

 as "the division of the electric light is in contradiction to dyna- 

 mic principles," or " the laws of nature must be reversed " (what- 

 ever that may mean), or "new laws have to be discovered first, 

 before a solution of this important problem could be even at- 

 tempted," &c.&c, which I have read frequently in scientific or pro- 

 fessional journals and newspapers. Statements of this kind appear 

 very clever to the uninitiated, and they are exceedingly cheap to 

 make ; but they will invariably do an enormous amount of harm 



