121 
Ordinary Meeting, February 21st, 1871. 
E. W. Binney, F.R.S., F.G.S., President, in the Chair. 
“ The Overthrow of the Science of Electro-Dynamics,” by 
John Hopkinson, D.Sc. 
In science no theory should be considered unquestionable 
and no man’s work held sacred from attack, and our scienti- 
fic periodicals should afford the freest scope to discussions 
no matter how hostile to established notions. Still it is 
evident that the journals ought not to publish everything 
that may come to hand; they should at least take care that 
a hostile critic understands the meaning of what he criticises. 
Two papers appeared last month in the “ Quarterly Jour- 
nal of Science” and the “ Chemical News” respectively, in 
which the author (the Rev, Mr. Highton) somewhat summa- 
rily disposes of the science of Thermodynamics, fancying he 
has disproved the equivalence of heat and work. I will 
only trouble you with one or two quotations with a view 
to support my opinion that the papers in question ought 
never to have been permitted to appear in any journal pre- 
tending to scientific position. 
In the “ Chemical News,” p. 42, we find, speaking of Joule 
and Scoresby’s experiments on electro-dynamic engines — 
“They say that ‘the quantities of zinc consumed’ (that is, 
respectively, when the engine is at rest and doing work) 
‘ being as a to b, (a — b ) represents the quantity of heat con- 
verted by the engine into useful mechanical effect.’ There- 
fore, since on the supposition of a mechanical equivalent of 
heat a grain of zinc consumed equals 158 foot pounds, if 
x = pounds raised a foot high per consumption of a grain 
of zinc in the battery, — 
_{ a - b ) 158 
oc — 
a 
PBOOEEDIN 03 — Lit. & Phil. Soc — Vox. X.— No. 11.— Session 1870-71. 
