copper wire about 0.04 in. in diameter, inclosed in an insulating casing of gutta percha, giving to the conductor thus protected a total thickness of 0.20 in.; this wire is coiled, as shown in the illustration. It forms twenty-nine turns in each section, and the direction of winding changes at each passage in front of a pole piece. The ends of the wire coinciding with the horizontal diameter of the ring are stripped of the gutta percha, and are connected to copper wires which are twisted together and around two copper rods, which are placed vertically, their lower ends entering two small cavities made in the base of the apparatus. The circuit is thus continuous with two ends at opposite points of the same diameter. The ring is about 1.1 in. thick, and is fixed, as shown, to two wooden columns, B B, by two blocks of copper, a.

THE ELIAS ELECTROMOTOR.—MADE IN 1842.

It will be seen from the mode of coiling the wire on this ring, that if a battery be connected by means of the copper rods, the current will create six consecutive poles on the various projecting blocks. The inner ring, E, is about 11 in. in outside diameter, and is also provided with a series of six projecting pieces which pass before those on the exterior ring with very little clearance. Between these projections the space between the inner face of the outer, and the outer face of the inner ring, is 0.40 in. The latter is movable, and is supported by three wooden arms, F, fixed to a boss, G, which is traversed by a spindle supported in bearings by the columns, A and C. A coil is rolled around the ring in exactly the same way as that on the outer ring, the wire being of the same size, and the insulation of the same thickness. The ends of the wire are also bared at points of the diameter opposite each other, and the coil connected in pairs so as to form a continuous circuit. At the two points of junction they are connected with a hexagonal commutator placed on the central spindle, one end corresponding to the sides 1, 3, and 5, and the other to the sides 2, 4, and 6. Two copper rods, J, fixed on the base to two plates of copper furnished with binding screws, are widened and flattened at their upper ends to rest against opposite parallel sides of the hexagon. It will be seen that if the battery is put in circuit by means of the binding screws, the current in the interior ring will determine six consecutive poles, the names of which will change as the commutator plates come into contact successively with the sides of the hexagon. Consequently, if at first the pole-pieces opposite each other are magnetized with the same polarity, a repulsion between them will be set up which will set the inner ring in motion, and the effect will be increased on account of the attraction of the next pole of the outer ring. At the moment when the pole piece thus attracted comes into the field of the pole of opposite polarity, the action of the commutator will change its magnetization, while that of the pole-piece on the fixed ring always remains the same; the same phenomenon of repulsion will be produced, and the inner ring will continue its movement in the same direction, and so on. To the attractive and repulsive action of the magnetic poles has to be added the reciprocal action of the coils around the two rings, the action of which is similar. From this brief explanation the differences between the Elias machine and the Gramme will be understood. The Dutch physicist did not contemplate the production of a current; he utilized two distinct sources of electricity to set the inner ring in motion, and did not imagine that it was possible, by suppressing one of the inducing currents and putting the ring in rapid rotation, to obtain a continuous current. Moreover, if ever this apparent resemblance had been real, the merit of the Gramme invention would not have been affected by it. It has happened very many times that inventors living in different countries, and strangers to one another, have been inspired with the same idea, and have followed it by similar methods, either simultaneously or at different periods, without the application having led to the same results. It does not suffice even for the seed to be the same; it must have fallen in good ground, and be cultivated with care; here it scarcely germinates, there it produces a vigorous plant and abundant fruit.—Engineering.

BJERKNES'S EXPERIMENTS.

As a general thing, too much trust should not be placed in words. In the first place, it frequently happens that their sense is not well defined, or that they are not understood exactly in the same way by everybody, and this leads to sad misunderstandings. But even in case they are precise, and are received everywhere under a single acceptation, there still remains one danger, and that is that of passing from the word to the idea, and of being led to believe that, because there is a word, there is a real thing designated by this word.

Let us take, for example, the word electricity. If we understand by this term the common law which embraces a certain category of phenomena, it expresses a clear and useful idea; but as for its existence, it is not permitted to believe a priori that there is a distinct agent called electricity which is the efficient cause of the phenomena. We ought never, says the old rule of philosophy, to admit entities without an absolute necessity. The march of science has always consisted in gradually eliminating these provisory conceptions and in reducing the number of causes. This fact is visible without going back to the ages of ignorance, when every new phenomenon brought with it the conception of a special being which caused it and directed it. In later ages they had spirits in which there was everything: volatile liquids, gases, and theoretical conceptions, such as phlogiston. At the end of the last century, and at the beginning of our own, ideas being more rational, the notion of the "fluid" had been admitted, a mysterious and still vague enough category (but yet an already somewhat definite one) in which were ranged the unknown and ungraspable causes of caloric, luminous, electric, etc., phenomena. Gradually, the "fluid" has vanished, and we are left (or rather, we were a short time ago) at the notion of forces—a precise and mathematically graspable notion, but yet an essentially mysterious one. We see this conception gradually disappearing to leave finally only the elementary ideas of matter and motion—ideas, perhaps, which are not much clearer philosophically than the others, particularly that of matter taken per se, but which, at least, are necessary, since all the others supposed them.

Among those notions that study and time are reducing to other and simpler ones, that of electricity should be admitted; for it presents itself more and more as one of the peculiar cases of the general motion of matter. It will be to the eternal honor of Fresnel for having introduced into science and mathematically constituted the theory of undulations (already proposed before him, however), thus giving the first example of the notion of motion substituted for that of force. Since the principle of the conservation of energy has taken the eminent place in science that it now occupies, and we have seen a continual transformation of one series of phenomena into another, the mind is at once directed to the aspect of a new fact toward an explanation of this kind. Still, it is certain that these hypotheses are difficult of justification; for those motions that are at present named molecular, and that we cannot help presuming to be at the base of all actions, are per se ungraspable and can only be demonstrated by the coincidence of a large number of results. There is, however, another means