United States or Latvia ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Lavoisier's claim was soon disallowed even by his own countrymen, but for many years a bitter controversy was carried on by the partisans of Watt and Cavendish. The two principals, however, seem never to have entered into this controversy with anything like the same ardor as some of their successors, as they remained on the best of terms.
Supposing the bushel of grain to weigh 50 pounds, and that it gives 2 gallons of whiskey at 19°, each of which gallons is the product of 4lbs. of sugar; then the strong beer which contains in 40 gallons the sweet matter of 200lbs. of grain, contains the elements of 8 gallons of spirit, or 32lbs. of dry sweet substance; and as the 40 gallons of this beer weigh 320lbs. the 32lbs. of sugar form only one-tenth of it, which is one half of Lavoisier's proportions.
In this again we see a further extension of accurate measurement: another order of things different in quality began to be treated by a quantitative analysis. Lavoisier's is the greatest name. He gave a clear and logical classification of the chemical elements then known, which served as useful a purpose in that science, as classificatory systems in botany and zoology have done in those cases.
Although Boyle had stated very lucidly what he meant by the composition of a definite substance, about a century before Lavoisier's work on combustion, nevertheless the views of chemists concerning composition remained very vague and incapable of definite expression, until the experimental investigations of Lavoisier enabled him to form a clear mental picture of chemical changes as interactions between definite quantities of distinct substances.
"Audacity," he exclaimed to himself, "as inspired, perhaps, as a Lavoisier's or an Ampere's, the audacity of a Vinteuil making experiment, discovering the secret laws that govern an unknown force, driving across a region unexplored towards the one possible goal the invisible team in which he has placed his trust and which he never may discern!"
I have given a free rendering of Lavoisier's words. In these words Lavoisier defines the chemical conception of elements; since his time an element is "the actual term whereat chemical analysis has arrived," it is that which "with our present knowledge we cannot sub-divide"; and, as a working hypothesis, the notion of element has no wider meaning than this.
For all that, science gives us the truth only from one angle and the science of one age is often disproved by the science of the next. Modern chemists may agree on what happens when phosphorus burns, but many a theory of Lavoisier's day has been disproved in its turn. A thousand scientists have declared flying impossible to man, yet today men fly. Lavoisier was right, no doubt.
If Lavoisier's memoirs are examined closely, it is seen that at the very beginning of his chemical inquiries he assumed the accuracy, and the universal application, of the generalisation "nothing is created, either in the operations of art or in those of nature."
It may possibly be the same in a weaker liquor; which would increase the loss, in the inverse ratio of the density of the liquor. Such are the causes to which I attribute the great superiority of Lavoisier's products; and from those observations I thought I could establish the fabrication of whiskey upon new principles.
Reviving Lavoisier's idea, with modifications and additions, Liebig contended, and in the face of opposition finally demonstrated, that the source of animal heat is really the consumption of the fuel taken in through the stomach and the lungs.
Word Of The Day