Exposition of the atomic theory of chymistry : and the doctrine of definite proportions / by William James Macneven ... ; with an appendix of chymical exercises, by the pupils of the laboratory, &c.

  • MacNeven, William James, 1763-1841.
Date:
1819
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Exposition of the atomic theory of chymistry : and the doctrine of definite proportions / by William James Macneven ... ; with an appendix of chymical exercises, by the pupils of the laboratory, &c. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the National Library of Medicine (U.S.), through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the National Library of Medicine (U.S.)

    43/126
    Berzelius, the corpuscular theory of chymistry is most largely indebted, have not failed, with many valuable improvements, to introduce a further per- plexity, by determining chymical proportions in volumes and not in atoms. Their method is in- deed founded on a fact discovered by Gay Lu- sac, namely, that bodies when in a state of gas unite either in equal volumes, or 1 volume of one combines with 2, 3, &c. volumes of the other; a fact which has been verified by several other distin- guished chymists. Berzelius, also, prefers the com- putation in volumes; and, though, in the meaning of those very eminent chymists, volumes are but another name for atoms, yet it injures the unity and simplicity of the doctrine to represent essential prin- ciples in such diversified forms and expressions. It is true that in the present state of our knowledge, the theory of volumes has the advantage of being founded on a well constituted fact, and it admits of our taking a demi-volume in calculation ; while, in the theory of atoms, a demi-atom is an absurdity. But then it is a very forced and unnatural assumption to represent all bodies in a state of gas, even those which were never known to assume that form, or which can be supposed ever to exist in it, in order to determine the proportional weights of their con- stituent parts. Hence, as there is in reality no dif- ference intended by the theory of volumes, but that