My dear Dr. Whewell
The following are references1.
Thomson - On Poissons2 Magnecrystallic views - Phil. Mag. March 1851, page 1773. Perhaps Thomson has something more about the matter in 1854, Comptes Rendus xxxviii pp. 632. 6374.
As to lines of Magnetic force you will find the test experiments described at p 28 of the accompanying paper Par 3351 &c. of Exp Res5.
Van Rees6 has a mathematical paper in Poggendorfs Annalen 1853, vol xc p 4157, - he is opposed to my views but says they give the same mathematical results8 as the views of Ampere9 or Coulomb10 or Weber11[.]
Thomson says that the lines represent truly the Magnetic forces & even more simply than the representative idea of Coulomb Phil Mag 1854, viii. p 5312
Another paper besides that on some points has turned up - I send it because pp. 4.5.6.7 has reference to what we said about Gravity[.]
Ever faithfully Yours | M. Faraday
Royal Institution | London W | 3 Feby 1857.
FARADAY, Michael (1855b): “On some Points of Magnetic Philosophy”, Phil. Mag., 9: 81-113.
REES, Richard van (1853): “Ueber die Faraday’sche Theorie der magnetischen Kraftlinien”, Pogg. Ann., 90: 415-36.
THOMSON, William (1851): “On the Theory of Magnetic Induction in Crystalline and Non-crystalline Substances”, Phil. Mag., 1: 177-86.
THOMSON, William (1854a): “On the Mathematical Theory of Electricity in Equilibrium”, Phil. Mag., 8: 42-62.
THOMSON, William (1854b): “Remarques sur les oscillations d’aiguilles non cristallisées de faible pouvoir inductif paramagnétique ou diamagnétique, et sur d’autres phénomènes magnétiques produits par des corps cristallisés ou non cristallisés”, Comptes Rendus, 38: 632-40.
WHEWELL, William (1857): History of the Inductive Sciences, from the Earliest to the Present Time, 3rd edition, 3 volumes, London.
Please cite as “Faraday3231,” in Ɛpsilon: The Michael Faraday Collection accessed on 29 April 2024, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/faraday/letters/Faraday3231