10th March 1863
My dear Clausius
It gives me great pleasure to send you a copy of my Lectures on Heat.1
I also send you an abstract of a lecture which I gave2 here some time ago on the action of the aqueous vapour of the air.
Further, I send you a short paper3 which refers to your friend Mr. Thomson: it will explain itself.
Pray read the note which Thomson has appended to his article & which is meant to show that Mayer operated on false principles. I think it will surprise you.4
I confine my remarks to Thomson because he is my real antagonist—of Tait I know nothing.
At the time of the glacier controversy5 in this country Thomson I learned was unsparing in his censures. My reply always was “if he has any thing to say against me let him do so openly.” But he did nothing of the kind. Now however he appears in print but not in an open manner of course my duty is to compel him to state his case against me in the presence of those who are expected to give an opinion on the subject.
It is unpleasant work—causing loss of time & loss of temper—but it will never do to allow Mr. Thomson to take such liberties with impunity.
Kindest regards to Madame Clausius.6 Goodbye | Yours ever sincerely | John Tyndall
RI MS JT/1/T/187
Lectures on Heat: Heat as a Mode of Motion (see letter 1962, n. 1).
a lecture which I gave: see letter 1948, n. 7.
a short paper: probably J. Tyndall, ‘Remarks on an Article entitled “Energy” in “Good Words”’, Phil. Mag., 25 (1863), pp. 220–4. The reference to Thomson is W. Thomson and P. G. Tait, ‘Energy’, Good Words, 3 (October 1862), pp. 601–7. See also Ascent of John Tyndall, pp. 176–7.
I think it will surprise you: Tyndall was in dispute with Joule, Thomson, and others regarding the priority to the discovery of the mechanical equivalent of heat. Tyndall supported Mayer’s claim to priority over that of Joule. The dispute occupied Tyndall for the duration of the period covered by this volume. See the introductory essay for further commentary.
the glacier controversy: during the early 1850s and early 1860s, Tyndall was in dispute with James David Forbes, Thomson, and others over the physics of glacier motion. See the introductory essay to this and earlier volumes for further commentary.
Madame Clausius: Adelheid Clausius.
Please cite as “Tyndall1979,” in Ɛpsilon: The John Tyndall Collection accessed on