 Watt did ; and the dates here become very material. It appears that he wrote a letter to Dr. Priestley on 26th April, 1783, in which he reasons on the experiment of burning the two gases in a close vessel, and draws the conclusion, " that water is composed...  Mechanics' Magazine - Page 901840Full view - About this book
 | Davis Baird - 2004 - 297 pages
...first communicated his discovery that water is not a simple substance in a letter to Joseph Priestley. "Water is composed of dephlogisticated air and phlogiston deprived of part of their latent or elementary heat," Watt writes (quoted in Muirhead 1859, p. 321). Later, in 1783, he wrote to Joseph... | |
 | 390 pages
[ Sorry, this page's content is restricted ] | |
 | Douglas McKie - 1951 - 924 pages
[ Sorry, this page's content is restricted ] | |
 | James Anthony Froude, John Tulloch - 1844 - 774 pages
...from Watt explaining the hypothesis which a view of Priestley's experiments had suggested. This was, that water is composed of dephlogisticated air and phlogiston deprived of part of their elementary heat. This letter was communicated by Priestley at the time to several fellows of the Royal... | |
 | William Whewell - 1858 - 662 pages
[ Sorry, this page's content is restricted ] | |
 | Henry Cavendish - 530 pages
...reproduce it in full: As Mr. Watt, in a paper lately read before this Society, supposes water to consist of dephlogisticated air and phlogiston deprived of part of their latent heat, whereas I take no notice of the latter circumstance, it may be proper to mention in a few words the... | |
| |
