<i>The Correspondence of Michael Faraday</i>, edited by Frank A.J.L. James
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Correspondence of Michael Faraday, edited by Frank A.J.L. James. 6 volumes: Volume I: 1811-1831 Volume II: 1832-1840 Volume III: 1841-1848 Volume IV: 1849-1855 Volume V: 1865-1860 Volume VI: 1860-1867 Volumes I-IV, London, The Institution of Electrical Engineers, 1991-99; volumes V-VI, London, The Institution of Engineering and Technology, 2008-12. I: lv + 807 pp., II: lvii + 835 pp., III: lxv + 1,003 pp., IV: lviii + 836 pp., V: xlix + 673 pp., VI: lxi + 919 pp. Set of six volumes: 450 [pounds sterling]/640.40 [pounds sterling] US (cloth). Each volume may be purchased separately. Michael Faraday (1791-1867) is mainly remembered today as a discoverer whose researches established and transformed a new understanding of electricity, and as a pioneer in electro-magnetism, electrochemistry, and the conceptual but non-mathematical adumbration of field theory. He is also remembered for his humble beginnings as the son of a blacksmith who became first a book-binder's apprentice, then Humphry Davy's laboratory assistant, and finally Davy's successor in the Royal Institution of Great Britain, and one of the nineteenth century's leading physicists (although he preferred the title of natural philosopher): in short, the perfect embodiment of the Victorian ideal of self-help. Then there is Faraday the Christian, member of what he called a small sect, the Sandemanians, whose faith exerted a major influence on his life and work. There is also Faraday the lecturer, one who thought early and deeply about the craft of lecturing and the role of experiment therein; he founded the Friday evening discourses and the Christmas lectures for children at the Royal Institution, establishing a tradition that still continues, and promoting what we call the public understanding of science. Always serious, never condescending, he was as brilliant a lecturer as he was an experimentalist and natural philosopher. All these aspects are illuminated by James's edition. But the correspondence reveals a good deal more, and enriches our understanding of the range of Faraday's occupations, the balance among them, and the place of pure and applied science in nineteenth-century British and European society. Faraday was a prolific researcher and became a prolific correspondent. Writing and receiving letters were among his keenest pleasures. As a young man, Faraday wrote that my mind delights to occupy itself in serious subjects (I, p. 39). He was a generous and wonderfully informative correspondent, although it seems unlikely that his mother was as excited as he was by the accounts he sent her of his scientific news from the European tour with Davy. Frank James's newly completed edition runs to over 5,000 pages, and contains 5,053 letters. They range from 1811, when Faraday was twenty years old, until the year before his death. In his final year his wife Sarah wrote for him, and the very last letter in these volumes is a letter of condolence to Sarah from the Prince of Wales. Over seventy per cent of the letters have not been published before. Tracing, collecting, transcribing, editing and annotating these letters were very substantial tasks which occupied James as sole editor (unusually in an age where similar projects have teams of editors) for twenty-six years, and to admirable effect. The letters are arranged chronologically, with a section of the final volume containing 143 undated letters (some of which are approximately dated by James). That volume also contains 306 letters belonging to years covered by previous volumes, but located too late for inclusion in them; more will no doubt turn up. The notes identify people, publications and institutions, and explain events where the letters fail to do so. There is a biographical register of individuals mentioned three or more times in each volume, with an indication of where more detailed information may be found. Those persons occurring fewer than three times are identified in the notes. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".