TWO:Although a system but recently developed, the employment of hydraulic machinery for transmitting and applying power has reached an extended application to a variety of purposes, and gives promise of a still more extensive use in future. Considered as a means of transmitting regularly a constant amount [54] of power, water apparatus is more expensive and inferior in many respects to belts or shafts, and its use must be traced to some special principle involved which adapts hydraulic apparatus to the performance of certain duties. This principle will be found to consist in storing up power in such a manner that it may be used with great force at intervals; and secondly, in the facilities afforded for multiplying force by such simple mechanism as pumps. An engine of ten-horse-power, connected with machinery by hydraulic apparatus, may provide for a force equal to one hundred horse-power for one-tenth part of the time, the power being stored up by accumulators in the interval; or in other words, the motive power acting continuously can be accumulated and applied at intervals as it may be required for raising weights, operating punches, compressive forging, or other work of an intermittent character. Hydraulic machinery employed for such purposes is more simple and inexpensive than gearing and shafts, especially in the application of a great force acting for a considerable distance, and where a cylinder and piston represent a degree of strength which could not be attained with twice the amount of detail, if gearing, screws, levers, or other devices were employed instead.With Socrates and Plato, scepticism exhibits itself under two new aspects: as an accompaniment of religious belief, and as an element of constructive thought. Thus they represent both the good and the bad side of this tendency: the aspect under which it is a help, and the aspect under which it is a hindrance to scientific investigation. With both philosophers, however, the restriction or negation of human knowledge was a consequence rather than a cause of their theological convictions; nor do they seem to have appreciated its value as a weapon in the controversy with religious unbelief. When Socrates represented the irreconcilable divergence in the explanations of Nature offered by previous thinkers as a sufficient condemnation of their several pretensions, he did not set this fact against the arguments by which a Xenophanes had similarly endeavoured to overthrow the popular mythology; but he looked on it as a fatal consequence of their insane presumption in meddling with the secrets of the gods. On one occasion only, when explaining to Euthyd��mus that the invisibility of the gods is no reason for doubting their existence, he argues, somewhat in Butler��s style, that our own minds, whose existence we cannot doubt, are equally invisible.222 And the Platonic Socrates makes it134 his business to demonstrate the universality of human ignorance, not as a caution against dogmatic unbelief, but as a glorification of the divine knowledge; though how we come to know that there is any such knowledge he leaves utterly unexplained.
Aliquam sit amet lorem dui Ut sodales erat tortor, Nulla sagittis dolor id mi tincidunt varius. Donec quis suscipit tortor vel pellentesque libero eget rhoncus nulla rutrum sit amet