{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.035493827160493825, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02546296296296296, 'mean_word_length': 4.8954545454545455, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries

equivalent of heat' (1851), all newly translated except for the lengthy 'Celestial dynamics'. Unfortunately, the virtues of the compilation suffer from the absence of perceptive editorial work. The 1842 essay lacks the two critically important paragraphs in which Mayer clarified his new interpretation of Kraft in terms of cause and effect relationships in chemistry (cf. pp. 68-9 and The correlation and conservation of forces, ed. E. Youmans [New York, 1870], pp. 252-3), and several clauses are missing at the close of the top paragraph on page 70. Moreover, the English version of the table in which Mayer presented his image of the relationships between the various forces is not complete. There is no indication that Mayer bracketed together the forces of vibrational motion, heat, magnetism, and electricity under the label imponderables, nor does the bracket designating chemical forces include the category of galvanic current as it should. These typographical errors, together with some misleading editorial comments, e.g. that Mayer might have known in 1842 of Joule's work on the frictional generation of heat (p. 71) or that Mayer should have studied Carnot's work in 1845 (p. 41), mar what could have been a trustworthy and helpful new resource.