I have seen assertions that he did not claim to have actually done the kite experiment, but only proposed it, and was after assumed to have done it. Maybe after a while he got embarrassed to correct people?
> The Founding Father once infamously electrocuted himself while trying to kill a turkey with electricity.
I'm pretty sure you only get to "electrocute" yourself once. Especially in 1743.
I wonder- his lack of grounding may just be what saved his life. If the mentioned chain connected to the outsides of both jars were grounded then there might have been a short across his heart.
Electrocute may also mean to injure, not just to kill...
The chain was probably the cell ground? Unless the Leyden jar had a different ground wire, which seems improbable. Likely he got it straight across the chest.
Thank you - it did feel a little silly to type, but I didn't care to search online, nor to get up.
Laziness subsided, my Collins (complete, 2016) - which is a rather accepting dictionary of new-fangled words or usages - has only two definitions, both involving death. (1. to kill as a result of electric shock; 2. (US) to execute in an electric chair).
To be electrocuted has always meant death, until relatively recently. Because Englishe talking is good not, it now can mean what formerly meant "shocked".
I still prefer the specificity of death for electrocuted. Keith Relf was electrocuted, if you can still talk about it, you received an electric shock.
Portmanteau of electric execution. Strangely enough, not used by Edison in the Current War against Tesla/Westinghouse. He made up words with mort that everyone has since forgotten.
For nonlethal electrical mishap, just "shock" is fine, and "electric shock" to disambiguate when there may be confusion with emotional shock from excessive surprise or physiological shock from a traumatic injury.
It's the start of the letter to his brother, which is linked[0]. That part isn't quoted in the body, but I thought the main part of the headline above the quote made it clear what it referred to.
Reminds me of a curiosity seen during a tour of the historic Filoli mansion: An appliance that cooks food by running mains power through it. Apparently someone in the early 20th century thought this was a good idea. I don't remember the exact food it was used for -- maybe hotdogs, or bacon?
The first thing Sony tried to build (before it was called Sony) was a rice cooker that used the water in the rice to complete the circuit. When the water boiled away, the cooker shut off.[1]
I had one of these in my student dorm in Shanghai ten years ago. If I'd raise my hands too close when shampooing I could feel the shock coming... I took cold showers most of the semester.
Wow, 10 lb turkeys. He would be aghast at trying to knock off a 22 lb Foster Farms turkey. :-)
One could make the argument that a turkey cooker that used an electrical current would be both more efficient and result in a more even cooking. Assuming the turkey was brined before cooking (fairly common), as the brine evaporates the conductivity goes down and the current would redirect to lest cooked areas. As a result cooking the entire bird evenly.
What's really interesting about Franklin electrocuting chickens is that electrocution went on to become the predominant method of killing chickens in the US poultry industry until 2017 when the largest purchaser of chickens, McDonalds, switched to using asphyxiating gas because activists were upset about the electrocution. Non-McDonalds chicken though is still killed the "old fashioned" way - through electrocution pioneered by Franklin. The electrocution doesn't actually kill the birds, it stuns them and makes them rigid prior to a giant saw cutting off their heads.
>The Founding Father once infamously electrocuted himself while trying to kill a turkey with electricity
Electrocution is death, or (more recently) serious injury, by electric shock. It does not mean "harmlessly shocked".
I have seen this error more and more often. It seems that the word is evolving to become more broad over time, since it's the only handy verb we have for "the application of current to a living thing". It originally meant only execution, hence the construction: electricity + execution. Then it broadened to any death, and then serious injury, and now it's being used for harmless shocks.
45 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 106 ms ] threadhttps://hauntedpalaceblog.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/the-stran...
I'm pretty sure you only get to "electrocute" yourself once. Especially in 1743.
I wonder- his lack of grounding may just be what saved his life. If the mentioned chain connected to the outsides of both jars were grounded then there might have been a short across his heart.
The chain was probably the cell ground? Unless the Leyden jar had a different ground wire, which seems improbable. Likely he got it straight across the chest.
I suspect a dictionary might accept it as an 'informal' alternative to the main 'death by' definition.
Laziness subsided, my Collins (complete, 2016) - which is a rather accepting dictionary of new-fangled words or usages - has only two definitions, both involving death. (1. to kill as a result of electric shock; 2. (US) to execute in an electric chair).
chortle (chuckle/snort) podcast (ipod/broadcast) newscast (news/broadcast) sportscaster (sports/broadcaster) motel (motor/hotel) email (electronic/mail) blog (web/log) bit (binary/digit) chunnel (channel/tunnel)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_portmanteaus
I still prefer the specificity of death for electrocuted. Keith Relf was electrocuted, if you can still talk about it, you received an electric shock.
Edit: spelling. Make Englyish great again!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_change
A lack of grounding would preclude the conduction of electricity. As this is HV, a small spark gap would not have helped remarkably.
For nonlethal electrical mishap, just "shock" is fine, and "electric shock" to disambiguate when there may be confusion with emotional shock from excessive surprise or physiological shock from a traumatic injury.
But in common use it just means to receive an injurious electric shock, nowadays.
[0] https://www.masshist.org/objects/cabinet/december2002/decemb...
(Seen here, on the counter:) https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a0/f7/35/a0f7352484c9426ea188...
It didn't work too well.
1. https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/09/sonys-first-failure-the-1...
An in Germany a just guy convinced 88 people to try to electrocute themselves and send him a video of it
https://blog.kevmo314.com/presto-hotdogger.html
One could make the argument that a turkey cooker that used an electrical current would be both more efficient and result in a more even cooking. Assuming the turkey was brined before cooking (fairly common), as the brine evaporates the conductivity goes down and the current would redirect to lest cooked areas. As a result cooking the entire bird evenly.
Here's a video of a typical poultry plant, though this one is in Mexico it's identical to US operations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMSNGZh60zY
(Warning: do not watch if you can't handle it it's exactly as described.)
Electrocution is death, or (more recently) serious injury, by electric shock. It does not mean "harmlessly shocked".
I have seen this error more and more often. It seems that the word is evolving to become more broad over time, since it's the only handy verb we have for "the application of current to a living thing". It originally meant only execution, hence the construction: electricity + execution. Then it broadened to any death, and then serious injury, and now it's being used for harmless shocks.