E-text prepared by Barbara Tozier, Ronnie Sahlberg, Bill Tozier, and the
Project Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team
(https://www.pgdp.net)
Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this
file which includes the original illustrations.
See 24667-h.htm or 24667-h.zip:
(https://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/4/6/6/24667/24667-h/24667-h.htm)
or
(https://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/4/6/6/24667/24667-h.zip)
Transcriber's note:
Numbers preceded by a carat character are superscripts
(example: 3^2 = 9).
Numbers preceded by an underscore are subscripts
(example: CO_2)
Text enclosed by underscores is italicized.
A detailed transcriber's note is at the end of the text.
AETHER AND GRAVITATION
by
WILLIAM GEORGE HOOPER, F.S.S.
[Illustration]
London
Chapman and Hall, Ltd.
1903
INTRODUCTORY NOTES
The author in this work endeavours to solve the greatest scientific
problem that has puzzled scientists for the past two hundred years. The
question has arisen over and over again, since the discovery of
universal gravitation by Sir Isaac Newton, as to what is the physical
cause of the attraction of gravitation.
"Action at a distance" has long ceased to be recognized as a possible
phenomenon, although up to the present, the medium and method of
gravitational attraction have not yet been discovered.
It is, however, generally accepted by scientists, that the only possible
medium which can give rise to the phenomena incidental to, and
associated with the Law of Gravitation, must be the universal aether,
which forms the common medium of all phenomena associated with light,
heat, electricity and magnetism.
It is impossible, however, to reconcile gravitational phenomena with the
present conception of the universal aether medium, and a new theory is
therefore demanded, before the long-sought-for explanation will be
forthcoming.
Professor Glazebrook definitely states the necessity for a new theory in
his work on J. C. Maxwell, page 221, where he writes: "We are waiting
for some one to give us a theory of the aether, which shall include the
facts of electricity and magnetism, luminous radiation, and it may be
gravitation."
A new theory of the aether is also demanded in view of the recent
experimental results of Professor Lebedew, and Nichols and Hull of
America. It is logically impossible to reconcile a frictionless aether,
with their results relative to the pressure of light waves.
In the following pages of this work the author has endeavoured to
perfect a theory, which will bring aetherial physics more into harmony
with modern observation and experiments; and by so doing, believes that
he has found the key that will unlock the problem not only of the cause
of universal gravitation, but also other problems of physical science.
The author has taken Newton's Rules of Philosophy as his guide in the
making of the new theory, as he believes that if any man knew anything
of the rules of Philosophy, that man was Sir Isaac Newton. The first
chapter therefore deals with the generally recognized rules which govern
philosophical reasoning, the same being three in number; the fundamental
rule being, that in making any hypothesis, the results of experience as
obtained by observation and experiments must not be violated.
In applying the rules to the present theory of the aether, he found that
the theory as at present recognized violated two of the most important
rules of Philosophy, because, while aether is supposed to be matter, yet
it failed to fulfil the primary property of all matter, that is, it is
not subject to the Law of Gravitation. If aether is matter, then, to be
strictly logical and philosophical, it must possess the properties of
matter as revealed by observation and experiment.
Those properties are given in Chapter III., where it is shown that they
are atomicity, heaviness or weight, elasticity, density, inertia, and
compressibility. To be strictly logical and philosophical, the author
was compelled to postulate similar properties for the aether, or else
his hypotheses would contravert the results of all experience.
The application of these properties to the aether will be found in
Chapter IV., where the author has postulated atomicity, heaviness or
weight, density, elasticity, inertia, and compressibility for the
aether, and so brought the theory of the aether into perfect harmony
with all observation and experiments relative to ordinary matter. It
will be shown that Clerk Maxwell also definitely affirms the atomicity
of the aether, while Tyndall and Huyghens also use the term "_particles
of aether_" over and over again.
Moreover, in view of the most recent researches in electricity made by
Sir William Crookes and Professor J. J. Thomson, we are compelled to
accept an atomic basis for electricity, and as Dr. Lodge, in his _Modern
Views of Electricity_, states that "Aether is made up of positive and
negative electricity," then, unless we postulate atomicity for the
aether, we have to suppose that it is possible for a non-atomic body
(aether) to be made up of atoms or corpuscles, which conclusion is
absurd, and therefore must be rejected as illogical and unphilosophical.
After postulating atomicity for the aether, we are then able to apply
the Newtonian Law of Gravitation to it, which distinctly affirms that
"every particle of matter attracts every other particle," and so we
arrive at Thomas Young's fourth hypothesis given in the Philosophical
Transactions of 1802, where he asserts that "All material bodies have an
attraction for the aetherial medium, by means of which it is
accumulated within their substance, and for a small distance around them
in a state of greater density." He adds the significant remark that this
hypothesis is opposed to that of Newton's. With an atomic and
gravitative aether it is shown in Chapter IV. how the elasticity,
density, and inertia of the medium are brought into harmony with all
observation and experiments.
In the succeeding chapters the new theory is applied to the phenomena of
heat, light, electricity, and magnetism, and the principles enunciated
therein are then applied to solar and stellar phenomena.
One of the greatest stumbling-blocks to the discovery of the physical
cause of gravitation, apart from the unphilosophical theory of the
aether medium, lies in the fact that apparently the Law of Gravitation
only recognizes a force of one kind. Dr. Lodge refers to this phase of
the subject on page 39 of his _Modern Views of Matter_ just published.
It is here where scientists have failed to solve the problem of
universal gravitation, as there are _two_ forces at work in the solar
system and not one; that is, if we are to accept the results of
up-to-date experiments in relation to radiant light and heat as
performed by Professor Lebedew, and Nichols and Hull of America. Their
experiments conclusively prove that light waves exert a pressure upon
all bodies on which they fall, and by no reasoning can this pressure be
resolved into an attractive force.
Herschel in his _Lectures on Scientific Subjects_ definitely refers to
the existence of a repulsive force in the solar system, and asserts that
it offers the most interesting prospect of any future discovery.
The author has therefore attacked the problem of the cause of
gravitation, by trying to solve the problem of the cause of the
_repulsive_ force which has been experimentally demonstrated to exist by
Professor Lebedew and others.
In his efforts to ascertain the physical cause of the Centrifugal Force,
he has been assisted by an unknown and original essay written by an
unknown writer over twenty years ago. That unknown writer was the
author's father, who wrote an essay on the _Complementary Law of
Gravitation_, and if it had not been for that essay, the present work
would never have been attempted.
The main object of the author in Chapters VI., VII., and VIII., is to
prove beyond the possibility of contradiction, from the phenomena of
heat, light, and electricity, the existence of _two_ forces in the solar
system; and by so doing, to bring our philosophy of the aether medium,
and all gravitational phenomena, into harmony with all observation and
experiments, which at present is not the case. In seeking to do this he
found that the new theory of the aether harmonized with views given, by
Faraday and Clerk Maxwell in relation to electric and magnetic
phenomena, and by the new theory Maxwell's hypothesis of "Physical Lines
of Force" receives a definite and physical basis. In Chapter X. the
author endeavours to show what the Electro-Kinetic energy is, which term
is used by Clerk Maxwell, the term being brought for the first time into
harmony with our experience. The Electro-Magnetic Theory of Light also
receives fresh light from the new theory of an atomic and gravitating
aether.
In the succeeding chapters the theory is applied to Newton's Laws of
Motion and Kepler's Laws, and is found to harmonize with all the results
given by these laws. Such a result is a distinct advance on the
application of a frictionless aether to solar and stellar phenomena, as
it is impossible for Kepler's Laws to be reconciled in any way with our
present theory of the aether.
In the concluding chapter on the unity of the universe, certain views
are suggested as to the ultimate constitution of all matter, upon an
aetherial basis, which hypothesis practically resolves itself into an
electric basis for all matter. It is suggested that aether and
electricity are one and the same medium, both being a form of matter,
and both possessing exactly the same properties, viz. atomicity, weight,
density, elasticity, inertia, and compressibility. This view of matter
harmonizes with the most "Modern Views of Matter" as suggested by Sir
Oliver Lodge in his Romanes Lecture 1903.
The author has accepted Newton's way of spelling "_aether_" as given in
his work on _Optics_, and has given "_aetherial_" the same suffix as
"material," in order to differentiate the word from "ethereal," which is
too metaphysical a term for a material medium.
_Nottingham_,
_Sept._ 1903.
CONTENTS
CHAPTER I
PHILOSOPHY OF GRAVITATION
PAGE
ART. 1. GRAVITATION 1
" 2. CAUSE OF GRAVITATION 1
" 3. NEWTON'S RULES OF PHILOSOPHY 3
" 4. FIRST RULE OF PHILOSOPHY 3
" 5. SECOND RULE OF PHILOSOPHY 4
" 6. THIRD RULE OF PHILOSOPHY 7
" 7. APPLICATION OF RULES TO GRAVITATION 9
" 8. ANALYSIS OF LAW OF GRAVITATION 9
" 9. PRIMITIVE IMPULSE 10
" 10. CENTRIPETAL FORCE 12
" 11. CENTRIFUGAL FORCE 13
" 12. NEWTON'S LAWS OF MOTION 15
" 13. FORCE 16
" 14. FIRST LAW OF MOTION 16
" 15. SECOND LAW OF MOTION 19
" 16. THIRD LAW OF MOTION 20
" 17. SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 22
CHAPTER II
PHILOSOPHY OF GRAVITATION--(_continued_)
ART. 18. GRAVITATION ATTRACTION 24
" 19. UNIVERSALITY OF GRAVITATION 24
" 20. DIRECTION OF THE FORCES 26
" 21. PROPORTION OF THE FORCES 26
" 22. LAW OF INVERSE SQUARES 27
" 23. TERRESTRIAL GRAVITY 29
" 24. CENTRIFUGAL FORCE 30
" 25. KEPLER'S LAWS 32
" 26. FIRST LAW OF KEPLER 33
" 27. SECOND LAW OF KEPLER 36
" 28. THIRD LAW OF KEPLER 37
CHAPTER III
MATTER
ART. 29. WHAT IS MATTER? 40
" 30. CONSERVATION OF MATTER 42
" 31. MATTER IS ATOMIC 42
" 32. WHAT IS AN ATOM? 43
" 33. THE ATOMIC THEORY 44
" 34. KINDS OF ATOMS 44
" 35. ELEMENTS OF MATTER 47
" 36. THREE KINDS OF MATTER 47
" 37. MATTER IS GRAVITATIVE 50
" 38. MATTER POSSESSES DENSITY 51
" 39. MATTER POSSESSES ELASTICITY 51
" 40. MATTER POSSESSES INERTIA 52
CHAPTER IV
AETHER
ART. 42. AETHER IS MATTER 54
" 43. AETHER IS UNIVERSAL 58
" 44. AETHER IS ATOMIC 59
" 45. AETHER IS GRAVITATIVE 64
" 46. AETHER POSSESSES DENSITY 71
" 47. AETHER POSSESSES ELASTICITY 74
" 48. AETHER POSSESSES INERTIA 76
" 49. AETHER IS IMPRESSIBLE 78
" 50. AETHER AND ITS MOTIONS 80
CHAPTER V
ENERGY
ART. 51. ENERGY 83
" 52. CONSERVATION OF ENERGY 84
" 53. TRANSFORMATION OF ENERGY 86
" 54. POTENTIAL ENERGY 87
" 55. KINETIC ENERGY 89
" 56. ENERGY AND MOTION 91
" 57. CONSERVATION OF MOTION 92
" 58. TRANSFORMATION OF MOTION 93
" 59. MOTION AND WORK 95
CHAPTER VI
HEAT, A MODE OF MOTION
ART. 60. HEAT, A MODE OF MOTION 98
" 61. HEAT AND MATTER 100
" 62. RADIATION AND ABSORPTION 104
" 63. HEAT IS A REPULSIVE MOTION 107
" 64. RADIANT HEAT 109
" 65. DIRECTION OF A RAY OF HEAT 111
" 66. LAW OF INVERSE SQUARES 112
" 67. FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS 114
" 68. SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS 116
" 69. IDENTITY OF HEAT AND LIGHT 119
CHAPTER VII
LIGHT, A MODE OF MOTION
ART. 70. LIGHT, A MODE OF MOTION 122
" 71. TRANSVERSE VIBRATION OF LIGHT 130
" 72. REFLECTION AND REFRACTION 135
" 73. THE SOLAR SPECTRUM 139
" 74. DIRECTION OF A RAY OF LIGHT 144
" 75. INTENSITY OF LIGHT 145
" 76. VELOCITY OF LIGHT 148
" 77. DYNAMICAL VALUE OF LIGHT 150
" 78. ELECTRO-MAGNETIC THEORY OF LIGHT 155
CHAPTER VIII
AETHER AND ELECTRICITY
ART. 79. ELECTRICITY, A MODE OF MOTION 162
" 80. ELECTRIC FIELD 166
" 81. ELECTRIC INDUCTION 174
" 82. ELECTRIC ENERGY 179
" 83. ELECTRIC RADIATION 182
" 84. LAW OF INVERSE SQUARES 184
" 85. SECOND LAW OF ELECTRICITY 186
CHAPTER IX
AETHER AND MAGNETISM
ART. 86. ELECTRO-MAGNETISM 192
" 87. THE EARTH A MAGNET 195
" 88. THE SUN AN ELECTRO-MAGNET 199
" 89. FARADAY'S LINES OF FORCE 203
" 90. TERRESTRIAL MAGNETISM 206
" 91. SOLAR MAGNETS 211
" 92. CAUSE OF ROTATION OF THE EARTH ON ITS AXIS 219
" 93. VORTEX MOTION 221
" 94. RELATIVE MOTION OF AETHER AND MATTER 224
" 95. VIBRATIONS IN THE ELECTRO-MAGNETIC THEORY OF LIGHT 228
CHAPTER X
AETHER AND NEWTON'S LAWS OF MOTION
ART. 96. AETHER AND CENTRIFUGAL FORCE 232
" 97. AETHER AND CENTRIPETAL FORCE 236
" 98. AETHER AND NEWTON'S FIRST LAW OF MOTION 239
" 99. AETHER AND NEWTON'S SECOND LAW OF MOTION 244
" 100. AETHER AND NEWTON'S THIRD LAW OF MOTION 251
" 101. WHY PLANETS REVOLVE FROM WEST TO EAST 253
CHAPTER XI
AETHER AND KEPLER'S LAWS
ART. 102. AETHER AND KEPLER'S FIRST LAW 256
" 103. AETHER AND KEPLER'S SECOND LAW 260
" 104. AETHER AND KEPLER'S THIRD LAW 263
" 105. ORBITAL MOTION OF PLANETS 266
" 106. ECCENTRICITY OF THE MOON'S ORBIT 268
" 107. THE SUN AND KEPLER'S FIRST LAW 270
" 108. THE SUN AND KEPLER'S SECOND LAW 274
" 109. AETHER AND THE PLANE OF THE ECLIPTIC 277
" 110. AETHER AND THE CENTRIPETAL FORCE 282
CHAPTER XII
AETHER AND COMETS
ART. 111. WHAT IS A COMET? 291
" 112. ORBITS OF COMETS 293
" 113. KINDS OF COMETS 296
" 114. PARTS OF A COMET 298
" 115. CENTRIFUGAL FORCE AND COMETS 300
" 116. FORMATION OF TAILS 303
CHAPTER XIII
AETHER AND STARRY WORLD
ART. 117. STARRY WORLD 306
" 118. STARS AND KEPLER'S LAWS 309
" 119. AETHER AND NEBULAE 313
" 120. WHAT IS A NEBULA? 314
" 121. AETHER AND NEBULAR HYPOTHESIS 317
" 122. KINDS OF NEBULAE 319
CHAPTER XIV
AETHER AND THE UNIVERSE
ART. 123. THE UNIVERSE 323
" 124. UNITY OF THE UNIVERSE 326
" 125. CONSTITUTION OF MATTER 334
" 126. QUOD ERAT FACIENDUM 337
" 127. GOD AND THE UNIVERS 342
APPENDIX 349
INDEX 351
AETHER AND GRAVITATION
CHAPTER I
PHILOSOPHY OF GRAVITATION
ART. 1. _Gravitation._--In the realm of Science, there exists a Force or
Law that pervades and influences all Nature, and from the power of
which, nothing, not even an atom, is free.
It holds together the component parts of each and every individual
world, and in the world's revolving prevents both its inhabitants and
its vegetation from being whirled off its surface into space. It exists
in each and every central sun, and circles round each sun its associated
system of planets. It rolls each satellite around its primary planet,
and regulates the comet's mysterious flight into the depths of space,
while the pendulation of even the remotest star is accomplished by this
same force. Our own rocking world obeys the same mysterious power, that
seems to grasp the entire material creation as with the grasp of the
Infinite.
It exists in, and influences every atom, whose combinations compose and
constitute the entire material creation, or each and every orb that
bespangle the blue infinity.
As is readily seen, it weaves as it were around each and all, a
mysterious network or chain, that binds star to star, and world to
world, blending all into one entire, vast and complete unity. It decides
all their orbits and distances, regulates and controls all their
motions, from the most simple even to the more complex and intricate,
ultimately producing that wondrous and beauteous order, unity and
harmony that everywhere pervade and blend all the universe into one
grand and harmonious whole.
That Law I need hardly say is the Law of Gravitation.
ART. 2. _Cause of Gravitation._--Now the question arises, and indeed has
arisen a thousand times since the discovery of this law by Sir Isaac
Newton over two hundred years ago, as to what is the physical cause, the
true explanation of this universal attraction.
MacLaurin in his work on the philosophical discoveries of Sir Isaac
Newton says: "In all cases when bodies seem to act upon each other at a
distance, and tend towards one another without any apparent cause
impelling them, this force has been commonly called Attraction, and this
term is frequently used by Sir Isaac Newton. But he gives repeated
caution that he pretends not by the use of this term to define the
nature of the power, or the manner in which it acts. Nor does he ever
affirm or insinuate that a body can act upon another body at a distance,
but by the intervention of other bodies."
The results of modern discovery show that action at a distance, without
the intervention of any medium, as for example the sun attracting the
earth, is not the universal condition which governs all so-called
forces.
It is now recognized that light and heat are both forms of energy, and
therefore forces, using the term in the same sense that it is applied to
Gravitation.
Both light and heat are transmitted through space with finite velocity
through the intervention of a medium, the universal Aether. It is
therefore only reasonable to suppose, that if one or more particular
kinds of energy, or forces, require a medium for their transmission, why
not another force, as for example Gravitation?
Gravitation is an universal force which operates throughout the length
and breadth of the entire universe, and if there be a medium which is to
Gravitation, what the Aether is to light and heat, the question at once
confronts us, as to what are the characteristics, properties, and
qualities of that universal medium, which is to form the physical basis
of this universal attraction?
Newton himself suggested that Gravitation was due to an aetherial subtle
medium, which filled all space.
In his well-known letter to Bentley, Newton writes as follows: "That
Gravity should be innate, inherent, and essential to matter, so that one
body can act upon another body at a distance through a vacuum, without
the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and
force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an
absurdity, that I believe no man who has any philosophical nature or
competent faculty of thinking can ever fall into it."
We also know from his Queries in his book on _Optics_, that he sought
for the explanation of Gravitation in the properties of a subtle,
aetherial medium diffused over the universe.
MacLaurin on this point says: "It appears from his letters to Boyle,
that this was his opinion early, and if he did not publish his opinion
sooner, it proceeded from hence only, that he found he was not able from
experiment and observation to give a satisfactory account of this
medium, and the manner of its operations in producing the chief
phenomena of Nature."
Therefore, if we accept Newton's suggestion, and endeavour to trace the
physical cause of Gravitation in the qualities, properties, and motions
of this subtle aetherial medium to which he refers, we shall be simply
working on the lines laid down by Sir Isaac Newton himself.
I wish therefore to premise, that the future pages of this work will
deal with the hypothesis of this aetherial medium, by which will be
accounted for, and that on a satisfactory and physical basis, the
universal Law of Gravitation.
ART. 3. _Rules of Philosophy._--In order that we may rightly understand
the making of any hypothesis, I purpose giving some rules laid down by
such philosophers as Newton and Herschel, so that we may be guided by
right principles in the development of this new hypothesis as to the
cause of Gravitation.
The rules that govern the making of any hypotheses, so far as I can
discern, may be summed up under the three following heads--
(1) Simplicity of conception.
(2) Agreement with experience, observation, and experiment.
(3) Satisfactorily accounting for, and explaining all phenomena
sought to be explained.
ART. 4. _1st Rule. Simplicity of Conception._--From this rule we learn
that the hypothesis must be simple in conception, and simple in its
fundamental principles, and further, that the same characteristic of
simplicity must mark each step of its development.
This rule of simplicity is distinctly laid down by Sir Isaac Newton in
his _Principia_, Book 3, under the heading "Regulae Philosophandi."
In that work he writes: "Natura simplex est, et rerum causis superfluis
non luxuriat."--"Nature is simple, and does not abound in superfluous
causes of things."
He further states that: "Not more of the natural causes of things ought
to be admitted, than those which are true and suffice to explain
phenomena. In the nature of Philosophy nothing is done in vain, and by
means of many things, it is done in vain when it can be done by fewer.
For Nature is simple, and does not abound in superfluous causes."
While again in Rule 3, he adds: "Natura simplex est et sibi semper
consona."--"Nature is simple, and always agrees with itself."
Whewell also considers simplicity as a fundamental principle of all true
hypotheses. On this point he writes: "All the hypotheses should tend to
simplicity and harmony. The new suppositions resolve themselves into the
old ones, or at least only require some easy modification of the
hypothesis first assumed. In false theories the contrary is the case."
Thus, it is the very essence of philosophy to build upon a foundation of
simplicity, combined with the results of experience, observation, and
experiment. For example, if we desired to form a hypothesis as to the
cause of day and night, two hypotheses might be assigned as to the
cause.
First, that the earth revolves on its axis once a day, and so presents
each part successively to the light and heat of the sun; and second,
that the sun revolves round the earth once every 24 hours. But such an
assumption as the latter would involve the revolution of the sun through
an immense orbit at an enormous velocity, in order for the journey to be
accomplished in the time. So that it is much simpler to conceive of the
earth revolving on its axis once every 24 hours, than it is for the sun
to perform this journey in the same period. Hence the rule of simplicity
is in favour of day and night being caused by the revolving of the earth
on its axis. The same rule might be illustrated in many ways; but,
however illustrated, the principle, according to Newton, always holds
good that all effects are produced by the simplest causes, and if there
are apparently two causes to the same phenomenon, then the simpler cause
is the true and correct one. So that in the making and development of
any hypotheses of the physical cause of Gravitation, this rule of
simplicity must always be recognized; and, in conjunction with the other
rules, we must seek to make our hypotheses, so as to be able to account
and explain all phenomena sought to be explained.
ART. 5. _2nd Rule. Experience._--Newton fully recognized the necessity
of experience in Philosophy. He saw the absolute necessity of appealing
to experience, observation, and experiment, both as a basis for
philosophical reasoning, and further, for the data which were necessary
to verify particular applications of the hypotheses suggested.
In his Rules of Philosophy, referring to experience as a guide, he says:
"Hoc est fundamentum philosophiae."--"This is the basis of philosophy."
Herschel, writing on the same subject in his _Natural Philosophy_,
writes thus with regard to experience: "We have pointed out that the
great, and indeed the only ultimate source of our knowledge of nature,
and its laws, is experience. By which I mean, not the experience of one
man only, or of one generation, but the accumulated experience of all
mankind in all ages registered in books or recorded in tradition. But
experience may be acquired in two ways, either first by noticing facts
as they occur without any attempt to influence the frequency of their
occurrence, or to vary the circumstances under which they occur. This is
observation. Second, by putting in action causes and agents over which
we have no control, and purposely varying their combination, and then
noticing what effects take place. This is experiment. To these two
sources we must look as the fountains of all natural science."
Herschel further writes: "Experience once recognized as the fountain of
all our knowledge of nature, it follows, that in our study of nature and
its laws, we ought at once to make up our minds to dismiss, as idle
prejudices, or at least suspend as premature, all preconceived notion of
what might, or ought to be the order of nature in any proposed case, and
content ourselves as a plain matter of fact with what is. _To experience
we refer as the only ground for all physical enquiry._ But before
experience itself can be used to advantage, there is one preliminary
step to make which depends wholly upon ourselves."
"It is the _absolute dismissal_ and clearing the mind _of all
prejudices_ from whatever source arising, and the determination to stand
or fall by the result of direct appeal to facts in the first instance,
and to strict logical deduction from them afterwards."
From extracts like these, from such men as Newton and Herschel, it can
at once be seen that experience, and experience alone, should be the
chief fountain from whence we draw all our data to form the bases of any
hypothesis or theory. If the hypothesis formed is contradicted by the
result of any present or future observation or experiment, then such
hypothesis will either become untenable, or must be so modified as to
take in the new fact furnished by that observation and experiment.
It is a _sine quâ non_ of all true philosophy, that philosophy should
always agree with experience. To the extent that our Philosophy of
Nature fails to agree with our experience, or with the results of
observation and experiment, then to that extent it ceases to be
philosophy. It may be a hypothesis or even a theory, but certainly it is
not true Philosophy.
Now, in the elaboration and development of the theory as to the physical
cause of Gravitation, I can premise that nothing will be postulated or
supposed, unless such supposition can be directly verified by our own
observation and experiments.
Any theory or hypotheses that are contradicted by our own experience in
its widest form, will find no place in the development of this work.
Further, any present accepted theory in relation to any natural
phenomena, which is controverted by experiment, or observation, will be
rejected as untenable in the scheme of Natural Philosophy to be
submitted to the reader.
Whatever else the theory suggested may, or may not be, one thing it
certainly shall be, and that is, that it shall be strictly based upon
the Philosophical Rules as given by some of the greatest philosophers
the world has ever seen. I do not premise that the hypotheses advanced
will be strictly correct in every detail.
That would be to assume that my experience of all natural phenomena was
perfect. To the extent that our experience is limited, to that extent
our hypotheses will be limited and faulty. It would need an Infinite
mind to form a perfect theory of the philosophy of the universe, because
only an Infinite mind possesses infinite experience. A finite mind can,
however, form true philosophical conceptions of natural phenomena, if
that mind will only follow the guidance of his own experience, and be
willing to accept the teaching that always arises from the results of
that experience. In order to do this, however, it must be observed, as
Herschel points out, that all old prejudices must be put away, and the
question or problem to be considered must be viewed with an open mind.
Let me illustrate what I mean. Suppose, for example, that for two
hundred years, chalk had always been thought to be a mineral, and then,
owing to the development of the microscope, and to the increased
magnifying powers of the lenses, it was conclusively demonstrated that
chalk is made up of the shells and remains of certain organisms that
lived in the sea ages ago. Would it be philosophical to throw over the
results of the microscopical research, and, simply because for two
hundred years chalk had been thought to be a mineral, to argue, and
still retain the idea that chalk was a mineral?
Such a result would be entirely opposed to all the teaching and
principles of philosophy. In a similar way, suppose in the development
of the physical cause of Gravitation, a certain conception of the
universal Aether has to be put forth in order to account for
Gravitation, and that that conception is opposed to some of the theories
which have been held relative to the Aether medium for the past two
hundred years; but that the conception so advanced is supported by the
experiments and observation of some of the ablest scientists of the
present century, would it be philosophical to reject the newer
conception which harmonized with all experiment and observation, and
still retain the old conception of the aetherial medium; or, to accept
the newer conception of that medium, and to reject some of the ideas
included in the old conception? From a purely philosophic standpoint,
there can only be one reply, which would be in favour of the newer
conception, by which our philosophy would be brought into harmony with
our experience.
This I premise will be done in this work, and the result will be, that
for the first time, our philosophy of the aetherial medium will agree
with our experience; and, as the natural result, several outstanding
problems will be explained on a physical basis, which at the present
time cannot be satisfactorily explained except from the mathematical
standpoint.
ART. 6. _3rd Rule. Satisfactory explanation of the Phenomena sought to
be Explained._--The third rule which governs the making of any
hypothesis is, that the hypothesis formed in accordance with the first
and second rules shall satisfactorily account for all the phenomena
sought to be explained.
Newton writes on this point as follows: "No more causes of natural
things are to be admitted, than such as are true, and sufficient to
explain the phenomena." While again in his fourth rule he states: "In
experimental philosophy, propositions collected by induction from
phenomena are to be regarded as accurately true, or very nearly true,
notwithstanding any contrary hypothesis, till other phenomena occur by
which they are made more accurate, or are rendered subject to
exceptions." _Principia_, Book 3. Herschel in his _Natural Philosophy_
points out, that one of the chief requirements of any assumed hypothesis
is, that it shall be sufficient to account for the phenomena to be
explained, and that it shall be suggested by analogy.
Now the object of this work is to give a physical explanation of the
cause and working of Gravitation, and to show how, by the properties,
qualities and motions of the universal Aether, Universal Gravitation may
be accounted for on a physical basis. So that every phenomenon,
associated with, or included in the Law of Gravitation, should receive a
satisfactory physical explanation by the proposed theory.
Thus the physical cause of the centripetal and centrifugal forces should
receive for the first time a physical explanation.
Newton's Laws of Motion, in so far as they conform to his own Rules of
Philosophy, should also receive a physical explanation.
Kepler's Laws, which govern the motion of planets in their orbits,
should also receive a similar physical explanation. Indeed, all
phenomena which the Law of Gravitation explains from a mathematical
standpoint, ought to receive a physical explanation by the proposed new
conception of the Aether medium.
In addition to the outstanding physical cause of Gravitation, there are
other physical problems that yet remain to be solved; as, for example,
there is the question as to what is the relative motion of Aether to
moving matter. Does the Aether move with matter through space as
suggested by Michelson's and Morley's experiment of America, or does it
flow freely through all matter, as it is usually thought to do? I
premise I will give a satisfactory solution of this problem in due
course.
Again, in relation to the Phenomena of Light, there is still outstanding
the problem of the physical explanation as to the transverse vibration
of light. This problem will also be dealt with from the standpoint of
our new conception of the Aether. Whether it will be as satisfactorily
solved, as the physical cause of Gravitation, remains to be seen.
Further, there is also the important question yet unsolved, as to what
Matter is. Lord Kelvin and Dr. Larmor have recently given to the world
certain conceptions as to the origin of Matter, and I shall endeavour to
show that such conceptions receive confirmation and support by the
proposed new conception of the Aether.
Another problem that will be attacked and solved, will be the cause of
the Permanent Magnetism of the earth, with an answer to some of the
questions propounded by Professor Schuster at the British Association of
1892 relative to the magnetism of solar bodies.
There is certainly some physical explanation as to the cause of the
earth being a magnet, yet up to the present no satisfactory physical
theory has been given. I premise that the new conception of the Aether,
to be submitted in the after pages, will satisfactorily account, and
that on a philosophical basis, for this phenomenon.
Lastly, one of the most interesting discoveries of the present day will
receive an added confirmation and explanation in the conception of the
Aether medium to be advanced. I refer to the system of Wireless
Telegraphy that has been so successfully developed by Signor Marconi,
and I premise that new light will be thrown on that discovery by the
suggested theory of the Aether.
Now, if all these problems can be partially or wholly solved by the same
theory that is advanced to explain the physical cause of Gravitation, it
needs no further comment to show that that theory is considerably
strengthened and more firmly established.
For it is a rule in Philosophy, that the more problems any suggested
theory can solve, the greater are the claims of that theory for
acceptance by scientists generally. For, if two rival theories can solve
three and ten physical problems respectively, then, in giving a decision
as to which is the better theory, the balance of opinion would be
overwhelming in favour of that theory which could solve the ten
problems. So that, if in addition to the satisfactory explanation of the
physical cause of Gravitation, some, if not all of the other problems
can be solved, as I premise they can, by the same conception of the
Universal Aether, then it follows our third rule of Philosophy will be
more than fulfilled, and the theory so advanced will be placed upon such
a strong foundation, that it can only be overthrown by proving that it
contradicts the results of some undiscovered phenomena.
ART. 7. _Application of Rules to Gravitation._--Let us therefore apply
Newton's own Rules of Philosophy to the Law of Gravitation, and
endeavour to find out if the law, as at present understood, fully
satisfies his own Rules of Philosophy. No one can reasonably object to
subjecting the Law of Gravitation to the test of those principles which
he lays down as the fundamental Rules of Philosophy.
If it comes through the ordeal with complete success, that is, if it is
essentially simple in its conception and development, and if all its
details are fully in accord with experience, as revealed by observation
and experiment, then there will be no need to alter any of its
hypotheses or axioms. If, on the other hand, it violates any of the
rules as laid down by Newton, then, to that extent, an alteration will
be necessary, in order that the Law of Gravitation may be brought into
conformity with his own rules, and our Philosophy made to agree with our
experience and observation.
ART. 8. _Analysis of Law of Gravitation._--In order to accomplish this,
let us ask ourselves, "What are the component parts of this Law of
Gravitation?" The Law is not a simple law, but a compound one. It is
compounded primarily of three parts.
1st. A Primitive Impulse.
2nd. A Centripetal Force.
3rd. A Centrifugal Force.
To these must be added the three Laws of Motion; although they are not
directly part of the Law of Gravitation, yet they are essential to its
effectiveness and completion. Without any one of these, the Law of
Gravitation would fail to account for all the phenomena that it does
account for.
If there were no Primitive Impulse, then the planets and meteors, sun
and stars would for ever remain at rest, and the Laws of Motion would
remain inoperative. If there were no Centripetal Force, then the
Centrifugal Force would hurl the planets and comets, asteroids or minor
planets away into the depths of space, never to return to their central
sun.
If there were no Centrifugal Force, then the Centripetal Force would
draw all bodies, _i. e._ all planets, etc., to their central sun, and,
instead of the planets continually revolving round the sun, there would
be but one immense solitary mass in the centre of the solar system.
If there were no Laws of Motion, with their necessary corollary the
Parallelogram of Forces, the Primitive Impulse would cease to act, and
the Law of Gravitation would again fail in its attempt to account for
those phenomena it does account for.
Thus, as it may easily be seen, Gravitation is a compound Law, depending
upon at least four hypotheses, and therefore is not essentially a simple
Force, or Law.
If, therefore, in giving a physical explanation of the cause of
Gravitation, we can reduce all these four elements of the Law into one
single physical cause, _i. e._ the Universal Aether, and show how they
may all be explained and accounted for by the properties, qualities and
motions of that physical medium, then such a result will be strictly in
harmony with the first Rule of Philosophy, as laid down by Newton and
others.
We will, therefore, proceed to consider some of these parts of the Law
of Gravitation in detail.
ART. 9. _Primitive Impulse._--This may be explained as follows. At the
creating and launching of each world, Newton supposed that there was
given to each world an impulse or tendency to fly off from the
controlling centre into space. On this matter MacLaurin writes as
follows: "If we had engines of sufficient force, bodies might be
projected from them, so as not only to be carried a vast distance away
without falling to the earth, but so as to move round the whole earth
without touching it; and, after returning to the first place, commence a
new revolution with the same force they first received from the engine;
and after the second revolution, a third, and thus revolve as a moon or
satellite round the earth for ever. If this can be effected near the
earth's surface, it may be done higher in the air, or even as high as
the moon. By increasing the force or power, a body proportionately
larger may be thus projected, and by a power sufficiently great, a heavy
body, not inferior to the moon, might be put in motion, which might
revolve for ever round the earth. Thus Sir Isaac Newton saw that the
curvilineal motion of the moon in her orbit, and of a projectile at the
surface of the earth, were phenomena of the same kind, and might be
explained from the same principle extended from the earth so as to reach
the moon, and that the moon was only a greater projectile that received
its motion in the beginning of things from the Almighty Author of the
Universe."
Now what I desire to know is, "What is the nature, the mode of
operation, and, above all, the physical cause of this Primitive
Impulse?" Is it in its nature and mode of operation a simple Force, or
Cause? Does it fulfil the condition of Newton's First Rule of
Philosophy? Permit me to suggest several lines of thought which may be
made the basis of its analysis.
Astronomers tell us that there are in existence millions of stars, and
suns, flooding immensity and space with their light and heat.
Now the question I wish to ask regarding Primitive Impulse in relation
to all these stars is this: "Was the Primitive Impulse imparted to each
sun, and star, and planet, separately and distinctly?" If so, then there
must have been just as many Primitive Impulses as there are stars and
suns and planets, and there would be according to a certain astronomer's
estimate at least 800,000,000 Primitive Impulses, which assumption is
altogether opposed to, and violates the First Rule of Philosophy.
If, on the other hand, it is affirmed that they all received their
motion at one and the same time, then I ask: "What was the physical
cause and method adopted to communicate the impulse to each one at the
same time?" If the reply is given, that it was by Universal Gravitation,
I have two objections to make to such a reply: first, that Gravitation
is altogether inoperative without the Primitive Impulse, otherwise why
was it conceived? and secondly, what is the physical cause of
Gravitation?
Again, scientists inform us that there is every reason for believing,
that stars and suns are still being formed in the universe, and that
there are certain distinctive phenomena which go to prove that
statement. Now, if that be true, and I believe it to be true, I wish to
ask if the Primitive Impulse as suggested by Newton, is applicable to
the stars and suns already in process of formation in the various
nebulae? and, if so, at what point in the star's history or development
is that Impulse applied?
Personally, I cannot conceive of the Great Creator of all things being
so lacking in inventive genius, if I may reverently use that term, as to
necessitate a separate Impulse being given to every separate star, or
sun, as each one is created or formed during the progress and
development of the universe of worlds.
I would much rather believe that which I hold to be the correct
explanation, viz. that He has given to a certain fundamental and
primordial medium, certain qualities and properties, by, and through
which are originated and perpetuated, all the motions of the heavenly
bodies already existent in the universe, or that are ever likely to be
existent throughout all time.
The question of separate Primitive Impulses for separate bodies becomes
more and more incongruous and inadmissible, as we consider it in its
application to such small bodies as meteors and planetoids. Is it not
contrary to our fundamental principles of Philosophy, that a separate
Impulse should be necessary for all small bodies that exist in their
myriads throughout the solar system, not to speak of the universe of
which that system forms a part? Such a conception as Primitive Impulse,
to each separate world, is altogether opposed to one's idea of that
simplicity and beauty which govern the universe at large, and violates
the first rule of our philosophical reasoning, and for this reason must
be rejected from the System of Philosophy to be propounded in this work.
ART. 10. _Centripetal Force._--Let us now look at the Centripetal Force,
and ask ourselves what is meant by such a force, and what is its mode of
action and working. Centripetal Force, strictly, may be defined as that
force which is always exerted towards the centre of the attracting body.
Taking the earth as an example, Newton points out, that though the
gravity of bodies arises from their gravitation towards several parts of
the earth; yet, because this power acts always towards the centre of
gravity of the earth, it is therefore called the Centripetal Force.
This force, then, is that part of the Law of Gravitation which
corresponds to the Attraction of Gravitation, and is always exerted in
that straight line from the body attracted, to the centre of the
attracting body, which joins the centres of gravity of the two bodies
concerned.
The combination and effect of the various forces included in the Law of
Gravitation are illustrated by the familiar illustration of the ball
whirled round the hand by a piece of string, or the bucket filled with
water, whirled round in the same way. Let us take the former. A piece of
string with a ball attached to one of the ends is held firmly by the
hand. An impulse or motion is imparted to the ball by the hand, that
motion being continued by the movement from the hand. The first impulse
given to the ball by the hand represents the Primitive Impulse. The
tension on the string which holds the ball to its controlling centre
represents the Centripetal Force, while the opposite force on the
string, which takes up the Primitive Impulse and continues it, is
represented by the Centrifugal Force.
The conception of the Centripetal Force is therefore simple, and
entirely in accordance with our experience as gathered from observation
and experiments. Both in the spheres of electricity, and magnetism, we
find a similar force acting, which tends towards the centre of the
attracting body, and therefore the Centripetal Force satisfies the first
two Rules of our Philosophy.
Further, it adequately accounts for certain distinctive phenomena which
occur through the Law of Gravitation, as, for example, the falling of
bodies to the earth, and therefore is entirely in harmony with all the
requirements of those principles enunciated by Newton for the successful
explanation of any phenomena. I need hardly point out, therefore, this
being so, any physical cause suggested as the explanation of Gravitation
must deal with the Centripetal Force, and be able to give a physical
explanation of the mode and manner in which the Centripetal Force
operates.
The Attraction of Gravitation or the Centripetal Force, however, being,
as its name implies, simply a drawing or pulling power to a centre, that
is, a force that is ever and ever only drawing matter to matter, or body
to body, it could not of, and by itself, accomplish those necessary
stellar and planetary motions by which are produced that universal
order, unity and harmony which characterize the universe. It is
essentially in its operations and influences, a one-sided force, ever
tending and influencing towards self, and therefore by itself would only
be a detriment and an evil; and, unless it were accompanied by some
companion or complementary and counter force, with which it acts in
union and concert, and which exactly counteracts its pulling power and
influence, it would soon draw star to star, and world to world, crashing
and heaping them together in ruinous and dire confusion. So that,
instead of the infinitude of worlds which now exist, which flash and
sparkle in the heavens, and in their intricate, elaborate, and mazy
motions move through the vast infinity like stately armies on the march,
there would only be one agglomeration of matter, a silent and solitary
mass existing in the vast abyss of space.
Therefore, as soon as Sir Isaac Newton had discovered and demonstrated
the existence of the power of Attraction, as represented by the
Centripetal Force, and its association with the universe at large, there
was seen at once the necessity of another Force, of an opposite
character, which would form the companion and complementary force to
Attraction; a repulsive, repellent force, one tending or repelling from
a centre, so as to counterbalance the influence of the Centripetal Force
which ever tends towards the centre.
To fill up the blank, there was conceived to exist what is called a
Centrifugal Force, that is, literally, a Force acting, and ever acting
from a centre, and with that Force we will now deal.
ART. 11. _Centrifugal Force._--In applying our Rules of Philosophy to
this Force, if by Centrifugal Force is simply meant that Force which is
the exact opposite of the Centripetal Force, that is, a Force which acts
from a centre, instead of to a centre, then such a Force is strictly in
harmony with, and satisfies all the conditions of the two first Rules of
Philosophy.
Not only is such a conception simple, but it is also in accordance with
experience and observation. Professor Hicks in his address to the
British Association in 1895 said: "What is called Centrifugal Force is
an apparent bodily Force directed outwards from the centre of curvature
of the body's path, and having an intensity equal to the distance from
the centre multiplied by the square of the absolute angular velocity."
In the sphere of magnetism and electricity, the operation of two equal
and opposite forces prevails. The attractive force of electricity, which
is exerted to the centre, is always accompanied by the generation and
development of a repulsive force, it being one of the fundamental rules
of electricity that equal and opposite quantities of electricity are
always generated at one and the same time. So that if the Centrifugal
Force is viewed as being simply the exact opposite of the Centripetal
Force, it fully satisfies the test when the first two rules laid down by
Newton are applied to it.
If, on the other hand, Centrifugal Force implies and embodies the idea
of continuance of the Primitive Impulse, as I believe it is supposed to
do, then to that extent it is not conformable to the principles of our
Philosophy, as embodied in the rules given by Newton.
Simply because, while it supposes a source or origin of its activity at
the first, it goes on to suppose a continuance of that activity, without
recognizing a continuing source or cause. It only recognizes and
supposes the one original impulse given at the beginning, to account for
the cause of the continually existing, and exerted power of the
Centrifugal Force. I do not for a moment suggest, that the Divine
Creator of all things, and the Ordainer and Upholder of all powers,
forces and laws could not, had He chosen to give such a force, have
given it and for ever operating. With that aspect of the question I have
nothing to do, and of it nothing to say. I am dealing, and only wish to
deal, with scientific facts, and scientific teaching from the purely
philosophical standpoint.
Such an idea of a continuing effect, without a continuing cause, is
altogether opposed to experience and observation, and is a violation of
the second Rule of Philosophy.
Look where we will, or at what we will, and not only effects and causes
are seen on every side, and in every thing, linked together inseparably,
but wherever, and in whatever phenomena there is found a continuance of
effect or effects, there is always and without exception found also a
continuing source or cause.
Wherever Nature, therefore, gives us a continuous effect of any kind or
sort, she always gives us a continuing cause, that can be both proved
and demonstrated to exist. Nowhere in Nature, amid all her powers,
principles and laws, is there to be found an effect without a cause, and
in all continuing effects, a continuing and perpetuating cause also, and
that effect exists just as long as the cause exists.
If the effect is perpetual, then the source and cause is perpetual also,
both in its existence and energy. Hence if the Centrifugal Force
embodies the idea of continuance of the Primitive Impulse, without
showing how that Primitive Impulse is continued, then such an idea is an
anomaly in the universe, is altogether opposed to the teaching of Nature
and science, and violates the most fundamental principles of our
Philosophy.
The philosophic explanation, therefore, of the Centrifugal Force, is
that Force which flows from a centre, and _which is the exact opposite
and counterpart of the Centripetal Force_. Further, as the Centripetal
Force is an attractive Force ever attracting to a centre, so the
Centrifugal Force, being its exact opposite, is a repulsive Force, which
fulfils all the laws and conditions which govern the Centripetal Force,
as it is in every phase and aspect the exact opposite, being indeed its
complement and counterpart.
Any physical explanation of the Law of Gravitation, therefore, must also
give a satisfactory physical explanation of this Force, and show its
mode of operation and working. This I premise I will do without the
faintest shadow of doubt or failure; that is, if we are to accept the
evidence of some of the most delicate experiments of modern times
relative to aetherial physics.
ART. 12. _Laws of Motion._--One of the most important factors in the
successful application of the Attraction of Gravitation to the universe
at large, are the Laws of Motion enunciated by Sir Isaac Newton. These
are three in number, and are as follows--
1st. Every body continues in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in
a straight line, except in so far as it may be compelled by impressed
Forces to change that state.
2nd. Change of motion is proportionate to the impressed Force, and takes
place in the direction of the straight line in which the Force acts.
3rd. To every action there is always an equal and contrary reaction.
_Corollary._--To these must be added the first Corollary of the three
laws which is commonly known as the Parallelogram of Forces, which is as
follows: "That when a body is acted upon by two Forces at the same time,
it will describe a diagonal, by the motion resulting from their
composition, in the same time that it would describe the sides of the
parallelogram."
Now let us apply Newton's Rules of Philosophy to these laws, and see if
they fulfil the conditions laid down therein.
In the first place, there being three laws necessary to cover all the
motions involved, there is not that simplicity of conception which is a
primary factor in the making of any hypothesis. Then it will be observed
that even after postulating the three laws, Newton was unable to account
for the elliptic orbits of the planets, until he had added a Corollary
known as the Parallelogram of Forces.
ART. 13. _Force._--The question has arisen also, as to the meaning of
the term Force which Newton uses. What is a Force, its cause and mode of
operation? The idea of Force is conveyed to us by our "muscular sense,"
which gives us the idea of pressure, as for example when we push or pull
a body along the ground.
We must not, however, limit our idea of Force to that narrow circle. It
has now been fully established that Sound and Heat, Light, Magnetism,
and Electricity are Forces, and therefore capable of doing work, as will
be shown later on. Newton's use of the term Force is therefore somewhat
vague; he does not definitely say what the Force is which causes the
change of position, of the body, or of the rate of motion of that body.
That it is something to do with Gravitation is obvious, but its exact
nature or character is not revealed.
Since Newton's time we have made an advance in the definition of Force,
and have come to consider Force as a kind of energy; the application of
Force being the application of energy. Such terms as Mechanical Force,
Chemical Force, Vital Force, are therefore out of date, and in their
place the more definite ideas of energy are substituted. Instead,
therefore, of getting such terms as Transformation of Forces, we now get
Transformations of Energy. In the chapter on Energy, I hope to show that
even that is not a satisfactory solution of the definition of a Force.
If we are to make our Philosophy agree with our experience, then Force
is due to motion, and motion alone.
So that Centrifugal Force will imply a motion from the centre;
Centripetal Force a motion whose effect is ever towards the centre of
gravity of any body.
ART. 14. _First Law of Motion._--This may naturally be divided into two
parts for the purpose of applying the Rules of Philosophy.
(I) Every body continues in a state of rest, except in so far as it is
compelled by impressed Forces to change that state. To what extent is
this statement conformable to our experience and observation? If I place
a body, as for example a weight, on a table, will it remain in that
state until it is moved by some other Force? I think that it will so
remain, and to that extent the law conforms to experiment.
Wider observation, and all experience, also prove the conformity of this
part of the First Law of Motion to the second Rule of Philosophy, as all
experience testifies to the fact that a body remains at rest, until some
other power or force moves it from the position of rest. The application
of this position of rest to any of the planets is, however, very
difficult to conceive. MacLaurin, in relation to this fact, states:
"This perseverance of a body in a state of rest can only take place in
absolute space, and can then only be intelligible by admitting it." In
dealing with the physical cause of Gravitation, I hope to be able to
show that it can not only be admitted as a mathematical proposition, but
that it can be made intelligible from the physical standpoint.
The second part of the First Law of Motion may be stated as follows:
"Every body continues in a state of uniform motion in a straight line,
except in so far as it is compelled by impressed forces to change that
state."
Now what is the testimony of observation and experiment in regard to
this part of the First Law of Motion? Let us test the question by the
results of our experience. If a ball is sent rolling along the ground,
its motion is gradually reduced until it comes to rest. If the ground is
very rough indeed, as for example a ploughed field, then its speed will
be very soon reduced, and the ball quickly comes to a standstill. If,
however, the ground is smooth and level, like a well-kept cricket-field,
then the motion of the ball will be reduced more slowly, and it will
travel further before being brought to rest; while, if the ball is
thrown along a very smooth surface of ice, it will travel a much longer
distance before it is finally brought to rest.
Thus we learn, that the more we can get rid of all resistances to the
motion of any body, the greater distance will the body travel, and the
less diminution there is in the uniform motion of the body. So that, if
it were possible to obtain a medium which offered no resistance at all
to a moving body, then it would be a legitimate inference to infer that
a body in such a medium, when once set in motion, would move with
uniform motion for ever. Under such conditions, therefore, this part of
Newton's First Law of Motion is physically conceivable. The crux of the
whole matter, therefore, lies in the problem as to whether there is, or
there is not, in existence, such a thing as a frictionless medium. We
will therefore consider the problem of the existence of a frictionless
medium from the philosophical standpoint.
Professor Lodge, in _Modern Views of Electricity_, p. 331, writes: "Now,
if there is one thing with which the human race has been more conversant
than another, and concerning which more experience has been
unconsciously accumulated than about almost anything else that can be
mentioned, it is the action of one body upon another; the exertion of
Force by one body on another, the transfer of motion and energy from one
body to another, any kind of effect, no matter what, which can be
produced in one body by means of another, whether the bodies be animate
or inanimate."
"Now I wish to appeal to this mass of experience, and to ask, Is not the
direct action of one body on another across empty space, and with no
means of communication whatever, is not this absolutely unthinkable? We
must not answer the question offhand, but must give it due
consideration, and we shall find, I think, that wherever one body acts
on another body by obvious contact, we are satisfied and have a feeling
that the phenomena is simple and intelligible, and that, whenever one
body apparently acts on another body at a distance, we are irresistibly
impelled to look for the connecting medium."
Again, on p. 333 of the same work, he adds: "Remember then, that
whenever we see a thing being moved, we must look for the rope. It may
be visible, or it may be invisible, but unless there is either a push or
a pull, there can be no action."
Now, in relation to celestial phenomena, we are confronted with the fact
of bodies acting on one another, and yet apparently they do not act upon
one another by or through a medium, and to that extent according to the
above extracts, such phenomena are opposed to universal experience.
Again, we find planets and satellites moving through space with more or
less uniform speed, and yet apparently there is no physical medium that
acts upon them with either a push or a pull, as the present conception
of the Aether is that of a frictionless medium, so that experience in
its widest form seems altogether opposed to the existence of a
frictionless medium.
Again, Tait in his _Natural Philosophy_ says: "The greater masses,
planets and comets moving in a less resisting medium, show less
indications of resistance. Indeed it cannot be said that observations
upon any one of these bodies, with the exception of Encke's Comet, has
demonstrated resistance. The greater masses, planets and comets moving
in a less resisting medium, show less indications. No motion in Nature
can take place without meeting resistance due to some if not all of
these influences. _The analogies of Nature and the ascertained facts of
physical science forbid us to doubt that every one of them, every star,
and every body of every kind has its relative motion impeded by the air,
gas, vapour, medium, or whatever we choose to call the substance
occupying the space around it_, just as the motion of a rifle-bullet is
impeded by the resistance of the air."
What is the testimony of our own personal observation and experiments to
such an impossible entity as a frictionless medium? Can any of the
readers tell me of any medium, be it solid, liquid, or gaseous, that
they have ever heard of, or read of, or experimented with, that
possesses the quality of being frictionless? The answer is unanimously
in the negative. But a frictionless medium was absolutely imperative to
the success of the Newtonian aspect of the Law of Gravitation. If the
Aether had not been frictionless, then the First Law of Motion would
have been violated, and a body, as for example a planet set in motion,
would not then have moved with uniform motion, but would have been
brought to a standstill by the resistance of the Aether. Accepting
therefore experience as a guide, as we are bound to do if we wish to be
strictly philosophical, as Newton pointed out, then we are compelled to
come to the conclusion that there is no such thing in the entire
universe as a frictionless medium. Such a hypothesis is contrary to all
laws and rules of Philosophy, and to continue to advocate its claims is
to remain where we are in relation to the cause of Gravitation, and in
complete ignorance of the beauty and harmony of the wonderful physical
mechanism that underlies the whole of the universe. Of course, if
experience and observation are no guide to Philosophy, then we will let
imagination run riot, and postulate the most extravagant explanations
for the varied phenomena of the heavens. With experience of no account,
we will affirm that the moon is made of green cheese, that the earth is
flat, that the sun revolves round the moon, and a host of other absurd
hypotheses that require no correction by experience and observation. But
there, a truce to such absurd imaginations. Experience is a guide to
Philosophy, its claims are recognized by the greatest Philosopher the
world has ever known, and therefore as either experience or a
frictionless medium has to go, we will part with the frictionless
medium, and endeavour to make a hypothesis of the Aether that is in
greater harmony with our Rules of Philosophy.
ART. 15. _Second Law of Motion._--The application of Newton's Rules of
Philosophy to the Second Law of Motion is attended with greater success
than was the case with his First Law. "Change of motion," he states, "is
proportionate to the impressed Force, and takes place in the direction
of the straight line in which the Force acts."
Newton adds this explanation to his Second Law: "If a Force generates
any motion, a double Force will generate double motion, and a triple
Force triple motion, whether they are applied simultaneously or
gradually and successively. And this motion, if the body were already
moving, is either added to the previous motion, if it is in the same
direction, or subtracted from it if directly opposed to it, or is
compounded with the previous motion if the two are inclined at an
angle."
According to that, a force which presses or pushes with a four-pound
pressure per square inch, if doubled, would press with a force of eight
pounds per square inch, which fact agrees with experience. If the force
is applied gradually, then the change of motion would be gradual; if
applied suddenly, then the resultant motion would be sudden and violent.
The impressed force, therefore, always produces a definite and
corresponding effect on any moving body, however that force may be
originated, and however it may be applied. The effect so produced is
always a change of motion, or, in present scientific terms, a change of
momentum in the moving body. If the impressed force is halved, by an
alteration in the mass of the body which exerts the impressed force,
then the resultant momentum produced is halved also. If the impressed
force is doubled, through any alteration in the velocity of the body
which exerts the force, then the momentum produced in the moving body
will be doubled also. So that the impressed force is equal to the change
of momentum in the moving body upon which it is impressed.
When similar forces are impressed upon exactly similar bodies, the
velocities produced are exactly the same; but, if similar forces act on
dissimilar bodies, then the velocities produced in the different bodies
are not the same; yet the total motion produced on all bodies, according
to the Second Law of Motion, must always be proportionate to the
impressed force. So that when we compare the effect of similar forces on
different bodies, we find that there are two factors involved, viz., the
mass and velocity of the moving body. The product of these two
quantities is termed the momentum of the body.
When we apply the Second Law of Motion to the theory of aetherial
dynamics, as suggested in this work, we shall seek to show that Newton's
Second Law of Motion holds good in its application to the new theory.
With the present conception of a frictionless Aether, however, it is
philosophically impossible for the Aether to exert force on any body
that may exist in it. Because, to the extent that it is frictionless, to
that extent it ceases to possess mass. If it does possess mass, then it
cannot be frictionless. Such an assumption violates all the Rules of
Philosophy.
Yet the Aether is supposed, in some unknown manner, to possess inertia,
which property is also dependent on mass. If the Aether really possesses
inertia, then it must possess mass, and possessing mass it ceases to be
a frictionless medium. So that if it possesses mass, then it can exert
force the same as any other body, and Newton's Second Law of Motion is
applicable to it.
ART. 16. _Third Law of Motion._--Newton's Third Law of Motion reads as
follows--
"Action and re-action are equal and opposite, or, to every action there
is always an equal and contrary re-action." This law is also conformable
to experience; for, by experiment, it has been proved to hold good for
electric and magnetic action. As MacLaurin points out, the Third Law of
Motion may be extended to all sorts of powers that take place in Nature,
and belongs to attraction and repulsion of all kinds, and must not be
considered as being arbitrarily introduced by Newton.
The mutual action between any two bodies has, therefore, a double
action. Thus a piece of stretched string must be conceived as pulling at
both ends; the pull at the one end being exactly equal and opposite to
the pull on the other end.
A magnet will attract a piece of iron with a certain force, but it is
equally true that the iron attracts the magnet with an exactly equal and
opposite force. We might even extend the application of this Third Law
to a falling stone in its relation to the earth. Thus, if a stone is
dropped from a high altitude to the surface of the earth, although the
motion seems to be all in one direction, yet if the Third Law holds
good, then the earth is attracted by the stone in exactly an equal, but
opposite direction, to that in which the earth attracts the stone.
As, however, the mass of the earth is very great compared with that of
the stone, it follows that the velocity of the stone compared with the
velocity of the earth, must be very much greater, in order that the
forces shall be equal.
The application of this Third Rule of Motion to planetary and celestial
phenomena is therefore philosophical, in that its conception agrees with
experience and observation.
Thus, while it is true that the sun attracts each of the planets in his
system, it is equally true that the planets, in their turn, attract the
sun with an exactly equal and opposite force. But the velocity of motion
induced by the earth's attractive power upon the sun, would be less than
the velocity of motion induced by the sun's attractive power upon the
earth, although the two forces would be equal and opposite, simply
because force, being a compound quantity, is dependent upon the mass of
a body as well as upon its velocity.
Not only, however, is it true that the sun and all the planets jointly
attract each other, but it is equally true that the planets attract each
other also, with an exactly equal and opposite effect. Indeed, as
Gravitation is universal, it has to be conceived that there are no two
bodies existing, but what the Third Law of Motion equally applies to
those two bodies; so that equality of action and re-action is as
universal as the Law of Gravitation itself.
In coming to a conclusion with reference to Philosophy and the Laws of
Motion, I wish to say that I am strongly of the opinion that the day has
come, or will soon come, when they will pass away and give place to a
more direct and simple method of working of the great Law of
Gravitation. I look upon the Laws of Motion as part of the scaffolding
which has been used to build up the Law of Gravitation. That Law has now
been erected, and stands firm and secure in its position in the
universe. Whatever changes may take place in its scaffolding, the Law
itself will stand out with greater beauty and clearness, if we could but
see the perfected structure, apart from the props and helps which have
assisted in its successful erection and completion. As Dr. Larmor said,
in his address to the British Association, 1900: "There has even
appeared a disposition to consider that the Newtonian principles, which
have formed the basis of physical phenomena for nearly two centuries,
must be replaced in these deeper subjects by a method of more direct
description of the cause of the phenomena. The question has arisen, as
to how far the new methods of aetherial physics are to be considered as
an independent departure; or how far they form the natural development
of existing dynamical science."
I hope, therefore, to be able in this work to do something towards
clearing the completed Law from some of the outside props, which have
long hidden the simplicity, beauty and harmony of the physical working
of Gravitation from the eyes of those who feign would see its wonderful
mechanism.
In the elaboration and development, therefore, of the physical cause of
Gravitation, it will be necessary to conceive a medium, whose properties
and motions shall be able to account for all the movements of the
planets, comets, suns and stars that the Laws of Motion now account for.
Instead, however, of there being several Laws purely and simply
mathematical in their application, there will be one physical medium,
which will by its properties and motions account for--and that in a
satisfactory manner--all the motions of the heavenly bodies. That such a
medium is required in the scientific world is proved by the statement
made by Professor Glazebrook, in his work on J. C. Maxwell, page 221,
where he says: "We are still waiting for some one to give us a theory of
the Aether, which shall include the facts of electricity and magnetism,
luminous radiation, and it may be Gravitation."
ART. 17. _Summary of the Chapter._--In summing up the contents of this
chapter, we find therefrom, that there is a Universal Law in existence
that is known as the Law of Gravitation. The physical cause of this Law,
however, is unknown; Newton suggesting that it was due to the properties
of an aetherial medium that pervaded the universe.
To form a right conception of this medium, and to develop the hypotheses
of the same on strictly philosophical lines, it is essential for us to
know the rules which govern the making of any hypothesis.
Those rules, according to Newton, and other philosophers, are chiefly
three in number, and form the very essence of any philosophical
reasoning. Any departure from those rules will entail partial or entire
failure in the success of the undertaking.
The application of Newton's rules to parts of the great Law of
Gravitation show that some of those parts are not fully in harmony with
the rules which Newton laid down in his _Principia_.
Any physical theory that may be hereafter suggested as the physical
basis for the Law of Gravitation, must itself not only account for the
various forces already referred to, but must itself fulfil the Rules of
Philosophy laid down by Newton. That is to say, the conception of the
physical medium must be simple in character, its properties and motions
must agree with all our experience, as given by observation, and
experiments; and the properties and motions postulated for it must
satisfactorily account for, and explain all the phenomena that are
presented to us by the Universal Law of Gravitation.
If all this be done, then from the standpoint of strict philosophical
reasoning, the physical medium so suggested, and the theory so made,
will be incapable of being overthrown or disproved.