CHAPTER I.

Produced by Jonathan Ingram, Stephen H. Sentoff and the

Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net

(This file was produced from images generously made

available by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)

[Illustration: 51 Messier; 99 Messier]

THE

PLURALITY OF WORLDS.

On Nature's Alps I stand,

And see a thousand firmaments beneath!

A thousand systems, as a thousand grains!

So much a stranger, _and so late arrived_,

How shall man's curious spirit not inquire

What are the natives of this world sublime,

Of this so distant, unterrestrial sphere,

Where mortal, untranslated, never strayed?

NIGHT THOUGHTS.

WITH AN INTRODUCTION

BY

EDWARD HITCHCOCK, D.D.,

PRESIDENT OF AMHERST COLLEGE, AND PROFESSOR OF

THEOLOGY AND GEOLOGY.

BOSTON:

GOULD AND LINCOLN,

50 WASHINGTON STREET.

1854.

Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1854, by

GOULD AND LINCOLN,

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of

the District of Massachusetts.

PREFACE.

Although the opinions presented in the following Essay are put forwards

without claiming for them any value beyond what they may derive from the

arguments there offered, they are not published without some fear of

giving offence. It will be a curious, but not a very wonderful event, if

it should now be deemed as blamable to doubt the existence of

inhabitants of the Planets and Stars, as, three centuries ago, it was

held heretical to teach that doctrine. Yet probably there are many who

will be willing to see the question examined by all the light which

modern science can throw upon it; and such an examination can be

undertaken to no purpose, except the view which has of late been

generally rejected have the arguments in its favor fairly stated and

candidly considered.

Though Revealed Religion contains no doctrine relative to the

inhabitants of planets and stars; and though, till within the last three

centuries, no Christian thinker deemed such a doctrine to be required,

in order to complete our view of the attributes of the Creator; yet it

is possible that at the present day, when the assumption of such

inhabitants is very generally made and assented to, many persons have so

mingled this assumption with their religious belief, that they regard it

as an essential part of Natural Religion. If any such persons find their

religious convictions interfered with, and their consolatory impressions

disturbed, by what is said in this Essay, the Author will deeply regret

to have had any share in troubling any current of pious thought

belonging to the time. But, as some excuse, it may be recollected, that

if such considerations had prevailed, this very doctrine, of the

Plurality of Worlds, would never have been publicly maintained. And if

such considerations are to have weight, it must be recollected, on the

other hand, that there are many persons to whom the assumption of an

endless multitude of Worlds appears difficult to reconcile with the

belief of that which, as the Christian Revelation teaches us, has been

done for this our World of Earth. In this conflict of religious

difficulties, on a point which rather belongs to science than to

religion, perhaps philosophical arguments may be patiently listened to,

if urged as arguments merely; and in that hope, they are here stated,

without reserve and without exaggeration.

All speculations on subjects in which Science and Religion bear upon

each other, are liable to one of the two opposite charges;--that the

speculator sets Philosophy and Religion at variance; or that he warps

Philosophy into a conformity with Religion. It is confidently hoped that

no candid reader will bring either of these charges against the present

Essay. With regard to the latter, the arguments must speak for

themselves. To the Author at least, they appear to be of no small

philosophical force; though he is quite ready to weigh carefully and

candidly any answers which may be offered to them. With regard to the

amount of agreement between our Philosophy and Religion, it may perhaps

be permitted to the Author to say, that while it appears to him that

some of his philosophical conclusions fall in very remarkably with

certain points of religious doctrine, he is well aware that Philosophy

alone can do little in providing man with the consolations, hopes,

supports, and convictions which Religion offers; and he acknowledges it

as a ground of deep gratitude to the Author of all good, that man is

not left to Philosophy for those blessings; but has a fuller assurance

of them, by a more direct communication from Him.

Perhaps, too, the Author may be allowed to say, that he has tried to

give to the book, not only a moral, but a scientific interest; by

collecting his scientific facts from the best authorities, and the most

recent discoveries. He would flatter himself, in particular, that the

view of the Nebulae and of the Solar System, which he has here given, may

be not unworthy of some attention on the part of astronomers and

observers, as an occasion of future researches in the skies.

CONTENTS

OF

THE PLURALITY OF WORLDS.

PAGE

Introduction. 9

CHAPTER I.

Astronomical Discoveries. 17

CHAPTER II.

Astronomical Objection to Religion. 33

CHAPTER III.

The Answer from the Microscope. 41

CHAPTER IV.

Further Statement of the Difficulty. 49

CHAPTER V.

Geology. 72

CHAPTER VI.

The Argument from Geology. 98

CHAPTER VII.

The Nebulae. 135

CHAPTER VIII.

The Fixed Stars. 163

CHAPTER IX.

The Planets. 192

CHAPTER X.

Theory of the Solar System. 219

CHAPTER XI.

The Argument from Design. 236

CHAPTER XII.

The Unity of the World. 275

CHAPTER XIII.

The Future. 292

INTRODUCTORY NOTICE

TO THE

AMERICAN EDITION.

It is an interesting feature in the literature of our day, that so many

minds are turning their attention to the bearings of science upon

religion. With a few honorable exceptions, Christian scholars have

regarded this as a most unpromising field, which they have left to the

tilting and gladiatorship of scepticism. But we owe it mainly to the

disclosures of geology, that the tables are beginning to be turned. For

a long time suspected of being in league with infidelity, it was treated

as an enemy, and Christians thought only of fortifying themselves

against its attacks. But they are finding out, that if this science has

been seen in the enemy's camp, it was only because of their jealousy

that it was compelled to remain there; like captives that are sometimes

pushed forwards to cover the front rank and receive the fire of their

friends. Judging from the number of works, some of them very able, that

appear almost monthly from the press, in which illustrations of

religion are drawn from geology, we may infer that this science is

beginning to be recognized by the friends of religion as an efficient

auxiliary.

"The Plurality of Worlds," now republished, is the most recent work of

this description that has fallen under our notice. We can see no reason

why an Essay of so much ability, in which the reasoning is so

dispassionate, and opponents are treated so candidly, should appear

anonymously. True, the author takes ground against some opinions widely

maintained respecting the extent of the inhabited universe, and seems to

suppose that he shall meet with little sympathy; and this may be his

reason, though in our view quite insufficient, for remaining incognito.

We think he will find that there are a secret seven thousand, who never

have bowed their understandings to a belief of many of the doctrines

which he combats, and he might reasonably calculate that his reasoning

will add seven thousand more to the number. We confess, however, that

though we have long been of this number to a certain extent, we cannot

go as far as this writer has done in his conclusions.

All the world is acquainted with Dr. Chalmers' splendid Astronomical

Discourses. Assuming, or rather supposing that he has proved, that the

universe contains a vast number of worlds peopled like our own, he

imagines the infidel to raise an objection to the mission of the Son of

God, on the ground that this world is too insignificant to receive such

an extraordinary interposition. His replies to this objection, drawn

chiefly from our ignorance, are ingenious and convincing. But the author

of the Plurality of Worlds doubts the premises on which the objection is

founded. He thinks the facts of science will not sustain the conclusion

that many of the heavenly bodies are inhabited; certainly not with moral

and intellectual beings like man. Nay, by making his appeal to geology,

he thinks the evidence strong against such an opinion. This science

shows us that this world was once certainly in a molten state, and very

probably, at a still earlier date, may have been dissipated into

self-luminous vapor, like the nebulae or the comets. Immense periods,

then, must have passed before any organic structures, such as have since

peopled the earth, could have existed. And during the vast cycles that

have elapsed since the first animals and plants appeared upon the globe,

it was not in a proper condition to have sustained any other than the

inferior races. Accordingly, it has been only a few thousand years since

man appeared.

Now, so far as astronomy has revealed the condition of other worlds,

almost all of them appear to be passing through those preparatory

changes which the earth underwent previous to man's creation. What are

the unresolvable nebulae and most of the comets also, but intensely

heated vapor and gas? What is the sun but a molten globe, or perhaps

gaseous matter condensed so as to possess almost the density of water?

The planets beyond Mars, also, (excluding the asteroids,) appear to be

in a liquid condition, but not from heat, and therefore may be composed

of water, or some fluid perhaps lighter than water; or at least be

covered by such fluid. Moreover, so great is their distance from the

sun, that his light and heat could not sustain organic beings such as

exist upon the earth. Of the inferior planets, Mercury is so near the

sun that it would be equally unfit for the residence of such beings.

Mars, Venus, and the Moon, then, appear to be the only worlds known to

us capable of sustaining a population at all analogous to that upon

earth. But of these, the Moon appears to be merely a mass of

extinguished volcanos, with neither water nor atmosphere. It has

proceeded farther in the process of refrigeration than the earth,

because it is smaller; and in its present state, is manifestly unfit for

the residence either of rational or irrational creatures. So that we are

left with only Mars and Venus in the solar system to which the common

arguments in favor of other worlds being inhabited, will apply.

But are not the fixed stars the suns of other systems? We will thank

those who think so, to read the chapter in this work that treats of the

fixed stars, and we presume they will be satisfied that at least many of

these bodies exhibit characters quite irreconcilable with such an

hypothesis. And if some are not central suns, the presumption that the

rest are, is weakened, and we must wait till a greater perfection of

instruments shall afford us some positive evidence, before we know

whether our solar system is a type of any others.

Thus far, it seems to us, our author has firm ground, both geological

and astronomical, to stand upon. But he does not stop here. He takes the

position that probably our earth may be the only body in the solar

system, nay in the universe, where an intellectual, moral and immortal

being, like man, has an existence. He makes the "earth the domestic

hearth of the solar system; adjusted between the hot and fiery haze on

one side, and the cold and watery vapor on the other: the only fit

region to be a domestic hearth, a seat of habitation." He says that "it

is quite agreeable to analogy that the solar system should have borne

but one fertile flower. And even if any number of the fixed stars were

also found to be barren flowers of the sky, we need not think the powers

of creation wasted, or frustrated, thrown away, or perverted." He does

not deny that some other worlds may be the abodes of plants and animals

such as peopled this earth during the long ages of preadamic history.

But he regards the creation of man as the great event of our world. He

looks upon the space between man and the highest of the irrational

creatures, as a vast one: for though in physical structure they approach

one another, in intellectual and moral powers they cannot be compared.

He does not think it derogatory to Divine Wisdom to have created and

arranged all the other bodies of the universe to give convenience and

elegance to the abode of such a being; especially since this was to be

the theatre of the work of redemption.

Now we sympathize strongly in views that give dignity and exaltation to

man, and not at all with that debasing philosophy, so common at this

day, that looks upon him as little more than a somewhat improved orang.

But we cannot admit that man is the only exalted created being to be

found among the vast array of worlds around us. Geology does, indeed,

teach us, that it is no disparagement of Divine Wisdom and benevolence

to make a world--and if one, why not many--the residence of inferior

creatures; nay to leave it without inhabitants through untold ages. But

it also shows us, that when such worlds have passed through these

preparatory changes, rational and immortal beings may be placed upon

them. Nay, does not the history of our world show us that this seems to

be the grand object of such vast periods of preparation. And is it not

incredible, that amid the countless bodies of the universe, a single

globe only, and that a small one, should have reached the condition

adapted to the residence of beings made in the image of God? Of what

possible use to man are those numberless worlds visible only through the

most powerful telescopes? Surely such a view gives us a very narrow idea

of the plans and purposes of Jehovah, and one not sustained in our

opinion by the analogies of science.

There is another principle to which our author attaches, as we think,

too little importance in this connection. When we see how vast is the

variety of organic beings on this globe, and how manifold the conditions

of their existence; how exactly adapted they are to the solid, the

liquid, and the gaseous states of matter, can we doubt that rational and

intelligent beings may be adapted to physical conditions in other worlds

widely diverse from those on this globe? May not spirits be connected

with bodies much heavier, or much lighter, than on earth; nay, with mere

tenuous ether; and those bodies, perhaps, be better adapted to the play

of intellect than ours; and be unaffected by temperatures which, on

earth, would be fatal? It does seem to us that such conclusions are

legitimate inferences from the facts of science; and if so, we can

hardly avoid the conclusion that there may be races of intelligent

beings upon other worlds where the condition of things is widely

different from that on earth. Yet there is a limit to this principle;

and when we can prove another world to be in a similar condition to our

earth, when it was inhabited by preadamic races, or not at all

inhabited, the presumption is strong, that such a world has inhabitants

of a like character, or none at all.

Our author makes but a slight allusion to some most important statements

of revelation, that seem to us to bear strongly upon the hypothesis

which he adopts. We refer to the existence of angels, holy and unholy.

In the history of the latter, we learn that _they kept not their first

estate, but left their own habitation_. Have we not here an example of

other rational creatures, more exalted than man, who, like him, have

fallen from their first estate; and does not the presumption hence

arise, that there may be similar examples in other worlds? And is there

not a probability, that holy angels now in heaven, may be rational

intelligences who have passed a successful probation in other worlds? It

does seem to us, that these biblical facts make the hypothesis of our

author respecting man extremely improbable.

But though we must demur as to some of the views of this work, we can

cordially recommend its perusal to intelligent and reasoning minds. It

is an effort in the right direction, and we think will do much to

correct some false notions respecting the Plurality of Worlds. And even

the author's peculiar hypothetical views are sustained with much

ability. He states the facts of geology and astronomy with great

clearness and correctness, and seems quite familiar with mathematical

reasoning. Nor does he advance opinions that come into collision with

natural or revealed religion; though, as already stated, we think his

favorite notions narrow our conceptions of the Divine plans and

purposes. We predict for the work an extended circulation among

scientific men and theologians; and commend it with confidence to all

readers--and in our country they are numerous--who are fond of tracing

out the connection between science and religion.

E. H.

Amherst College, April, 1854.

THE

PLURALITY OF WORLDS.

CHAPTER I.

ASTRONOMICAL DISCOVERIES.

"When I consider the heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the

stars, which thou hast ordained; What is man, that thou art mindful of

him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?"

1. These striking words of the Hebrew Psalmist have been made, by an

eloquent and pious writer of our own time, the starting point of a

remarkable train of speculation. Dr. Chalmers, in his _Astronomical

Discourses_, has treated the reflection thus suggested, in connection

with such an aspect of the heavens and the stars, the earth and the

universe, as modern astronomy presents to us. Even from the point of

view in which the ancient Hebrew looked at the stars; seeing only their

number and splendor, their lofty position, and the vast space which they

visibly occupy in the sky; compared with the earth, which lies dark, and

mean, and perhaps small in extent, far beneath them, and on which man

has his habitation; it appeared wonderful, and scarcely credible, that

the maker of all that array of luminaries, the lord of that wide and

magnificent domain, should occupy himself with the concerns of men: and

yet, without a belief in His fatherly care and goodness to us,

thoughtful and religious persons, accustomed to turn their minds

constantly to a Supreme Governor and constant Benefactor, are left in a

desolate and bewildered state of feeling. The notion that while the

heavens are the work of God's fingers, the sun, moon, and stars ordained

by him, He is _not_ mindful of man, does not regard him, does not visit

him, was not tolerable to the thought of the Psalmist. While we read, we

are sure that he believed that, however insignificant and mean man might

be, in comparison with the other works of God,--however difficult it

might seem to conceive, that he should be found worthy the regards and

the visits of the Creator of All,--yet that God _was_ mindful of him,

and _did_ visit him. The question, "What is man, that this is so?"

implies that there is an answer, whether man can discover it or not.

"_What_ is man, that God is mindful of him?" indicates a belief,

unshaken, however much perplexed, that man is _something_, of such a

kind that God _is_ mindful of him.

2. But if there was room for this questioning, and cause for this

perplexity, to a contemplative person, who looked at the skies, with

that belief concerning the stars, which the ancient Hebrew possessed,

the question recurs with far greater force, and the perplexity is

immeasurably increased, by the knowledge, concerning the stars, which is

given to us by the discoveries of modern astronomy. The Jew probably

believed the earth to be a region, upon the whole, level, however

diversified with hills and valleys, and the skies to be a vault arched

over this level;--a firmament in which the moon and the stars were

placed. What magnitude to assign to this vault, he had no means of

knowing; and indeed, the very aspect of the nocturnal heavens, with the

multitude of stars, of various brightness, which come into view, one set

after another, as the light of day dies away, suggests rather the notion

of their being scattered through a vast depth of space, at various

distances, than of their being so many lights fastened to a single

vaulted surface. But however he might judge of this, he regarded them as

placed in a space, of which the earth was the central region. The host

of heaven all had reference to the earth. The sun and the moon were

there, in order to give light to it, by day and by night. And if the

stars had not that for their principal office, as indeed the amount of

light which they gave was not such as to encourage such a belief,--and

perhaps the perception, that the stars must have been created for some

other object than to give light to man, was one of the principal

circumstances which suggested the train of thought that we are now

considering;--yet still, the region of the stars had the earth for its

centre and base. Perhaps the Psalmist, at a subsequent period of his

contemplations, when he was pondering the reflections which he has

expressed in this passage, might have been led to think that the stars

were placed there in order to draw man's thoughts to the greatness of

the Creator of all things; to give some light to his mental, rather than

to his bodily eye; to show how far His mode of working transcends man's

faculties; to suggest that there are things in heaven, very different

from the things which are on earth. If he thought thus, he was only

following a train of thought on which contemplative minds, in all ages

and countries, have often dwelt; and which we cannot, even now,

pronounce to be either unfounded or exhausted; as we trust hereafter to

show. But whether or not this be so, we may be certain that the Psalmist

regarded the stars, as things having a reference to the earth, and yet

not resembling the earth; as works of God's fingers, very different from

the earth with its tribes of inhabitants; as luminaries, not worlds. In

the feeling of awe and perplexity, which made him ask, "What is man that

thou art mindful of him?" there was no mixture of a persuasion that

there were, in those luminaries, creatures, like man, the children and

subjects of God; and therefore, like man, requiring his care and

attention. In asking, "What is man, that thou visitest him?" there was

no latent comparison, to make the question imply, "that thou visitest

_him_, rather than those who dwell in those abodes?" It was the

multitude and magnificence of God's works, which made it seem strange

that he should care for a _thing_ so small and mean as man; not the

supposed multitude of God's intelligent creatures inhabiting those

works, which made it seem strange that he should attend to every

_person_ upon this earth. It was not that the Psalmist thought that,

among a multitude of earths, all peopled like this earth, man might seem

to be in danger of being overlooked and neglected by his Maker; but

that, there being only one earth, occupied by frail, feeble, sinful,

short-lived creatures, it might be unworthy the regards of Him who dwelt

in regions of eternal light and splendor, unsullied by frailty,

inaccessible to corruption.

3. This, we can have no doubt, or something resembling this, was the

Psalmist's view, when he made the reflection, which we have taken as the

basis of our remarks. And even in this view, (which, after all that

science has done, is perhaps still the most natural and familiar,) the

reflection is extremely striking; and the words cannot be uttered

without finding an echo in the breast of every contemplative and

religious person. But this view is, as most readers at this time are

aware, very different from that presented to us by Modern Astronomy. The

discoveries made by astronomers are supposed by most persons to have

proved, or to have made it in the highest degree probable, that this

view of the earth, as the sole habitation of intelligent subjects of

God's government; and of the stars, as placed in a region of which the

earth is the centre, and yet differing in their nature from this lower

world; is altogether erroneous. According to astronomers, the earth is

not a level space, but a globe. Some of the stars which we see in the

vault of heaven, are globes, like it; some smaller than the earth, some

larger. There are reasons, drawn from analogy, for believing that these

globes, the other planets, are inhabited by living creatures, as the

earth is. The earth is not at rest, with the celestial luminaries

circulating above it, as the ancients believed, but itself moves in a

circle about the sun, in the course of every year; and the other planets

also move round the sun in like manner, in circles, some within and some

without that which the earth describes. This collection of planets, thus

circulating about the sun, is the SOLAR SYSTEM: of which the earth thus

forms a very small part. Jupiter and Saturn are much larger than the

earth. Mars and Venus are nearly as large. If these be inhabited, as the

Earth is, which the analogy of their form, movements and conditions,

seems to suggest, the population of the earth is a very small portion of

the population of the solar system. And if the mere number of the

subjects of God's government could produce any difficulty in the

application of his providence to them, a person to whom this view of the

world which we inhabit had been disclosed, might well, and with far more

reason than the Psalmist, exclaim, "Lord, what is man, that thou art

mindful of him? the inhabitants of this Earth, that thou regardest him?"

4. But this is only the first step in the asserted revelations of

astronomy. Some of the stars are, as we have said, planets of the kind

just described. But these stars are a few only:--five, or at most six,

of those visible to the unassisted eye of man. All the rest, innumerable

as they appear, and numerous as they really are, are, it is found,

objects of another kind. They are not, as the planets are, opaque

globes, deriving their light from a sun, about which they circulate.

They shine by a light of their own. They are of the nature of the sun,

not of the planets. That they appear mere specks of light, arises from

their being at a vast distance from us. At a vast distance they

undoubtedly are; for even with our most powerful telescopes, they still

appear mere specks of light;--mere luminous points. They do not, as the

planets do, when seen through telescopes, exhibit to us a circular face

or disk, capable of being magnified and distinguished into parts and

features. But this impossibility of magnifying them by means of

telescopes, does not at all make us doubt that they may be far larger

than the planets. For we know, from other sources of information, that

their distance is immensely greater than that of any of the planets. We

can measure the bodies of the solar system;--the earth, by absolutely

going round a part of it, or in other ways; the other bodies of the

system, by comparing their positions, as seen from different parts of

the earth. In this manner we find that the earth is a globe 8,000 miles

in diameter. In this way, again, we find that the circle which the earth

describes round the sun has, in round numbers, a radius about 24,000

times the earth's radius; that is, nearly a hundred millions of miles.

The earth is, at one time, a hundred millions of miles on one side of

the sun; and at another time, half a year afterwards, a hundred millions

of miles on the other side. Of the bright stars which shine by their own

light,--the _fixed stars_, as we call them, (to distinguish them from

the planets, the _wandering stars_,)--if any one were at any moderate

distance from us, we should see it change its apparent place with regard

to the others, in consequence of our thus changing our point of view two

hundred millions of miles: just as a distant spire changes its apparent

place with regard to the more distant mountain, when we move from one

window of our house to the other. But no such change of place is

discernible in any of the fixed stars: or at least, if we believe the

most recent asserted discoveries of astronomers, the change is so small

as to imply a distance in the star, of more than two hundred thousand

times the radius of the earth's orbit, which is, itself, as we have

said, one hundred millions of miles.[1] This distance is so vastly

great, that we can very well believe that the fixed stars, though to our

best telescopes they appear only as points of light, are really as large

as our sun, and would give as much light as he does, if we could

approach as near to them. For since they are thus, the nearest of them,

two hundred thousand times as far off as he is, even if we could magnify

them a thousand times, which we can hardly do, they would still be only

one two-hundredth of the breadth of the sun; and thus, still a mere

point.

5. But if each fixed star be of the nature of the sun, and not smaller

than the sun, does not analogy lead us to suppose that they have, some

of them at least, planets circulating about them, as our sun has? If the

Sun is the centre of the Solar System, why should not Sirius, (one of

the brightest of the fixed stars,) be the centre of the _Sirian System_?

And why should not that system have as many planets, with the same

resemblances and differences of the figure, movements, and conditions of

the different planets, as this? Why should not the Sirian System be as

great and as varied as the solar system? And this being granted, why

should not these planets be inhabited, as men have inferred the other

planets of the solar system, as well as the earth, to be? And thus we

have, added to the population of the universe of which we have already

spoken, a number (so far as we have reason to believe) not inferior to

the number of inhabitants of the solar system: this number being,

according to all the analogies, very many fold that of the population of

the whole earth?

And this is the conclusion, when we reason from one star only, from

Sirius. But the argument is the same, from each of the stars. For we

have no reason to think that Sirius, though one of the brightest, is

more like our sun than any of the others is. The others appear less

bright in various degrees, probably because they are further removed

from us in various degrees. They may not be all of the same size and

brightness; it is very unlikely that they are. But they may as easily be

larger than the sun, as smaller. The natural assumption for us to make,

having no ground for any other opinion, is, that they are, upon the

average, of the size of our sun. On that assumption, we have as many

solar systems as we have fixed stars; and, it may be, six or ten, or

twenty times as many inhabited globes; inhabited by creatures of whom

we must suppose, by analogy, that God is mindful, if he is mindful of

us. The question recurs with overwhelming force, if we still follow the

same train of reflection: "What is man, that God is mindful of him?"

6. But we have not yet exhausted the views which thus add to the force

of this reflection. The fixed stars, which appear to the eye so

numerous, so innumerable, in the clear sky on a moonless night, are not

really so numerous as they seem. To the naked eye, there are not visible

more than four or five thousand. The astronomers of Greece, and of other

countries, even in ancient times, counted them, mapped them, and gave

them names and designations. But Astronomy, who thus began her career by

diminishing, in some degree, the supposed numbers of the host of heaven,

has ended by immeasurably increasing them. The first application of the

telescope to the skies discovered a vast number of fixed stars,

previously unseen: and every improvement in that instrument has

disclosed myriads of new stars, visibly smaller than those which had

before been seen; and smaller and smaller, as the power of vision is

more and more strengthened by new aids from art; as if the regions of

space contained an inexhaustible supply of such objects; as if infinite

space were strewn with stars in every part of it to which vision could

reach. The small patch of the sky which forms, at any moment, the field

of view of one of the great telescopes of Herschel, discloses to him as

many stars, and those of as many different magnitudes, as the whole

vault of the sky exhibits to the naked eye. But the magnifying power of

such an instrument only discloses, it does not make, these stars. There

appears to be quite as much reason to believe, that each of these

telescopic stars is a sun, surrounded by its special family of planets,

as to believe that Sirius or Arcturus is so. Here, then, we have again

an extension, indefinite to our apprehension, of the universe, as

occupied by material structures; and if so, why not by a living

population, such as the material structures which are nearest to us

support?

7. Even yet we have not finished the series of successive views which

astronomers have had opened to them, extending more and more their

spectacle of the fulness and largeness of the universe. Not only does

the telescope disclose myriads of stars, unseen to the naked eye, and

new myriads with each increase of the powers of the instrument; but it

discloses also patches of light, which, at first at least, do not appear

to consist of stars: _Nebulae_, as they are called; bright specks, it

might seem, of stellar matter, thin, diffused, and irregular; not

gathered into regular and definite forms, such as we may suppose the

stars to be. Every one who has noticed the starry skies, may understand

what is the general aspect of such nebulae, by looking at the milky way

or galaxy, an irregular band of nebulous light, which runs quite round

the sky; "A circling zone, powdered with stars;" as Milton calls it. But

the nebulae of which I more especially speak, are minute patches,

discovered mainly by the telescope, and in a few instances only

discernible by the naked eye. And what I have to remark especially

concerning them at present is, that though to visual powers which barely

suffice to discern them, they appear like mere bright clouds, patches of

diffused starry matter; yet that, when examined by visual powers of a

higher order, by more penetrating telescopes, these patches of

continuous feeble light are, in many instances at least, distinguishable

into definite points: they are found, in fact, to be aggregations of

stars; which before appeared as diffused light, only because our

telescopes, though strong enough to reveal to our senses the aggregate

mass of light of the cluster, were not strong enough to enable us to

discern any one of the stars of which the cluster consists. The galaxy,

in this way, may, in almost every part, be _resolved_ into separate

stars; and thus, the multitude of the stars in the region of the sky

occupied by that winding stream of light, is, when examined by a

powerful telescope, inconceivably numerous.

8. The small telescopic nebulae are of various forms; some of them may be

in the shape of flat strata, or cakes, as it were, of stars, of small

thickness, compared with the extent of the stratum. Now, if our sun were

one of the individuals of such a stratum, we, looking at the stars of

the stratum from his neighborhood, should see them very numerous and

close in the direction of the edge of the stratum, and comparatively few

and rare in other parts of the sky. We should, in short, see a galaxy

running round the sky, as we see in fact. And hence Sir William Herschel

has inferred, that our sun, with its attendant planets, has its place in

such a stratum; and that it thus belongs to a host of stars which are,

in a certain way, detached from the other nebulae which we see. Perhaps,

he adds, some of those other nebulae are beds and masses of stars not

less numerous than those which compose our galaxy, and which occupy a

larger portion of the sky, only because we are immersed in the interior

of the crowd. And thus, a minute speck of nebulous light, discernible

only by a good telescope, may contain not only as many stars as occupy

the sky to ordinary vision, but as many as is the number into which the

most powerful telescope resolves the milky light of the galaxy. And of

such resolvable nebulae the number which are discovered in the sky is

very great, their forms being of the most various kind; so that many of

them may be, for aught we can tell, more amply stocked with stars than

the galaxy is. And if all the stars, or a large proportion of the

stars, of the galaxy, be suns attended by planets, and these planets

peopled with living creatures, what notion must we form of the

population of the universe, when we have thus to reckon as many galaxies

as there are resolvable nebulae! the stock of discoverable nebulae being

as yet unexhausted by the powers of our telescopes; and the possibility

of resolving them into stars being also an operation which has not yet

been pursued to its limit.

9. For, (and this is the last step which I shall mention in this long

series of ascending steps of multitude apparently infinite,) it now

begins to be suspected that not some nebulae only, but _all_, are

resolvable into separate stars. When the nebulae were first carefully

studied, it was supposed that they consisted, as they appeared to

consist, of some diffused and incoherent matter, not of definite and

limited masses. It was conceived that they were not stars, but Stellar

Matter in the course of formation into stars; and it was conceived,

further, that by the gradual concentration of such matter, whirling

round its centre while it concentrated, not only stars, that is, suns,

might be formed, but also systems of planets, circling round these suns;

and thus this _Nebular Hypothesis_, as it has been termed, gave a kind

of theory of the origin and formation of systems, such as the solar

system. But the great telescope which Lord Rosse has constructed, and

which is much more powerful than any optical instrument yet fabricated,

has been directed to many of the nebulae, whose appearance had given rise

to this theory; and the result has been, in a great number of cases,

that the nebulae are proved to consist entirely of distinct stars; and

that the diffused nebulous appearance is discovered to have been an

illusion, resulting from the accumulated light of a vast number of small

stars near to each other. In this manner, we are led to regard every

nebula, not as an imperfectly formed star or system, but as a vast

multitude of stars, and, for aught we can tell, of systems; for the

apparent smallness and nearness of these stars are, it is thought, mere

results of the vast distance at which they are placed from us. And thus,

perhaps, all the nebulae are, what some of them seem certainly to be, so

many vast armies of stars, each of which stars, we have reason to

believe, is of the nature of our sun; and may have, and according to

analogy has, an accompaniment of living creatures, such as our sun has,

certainly on the earth, probably, it is thought, in the other planets.

10. It is difficult to grasp, in one view, the effect of the successive

steps from number to number, from distance to distance, which we have

thus been measuring over. We may, however, state them again briefly, in

the way of enumeration.

From our own place on the earth, we pass, in thought, as a first step,

to the whole globe of the Earth; from this, as a second step, to the

Planets, the other globes which compose the Solar System. A third step

carries us to the Fixed Stars, as visible to the naked eye; very

numerous and immensely distant. The transition to the Telescopic Stars

makes a fourth step; and in this, the number and the space are

increased, almost beyond the power of numbers to express how many there

are, and at what distances. But a fifth step:--perhaps all this array of

stars, obvious and telescopic, only make up our Nebula; while the

universe is occupied by other Nebulae innumerable, so distant that, seen

from them, our nebula, though including, it may be, stars of the 20th

magnitude, which may be 20 times or 2,000 times more remote than Sirius,

would become a telescopic speck, as their nebulae are to us.

11. Various images and modes of representation have been employed, in

order to convey to the mind some notion of the dimensions of the scheme

of the universe to which we are thus introduced. Thus, we may reckon

that a cannon-ball, moving with its usual original velocity unabated,

would describe the interval between the sun and the earth in about one

year. And this being so, the same missile would, from what has been

said, occupy more, we know not how much more, than 200,000 years in

going to the nearest fixed star: and perhaps a thousand times as much,

in going to other stars belonging to our group; and then again, 200,000

times so much, or some number of the like order, in going from one group

to another. When we have advanced a step or two in this mode of

statement, the velocity of the cannon-ball hardly perceptibly affects

the magnitude of the numbers which we have to use.

And the same nearly is the case if we have recourse to the swiftest

motion with which we are acquainted; that of Light. Light travels, it is

shown by indisputable scientific reasonings, in about eight minutes from

the sun to the earth. Hence we can easily calculate that it would occupy

at least three years to travel as far as Sirius, and probably, three

thousand years, or a much greater number, to reach to the smallest

stars, or to come from them to us. And thus, as Sir W. Herschel

remarked, since light is the only vehicle by which information

concerning these distant bodies is conveyed to us, we do, by seeing

them, receive information, not what they are at this moment, but what

they were, as to visible condition, thousands of years ago. Stars may

have been created when man was created, and yet their light may not have

reached him.[2] Stars may have been extinguished thousands of years

ago, and yet may still be visible to our eyes, by means of the light

which they emitted previous to their extinction, and which has not yet

died away.

12. So vast then are the distances at which the different bodies of the

universe are distributed; and yet so numerous are those bodies. In the

vastness of their distances, there is, indeed, nothing which need

disturb our minds, or which, after a little reflection, is likely to do

so: for when we have said all that can be said, about the largeness of

these distances, still there is no difficulty in finding room for them.

We necessarily conceive _Space_ as being infinite in its extent: however

much space the heavenly bodies occupy, there is space beyond them: if

they are not there, space is there nevertheless. That the stars and

planets are so far from each other, is an arrangement which prevents

their disturbing each other with their mutual attractions, to any

destructive extent; and is an arrangement which the spacious, the

infinite universe, admits of, without any difficulty.

13. But we are more especially concerned with the _Numbers_ of the

heavenly bodies. So many planets about our sun: so many suns, each

perhaps with its family of planets: and then, all these suns making but

one group: and other groups coming into view, one after another, in

seemingly endless succession: and all these planets being of the nature

of our earth, as all these stars are of the nature of our sun:--all

this, presents to us a spectacle of a world--of a countless host of

worlds--of which, when we regard them as thus arranged in planetary

systems, and as having, according to all probability, years and seasons,

days and nights, as we have, we cannot but accept it as at least a

likely suggestion, that they have also inhabitants;--intelligent beings

who can reckon these days and years; who subsist on the fruits which

the season brings forth, and have their daily and yearly occupations,

according to their faculties. When we take, as our scheme of the

universe, such a scheme as this, we may well be overwhelmed with the

number of provinces, besides that in which man dwells, which the empire

of the Lord of all includes; and, recurring to the words of the

Psalmist, we may say with a profundity of meaning immeasurably

augmented--"Lord, what is man?"

It was this view, I conceive, which Dr. Chalmers had in his thoughts, in

pursuing the speculations which I have mentioned, in the outset of this

Essay.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] It is quite to our purpose to recollect the impression which such

discoveries naturally make upon a pious mind.

Oh! rack me not to such extent,

These distances belong to Thee;

The world's too little for Thy tent,

A grave too big for me!

GEORGE HERBERT.

[2] This thought is, however, older. Young expresses it in his _Night

Thoughts_, Night IX., (published in 1744):

How distant some of these nocturnal suns!

So distant (says the sage) 'twere not absurd

To doubt if beams, set out at nature's birth,

Are yet arrived at this so foreign world.

The Plurality of Worlds · 第 1 / 13 章