Further, if the atoms possess different masses or weights, as they do, then each atom would possess an aetherial atmosphere proportionate to its mass, with the result that an atom of carbon, with its atomic weight of 12, ought to possess a denser aetherial atmosphere than an atom of hydrogen, and so on right through the atomic scale. I need hardly point out that this conception of the Aether in relation to atoms, and molecules of bodies, will solve certain problems relating to the density of Aether in connection with matter, which problem up to the present cannot be solved by the present conception of a frictionless medium. That problem may be stated as follows: Does the presence of matter affect the Aether in any way, so as to load or make it denser? Professor Lodge, in _Modern Views of Electricity_, in relation to the density of the Aether, writes: "The neighbourhood of gross matter seems to render Aether more dense. It is difficult to suppose that it can really condense an incompressible fluid, but it may load it, or otherwise modify it, so as to produce the effect of increased density." In view of the fact that Aether is gravitative, the reply is to be found in the Law of Gravitation, "Every particle of matter attracts every other particle of matter, etc.," and as Aether is matter, it will be attracted by the other matter irrespective of whether that matter be in the atomic, molecular, or planetary or stellar form. We shall see that this is so when we come to deal with the density of the Aether. It may be objected in relation to this aspect of Aether, that Young also asserted that the Aether flows as freely through matter, as the air flows through the trees of the forest, and that such a statement therefore contradicts his fourth proposition regarding the gravitating properties of Aether. A little reflection will, however, put a different construction on this objection. Let us consider the analogy from the standpoint of experience, and see what that analogy teaches us. From experience we learn that the air is gravitative, but we also learn that it is possible to be moved from place to place as winds, and that as such it can move freely between the trees of the forest, causing their boughs and leaves to tremble and bend beneath its energy and power. I have yet to learn, however, that while it moves between the trees as separate and distinct objects, such a movement militates or destroys its gravitating properties. Does the air cease to be any less gravitative, or subject to the Law of Gravity, when it is subject to certain movements, which give rise to certain currents as winds? Such an assumption is altogether opposed to philosophical reasoning.