An original theory or new hypothesis of the universe: $b founded upon the laws of nature, and solving by mathematical principles the general phænomena of the visible creation; and particularly the via lactea ...Wright, Thomas
Philosophy
An original theory or new hypothesis of the universe: $b founded upon the laws of nature, and solving by mathematical principles the general phænomena of the visible creation; and particularly the via lactea ...
Wright, Thomas
Astronomy -- Early works to 1800
Homer.
]
But how ridiculous and absurd all these Opinions and Conjectures really
are, will easily appear, if we but once consider the Nature of an
unbounded Æther, and the amazing Property of infinite Space.
This, with what has been said before, will not a little assist your
Imagination towards conceiving the Reasonableness of the Notion modern
Astronomers are now confirmed in, of their being absolutely so many
burning Balls, and which was no doubt, many Years ago, the Opinion of
_Manilius_, as is evident from these Lines in his Poem of the Sphere.
For how can we the rising Stars conceive
A casual Production; or believe
Of the chang'd Heav'ns the oft renascent State
_Sol's_[R]frequent Births, and his quotidian Fate.
Sherburne.
And again, in the same Poem:
The fiery Stars, and Æther that creates
Infinite Orbs, and others dissipates.
[Footnote R: _Xenophanes_ believed the Stars to be no other than Clouds
set on Fire, quenched in the Day-time, and rekindled in the Night.]
_Zoroaster_, the first of all Philosophers we read of who studied
the Stars, is reported to have believed them of a fiery Nature.
_Empedocles_ judged them to be Fire æthereal, struck forth in its
Secretion, and blazing in the upper Regions. _Plato_ thought them Fire,
with the Mixture of other Elements as Cements. _Heraclides_ Worlds by
themselves, of _Earth_, _Air_, and _Fire_; and _Aristotle_, simple
Bodies of the Substance of Heaven, but more condensed.
But that I may not take up too much of your Time with Opinions that
has been imbibed in the Infancy of Astronomy, and has long ago been
exploded, I shall attempt but one Thing more to confirm your Sentiments
in this new Doctrine.
First, that the Stars are all at a Distance, not to be determined by
the utmost Perfection of human Art, is manifest from their having very
little, or no sensible [S]Parallax; and consequently, that any one of
them is absolutely bigger or less than another, from the simple Laws of
Opticks, cannot possibly come under our Observation to be ascertained;
but that they all of them may be nearly of the same Size or Solidity,
is as impossible, with any Shew of Reason to deny, since it is a known
Principle in Geometry, that all visible Objects naturally diminish,
as has been said before, or are magnified in a certain Proportion to
their Distance from the Eye; and hence we may conclude, and not without
Reason in its strongest Light to support us, that the smallest Stars,
to the very least Denomination, are only removed respectively more
distant from the Observer's Station; and that at least this we may be
certain of, that they are all together undoubtedly an Infinity of like
Bodies, distributed either promiscuously, or in some regular Order
throughout the mundane Space: And, as _Marino_ says,
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account