Conversations on the Plurality of WorldsFontenelle, M. de (Bernard Le Bovier)
Philosophy
Conversations on the Plurality of Worlds
Fontenelle, M. de (Bernard Le Bovier)
Plurality of worlds
We will therefore suppose that some of the small vortices, being light
and active, slip betwixt the others, and return after they have made
their tour, whilst the larger systems remain immoveable. But there is
one inevitable misfortune: there are some fixed stars, which for a
long time are alternately visible and invisible, and at length totally
disappear. Half suns would re-appear at a regular time; others that
had retreated to an immense distance would at once disappear, and be
concealed for a very long time: exert therefore all your resolution,
madam; these stars are certainly suns which grow so dark as to be
invisible to us, then resume their brightness, and afterwards are
entirely extinguished. How, exclaimed the Marchioness, can a sun, a
source of light, become darkened? With the greatest ease, answered I,
if Descartes be in the right. He imagines that the spots on our sun,
being impurities, or vapours, may grow thick, collect together, form
themselves into a mass, and continue to encrust the sun till it is
quite hid. If, the sun is a fire connected with a solid matter, serving
as its aliment, we are not in a better condition; the solid matter may
be consumed. 'Tis said we have already had a fortunate escape: the
sun during several years, (the year, for instance, after the death
of Cæsar;) appeared very pale; owing to the encrustation which was
beginning to form. The sun had sufficient force to break and disperse
it; had it continued, we should have been lost. You make me tremble,
said the Marchioness. Now I know the consequences of paleness in the
sun, instead of going to my glass every morning to see if _I_ am pale,
I think I shall go and look whether _the sun_ is so. Take courage,
madam, I replied, it requires a good deal of time to ruin a system
of worlds. But, answered she, it seems as if time would inevitably
effect it. I cannot take upon me to deny it, said I. The immense mass
of matter which composes the universe is in continual motion, even
the smallest particles of it, and since there is this motion we are in
danger, for changes must happen, either slowly or rapidly, but always
in a time proportioned to the effect. The ancients were so vastly
wise as to imagine the heavenly bodies were of such a nature as never
to alter, because they had not observed any alteration in them. Had
they leisure to assure themselves of this by experience? Compared
with us the ancients were young: if flowers that last but a day were
to transmit their histories to each other, the first would draw the
resemblance of their gardener in a certain way; after fifteen thousand
ages of these flowers had elapsed, others would still describe him in
the same manner. They would say; "We have always had the same gardener,
the memoirs composed by our ancestors prove this to be the case; all
their representations exactly apply to him; surely he is not mortal
like us; no change will ever take place in him." Would the reasoning
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account