In any case, what observers have not done in the past they may very
well do in the future, thanks to the suggestions of the new science.
Possibly it is going to have a great effect on observational astronomy
and induce it to furnish brilliant new verifications of theory. There
may be astonishing results, unforeseen by our folly, of the new
conceptions, surpassing in their fantastic poetry the most romantic
constructions of the imagination. Reality, or at least the possible, is
rising to giddy heights that were far beyond the reach of the golden
wings of fantasy.
I spoke on a previous page of the millions of years which light
takes to travel round our curved universe. Starting from the fairly
well-ascertained value of the quantity of matter comprised in the
Milky Way, it is possible to calculate the curvature of the world and
its radius. We find that the radius has a value equal to at least
150,000,000 light-years.
It therefore takes light at least 900,000,000 years, at a speed of
186,000 miles a second, to travel round the universe, assuming that it
consists only of the Milky Way and its annexes. The figure is quite
consistent with the figures we get from astronomical observation for
the dimensions of the galactic system, and also with the much larger
figures which we find if we regard the spiral nebulæ as Milky Ways.
Thus for the Relativist the universe may be unlimited without being
infinite. As to the Pragmatist, who goes straight ahead—who follows
what he calls a straight line, or the path of light—he will get back
in the end to the body from which he started, provided that he has time
enough at his disposal. He will then say that, if that is the nature of
things, the universe is not infinite.
Hence the question of the infinity or finiteness of the universe can
be controlled by experience, and some day it will be possible to prove
whether the whole cosmos and space are Newtonian or Einsteinian.
Unfortunately, it will have to be a very long experience, with various
little practical difficulties to overcome.
We may therefore prefer not to commit ourselves without further
instructions. We may not feel ourselves obliged to choose between the
two conceptions, and we may leave the benefit of the doubt to whichever
of the two is false.
* * * * *
Moreover, there is perhaps a third issue: if not for the Pragmatist, at
least for the philosopher—I mean, seeing that in England physics comes
under the head of “Natural Philosophy,” for the physicist.
Here it is. If all the heavenly bodies we know belong to the Milky Way,
other and very remote universes may be inaccessible to us because they
are optically isolated from us; possibly by the phenomena of the cosmic
absorption of light, to which we have already referred.
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