Sight-physics has inevitably been dominant in astronomy, owing to
the fact that sight is the only sense by means of which we have
cognizance of the heavenly bodies. So long as we only see a motion,
we are not conscious of anything analogous to force. The fact that
gravitation remained so long unexplained may have stimulated the
desire of theoretical physicists to develop their subject without the
notion of "force" since the "force" of gravitation remained totally
obscure. Sight-physics also had the advantage that it dealt with a
wider range of phenomena than were included in dynamics, since it
included everything to do with light. Thus physics came more and more
to use only such notions as were intelligible in terms of visual data.
Mass, it is true, remained from another order of ideas. Obviously
the sensational source of the idea of mass is the feeling of weight.
But even mass has gradually yielded. On the one hand, it is less
fundamental than it formerly seemed; on the other hand, it can be
inferred from optical data, by the deflection from a straight line
which a body suffers in a known field of force. (Consider methods of
determining the apparent masses of and particles.)
Sight-physics also makes the relativity of motion much more evident
than either of the other kinds. A train exerts force, and a railway
station does not, so that, from this point of view, it seems natural
and right to say that the train is "really" moving while the station is
"really" at rest. But from a visual point of view the appearance of the
station from the train is exactly correlative to that of the train from
the station.
In the visual world, quite independently of the velocity of light, a
rapid movement can be produced by a very small[Pg 164] "force"—for instance,
by rotating a mirror which is reflecting a bright light. Rotating
lighthouses at night send out beams which can be seen travelling with
great rapidity. A beam is not a "thing," because it is not tangible,
and yet, for common sense, it preserves its identity while it rotates.
But common sense is not shocked when the beam is broken up into a
series of events. A purely visual view of matter makes it much easier
to regard all material things as series of events, like the rotating
beam.
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