The weakness of this view may be due to the fact that at that time MAJOR ELLIS was emphasizing in his own mind the necessity of simplifying the conception so as to make it of easy comprehension rather than the establishment of any fealty to truth or the spirit of mathesis in his examination of the problem. What therefore of reality the student fails to find in his view may be attributed to the sacrifice which the writer (MAJOR ELLIS) felt himself called upon to make for the sake of simplicity. Hence a certain expressed connivance at his position is allowable. But, on the other hand, if such were not the conscious intent of MAJOR ELLIS it is not understood how it should appear that "the unexplained residuum would seem to indicate that so far we have merely been considering the three dimensional aspects of four dimensional processes." Contrarily, it has yet to be proved that three dimensional space does not afford ample scope of motility for all observable or recognizable physical processes and that there is no necessity for reference to hyperspace phenomena for an explanation of the "unexplained residuum." It is, of course, understood that many of the possibilities predicated for hyperspace are purely nonsensical so far as their actual realization is concerned. Our concern is, therefore, not with that class of predicates, but with those wherein reside some slight show of probability of their response to the conditions of n-dimensionality either as a system of space-measurement or a so-called space or series of spaces. MAJOR ELLIS concludes his simple study of four-space by proposing the following query: "May not birth be an unfolding through the ether into the symmetrical life-cell, and death, the reverse process of a folding-up into four dimensional unity?" It is confessed that there seems to be nothing to warrant the giving of an affirmative reply to this query. It is, perhaps, sentimentally speaking a very beautiful thing to contemplate death as a painless, unconscious involvement into a glorious _one-ness_ with all life, and birth, as the reverse of all this. But where is the utility of such a dream if it be merely a dream and impossible of realization? SIMON NEWCOMB,[23] at one time one of the outstanding figures in the early development of the fourth dimensional hypothesis, openly declared that "there is no proof that the molecule may not vibrate in a fourth dimension. There are facts which seem to indicate at least the possibility of molecular motion or change of some sort not expressible in terms of time and the three coördinates in space." Of course, there is no proof that a molecule may not at times be ensconced in a four-space neither is there proof nor probability that it is so hidden. Indeed, there is no proof that there is such a thing as a molecule for that matter. [23] Vide _Science_, Vol. VII, 158, 1898, p. 4.