. 
 
 IIIJU 
 
 / JUN 2 1930 
 
 COPYRIGHT NOT RESERVED. 
 
 THE FIXED IDEA 
 
 OF 
 
 ASTRONOMICAL THEORY, 
 
 We may in thought pursue a train of hypo- 
 theses and suppositions, but they do not thereby 
 acquire reality; still, in a normal condition of 
 the human intellect, it is impossible to conceive 
 that any thing can exist and not exist at the 
 same time. 
 
 BY 
 
 AUGUST ITISCHNER. 
 
 V 
 
 LEIPZIG 
 GUSTAV FOCK 
 
 1885. 
 
COPYRIGHT NOT RESERVED. 
 
 \ THE FIXED IDEA . 
 
 OF 
 
 ASTRONOMICAL THEORY, 
 
 We may in thought pursue a train of hypo- 
 theses and suppositions, but they do not thereby 
 acquire reality; still, in a normal condition of 
 the human intellect, it is impossible to conceive 
 that any thing can exist and not exist at the 
 same time. 
 
 BY 
 
 AUGUST TISCHNER, 
 
 LEIPZIG 
 GUSTAV FOCK 
 
 1885. 
 
v 
 
Claudius Ptolemaeus. 
 
 
 Terrae stator, soils motor. 
 
Nicolaus Copernicus. 
 
 Terrae motor, soils stator. 
 
Wiliam Herschel, 
 
 Terrae, solisque motor. 
 
DEDICATED 
 
 TO ALL CANDID FRIENDS OF RATIONAL 
 ASTRONOMY. 
 
 736353 
 
(Sir/ 
 
 <LS dorit doubt that you look in science for nothing 
 but truth, and admit, that theory is but an attempt to 
 explain inexplorable , great Nature, and that theory can 
 serve but for a resting-point , a point of departiire for 
 further explorations, and that science, if raised to dogma, 
 is brought to a standstill, and any further success is 
 rendered impossible. 
 
 The history of science proves, too, that at every time 
 there have been stated theories which in the course of 
 time must be variously altered and even replaced by 
 others quite opposed to them. 
 
 It was as an explanation of the phenomena of heaven, 
 that the theory of a fixed earth in the centre of the 
 universe was stated-, this theory was found to be un- 
 tenable, when the movement of the earth was recognized, 
 and now theory based itself on a fixed sun. But after- 
 wards it was discovered, that even the sun is not fixed, 
 but transposes himself in space. The conviction, too, was 
 arrived at, that not only the sun moves in mundane 
 space, but also, that the stars, too, are not fixed, but in 
 motion. In short, in the universe there is no immovable 
 
thing , neither a fixed earth, nor a fixed sun, nor fixed 
 stars. Now , instead of stating or seeking some theory 
 based upon the general movement of all the heavenly 
 bodies } mankind has become so enamoured of the idea of 
 a fixed sun, that no astronomer has the courage to come 
 forward in order to demonstrate that the present concep- 
 tion of tlie universe is no longer tenable. They have 
 even dared to. affirm, that it is quite irrelevant to theory, 
 whether the sun is considered as fixed or as in motioti ; 
 for astronomers say, "we may consider the sun as being 
 at rest." 
 
 Dear Sir , I dorit doubt, that you arc endeavouring 
 to lead science to truth, and I hope , you will cause the 
 question thus raised to be seriously discussed. 
 
 I am, Sir, 
 your obedient servant 
 
 Leipzig. 
 
 /*fc^ 
 
To .the Reader. 
 
 To remove misunderstanding, we must remark, that 
 in our pamphlets we do not attack practical astronomy, 
 which, with the excellent instruments at its command, has 
 attained a high perfection. We do but reject the present 
 astronomical view of the world along with the Copernican 
 hypothesis. According to the hypothesis of Copernicus, 
 the sun is fixed in the centre of the universe ; observations 
 prove, however, that he is not fixed, but moves. Now, if 
 we know, that the sun moves, why are we always to treat 
 him "as at rest?" On this account astronomers are bound 
 to give a rational explanation. 
 
The fixed idea of astronomical theory. 
 
 We may in thought pursue a train of hypotheses and 
 suppositions, but they do not thereby acquire reality ; still, 
 in a normal condition of the human intellect, it is im- 
 possible to conceive that any thing can exist and not exist 
 at the same time. 
 
 Copernicus established his system on the hypothesis 
 of a fixed sun. Those who worked at the construction 
 of astronomical theory, were fully convinced that his 
 system was wholly right and derived from nature itself. 
 
 The system of Copernicus was not immediately adopted 
 by the learned men of his time, its very possibility was 
 contested by the most celebrated astronomers , and it is,, 
 even now, admitted by not a few only as the best hypo- 
 thesis. But astronomers and mathematicians contend, with 
 an obstinacy one might call fanatical, that we may con- 
 sider the sun as "at rest." Astronomers, however, refer 
 motion only to fixed points (centres), and are obliged to 
 measure from these, but as such fixed points nowhere exist 
 in the universe, we cannot wonder, that they could not 
 attain to the comprehension of a universal motion. 
 
 It was by the heroical appearance of Galilei that the 
 system of Copernicus attained to general propagation, and 
 was, by the majority of modern astronomers and mathe- 
 maticians, by means of analysis , declared to be the only 
 possible and 'right system, and it is by them, too, asserted 
 that only foolishness and ignorance cannot comprehend it. 
 
14 
 
 n; ,*. Galilei is : said to have exclaimed: "And yet it (the 
 
 * '^arth) l mdve&" v ' 'But because the earth is in motion, it 
 
 c * ^t^s/ftQt ^necessarily follow that the sun is at rest. If 
 
 Galilei HacTsaid "tney both move", that is, the sun as well 
 
 as the earth, Laplace would have been spared the pains 
 
 of arguing "analytically" that the sun must be fixed. What 
 
 "analysis" is that, which argues that the .sun is fixed, while 
 
 observations prove that he moves ! 
 
 All astronomers know very well that the sun changes 
 his position in space, and othetfwho copy their words in 
 their books, know very well that the sun is in motion. 
 How then, are we to explain this frivolous trick of so 
 lightly overlooking the fact of the sun's motion? 
 
 Herschel was the first to make determination about 
 the direction and course of the sun. Now-a-day nobody 
 doubts the truth of this fact; it being the general 
 opinion that not only the sun moves itself, but that 
 nothing at all in the universe is at rest. Yet they teach 
 by writing and speaking and in school, that the sun moves 
 in the space, and is at the same time motionless, or may 
 be considered at rest. There exists thus for astronomers 
 a "motion at rest." 
 
 If the sun is not fixed, the system of Copernicus is 
 fallen, if the system is a truth, astronomers must prove 
 that the sun does not move. Motion round the centre as 
 well as the closed circles or ellipses, in which the planets 
 are said to move, are conceivable only with a fixed sun. 
 Now, to obtain their closed ellipses and the planes to 
 them, astronomers must absolutely determine that the sun 
 does not move. Either the sun moves, or it does not; a 
 moving sun, which is at rest, is an impossibility, a nonen- 
 tity. If the sun moves, there is no fixed centre, there are 
 no closed or recurrent curves and no planes of orbits; if 
 
15 
 
 these must to be obtained at any cost, the sun must be 
 made to be absolutely at rest, but he cannot be made to 
 be at one and the same time in motion and not in motion. 
 
 Circulation round the fixed centre or in closed curves 
 is, after the establishment of the theory of attraction by 
 attracting centre, proved to be impossible, for if an at- 
 tracting centre is moving, the bodies attracted by it cannot 
 move round it in closed curves. 
 
 The sun, eternally moving in the universe, carries with 
 him his system, the planets etc.; none of the appertaining 
 bodies can remain behind, all must follow the sun with 
 the same velocity, without regard to their circulation, 
 without regard to their own movement. While the plan- 
 ets are following the sun, they make curves of revolutio'n. 
 The sun advancing, no planet can precede or move in 
 front of him in his path or orbit. If the sun is moving, 
 there are no closed orbits reentering into themselves, nor 
 planes of orbits. 
 
 The moving sun changes the orbits (curves of revo- 
 lution) of the planets following him into spirals; the 
 ring of the spiral is therefore the true curve of revolution 
 of the celestial body, which it describes by its own velo- 
 city; the curve centrally seen is a circle, the consecutive 
 rings will therefore exhibit a series of revolutions as a 
 cylindrical spiral. If the diameter of the ring is 
 known, there results thence the proper velocity of the 
 celestial body. The longitudinal extension of the spiral 
 depends on the space the sun passes through during the 
 time of revolution of the planet; this space indicates the 
 leading or conducting velocity of the planet. The total 
 or absolute velocity of the planet censists therefore of its 
 own velocity and that of the sun; if the latter is known, 
 the elongation of the curve of revolution is likewise known. 
 
16 
 
 It is evident that the leading velocity of all planets is 
 the same, independent of their distance from the sun. 
 
 But the spiral, in itself a line of double curvature, 
 by the course of the sun its third curvature, for a 
 motion in a straight line being impossible in space, 
 the sun makes a curve himself. If we imagine the moon, 
 as she follows the earth, we see that her orbit is com- 
 posed of at least four different curvatures; if we consider 
 the rotation of the earth, as it influences the phenomena 
 of the motion of the moon, and the geographical situation 
 of the observer, who sees the phenomena changed according 
 his very position: we have formed an idea of the com- 
 plications of the motion and situation of the moon in 
 space, and we comprehend that, in consequence of these 
 uninterrupted variations in motion and position, the various 
 phenomena shown by "her must change at every moment. 
 If, therefore, the mode of this motion comes to our know- 
 ledge, the inequalities, anomalies, perturbations etc. will 
 explain themselves. 
 
 The notion of the connexion and coherence of the 
 
 ^ 
 
 system is only to explained by the moving sun: that, what 
 follows him and does not remain behind, belongs to him. 
 The sun draws his system with and after him ; if, there- 
 fore, the whole system moves, each body belonging to it 
 must undoubtedly move with it in the same manner; it 
 is for the same reason evident, too, that the direction of 
 the sun is the direction of the system and all its parts. 
 
 Whatever is incomprehensible on the hypothesis of a 
 sun at rest or fixed, becomes perspicuous and intelligible, 
 if the sun is in motion. 
 
 While they worked on, confirming and as they suppo- 
 sed perfecting the system of Copernicus, they must surely 
 have felt, that moving sun was capable of overthrowing 
 
17 
 
 their theoretical conceptions; nevertheless they continued 
 to work until our time. 
 
 While Laplace continued his work with exemplary 
 perseverance, the sun protested loudly enough against his 
 immobility; he clearly demonstated that he will not be a 
 fixed point for the fixed planes ; but it was in-vain : the 
 great mathematicians despised his remonstrances, and so 
 he had to act fixed, nolens volens, according their high will. 
 
 Laplace says also in his "Considerations on the system 
 of the world" pp. 396, 397 : The moon makes a nearly 
 circular orbit round the earth, but, seen from the sun, 
 she seems to form a series of epicycloides, the centres 
 of which are on the circuit of the earth's orbit. The 
 earth likewise makes a series of epicycloides, the 
 centres of which are on the curve which the sun de- 
 scribes round the centre (point of gravity) of the group 
 of stars to which he belongs. Finally the sun himself 
 makes a series of epicycles, the centres of which are on 
 the curve, which the point of gravity of that group of 
 stars describes round that of the "universe". Astronomy 
 has already taken a great step by making us acquainted 
 with the motion of the earth and those epicycloides, 
 which the moon and the satellites describe on the orbits 
 of their respective planets. But if it wanted centuries for 
 the understanding of the motion of the planetary system, 
 what immense space of time is required to determine the 
 motion of the sun and stars! Already observations are show- 
 ing us these motions: they seem, upon the whole, to indi- 
 cate a general movement of all bodies belonging to the 
 solar system towards the constellation of Hercules; but 
 they seem to demonstrate, too, that the apparent motion 
 of the stars is a combination of their own movement with 
 
 that of the sun. Laplace says also, "that the proper velo- 
 
 2 
 
18 
 
 city of the sun is at least equal to that of the earth in 
 its orbit." 
 
 And yet it is the very same Laplace, who says repea- 
 tedly in his work, that the sun in truth is motion less, 
 and supports all his conclusions and demonstrations b y 
 this immobility. 
 
 It is the same Laplace, who sets forth here the epi- 
 cycloides rolling on in infinity without end, but in his 
 work strictly demonstrates the elliptical movement of 
 all celestial bodies - - except comets - by means of 
 analysis which requires invariable planes. 
 
 For Laplace, therefore, the motion of the sun is some- 
 thing accidental, a secondary thing, a curiosity, which has 
 nothing in common with theory, and which is without in- 
 fluence, of no consequence to him and his work. 
 
 The fact is that the planets do not revolve round 
 the sun, but follow him. It is evident that the revolution 
 is related to the sun and his centre; but in truth they 
 proceed round the orbit of the sun. The moon for example 
 moves with the earth in the same direction. The velo- 
 city of the earth surpasses the proper velocity of its satellite, 
 even according to theory , more than thirtyfold : their 
 distance remains the same. But now, how can any one 
 say, as Laplace says himself, that the moon revolves round 
 the earth in a closed nearly circular curve? It 
 is possible that this circle round the earth is in agreement 
 with the laws of highest mechanics, but it is surely in 
 contradiction to Nature. But how do astronomers render 
 possible what is impossible? By considering the earth, 
 with reference to the moon, as "at rest" ; for they think, 
 that, if they consider the earth as "at rest", it will not 
 move. If the planets follow the sun, and the satellites 
 
19 
 
 folloAv the planets, how are we to get a revolution around 
 the centre? 
 
 While the planets describe their original curve, they 
 are drawn forward by the sun; the consequence of which 
 is the inevitable necessity for the spiral as the definitive 
 curve of orbit or moving line of double curvature, which 
 result's from the combination of two velocities (forces), 
 one of which belongs to the planets, being their originally 
 received velocity which thej^- themselves cannot change, 
 the other belongs to the sun. It is this movement of the 
 sun, which is communicated to the planets by attraction, 
 their own velocity receives by it an increment which may 
 b- called leading or conducting velocity. The sum 
 of both movements is the absolute velocity of the planet 
 in space. What is understood of the sun and planets, may 
 be said likewise of the planets and their satellites. 
 
 It is, therefore, the original circular motion of the 
 planets, modified by the motion of the sun, which may 
 be taken to be the path of their orbit, and the figure of 
 which we have considered as a ring changed into an 
 endless spiral. An isolated piece or part of the uninter- 
 ruptedly continuing orbit, which may be signified by a 
 periodically returning coincidence, we may call the curve 
 of revolution of the planet. This curve projected on the 
 celestial sphere, on the apparent hollow sphere of the sky 
 and seen centrally, appears, at first sight, as closed; a 
 continued, more accurate consideration shows, however, 
 that even the projection is not a closed figure , but is 
 self-continuous. A proof of this is given by the pheno- 
 menon of precession. 
 
Essay. 
 
 Quaerendo, non afftrmando. 
 
 The first consequence of the movement of the sun 
 delivers astronomical theory from a great burden: it no 
 longer needs centrifngul force. Vide appendix VI. - 
 
 If attraction thanks to the sun -- has delivered 
 itself from its mortal enemy, the centrifugal force, it, too, 
 can act unhindered and will produce the invariable di- 
 stance of the planets from the sun. 
 
 We may now sketch , as an approximation , the 
 following image of the solar system. 
 
 After the sun, who is like the nucleus of a comet 
 preceding it, there come, ranged one after another, the 
 planets, the curves of revolution of which enlarge more 
 and more according to their distance, as if they represented 
 so many centrifugal pendula, the threads of which proceed 
 from the centre of the sun. 
 
 If all these are in revolution and the sun is, for a 
 moment, considered as immovable, the threads (radii vectores) 
 form regular cones, the base of which is perpendicular to 
 their axe$. The circumference of this base of the cone is, 
 
21 
 
 what we have called the original curve of revolution. If 
 these cones are situated in the same angle, they seem to 
 make but a single one, the planets revolving on the sur- 
 face of it. 
 
 To judge from observations, it seems indeed, that 
 the cones are situated nearly in the same angle, and that 
 in consequence of this situation, the zodiac is to be con- 
 sidered as a common boundary of the orbits. 
 
 The central projection of the rings is, of course, a 
 circle, which, when projected, changes into one or the other 
 ellipse. Seen from the sun , the orbits of the planets 
 appear as projected into a configuration, which is re- 
 presented accurately by the diagram of Copernicus : the sun 
 being in the midst of all the orbits, the planets seem to 
 revolve round his centre. 
 
 The cone itself is shown by the profile; now, if the 
 curves are situated in the same angle, the sizes of the 
 orbits their semi-diameter -- are as the distances of 
 the planets from the sun. It is self-evident that from no 
 planet can this cone of an other planet be seen as central ;' 
 the curves must therefore present themselves as eccentric 
 circles or ellipses. The earth, in regard to other planets, 
 among the mdst various positions gets also into one, in 
 which the satellites of the planets show centrally projected 
 orbits. 
 
 Now, if the sun moves, the direction of his move- 
 ment is the common axis of the cone, that is to say, the 
 planets revolve round the line described by the sun, which 
 we may call his orbit; this line is the very equator of 
 heaven. 
 
 By the movement of the sun, the orbits of the planets, 
 hitherto considered as plane curves or rings, change into 
 spirals, which are the more extended, as the velocity of 
 
- 22 
 
 the sun is greater, compared with the proper velocity of 
 the planet ; these curves of double curvature are no longer 
 perpendicular to the axe of the cone or to the orbit of 
 the sun, but they have such an inclination to it, as is in- 
 dicated by the angle of the cone. 
 
 If we suppose that the sun moves in a straight line, 
 the rings of the spirals described by the planets form a 
 cylinder, the diameter of which is equal to the diameter 
 of the original curve of revolution or spiral ring; in that 
 case one might call the spiral cylindrical, the consecutive 
 rings of the same diameter having likewise the same 
 situation; but it is clear in itself, that the sun moves in 
 a curve, too, therefore the cylinder we have imagined 
 plane, will acquire a curvature, which to the curvature 
 of the spiral - - double by itself adds a third one. It 
 is a matter of course that the diameter of the spiral rings 
 is not altered by this third curvature, but the projection 
 of them is modified. According to this view, the cone, 
 the figure of the system, will acquire a slight curvature 
 and give an image, which reminds us the figure of the 
 horn of plenty. The central section - - in the length of 
 the axe of this curved cone is a spherical triangle. Now, 
 seen centrally, the sun will no longer be in the centre of 
 all the orbits (spiral rings), but there are produced the 
 eccentrities as well as the^ apparent inclinations of the 
 orbits towards another. 
 
 The earth is little distant from the top of the cone 
 
 - the sun and moves on its surface; it sees the ever 
 
 changing position of the planets in perspective ; at every 
 
 moment of the motion there appears another projection. 
 
 If we suppose, that all planets are in the same line 
 of the surface of the cone, that is just as if we were to 
 say according to the system of Copernicus, that the interior 
 
23 
 
 planets are in conjunction at the same time as the ex- 
 terior ones are in opposition. This position of all planets 
 was taken into consideration already by the ancients, 
 its recurrence called the Great Period. That this Great 
 Period has been very much enlarged by the two newly 
 discovered planets Uranus andNeptunus, is clearly apparent. 
 
 Each planet has its originally received velocity, and 
 its period of revolution seems, if not to depend directly upon, 
 to be in proportion to its aphelion. All periods of revo- 
 lution renew themselves regularly as well as the relative 
 positions of the planets with respect to each other. It is 
 therefore comprehensible that the planets during thoir 
 revolution assume those various positions, which they have 
 marked with the names of conjunction, opposition, quadra- 
 ture etc., but which need a correction, even if the appa- 
 rent angular distance, in reference to the sun, is preserved, 
 as is required by observation. 
 
 As to the periods and positions of. the bodies, which 
 form the moving system, their change is inconsiderable, the 
 whole remaining together, and consequently, the figure of 
 the system being unchanged. The respective distances 
 are chained to the regulated motion: if, therefore, obser- 
 vation of the bodies belonging to the system was sufficient 
 for astronomy, the phenomena might be reduced to their 
 greatest simplicity ; as it is, however, the starry heaven and 
 its content, which serve as basis of comparison and 
 projection, there follows hence a complication, according to 
 which the heaven seems to transpose itself in the space. 
 
 If we consider the conical figure of the system, on 
 the hypothesis that the sun is immoveable, the planets will 
 describe closed curves, that is, they revolve in the same 
 plane curve, which we have called the spiral ring or 
 the original curve of revolution of the planet, and which, 
 
24 
 
 of course, does not change its place in space, for which 
 reason its plane, according to present notions , is to be 
 considered as invariable. But that presumes another in- 
 admissible condition, according to which the attraction of 
 the sun exercises no other effect on the planets than that 
 which is necessary to preserve the equilibrium of the 
 system and the invariable distance of its bodies from the 
 sun in such a manner, that none can approach to, and 
 none remove from him. This condition remains unchanged 
 with the moving system, and the effect of the attraction 
 of the sun is reduced to the communication of his own 
 velocity, in consequence of which the original curves of 
 revolution change themselves into spirals. But now, it 
 becomes intelligible from this effect of the attraction, that 
 the planets must necessarily remain at the same distance 
 from the sun. That the elongation of the spiral depends 
 upon the relation of the two respective velocities (that of 
 the sun and a planet, or of a planet and its moon), is a 
 matter of course. This longitudinal extension of the curve 
 of revolution is at the same time the inclination (whether 
 declination or inclination, does not matter) of the spiral 
 orbit towards the axe of the cone of the system (sun's orbit or 
 equator) ; the angle of inclination is therefore obtained 
 from the proper velocity of the planet and that of the 
 sun. That the conducting or leading velocity, therefore, 
 is the same for all bodies of the system, we have al- 
 ready mentioned. 
 
 It is evident, that, if there is observed in the heaven 
 a perceptible transposition, which appears to be inde- 
 pendent%of the double movement of the earth, one may 
 conclude with certainty, that this is the consequence of 
 the sun's motion and the transposition of his system 
 in space. 
 
25 
 
 The foregoing diverse considerations will enable us to 
 bring clearness into the question of revolutions or times 
 of revolution. The continual transposition of the solar 
 system in space requires 'the unintermitted transposition 
 of the planets and their revolution; there is, therefore, 
 an uninterrupted continuation of the same movement, and 
 neither a true revolution, nor a time of revolution. A 
 period of revolution is therefore the return of the same 
 phenomenon, or the same apparent position; it is there- 
 fore relative, it is a coincidence. That these coincidences 
 return periodically, results from the nature of general 
 movement ; that they return regularly, is as it seems - 
 the work of the universal attraction. 
 
 The question now is, which coincidence, the return of 
 which phenomenon is to be considered as an accomplished 
 revolution, a period of revolution or time of revolution, 
 and to what does this period relate? 
 
 Theory has founded its choice or decision not on 
 that rational view, which proceeds from the study of the 
 phenomena, and has proved this by referring even the time 
 of rotation of the earth to the stars , thus postulating a 
 sideral revolution, whereas it is evident enough, that 
 we can only refer this movement of the earth to itself. 
 
 IjT the system of Copernicus was founded on reality, 
 if the planets did indeed revolve round the sun, ever move 
 in the same space, inclosed curves, it is evident, 
 that, after having passed 3(30 degrees, they would return 
 to the same place in their orbit, and that, in this case, 
 their position in reference to some comparative stars, after 
 each revolution accomplished on this manner, wofcld be 
 the same. But as coincidence with the stars takes 
 place in increasing periods, the consequence is that the 
 movement of the planets cannot take place according to 
 
26 
 
 the system of Copernicus, and that, therefore, their periods 
 ot revolution cannot refer to the slars. If the system 
 transposes itself in space, and remains everywhere the same 
 without change, the coincidences, that is, the periods of 
 revolution of the bodies forming the system can only refer 
 to their guide, the sun, and we may conclude with 
 certainty that the coincidences of the respective positions 
 fall at the same periods , as the planets , keeping their 
 aphelion, move with equal velocity. 
 
 It is a matter of course , that in consequence of the 
 general movement as well as of the uninterrupted serpentine 
 onward movement of the orbits, there arise different coinci- 
 dences, that, thus, there appear periodically different phe- 
 nomena; it was on account of this circumstance, that 
 theory ascribed to the moon five different times of re- 
 volution. ''Revolution" or "time of revolution" employed 
 in this manner, has no longer any significance, any sense, 
 as, according to the nature of the matter, we have to be 
 contented with but one period of revolution. 
 
 If we call orbits the space passed through by the 
 planets and satellites and the endless spirals described by 
 them in this space, we embody in our thought the path 
 of the celestial bodies which vanishes and leaves no track 
 in order to facilitate figuratively oar conception of their 
 movement; if this running through one extended spiral 
 ring is termed describing 360 degrees and an accomplished 
 revolution, it is so termed with reference to the sun, and 
 assumes, that the two extremities (beginning and end) of 
 the spiral ring thus imagined are in the same line, that 
 is, if the point of a spiral, for instance in the equinoxes 
 of spring, coincides with the sun, its point of ending in 
 this very same position after an accomplished revolution 
 coincides likewise with the sun. 
 
27 - 
 
 Having comprehended the importance of the solar move- 
 ment, we may perceive, why so few phenomena of heaven 
 are understood, and why so often we do not know what 
 it is that we are observing. That is the spell which has 
 lain upon science for four thousand years, and can be 
 removed only by the sun. 
 
 This solar, system, moving on without end and boun- 
 dary, flying through infinite space; this cone, a point 
 vanishing as respects its size in the universe, transposing 
 itself in a line of double curvature, contains by the way 
 all that, which man may distinctly perceive and success- 
 fully observe in the heaven; the phenomena apparently 
 different, the motions and positions changing without end, 
 the periodical and secular variations etc., all these exist, 
 it is the unity of science , the basis of its theory. Com- 
 prehending the movement we do not need to take refuge 
 in hidden powers; each explication becomes superfluous, 
 even useless ; nature explains itself, assuming that man is 
 capable of studying it. 
 
ihis idea of the fixity of the sun has taken root in 
 such a degree, that to pull it up, there exists no natural 
 power, which would be strong enough. Howsoever the 
 sun may move, while astronomers explore diligently, whither 
 he goes, how swiftly he goes, they seem to think of his 
 fixity, and continue their "investigations and explorations", 
 without drawing from them the least deduction. As soon 
 as they feel in themselves an impulse to make some deter- 
 mination, theory or law, they fix the sun solidly on 
 the ether. The scholars faithfully repeating, what they 
 have learned from the professor, astronomical writers believe 
 themselves to have done enough, if they respectfully mention 
 the motion of the sun; but all their deductions, conclusions, 
 theorems, explanations, proofs, arguments, laws, etc. are 
 founded on his fixity, according to the system of Coper- 
 nicus. 
 
 It is very striking, that the astronomers of the last 
 century could, and those of the present can yet believe, that 
 such men as Copernicus, Kepler and Newton, had they 
 been conscious of the moving sun, would have stated the 
 same system, the same laws and theories, which they founded 
 exclusively on his fixity, his immoveableness ! That in this 
 circumstance there is something to be ashamed of, cannot 
 be denied, cannot escape thinking men. 
 
 With great satisfaction astronomers rock themselves 
 in the idea, which has graduelly become a comfortable 
 
29 
 
 conviction, that they have regulated the heavens extremely 
 well, all their arrangements being so excellent, that no 
 one can suggest any alteration of them. If therefore one 
 or another arises from their midst which has occurred 
 already sometimes saying, that the time has come at last 
 to purge science, to enter upon a rational way and to 
 subject the untenable theory to a rigid investigation and 
 examination, the immense majority of astronomers and 
 mathematicians as with one voice reply u non possumus". 
 That is the spoken manifestation of the first law of nature : 
 Inertia is the most simple and natural (sic) law of nature 
 which can be imagined. Laplace, Mecanique celeste I, p. 14. 
 
 From the untenability of the system of Copernicus 
 there results, that all those ideas, notions, theories, which 
 are connected with, or founded on it, all those conclusions 
 deduced from observation and referred to his system are 
 likewise and altogether, without exception, abolished with 
 it. We may still note, that it is impossible to render 
 science a greater and more important service than to 
 overthrow the present system, as indeed the sun has al- 
 ready done. 
 
 It seems, that the heaven, weary at length of man's 
 haughtiness, would heal him of his sickness by allowing 
 him to recognise that the sun moves. The medicine is 
 something drastic , the lesson a little severe ; pride is 
 broken, vanity crushed, and the ruin history knows 
 nothing like it is terrible. To rise up again, man 
 will certainly be obliged to exert his spirit in an unusnal 
 manner. 
 
 Astronomers , mathematicians and learned men may, 
 however, quiet themselves. The catastrophe will not 
 break forth very soon. Keeping human nature before our 
 eyes we deem it not impossible , that for some centuries 
 
30 
 
 still to come they will continue to teach in books and 
 schools the "true things" and unchangeable laws of this 
 day, as the mysteries of heaven till now revealed ! 
 
 We cannot bring ourselves to believe , that those 
 astronomers who teach, that the sun has a proper motion, 
 are really of opinion , that the sun must be regarded as 
 u at rest" for theory. What can be the reason of their 
 stubborn perseverance in upholding the Copernican system, 
 at any price, untouched for eternity ? Ay, how can it be 
 expected, that the queen of science , praised as the most 
 pure and irrefutable truth, astronomy, which, aided by 
 analysis, penetrates into the deepest recesses of heaven, dis- 
 covers all its mysteries, shall now, at once, fall down 
 miserably, because her theory does not agree with reality? 
 That requires from our modern astronomers, and from 
 learned men in general, a self-denial, which at present is 
 not to be hoped for. But in time they will, no doubt, .be 
 forced to avow, that they are wrong, and will penitently 
 confess : pater peccavi ! 
 
 We shall ever repeat that a basis for a theory of 
 ~t& solar system can be got only by rightly perceiving the 
 original type of the celestial phenomena, and this ori- 
 ginal type is to be found only by observations on the 
 equator. 
 
 Will the necessary works and studies for this purpose 
 be soon undertaken on the equator? We do not believe 
 it, for learned men, as we see from history, have ever 
 resisted by all the means at their command the rise of 
 new ideas, if these are contradictory to those already 
 existing and rooted by centennial propagation, and they 
 have persecuted the upholders of them with contumely 
 and fanaticism. Vain endeavour ! Truth opens its path, 
 although sometimes very slowly. The Ptolemean intuition 
 
31 
 
 of the world endured undisputed through fifteen centuries, 
 the Copernican intuition of the world is but in its fourth 
 century, it was rejected by thinking men at its very birth, 
 and still now is attacked repeatedly; even genuine astro- 
 nomers admit it but as a hypothesis. The proper movement 
 of the sun having been discovered, however, the Copernican 
 intuition of the world has become a curiosity, a folly of 
 the spirits of the age, for after the general movement of 
 all heavenly bodies without any exception has been acknow- 
 ledged, there is required an exaggerated dose of imagination 
 to conceive the sun as immoveable or "at rest." 
 
Infinite space and its content as the celestial mecha- 
 nism are beyond the intellectual faculties of man to under- 
 stand, and it is a matter of course that knowledge is replaced by 
 imagination. Theoretical astronomy or what they have agreed 
 to call explanatory science, i but the fruit of imagination. 
 
 In order to comprehend the observable phenomena, 
 they have resolved to search after their causes, and to 
 produce these , they have imagined theories which are 
 often devoid of sense and not without contradictions. 
 
 It is very indifferent, what ideas one feigns about the 
 mechanism of the heaven, if they are but more or less 
 rational; but one will never attain so far as to be able to 
 affirm that they are the only true explanation of reality. 
 
 The ideas exhibited in our pamphlet must contradict 
 those which are taught now-a-day that is inevitable. Are 
 they nearer to the truth ? The future will decide. 
 
 The observable phenomena look to-day as in old 
 times, but the intelligence of man is modified, it may 
 enlarge, and science will be perfected. What they don't 
 comprehend to-day, they will comprehend perhaps to- 
 morrow, and we are persuaded, that the number of those 
 who will occupy themselves earnestly and attentively with 
 the study of the celestial phenomena, will increase, and 
 then the most sublime object of nature, heaven and its 
 phenomena, will find better commentators than we can 
 exhibit now. 
 
One who doubted the possibility of the Copernican 
 system desired to be enlightened about it, and went to 
 Alexander v. Humboldt, who was indeed ever the first 
 refuge of those seeking information, and was, too, so 
 complaisant, that he sent nobody away, that he even con- 
 scientiously answered each letter. The visitor was friendly 
 received by Alexander v. Humboldt, and when he laid 
 before him his doubt about the Copernican system, got 
 for answer the memorable words: "I have known, too, for 
 a long time, that we have no arguments for the Coper- 
 nican system , but I shall never dare to be the first to 
 attack it. Don't rush into the wasps' nest. You will but 
 bring upon yourself the scorn of the thoughtless multi- 
 tude. If once a famous astronomer arises against the present 
 conception, I will communicate, too, my observations, but 
 to come forth as the first against opinions, which the world 
 has become fond of, I don't feel the courage." 
 
 From Humboldt our doubter went to Encke. Here, 
 indeed, he was not friendly received. In a surly manner 
 Encke declared, that astronomers had something better 
 to do than to meddle with hypotheses ; he had no time 
 to teach every one who had any doubts ; there were books 
 enough about astronomy, these he should read. The doubter 
 replied, that he had already read the books written for 
 the general public by Littrow and Madler, but he had 
 found in them no reliable information. Encke remarked 
 
on that, that if these books did not satisfy him, he, too r 
 could not give him further advice. 
 
 In 1854 our doubter visited Carl v. Raumer at Er- 
 langen, who avowed to him openly, that he, too, was not 
 fond of the Copernican hypothesis, but had never dared 
 do more than utter vague objections against it. Thus in- 
 his. "Croisades" p. 119, where he writes: "Now, indeed, each 
 schoolmaster, according to hear-say, teaches, that the earth 
 moves round the sun, without thinking in the least about 
 exerting himself and his scholars to perceive the planetary 
 movement." When the doubter left Raumer, the latter 
 congratulated him on his purpose of helping truth to her 
 rights, he was, however, doubtful, whether it would in a 
 short time be possible to vanquish the fanaticism of the 
 world. 
 
 At Munich our doubter visited Lament , director of 
 the observatory. Lament said to him : "You and the world 
 in general are in error: never yet has any real astronomer 
 spoken of a Copernican system, we only know a Copernican 
 hypothesis. Whether this may be true or erroneous, does 
 not matter at all for each genuine astronomer." The doubter 
 replied, that he very w&l knew that, but then surely one 
 should not abandon lay people to the presumption that 
 astronomy takes the Copernican hypothesis for a truth. 
 "I have never meddled with lay astronomy," said Lament, 
 "if Littrow and Ma'dler instill superstition into the people 
 by selling hypothesis for truth, that is their affair." 
 
 At Gottingen our doubter made the acquaintance of the 
 astronomer Gauss, who met him in the most friendly manner, 
 aided him with books and allowed him to apply to him 
 at each time, when he thought himself to have need 
 of his counsel. The doubter communicated to Gauss 
 the course of his investigations made hitherto; he told 
 
35 
 
 him of his having found, that all great thinkers, such 
 as Schelling or Hegel, had criticised the transcendental 
 suppositions of the Copernicans, while only little spirits and 
 uneducated folk claimed the right of not only scorning as a 
 fool, but even persecuting with wild fanaticism, him, who did 
 not agree with the chorus of general opinion. Gauss avowed 
 to the doubter that every new discovery in astronomy 
 filled him with new doubts about the dominant system. 
 When our doubter communicated to him that Alexander 
 v. Humboldt had declared that he would likewise arise 
 immediately against the present conception, if some famous 
 astronomer would declare himself against the dominant 
 system, Gauss answered: "Ay, if I were twenty years 
 younger!" 
 
 The astronomers of our days (1885) say: Everybody 
 will understand, that an astronomer of the present time 
 cannot take up any other system thakthat of Copernicus, 
 though it were but by the way of trial. They assert, that 
 the system of Copernicus is the only possible one , the 
 eternal foundation of all further progress of astronomy, 
 that with the system of Copernicus the whole of astronomy 
 stands or falls, and that without it we must renounce all 
 explanation, all scientifically founded prediction. 
 
 3* 
 
It is strange : even sound intellects yield to that 
 mighty incubus, the spirit of the age ! 
 
 Is there no renowned astronomer, who has the courage 
 to arise against the untenable present theory of the sun 
 being thought as "at r4st", and to establish an astronomy 
 on more rational principles, which agree with the proper 
 movement of the sun? 
 
 How long yet shall the great genii disfigure this 
 magnificent, sublime science by their transcendental ideas, 
 and scorn the sound human understanding? 
 
 The modern astronomical theory, that is, the expla- 
 natory astronomical science, may still to-day be called 
 
 rightly 
 
 docta ignorantia, 
 
 as astronomy was called more than 400 years ago by 
 Cardinal Cuza. 
 
Ce n'est point de s'etre trompe que les liommes doi- 
 vent rougir, mais seulement de leur obstination a ne pas 
 reconnaitre leurs erreurs. Fretet, Defense de la chrono- 
 logic etc. contre le systerue chronologique de Newton. 
 
 1 o avow that one is wrong, is to prove modestly that 
 one has become reasonable. Swift. 
 
 Hypotheses have their time like fashions, and the same 
 courage is needed to profess those the hour of which is 
 passed, as those the hour of which is not come. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
Appendix. 
 
 I 
 
 The heaven or firmament, as it is called, appears al- 
 most as a hollow hemisphere, in the centre of which we 
 stand on the surface of the earth, and on the concavity 
 of which that magnificent legion of stars seems to be fixed. 
 
 In spite of the astonishing distance of the stars among 
 themselves, in spite of the endless depth of heaven, this 
 latter appears to us as a sphere, a hollow sphere of one 
 piece of crystal of old style. The opinion has been 
 pronounced that this phenomenon is effected by the atmo- 
 sphere, one of the qualities of which would be, of course, 
 to round off the heaven. We know indeed, that, what- 
 ever spreads around and above us, assumes a spherical 
 figure. The heaven, when partly covered by clouds, still 
 remains for our vision a sphere. If we are enveloped by 
 mist, the boundary of our sight narrows very much, and 
 yet we see continually a hollow sphere, which is changed 
 and renewed with every step we make forward or back- 
 ward, but in doing so always preserves the same 
 dimension, which is, too, proportional to the density of the 
 mist. The same phenomenon appears to us in the celestial 
 regions : wherever the earth may be in the universe, 
 everywhere the same sphere is presented to us. If we 
 
42 
 
 wander in thought through the wide celestial regions, 
 there opens everywhere another sphere, a new one, and 
 all these spheres of endless number have the same dimen- 
 sion; the apparent size and extension of the vault of heaven 
 remains, therefore, ever the same to our vision. A philo- 
 sopher once said, that the heaven or the infinite space it 
 occupies might be regarded as a sphere, the centre of which 
 is everywhere, but the circuit nowhere; as there is, 
 however, no centre without circuit, he might have said 
 immediately: The heaven is everywhere a sphere, conse- 
 quently its centre and circumference are everywhere, too. 
 From these remarks we may conclude, that the heaven 
 is not rounded off by the atmosphere -- which is besides 
 rounded off by itself but that it is our vision which 
 effects this work: for it is bounded equally to all directions, 
 and as our eye reaches necessarily in^all directions to 
 the same distance, it meets everywhere with its boundary, 
 the consequence of which is then, that our eye like 
 us ourselves - must be in the centre of the visible 
 sphere. 
 
 Whatever of the heaven is visible to the earth, is in 
 perspective. No absolute direction, no orientation in space. 
 The general movement allows at most but a mo- 
 mentary hold. Whatever abides and moves in space, 
 becomes visible by projection on a sphere which always 
 remains the product of our vision Each visible object 
 therefore, be it a heavenly body as a point of light, or be 
 it movement, is a perspective projection on the surface of 
 an apparently hollow globe or sphere, the geometrical 
 qualities of which are known and which is the basis of the 
 astronomical observations. 
 
 The heavenly sphere in itself is, however, our vision 
 bounded all directions, and considered thus the sphere 
 
43 
 
 itself is bounded by our vision, its apparent extension 
 - greatness depends on the power of our vision, if 
 one could measure this power, determinate it accurately 
 by numbers, the dimension of the visible heavenly 
 sphere would be known. The stronger the power of vision 
 or our eye, the more the space of heaven extends itself, 
 and the telescope, strengthening the ability of our sight, 
 enlarges at once the sphere and increases its content. 
 With each extension of the sphere there opens a greater 
 depth of heaven, and the angles of vision are extended 
 in proportion to the enlargement. 
 
 To each distance from the earth there corresponds 
 another circle, another sphere. The sun moves apparently 
 in a circle 410 times greater than the moon, and if one 
 of the stars nearest to us is 200000 times more distant 
 than the sun, the circle described by it will exceed that 
 of the moon 82 million times. It is probably this circum- 
 stance which led the ancients to the idea that the many 
 consecutive heavenly spheres were, so to speak, encased 
 one into another. The same succession of ideas has induced 
 modern astronomers, to imagine the various circular orbits 
 of the planets inclined to one another in the same manner, 
 as if they had planes which cut one another in different 
 points, transpose themselves one on another, have their poles 
 and describe with them geometrical figures on the heaven. 
 
 It must be remarked , that, as the heavenly bodies 
 and the phenomena connected with their movement are in 
 the same manner projected on this sphere, whatever may 
 be their distance from the earth, the moon near us in 
 just the same way as the smallest or apparently most 
 remote star, the study of this sphere, totally neglected 
 till our days, must give important disclosures about many 
 celestial phenomena. 
 
44 
 
 Each visible object or phenomenon is, with relation 
 to its apparent position, more or less affected by the motion 
 of the earth. This "more or less" depends on the distance 
 of the object as well as on its relative situation to the 
 direction of the moving earth ; each translo cation, linear 
 and angular, is consequently projected on the heavenly 
 sphere and is there seen perspectively. 
 
 The solar system itself appearing but as a point in 
 the midst of the heavenly hollow sphere, it is very probable 
 that the heavenly sphere offers the same aspect to all 
 bodies forming the system ; each planet sees therefore the 
 same constellations and stars, the proper motion and trans- 
 location of which will be too the same for each planet 
 with regard to time. It is not the same within the 
 system itself, each planet sees the other bodies of the 
 system in other places, in other projections and perspectives. 
 Thus, for example, for that body which is nearest the sun, 
 are no inner planets, no conjunctions and no solar eclipses ; 
 for the most remote one, in the contrary, there are only 
 inner planets and nothing but conjunctions, for it all other 
 planets and their moons may possibly appear on the disk 
 of the sun. But it is very probable, that Mercury as far 
 as Neptune is invisible, as this little planet seen from 
 that other, never deviates more than 46 to 50 seconds of 
 an arc from the sun. 
 
 All heavenly bodies transpose themselves with relation 
 to another exactly in consequence of their own move- 
 ment. The translo cation therefore as well as the move- 
 ment is a general one. 
 
 To these real or proper translocations there must 
 be added the apparent ones, in consequence of the 
 earth's motion as well as of the translocation of the solar 
 
45 
 
 system. If we remember that the earth besides its rota- 
 tory motion describes a doubly' bent curve round the double- 
 curve of the sun, it becomes evident that the relative 
 positions of the heavenly bodies are perpetually changing, 
 and that to find out their proper movements one must 
 necessarily know, how far their total movement is affected 
 by that of the earth and sun, that is, one must know the 
 movement of the earth and sun as well as the effects 
 they produce. 
 
 From these few remarks we may recognise, what 
 immense studies have to be made to enable us to comprehend 
 in general and to perceive rightly the phenomena of the 
 movement. 
 
 According to the nature of the sphere all objects 
 projected on it, all points of the starry heaven, even these, 
 which in reality are far beyond the apparent vault, must 
 to our vision appear to be at the same distance. The 
 consequence of this optical effect of our vision is, that 
 the earth is ever in the centre of the sphere 
 or heavenly hollow sphere, whithersoever it may be con- 
 ducted by the sun. But now, the earth is itself a sphere, 
 one may therefore imagine it to be a little globe in the 
 midst of a great hollow sphere. Surrounded and enveloped 
 in this manner, to every point of the surface of the earth 
 (the inner sphere) there answers a corresponding point of 
 the heavenly sphere (the outer great hollow sphere). From 
 this circumstance it is evident, that the heavenly hollow 
 sphere, taken as a whole, has for each other point of the 
 earth another appearance, and therefore all heavenly 
 phenomena, according to their different points, show them- 
 selves differently. Apparent and angular distances, move- 
 ment, direction, aspect, configuration etc, all vary and 
 change with the changed position of the observer, and it 
 
46 
 
 is absolutely impossible, that two or more observers, being 
 perceptibly remote from" another, can see accurately in 
 the same manner a phenomenon observed by them at the 
 same time: each one of them will perceive in the pheno- 
 menon something different. This circumstance is a uni- 
 versal one and without exception, and in the strict sense 
 of the word even a very little distance of two observers 
 produces a different result: the matter is therefore, with 
 what accuracy and delicacy have the observations been 
 performed. 
 
 Of such observations as have been made in different 
 countries or "parts of the world," there often arises the 
 question, which of them has better and more accurately 
 indicated one or the other phenomenon. From the difference 
 of the results they have got, they often infer a greater 
 or less precision in the observations; with a little reflection 
 we shall find the true cause of most ^of the differences, 
 even if we lay no great stress on the correctness of 
 the watches employed , which cannot in any case agree with 
 each other, or on the accuracy of the time as determined 
 by calculation. 
 
 It is very remarkable and of high importance, that 
 the heavenly sphere is a true copy of the geometrical 
 surface of the earth. All points, lines, circles of the earth 
 are ' to be found on the sphere of stars ; the copy is perfect 
 and extends to the minutest details. Thus e. g. the visible 
 heavenly sphere is flattened, a spheroid, a magnified form 
 of the little earth ; thus the surface of the earth is to- 
 tally projected on the heaven, as well as its movement 
 without exception. As the earth thus, as it were, graphi- 
 cally transfers all its geometrical and mechanical qualities 
 to the heaven, its image is by this means perfectly reflected. 
 The velocity of its rotation, for example, different for each 
 
47 
 
 point of its surface between the equator and pole, is found 
 in the parallel circles of the heavenly sphere, which corre- 
 spond to those of the earth, in such perfection, that by 
 accurate observations made in this sense one might find, 
 how the heaven itself indicates the flattening of the earth, 
 and this only by the difference of the velocities, which 
 belong to the equatorial parts of the earth by the 
 rotation. 
 
 This sublime, remarkable phenomenon, that the sur- 
 face and movement of the earth are accurately copied by 
 the heaven, has never been the object of study, simply 
 because explanatory science seems to know nothing about 
 its existence. That the equator, ecliptic, parallel circles, 
 axis of the world, and the poles of the world, correspond 
 to those of the earth, is about all that theory knows. 
 But it is just this magnificent phenomenon which ex- 
 plains many other great and small phenomena ; it explains, 
 beside other things, the variable velocities of the sun 
 in the ecliptic, it explains partly the variable diameters 
 of the sun and moon; nay, it discloses, why some astro- 
 nomical instruments, as, for example, the parallactical 
 ones, among them especially the equatorial, will not do 
 good service and will not indicate the cause of their 
 doing so. 
 
 This true, wonderful reproduction of the spheroid of 
 the earth and its surface offers us a view of the most 
 delicate mechanism of the heavens; it informs us about 
 such phenomena as the imagination is not enabled to 
 comprehend. "Whatever may be the position of the earth 
 in space, the reproduction is always and everywhere a 
 perfect one. If the axis of the earth or its pole is di- 
 rected to Sirius, Sirius is the polar star; if the earth is 
 inclined to it at 90 , Sirius is in the equator , and so 
 
48 
 
 on. The least displacement of the earth is therefore indi- 
 cated by the heavenly sphere, but the earth transposes 
 itself in space incessantly, and its situation changes in 
 consequence of the motion of the sun. Whatever to the 
 theorician seems to be disorder, irregularity, inequality, 
 anomaly, disturbance etc., is the most perfect harmony; 
 but the general movement is not to be explained by 
 the laws of attraction. 
 
IL 
 
 The earth, thrown into universal space with its double 
 movement, communicates, so to say, to the heaven its 
 geometrical qualities; its poles, lines and circles are adopted, 
 copied by the heavenly sphere. 
 
 The axis, poles and equator of the earth transform 
 themselves into the axis, poles and equator of the universe. 
 Its parallel and horal circles are drawn on the firmament, 
 on the apparent heavenly hollowsphere ; its longitudes 
 and latitudes become right ascension and declination for 
 the shining and light-giving points of the heaven, the 
 heavenly bodies But as to the ecliptic and its poles, 
 the earth does not know them: these arise from the 
 apparent position of the sun. 
 
 The horizon and zenith like the horal circles (meri- 
 dian) are the property of the observer, that is, to each 
 point on the surface of the earth there answers its own 
 horizon, zenith and meridian, which transpose themselves 
 together with the observer in consequence of the motion 
 of the earth. 
 
 The celestial maps and globes, a kind of topography 
 of the heaven, serve for nothing but to represent the 
 apparent and relative positions of the stars among 
 themselves ; they show us the distribution and arrangement 
 of the constellations, and, in general, the firmament, as it 
 appears seen from the earth; if we should expect any- 
 
50 
 
 thing else from them , we should lose ourselves in the 
 infinite. 
 
 A terrestrial globe is a true image of this planet, for 
 the matter is here particularly the surface of the sphere, 
 and whatever may be the size of such a globe, it always 
 remains in a calculable ratio to the size of the earth, 
 while a celestial globe of paste-board is mere nonsense, 
 as infinity cannot be reduced and in all its -- ideal - 
 parts ever remains infinite. 
 
 Let us, for example, assume that to construct a cele- 
 stial globe, beginning from its centre the place of the 
 earth we give the distance of the sun the value of a 
 millimeter. The diameter of some sixty millimeters for 
 a globe which includes the known solar system, will surely 
 surprise nobody on account of its size; but if we wish to 
 find room for that fixed star deemed to be the nearest to 
 the earth, the diameter of the globe increases instantly 
 to as much as 1200 metres; if we wish to include by 
 degrees the stars of 22 nd , 3 rd , 4 th , 5 th , 6 th magnitude, the 
 globe of paste-board will forthwith surpass the dimension 
 of the earth, and thus, with the distances of the following 
 stars, extend into infinity. 
 
 In general, celestial maps and globes represent the 
 stars with their constellations, as they appear to us 
 projected on the surface of a hemisphere; the marked 
 distances are angular distances, for astronomy itself 
 cannot bring into account the diverse directions in space. 
 But now, as the starry heaven is neither a plane, nor the 
 surface of a globe, the real positions and planes, like the 
 relative distances of the stars from another, cannot be recog- 
 nised. The 6 or 7 stars, for example, which represent the 
 Great Bear, appear to us in the same plane of the firmament, 
 they are equally projected on the apparentsphere, on the 
 

 51 
 
 apparent heavenly hollowsphere , and yet each of these 
 stars may belong to another plane, or, as the ancients 
 imagined the heaven to be composed of many spheres en- 
 cased one in another, to another sphere or concentric 
 globular surface; which surfaces are also at enormous 
 distances from each other and may be independent of the 
 apparent angular distances. 
 
 As to the distance of the stars, we have only ideas 
 about it, but no knowledge. According to these ideas the 
 distance of the stars is very great : the star nearest to the 
 earth is said to be represented by the number of 7 billions 
 of miles (a 4000 meters). 
 
 Although we cannot think that there are two stars, 
 the distance of which is the same, still we may assume, 
 on this hypothesis, that the linear space between two stars 
 which are diametrally opposite on the heaven, amounts 
 to at least 14 billions of miles; transferring this line to 
 the celestial hollowsphere and deeming it to be its dia- 
 meter, we may conceive that the sun with his system is 
 always in the centre of the celestial hollowsphere as it 
 appears to us, the consequence of which is, that either his 
 translocation in space, with reference to the starry heaven 
 and the stars, is imperceptible, or that there is taking 
 place an equable general translocation of all heavenly 
 bodies. 
 
 For a star which is nearest to the earth even the 
 sun appears as a little sparkling star ; the planets , his 
 retinue, will be hidden by his refulgence (irradiation) and 
 be invisible ; the movement of the sun will for the obser- 
 ving star show almost the same angular velocity, which 
 from the earth is observable for this star. 
 
 For the earth, however, this space occupied by the 
 solar system is important; according to the notions of 
 
 4* 
 
52 
 
 our day it extends from the sun as far as Neptune, a 
 distance which represents by the way 1184 millions of 
 miles, the 12200 th part of the distance of the two stars 
 which are nearest to the earth. To pass through this 
 distance which separates us from one of these two stars 
 and which we imagine to he the semi-diameter of the 
 heavenly hollowsphere, the sun would, with a velocity of 
 4 miles in a second, have to spend about 55,5 millennia. 
 
 Now, if the student asks: "Pray, where is the fixed 
 sun to be found on the celestial globe, be it of paper 
 or real?" how and what will the professor answer? Will 
 he say , that the sun is not fixed, but moves round the 
 celestial globe in the ecliptic which is very well deli- 
 neated on the globe, and that his positions during the time 
 of his revolution are noted accurately for each day, that 
 he crosses the equator twice in a year etc., or will he say 
 that the sun is fastened inside, in the centre of the globe, 
 which centre is at once the focus of all ellipses, parabolas 
 and hyperbolas, in which the planets, moons and comets 
 move round the sun, that therefore the movement of the 
 sun is but a semblance? 
 
 It is very probable, that the professor, to avoid com- 
 mitting any mistake, says both, the one and the other. 
 
III. 
 
 In several books there is ascribed to the solar move- 
 ment no other result than the parallactical change of some 
 constellations or configurations, namely the amplification 
 and extension of those towards which the sun, as he 
 approaches, directs himself; and the diminution or con- 
 tracting of the opposite ones. 
 
 Astronomers have accustomed themselves to the idea, 
 that the sun - - with reference to his system may be 
 considered as fixed, imagining that it is the unchangeable 
 orbits which cut through the centre of the sun, and move 
 forward together with him; the planets bound to these 
 orbits are not brought into account at all. 
 
 Farther it is taught in the books, that up to present 
 time no one has yet discovered or observed any pheno- 
 menon indicating the motion (path) of the sun. 
 
 But now, pray, how do people expect this motion to 
 manifest itself? If they would be sincere, they must say: 
 "Although we do almost exclusively observe the move- 
 ment, yet we don't study it," for the fact is that studying 
 it seriously leads to the acknowledgment, that there is not 
 a single phenomenon, which does not more or less in- 
 dicate directly or indirectly the movement of the sun. If 
 therefore one cannot yet produce such observations as 
 speak intelligibly and distinctly to everybody, it does not at 
 all follow, that one must ignore the movement of the sun. 
 
54 
 
 To this insufficient comprehension we prefer the cate- 
 gorical declaration given by some astronomers, according 
 to which astronomers do not meddle with absolute move- 
 ment in space, but consider only "relative movement", as 
 for example the movement of the planets relative to 
 the sun. 
 
 "Absolute" and "relative" are intended here to 
 b^ synonymous with "true" and "apparent". The word 
 "apparent" signifies that we cannot see and observe the 
 phenomena of the heaven otherwise than they represent 
 themselves to our vision, appear to our eye. In astronomy 
 this word has no other meaning, but it does not the less 
 indicate, that the phenomena may well be of other kind 
 than they show^ themselves to us. 
 
 Now comes the question: does theory believe that 
 the absolute movement of the planets in space is not 
 relative to the sun, or does it believe that the movement 
 of the planets, being relative to the sun, does not occur 
 absolutely in space? By establishing the sideral times 
 of revolution the astronomers prove, that they don't view 
 such a movement of the planets as is relative to the sun. 
 
 The practical astronomer is bound to consider only 
 the relative apparent movements and to take these for 
 the basis of his calculations. If he removes but in the 
 least degree from the apparent, his calculations 
 especially if they are to be a prediction have no longer 
 any value; for only the same apparent will appear 
 another time. 
 
 The practical astronomer has nothing to do with the 
 theory which looks for the Why of the phenomena; it 
 is of no matter to him, whether the one or the other 
 system has been adopted, these or those laws have been 
 
55 
 
 decreed, of no matter therefore, whether there are system 
 and laws or not: he abides directly by the heaven itself, 
 and he does well. 
 
 But now even the practical astronomer may be seduced 
 to derive conclusions from observations and their nume- 
 rical determinations, which are defective in that very 
 point he does not study, and that is the absolute movement. 
 
 The reality of the celestial phenomena can be inferred 
 only from apparent things, as the true movement does 
 not permit any direct observation. But by supposing 
 that the reality is represented by the system or by the 
 laws, we enter on the converse method and get no useful 
 result, we shall even recede from our aim. So it becomes 
 evident, that astronomers, in opposition to the above 
 categorical declaration, don't take into consideration those 
 movements of the planets which refer to the sun, as they 
 make their observations in the sense of the postulated 
 system, and refer to the stars not only the time of revo- 
 lution, but also the rotation of the earth. 
 
 Now, if the sun and the stars are equally fixed, the 
 movement of the planets must be equally relative to both, 
 and no difference can take place between the sideral 
 and other revolutions, but as for example "sideral" and 
 "tropical" are two different things, and astronomers 
 grant the preference to the stars, they just prove that 
 they don't comprehend the movement of the sun and his 
 system, that they have not perceived the manner of the 
 transition from apparent to real things. Now, if astro- 
 nomers, content with the planes and surfaces, will not 
 meddle with studying absolute movement in 
 space, they may also spare themselves the trouble of 
 explaining and demonstrating the phenomena, propounding 
 theories and enunciating laws. 
 
56 - 
 
 The observations of the stars, continued since Bradley 
 with zeal and ability, have proved clearly, that their right 
 ascension and declination are subject to annual changes, 
 they have proved, that these variations continue without 
 interruption. An especial case of the continually increasing 
 right ascension of the stars is that phenomenon which we 
 have known for two thousand years by the name of 
 precession of the equinoxes. 
 
 This uninterrupted transposition of the stars on the 
 firmament and their coordinates in right ascension and 
 declination teaches us that in truth there exists neither a 
 precession or advance, nor as it is found in the books - 
 a retrogression ; but there exists if one will call it 
 thus a precession not generally equal, but common, in 
 which the whole starry heaven seems to remove or trans- 
 pose itself, change its place in space, in consequence of 
 the solar system being dislocated in space. The general 
 precession is therefore called 
 
 "Solar movement." 
 
 The phenomenon is indeed simple : even as we are 
 varying, changing our situation or position (place) in space, 
 the vault of heaven offers us another aspect, a changed 
 view, and the question about the direction of the move- 
 ment of the sun is reduced to the question about his 
 orbit; to the discovery of this orbit we shall be led by 
 the study of his movement, which has been already made 
 observable partly by observing the stars, partly by, what 
 even now is unknown, the motion of the earth. 
 
 The system of Copernicus, the laws of Kepler, and 
 Newton's theory of gravitation or laws of attraction are 
 the basis of the astronomical theory , and it is admitted, 
 that these three doctrines, supporting and proving one 
 
57 
 
 another reciprocally, make up one and the same whole. 
 After these three immortals , their followers had nothing 
 more to do than to produce their arguments in such a 
 manner as the system of Copernicus and the laws of Kepler 
 and Newton require, that is to say, heaven and nature 
 must comply with human imagination. Now in 
 this manner Laplace could say, that the system of Coper- 
 nicus and its correctness with each new theory, each 
 analytical inquiry became firmer and firmer, until at last 
 it attained the highest degree of certainty. 
 
 Now, if an astronomer should say that "the system 
 of Copernicus is the only one possible", he means that 
 the solar movement is an impossibility ; if he says , too, 
 that with the system of Copernicus the whole of astronomy 
 stands and falls, he means that before Copernicus astro- 
 nomy did not exist and after the fall of his system will 
 once more not exist; he means further that the true 
 astronomy is, what they have imagined about the heaven 
 and the causes of the phenomena. 
 
 If astronomers had merely presented their ideas and 
 opinions to the world as such, and no more, no oncfe 
 could raise any objection; b^they lay down their opi- 
 nions in words and on paper as a positive science, 
 they give their views as incontrovertible truths, 
 and this fact alters the situation, fore we cannot admit 
 that science is a mere barge to be taken in tow by the 
 imagination. 
 
IV. 
 
 The position taken by the sun in space cannot, seen 
 from the earth, surpass his apogee; if therefore they en- 
 larged the apparent ecliptic to a great heavenly circle, 
 they did so in consequence of a false application of 
 geometrical relations to the heaven. We know that a 
 circle, being in space, from that of the rotating earth up 
 to that of Neptune, produces the same effect on the starry 
 heaven: they appear all as great heavenly circles, 
 which don't exist in reality. 
 
 Neither the sun, nor the earth are moving in the 
 ecliptic, none of them describes a great circle. The solar 
 system takes a very diminutive place in that space, which 
 the apparent heavenly sphere, the apparent heavenly hollow- 
 sphere includes, it is, however, inevitable, that whatever 
 is visible in space, projects itself on the sphere, on the 
 apparent heavenly hollowsphere, the consequence of which 
 is now, that the apparent ecliptic cannot b^ anything 
 else than the trace of the successive projections 
 of the sun on the firmament, on the apparent 
 heavenly hollowsphere. 
 
 As the greatest celestial circle the ecliptic has nothing 
 to do at all, it accompanies the system wherever it goes, 
 its projection is always a new one, its place is therefore 
 changing every year, even every day, every moment, it 
 
59 
 
 changes even its inclination to the equator, its obli- 
 quity. 
 
 The orbit of the earth derived from the declination 
 of the sun, or rather from the apparent solar move- 
 ment, theory has made the ecliptic or solar orbit and has 
 raised this to a great celestial circle, which is equalled 
 by only one other great celestial circle, the celestial 
 equator, and even surpasses it in importance. The notions 
 given by theory about the ecliptic are unintelligible and 
 confused, as theory itself does not know, what the ecliptic 
 is. Now it is the solar orbit, the circle, in which the 
 sun moves, which he never leaves ; then it is the orbit 
 of the earth; again it is a great circle inclined towards 
 the celestial equator. The two great circles equator 
 and ecliptic cut one through the other in two opposite 
 points. The ecliptic has its plane, axes, poles standing 
 off the poles of the world 23 5 and describing geo- 
 metrical figures. As long as the ecliptic represents 
 the orbit of the sun or alternately the orbit of the 
 earth, it must be an ellipse and has, of course, two foci, 
 two axes and four poles, but after having become a 
 celestial circle, it loses one of its axes and one focus, 
 being thus enabled to rival the equator even as system 
 of coordinates. 
 
 The obliquity of the ecliptic decreases periodically 
 and is subject to secular changes. It makes therefore 
 variable coordinates; nor has it latitude, as the sun is 
 ever in the ecliptic, for in the system of coordinates the 
 latitudes are relative to the ecliptic. In this case the 
 ecliptic is therefore at the same time ellipse and circle, 
 at the same time orbit and great celestial circle. 
 If the ecliptic becomes exclusively the orbit of the earth, 
 it has triple character: it remains solar orbit and great 
 
60 
 
 celestial circle too, the consequence of which is, that the 
 earth and sun are moving in the same circle of ellipses 
 and in the same direction. From this definition we can 
 neither draw conclusions respecting the orbit of the sun 
 nor that of the earth. 
 
 The confusion respecting the ecliptic appears most 
 distinctly in the conception they have formed of the 
 periodical movement of the earth as well as of the axes 
 of the world. Namely the axis of the earth describes a circle 
 round the pole of the ecliptic. Connected with the pre- 
 cession the pole of the world describes a circle around 
 the pole of the ecliptic in 26000 years, in consequence 
 of which diverse stars arrive by degrees at the place of 
 the present polar-star. Now, as the imagined pole of the 
 ecliptic is distant 23 5 from the pole of the world, this 
 describes a circle , the diameter of which has 47 ; the 
 consequence of it is, that the present polar-star after 
 13000 years will have a declination diminished by 47, 
 as it inclines by this arc to the south. But as the celestial 
 equator is ever perpendicular to the celestial axis, it too 
 must inquestionably incline by 47 farther to the south. 
 But now the wonder emerges: the ecliptic remains on the 
 same place with Us planes and poles, it does not move 
 at all, its axis and poles continue to be parallel to them- 
 selves. The stars, the declination of which has changed 
 by 47 , retain their old latitude unchanged ; but the still 
 greater wonder is, that, while the celestial equator transposes 
 itself by 47 , the celestial ecliptic has always the same 
 inclination to it! If the inclination between the axis, 
 equator and ecliptic did really take place, the inevitable 
 consequence of it would be, that the declination of the 
 stars would change in the very same manner as that of 
 the sun. It is known that this is not the case. The 
 
61 
 
 apparent positions of the sun during a revolution of 
 the earth are, as we know, perspective projections 
 on the celestial sphere, on the apparent heavenly 
 hollow sphere; neither this heavenly hollow sphere, nor 
 the stars which are visible on it have anything in common 
 with the declination of the sun, which, with its extension 
 of 47 , for the starry heaven amounts to only some 
 seconds. 
 
V. 
 
 Kepler must have known that the observable orbits 
 are perspective projections, and that an inclined 
 circle may present all possible ellipses up to the straight 
 line, just as the inclined ellipse may project a circle 
 but only one. He must have known that all the more 
 since he says, that if men could see the orbit of Mars 
 centrally, this too would then present itself as an ellipse. 
 Now, as it is hard to transplace one 's self in such a 
 manner as to view the centre of the orbit of Mars, &ne 
 must take Kepler's word for it, that this planet does 
 describe an ellipse. 
 
 Closed orbits and their planes were the basis 
 on which Kepler grounded his opinion ; he could not sever 
 himself from the system of Copernicus, for it belongs 
 his opinion that is still to the dogmas of astronomy. 
 Kepler could not therefore suppose that all projections 
 on the surface of the firmament can have but two dimen- 
 sions. As a sphere projects itself as a circular disk, so 
 lines of double or manifold curvature will project them- 
 selves as simple curves. Thus , for example , a cylindric 
 spiral will, in its central projection, appear as a circle, 
 but projected lengthwise it will show itself as a serpentine. 
 From the projected movement alone no conclusion can be 
 drawn as to the figure really described by the body. The 
 
63 
 
 celestial bodies cannot move in space in simple curves, 
 but the figure they describe always projects itself in two 
 dimensions. 
 
 With his ellipse Kepler has led theory into a laby- 
 rinth, from which it can never escape: the important 
 question of the difference between the angular and 
 virtual (linear or spatial) velocity clearly gets into con- 
 fusion, as well as the question about uniform or variable 
 movement. 
 
 According to the principles of mechanics, a body 
 moving in free space can advance only with uniform, of 
 course the same, velocity; if it does not, there are either 
 retarding or accelerating forces which influence it. Astro- 
 nomical theory acknowledges on the one hand a uniform 
 motion of the celestial bodies, but postulates on the other 
 hand a variable velocity. 
 
 If a body moves uniformly in a curved line, its angular 
 velocity is proportional to the curvature. The greater the 
 curvature, the greater is the angular velocity. The ellipse 
 is an unequally curved figure, in which the curvatures of 
 those parts which are diametrally opposite are equal. 
 At the two endpoints of the major axis the apsides 
 - the body will therefore have the greatest but equally 
 great angular velocity, and the least velocity on those 
 points of the curve answering to the minor axis. 
 
 If, for example, the sun were to describe an ellipse 
 with uniform movement, he must have in his apogee the 
 same angular velocity he has in his perigee, but must 
 move the most slowly in the equinoxes. Observations say 
 that the sun, or the earth substituted for him, moves 
 quickest in winter and slowest in summer, that his angular 
 velocity attains its maximum in the perigee (the perihelion 
 of the earth) and thence diminishes gradually until the 
 
64 
 
 apogee (or aphelion) to increase again in the other half 
 of the orbit. The immediate consequence is , that the 
 question is no longer about the angular, but the linear 
 velocity, which must be variable. 
 
 A planet cannot according to the preceding - 
 move uniformly in its orbit, it cannot of course in equal 
 times pass through equal spaces, but through spaces pro- 
 portional to its variable velocity. That the angular move- 
 ment is proportional to the curvature is understood of itself. 
 
 The ellipse being elevated to a law, they were ob- 
 liged, to attain their end, to place the sun in the plane of 
 a planetary orbit, and they chose, with much circumspec- 
 tion, to locate it in one focus of their favorite curve, as 
 from this spot the planes are described by the radius vector. 
 Now we must clearly imagine the radius vector to be the 
 stretched thread (fil tendu) joining the centre of the sun 
 with that of the planet , for example , the earth. This 
 thread must, in order to do its duty properly, first lengthen 
 and then contract again. It is indeed hardly to be under- 
 stood, how a force, the attraction, the quantity or greatness 
 of which is given by the invariable mass (for example, 
 of the sun and earth), can increase and decrease alternately. 
 But if we add too, that the swiftness of this force is 
 infinite and its permanent action consequently momentary, 
 which Laplace demonstrates by analysis, we get into 
 confusion. 
 
 What is the reason, what is the cause of a force 
 being diminished, the greatness and action of which is 
 constant and momentary, the swiftness of which is infinite ? 
 This is one of those questions, to which natural philosophy 
 (physics) gives no answer. 
 
VI. 
 
 Centrifugal force as a force does not exist in 
 nature, it is an imaginary force. 
 
 The science of mechanics teaches that centrifugal force 
 generates itself together with the revolution, and that, if 
 there is neither rotation nor circulation, there is no centri- 
 fugal torce; it only remains for mechanics to teach us, 
 that the movement is not produced by the force, but 
 inversely that the force is generated by the movement, 
 and that the movement changes even the nature of the 
 force. According to the view of mechanics the impulsive 
 force, which has produced the rotation or circulation, changes 
 into centrifugal force, which disappears as soon as the 
 rotation ceases. The centrifugal force of terrestrial mechanics 
 was by the great scientists transfered to the heaven. 
 
 If the material parts of a sphere which is in rotation 
 are not hurled into universal space, it is on account of the 
 cohesion, the compactness of matter, the heaviness or at- 
 traction, but principally because the rotation does not proceed 
 quickly enough. A celestial body circulating in free space, 
 which describes its revolutive curves, may of coarse lose 
 itself in infinity, if it is not restrained by something, they 
 are therefore obliged to call to their aid the sling, the 
 stretched thread, in one word centrifugal force, in 
 order to check the annihilating centripetal force. The 
 higher geometry has tried to metamorphose these two 
 
66 
 
 forces, by taking the tangential velocity and central attrac- 
 tion for their equivalent; according to new determination 
 both forces influence each celestial body together, equally 
 and in the same measure, they are opposite, they abolish 
 themselves mutually, they annihilate one another." 
 
 To postulate forces acting against another, contrary 
 ones, is to annihilate directly each movement; one has 
 therefore no need of their permanent action. But why 
 contradict fundamental notions , why deny them , if they 
 are proved by fact and don't change? 
 
 The "resultant of forces" having been propounded as 
 law, there is but one action, one force. It is by the 
 action of mutual attraction, of perturbations, that theory 
 has simply abolished the first and capital law of mechanics 
 about the action of forces. 
 
 With reference to centrifugal force, the rotation is 
 often changed with the circulation. It is a matter of 
 course, that both movements are made round the centre; 
 as to the circulation, this circumstance is explained by 
 the sling, for by this the circulation around the centre 
 is obtained by force, the body has been forced to describe 
 a circle*), says mechanics. But is not a slinging motion 
 rather a rotation, than a circulation? Translation 
 alone is generated only when the impulsive force hits 
 the centre of gravity of the sphere, in which case all its 
 molecules move with equal velocity; if the force produces 
 a rotation, the molecules get different velocities, the 
 centre of gravity has however in this case been influenced 
 but partially, indirectly, by the force, which is aiming at 
 a point of the axis. The farther this point is distant from 
 the centre, the greater becomes the velocity of rotation, 
 
 *) But an ellipse cannot be produced with the sling. 
 
which attains of course its maximum, when the force in- 
 fluences the end-point of the axis. 
 
 Now, if the mechanics calls circulation the movement 
 of the stone which is in the sling, it has forgotten the 
 essential difference between rotation and circulation, 
 for it can hardly 'Fail to be understood, that every point 
 of the stretched thread has another velocity, which attains 
 its maximum at the end of the thread of course at the 
 stone. The movement in the sling is therefore a rota- 
 tion, it is that of a flying wheel: it is from the centre 
 where it is the least that the velocity of the axis 
 (stretched thread) increases up to the surface or circum- 
 ference of the wheel (stone in the sling), where it attains 
 its maximum. 
 
 It is evident, that those parts of the rotating sphere, 
 which are provided with a greater swiftness, endeavour to 
 part from those, the swiftness of which is less for they 
 will advance that therefore the elevation of the equator 
 and the depression of the poles is an inevitable consequence 
 of the rotation. 
 
VII. 
 
 Inertia is the most simple and natural (sic !) law of 
 nature, which we can imagine. Laplace, Mecanique 
 celeste I, p. 14. 
 
 Now, what is this inertia of matter promulgdcJTas 
 the first law of nature ? Absolute passivity , perfect obe- 
 dience, total senselessness, want of feeling, indolence etc., 
 in one word the incarnate "non possumus", and all that 
 in order to allow other men to act, and at the same time 
 to submit one's self to the action of any force whatever, 
 to follow each impulsion. 
 
 Can these qualities really be found in matter? It is 
 neither to be compressed, nor to be extended without 
 resisting, but resistance is a force itself, and it was not 
 without reason that the ancients said "vis inertiae." 
 
 Matter has the inclination to be a whole, its least 
 parts atoms, molecules or dust, it makes no difference 
 attract each other, in order to aggregate themselves round 
 a common centre or centre of gravity ; they squeeze, they 
 join one to another, matter is therefore provided with the 
 attracting force, it is itself a force in continual action, it 
 cannot therefore be inert. 
 
 The activity ascribed to the parts of the earth is but 
 apparent and relative, each part of matter, whether it be 
 in the interior or on the surface of the spheroid of the 
 earth, is attracted by its centre or centre of gravity, which 
 
69 
 
 centre is, on its part, attracted by each particle of matter, 
 but the whole is in an uninterrupted movement and each 
 molecule of the sqeezed matter participates in the double 
 movement of the earth. But whatever moves, cannot 
 be inert. 
 
 Any heavy body soever, for example a piece of stone, 
 slung vertically, falls back to the surface of the earth, 
 and they imagine, that the falling body , if not stopped, 
 would penetrate as far as the centre of the earth. 
 
 By what means, now, could the fall of the stone be 
 hindered in such a manner as to cause it to stop floating 
 in thfe air? Certainly by a force, which is like the at- 
 traction of the earth, influencing the stone in a vertical 
 direction, by an opposite force, therefore, which should 
 act directly from the centre of the earth; which is as 
 much as to say, that, the attraction being annulled , the 
 stone remains floating in the air, at a height or distance 
 corresponding to the throwing force; but this kind of 
 suspension is not yet fixity , for the stone , being in the 
 air, will continue to partake of the rotation as well as 
 the translation of the earth. 
 
 But now, how might a spherical body be fixed in 
 universal space? By the action on its centre of as many 
 equal forces as there are directions in space, and these 
 numberless forces, united in its centre, produce the very 
 same effect which the central attraction of a sphere exer- 
 cises on its molecules : whatever may be the source which 
 the supposed forces arise from, yet these cannot hinder 
 the celestial body from moving forward, that is gravitating 
 with the other celestial bodies, as the effect produced 
 relates but to the proper movement of the body. The 
 consequence is that, to form a good idea of the fixity 
 of a celestial body, one must postulate a general fixity, 
 
70 
 
 of course a fixed universe, as the forces acting according 
 to the hypothesis can only proceed from fixed bodies. 
 In this manner we arrive at the idea of an absolute 
 immobility, at the idea of universal inertia in consequence 
 of the repulsion. Does it not become clear, that with 
 much more reason we may say, that the first and most 
 simple law of nature is motion? 
 
 For the astronomy it is very indifferent, whether one 
 does, or does not, imagine an inertia; science sees nothing 
 else but the movement and cannot imagine, how a celes- 
 tial body can be suspended motionless in space. The 
 fixity imagined by the theory is besides no more in vogue. 
 
VIII. 
 
 It is little more than three centuries ago, that an 
 explanative science began to form itself, that men asked 
 for the "why" of phenomena. The historians of astro- 
 nomy attribute great importance to this epoch and believe, 
 that with it investigation, the highest function of the mind, 
 awoke from a sleep of twenty centuries. But if the 
 mechanics of the heaven were regulated, the universe would 
 prove to be a great disorder, a total confusion; an un- 
 pardonable disobedience would manifest it. 
 
 Now they were obliged to ask for the reasons, why 
 the phenomena of the celestial bodies as well as the whole 
 heaven show a hostile behaviour and will not obey the 
 laws imposed upon them. 
 
 Velocity once acquired does not change, the perma- 
 nency of the distance is warranted, the quiet, ever equal 
 course is secured, the almost-circles may so easily be run 
 through, the well-traced orbits are like rail-roads, the sun 
 does not move etc. etc. ; ^iow what may be the reason of 
 the irregularities? There must be some deadly enemy of 
 established order, whom one must discover as soon as 
 possible at any cost. 
 
 It is Newton who answers the why, it is Newton 
 who finds the disturber who is the sole reason of each 
 disorder, each anomaly, each disturbance, and this disturber 
 an astronomical Proteus calls itself attraction. 
 
Attraction points to a force, there is no doubt of that. 
 The universal attraction presupposes a universal force, 
 which, as such, cannot be without activity, as its action 
 extends to all celestial bodies. Now, if we can know, 
 how and in what manner this force is exer- 
 cised, the irregularities will explain themselves. Newton 
 has decided, how attraction is to behave and demean 
 itself, and it is with him and according to him, that lear- 
 ned men have demonstrated "all with the most astonishing 
 evidence." 
 
 The same Newton maintained the position, that we 
 ought not to believe anything which is not proved. But 
 how does one get the proof; how does one acquire the 
 persuasion, that the proof is indeed a proof? Facts, 
 like truth, have no need of proofs, for they are stronger 
 than these. In astronomy they make or produce the 
 argument and are content, they are pleased with having 
 furnished it. But.it is hard to comprehend the phenomena, 
 to undestand their meaning, it is hard to recognise the 
 observations , it is altogether impossible to comprehend 
 them, as long as one retains the fixed ideas about the 
 solar system and the nature of forces in general, but 
 especially those about attraction. 
 
 The theory of attraction and the application of its 
 laws to the proofs of the "why" of the phenomena do 
 not satisfy reason. It is on this account, that many people 
 have some aversion to attraction, and say plainly that it 
 does not exist. They have , too , repeatedly substituded 
 other forces for it, without considering that by substituting 
 one unknown thing for another there is not made any 
 progress. 
 
 The attraction of the earth, for example, is observable 
 on its surface ; by observing attentively its phenomena one 
 
73 
 
 may be persuaded, that an attracting force exists really, 
 and it is permissible, it is even reasonable to think, that 
 the other celestial bodies which are likewise supposed 
 to be material own the same force. But if the exi- 
 stence of an attractive force is no longer doubted, there 
 still remains unsolved the great question, in what manner 
 do the celestial bodies act one on another. Whether this 
 be answerable, is another question. 
 
 It is by their mutual attraction that the atoms 
 strive to unite themselves and form that material body, 
 which includes their totality. Now, the mass of this body 
 contains the sum of the attraction of all its atoms, the 
 consequence of which is, that the attraction of a body is 
 proportional to its mass, proportional to the accumulated 
 matter. From this position they conclude, that one body 
 acts on another body, which sum as we see is 
 represented by the quantity of the atoms. It is certainly 
 intelligible, that the quantity or greatness of the attraction 
 exists in the body and in an amount, too, proportional 
 to its mass. But if the molecules apply this immanent 
 force to attract each other mutually, to maintain their 
 mutual contact, they can no longer, either singly or 
 collectively, influence another body and its atoms with the 
 same force.*) 
 
 *) The sun , in truth , influences the earth (according to the 
 theory) in as many ways as it has. molecules; he influences single 
 parts of the earth, or does not, but he is not hindered by this from 
 attracting the centre of the planet according to the law of quadrate. 
 Is it not a wonderful invention, this of a variable attraction, which 
 is at the same time both stronger and weaker ? In the theory of the 
 tides, for example, attraction does not act according to the square, 
 but to the cube of the distance ; the moon exercises on the earth 
 a stronger attraction than the sun. In the two theories of pre- 
 cession and nutation the manner of attraction is still more 
 
74 - 
 
 As a distinctly observable phenomenon attraction 
 defines itself. Attraction appears ever in the same manner : 
 the final result of its influence is, that two bodies 
 approach and unite which each other. The approach 
 and final union cannot take place without motion, the 
 consequence of which is, that the attracting force is 
 at the same time a moving force. Experience has taught, 
 that some forces as magnetism, electricity, light etc. not 
 only attract, but also repel; they have been called polar 
 forces, and their opposite directions have been denoted 
 by positive and negative. To repel something is to remove 
 it, and there appears again movement, which therefore i& 
 inseparable from attraction and repulsion. The mutual 
 action of the forcer on each other and on matter can produce 
 attraction, if there did not yet exist any, it can strengthen 
 and weaken the existing attraction, generate light and 
 warmth, magnetism and electricity; this latter is especially 
 and powerfully the potential cause of the power of the 
 magnet, and all bodies or substances may - - with a few 
 
 astonishing; there the sun chooses certain parts of the surface of 
 the earth, on which he acts arbitrarily in order to produce the 
 precession; but he does not act at all on the same parts in 
 order to produce the nutation; acting and not acting together 
 might be more than a miracle. 
 
 But how are these and many similar incongruities to be re- 
 conciled with the accurate determinations, demonstrations, principles, 
 laws etc. which they have produced with so much pains? After 
 having proved, by the omnipotence of analysis, that the sun acts 
 on the earth a rotating spheroid in such a manner, as if 
 the entire mass was united in its centre, that all its parts, the 
 totality of its molecules, of course its water and atmosphere too, 
 must be considered as belonging to the solid mass, and are, conse- 
 quently, also united in the centre ; after having proved clearly, that 
 the sun acts on the earth and its moon as if these two bodies were 
 united at one centre etc. etc., they allow the sun to act arbitrarily 
 in this or that manner, on these or those parts separately!!! 
 
75 
 
 exceptions become magnetical or electrical, or, if they 
 possessed these qualities latent, attain to their mani- 
 festation. 
 
 The action of forces working upon and in another 
 - called correlation may raise the thought, that it 
 is the very same natural power, which is but represented 
 to us in its modifications, and that we cannot but take 
 these modifications for distinct separate powers independent 
 of one other. Which of these modifications is nearest to 
 that true power, which effects the attraction, we cannot 
 decide, as we do not know the force. Nor does the word 
 "attraction'' signify the force itself, but its expression, its 
 effect and, if we may say so, the result of the acting 
 force. Now, if two bodies attract one another with une- 
 qual force, the less must no doubt concede the preference 
 to the greater ; that is to say, if matter is falling, moving, 
 attracting etc., the lesser mass must fall into the greater 
 one, and not inversely. Thus a little magnet will not 
 attract a greater mass of iron, but will itself rush towards 
 it; in this case the iron attracts the magnet. But if a 
 little magnet is fixed, it will be capable of attracting a 
 much greater mass of iron. The idea of mutual attraction 
 being stated as a general position, the notion of attrac- 
 ting forces falls away and the magnet, which attracts 
 the iron, is attracted by it in the same manner. Now, if 
 two bodies attract one another equally, we can no longer 
 decide, which is the attracting one, and which is the 
 attracted one. In consequence of the fixed sun always 
 attracting, all planets would be forced to fall upon him. 
 Now, to escape this inevitable catastrophe which is 
 rendered necessary by the system of Copernicus combined 
 with the central attraction they must think of means, 
 and they invented the centrifugal force. As long as 
 
76 
 
 the sun is fixed, they can hardly do otherwise than abide 
 by this imagination, for the celestial phenomena are in- 
 comprehensible. As the movement takes place in space, 
 we have no idea of it. But now it is recognised that the 
 centre is moving; we find that the sun advances in space, 
 swiftly enough, and as he has yet a great disk, and it has 
 not yet been observed that he diminishes, so as to become 
 at last a fixed star to the earth, it may be verisimilar, 
 that the earth follows him, or that the sun carries his 
 system with himself. But if the centre moves, there are 
 no closed curves, no orbit and of course no plane of orbit 
 remaining on the same place in space, the circulation exists 
 it is true, but it is not made round the centre of the sun 
 and the radius of the curve of revolution is no longer 
 the distance of the sun. 
 
 When it is said that the proper astronomical science 
 is the theory, that is the doctrine of attraction, which 
 impresses on this science the stamp of infallibility, that 
 this doctrine explains perfectly the mechanism of the heaven, 
 after penetrating, with the help of analysis which 
 demonstrates everything clearly into the sanctuary of 
 the universe and revealing all mysteries etc., one would 
 suppose, that the attraction itself is known accurately, 
 and the theory is on a firm basis. It becomes however 
 simply apparent, that of this immense, inscrutable and 
 incomprehensible power of nature and particularly of 
 its being and action, we do not, nor can we know 
 anything. 
 
 The soul of the laws of attraction is the law of qua- 
 drate. The attracting force acts inversely, proportionally 
 to the quadrate of the distance. Thus Newton has 
 decided. 
 
 If we ask our learned men, our authorities, our sages, 
 
77 
 
 whence this law is derived, on what fact it depends, what 
 phenomena it rests upon, whether they have observations 
 for it, whether they have not perhaps established its truth 
 by an 'experiment made with a machine, or whether they 
 have discovered at all one or more phenomena, which 
 prove the correctness of the law, the unanimous answer 
 is: "no, nothing, of the sort, but Newton has 
 discovered the law, and as this inspired mortal 
 has succeeded in entering into the sanctuary 
 of the universe, whither nobodybefore him had 
 entered, and nobody will ever enter after him, 
 we must consider the law to be a direct mani- 
 festation, and abide by it conscientiously, 
 as long as there appears no necessity for 
 setting it aside!" If Newton, instead of the quadrate, 
 had "discovered" as law another potency of entire or broken 
 numbers, the mass of the sun would have had to accommo- 
 date itself to it, for his learned successors do not know 
 any means of transposing themselves to the remote space 
 of the universe in order to obtain there a personal con- 
 viction of the state of things. 
 
 Newton's theory of universal gravitation is at the 
 same time sublime and colossal. What guarantees the 
 stability of the universe, what supports the celestial bodies 
 in space, what leads them in their orbits, is an immense 
 power of nature, it is attraction ! Had Newton stopped at 
 this sublime notion, had he remained satisfied with his 
 originally great idea, contented reason would have reposed 
 in the thought, that the universal attraction governs the 
 general and mutual attraction of all celestial bodies, the 
 relative and immutable distances of them, and thus makes 
 possible a likewise general uninterrupted movement. But 
 Newton goes further, his active fancy leads him to the 
 
78 - 
 
 idea, that the same power, which guarantees the stability 
 and has induced the wonderful order and harmony of the 
 universe, destroys its own work, and may therefore cause 
 disorder, too; the same fancy suggests to him that all 
 variations observed in the motions and positions can only 
 be irregularities , inequalities and perturbations effected 
 by attraction. In consequence of this imagination Newton 
 states his laws, and it may be a matter of course, that 
 he often got into doubts about his own work. 
 
 The motions of the celestial bodies being regulated 
 by the system, ensured by the laws, it was not necessary 
 to apply one's self to study the movement; if, however, 
 one wishes to give an account of the causes of the dis- 
 orders, which, of course, are not produced by the move- 
 ment, one must look for them elsewhere, but where to 
 look for them, one did not know. 
 
IX. 
 
 The elements of the elliptical orbits: the half great 
 axis and the time of revolution depending on it; the 
 eccentricity of the closed orbit; the longitude of the 
 perihelion, the longitude of the ascending knot, and the 
 inclination of the orbit to the ecliptic, don't exist at all 
 in reality in the sense adopted by theory. 
 
 If an astronomer of our time says : "The elements of 
 the elliptical orbits are derived from observations of more 
 than 3000 years ; it is from them, that the planetary tables 
 as well as the yearly ephemerides are calculated; the results 
 of the calculations agree with the observations and the 
 positions of the celestial bodies (the solar system) are 
 for each supposed moment nearly precisely such as proceed 
 from the tables, the consequence of which is therefore 
 the correctness of the supposed elements," he may be sure 
 that it will not occur to the thoughts of anybody to object 
 to it. If, however, this astronomer adds: "It is from the 
 correctness of the elements and the results of calculation 
 that there arises the proof that the system of Copernicus 
 and the laws of Kepler are a fact," he has said something 
 thoroughly false and contradictory to the general move- 
 ment. Copernicus and Kepler had a fixed sun, but 
 this has since that time got into motion. 
 
 It is pretended: "Astronomers don't meddle with the 
 absolute movement of the celestial bodies in space." If 
 
80 
 
 they did abide consistently by this sentence, what we should 
 read in their books, would be very nearly as follows: 
 
 "What we can, and especially do, observe, are the 
 positions and motions of the celestial bodies; both are 
 projected on the celestial sphere, on the apparent heavenly 
 hollow sphere, in the centre of which is our eye; we see 
 them from the earth, which moves, too, from our point 
 of observation on the surface of the earth. The move- 
 ment of a planet projects itself on the apparent heavenly 
 hollow sphere in such a manner as if it were circulating 
 in an ellipse , the half great axis , eccentricity and in- 
 clination to the ecliptic of which are such and snch; 
 as we know the apparent situation of the vernal point 
 and the inclination of the ecliptic to the equator, we have 
 the epoch, longitude and ascending knot of the planet. 
 As this position of the movement repeats itself periodically 
 and is always the same, it is evident, that, in order to 
 determine the situation of the planet with reference to 
 the starry heaven and the sun, we can only calculate with 
 such elements as give the observable position for a result. 
 Now, if the ellipses with their appertenances like the 
 ecliptic are no reality and mere products of the imagination, 
 this is indifferent to the calculation, for it must bring 
 forward the apparent and does not care either for the 
 reality or for the name , by which one denotes the ob- 
 served phenomena. That the orbits are close, is a sup- 
 position, which might arise from a superficial, inattentive 
 observation of the phenomena of movement; that obser- 
 vations have been made, and still are made under the 
 preconceived opinion that the planets are forced to move 
 according to the system of Copernicus and the laws of 
 Kepler, is a prejudice from the influence of which the 
 observer can hardly escape. It is, however, not only by 
 
81 
 
 the solar movement, that the closed orbits have been 
 abolished, but it has been proved by the observations 
 themselves, that the orbits don't close. As to the orbit 
 of the earth especially, it appears clearly that the end- 
 point of its curve of revolution after an accomplished 
 period does not project itself on the same place of the 
 celestial sphere, but on a point which is situated 50" 3 
 more to the east , which is indicated , too , distinctly by 
 the yearly movement of the sun. If, in spite of all these 
 facts, theory continues to announce ellipses and closed 
 orbits as an indisputable truth, there is to be found in this 
 the proof of its labouring under a chronical, incurable 
 sickness. 
 
We believe ourselves bound to inform the reading 
 and thinking public, that the astronomers and mathe- 
 maticians of our time have agreed together to pass over 
 with condescending silence all those endeavours of lear- 
 ned and unlearned men which tend to demonstrate the 
 untenableness of the Copernican conception of the world. 
 It is in the interest of the science that we protest against 
 this proceeding, for science suffers from it, and is even 
 insulted. Some of the most famous astronomers are 
 feeling the impulse to compose popular works to in- 
 form the public; it is the duty of those in the first 
 rank to bring clearness into the proposed question. The 
 most noted in this respect of present astronomers are 
 Newcomb at Washington and Weiss at Vienna, the 
 editor of a new edition (the 7 th ) of Littrow's "Wonders 
 of Heaven." 
 
 As long as the question relating to the sun being 
 considered as "at rest" is not cleared up, modern astro- 
 nomical theory must be looked on as a product of 
 the imagination , and has no greater value than the 
 
83 - 
 
 conception of the world of Ptolemaeus and Tycho, for 
 there is no fixed or immoveable thing in the universe, 
 neither a fixed earth , nor a fixed sun , nor a fixed 
 star. All is moving. Each celestial body has a triple 
 movement : a rotation round its axis , its own mo- 
 tion , and it must follow the chief member of its group 
 (system). 
 
 6* 
 
Literature. 
 
 1. Sta, SOl, lie moveare. August Tischner. Leipzig 
 18811882. Gustav Fock. 
 
 2. Grosse, Entfernung und Masse der Sonne. August 
 
 Tischner. Leipzig 1882. Gustav Fock. 
 
 3. The Sun changes his position in space, therefore 
 he cannot be regarded as being "in a condition of rest." 
 August Tischner. Leipzig 1883. 
 
 4. Die Sonne und die Astronomic. K Nagy. Leipzig 
 1866. F. A. Brockhaus. 
 
 5. Memoire sur le systeme solaire et sur 1'explication 
 des phenonienes celestes. Charles Nagy. Paris 1862. 
 Leibner. 
 
 6. Consideration sur les cometes, elements de Co- 
 
 metologie. Charles Nagy. Paris 1862. Leibner. 
 
 7. Systeme solaire d'apres la marche reelle du Soleil, 
 
 E. G. Fahrner. Paris 2 me ed. 1869. 
 
 8. Unumstosslicher Nachweis dass die Erde nicht um 
 die Sonne herumgehe. Xaver Schechner. Munchen 1868. 
 
 9. Das wahre Sonnensystem. Bewegung und Bahnen 
 der Gestirne nach einer neuen Auffassung iiber dieselben 
 im Himmelsraume , und zwar welche nicht in Ellipsen 
 statt hat. James Hermann Milberg. Munchen 1862. 
 
86 - 
 
 10. Die wahre Gestalt der Planeten- und Kometen- 
 bali lion. Friedrich Carl Gustav Stieber. Dresden 1864. 
 
 11. Die Sonne foewegt Sich. Folgerungen aus dieser Lehre 
 inBezug auf die Fixsterne und Planeten. G. R(ohrbach). 
 Berlin 1852. 
 
 12. Uefoer Yeranschaulichungsmittel fur mathema- 
 tlSChe Geographic. Erlauternde Beigabe zu neu con- 
 struirten Veranschaulichungsapparaten fiir Volksschulen 
 und hohere Unterrichtsanstalten. F. A. Puschmann, 
 Seminaroberlehrer, Grimma. 
 
 13. Der Himmels-Mechanik ganzliche Reform auf 
 Gruild der inductiven Logik mit der strengberechtigten 
 philosophischen und mathematischen Nachweisung. V. 
 P. Kluk-Kluczycky. 1880 - 
 
 J, Morrison, weuiu^ ' 
 
 - ^A Spence, lo-><- 
 
 G. KRKYSING, LEIPZIG. 
 
/ 
 
 ^ 
 
 14 DAY USE 
 
 RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 
 
 LOAN DEPT. 
 
 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or 
 
 on the date to which renewed. 
 Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. 
 
 LIBRARY nee 
 
 
 *J*3C. 
 
 Nf)}/ 1^ -inrQ 
 
 
 " w * j. ij laPM 
 
 REC'D LD 
 
 
 m 15 1959 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 LD 21A-50m-4,'59 
 (A1724slO)476B 
 
 General Library 
 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley 
 
736353 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY