Infinite Divisibility of Matter, 55 
Arr. VIIL—ZJnfinite Divisibility of Matter.* 
(Communicated for this Journal.) 
Tur arguments which favor the doctrine of the infinite divisi- 
bility of matter are derived from the wonderful extent to which 
subdivision has been carried in actual experiment, and from the 
supposition that if a magnitude however small may be assigned 
or imagined, a fractional part of it may also be assigned or imag- 
ined. As there appears at present little probability that the nega- 
tive of this question will soon be established by experiment, the 
result of which heretofore seems rather to favor the reverse, if it 
were possible to arrive at a satisfactory theoretical conclusion, 
though the result might not be of any practical importance, some- 
thing would be gained on the side of truth. 
The writer must however deprecate the charge of presumption 
which might attach to any attempt to decide on a point which 
has been the cause of so much agitation in the world of trans- 
cendental philosophy—a question which all the metaphysical 
talent of Germany has not been able to determine, and on which 
the physical researches of English inquirers tive only enabled 
them to form a surmise. 
The primary error appears to have arisen from the gratuitous 
assumption that divisibility is a universal property of extension, 
in whatever magnitude it may occur. This, as may hereafter 
be shown, amounts to nothing less than begging the question. 
But for his adherence to this opinion the German Euler 
have set the matter at rest long ago; and Dugald Stewart con- 
sidered a perception of — ——— a a 
intuitive. 
* Philadelphia, Feb. 19, 1840. 
To the Editors —Seeing in the abstract of the proceedings of the Retin Associ- 
ation for the Advancement of Science given in the last number of your Journal, 
some remarks by Prof. Whewell on the infinite div gas of atl in a dat ie 
adheres to the old geometrical opinion, if I may so call it in opposition to that of 
modern chemists, I have ventured to offer afew words on the pay stare ony 
standing the notice on the back of your Journal, that every paper shall be accom- 
panied by the name of the author. This, peculiar circumstances prevent me from 
givi ing; th am persuaded that should you deem these remarks worthy of an 
will not be rendered the more forcible by the name of a subscriber 
and constant earn of your Journal. 
