362 



SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT. 



sidered to be premature, 1 they have contributed much to 

 impress on the thought of our age the genetic or 

 developmental view on a large as well as on a minute 

 scale. 



law of Mendeleef were explained 

 by utilising this hypothesis (p. 165), 

 and in the sequel other authorities, 

 such as Brodie and Rydberg, ex- 

 pressed themselves in the same 

 sense (p. 164). These, and quite 

 recently the electrical researches 

 of Prof'. J. J. Thomson (referred 

 to supra, p. 192), support the view, 

 originally suggested in a cruder 

 form by Prout, that what we call 

 elements are really compounds or 

 aggregations or complexes, built up 

 " from similar particles associated 

 with the presence of electricity " 

 ('Inorg. Evol.,'pp. 167, 190; also 

 J. J. Thomson, ' Discharge of Elec- 

 tricity through Gases,' p. 198 sqq.) 

 1 It would be unfair not to state 

 that many works on astronomy are 

 still written in which all genetic 

 hypotheses are left out, the " stat- 

 ical" view being still the pre- 

 dominant one. Especially in Ger- 

 many, it seems as if "inorganic 

 evolution " is not very popular ; 

 though a large amount of the best 

 work in spectrum analysis of the 

 stars has been done there by H. C. 

 Vogel, Kayser and Runge, Scheiner, 

 and many others. Dr Scheiner, in 

 his valuable work (translated with 

 the title ' A Treatise on Astro- 

 nomical Spectroscopy,' by Prof. 

 Frost of Dartmouth College, U.S.A., 

 1894), has some important criti- 

 cisms on hypotheses and solar 

 theories (see Preface, and the dis- 

 cussion of the Meteoritic Hypothesis 

 in the German edition, Part II. 

 chap. i. ) In his ' Bau des Weltalls ' 

 (Leipzig, 1901) genetic views are 

 not discussed. The older very 

 valuable works of R. Wolf ( ' Gesch. 

 d. Astronomic,' 1877, ' Handbuch 

 der Astronomie,' 2 vols., 1890-92) 



give only slight attention to 

 " genetics," and consider even the 

 "statics " of the universe though a 

 possible yet a difficult problem (see 

 the last-named work, 298, 299). 

 The latest and excellent ' History 

 of Astronomy,' by Mr A. Berry 

 ! (1898), is likewise reticent about 

 1 the evolution of the universe, ad- 

 mitting only a general, fairly well- 

 founded presumption in favour of 

 a modified nebular hypothesis (p. 

 409). It would, therefore, be 

 doubtful whether a history of 

 science should, at the end of the 

 nineteenth century, give much room 

 to these modern genetic theories in 

 astronomy. It is different with a 

 history of scientific thought. How- 

 ever premature and venturesome 

 it may appear to purists in science 

 to elaborate such hypotheses, there 

 is no doubt that the genetic argu- 

 ments and lines of reasoning have 

 got a firm hold of many great 

 thinkers in the physics of the 

 universe as well as in biology, and 

 that the genetic view of nature 

 in general has received very strong 

 support from the several trains 

 of reasoning and the rapidly in- 

 creasing revelations of spectrum 

 analysis of cosmical and terrestrial 

 objects, as set forth in Sir N. 

 Lockyer's interesting volumes. 

 Already thirty years ago Lord 

 Kelvin said of the spectroscope : 

 " It is not merely the chemistry 

 of sun and stars, as first suggested, 

 that is subjected to analysis by the 

 spectroscope. Their whole laws of 

 being are now subjects of direct 

 investigation ; and already we have 

 glimpses of their evolutional history 

 through the stupendous power of 

 this most subtle and delicate test. 



