EVIDENCE PROVING THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE 49 



and Physical Section), states : " It is a slow and 

 laborious process. The wreckage of rejected theories 

 is appalling." And with this confession absolutely 

 frankly stated, he goes on repeating the error, 

 for he adds, " It is at present a subject " i.e. 

 the Kinetic theory, or the theory of the motions of 

 rigid atoms " in which the mathematicians must lead 

 the attack" l 



In this remarkable address all manner of impossible 

 ideas are brought forward by the physicist. A 

 " Vortex atom theory of matter." Atoms of gross 

 matter " composed of filaments whose rotating cores 

 are of much greater density than the ether itself," the 

 Atoms altering into a " spherical " condition. That 

 is, an object which is stated to be constant in volume 

 and absolutely rigid, is regarded as constantly altering 

 in sJiape ! The conceptions are fundamentally antago- 

 nistic. Then Professor Hicks follows with the same 

 fundamental idea, to consider, " each vortex atom to 

 be composed of a vortical mass of ... cell-structure 

 ether," and each cell of Ether "begins to grow." 

 Then, more remarkable still, he regards the atom as 

 "much larger than a cell" of Ether in which it is 

 supposed to be imbedded ! Then vortex filaments 

 are again brought in, linked together " like helices 

 drawn on an anchor ring." He also flies to the 

 " vortex sponge theory of the ether," and so on, 

 trying to give unthinkable variations of the initial 

 fundamental idea the absolutely rigid atom this is 

 the fixed preconceived idea. 2 All is made to satisfy 



1 The italics are ours. 



2 " Nothing can be done . . . without preconceived ideas ; only 

 there must be the wisdom not to accept their deductions beyond 



E 



