216 COSMICAL ARRANGEMENTS. 



masses, or those of their component particles, 

 follow this law of the inverse square of the dis- 

 tance rather than any other? When the distance 

 becomes J , 2, and 3, why should not the force 

 also become 1, 2, and 3 ? or if it must be weaker 

 at points more remote from the attracting body, 

 why should it not be 1, a half, a third? or 1, 

 l-8th, l-27th? Such laws could easily be ex- 

 pressed mathematically, and their consequences 

 calculated. Can any reason be assigned why 

 the law which we find in operation must obtain ? 

 Can any be assigned why it should obtain ? 



The answer to this is, that no reason, at all 

 satisfactory, can be given why such a law must, 

 of necessity, be what it is ; but that very strong 

 reasons can be pointed out why, for the beauty 

 and advantage of the system, the present one is 

 better than others. We will point out some of 

 these reasons. 



1 . In the first place, the system could not have 

 subsisted, if the force had followed a direct instead 

 of an inverse law, with respect to the distance ; 

 that is, if it had increased when the distance in- 

 creased. It has been sometimes said, that " all 

 direct laws of force are excluded on account of 

 the danger from perturbing forces ;* that if the 

 planets had pulled at this earth, the harder the 

 further off they were, they would have dragged 

 it entirely out of its course. This is not an exact 



* Paley. 



