42 FKOM NEBULA TO NEBULA 



ously cajoled into admitting that persistence and inertia 

 are synonyms! Imagine the cultured Bostonian father 

 predicting great things for the infantile Waldo because 

 of his l ' superabundance of inertia ! ' ' 



Again, does the moon really fall toward the earth as 

 astronomers allege ? It is admitted, on all hands, that its 

 mean distance is quite, or at least very nearly, the same 

 from month to month and from century to century. If it 

 be correct to say that the moon is falling simply because 

 it is continually diverging from the tangent of its orbit, 

 it is no less correct to assert that the dome on the Capitol 

 at Washington is falling, because it, too, is continually di- 

 verging from the tangent of the circle in which it revolves 

 by reason of the earth's diurnal rotation; specifically, 

 three inches per second. According to the doctrine of 

 the conservation of energy, loss of " position " involves 

 transformation of potential energy into kinetic, and for 

 every unit of the former that disappears one of the latter 

 must appear. If such be not the case in every instance, 

 the law is no law at all, and must be relegated to the limbo 

 of exploded errors. In one ordinary month there are 

 about 2,551,400 seconds, or 708.7, hours, or 29.5306 days. 

 If in one second of time, as alleged, the moon falls .0535 

 ins., it should develop kinetic energy equal to 240 million, 

 million horse-power as long as the falling process con- 

 tinues, which, humanly speaking, means forever. What 

 becomes of this energy, I ask? If nothing becomes of it 

 and it passes out of existence in the moment of its 

 creation, then must we not admit that there exists a 

 creative energy in nature and also a way whereby energy 

 can perish, neither of which propositions scientists now 

 concede ? If no potential energy, on the other hand, dis- 

 appears and no kinetic energy appears, then there is no 

 loss of " position " at all, the moon is not falling, and the 

 whole Newtonian argument breaks down. Lastly, if the 

 moon is not falling earthward, it is not construable as a 

 body falling in vacuo, hence she must be obeying the law 

 of lowest center of gravity with respect to the earth, and 

 this should suffice as the reason for her " constantly turn- 

 ing the same face toward us". For the same reason, the 



