52 G. Hinrichs on Planetology. 
is not satisfied. We fully admit this; but beg them to remember 
that it has taken two centuries of labor to ensure this legitimacy — 
cifully in connection with speculations on the inhabitants of dis: 
Plana, etc. ie 
_Can anything be more unjust than exaltation of the hypothe — 
sis of Newton—this deservedly cherished subject of the master 
minds of two centuries—above the hypothesis of Kant-Laplace, — 
which, being too early left even by its astronomical parent, has 
been ever since considered an outcast in the world, endangering — 
the reputation of any one who would dare to touch it : 
We will adopt this almost forlorn hypothesis as a mere hypothe 
esis—we will patiently and carefully trace its bearings by means 
of as rigid an analysis as we can command in this most intricate — 
field; we will minutely compare the results thus obtained with — 
the actually observed state of things; and if we find the correr — 
pondence between idea and phenomenon, between analysis and ob- 
servation, to be very close, we hope that those who have analysis — 
more at their command than we, will pay as much attention 0 — 
this high branch of astronomy as has been, and deservedly con: — 
tinues to be, bestowed on Newton’s hypothesis of gravitatio} — 
If our feeble endeavors only succeed in making Kant— place's” 
hypothesis admitted as such among analysts, we shall have accom 
sidered as firmly established a principle as gravitation,” or a8” 
the fact of the rotation of the earth,” fo g if 
standing Foucault’s pendulum and gy pes—still remains un 
proved by ocular evidence, all ‘‘demonstrations” being in fact 
® Allgemeine Naturgeschichte und Theorie des Himmels, 1755. 
es Tourbillons Cartésiens avec des réflections sur l’attraction (1752) : 
ri 
Also his Entretiens sur la pluralité des mondes. 
** Gravitation was always treated as a mere hypothesis by the Cartesians; the 
work of Fontenelle above cited offers the instance most generally known. f 
‘ scientific prejudice existing against the nebular theory is perhaps as 1M)” 
rious as the religious prejudice once “resisting” the motion of the earth. 
D' 
ecsagrengg pene pr erti fenomeni.” Also Galileo 
himself, in his Dialogue (Opere compl, Firenze. Vol. i, 1848, pp. 387 and 
plished all we desire: for then this hypothesis will soon be com — 
