Atomic  Hypothesis  and  Dissected  {Structural)  Formula.     261 
about  the  same  relationship  as  the  set  of  symbols 
S,  Mo,  V0)  E„  Ms0>  J4,  Sta,  U4>  N, 
does  to  the  position  of  the  sun  and  planets  at  any  given  instaut, 
the  initial  letters  representing  the  planets,  the  order  of  writing 
the  order  of  magnitude  of  their  orbits,  and  the  suffixes  the  num- 
ber of  their  moons. 
34.  The  observed  fact  that  the  dissected  formula  of  a  com- 
pound deduced  from  the  majority  of  its  reactions  does  not  ne- 
cessarily express  all  the  reactions  of  this  body  meets  with  a  ready 
explanation  by  the  atomic  hypothesis;  of  all  the  possible  ways  i:i 
which  a  given  number  of  atoms  can  be  connected  together  under 
the  influence  of  certain  forces,  some  must  be  more  stable  than 
others.  At  the  moment  of  the  breaking  up  or  other  alteration 
of  a  molecule  whose  component  atoms  are  not  arranged  in  the 
most  stable  position  with  respect  to  the  particular  set  of  forces 
then  acting  on  them,  there  must  be  a  tendency  for  the  atoms  to 
alter  their  original  position  for  more  stable  arrangements^  which 
will  therefore  be  produced  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  for  the  in- 
stant ;  hence  the  end  products  of  the  reaction  will  be  to  a  greater 
or  less  extent  those  which  would  have  been  formed  had  the  original 
substance  been  not  what  it  was,  but  a  mixture  of  the  isomerides 
containing  the  atoms  in  these  more  stable  positions. 
35.  In  the  foregoing  pages  the  attempt  has  been  made  to  esta- 
blish the  following  points. 
(1)  Symbolic  representations  having  no  connexion  with  any 
theory  whatever  may  be  employed  to  designate  and  refer  to  a 
large  number  of  experimental  laws  and  generalizations. 
(2)  A  certain  view  of  the  constitution  of  matter  is  capable  of 
affording  a  raison  d'etre  for  several,  but  not  all,  of  these  laws  and 
generalizations. 
It  is  instructive  to  compare  these  views  with  the  ideas  of  other 
chemists  on  this  subject.  Thus  Gerhardt  *  says,  u  Les  formules 
chimiques  .  .  .  .  ne  sont  pas  destinees  b.  representer  Farrange- 
ment  des  atomes,  mais  elles  ont  pour  but  de  rendre  evidentes, 
de  la  maniere  la  plus  simple  et  la  plus  exacte,  les  relations  qui 
rattachent  les  corps  entre  eux  sous  le  rapport  des  transforma- 
tions." Reasoning  further  on  this,  Sir  Benjamin  Brodief  has  ela- 
borated a  "  method  for  the  investigation,  by  means  of  symbols, 
of  the  laws  of  the  distribution  of  weight  in  chemical  change,'" 
wherein  the  truth  of  the  first  of  the  above  two  propositions  is 
abundantly  proved,  and  that  of  the  second  admitted.  The  di- 
stinguished author,  however,  is  of  opinion  that  ordinary  sym- 
bols (atomic  symbols),  when  used  for  the  construction  of  a  for- 
*  Chimie  Organique  (Paris,  1856),  t.  iv.  p.  566. 
t  Phil.  Trans.  lsf>6. 
