in Causal Research. 361 



the general source of the motions developed in gross matter* 

 (in the coal of the steam-engine, the explosion of gunpowder, 

 chemical action generally, gravity, &c), would come to be con- 

 templated and talked of as worthy of the intense interest that 

 such problems must excite in minds capable of appreciating 

 their rational worth. Under the reign of spiritualism the 

 simple physics of Newton and his contemporaries run the risk 

 of being forgotten ; and for the method and strict system that 

 existed then, which was the very keystone to progress, we 

 have the absence of method f, resting upon the abortive and 

 endless speculations about "force," whereby everything is in- 

 volved in mystery and the rational inquirer discouraged. How 

 shall the magnificent proofs of a concealed store of motion 

 exhibited by nature in the endless phases of motion developed 

 in gross matter on every hand, ever assert themselves in the face 

 of a spiritualistic theory (based on "action at a distance")^ 

 viz. that energy can exist without motion (i. e. in some ghostly 

 form), that energy can in fact have a duplex nature (kinetic 

 and not kinetic) and exist in matter at rest ? It is so far per- 



* There would seem to be some who profess to reject u action at a dis- 

 tance/' and yet do not recognize the only logical alternative that could 

 replace it, viz. the fact that motions developed in gross matter must 

 be derived from a material agent in space. Where is the motion to come 

 from consistently with the Conservation of Energy, unless it come from 

 an external material agent that encloses a store of motion ? For it is 

 needless to add that we can have no recourse to "force " or "potential" 

 energy by the rejection of " action at a distance." The recognition of the 

 fact of the derivation of the motion from the material agent is obviously 

 the necessary preliminary towards an inquiry after the process. How 

 shall progress ever be possible unless these facts are first debated and rea- 

 lized ? Shall a truth wait for appreciation until it becomes a truism or 

 platitude. The time may come when the present superficial theories, 

 whereby motions are referred en bloc to spiritualistic stores of energy 

 (represented by the high-sounding phrase "potential" energy) will be 

 looked back upon with something like contempt. It only needs that 

 attention should be thoroughly roused to this matter to ensure this end. 



t The grand fatality of the error of " action at a distance " consisted in 

 its departure from a method ; and errors of principle are always the most 

 disastrous. 



X The prevalence, even now, of the theory of " potential " energy (in 

 the sense of an energy which is not kinetic), or the idea that energy is of 

 two kinds, is an additional proof of the fact before stated, viz. that although 

 "action at a distance" may be professedly rejected, the logical conse- 

 quences of its rejection are not adequately realized. There would not be 

 such an objection to the term " potential energy " if it were not inevitably 

 contrasted with kinetic energy as something different, thereby serving as a 

 continued support to the fiction of " action at a distance." Indeed the prefix 

 " kinetic " itself (applied to energy) acts as a perpetual cover to this 

 fiction; for where would be the use of the distinctive prefix "kinetic," 

 unless it were thereby implied that some other energy than " kinetic " 

 energy (or the energy of motion) existed ? 



Phil Mag. S. 5. Vol. 9. No. 57. May 1880. 2 D 



