248 
Mr. Moore.— B ut there is a material difference. 
Mr. Newton. — I have ventured upon a definition of force as being u a 
power ” by which changes, whether of position or of condition, are produced. 
But if “ energy ” be power not exerted in action, then I see no difference 
really, between that word and “ force ” and “ power,” and we get into a con- 
fusion of terms. 
Rev. P. Strutt. — It seems to me that there is a difference between 
Mr. Brooke and Mr. Moore. I understood the last speaker to introduce 
the idea of mental power as quite distinct from the physical power with 
which Mr. Brooke dealt. But if the conservation of force and power ex- 
tend to mental power, then the introduction of any human being into 
the world is the introduction of a new force into the world (the human 
will originates action, and with the augmentation of persons there is augmen- 
tation of power), and when you take that idea, you open up a new metaphy- 
sical field altogether. It appears to me that that should be distinctly kept 
in mind if we are to deal with the physical question. 
The Chairman.— I apprehend that Mr. Brooke deals exclusively with the 
physical question. It is difficult to say where it infringes on the mental 
question. 
Dr. Irons. — May we catechise Mr. Brooke ? 
The Chairman. — I think we are fully entitled to ask him to explain his 
terms. 
Dr. Irons. — Then I should like to ask him one or two questions. First, 
how these ultimate atoms — so to speak — are supposed in his philosophy to 
work ? Do they work in right lines, on the north, south, east, or west of 
each atom ? How did they get their original direction, and how do they 
afterwards carry out the original idea according to which they began to 
move ? Take the leaves of the plane-tree, for instance ; they are all formed 
on one model, so that an observer may see at once whether a given, leaf is the 
leaf of an oak or of a plane-tree. The original atom began to obtain motion 
somehow, and I want to know if that motion was in a direct line ? 
Mr. Brooke. — We know nothing whatever about atoms. It is all pure 
conjecture, and therefore when you ask me what the atoms do, I tell you 
distinctly that I know nothing about them. 
Mr. Moore. — I have always felt that the battle would have to be fought 
there, and I asked an able physicist, “ Do you not put the whole of the 
doctrine of the conservation of energy upon the doctrine of atoms ? ” His 
reply was, “ Certainly I do.” We know nothing at all about matter and 
motion, but we have various forms of motion, and these are the forces of the 
atoms. That is the whole basis of the conservation of energy.” Though 
Mr. Brooke may assert nothing on this point, other physicists do. Mr. 
Croll has written a paper in the Philosophical Magazine on this subject — 
as to what is the cause of molecular motion in reference to these 
atoms. 
The CnAiRMAN. — Mr. Moore surprised me in his previous observations, 
by seeming to intimate that colour was a quality of the atoms. 
