414 
“ He [Hook] affirms to have actually made four observations ; by which, he 
says, it is manifest that there is a sensible parallax in the earth’s orbit to 
the star in the dragon’s head, and consequently a confirmation of the Coper- 
nican system against the Ptolemaic and Tychonic Lastly, he 
promises that he will explain to the curious a system of the world, differing 
in many particulars from any yet known, but answering in all things to the 
common rules of mechanical motions ; which system he here declares to depend 
on three suppositions 1. That all celestial bodies whatsoever have an 
attraction or gravitating power towards their own centres, whereby they 
attract, not only their own parts, and keep them from flying from them, 
as we may observe the earth to do ; but also all other celestial bodies that are 
within the sphere of their activity. 2. That all bodies whatsoever, that are 
put into a direct and simple motion, will so continue to move forward m a 
straight line, till they are by some other more effectual power deflected and 
bent into a motion that describes some curve line. 3. That these attractive 
powers are so much the more powerful in operating, by how much the nearer 
the body acted on is to their own centres.” 
There was besides this another book, by Halley, published in 1676, stiff 
ten years before the Principia, which even gives the precise ratio of 
attractive force as “ increasing inversely as the square of the distance.”* Now 
the only book in which we have any approximation to a statement of the 
real facts as to this theory is in Wheweff’s History of the Inductive Sciences. 
He laughs at the mythical story of the apple ; but even he does not tell us the 
whole truth : and although it is actually to be found in print in the Philo- 
sophical Transactions , it seems to have been lost sight of or intentionally put 
aside. I think, therefore, these interesting facts are well worth being put on 
record in our Journal of Transactions. We hear many now still talk of this 
theory as one not to be questioned, although Mr. Grove really gave it up in 
his address at Nottingham last year ; and indeed every one who has learnt 
more than this child’s story of the apple, or really understands anything about 
the matter, must know that whatever may be the amount of truth or error in 
the theory, it has the merit at least of being totally inconsistent with any- 
thing like “the law of continuity” applied to the heavenly bodies ; for they, 
according to Newton, must have been hurled into space, or projected in the 
direction of tangents to their orbits, by a force once given ah extra. 
Dr. Irons. — I would mention, in addition to the story of Newton’s apple, 
another old story which some men are never tired of quoting that of Galileo 
and his recantation— which should be revised before it is again brought 
forward. The Pope has really never had justice done to him on that subject ; 
and I think this stock story of sham scientifics ought to be entirely eliminated 
from scientific history. 
The Chairman.— I think the late Professor Whewell has conclusively 
shown that the whole story of Galileo’s persecution has been greatly exag- 
gerated, and that he never was thrown into the dungeons of the Inquisition. 
With regard to the first paper read this evening, that of Mr. Brodie, no one 
* Philosophical Transactions , anno 1676, vol. ii. p. 326. (Lond., 1809.) 
The Principia itself was not published, or noticed in the Philosophical 
Transactions, till the year 1687. ( lh ., vol. iii. p. 358.) 
