Chapter IX: Appendix: On the temperature of the earth anciently (1)

That the temperature of the earth’s surface was much higher
in the first ages of its existence, than since the period of
authentic history, seems now to be nearly established, in the
opinion of the learned, and only requires time to have the
weight of evidence produce its proper effect on the great mass
of community.

Though this fact would be apprehended from what is said
above, it may be desirable to the reader to see a concise view
of the reasons which induce this opinion.

1. _It may be inferred from the original constitution of
the globe, and the chemical action consequent upon it._ It
has been seen above that the _natural_ condition of matter
is _cold_, _frozen_, _inactive_, and _solid_: and that the
elements of this globe were created in a _simple, uncombined
state_. If this mass of elements received a quickening impulse,
the chemical laws of _affinity_ and _attraction_, and also the
natural law of _gravitation_, would commence exerting their
influence. This we know would create a rise in the temperature
of the whole mass, in proportion to the _amount_ of matter
acted on, and the _force_ of the different principles and
agents which were in operation. Upon consideration of these
points in regard to our earth, no one can doubt but that they
would raise the temperature to an inconceivable height.

_Refrigeration_ would commence at the surface as soon
as the first violent action was abated, and the water and
air began to assume their relative places, through which the
heat would escape into celestial space. This refrigeration
would be increased by the oxidation of the metals forming the
crust of the earth, which would confine the interior heat
more effectually, because, the earths are almost complete
_non-conductors_ of caloric. Thus the crust of the earth would
continue to cool, and the oxidation would thicken it, and, of
course, contribute to the reduction of its temperature.

From this natural process it is very evident that the earth
was much warmer during its first periods; earthquakes, and
volcanos much more common than now, and a general instability
in the condition of our globe. The deluge was the climax of its
alternations, and settled, in some measure, its constitution by
a sudden and great reduction of temperature.

2. _It may be inferred from the vast extent of volcanic
action, as indicated by the remains of extinct volcanos, and
their effects on the earth._ This argument is merely _called up
here_, not to be discussed at length, but to be _referred_ to,
as it has been mentioned in a preceding part of this paper.

It is almost impossible for the ordinary reader, who has
not closely studied the geological phenomena which present
themselves to the close observer, to conceive of the extent
to which volcanic action operated anciently. It would not be
exaggeration to say, there was a remote period _when our globe
was a single volcano_: the whole surface of it being subject to
its action.

Though we may ascribe something of the formation of hills
and vallies to the action of water, yet, doubtless, the
most effectual agent in upheaving the mountains, and even
continents, possibly, was volcanic force.

“Those ranges of volcanos,” says the celebrated Humboldt,
“those eruptions through vast chasms, those subterranean
thunders, that roll under the transition rocks of porphyry and
slate in the new world, remind us of the present activity of
subterranean fire, of the power, which in remote ages, _has
raised up chains of mountains, broke the surface of the globe,
and poured torrents of liquid earth in the midst of the most
ancient strata_.”

From this constant and extensive volcanic action we may
safely infer the high temperature of our earth anciently.

3. _It may be inferred from the origin of primitive,
trapean, and basaltic rocks._ The primitive rocks, as granite,
gneiss, mica slate, &c, give evidence on this consideration;
they must have been deposited when their substance was in
solution, admitting of _chemical mobility_, in order that they
might assume a crystalline form which they are known to have.

It is not easy to conceive _how_ the substances of the
primitive rocks could be solved, except by _heat_, as a
_principal solvent_. The acids, and water also, may have
contributed to their solution, but would not be competent of
themselves. This consideration would give a high temperature
for the earth anciently.

It is now generally admitted that the trap, and basaltic
rocks are of _igneous_ origin. When we consider the _magnitude_
of the trap and basalt formations, the extent of surface which
they cover, the hills, and even elevated and lofty mountains
which they form, we shall not hesitate to assign a higher
temperature to our earth at the period when fires, so immense
as to effect the upheaving and ejection of all these, actually
burned in the bowels of the earth.

4. _It may be inferred from the well preserved remains of
vegetables and animals of warm equatorial climates, in high
northern latitudes where they have not been found since the
memory of man._ This is a conclusive argument if its _data_
be well established. Because, if _tropical_ and _equatorial_
animals and fruits are _now_ found buried and fossilized
in Siberia, and the islands of the _arctic sea_, in such a
state of preservation as to forbid the supposition they were
transported thither, it will follow inevitably, that they _grew
there_, and there flourished, died, and were buried.

Moreover, if _herbivorous_ animals are found fossilized
in those high northern latitudes, under such circumstances as
forbid the supposition, that they were transported thither, it
will doubtless, follow, that not only _they_ lived there, but
also _luxuriant vegetation_ must at the same time have covered
the plains where their remains are entombed.

The inference which we are forced to draw from these
_data_, is this: _As no such tropical and equatorial animals or
plants have been known to exist there, nor even herbage of any
kind, on which such animals might subsist, since the memory of
man, there was a time anciently when the climate suited their
growth, and of course was very much warmer than it is known to
be now, its temperature then corresponding to the temperature
of the present equatorial regions, as it produced and subsisted
anciently the animals and plants which the tropical regions
produce and subsist at the present time, and which cannot
subsist in any other climates._

In proof of the above position, it is well known that
animals and plants have their peculiar climates, in which they
are _indigenous_, and out of which they cannot thrive, or even
live, if too far removed. It is also well known, that the
warmer, and more moist the climate is, the more luxuriant the
vegetation, and the more huge the animals.

Hence we are in the habit of denominating animals and
plants by the climates in which they are indigenous, as
_arctic_, or northern; _tropical_, or southern. Let us now see
if the tropical animals and plants once lived and flourished in
high northern latitudes. The best authorities follow.

“We proceed now to examine the remains of quadrupeds:
_these are found accumulated in regions where similar animals
do not_ NOW _exist_. Some are buried deep in gypsum.--Some
present themselves to view, accumulated in vast caverns, and
destitute of any envelope. The islands of Lachof, situated
to the NORTH _of Siberia_, are, according to a modern
traveller, _only heaps of sand, ice, and bones of elephants and
rhinoceros_, mixed with those of great cetaceous animals, and
even, agreeably to the latest accounts, with the remains of
gigantic birds.

“There have been found in _Siberia, whole carcases of the
elephant, covered with their_ FLESH and SKIN, preserved by the
frosts which prevail in those regions.--Germany has furnished
the greatest number (of bones:)--In France a great many bones
of the elephant have been met with.

“These discoveries, though as yet scarcely commenced, have
thrown already _a new light upon the revolutions which our
globe must have undergone, and upon the_ STATES WHICH MUST HAVE
PRECEDED THE PRESENT COURSE AND CONSTITUTION OF NATURE.

“These bones, presenting no trace of having been rolled
up and down, occurring only fractured as we find those of
our domestic animals, and sometimes joined together in the
form of skeletons, often even as it were heaped up in common
cemeteries, clearly demonstrate, _that the catastrophe which
has destroyed the living beings to which they belonged must
have overtaken them in the_ SAME CLIMATES WHERE WE MEET WITH
THESE RECORDS OF THEIR FORMER EXISTENCE.

“The quantity of nourishment which such huge animated
masses required, and their numbers, proved by the existence of
the carnivorous kinds, _render it probable that the countries
where we find their remains_ ONCE _enjoyed a temperature, if
not warmer, at least more favorable to vegetation_.” MALTE
BRUN, _Physical Geography, Book 12_.

In the above quotations, the data on which our argument
rests are so clearly sustained there needs no comment. The
authority given is unquestionable, and could be corroborated by
scores of weighty names, and in reference to all the _northern_
countries of Asia, Europe, and America.

It is impossible to read the above extracts without being
convinced that those tropical and equatorial animals lived,
flourished, and died _where_ their remains are _now_ found. And
it is equally impossible to avoid another conclusion; viz: that
there must have been a heavy vegetation on those plains, where
_now_ the rein-deer can scarcely pick up a blade of grass.

From these convictions no other inference can be drawn, but
that the temperature of the _frigid zones_, was anciently much
higher than at present; and of course the general temperature
of the earth also.

From the perfect preservation of these fossil remains; from
the fact that they are found in their relative position, bone
to bone, and, in some instances, with their _hair_, _skin_,
and _flesh undecayed_, it is obvious, _the animals must have
perished by a catastrophe which overwhelmed them suddenly, and
was, instantaneously followed by a freezing of the overwhelming
waters_. Such was the catastrophe of the _scripture deluge_,
which _physically_ was competent to perform the phenomena, as
shall be shown presently.

Let us now see if we do not arrive at the same conclusion
by examining the _fossil_ VEGETABLES.

At Portland, England, the Rev. Dr. Buckland finds fossil
plants _akin to the cycas family of Malabar_, from which he
concludes, “it is probable that the climate of these regions,
_at the time when the oolites_ (a series of rocky strata) _were
deposited, was of the same warm temperature with that_ (the
tropical) _which produces a large proportion of the existing
cycadeæ_.” URE, _New Syst. Geol._ p. 433.

“The remarkable development of these vegetables
(equisetums) during the first (or coal measure) period of
vegetation, and their size in the second (or oolitic) period,
_smaller_ than before, but still far greater than our existing
equisetums, accord with many other facts, furnished by fossil
vegetables of many other families, to lead us to regard the
_climate of the earth, at these remote epochs, to have been
hotter than the hottest of modern climates_.” _Ibid_, p. 443.

“There is no doubt, however, that _palms with fan-shaped
leaves covered Europe with their lofty vegetation at this
remote period, in regions where no species of these plants
could_ NOW _grow_!” _Ibid_, p. 452.

The palm is well known to be a _tropical_ plant, and cannot
thrive, except in a warm climate. The climate of Europe, when
it grew in the north, must have been tropical. Indeed, in
all parts of northern Europe _tropical flowers_, _leaves_,
and _fruits_ are found in such a state of preservation as to
convince the most incredulous, _that they must have grown
on the spot_; which would be to convince him of the high
temperature, anciently, of those regions.

“Professor Kounizin describes in the Isis for 1821, immense
beds of fossil wood in several localities of the governments
of Novogorod and Twer in the _north_ of Russia, _where no such
trees are now found to grow_.

“Near Constand on the river Necker, M. Autenrieth found an
entire forest of the trunks of _palm trees_, buried along with
the remains of elephants.” _Ure, Ibid_, p. 455.

“The fossil shells found in the strata of England, and
France, and the contiguous countries, having for the most part,
no _antitypes alive except in equatorial regions_, harmonize
with the preceding details.” _Ibid_, p. 456.

To the above testimony might be added the _caves_ in
Germany, England, and France, in which great quantities of
bones are found in such a state of preservation, and under such
circumstances as to show that the animals whose bones are found
were in the habit of frequenting these caves, and perished
in them suddenly, as their remains are found mixed with sand
and gravel, _but not water-worn_. Of these bones, the great
majority are those of the hyæna; hence these dens, specially in
England, are called _hyæna dens_. In them are also found the
bones of other animals _gnawed_ by the hyænas.

From these facts there can be no doubt but the hyæna
inhabited England, France, and Germany, and dwelt in these
caves, and here perished when the sudden catastrophe of the
flood overtook him. This argues beyond doubt that these
countries were once _warm_, _when these tropical animals lived
in them_.

5. _The same fact may be inferred from the immense amount
of vegetable matter which was necessary to supply the materials
for the coal measures._ This is an irresistible argument in
view of the _immense amount_ of coal in the bowels of the
earth, which must be of _vegetable origin_. Because at the
ratio of vegetable product of _our age_, the earth would not
produce a sufficient amount to form the coalbeds, short of
millions of years.

The _vegetative power_ of the earth, therefore, must have
been anciently very much greater than at present, which could
only be on the supposition of a _warmer_ and more moist climate.

Moreover, the fact that tropical plants are known to have
contributed almost entirely to the formation of coal measures
in the _northern latitudes_, is proof direct. This is clear
from the fact that their roots, stems, leaves, flowers, and
fruits are found impressed on the coal, in such a manner that
there can be no mistake; and the _perfection_ of the impression
forbids the supposition that they were _transported_ thither
from tropical climates.

“Brown coal and black coal, the former sometimes called
wood coal, is found chiefly in diluvial or alluvial ground.
It contains, besides charcoal and bitumen, _various vegetable
principles, and the branches or trunks of trees_ partially
decomposed, _which mark the origin of this kind of coal_.”
_Bakewell’s Geology_, p. 111.

“Wood coal, or brown coal, is found in low situations
and appears to have been _formed of heaps of trees_ buried
by inundations under beds of clay, sand, or gravel.--In some
specimens of this coal the _vegetable fibre, or grain_, is
perceptible in one part, and the other part is reduced to
coal.” _Ibid_, p. 121.

“In wood coal we may almost seize nature in the fact of
making coal, before the process is completed. These formations
of coal are of far more recent date than that of common coal,
though their origin must be referred to a former condition
of our globe, _when the vegetable productions of tropical
climates flourished in northern latitudes_. The _vegetable
origin_ of common mineral coal appears to be established by its
association with strata _abounding in vegetable impressions_,
by its close similarity to wood coal, (which is undoubtedly a
_vegetable product_) and lastly by the decisive fact, that some
mineral coal in the Dudley coal-field is _entirely composed of
the layers of mineralized plants_.” _Ibid_, p. 122.

“When we see the multitude of reeds filled and surrounded
with sandstone, having their thin scaly bark _converted into
a true coal_, it is _impossible to doubt of its vegetable
origin_.” _Ure’s New System Geol._ p. 166.

Quotations from the best authorities might be multiplied
to the same effect, but it is deemed unnecessary. It remains
to repeat the question, _Could such an amount of vegetable
matter have been accumulated, short of millions of years, at
the ratio of the present vegetative powers of the earth?_ It is
impossible. The only remaining conclusion is, the vegetative
power of the earth anciently was much greater than at present,
which could not have been except its temperature was much
higher also.

In conclusion on this question, it is necessary to say,
that the reduction of the earth’s temperature would be gradual,
in a natural way, by the heat flying off into celestial spaces,
until the crust became so thick and compact as to prove a
perfect non-conductor of caloric. Then the surface of the earth
would depend on the heating power of the sun altogether.
The thickening of the crust of the earth would be attended
with earthquakes, volcanos, and partial deluges, the natural
and necessary results of the oxidations of the metals. Hence
we would have different strata of rocks, sand, gravel, &c,
deposited at different times, and over different sections of
the country. Hence also forests would be overthrown, and the
vegetation of years be thrown together in the nearest lakes
or seas; which explains the origin of _coal-basins_. This
state of things also well explains the alternations of strata
of different kinds, as sand, gravel, chalk, fresh and salt
water deposites, &c, as well as the dislocations, fractures,
contortions, and confusions observable in the structure of the
earth’s crust.

There are however various phenomena which indicate
clearly that there was _a general and sudden reduction of
temperature_. The state of preservation, in which those animals
in Siberia are found, proves this. The vestigia of the _last_
great revolution in our globe clearly indicate the DELUGE
to have been the cause of this general and sudden reduction
of temperature. This would be the natural consequence of
_submerging_ the earth in water: and the suddenness of the
event is well attested both by the scriptures, and the physical
history of our earth.

The action of the deluge does not come within the
contemplation of this volume, and therefore will not be noticed
here.]

The air is another storehouse of fire. When lucid igneous particles are strongly attracted to one another in great quantities, their heat becomes intolerable, and is capable of destroying the most solid bodies. It is well known, that when converged in the focus of one of Hartsocker’s burning-glasses, they will produce wonderful effects: tin, lead, or any soft metal, will dissolve at the first touch; and iron, which requires a very strong fire for liquefaction, will melt before one of these glasses almost as soon as applied. They will consume wood, though wet, in a moment; vitrify bricks and pumice stones, and dissolve earthen vessels full of water; and plume-allum, which will resist the fire of the hottest glass-houses, without alteration, is instantly melted. Even gold, that resists the force of common fire, is soon liquefied by their powerful agency. This plainly shows us that, provided there were not a wise and almighty Providence, superintending all his works, those materials which are of the greatest utility to the harmony and order of things, would have a direct tendency to destroy the whole. If lucid igneous particles were to form solid bodies, and depart from their state of fluidity, they would, in an instant, reduce this globe to ashes, or render it liquid fire. Were they all of one kind, it is probable they might unite in solid bodies; but the wisdom of Providence has formed them of various colors, and of different reflections and refrangibility. This prevents them from associating in such a manner as to do harm, which can only be produced by converging them with some instrument which prevents their flying off. As all these have not the same degree of reflexibility and refrangibility, but as some are capable of greater reflections and refractions than others, they cannot, without force, be united in one solid body, yet they are all serviceable for important purposes, contributing to the happiness of man, and the welfare of all living creatures.

Considering the extent of fire, and that its property is, when put into motion, to consume all combustible substances within its reach, it is astonishing that the world has not long since been destroyed! This terrible element is at present restrained and directed by its almighty Creator; but divine revelation informs us, that a period will arrive when its utmost energies shall be called into action. The apostle Peter asserts, that “the heavens and earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men;--in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat; the earth also, and the works that are therein shall be burnt up.” Again he says, “looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat.” The _passing away of the heavens_ means the same as their being _dissolved by fire_. The word Ῥοιζηδὸν signifies with a _very loud_ and _terrible noise_: with a sound resembling that of a great _storm_. In this place it more particularly denotes the horrid crackling noise of a wide-spreading fire.

“The cloud-capp’d towers, the gorgeous palaces,
The solemn temples, the great globe itself
Yea, all which it inherit, shall _dissolve_;
And, like the baseless fabric of a vision,
Leave not a wreck behind.”

The word rendered _melt_, is a metaphor taken from _metals_, dissolving in the fire, or _wax_ before the flame; so will the fierce and spreading fire of the last day _melt down_ this globe, and its surrounding atmosphere.[36] That the world was to be dissolved by fire was the opinion of Anaximander, Anaxiphanes, Anaxagoras, Archelaus, Diogenes, and Leucippus.[37] The inference which the apostle deduces from this view of the general and final conflagration of the world, is highly impressive. “Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness.”

* * * * *

_Section_ III.--LIGHT.

Motion of luminous and fiery particles the first cause
of light -- Light the most simple body --Velocity of light
-- Light diffusive -- Light the medium through which objects
become visible -- Light beautiful, or its rays of different
colors -- Light a visible resemblance of its Divine Author,
in his spirituality, simplicity, purity, energy, goodness,
manifestation, glory.

Moses, in the original word אור _aur_, seems plainly to hint at the operation of a principle in the universe which, as a second cause, produced the phenomenon of _light_. This, most probably, was the motion of the luminous and fiery particles in the chaotic mass which, at the Divine command, separated themselves from the other gross materials of the miscellaneous composition, and by an attractive sympathy associated in one body.

It is conjectured, that light was at first impressed on some part of the heavens, or collected in some lucid body. Dr. Wall says, Though the sun was not yet formed into a compact body, yet the most subtile and active particles had already begun to fly together to the centre of the solar system, which gave some light; though probably not so great as when afterward they made the compact body of the sun. And the earth, which was then only a round lump of mud, or muddy salt-water, being turned, as it has been ever since, upon its own axis, receiving that light on its several hemispheres successively, made night and day, or evening and morning. Milton gives his opinion in the following lines:

“Let there be light! said GOD; and forthwith light
Ethereal, first of things, quintessence pure,
Sprung from the deep; and from her native east
To journey through the aery gloom began,
Spher’d in a radiant cloud; (for yet the sun
Was not;) she in a cloudy tabernacle
Sojourn’d the while.”

Light, after a short progression, concentrated in the sun, the common centre of our system; the various parts of this system, by his central light or fire, are balanced, and, by mutual attraction, move in the expanse, according to fixed laws, or determined distances.[38]

Light was once considered to be a property or quality of matter only; but more recently it has been discovered to be a _body_, a very subtile fluid, consisting of minute particles. We have no certain knowledge of its nature; though a collection of its rays make other things visible, yet its constituent parts themselves are most exquisitely small, and quite imperceptible; and therefore it approaches the nearest to the nature of spirit.[39]

Of all material bodies, light is the most _simple_. Most others are compounded of several parts, not only of different, but sometimes of contrary natures: but light is an unmixed body. It is also a most pure matter; It has no defilement in itself, neither is it capable of contracting pollution from other objects. When it shines upon a dunghill or sepulchre, which sends forth the most offensive effluvia, it still remains uncontaminated.

[The author is undoubtedly mistaken when he considers light
“of all material bodies--the most simple,” and “an unmixed
body.”

It is well known that a beam, or pencil, of light, as
emitted from the sun, is _not_ a simple body, but is capable of
being divided into seven prismatic colors. The image which is
formed by the refraction of the pencil, by means of a prism, is
called a _Spectrum_, and clearly exhibits the compound nature
of light. The refracted rays of the Spectrum may be collected
and made to constitute a pencil of light again, which will be
white, or colorless as before.

If this prismatic Spectrum be examined closely, it will
be found that the different colored rays differ very much
in their _heating_, _illuminating_, and _chemical_ powers.
Dr. Herschell, and other experimenters, have found that the
_orange_ rays possess a greater illuminating power than the
red; and the _yellow_ more than the orange: but the _maximums_
of illumination lies in the _brightest yellow_ or _palest
green_.

There is also a very sensible difference in the _heating_
power of these colored rays. By passing the bulb of a
delicate air thermometer through the different colored rays,
it indicates the greatest heat in the _red_ rays; next in
the _green_, and so on diminishing to the _violet_. But
the maximum of heat has been ascertained to be immediately
_beyond_ the red rays, and of course _out_ of the Spectrum,
in an _unilluminated_ spot: thus indicating that there are
_invisible_ rays possessing a greater heating power than any of
the seven colored rays. These are called _calorific rays_.

By the experiments of Ritter and Wallaston it is now
satisfactorily ascertained that there are also _chemical rays
which excite neither heat nor light_, and lie on the _other
side_ of the Spectrum from the invisible calorific rays, just
without the violet. It is true, the chemical effect can be
distinguished even to the green rays, but this seems to be by
_diffusion_, or a species of sympathy. The sensible chemical
power is exerted just without the violet rays.

This fact is established more clearly by Berard. He
concentrated, by a lens, all the portion of the Spectrum from
the green to the red rays, and made them act on muriate of
silver _two hours_ without effect. He then concentrated all
the portion of the Spectrum from the green to the violet rays,
and made them act on muriate of silver, and _they blackened it
in less than six minutes_. Thus, evidently, are detected very
different properties in the different portions of the prismatic
Spectrum.

Instead, therefore, of light being a “simple substance,”
and “unmixed” it is found to be decidedly _compound_. It is
capable of being divided into seven differently colored rays,
and these rays, according to their natural properties, into
three classes: the _illuminating_ rays, _calorific_ rays, and
_chemical_ rays.]

The rays of light always proceed in _straight lines_, unless diverted by some intervening body. They are subject to the laws of attraction like other small bodies. If a stream of light be admitted through a small hole into a dark room, and the edge of a knife be applied, it will be diverted from its natural course, and _inflected_ towards it. When the rays of light are thrown back by any opposing body, they are said to be _reflected_. When in passing from one medium to another, they are inflected or diverted from their rectilineal course, they are said to be _refracted_; and this property of light is called its _refrangibility_. Refraction arises from this, that the rays are more attracted by a dense, than by a rare medium.

The _velocity_ of light is prodigious, and almost incredible; it moves at the rate of near 200,000 miles in _a second_ of time! Roemer, a Danish philosopher, was the first who found the means of determining the velocity of light, by the difference of time in the eclipses of Jupiter’s satellites, when the earth was on the same, or on the contrary side of the sun, with that planet. This point may be easily proved; for when the earth is between the sun and this planet, those eclipses will happen about 8¼ minutes sooner, than according to the tables; but when the earth is in the contrary position, the eclipses happen about 8¼ minutes later than they are predicted by the tables. Hence, therefore, light takes up about 8¼ minutes in passing from the sun to the earth, a distance of 95,513,794 miles; and it takes about 16½ minutes of time to go through a space equal to the diameter of the earth’s orbit, which is at least 190 millions of miles in length; which is near a million of miles swifter than the motion of a cannon-ball, which flies with the velocity of about a mile in eight seconds.[40] In comparing this velocity of light with that of a cannon-ball, it has been observed, that light passes through a space in about eight minutes, which a cannon-ball with its ordinary velocity, could not traverse in less than thirty-two years! The velocity of sound bears a very small proportion to that of light. Light travels, in the space of eight minutes, a distance in which sound could not be communicated in seventeen years; and even our senses may convince us, if we attend to the explosion of gunpowder, &c, of the almost infinite velocity of the one compared with that of the other.[41] Were the propagation of the rays of light less rapid, the darkness would be very slowly dissipated, and great inconveniences would result to the inhabitants of the earth.

The _divisibility_ of the parts of matter is no where more apparent than in the minuteness of the particles of light. The unobstructed rays of light which proceed from a candle, will, almost instantaneously, fill a space of two miles; and it has been computed, says Dr. O. Gregory, that there fly out of the end of the flame of a burning candle, in a second of time, ten thousand millions of times more such particles than there are visible grains of sand in the whole earth. Dr. Nieuwentyt has computed, that an inch of candle, when converted to light, becomes divided into 269,617,040 parts, with 40 ciphers annexed; at which rate there must issue out of it, when burning, 418,660, with 39 ciphers more, particles in the second of a minute; vastly more than a thousand times a thousand million of times the number of sands the whole earth can contain; reckoning ten inches to one foot, and that 100 sands are equal to one inch.[42] As sound is propagated only at the rate of 1,142 feet in a second, a particle of light must be 786,000 times more subtile than a particle of air. If the particles of light were not extremely small, their velocity would be highly destructive. Indeed, were they equal in bulk to the two millionth part of a grain of sand, this impulse would not be less than sand shot from the mouth of a cannon. If the particles of light had more density, they would not only dazzle us by their splendor, but injure us by their heat.

There is no creature of God that _diffuses_ itself, and whose influence reaches so far and wide, and fills so large a vacuum, as light. All that inconceivable space between this globe and the fixed stars, a distance which numbers cannot reach, is replete with light. Nay, the space in which it is diffused is not less than the universe itself; the immensity of which exceeds the conception of human understanding. It is from this almost unlimited diffusion of light that the very remotest of the heavenly bodies in the solar system become discernible, either by the naked eye or by telescopes. And had we instruments that could carry our sight as far as the light is extended, we should discover those bodies which are placed at the very extremity of the universe.[43]

Light is the _medium_ through which objects become _visible_ to us. It is owing to it, that we are enabled to behold and contemplate the wonderful works of the great Creator; to discover unexplored systems in the trackless regions of unbounded space, to imbibe knowledge from things created, to hold intercourse with each other, to steer the hollow bark to distant climes, and to investigate the records of all science. Without its aid, the world would have been an inhospitable wilderness, involved in sable shades of perpetual night. “Truly the light is sweet, and a pleasant thing it is for the eyes to behold it.”

Light _beautifies_ every delightful object which comes within the reach of its rays.

“Nature’s resplendent robe!
Without whose vesting beauty all were wrapt
In unessential gloom.”

All colors are rays of light differently reflected. The cause of their diversity was first rationally accounted for by Sir Isaac Newton. He has shown that color is not a specific property of bodies, but is caused by the different rays of light being reflected from the surface of the body; the rest of the rays passing into or through the body. He discovered that in the rays of light are all the colors in nature; and the primary colors he considered to be seven in number, namely, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet; and that bodies appear of different colors, as they have the property of reflecting some rays more powerfully than others. These colors are poetically enumerated by Thomson.

“First the flaming _red_
Sprung vivid forth; the tawny _orange_ next;
And next delicious _yellow_; by whose side
Fell the kind beams of all-refreshing _green_:
Then the pure _blue_, that swells autumnal skies,
Ethereal play’d; and then, of sadder hue,
Emerg’d the deepen’d _indigo_, as when
The heavy-skirted evening droops with frost;
While the last gleamings of refracted light
Dy’d in the fainting _violet_ away.”

Since the time of this justly celebrated philosopher, it has been objected, that the seven colors above mentioned are not primitive. It seems very obvious that there can be only three primitive colors, namely, red, yellow, and blue; since all the colors can be made by means of these. It has lately been advanced by Prieur, that the primitive colors are violet, green, and red; that the yellow is formed with red and green, the latter being in excess; and that when the red is in excess, they form orange; the green and violet form blue. The colors excited by the different refrangible rays do not appear to determine what are the primitive colors, since we find that different rays are capable of producing the same color, as a mixture of the yellow with the red produces orange. And it must be admitted, that the violet rays excite, in some degree, the idea of red along with the blue; as in the green, the yellow and blue may be discerned, but none of the red. When the different colored rays are mixed together, either by recomposition, or by getting each color by a separate Spectrum, the result will be white light. Hence Sir Isaac Newton concluded, that when the rays are promiscuously reflected from any surface it will appear white. He also found, and the discovery has since been confirmed by the experiments of Dr. Herschell, that the different colored rays have not by any means the same illuminating power. The violet rays appear to have the least luminous effect, the indigo more, the blue a little more, the green very great, between the green and the yellow the greatest of all, the yellow the same as the green, and the red less than the yellow.[44] From experiments it is found, that those rays of light are of the largest quantity that paint the brightest colors; and of all these, the red rays have the least refrangibility. Without light vegetables would have no color, but would appear white; this has been remarkably illustrated by Professor Robison. Some bodies absorb one colored ray, others another, while they reflect the rest. This is the cause of color in bodies. A red body, for instance, reflects the red rays and absorbs the rest. A white body reflects all the rays, and absorbs none; while a black body, on the contrary, absorbs all the rays, and reflects none:[45] this shows, that black colored apparel is very improper during the heat of summer, or in tropical climates.

[There is one difficulty scarcely mentioned, and surely
not accounted for, in the preceding chapter: i.e. _How are we
to reconcile the creation of light on the first day, and the
creation of the sun not until the fourth?_

This has been a standing proposition since the revival
of learning. There can be no doubt but the account of the
creation, arrangement and nature of the world, as given
by Moses, is correct; and would so appear to the most
philosophically scientific, could we ascertain certainly
the meaning of the sacred historian, and did we understand
perfectly the phenomena of nature.

It is reasonable to suppose that the discoveries in natural
philosophy would tend to influence the explanations of Moses’
account. This is the fact. These discoveries have produced two
theories in regard to light: The _vibratory_, or Cartesian; and
the _corpuscular_, or Newtonian.

The Newtonian theory supposes the sun to be the original
and principal source of light; and that light is emitted
from the sun’s surface in inconceivably small _corpuscles_,
in such rapid succession, and in straight lines, as to seem
a continuous ray, though, in reality, the particles are a
thousand miles apart in their approach to the earth.

This is the most popular of modern theories, and the only
one, as I recollect, employed by commentators in illustrating
the account of Moses; or rather in solving the difficulty by
reconciling this theory with his account.

Some have supposed the sun was created long before, our
earth, and that his beams took effect on our earth, as now, on
the fourth day from his creation. Others have supposed that
the sun and earth were created _simultaneously_, but that the
sun’s beams did not fully penetrate our atmosphere, so as to
make himself distinctly visible as now, until the fourth day.
In both these cases it is supposed that the words of Moses,
in regard to the creation of the sun on the fourth day, are
to be interpreted of his _appearance_, and _influence_ on the
earth, by dispensing light. But this does not account for the
_existence_ of light _from the first to the fourth day_. This
is an insuperable objection here.

Finding the foregoing theories pressed with this
insurmountable difficulty, other commentators have supposed,
Light was a real substance, created _simultaneously_, and in
conjunction with the original chaotic mass of our earth; and
when God said “Let there be light, and there was light,” He,
by his divine power, caused the chaotic light to separate
itself from the earth, and, departing, _to condense_ in the
body of the sun; or, as some would probably say, in view of Dr.
Herschell’s solar discoveries, in the phosphoric clouds which
surround the real body of the sun. In this case, if the light
concentrated in the body of the sun, then that luminary must be
a body of _condensed light_: if in the solar phosphoric clouds
of Dr. Herschell, then those clouds would be _condensed light_.
This body of condensed light is considered the source of our
solar light, which flies off from it in the form of rays or
beams.

DR. URE, in his Chemical Dictionary, article LIGHT, takes
this view. He says, “We learn from scripture, that light
pre-existed before this luminary (the sun) and that its
_subsequent condensation_ in his orb was a particular act of
Almighty Power. The phosphorescence of minerals, buried since
the origin of things in the bowels of the earth, coincides
strictly with the Mosaic account of the creation. We shall
therefore regard light as the first born element of chaos,
as an independent essence, universally distributed through
the mineral, vegetable, and animal world, capable of being
disengaged from its latent state by various natural and
artificial operations.”

This theory, as I understand Dr. Ure’s view, has _two_
advantages, and _three_ disadvantages. It accounts for the
production of light on the _first_ day, as Moses says. It
also accounts for the _artificial production_ of light by
friction between bodies which have never been exposed to solar
light, by combustion, compression, &c. For though it supposes
light “subsequently condensed” in the sun, I presume it does
not suppose _all_ the light thus transferred from the earth,
and condensed: much of it is latent, and combined with other
substances, from which it is evolved by friction, combustion,
compression, &c.

But this ingenious theory, which is mentioned by our
author, and attributed to Dr. Wall, is pressed with _three_
difficulties:

1. It does not suppose the existence of the sun until the
_fourth_ day, and of course no common centre of attraction to
the earth and other planets. But it is impossible to conceive
of the _safe existence_ of the planets _previous_ to the
existence of their common center, which now regulates their
order and motion. This is an insuperable difficulty, unless we
resort to a “particular act of Almighty Power.”

2. If the body of the sun be “condensed light,”
_abstracted_ from the earth, the scene of its creation, then
we must suppose that _a body more than a million times
greater than the earth was drawn off from it_, which indeed
would require an “act of Almighty Power,” and is utterly
irreconcilable to the laws of attraction.

3. This view also destroys the idea of the sun’s being
an opake and habitable globe, unless we could conceive the
inhabitants capable of dwelling in “condensed light;” which
supposition is at variance with all our ideas of rational
existence. Hence it robs the mind of the pleasing and almost
intuitively correct idea of the sun’s being a habitable globe.

These difficulties appeared so great that others, and
particularly Dr. Adam Clarke, have offered a new mode of
interpretation, founded on the Newtonian theory as improved by
Dr. Herschell. Dr. Clarke supposes that _caloric_, or latent
heat, was produced on the first day, when God said, “let there
be light; and there was light.” In this case he considers that
latent heat and latent light are, probably, the same: or that
it is the same subtile substance diffused throughout creation,
which is capable of producing heat and light, when properly
excited.

Yet, in his remarks on the sun, he embraces Dr. Herschell’s
ideas of the sun’s real body being opake and habitable,
surrounded by phosphoric clouds which are the source of our
solar light. Of course the Doctor only transfers the source
of light from the real body of the sun to these phosphoric
clouds with which he is invested. Our solar light then comes by
_impulsion_ from these clouds, and not from the sun’s real body.

These clouds are supposed to give light to the _Solar_
inhabitants also, the intensity of which is regulated by a
stratum of clouds placed _below_ the _outer_ phosphoric clouds,
and which defends the sun’s real body from too great degree of
light.

This is Dr. Herschell’s supposition, and seems to be pretty
well established.

This ingenious theory solves the difficulty under notice,
by supposing that _caloric_, and not light, is intended in
the third verse, where God said, “Let there be light.” And by
supposing latent light, as well as latent heat, it seems to
provide for the well known existence of light in combination
with many, if not all, terrestrial substances; and yet it
refers to the sun as the principal source of light, which
according to this interpretation, was not necessary to the
existence of the substance intended in the third verse--“Let
there be light, and there was light.”

This theory has another most excellent suggestion, viz:
that the heat excited by the sun at the earth’s surface, is
produced by the luminous rays of the sun combining with the
caloric in the atmosphere, and other substances at the surface
of the earth. This suggestion supposes a very close affinity,
if not identity in the matter of light and heat.

Although this explanation approaches much nearer a
satisfactory solution of the difficulty in question, yet it is
by no means unembarrassed.

In the first place it is built upon a singular translation
of a word. The text, according to this theory, should be, “And
God said let there be _caloric_, and there was caloric.”
This may be the text; but I cannot help thinking, that a bias
to a system of philosophy, and a strong desire to _cut_ the
difficulty rather than _solve_ it, suggested this translation.
The text seems to have been so generally and uniformly
understood of light, it would be difficult to alter it. It
would be better to suspect a defect in our knowledge of the
source and nature of light.

Again: this view seems to suppose a _consecutive_ creation,
which is at variance with a seemingly well settled opinion,
in regard to the _Solar System_, and even at variance with
Dr. Clarke’s own remarks on Gen. chap. i, v. 2. On this verse
he says: “God seems at _first_ to have created the elementary
principles of _all things_.”

Finally: as his view is Newtonian, it is liable to all
the objections to which that theory is liable: such as the
_diminution_ which would take place at the source from whence
the light came; and the _destructive force_ with which it would
fall at the surface of the earth.

These considerations, with others, have influenced many of
the most learned and acute philosophers to look for another
theory. Our own countryman, Dr. Franklin, felt them. He says,
in a letter dated April 23, 1752, in reference to the theory,
of light being _particles of matter driven off from the sun’s
surface_; “Must not the smallest portion conceivable have, with
such a motion, a force exceeding that of a twenty-four pounder
discharged from a cannon? Must not the sun diminish exceedingly
by such a waste of matter, and the planets, instead of drawing
near to him, as some have feared, recede to greater distances,
through the lessoned attraction? Yet these particles with this
amazing motion, will not drive before them, or remove the
least, and slightest dust they meet with, and the sun appears
to continue of his ancient dimensions, and his attendants move
in their ancient orbits.”

He then supposes the phenomena of light may be more
satisfactorily solved by supposing a subtle fluid, universally
diffused, which is invisible _when at rest_, but _becomes
visible when put in motion_, by affecting the nerves of the
eye, as the vibrations of the air affect the ear, and produce
the sensation of sound; and that the different degrees of
intensity in the vibrations, will account for the different
colors. _See Nicholson’s Encyclopedia_, LIGHT.

This is the _vibratory_ or Cartesian system of light. As
already suggested, it supposes the existence of a subtle,
luminiferous ether, diffused throughout the universe, pervading
every particle of matter, and is capable of being put in
motion, so as to become visible, by the sun, as the grand
natural _excitant_, friction, combustion, compression, &c.
The _laws_ of the vibrations of this luminiferous fluid, are
precisely the same with those ascertained, and determined, in
regard to light as commonly understood. This luminiferous fluid
is to be considered an elementary substance, and was created
when the different substances composing the chaotic mass were
created. At its first creation, like caloric, it was in a
_latent_ state, as no excitant as yet had put it in motion.

It is to be understood, therefore, that the substances of
each planet in the _Solar System_, as well as the sun himself,
were created _simultaneously_ in a chaotic state, at their
proper relative distances from each other: that the requisite
quantity of each elementary substance was present in each mass:
but as caloric, and this luminiferous ether were _latent_,
these masses were solid, frozen lumps; inactive and lifeless;
and darkness necessarily prevailed. This then was the original
condition of the elements of our Solar System, according to
the scriptures. “And the earth was without form and void; and
darkness was upon the face of the deep.” Gen. i, 2.

In order, therefore, to produce a quickening in these
masses, which rendered them _soft_, it was only necessary to
call the latent caloric, and this luminiferous ether into
action, which would agitate, and bring to light the whole
mass, and thus commence the arrangement and organization of
the Solar System. However, as there was no exciting cause
_then_ in operation, it is evident the Almighty must have given
the _first_ impulse to these elements. This he did, and the
important fact is recorded by Moses in these words: “AND THE
SPIRIT OF GOD MOVED UPON THE FACE OF THE GREAT DEEP,” Jehovah
saying at the same time, “LET THERE BE LIGHT.”

Here is the Mosaic account of the production of light,
and possibly heat also, which took place on the _first_ day.
The same process went on _simultaneously_ in the sun and
planets, and the continued action cleared up their respective
atmospheres, and the _sun_ became visible at the earth’s
surface on the _fourth_ day. Hence, the sun was said to have
been _made_ on the fourth day.

This solution of the difficulty is consistent with the
account of Moses; and also all the well ascertained phenomena
of light can be satisfactorily explained by it. It will
naturally lead the mind to observe the resemblance between the
phenomena of light and heat, and impel us to the conclusion,
that light, or vision, is the _effect_ of a material cause, as
heat is of caloric: and it is natural to suppose this cause
is in the same relation to light, that caloric is to heat. Of
course we should conclude that light, or the luminiferous ether
in a latent state, enters into combination with all substances,
as does caloric; and at the same time a large proportion of it
is _free_, or in motion, and of course sensible to the eye, as
_free_ caloric is to the sense of feeling. Moreover we must
conclude that this latent light is capable of being set free
or evolved by the exciting influence of the sun, as also by
friction, compression, combustion, chemical action, &c. It
will be of advantage, therefore, to establish the fact of the
existence of _latent_ light, in combination with terrestrial
substances.

That this is the fact may be proven by a single reflection
on the process of _combustion_. It is a daily observation that
light is produced by _burning_ bodies. Let us suppose these
bodies burnt at midnight in a close room; still light will
be given out copiously and constantly. _Whence_ this light?
The natural and obvious answer is, it was in combination in
a _latent state_ with the burning bodies, and by combustion
it was set free, and thrown out, and thus put the surrounding
luminiferous ether in motion.

It is said by some, the light evolved in this case is not
from the burning bodies, but from the oxygen which is supplied
by the air to support the combustion. This does not alter the
case at all: for then the light was in combination with the
oxygen, and was invisible, being in a latent state, until it
was set free from the oxygen by combustion.

The same conclusion is obtained in the process of
_compression_ and _expansion_. If atmospheric air, or oxygen
be suddenly compressed in a glass syringe; or if a glass ball,
filled with the latter, be suddenly broke _in vacuo_, a _flash
of light_ is instantly perceived. In this case the light
suddenly becomes visible, which was invisible before, being
latent in combination with the air. (URE.)