Extracted text
E. Dwight, has utterly failed to conceive the first principle of the Koreshan Cosmogony, or our conception of the inside theory of the world. He has not opened his eyes sufficiently, to even know what we teach on the subject. If he has not sense enough to know our general statement, as plain as we have made it, he is not capable of. criticising any subject wisely.
He mentions “Prof. Lyon’s old theory of a hollow globe.” A few years since Mr. Symmes put forth a theory that there was an opening at the north pole, into the interior of the earth which was a hollow shell, and that this shell was inhabited. This opening was called “ Symmes’ hole.” We have never seen any other work or theory of a hollow globe.
The Koreshan Cosmogony is an entirely different thing. It teaches that the world is a shell or hollow sphere; that the surface upon which we dwell is a concavity, instead of a convex surface. It has a diameter of about eight thousand miles, and a circumference of twenty-five thousand miles. The stars are focal points of energy; not worlds. They are the reflections 1 of light passing from a stellar center or focal point, and mirrored by the metallic and mineral planes or laminae which comprise the earth’s shell.
We demonstrate this concavity, by physical science, employing the facts (not theories) given as the observations of every critical physicist. In applying the term critical, we mean critical as to observation of facts, but not rational in the formulation of theories as related to those facts. The use of the theodolite, in the relation of the apparent horizontal to the apparent depression of linear perspective, destroys every ghost of a chance to sustain the old theory.
The telescope does not reveal anything. Not till so-called scientific men can agree as to the depth of the atmosphere; the point at which it abruptly ceases, and the relative density of the attenuated ether beyond, can they state anything positively, concerning distant space.
We are told that space is filled with an ether, the relative tenuity of which is unknown, but that it nevertheless is a substance. How thin is this substance? We are not told whether it is as subtile as electricity or not. Will some of our great “scientists” give to us, for the sake of argument, its relative density as compared to our atmosphere? We know something of the specific density of the oxygen and nitrogen which surrounds, as is supposed, our earth.
The orbit of our earth, according to so-called science, is over six hundred millions of miles. This distance is traversed by the earth in about 365 days. A world surrounded by a thin atmosphere, is passing through space filled with a substance. The possibility of a ball of thin atmosphere passing through another atmosphere, somewhat more attenuate, at the rate of thirty miles per second, is so ridiculously absurd that a child ten years of age would not entertain the idea for an instant, except for the fact that he had been taught the theory from infancy.
Electricity, an energy so attenuate or thin as to be regarded as not even a substance by the absurd “thinkers” of modern times, but only a “mode of motion,” will cause so much friction in passing through a solid silver wire, that it will reduce it to white heat or even to molten liquid.
If it were known to modern science, that at the termination of our atmosphere there was an atmosphere of a definitely known tenuity, like hydrogen, then the power of refraction could be calculated and definitely ascertained. Electricity in passing through our atmosphere, will cut and burn the oxygen and nitrogen of which the atmosphere is composed, by the friction it produces against their atoms. What, would be the effect of the ether, through which our atmosphere is passing at the rate of thirty miles per second, upon the air of our earth?
If a correct calculation of eclipses now proves the present theory true, then the same correctness would prove the Ptolemaic or Chaldean systems true, for, accompanying both these systems, stellar and planetary phenomena, such as eclipses, occultations, transits, etc., were as accurately prognosticated as by the present theory. This proves nothing. We can calculate stellar and planetary phenomena just the same, taking our system as our basis, but this does not prove it true. The establishment of its truth or fallacy must rest entirely upon another basis.
Mr. Dwight is evidently sore-headed upon the subject of Divine Revelation, and will no doubt do more “ twisting” to prove that early Christianity, which in one hundred years after the birth of Jesus had grown to such an extent as to disturb thrones and kingdoms, had its origin in nothing, than the screw-wheel of an Atlantic steamer does to propel a ship from New York to Liverpool. With all Mr. Dwight’s twisting, the man Jesus Christ has compelled the age to say, throughout the civilized world, 1890, because, about 1890 years ago such a man was born. This alone attests his . greatness. Our “sex theory” was his sex theory, and if Mr. Dwight doesn’t like it, he is under no obligation to embrace it.
Queries, Facts, Vagaries and Absurdities.
Vagary. The earth moves at the rate of thirty miles a second, through space filled with substance, without even causing a streak of atmosphere to be strung out in a long train in the wake of its motion, to say nothing of the destruction of the atmosphere, and then of the liquid and the solid substance, of which the earth is composed.
Absurdity. According to the Copernican system, the earth moves in an orbit because of the sun’s attraction. It is kept from being drawn into the sun by its tendency towards a straight line.
Query. Where does it get its momentum of repulsion, or movement In the straight line which keeps it from entering the sun? Will some one, posted in the Copernican system, help us out of the dilemma?
Vagary. “A ball set in motion through space,” (if space were a vacuum, which it is not,) “would forever move in a straight line.” Why? “Because it is inert, and has no power to stop.”
Query. If it takes a hundred billions of horse-power to overcome the inertia of rest in a given body, and set it in motion, how many horsepower will it take to resist the motion, caused by this one hundred billions of horse-power, in the same body, and set it at rest ?
F act. The inertia of motion is equal to the inertia of quiet.
F act. If the sun’s attraction for the earth moves it from a straight line, to assume the direction of orbitual motion, the resistance of the sun to the straight line would be in proportion to the square of the distance, and the diminution of speed would be in the same proportion. The speed would decrease in proportion to the departure of the earth from the direct motion, until the original impulse was exhausted, after which, the‘inertia would be the same, whether the earth was in motion or at a standstill.
Fact. If a ball set in motion through space would forever move because inert, it would not require the original impulse to continue its motion. This is only essential for its start-off. The original energy of momentum (push) could be removed, and the ball, because of its inertia, would never cease to go. If it be equally inert, whether in motion through vacuity or quiet in space, it would require no more force to draw it into the sun, from its motion in its orbit, than if it were quiet in space; for it would be as much at rest in one case as in the other.
Vagary. The Copernican system, to start off with, in order to meet the fact of motion and relation, must have an absolute vacuum. Why ? Because, if there were substance in space, let it be ever so tenuous (thin) it would offer some resistance to the earth’s motion, and if it offered any resistance, it would spoil the theory of the exact balance between the motion in the straight line, and the sun’s attraction. Now, because without substance throughout space, the theory of the transmission of energy will not work, space, to accommodate the later theory, must be filled with ether.
Here is the fine point of adjustment. Just how thin can we make this “jelly,” (jelly-like, is the physicist’s own term,) to provide for the transmission of light, heat, electricity, gravity, etc., and not upset the theory of motion ? It must be just thick enough to permit the action of energy, but thin enough to obviate friction.
Absurdity. Now this becomes perfectly easy for the scientists, who always give their facts the bounce to accommodate themselves to any theory which they determine to maintain.
It is declared by the “scientist” that electricity is merely a mode of motion. It is not substance. Now this nothing is capable of so acting on this thin ether, as to set it to vibrating, and nothing (light, electricity, or other energy) is imparted from the. starting point of nothing, to the termination of the same nothing.
But this nothing, or mere mode of motion, which must be incalculably thinner than the tenuous ether which it sets in motion, will cause it to burn carbon tips in its passage through them, as in the arc electric combustion.
Just think of it. Carbon tips are filled through their interspaces, between their atoms, with a very tenuous (thin) jelly. Electricity, or nothing, sets this thin jelly in motion, and the motion of the jelly sets the atoms in motion, and the motion of the atoms sets them on fire, and we have the electric light, and the foundation of modern advanced thought, and so-called science.
Query. What is gravity?
Answer of modern science. “Gravic energy or gravity is a mode of motion.”
A mode of the motion of what? “ Why, of the thin ether, to be sure.”
What is it that pulls the earth out of a straight line, and makes it move in an orbit around the sun?
Answer of modern science. “It is a mode of motion imparted to the thin ether. This mode of motion pulls the earth so hard, that it causes it to depart from a straight course, and to assume the orbitual motion in a curved line.”
What is this called ? “Attraction of gravity.” Query. The sun, then, is the center of gravity for the earth, is it not?
Answer of modern science. Yes. Let the sun be directly overhead. Now throw a stone into the air towards the sun. It immediately falls towards the earth.
Query. What causes it to fall away from the sun, towards the earth.
Answer of modern science. It falls towards the earth because the kind of motion in the thin ether, called gravity or gravic energy, pulls it towards the earth.
Query. How does it occur that the same kind of motion can pull in opposite directions, at the same time?
Answer of modern science. We bounce that question.
The Flaming Sword · Vol. 1, No. 16 · 22 Mar 1890 · PDF p. 1