The Flat Earth and Gravity

The Fall of an Apple

The Earth Review No. 5, October 1895

It must be conceded by those acquainted with the Theory of Gravitation, as formulated by Sir Isaac Newton, that it is in a very unsatisfactory condition. This no doubt is due to the fact that EXPERIMENT, the absolute ESSENTIAL of all true philosophy, was not thought to be a necessary element in the formation of this scientific hypothesis. Hence, in a practical investigation concerning this so-called “ law of nature,” it is absolutely necessary that the literal evidence of our God given senses be not utterly ignored! This also is true in respect to the meaning of words and sentences ! The aim and objects of tr u e PHILOSOPHY should be to both guard and fortify our minds against all speculating ideas ; but alas the popularly accepted philosophy is absolutely nothing but speculations or guesses, hence, what is termed “ the progress of astronomy ” is nothing more than one speculation supplanting a previous speculation, which in its turn is supplanted by another speculation! This is the essence of (so-called) science ! Lord F. Bacon proves himself to be a student of human nature as well as philosophy. He says, “ imaginary systems of philosophy derive no small charm ; for to the human mind, the fictitious drama is more attractive than true history.”

We trust that the exposure we shall give in this series of papers will cause every lover of truth to join issue with us in dissenting from, and protesting against the false and illogical conclusions deduced from the FALL of an apple in an orchard at Woolsthorpe. The importance of this theory to the Copernican system of astronomy, will be clearly seen from the fact that Lardner informs us that it “ resulted in nothing less than a complete discovery of the system of the World.” Therefore it necessarily follows that if the accepted theory of gravitation is PRACTICALLY DEMONSTRATED to be an unfounded piece of guess work, having no foundation in Nature or Fact, then the whole system of Modern Theoretical Science must fall to the ground like an house of cards, leaving nothing to mark its existence, save it be that which marks the bursting of a soap bubble.

Before proceeding further I would here say, that while names must necessarily be cited in these articles, we cast no aspersions at any person. We believe that scientists are actuated by the purest of motives in all that they have, and are doing, but at the same time they are verily guilty , with the rest of the world which accepts the system of modern astronomy ; of neglect and indifference, in that they have ; to use the confession of Herschel, “ TAKEN FOR GRANTED at the outset, the Copernican system of astronomy.” We most earnestly desire that official astronomers and geographers would, without educational bias, examine the vital elements of their “ systeai of the universe, ” and we feel sure that they would come to the same logical conclusions propounded both by Lock and Bacon, viz., “ The certainty of conclusions can never rise beyond the certainty of the premises upon which they are built,” and, “ if the origin from which a system of philosophy is derived be a false and erroneous one, whatever emanates from it must of necessity be false also.”

Concisely, the theory of “ Universal Gravitation” is thus expressed; Every particle of matter attracts every other particle of matter; and, in proportion to the density of a planet, is its power of attraction; and the greater is this power of attraction the nearer each body approaches the other.

The Earth Review No. 5, October 1895

We will now proceed to enquire: Is THERE IN THE UNIVERSE ANY SUCH “ FORCE ” OR “LAW ” AS THE “ LAW OF GRAVITATION ”?

Our answer; with that of many “ eminent scientists,” whose evidence we shall adduce in confirmation and justification of our position and protest: is, NO, decidedly not. This our negation is founded, as will eventually be seen, upon PRACTICAL INVESTIGATION, But first we shall adduce the evidence of scientists.

1st.— C. Vernon Boys, Esq., F.R.S., A.R.S.M., M.R.I., in his paper, “ The Newtonian Constant of Gravitation” says, “ G, represents that mighty principle under the influence of which every star, planet aad satellite in the universe pursues its allotted course. Unlike any other know physical influence, it is independent of medium, it knows no refraction, it cannot cast a shadow. It is a

mysterious power which NO MAN CAN EXPLAIN, OF ITS PROPAGATION through SPACE, ALL MEN ARE IGNORANT . . . I cannot contemplate this mystery, at which we ignorantly wonder, without thinking of the altar on Mars’ hill. When will a St. Paul arise able to declare it unto us ? Or is gravitation, like life, a mystery that can never be solved?”

2nd.— Professor W. B. Carpenter, C.B., F.R .S., in his paper, Nature and Law, says, “ The first of the great achievements of Newton in relation to our present subject, was a piece of purely Geometrical reasoning. ASSUMING two forces to act on a body, of which one should be capable of imparting to it uniform motion in a straight line, whilst the other should attract it towards a fixed point in accordance with Galileo’s law of gravity, he demonstrated that the path of the body would be deflected into a curve . . . The idea of continuous onward motion in a straight line, as the result of an original impulsive force not antagonised or affected by any other^—formalised by Newton as his first ‘ law of motion ’—is not borne out by any acquired experience, and does not seem likely to be ever thus verified. For in no experiment we have it in our power to make, can we entirely eliminate the antagonising effects of friction and atmospheric resistance; and thus all movement that is subject to this retardation, and is not sustained by any fresh action of the impelling force, must come to an end. Hence the conviction commonly entertained that Newton’s first ‘ law ’ of motion must be true, cannot be philosophically admitted to be anything more than a probability.

WE HAVE NO PROOF, AND IN THE NATURE OF THINGS CAN NEVER GET ONE, OF THE ASSUMPTION OF THE ATTRACTIVE FORCE EXERTED BY THE EARTH, OR BY ANY OF THE BODIES OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM, UPON OTHER BODIES AT A DISTANCE.

Newton himself strongly felt that the impossibility of rationally accounting for action at a distance through an intervening vacuum, was the weak point of HIS system. All that we can be said to know is, that, which we learn from our own experience. Now, in regard to the sun’s attraction for the Earth and Planets, WE HAVE NO CERTAIN EXPERIENCE AT ALL. Unless we could be transported to his surface, we have no means of experientially comparing Solar gravity with Terrestrial gravity; and if we could ascertain this, we should be no nearer the determination of his attraction for bodies at a distance. .THE DOCTRINE OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION THEN, IS A PURE ASSUMPTION.”— The Modern Review, Oct., 1880.

3rd.— In “ Letters to the British Association” Professor Bernstein says, “The theory that motions are produced through material attraction is absurd . . . Attributing such a power to mere matter, which is PASSIVE BY NATURE, is a supreme illusion . . it is a lovely and easy theory to satisfy any man’s mind, but when the practical test comes, it falls all to pieces and becomes one of the most ridiculous theories to common sense and judgment. I agree with you (R. Stevenson, Esq.) that if the power of material attraction existed, it would indeed be a wonderful miracle. Such a condition as laid down by Sir Isaac Newton’s law of gravitation would disprove all natural phenomena . . To -ascribe, for instance, the flow' and ebb of the tides to the attraction of the Moon is clearly absurd...To prove positively that the motions of the Universe-cannot be produced by attraction, I Will hinge three magnetized globes in 'Such a manner, that they should in their revolving motion attract each other, and thereby prove that a motion as natural as that described by the Sun, the Earth and the Moon, can never be produced by a mutual material attraction as described and taught in Universities and Colleges. The whole theory of attraction, and all scientific problems as believed by mankind, is not only a fable, - but a fake, great enough to destroy God, Truth and Common-sense, and will, and must, sooner or later, fall. It is clear that all, theories based on gravitation in the scientific world are lame and perverted. Material attraction is surely one of

mankind’s nightmares; THERE IS NO UNIVERSAL ATTRACTION OF MATERIAL MATTER. All and every phenomena incomprehensible to common - sense, is, and will remain a fake. Mere theories that within millions of years things will be this way or that way are ridiculous guesses.”— Transportation, Nov., 1894.

4th.— Sir Richard Phillips in his Million of Facts (p. 371) says, “ It is a principle never to be lost sight of, that circular motion is a necessary result of equal action and re-action in contrary directions; for the harmony would be disturbed by 'variation of distance, if the motions were rectilinear. The same distance, that is, the same action and re-action, are, therefore, only to be preserved by reciprocal circular motions. NO ATTRACTION AND NO PROJECTILE FORCE ARE THEREFORE NECESSARY, and THEIR INVENTION must be regarded as BLUNDERS of a superstitious age . . . If the bodies came neat while moving the same way, there would be no mutual re-action, and they would go together for want of re-action, and not owing to that MECHANICAL IMPOSSIBILITY, called attraction.”

5th.— Professor Airy informs us that, “ Newton was the first person who made a calculation of the figure of the earth on the theory of gravitation. He took the following SUPPOSITION as the only one to which his theory could be applied. He ASSUMED the earth to be a fluid. This fluid matter he ASSUMED to be equally dense in every part . . For trial of his theory he SUPPOSED the ASSUMED fluid earth to be a spheroid. In this manner he INFERRED that the form of the earth would be a spheroid in which the length of the shorter is to the longer, or equatorial diameter, in the proportion of 29 to 230. ’'—Lectures on Astronomy, 5th, Ed., p. 194.