The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-08-25
KINETIC STABILITY.
BY ROBERT STEVENSON, C.E.
FOURTH PAPER.

are endowed with this resistance is the ex-
perlmental proof given in my pam phlet
and which am trying to get Professor LIE
Conte and other professors to verify.
The mathematical proof, although not
very difficult, is not quite suited for news
paper readers, but has been submitted to
two mathematical professors, who will pass
on it by and by.
The common-sense proof is what pro-
pose to give here. Mathematicians may
scout the idea of common-sense proof, but
SO per cent of all the causes OF real life are
discovered and proven by common-sense
proof.
We know that body like car or pro-
jectile or planet moving with velocity in a
straight line can be DETECTED at any angle
from that line by means of certain force
acting along the line of DETECTION, and il
the motion of the body is not altered by
the force of detection, and the DETECTING
force always acts at right angles to the
moving or tangential force and that if the
moving and DETECTING force be equal to
each other the body will move in the cir
conference of a circle. We also know that
body may be compelled to move in the
circumference of circle, either by being
attached by string to the center of the
circle, as Newton supposed the planets
were attached to the sun by the force of at
traction; or by circular guide, such as
we see when a car on a track describes
a circular curve.
1t is very rare occurrence to find body
describing a curve without either of the
above causes. OF course there is neither a
string nor guide in the case of the plan
cts, but Sir Isaac Newton's imagination
supplied the next best thing, which he
called the invisible bond of attachment,
mutual attraction, not simple attraction
of the sun, but the mutual attraction of
both planets and sun.
The cause of such an attractive force has
never been explained, and the fact that it
appears to occur in the case of the magnet
gave great support to the theory until
Faraday found that the attraction of the
magnet was caused by the inductive infu-
ence of elastic motion. Since then the
theory of the innate force of attraction, or
action at distance, has been at discount
with the leaders of science.
Of course, every natural philosopher who
knows anything of the Newtonian theory
of gravitation knows that if body in mo-
ton in horizontal plane will not fall six
teen feet vertically in vacuum during the
first second of its motion, then the New
tonian theory is false theory. And when
that fact is proven, with the com leteness
and certainty which Professor LIE Conte
can prove it if he chooses by experiment,
the world will then be on the tiptoe of
and true theory will produce for the benefit
of mankind. The new theory does not ex-
plain the cause of attraction, although 1t
explains the cause of gravitat1on. Crawl
tation is fact which we have always
present with us, but to say that attraction
is the cause of gravitation is an error and
o falsehood.
| find it necessary to dwell on the dis
tinction and difference between gravitation
and attraction, as some people think
deny the existence of gravitation. The IL
luStration already given of the car moving
relatively along the resultant diagonal of
its two transverse momenta shows what
consider gravitation to be, and although
the car virtually moves in the direction of
the power-house situated on the resultant
line. yet | deny that the engine in the
power-house is causing that motion, be-
cause have already shown that the real
cause of the resultant motion is due to the
action OF the two transverse components.
Now let us see how the two tranve rse
components of kinetic energy and kinetic
stability produce resultant central force
or guiding action to cause the planet to
describe curve. We know that when
planet describes a circular orbit with uni
form velocity there is no tangential force
acting ON the body. The whole stress is
one of tension along the radius vector. But
if the planet was moving with accelerated
velocity in its orbit then there would be
both tangential force and tension along the
radius vector acting simultaneously.
Should planet be acted on tangentiallv
by constant and uniform force its orbital
velocity would be uniformly accelerated or
retarded, according as the force was posi-
tive or negative, and the tension along the
radius vector would increase with the
square of the orbital velocity.
Now to keep such a planet in its orbit,
the force of attraction would have to in
crease enormously, without the mass of
the sun or planet increasing one iota.
In nature such accelerated motion would
increase the radius vector, and Jupiter,
which at one time had whirled round the
sun in the same period as Mercury, now.
although moving with much greater
velocity, las much longer period. But
if the attraction of the sun could not keep
Jupiter revolving in Mercurys orbit on
account of its accelerating orbital velocity,
how, l ask, can the attraction of the sun
keep it now revolving when the force of
attraction decreases as the square of the
distance increases? l ask Professors Bar
nard or Soule, or any other professor of
astronomy to explain this attractive para
dox, in the pages of THE CALL.