Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-01-26

very powerfully because they are so very
close together. If the motion that
holds them apart could be stopped. the
electron would fall in upon the proton.
Inhalation. Similarly. all of the chem
ical atoms-that is. the whole universe
if deprived of all the inner atomic
motions would apparently be annihilat-
ed. In place of the universe would
be void. If the process were reversed,
void. separated into positive and
negative unit electrical ,<charges, and
endowed with immense jenergy of mo-
tons in characteristic orbits, would be-
come a universe. That would be the
primary step in evolution itself.
How did that primary step take
place? Science does not pretend to
know
THE Hebrew Scripture SAYS: Tn the
beginning God created the heaven and
the earth. And the earth was without
form and void; and darkness was upon
The face of the deep. And God
light
I'm this there is nothing which con-
tradicts what science has disclosed.
NOW. is Abbot an evolutionist, or
a creationist, or is he on the fence?
He is an evolutionist, but may not deny
that 1t may be creative evolution"
x x \
1t must be pointed cut that there are
two distinct hypothesis concerning light;
one assumes that it is material--"cor-
puScular" is the technical word - the
other is that light is only vibration of
the atoms of the ether which fills all
space. II light be matter, it can be alb
SoIped IN infinite space and be lost as
nght, but 1t remains matter floating in
space. and becomes raw material to be
recreated in making new worlds. 'for
matter never ceases to exist"
Or. Abbot says smithsonian report.
1927, page 1891: "All that We know of
astronomy depends on radiation. But
the nature of radiation itself is more
mysterious imam was supposed 80 wears
ago AT the end of the nineteenth CEN
Jury IL was agreed that radiation is a
transverse wave of vibration, set up in
the lumlniferous ether by the stimulus
OF tne violent internal motions of the
molecules OF heated substances. All the
Phenomena of the propagation of light
hlghly complex and varied though thew
are, seemed to be explained satisfac-
torlly IN this way. Yet now the newly
gained knowledge of the composition
ana interior structure of the atoms. in
cludlng the phenomena of radioactiyity
seems 10 require reconsideration of
the. older hypothesis of corpuscular
radlatlon. which Newton preferred"
30 again light Is recognized as mat
yer pouring out from the sun contin-
uousiy and filling our universe with
tangible material from the flues of that
great furnace.
Discussing this same topic. DR.. Hevl
says In an article published in the Sci
entlnc Monthly, October, 1925, "The
Inertia of Energy:
Inc total energy radiated bv orr
sun per second is enormous. Converted
INTO Its mass equivalent, it gives the
rather surprising figure Of four million
tons per second This is not so easy To
detect as might appear. Tor so super
enormous IS the suns mass that he is
GOOD Tor this rate of expenditure for
something like ten million million wears.
90 IL seems that our sun and all other
stars are Slowly diSsolving into light"
The enormity of the sun accounts for
tile supplies of its fuel, and not outside
sources renewing supplies. Our human
period OF observation is too short (only
q lew centurieS) for any measurement
showing loss of the suns mass. even
though its fuel bill does amount To-
Tour million tons second. Light Is
matter: light Is convertible into heat
ana neat into energy: so matter NAV
be converted into energy, and again en-
crgy may be reconverted into matter
and. out of dissolved light, worlds may
be formed.
Matter energy. therefore. remains
truly indestructible. DR.. Heyl. SPEAKING
OF the rather new doctrine of the in
of matter and energy.
says:
But how can matter disappearp
What then becomes of the law of
of matter. established
over century ago by Lavoisier. and
long regarded as great and perma-
nent contribution to science? And how
can energy appear without q COR
responding disappearance of energy else
where? What of the law of conserya-
lion OF energy. which has. since it's
foundation, enjoyed an esteem equal to
at accorded the law of conservation
of matter? The doctrine of inertia of
energy declares unflinchingly that both
laws are wrong. that matter may ac-
tually disappear as SUCH and enc
N equivalent quantity appear in
stead. In place of the two former lew.
We have one broader princiule--the con-
;erVation of matter energy"
SO the sun takes natter and makes
ight OF 1t, and recreation takes light
ana changes 1t back into matter.
Now are We the sons of light"
(Copyright, 1929, by Paul " ColiinaN