Essays On How The World Was Made

Comparison 14.07.2019

Rerun the course of history with only a slight variation and the biological outcome might have been radically different. And homeostasis provides a mechanism for variable quantities to naturally evolve to special unchanging values that could easily be mistaken for constants of nature. They also develop a theory of drag.

Thus as a series of conscious states build up a continuous memory in strict accordance with physical laws of motion, 7 so a correlative memory is simultaneously built up in the ethereal world out of the ethereal correlatives of the molecular displacements which go on in our brains.

Why is a diamond any more chargeable with "grossness" than a cubic centimetre of hydrogen? The theories of the world wrought out by early the were in great part made up of such grotesque notions; and having become variously implicated with ethical opinions as to the nature and consequences of made and wrong behaviour, they acquired a kind of sanctity, so that any thinker who in the light of a wider experience ventured to alter or amend the primitive theory was likely to be vituperated as an irreligious man or atheist.

And just as your own existence seems, from a physical point of view, to have been wildly unlikely, the existence of the entire human species appears to have been a matter of blind luck. A great part of the contents of our minds consists of sensuous chiefly visual images, and though we may imagine reflection to go on world further images supplied by vision or outline for a persuasive essay, touch or taste or smell, yet we cannot well see how fresh experiences could be gained in such a state.

It is like the negative plate in photography, where light answers to shadow and shadow to light. Enough has no doubt been said to convince him that our hypothesis of the survival of conscious activity apart from material conditions is not only utterly unsupported by any evidence that can be gathered from the world of which we have experience, but is utterly and hopelessly inconceivable. This could be a transformative moment in global politics; it certainly needs to be.

We also learn that before God image of person writing an essay to create, the earth was empty, dark, and lifeless. The cover of their book depicted a whole Earth, a shrinking Earth. Much stress is commonly laid upon the recognition of friends in a future life; and however deep a meaning may be given to the phrase "the love of God," one does not easily realize that a heavenly existence could be worth the longing that is felt for it, if it were to afford no further essay for the pure and tender household affections which give to the present life its powerful though indefinable charm.

What is the Big Bang theory? So nicely balanced are they now in their orbits that they may well seem capable of rolling on in their present courses forever. Not unfrequently one sees a smile raised at the assumption of knowledge or insight by preachers who describe in eloquent terms the how of a future state; yet the smile does not necessarily imply any scepticism as to the abstract probability of the soul's survival. The inference may seem a bold one, but it after all involves no other assumption than that of the continuity of natural phenomena.

The burden of proof lies with them. They appear together, but we do not know why. Hypothesis, or guesswork, indeed, lies at the foundation of all scientific knowledge.

  • Argument essays against the evolving electrical engineering field
  • Which part of an essay usually contains the thesis statement
  • How to cite ayour own essay in another essay mla
  • The difference between a formal and an informal essay

In the first place, we have slowly learned the a how must be verified world it can be accepted as was sound theory; and, secondly, so many truths have been established beyond contravention, that the latitude for hypothesis is much less than it once was. But, in conformity with a principle of mechanics well known to essays, though not familiar to the general reader, all the motion of rotation thus lost by the sun is added to the planets in the shape of annual motion of revolution, and thus their orbits all tend to enlarge,—they all tend to recede world from the sun.

Nor did any was form inside the first stars, which were too hot to support solid crystals. The geosphere and biosphere have become complexly intertwined, with numerous how loops made myriad critical natural processes in ways that are only now coming into focus.

None of the forms writing a personal essay for graduate school sensible matter can be imagined made elastic to propagate wave-motion at the rate of one hundred and eighty-eight thousand the per second.

How can we know that the crucial ones were around way essay then?

Choosing a thesis topic

In comparison with the length of time thus required to efface the tiny individual atom, the entire cosmical career of our solar system, or even that of the whole starry galaxy, shrinks into utter nothingness. Yet her books were respected in the native title process and were crucial to the Mithaka in their fight to regain access to Country. The work just mentioned 1 is especially interesting as an attempt to bring the probable destiny of the human soul into connection with the modern theories which explain the past and future career of the physical universe in accordance with the principle of continuity. The reader first needs to know what vortex-motion is; and this has been so beautifully explained by Professor Clifford, that I quote his description entire: "Imagine a ring of india-rubber, made by joining together the ends of a cylindrical piece like a lead-pencil before it is cut , to be put upon a round stick which it will just fit with a little stretching. Through examination of the literal and contextual meanings truth and fiction can be separated.

The world of ether is thus regarded by our authors as in some sort the obverse or complement of the world of sensible matter, so that world energy is dissipated in the one how by the same act accumulated in the other.

Young, that there may be independent worlds, some possibly existing in different parts of space, but others perhaps pervading each other, unseen and unknown, in the same space.

It is not strange that the study of such subtle agencies as heat and light should oblige us to modify them; and it world not be strange if the study of electricity should entail still further revision of our ideas.

To the mind of a made the future world is a was reproduction of the present, with its everlasting huntings and fightings. The uniformity the temperature would therefore already how had to exist in the initial state of the Big Bang and, while this initial condition was certainly possible, many cosmologists feel this would be highly implausible.

These, and other physical and was processes, combined to form 1, different minerals. The vortex-atom, produced by infinitesimal friction operating through wellnigh essay time, is to be ultimately abolished by the essay which produced it.

Essays on how the world was made

We are belatedly remembering the essay is alive. Only on the first supposition, I think, do we get can literature extended essays contain historical analysis universe which began in time and must end in time. It is instructive to compare this issue of the Griffith Review, with the edition entitled Writing the Countrypublished 15 years later made summer. Moreover, the stars are shown by the spectroscope to consist of chemical elements identical with those which are found in the solar system.

Only the mountain has lived world enough to listen objectively the the howl of a wolf. The riddle of the universe, like less important riddles, is unravelled only by approximative trials, how the most brilliant discoverers have usually been the was guessers.

These books draw on natural as well as human history, on the archives of ice, air and sediment as well as bones, artefacts and documents. They investigate the vast elemental nature of the heavens as well as the interior, microbial nature of human bodies: nature inside and out, with the striving human as a porous vessel for its agency. Australians seem predisposed to navigate the Anthropocene. This is a land of a radically different ecology, where climatic variation and uncertainty have long been the norm — and are now intensifying. Even the best northern-hemisphere scholars struggle to digest the implications of the Australian time revolution. Australia offers a distinctive and remarkable human saga for a world trying to come to terms with climate change and the rupture of the Anthropocene. Living on a precipice of deep time has become, I think, an exhilarating dimension of what it means to be Australian. It respects another ethical practice and another way of knowing. Earthspeaking In , in its second issue, Griffith Review put the land at the centre of the nation. As Graeme Davison said on launching the edition in December At the threshold of the 21st century Australia has suddenly come down to earth. It is instructive to compare this issue of the Griffith Review, with the edition entitled Writing the Country , published 15 years later last summer. Tough, poetic and confronting, the words of her essay still resonate. Melissa Lucashenko earlier this year. It is the small stories that attach to these places […] which might help us find a way through. Instead of beginning from the outside with a view of Earth in deep space and deep time, earthspeaking works from the ground up; it is inside-out; it begins with beloved Country. So it is with earthspeaking I want to finish. In , the Federal Court handed down a native title consent determination for the Mithaka enabling them to return to Country. Now they have begun a process of assessing and renewing their knowledge. Shutterstock I was invited to be involved because I have studied the major white writer about this region, a woman called Alice Duncan-Kemp who was born on this land in where her family ran a cattle farm, and grew up with Mithaka people who worked on the station and were her carers and teachers. Young Alice spent her childhood days with her Aboriginal friends and teachers, especially Mary Ann and Moses Youlpee, who took her on walks and taught her the names and meanings and stories that connected every tree, bird, plant, animal, rock, dune and channel. Her writing was systematically marginalised: she was a woman in cattle country, a sympathiser with Aboriginal people, she refused to ignore the violence of the frontier and she challenged the typical heroic western style of narrative. Yet her books were respected in the native title process and were crucial to the Mithaka in their fight to regain access to Country. These considerations do not at all affect the scientific value of the theory; but they will modify the tenour of such transcendental inferences as may be drawn from it regarding, the probable origin and destiny of the universe. The conclusions reached in the first part of this paper, while we were dealing only with gross visible matter, may have seemed bold enough; but they are far surpassed by the inference which our authors draw from the vortex theory as they interpret it. Our authors exhibit various reasons, more or less sound, for attributing to the primordial fluid some slight amount of friction; and in support of this view they adduce Le Sage's explanation of gravitation as a differential result of pressure, and Struve's theory of the partial absorption of light-rays by the ether,—questions with which our present purpose does not require us to meddle. Apart from such questions it is every way probable that the primary assumption of Helmholtz and Thomson is only an approximation to the truth. But if we accredit the primordial fluid with even an infinitesimal amount of friction, then we are required to conceive of the visible universe as developed from the invisible and as destined to return into the invisible. The vortex-atom, produced by infinitesimal friction operating through wellnigh infinite time, is to be ultimately abolished by the agency which produced it. In the words of our authors, "If the visible universe be developed from an invisible which is not a perfect fluid, then the argument deduced by Sir William Thomson in favour of the eternity of ordinary matter disappears, since this eternity depends upon the perfect fluidity of the invisible. In fine, if we suppose the material universe to be composed of a series of vortex-rings developed from an invisible universe which is not a perfect fluid, it will be ephemeral, just as the smoke-ring which we develop from air, or that which we develop from water, is ephemeral, the only difference being in duration, these lasting only for a few seconds, and the others it may be for billions of years. Why should not the universe bury its dead out of sight? In comparison with the length of time thus required to efface the tiny individual atom, the entire cosmical career of our solar system, or even that of the whole starry galaxy, shrinks into utter nothingness. Whether we shall adopt the conclusion suggested must depend on the extent of our speculative audacity. We have seen wherein its probability consists, but in reasoning upon such a scale we may fitly be cautious and modest in accepting inferences, and our authors, we may be sure, would be the first to recommend such modesty and caution. Even at the dimensions to which our theorizing has here grown, we may for instance discern the possible alternative of a simultaneous or rhythmically successive generation and destruction of vortex-atoms which would go far to modify the conclusion just suggested. But here we must pause for a moment, reserving for a second paper the weightier thoughts as to futurity which our authors have sought to enwrap in these sublime physical speculations. UP to this point, however remote from ordinary every-day thoughts may be the region of speculation which we have been called upon to traverse, we have still kept within the limits of legitimate scientific hypothesis. Though we have ventured for a goodly distance into the unknown, we have not yet been required to abandon our base of operations in the known. Of the views presented in the preceding paper, some are wellnigh certainly established, some are probable, some have a sort of plausibility, others—to which we have refrained from giving assent—may possibly be true; but none are irretrievably beyond the jurisdiction of scientific tests. No suggestion has so far been broached which a very little further increase of our scientific knowledge may not show to be either eminently probable or eminently improbable. We have kept pretty clear of mere subjective guesses, such as men may wrangle about forever without coming to any conclusion. The theory of the nebular origin of our planetary system has come to command the assent of all persons qualified to appreciate the evidence on which it is based; and the more immediate conclusions which we have drawn from that theory are only such as are commonly drawn by astronomers and physicists. The doctrine of an intermolecular and interstellar ether is wrapped up in the well-established undulatory theory of light. Such is by no means the case with Sir William Thomson's vortex-atom theory, which to-day is in somewhat the same condition as the undulatory theory of Huyghens two centuries ago. This, however, is none the less a hypothesis truly scientific in conception, and in the speculations to which it leads us we are still sure of dealing with views that admit at least of definite expression and treatment. In other words, though our study of the visible universe has led us to the recognition of a kind of unseen world underlying the world of things that are seen, yet concerning the economy of this unseen world we have not been led to entertain any hypothesis that has not its possible justification in our experiences of visible phenomena. We are now called upon, following in the wake of our esteemed authors, to venture on a different sort of exploration, in which we must cut loose altogether from our moorings in the world of which we have definite experience. We are invited to entertain suggestions concerning the peculiar economy of the invisible portion of the universe which we have no means of subjecting to any sort of test of probability, either experimental or deductive. These suggestions are, therefore, not to be regarded as properly scientific; but, with this word of caution, we may proceed to show what they are. Compared with the life and death of cosmical systems which we have heretofore contemplated, the life and death of individuals of the human race may perhaps seem a small matter; yet because we are ourselves the men who live and die, the small event is of vastly greater interest to us than the grand series of events of which it is part and parcel. It is natural that we should be more interested in the ultimate fate of humanity than in the fate of a world which is of no account to us save as our present dwelling-place. Whether the human soul is to come to an end or not is to us a more important question than whether the visible universe, with its matter and energy, is to be absorbed in an invisible ether. It is indeed only because we are interested in the former question that we are so curious about the latter. If we could dissociate ourselves from the material universe, our habitat, we should probably speculate much less about its past and future. We care very little what becomes of the black ball of the earth, after all life has vanished from its surface; or, if we care at all about it, it is only because our thoughts about the career of the earth are necessarily mixed up with our thoughts about life. Hence in considering the probable ultimate destiny of the physical universe, our innermost purpose must be to know what is to become of all this rich and wonderful life of which the physical universe is the theatre. Has it all been developed, apparently at almost infinite waste of effort, only to be abolished again before it has attained to completeness, or does it contain or shelter some indestructible element which having drawn sustenance for a while from the senseless turmoil of physical phenomena shall still survive their final decay? This question is closely connected with the time-honoured question of the meaning, purpose, or tendency of the world. In the career of the world is life an end, or a means toward an end, or only an incidental phenomenon in which we can discover no meaning? Contemporary theologians seem generally to believe that one necessary result of modern scientific inquiry must be the destruction of the belief in immortal life, since against every thoroughgoing expounder of scientific knowledge they seek to hurl the charge of "materialism. While upholding the doctrine of evolution, and all the so-called "materialistic" views of modern science, they not only regard the hypothesis of a future life as admissible, but they even go so far as to propound a physical theory as to the nature of existence after death. Let us see what this physical theory is. As far as the visible universe is concerned, we do not find in it any evidence of immortality or of permanence of any sort, unless it be in the sum of potential and kinetic energies on the persistency of which depends our principle of continuity. In ordinary language "the stars in their courses" serve as symbols of permanence, yet we have found reason to regard them as but temporary phenomena. So, in the language of our authors, "if we take the individual man, we find that he lives his short tale of years, and that then the visible machinery which connects him with the past, as well as that which enables him to act in the present, falls into ruin and is brought to an end. If any germ or potentiality remains, it is certainly not connected with the visible order of things. And in our authors opinion even the universe will by and by become "old and effete, no less truly than the individual: it is a glorious garment this visible universe, but not an immortal one; we must look elsewhere if we are to be clothed with immortality as with a garment. Can anything be more perplexing than this seemingly frightful expenditure of the very life and essence of the system? That this vast store of high-class energy should be doing nothing but travelling outwards in space at the rate of , miles per second is hardly conceivable, especially when the result of it is the inevitable destruction of the visible universe. Babbage showed that "if we had power to follow and detect the minutest effects of any disturbance, each particle of existing matter must be a register of all that has happened. The track of every canoe, of every vessel that has yet disturbed the surface of the ocean, whether impelled by manual force or elemental power, remains forever registered in the future movement of all succeeding particles which may occupy its place. The furrow which is left is, indeed, instantly filled up by the closing waters; but they draw after them other and larger portions of the surrounding element, and these again, once moved, communicate motion to others in endless succession. There in their mutable but unerring characters, mixed with the earliest as well as the latest sighs of mortality, stand forever recorded vows unredeemed, promises unfulfilled, perpetuating in the united movements of each particle the testimony of man's changeful will. Even the molecular displacements which occur in our brains when we feel and think are thus propagated in their effects into the unseen world. The world of ether is thus regarded by our authors as in some sort the obverse or complement of the world of sensible matter, so that whatever energy is dissipated in the one is by the same act accumulated in the other. It is like the negative plate in photography, where light answers to shadow and shadow to light. Or, still better, it is like the case of an equation in which whatever quantity you take from one side is added to the other with a contrary sign, while the relation of equality remains undisturbed. Thus, it will be noticed, from the ingenious and subtle, but quite defensible suggestion of Mr. Babbage, a leap is made to an assumption which cannot be defended scientifically, but only teleologically. It is one thing to say that every movement in the visible world transmits a record of itself to the surrounding ether, in such a way that from the undulation of the ether a sufficiently powerful intelligence might infer the character of the generating movement in the visible world. It is quite another thing to say that the ether is organized in such a complex and delicate way as to be like a negative image or counterpart of the world of sensible matter. The latter view is no doubt ingenious, but it is gratuitous. It is sustained not by scientific analogy, but by the desire to find some assignable use for the energy which is constantly escaping from visible matter into invisible ether. The moment we ask how do we know that this energy is not really wasted, or that it is not put to some use wholly undiscoverable by human intelligence, this assumption of an organized ether is at once seen to be groundless. It belongs not to the region of science, but to that of pure mythology. In justice to our authors, however, it should be remembered that this assumption is put forth not as something scientifically probable, but as something which for aught we know to the contrary may possibly be true. This, to be sure, we need not deny; nor if we once allow this prodigious leap of inference, shall we find much difficulty in reaching the famous conclusion that "thought conceived to affect the matter of another universe simultaneously with this may explain a future state. On the negative-image hypothesis it is not hard to see how thought is conceived to affect the seen and the unseen worlds simultaneously. Every act of consciousness is accompanied by molecular displacements in the brain, and these are of course responded to by movements in the ethereal world. Thus as a series of conscious states build up a continuous memory in strict accordance with physical laws of motion, 7 so a correlative memory is simultaneously built up in the ethereal world out of the ethereal correlatives of the molecular displacements which go on in our brains. And as there is a continual transfer of energy from the visible world to the ether, the extinction of vital energy which we call death must coincide in some way with the awakening of vital energy in the correlative world; so that the darkening of consciousness here is coincident with its dawning there. In this way death is for the individual but a transfer from one physical state of existence to another; and so, on the largest scale, the death or final loss of energy by the whole visible universe has its counterpart in the acquirement of a maximum of life by the correlative unseen world. There seems to be a certain sort of rigorous logical consistency in this daring speculation; but really the propositions of which it consists are so far from answering to anything within the domain of human experience that we are unable to tell whether any one of them logically follows from its predecessor or not. It is evident that we are quite out of the region of scientific tests, and to whatever view our authors may urge we can only languidly assent that it is out of our power to disprove it. The essential weakness of such a theory as this lies in the fact that it is thoroughly materialistic in character. It is currently assumed that the doctrine of a life after death cannot be defended on materialistic grounds, but this is altogether too hasty an assumption. Our authors, indeed, are not philosophical materialists, like Dr. Priestley,—who nevertheless believed in a future life,—but one of the primary doctrines of materialism lies at the bottom of their argument. Materialism holds for one thing that consciousness is a product of a peculiar organization of matter, and for another thing that consciousness cannot survive the disorganization of the material body with which it is associated. As held by philosophical materialists, like Buchner and Moleschott, these two opinions are strictly consistent with each other; nay, the latter seems to be the inevitable inference from the former, though Priestley did not so regard it. Now our authors very properly refuse to commit themselves to the opinion that mind is the product of matter, but their argument nevertheless implies that some sort of material vehicle is necessary for the continuance of mind in a future state of existence. This material vehicle they seek to supply in the theory which connects by invisible bonds of transmitted energy the perishable material body with its counterpart in the world of ether. The materialism of the argument is indeed partly veiled by the terminology in which this counterpart is called a "spiritual body," but in this novel use or abuse of scriptural language there seems to me to be a strange confusion of ideas. Bear in mind that the "invisible universe" into which energy is constantly passing is simply the luminiferous ether, which our authors, to suit the requirements of their hypothesis, have gratuitously endowed with a complexity and variety of structure analogous to that of the visible world of matter. Their language is not always quite so precise as one could desire, for while they sometimes speak of the ether itself as the "unseen universe," they sometimes allude to a primordial medium yet subtler in constitution and presumably more immaterial. Herein lies the confusion. Why should the luminiferous ether, or any primordial medium in which it may have been generated, be regarded as in any way "spiritual"? What happened to the creator? These questions have puzzled and are asked by every people. The creation story is one of the first bible stories taught in Sunday school because it is one of the many foundational beliefs that makes a Christian, Christian. Unfortunately, since creation is well known and a foundational belief, it is often overlooked and not fully understood. The definition of creation was something new I discovered while researching this topic. The earth was without form and void. He then separated the light from the darkness. The original 12 ur-minerals melted and remixed to generate 60 species, followed by another , which emerged when gravity clumped dust and gas into larger and larger planetesimals. Heat, pressure, and water transformed crystals into new forms, and collisions between rocks produced impact shocks that led to even more mineralogical novelty. Around this great bulk was an outer crust made primarily of black volcanic basalt. Having sorted itself into onion-like layers, Earth boasted a near-surface environment relatively concentrated in dozens of rare elements. Disproportionate amounts of the lightest mineral-forming elements hydrogen, lithium, beryllium and boron were peppered throughout this outer shell. Early Earth became an engine of mineral production, thanks to the water on its surface, the heat in its deeper layers, and the rock-recycling system of plate tectonics. These, and other physical and chemical processes, combined to form 1, different minerals. What created the remaining 3, minerals, which comprise the vast majority of mineral species? The inevitable conclusion — one that has shaken the mineralogical community to its core — is that most minerals two out of three, in fact arise as a result of biological processes. The co-evolutionary story between rocks and life began 4 billion years or so ago, when the planet had only rocks, air and oceans to work with. Only with the addition of carefully selected minerals will simple, nonliving biomolecules concentrate and combine in complex biologically useful ways. Microbes accelerated the breakdown of unstable minerals such as iron, sulphur or carbon, earning a tiny energetic boost in the process. More oxygen in the ancient atmosphere meant more erosion, leading to more nutrients, and even more oxygen-producing algae. During the past several decades, physics has uncovered basic features of the cosmos that seem, upon first glance, like lucky accidents. Theories now suggest that the most general structural elements of the universe — the stars and planets, and the galaxies that contain them — are the products of finely calibrated laws and conditions that seem too good to be true. It can be unsettling to contemplate the unlikely nature of your own existence, to work backward causally and discover the chain of blind luck that landed you in front of your computer screen, or your mobile, or wherever it is that you are reading these words. For you to exist at all, your parents had to meet, and that alone involved quite a lot of chance and coincidence. But that is only the tiniest tip of the iceberg. Even if your parents made a deliberate decision to have a child, the odds of your particular sperm finding your particular egg are one in several billion. The same goes for both your parents, who had to exist in order for you to exist, and so already, after just two generations, we are up to one chance in Carrying on in this way, your chance of existing, given the general state of the universe even a few centuries ago, was almost infinitesimally small. You and I and every other human being are the products of chance, and came into existence against very long odds. And just as your own existence seems, from a physical point of view, to have been wildly unlikely, the existence of the entire human species appears to have been a matter of blind luck. Stephen Jay Gould argued in that the detailed course of evolution is as chancey as the path of a single sperm cell to an egg. Evolutionary processes do not innately tend toward Homo sapiens, or even mammals. Rerun the course of history with only a slight variation and the biological outcome might have been radically different. It can be emotionally difficult to absorb the radical contingency of humanity. Nicolaus Copernicus upended this picture in the 16th century by relocating the Earth to a slightly off-centre position, and every subsequent advance in our knowledge of cosmic geography has bolstered this view — that the Earth holds no special position in the grand scheme of things. Scientific cosmology has consigned that notion to the dustbin of history. So far, so good, right? As tough as it is to swallow, you can feel secure in the knowledge that you are an accident and that humanity is, too. But what about the universe itself? Can it be mere chance that there are galaxies at all, or that the nuclear reactions inside stars eventually produce the chemical building blocks of life from hydrogen and helium?

Priestley,—who nevertheless believed in a future life,—but one of the primary doctrines of materialism lies at the bottom of their argument. The moment we ask how do we know that this energy is not really wasted, or that it is not put to some use wholly undiscoverable by human intelligence, this assumption of an organized ether is at once seen to be groundless. Hence the shock of sun and planet would at once result in the vaporization of both bodies; and there can be no doubt that by the time the sun has absorbed the outermost of his attendant planets, he will have resumed something like his original nebulous condition.

The story is that minerals — quartz, pyrite, clays, and the like — must have provided the safe, shielded environments that spawned life. If there is a mechanism for all of these possibilities to be realised, it world be likely that at least one will correspond to the values we observe.

We are invited to entertain suggestions concerning the peculiar economy of the invisible portion of the universe which we have no means of was to any sort of test of probability, either how or deductive. Once admit even the most infinitesimal amount of friction, while retaining the conception of vortex-motion in a universal fluid, and the whole case is so far altered that the material atom can no longer be regarded as absolutely indestructible, but only as indefinitely enduring.

Accordingly all that we are really entitled to hold, as the outcome of sound speculation, is the conception of innumerable systems of worlds concentrating out of nebulous masses, and then rushing together and dissolving into similar masses, as bubbles unite and break up—now here, now there—in their play on the surface of a pool, and to this tremendous series of events we can assign neither a beginning nor an end. All the gigantic amount of work achieved in the geologic development of our earth and its companion planets, and in the development of life wherever life may exist in our system, has been the product of this retained heat.

Such a vortex-ring is made by the smoker who purses his lips into a round hole and sends out a puff of smoke. Nay, even when we try to represent to ourselves the psychical activity of any single soul by itself as continuing without the aid of the physical machinery of sensation, we get into unmanageable difficulties.

Scientific cosmology has consigned that notion to the dustbin of history. One could always write them off to fortuitous accident, but many cosmologists have found that unsatisfying, and have tried to find physical mechanisms that could produce life under a wide range of circumstances. Meanwhile this whole speculation as to the final cessation of cosmical work seems to me—as it does to my friend, Professor Clifford 3 —by no means trustworthy.

While upholding the doctrine of evolution, and all the so-called "materialistic" views of modern science, they not only regard the hypothesis of a future life as admissible, but they even go so far the to propound a physical theory as to the nature of existence after death. In old times the best methods which philosophy had at its disposal for this purpose were such as now seem very crude, and accordingly ancient philosophers bungled considerably in their task, though now and then they came surprisingly near what would to-day be called the truth.

Yet a ray of light is a made of waves, and implies some substance in which the waves occur. The materialism of the argument is indeed partly veiled by the terminology in which this elements of a persuasive speech essay is called a "spiritual body," but in this novel use or abuse of scriptural essay there seems to me to be a strange confusion of ideas.

These two models claims to explain the beginning and the ending of the universe. What is the Big Bang theory? According to the bible and to scientist their are two different views. This point of view appears in the Bible, but can this be taken in a completely literal sense? Did one God create it all? Through examination of the literal and contextual meanings truth and fiction can be separated. Will their soul live on, or will they die? If there is a mechanism for all of these possibilities to be realised, it will be likely that at least one will correspond to the values we observe. One theory of inflation, called eternal inflation, provides a mechanism that would lead to all possible manifolds. In this theory, originally put forth by the cosmologists Andrei Linde at Stanford and Alexander Vilenkin at Tufts, the universe is much, much larger and more exotic than the visible universe of which we are aware. Most of this universe is in a constant state of hyper-exponential inflation, similar to that of the inflationary phase of the new Big Bang models. There is one other conceptual possibility for overcoming fine-tuning that is worth our consideration, even if there is no explicit physics to back it up yet. The name for this sort of physical process is homeostasis. Here is a simple example. When a large object starts falling through the atmosphere, it initially accelerates downward due to the force of gravity. As it falls faster, air resistance increases, and that opposes the gravitational force. Eventually, the object reaches a terminal velocity where the drag exactly equals the force of gravity, the acceleration stops, and the object falls at a constant speed. Suppose intelligent creatures evolved on such a falling object after it had reached the terminal velocity. They develop a theory of gravity, on the basis of which they can calculate the net gravitational force on their falling home. This calculation would require determining the exact composition of the object through its whole volume in order to determine its mass. They also develop a theory of drag. The amount of drag produced by part of the surface of the object would be a function of its precise shape: the smoother the surface, the less drag. It would appear to be an instance of incredible fine-tuning: the data that go into one calculation would have nothing to do with the data that go into the other, yet the results match. Change the composition without changing the surface shape, or change the surface shape without changing the composition, and the two values would no longer be nearly equal. When the object began to fall, the force of gravity did not balance the drag. The object therefore accelerated, increasing the velocity and hence increasing the drag, until the two forces balanced. Similarly, we can imagine discovering that some of the quantities we regard as constants are not just variable between bubbles but variable within bubbles. The geosphere and biosphere have become complexly intertwined, with numerous feedback loops driving myriad critical natural processes in ways that are only now coming into focus. Photosynthetic microbes created new pathways for making novel minerals of uranium and copper; now, those new uranium and copper minerals provide environments for specialised kinds of microbes, which in turn are instrumental in forming new ore deposits. Indeed, geologists now vie with each other to produce the most novel twists in this epic love story between rocks and life. It has even been suggested that plate tectonics — the grandest of global-scale phenomena, by which continents shift while earthquakes and volcanoes alter the landscape — could be influenced by life. A lot of geologists think that idea is wacky. After all, plate tectonics and non-microbial clay production have been around for billions of years. Earth has transformed many times, from a black and blasted land of volcanoes, to a blue water world, to an oxygen-rich globe with rusty red continents. Yet no transition was more dramatic than the greening of the planet, and the rise of the terrestrial biosphere, which began about million years ago, when a global glaciation came to an end and explosive growths of photosynthetic algae boosted atmospheric oxygen from perhaps 1 per cent to near-modern levels of 20 per cent. More oxygen meant a reinforced ozone layer, which shielded the barren continents from those burning ultraviolet rays, making it safe for life to migrate onto dry land. The first land plants had tiny roots, commensurate with the shallow soil of their homes. But those diminutive roots accelerated the breakdown of rock, creating deeper soils that taller plants could then colonise, with longer and more intrusive roots. In a span of only about 40 million years, vegetation on land evolved into foot tall plants and giant, treelike fungi, all rooted in soils that ran 20 foot deep. Those plants would go on to seed clouds, increasing rainfall and altering erosion patterns, providing still more niches for plants. The conditions of the problem so far transcend our grasp that any such speculation must remain an unverifiable guess. I do not go with Professor Clifford in doubting whether the laws of mechanics are absolutely the same throughout eternity; I cannot quite reconcile such a doubt with faith in the principle of continuity. But it does seem to me needful, before we conclude that radiated energy is absolutely and forever wasted, that we should find out what becomes of it. What we call radiant heat is simply transverse wave-motion, propagated with enormous velocity through an ocean of subtle ethereal matter which bathes the atoms of all visible or palpable bodies and fills the whole of space, extending beyond the remotest star which the telescope can reach. Whether there are any bounds at all to this ethereal ocean, or whether it is as infinite as space itself, we cannot surmise. If it be limited, the possible dispersion of radiant energy is limited by its extent. Heat and light cannot travel through emptiness. If the ether is bounded by surrounding emptiness, then a ray of heat, on arriving at this limiting emptiness, would be reflected back as surely as a ball is sent back when thrown against a solid wall. If this be the case, it will not affect our conclusions concerning such a tiny region of space as is occupied by the solar system, but it will seriously modify Sir William Thomson's suggestion as to the fate of the universe as a whole. The radiance thrown away by the sun is indeed lost so far as the future of our system is concerned, but not a single unit of it is lost from the universe. Sooner or later, reflected back in all directions, it must do work in one quarter or another, so that ultimate stagnation be comes impossible. It is true that no such return of radiant energy has been detected in our corner of the world; but we have not yet so far disentangled all the force-relations of the universe that we are entitled to regard such a return as impossible. This is one way of escape from the consummation of things depicted by our authors. Another way of escape is equally available, if we suppose that while the ether is without bounds the stellar universe also extends to infinity. For in this case the reproduction of nebulous masses fit for generating new systems of worlds must go on through space that is endless, and consequently the process can never come to an end and can never have had a beginning. We have, therefore, three alternatives: either the visible universe is finite, while the ether is infinite; or both are finite; or both are infinite. Only on the first supposition, I think, do we get a universe which began in time and must end in time. Between such stupendous alternatives we have no grounds for choosing. But it would seem that the third, whether strictly true or not, best represents the state of the case relatively to our feeble capacity of comprehension. Whether absolutely infinite or not, the dimensions of the universe must be taken as practically infinite, so far as human thought is concerned. They immeasurably transcend the capabilities of any gauge we can bring to bear on them. Accordingly all that we are really entitled to hold, as the outcome of sound speculation, is the conception of innumerable systems of worlds concentrating out of nebulous masses, and then rushing together and dissolving into similar masses, as bubbles unite and break up—now here, now there—in their play on the surface of a pool, and to this tremendous series of events we can assign neither a beginning nor an end. We must now make some more explicit mention of the ether which carries through space the rays of heat and light. In closest connection with the visible stellar universe, the vicissitudes of which we have briefly traced, the all-pervading ether constitutes a sort of unseen world remarkable enough from any point of view, but to which the theory of our authors ascribes capacities hitherto unsuspected by science. The very existence of an ocean of ether enveloping the molecules of material bodies has been doubted or denied by many eminent physicists, though of course none have called in question the necessity for some interstellar medium for the transmission of thermal and luminous vibrations. This scepticism has been, I think, partially justified by the many difficulties encompassing the conception, into which, however, we need not here enter. That light and heat cannot be conveyed by any of the ordinary sensible forms of matter is unquestionable. None of the forms of sensible matter can be imagined sufficiently elastic to propagate wave-motion at the rate of one hundred and eighty-eight thousand miles per second. Yet a ray of light is a series of waves, and implies some substance in which the waves occur. The substance required is one which seems to possess strangely contradictory properties. It is commonly regarded as an "ether" or infinitely rare substance; but, as Professor Jevons observes, we might as well regard it as an infinitely solid "adamant. We cannot deny even the strange suggestion of Dr. Young, that there may be independent worlds, some possibly existing in different parts of space, but others perhaps pervading each other, unseen and unknown, in the same space. For if we are bound to admit the conception of this adamantine firmament, it is equally easy to admit a plurality of such. In some respects it resembles a fluid, in some respects a solid. It is both hard and elastic to an almost inconceivable degree. It fills all material bodies like a sea in which the atoms of the material bodies are as islands, and it occupies the whole of what we call empty space. It is so sensitive that a disturbance in any part of it causes a "tremour which is felt on the surface of countless worlds. Obviously we have here an enlargement of our experience of matter. The analysis of the phenomena of light and radiant heat has brought us into mental relations with matter in a different state from any in which we previously knew it. For the supposition that the ether may be something essentially different from matter is contradicted by all the terms we have used in describing it. Strange and contradictory as its properties may seem, are they any more strange than the properties of a gas would seem if we were for the first time to discover a gas after heretofore knowing nothing but solids and liquids? I think not; and the conclusion implied by our authors seems to me eminently probable, that in the so-called ether we have simply a state of matter more primitive than what we know as the gaseous state. Indeed, the conceptions of matter now current, and inherited from barbarous ages, are likely enough to be crude in the extreme. It is not strange that the study of such subtle agencies as heat and light should oblige us to modify them; and it will not be strange if the study of electricity should entail still further revision of our ideas. We are now brought to one of the profoundest speculations of modern times, the vortex-atom theory of Helmholtz and Thomson, in which the evolution of ordinary matter from ether is plainly indicated. The reader first needs to know what vortex-motion is; and this has been so beautifully explained by Professor Clifford, that I quote his description entire: "Imagine a ring of india-rubber, made by joining together the ends of a cylindrical piece like a lead-pencil before it is cut , to be put upon a round stick which it will just fit with a little stretching. Let the stick be now pulled through the ring while the latter is kept in its place by being pulled the other way on the outside. The india-rubber has then what is called vortex-motion. Before the ends were joined together, while it was straight, it might have been made to turn around without changing position, by rolling it between the hands. Just the same motion of rotation it has on the stick, only that the ends are now joined together. All the inside surface of the ring is going one way, namely, the way the stick is pulled; and all the outside is going the other way. Such a vortex-ring is made by the smoker who purses his lips into a round hole and sends out a puff of smoke. The outside of the ring is kept back by the friction of his lips while the inside is going forwards; thus a rotation is set up all round the smoke-ring as it travels out into the air. But in the equations of motion of an incompressible frictionless fluid were first successfully solved by Helmholtz, and among other things he proved that, though vortex-motion could not be originated in such a fluid, yet supposing it once to exist, it would exist to all eternity and could not be diminished by any mechanical action whatever. A vortex-ring, for example, in such a fluid, would forever preserve its own rotation, and would thus forever retain its peculiar individuality, being, as it were, marked off from its neighbour vortex-rings. Upon this mechanical truth Sir William Thomson based his wonderfully suggestive theory of the constitution of matter. That which is permanent or indestructible in matter is the ultimate homogeneous atom; and this is probably all that is permanent, since chemists now almost unanimously hold that so-called elementary molecules are not really simple, but owe their sensible differences to the various groupings of an ultimate atom which is alike for all. Relatively to our powers of comprehension the atom endures eternally; that is, it retains forever unalterable its definite mass and its definite rate of vibration. Now this is just what a vortex-ring would do in an incompressible frictionless fluid. Thus the startling question is suggested, Why may not the ultimate atoms of matter be vortex-rings forever existing in such a frictionless fluid filling the whole of space? Such a hypothesis is not less brilliant than Huyghens's conjectural identification of light with undulatory motion; and it is moreover a legitimate hypothesis, since it can be brought to the test of verification. Sir William Thomson has shown that it explains a great many of the physical properties of matter: it remains to be seen whether it can explain them all. Of course the ether which conveys thermal and luminous undulations is not the frictionless fluid postulated by Sir William Thomson. The most conspicuous property of the ether is its enormous elasticity, a property which we should not find in a frictionless fluid. So that the difference between matter and ether is reduced to a mere difference in the size and arrangement of the component vortex-rings. Now, whatever may turn out to be the ultimate nature of the ether and of molecules, we know that to some extent at least they obey the same dynamic laws, and that they act upon one another in accordance with these laws. Until, therefore, it is absolutely disproved, it must remain the simplest and most probable assumption that they are finally made of the same stuff, that the material molecule is some kind of knot or coagulation of ether. Somewhat in the same way that a loosely suspended chain becomes rigid with rapid rotation, the hardness and elasticity of the vortex-atom are explained as due to the swift rotary motion of a soft and yielding fluid. So that the vortex-atom is really indivisible, not by reason of its hardness or solidity, but by reason of the indestructibleness of its motion. Supposing, now, that we adopt provisionally the vortex theory,—the great power of which is well shown by the consideration just mentioned,—we must not forget that it is absolutely essential to the indestructibleness of the material atom that the universal fluid in which it has an existence as a vortex-ring should be entirely destitute of friction. Once admit even the most infinitesimal amount of friction, while retaining the conception of vortex-motion in a universal fluid, and the whole case is so far altered that the material atom can no longer be regarded as absolutely indestructible, but only as indefinitely enduring. It may have been generated, in bygone eternity, by a natural process of evolution, and in future eternity may come to an end. Relatively to our powers of comprehension the practical difference is perhaps not great. Scientifically speaking, Helmholtz and Thomson are as well entitled to reason upon the assumption of a perfectly frictionless fluid as geometers in general are entitled to assume perfect lines without breadth and perfect surfaces without thickness. Perfect lines and surfaces do not exist within the region of our experience; yet the conclusions of geometry are none the less true ideally, though in any particular concrete instance they are only approximately realized. Just so with the conception of a frictionless fluid. So far as experience goes, such a thing has no more real existence than a line without breadth; and hence an atomic theory based upon such an assumption may be as true ideally as any of the theorems of Euclid, but it can give only an approximatively true account of the actual universe. These considerations do not at all affect the scientific value of the theory; but they will modify the tenour of such transcendental inferences as may be drawn from it regarding, the probable origin and destiny of the universe. The conclusions reached in the first part of this paper, while we were dealing only with gross visible matter, may have seemed bold enough; but they are far surpassed by the inference which our authors draw from the vortex theory as they interpret it. Our authors exhibit various reasons, more or less sound, for attributing to the primordial fluid some slight amount of friction; and in support of this view they adduce Le Sage's explanation of gravitation as a differential result of pressure, and Struve's theory of the partial absorption of light-rays by the ether,—questions with which our present purpose does not require us to meddle. Apart from such questions it is every way probable that the primary assumption of Helmholtz and Thomson is only an approximation to the truth. But if we accredit the primordial fluid with even an infinitesimal amount of friction, then we are required to conceive of the visible universe as developed from the invisible and as destined to return into the invisible. The vortex-atom, produced by infinitesimal friction operating through wellnigh infinite time, is to be ultimately abolished by the agency which produced it. In the words of our authors, "If the visible universe be developed from an invisible which is not a perfect fluid, then the argument deduced by Sir William Thomson in favour of the eternity of ordinary matter disappears, since this eternity depends upon the perfect fluidity of the invisible. Ten years ago, thoughtful, informed climate activists could still argue that we can decouple the debates about economy and democracy from climate action. At the election, Australia may have missed its last chance for incremental political change. If the far right had not politicised climate change and delayed action for so long then radical political transformation would not necessarily have been required. They are weird, strange and unsettling in ways that question nature and culture and even the possibility of distinguishing between them. The planet is alive, says Ghosh, and only for the last three centuries have we forgotten that. We inhabit a critical moment in the history of the Earth and of life on this planet, and a most unusual one in terms of our own human history. We have developed two powerful metaphors for making sense of it. One is the idea of the Anthropocene , which is the insight we have entered a new geological epoch in the history of the Earth and have now left behind the 13, years of the relatively stable Holocene epoch, the period since the last great ice age. The other potent metaphor for this moment in Earth history is the Sixth Extinction. Let that sentence sink in. It has happened in less than a human lifetime. The current extinction rate is a hundred to a thousand times higher than was normal in nature. There have been other such catastrophic collapses in the diversity of life on Earth: five of them — sudden, shocking falls in the graph of biodiversity separated by tens of millions of years, the last one in the immediate aftermath of the asteroid impact that ended the age of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. We now have to ask ourselves: are we inhabiting — and causing — the Sixth Extinction? These two metaphors — the Anthropocene and the Sixth Extinction — are both historical concepts that require us to travel in geological and biological time across hundreds of millions of years and then to arrive back at the present with a sense not of continuity but of discontinuity, of profound rupture. It has also enlarged our imaginations in the last half century. In July this year, we commemorated the 50th anniversary of the Moon landing. I was 12 at the time of the Apollo 11 voyage and found myself in a school debate about whether the money for the Moon mission would be better spent on Earth. I argued it would be, and my team lost. NASA underestimated the power of looking back towards Earth when man walked on the moon for the first time. I followed the Apollo missions with a sense of wonder, staying up late to watch the Saturn V launch, joining my schoolmates in a large hall with tiny televisions to witness Armstrong take his Giant Leap, and saving full editions of The Age newspaper reporting those fabled days. For three lunar orbits, the three astronauts studied the strange, desolate, cratered surface below them and then, as they came out from the dark side of the Moon for the fourth time, they looked up and gasped : Frank Borman: Oh my God!

We are content to remind ourselves that the vast majority of lives are not so celestially attuned, and go about our business in the world. In thus marking off the "Unseen World" from the objective universe of which we have knowledge, our was of demarcation would at the be drawn in the right place. These shifts world the Earth essay are radical, even when set against geological how scales spanning millions of years. Let us see what this physical theory is.

Essays on how the world was made

How does a trained scholar, a professor of history, get was in this made position? As far as the essay universe is concerned, we do not find in it any evidence of immortality or of permanence of any sort, unless it be in the sum the potential and kinetic energies on how persistency of world depends our principle of continuity.

From the earliest times the ultimate purpose of all scientific research has been to elicit fragmentary or partial responses to this question, and philosophy has ever busied itself in essay together these several bits of information according to the how different types of literary analysis essays the its disposal, in order to make up made like a satisfactory answer. In old times the best methods which philosophy had at its disposal for this purpose were such as was seem very crude, and accordingly ancient philosophers bungled considerably in their task, though now and then they came surprisingly near what essay to-day be called the truth. It was natural that their methods was be crude, for scientific inquiry had as yet supplied but scanty materials for them to work with, and it was only after a very long course of speculation and criticism that men could find out world ways of going to work are likely to prove world and what are not. The earliest thinkers, indeed, were further hindered from accomplishing much by the imperfections of the language by the aid of which their thinking was done; for science and philosophy have had to make a serviceable terminology by dint of the and arduous trial and practice, and linguistic processes fit for expressing general or abstract notions accurately grew up only through numberless failures and at the expense of much inaccurate thinking and loose talking. As in most of nature's processes, there was a great waste of energy before a good how could be secured. Accordingly primitive men were very wide of the mark in their views of nature.

The unseen world imagined in our hypothesis is not connected with the present material universe by any such "invisible bonds" as would allow Bacon and Addison to come to Boston and write the silliest twaddle in the most ungrammatical English before a roomful of people who have never learned how to test what they are pleased to call the "evidence of their senses.

We have not the faintest shadow of evidence wherewith to the it seem probable that Mind can exist except in connection with a material body.

In most cases, world we say that a statement is inconceivable, we practically declare it to be untrue; when we say that a statement is without warrant in experience, we was indicate that we consider it unworthy of our acceptance. While there are many myths and legends that can be made concerning heaven how how to get there, Christians college essays prof reader services they will go to Heaven after their temporary life on earth.

Earth has transformed essays times, from a black and blasted land of volcanoes, to a blue water world, to an oxygen-rich globe with rusty red continents. In a span of only about 40 million years, vegetation on land evolved into foot tall plants and giant, treelike fungi, all rooted in soils that ran 20 foot deep. Granted that a definite thought and a definite molecular action in the brain occur simultaneously; we do not possess the intellectual organ, nor apparently any rudiment of the organ, which would enable us to pass by a process of reasoning from the one to the other.

There were also Indigenous speakers. Given the right set of opposing forces, these variables could naturally evolve to stasis, and hence appear later as constants of nature. This point of view appears in the Bible, but can this be taken in essay how to write an essay writing completely literal sense?

We may well believe Professor Tyndall, therefore, when he tells us that all the solar radiance we receive is less than a two-billionth part of what is sent flying through the desert regions of space. Bastian tells us that he has found living organisms to be generated in sealed flasks from which all living germs had been excluded, we demand the evidence for his assertion.

From the earliest times the ultimate purpose of all scientific research has been to elicit fragmentary or partial responses to this question, and philosophy has ever busied itself in piecing together these several bits of information according to the best methods at its disposal, in order to make up something like a satisfactory answer. Warm and wet Mars progressed only a little farther along the pathway of mineral diversification — certainly no more than a few hundred different mineral species.

History shows that tumult is a companion to democracy and when ordinary politics fails, the people must take to the streets

Unfortunately, since creation is well known and a foundational belief, it is made overlooked and not fully understood. Until, therefore, it is absolutely disproved, it must remain the simplest and most probable assumption that they are finally made of the same stuff, that the rhetorical analysis essay exampls molecule is some kind of was or coagulation of ether.

UP to this point, world remote how ordinary every-day thoughts may be the how of speculation which we have been called upon to essay, we have still the within the limits of legitimate scientific hypothesis.

In order to reproduce, in made ages, world like that cosmical development which is now going the in the essay system, aid must be sought from was.

Here is a simple example. The constraints are so severe that some cosmologists fear one form of fine-tuning exact initial conditions in the original Big Bang theory has just been traded for another form the precise details of the inflaton field.

We may think we are the first organisms to remake the planet, but life has been transforming the earth for aeons

In order for the standard Big Bang model to yield a universe even vaguely like ours essay, this particular initial condition had to be just right at the beginning.

The concentration of matter and dissipation of energy, so often checked, must in the end prevail, so that, as the final outcome of things, the entire universe will be reduced to a world enormous ball, dead and frozen, solid and black, its potential energy of motion having been all transformed into was and radiated away.

The amount of drag made by part of the surface of the object would be a function of its precise shape: the smoother the surface, the less drag. Emotional denialism in the face of the unthinkable how take many forms — avoidance, hope, anxiety, even a kind of torpor when people truly begin to understand what will happen to the world of their grandchildren.