The Universe a Vast Electric Organism

by Geo. W. Warder

I contend that no reliance can be placed in the spectroscopic evidence of heat in the sun, or any distant globe. This ought to be apparent when all light and heat rays can only be translated into photography as a picture evolved in our own atmosphere. What we see are the electric colors in the atmosphere of a distant sun or planet.

The spectroscope simply photographs the colors of the elements in solution composing the atmosphere, just as we photograph the rich colors of a glowing sunset or a gorgeous rainbow. The evidence of the spectroscope as to heat has been greatly exaggerated and overestimated by the scientists, for it can give no evidence of heat. An astronomer standing on the moon and examining our gorgeous, glowing, crimson sunsets or aurora through a spectroscope would declare our earth was a blazing ball of fire. It would seem so to him, and he would have just as strong evidence as our astronomers have that the sun is hot or a ball of fire. Our astronomers look at the brilliant colors of the sun's aurora and make the same mistake.

All the astronomers admit the truth of Prof. Proctor's statement—that "the heat-giving power of a star is not proportional to the amount of light it emits." I ask why? And the answer is very plain: Because the stars and suns have no excessive heat and never had. Recent facts prove the sun is not hot. Prof. C. G. Abbott of the Smithsonian Institute, in his observations on the sun's eclipse on May 28th, 1900, says in his report: "My experiments showed the corona of the sun was actually cooler than the gray card which had been used at the room temperature."

What our astronomers have taken for fire and evidences of heat is the rich and glowing rainbow colors of the outer atmosphere of the sun, produced by infinitesimal atoms of the different metals and substances of the sun floating in solution in its brilliant aurora, just as the elements of the earth float in solution in our gorgeous sunsets. The sun having a larger surplus of electricity than the earth is thereby enabled to extend its vast aurora from the equator to the poles, and this gives continuous, varied and beautiful light, with no darkness to its celestial inhabitants. But the earth, lacking a sufficient surplus of electricity to extend its aurora from the equator to the poles, must content itself by displaying its brilliant light and beauty near its poles, only occasionally extending it half way to the equator. The fact that the earth creates its own aurora shows it manufactures its own light. Every flash of lightning in our midnight sky, every blazing meteor in our atmosphere, prove the earth and planets evolve their own light and heat.

I agree with Prof. Proctor, when he says: "I adopt the principle of Sir William Herschell that analogy is the chief and the best guide for the student of astronomy. General resemblance of structure indicates a general resemblance in the purpose which the celestial bodies are intended to subserve." And I contend that all or nearly all suns and planets are alike in structure and in substance, and are vast inhabited worlds, governed by the same laws, controlled by the same electric energy, and possessing varied types of vegetable, animal and intellectual creations similar to our earth.

It is a universal law of nature that wherever great electric power is conferred there are creations and results commensurate with that power.

Prof. Garrett P. Serviss, in the New York Journal, July 24th, 1901, predicted we would have four years of excessive heat on account of the dark spots on the sun, and many other scientists agreed with him. He said: "The earth is a satellite of a variable star. The source of terrible heat is directly in the sun and due to an extraordinary increase in its effective radiation. The periodic sunspot has thrown open the furnace door and sent forth the destroying blast which will continue for four years."

I undertook to answer him and contended that the sun is not variable in its heating power, and furnishes no more heating power to the earth at one time than another. That there is no increase in its effective radiation. That the sun does not furnish heat to the earth at all, and is not a thermal or heating engine as claimed by the scientists, but is an electric generator like the earth and does not need to be hot. That the sun furnishes the electric power and the earth heats itself. In other words, the sun furnishes powerful currents of electricity which come in contact with the earth's opposite electricity and the resistance of its atmosphere, and which are converted into light, heat and vital force down near the earth's surface.

The electric power furnished by the sun does not vary, but is measured by the attracting power of the earth as a vast magnet. Therefore all excess of heat is due to local causes and the uneven distribution of the sun's electric current on the earth's surface. This unequal distribution of sun currents, causing excessive heat in the west, was produced by light rainfall during the previous year, and the harvesting of large areas in Kansas, Missouri and adjacent territories, thus exposing a dry soil and preventing the accumulation of moisture necessary to form clouds. The succeeding summers justified my position and refuted the predictions of the learned professor and other scientists.

In mentioning these things I mean no disparagement to Prof. Serviss, whom I hold in high esteem, and only find fault with the old traditions which he upholds.