The Universe a Vast Electric Organism

by Geo. W. Warder

In addition to the above complications, Prof. J. J. Thomson, discovered (1901), the electric ions or corpuscles which is considered a new form of matter and force.

The discovery of these electric ions or corpuscles a thousand times smaller than atoms has produced utter confusion in the scientific world, and outside of the electric theory of creation they can make no possible explanation of them.

The fact is, the scientists are on an island of doubt, in a sea of uncertainty, scanning with telescope, microscope and spectroscope the ocean of foggy knowledge and dubious assumed facts to find a port of safety.

Their attempts to fix the specific gravity of the sun, and the sun's burning up and shrinkage as its source of heat, and the heat as the life of the planets; their treatment of heat as an entity and substance, when it is merely a sensation; their reliance on the spectroscope to indicate heat in distant suns, and their accepting gravity without a cause or an explanation, show the blind for centuries have led the blind in extravagant guessing.

But since they have seen an electric battery and an arc light, they should be ashamed to ever declare "the sun is hotter than any terrestrial furnace," or that it is hot at all. The arc and incandescent lights are object lessons they ought to study, for they will see almost an exact representation of how all light, heat and vital force are created on suns and planets.

They will see two wires, one positive and the other negative, brought together or so near together that in order to complete their electric circuit they must pass through a little space of resisting air, which is a non-conductor, and then they burst into light and moderate heat. In the same manner the positive and negative currents of electricity of the sun and earth, without wires, come together in our atmosphere, which is near the earth's surface a dense resisting non-conductor, and in order to complete the circuit they burst into light, heat and vital force and give life and energy to all animal and vegetable organisms. But the heat must be and is generally moderate, as no vegetable or animal life can exist in excessive heat. And as excessive heat means ruin and decay, therefore no burning sun can furnish light or give life and growth to any planet.

Prof. Simon Newcomb, the learned astronomer, says: "The sun is not a solid body, but must be liquid or gaseous, at least at its surface." He gives this singular reason, therefore, that "the sun's rotation at the equator is completed in less time than at a distance on each side of the equator."

I question both the fact and the sufficiency of his reasoning on this point. According to his own statement, the sun revolves at its equator 4,000 miles an hour, or over a mile a second, while it revolves very slowly near its poles and virtually is not in motion at all at its poles.

This rapid motion at the equator and slowness of motion near the centre of the sun is calculated to deceive the eye and make it think it completes its rotation at its equator in less time than at a distance from it, looking down along the slope of the sun's vast circumference. This is no evidence, for we see only the moving clouds of light on the outer rim of the sun's atmosphere, ten to twenty thousand miles or more from its surface, and they seem to and do complete their rotation a short time sooner. This they naturally should do. How frail and uncertain is the argument based on such doubtful and assumed facts?