account for the sun's heat than what can do so. We may, for instance, be perfectly certain that it cannot have been caused by chemical action. The most probable theory is that which was first worked out by Helmholtz and Thomson;[1] and which attributes the heat of the sun to the primeval energy of position possessed by its particles. In other words, it is supposed that these particles originally existed at a great distance from each other, and that, being endowed with the force of gravitation, they have since gradually come together, while in this process heat has been generated just as it would be if a stone were dropped from the top of a cliff towards the earth.
208. Nor is this case wholly imaginary, but we have some reason for thinking that it may still be in operation in the case of certain nebulæ which, both in their constitution as revealed by the spectroscope, and in their general appearance, impress the beholder with the idea that they are not yet fully condensed into their ultimate shape and size.
If we allow that by this means our luminary has obtained his wonderful store of high-class energy, we have yet to inquire to what extent this operation is going on at the present moment. Is it only a thing of the past, or is it a thing also of the present? I think we may reply that the sun cannot be condensing very fast, at least, within historical times. For if the
- ↑ Mayer and Waterston seem first to have caught the rudiments of this idea.
