Abstract
THE turn which the letter of Dr. Jeffreys (NATURE, April 28) has given to the “‘space’ or ‘æther’?” controversy may easily obscure the real point at issue. The clear import of my letters of April 7 and 21, and, I think also, of Prof. Eddington's forceful appreciation of the questions involved (April 14), is that the physical universe—at bottom a universe of energy—must in some form or other be continuously extensive, and cannot be discrete. The metaphysical necessity is that something physical must constitute interstellar “space”. The contention is not primarily one of defending the electro-magnetic æther, or any other specific æther, but of providing for extension throughout the universe. If those who doubt or deny the existence of a connecting medium in any sense hitherto understood, can show that light, electricity, gravitation, or any other manifestation of energy themselves constitute the regions of interstellar, or interplanetary, “space” in such a way that extension is always preserved, then I, for one, am perfectly satisfied. But let them not be responsible for language, or omissions of language, that inevitably lead to the implication of “emptiness” in a universe of transferable energy. It is when the outstanding question of paramount interest from the points of view of both physics and metaphysics, namely, “Of what does interstellar ‘space” consist?” is ignored that the situation becomes intolerable.
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
BONACINA, L. The Physical Continuity of “Space”. Nature 107, 300 (1921). https://doi.org/10.1038/107300b0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/107300b0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.