Daily National Intelligencer

THE NEW THEORY

[FROM THE WESTERN SPY.]—Reply to D. P's. Strictures.

Cincinnati Reading-Room, September 15.

Messrs. Mason & Palmer—Having last week only time to answer in part the strictures on my theory, (which you extracted from the Herald of Sept. 1st) by republishing my protest from the National Intelligencer, and making some hurried remarks as it was going to press, I now conclude to offer a few more lines on the subject.

I have applied to different sovereigns of Europe for assistance, only in a general way, as I have to "all the world," including our own government.

The reacting pressure of the fluids of infinite space, (which is, I think, the cause of gravity*) should, I find reason to conclude, press nearly or quite equally on every part of the earth, provided the earth were every where equally dense and convex, and the aerial or other fluid medium, at the given points of pressure, were equally quiet or located: therefore if the gravity at the equator can be measured, and is found less than at other parts, it is probably more owing to the centrifugal force of the fluid medium revolving round with the earth, than to any other circumstance; for, with respect to the rotation of the whole matter of this our sphere, it must be supposed to yield and flatten towards the Poles, and project and accumulate towards the equator, according to the degree of velocity with which it rotates, and yield thereto; much as a whirling soap bubble would: hence upon any increase or decrease of rotation, it would vibrate until it became settled in that shape which the principle of gravitation, and force of rotation, would balance it at; therefore the relative thickness of the sphere at the equator would depend thereon, and the gravity and centrifugal force would alike correspond to each other in every change.

Not knowing how the 347 experiments were performed, I cannot deny their correctness, but however correct they may have been made, they must have been founded on the theory of gravity as received in the schools: which, like my theory, is not yet admitted as an incontestible truth.

As I have not any where stated that the earth was a single "hollow globe," but a nest of spheres, Mr. D. P's 3d and 4th paragraphs need no other controversion; if there were not a succession of concentric spheres, I should think, with him, that the sides would have a tendency to collapse, especially at the verges: Perhaps, as it is surmised in Rees's Cyclopædia, the ring of Saturn, (which rotates exceedingly rapid) may be formed on such principle; of this principle I design to treat further at a future day.

If I do not convince the world of the general truth of my theory, I must submit it and myself to be styled absurd; for, however true it be, I shall have acted unwisely in undertaking what ought to have been foreseen could not be accomplished. I do not recollect to have ever read any of Kepler's or Halley's works—or even Newton's, except small quotations; I do not know how the two former founded their supposition about "concentric shells or crusts," or whether they offered any reasons whatever, or only guessed, as many others have done, but with rather better luck than their cotemporaries or predecessors: some have considered the internal part of the earth "as occupied by solid rock, others by water, others again by fire," as Doctor Mitchill mentions in his first letter to me. Amongst so many guesses as have been made, soon or late, it would be extraordinary, if some did not hit near the truth; but it is not certain that Kepler and Halley meant separate concentric spheres, when they said "shells or crusts;" if they meant something like strata, with one shell or crust lying upon another, those words, (as stated in the Cyclopedia under the Art. Ring) were sufficiently explicit; but if they meant separate shells or crusts, the word separate should have been used; but at any rate no one will pretend that the idea of open poles is not original, and that, if once admitted and established, is of an infinite deal more importance to the community, than inaccessible concentric cavities. I have not learned that Kepler or Halley ventured their reputations on the truth of their supposition, or that they did any thing more than surmise it; while I not only ventured mine, by an unqualified declaration, but have devoted my life to the investigation. Had I ever read or heard of any one having even thought of successive shells or crusts, or any thing like concentric spheres, before I published my declaratory circular, I would have noticed it, and rested my claims to originality upon showing the way to get at them. But it is the establishment of the fact, that I at present aim at; and it is that alone which ought to occupy the pens of all candid writers on the subject. It will be time enough, when I have run the ordeal of public investigation, and borne the theory in triumph through the ridicule and doubts of incredulity, and established it upon the firm basis of public faith, to dispute my claims to originality. and to decide to which the laurel shall be given—he who wrote a surmise without establishing it, or he who risked passing for a madman upon its truth, entered without reserve or hesitation upon its actual demonstration, and marked out the road, that conducts to its permanent and incontestible establishment, to the full satisfaction of a wondering world Respectfully,

JNO. CLEVES SYMMES.

* This Idea of the nature or cause of gravity, I decided on, and declared to my friends, in 1817; and I find it supported by an opinion of Sir Richard Phillips, published in a London paper last year. I have also lately somewhere seen a quotation from Newton which shows he has hinted that gravity might yet be found to be some such principle; though I believe he leaned more towards the idea that it was an innate or inherent principle contained within or immediately about the bodies producing or affected by it. My acquiring this idea of the cause of gravity was one of the links of the chain of causes and effects, which led my reasoning faculties to fix on the new theory of open poles and concentric spheres; another important link in this chain was a new theory in relation to the nature of the matter of heat, which I also fixed upon in 1817, and design to publish in due time.

J. C. S.