Old and New Questions in Physics, Cosmology, Philosophy, and Theoretical Biology pp 885-907 | Cite as

# Early Attempts at a Unitary Understanding of Nature

## Abstract

In the past 50 years remarkable progress has been made in identifying the elementary particles of matter and in understanding the interactions between them. Of course, many problems remain to be solved; two of the most fundamental ones concern gravitation. First, it is not understood how gravitation is related to the other fundamental forces. Second, there is no workable theory of gravitation that is consistent with the principles of quantum mechanics. Recently a new theory of gravitation called supergravity has led to new ideas on both these problems. It may represent a step toward solving them.

^{1}

## Keywords

Gravitational Radiation Detection Circuit Total Solar Eclipse Inertial Matter Pneumatic Motor## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References and Notes

- 1.D. Z. Freedman and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, “Supergravity and the Unification of the Laws of Physics,”
*Sci. Am*. 238, 126 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 2.Charles Babbage,
*The Ninth*Bridgewater Treatise, 2nd ed. (John Murray, London, 1838), p. 179.Google Scholar - 3.Today Mossotti is almost exclusively known for his contribution to the theory of the atomic polarizability of dielectrics embodied in the “Claussius-Mossotti” equation.Google Scholar
- 4.There are a number of works that deal with the germane issues in physics in the 19th century. Particularly helpful are E. Whittaker,
*A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity*, 2 Vols. (Thomas Nelson and Sons, London, 1951 and 1953)Google Scholar - 4a.M. B. Hesse,
*Forces and Fields*(New York Philosophical Library, 1961)Google Scholar - 4b.
- 4c.D. M. Knight,
*Atoms and Elements*,2nd ed. (Hutchinson, London, 1970)Google Scholar - 4d.A. Thackray, Atoms and Powers (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1970)Google Scholar
- 4e.and T. H. Levere,
*Affinity and Matter*(Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1971).Google Scholar - B. G. Doran, “Origins and Consolidation of Field Theory in Nineteenth-Century Britain: . . .,”
*Hist. Stud. Phys. Sci*. 6, 133 (1975)Google Scholar - 4f.A. J. Rocke, “Atoms and Equivalents: ...,”
*Hist. Stud. Phys. Sci*. 9, 225 (1978)Google Scholar - 4g.M. Crosland and C. Smith, “The Transmission of Physics from France to Britain,”
*Hist. Stud. Phys. Sci*. 9, 1 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 5.The origins of this view, at least in part, are to be found in the
*naturphilosophie*of the German romantics. But they also seem to have had indigenous roots as well. See P. M. Heimann, “Conversion of Forces and the Conservation of Energy,”*Centaurus*18, 147 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 6.See Y. Elkana,
*The Discovery of the Conservation of Energy*(Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1974), and Heimann, Ref. 5.Google Scholar - 7.O. F. Mossotti, Sur
*les forces qui*regissent*la constitution intérieur des corps*(Turin, 1836). Mossotti’s essay was translated into English and published in*Taylor’s Scientific Memoirs*1, 448 (1839).Google Scholar - 8.Reference 7, trans., p. 451.Google Scholar
- 9.P. S. Laplace, Mécanique
*Celeste*(Chelsea Reprint, New York, 1966–69), Vol. 5, pp. 117–121. Laplace’s argument deals with pressure/density relations in the caloric, which he supposed to possess a short-range mutual repulsion. It is, therefore, not obvious that Mossotti’s claimed analogy is correct.Google Scholar - 10.I cannot resist the temptation to remark here that it was almost exactly 100 years later that H. Yukawa
*[Phys. Math. Soc. Jpn, Proc*. 17, 48 (1935)] constructed a nuclear force law that differs only trivially from that which follows from Mossotti’s theory. In most discussions of the Yukawa interaction it is implied that his force law requires the transient violation of energy conservation. In light of Mossotti’s theory, it is easily seen that this is not true.Google Scholar - 11.These views, which can be found throughout Faraday’s work of the late 1830s, led to to an illuminating correspondence with R. Hare that is published in L. Pearce Williams, editor,
*The Selected Correspondence of Michael Faraday*(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1971), Vol. 1, 350–358, 360–370, and 382–392.Google Scholar - 12.Faraday to W. Whewell, 13 December 1836, in
*Correspondence*,Vol. 1, 306–307.Google Scholar - 13.C. Babbage to Faraday, 20 January 1837, in
*Correspondence*,Vol. 1, 308.Google Scholar - 14.G.-L. Lesage, “Essai sur l’origine des forces mortes” (ms., Univ. of Geneva Library, 1749). Lesage’s theory is predicated on the assumption that space is filled with high-velocity particles that are slightly attenuated by matter. Gravitation is the consequence of the “shadow” in the sea of these particles cast by matter. Shadow theories of gravitation are still independently rediscovered with high frequency and monotonous regularity. (R. H. Dicke, personal communication.)Google Scholar
- 15.See the reviews of this lecture in
*Phil*Mag. 10, 317 (1837), and*Lit Gazette*,4 Feb. 1837, p. 72.Google Scholar - 16.See Ref. 2.Google Scholar
- 17.Reference 2, p. 183. Note that Babbage has completely missed the main point of Mossotti’s force law—namely, the point of stable equilibrium.Google Scholar
- 18.Reference 2, p. 181.Google Scholar
- 19.T. Exley, “Remarks on M. Mossotti’s theory of Physics, . . .,”
*Phil. Mag*. 11, 496 (1837).Google Scholar - 20.S. Earnshaw, “On the Nature of the Molecular Forces which Regulate the Constitution of the Luminiferous Ether,”
*Trans. Camb. Phil*. Soc. 7, 97 (1839–42).Google Scholar - 21.There is also reason to suspect that Earnshaw may have discussed Mossotti’s theory with Exley, for Exley remarked that, “A very learned and universally admired professor of Cambridge, who honoured my paper with some judicious remarks, . . .” (Note 19, p. 497).Google Scholar
- 22.This is wrong. If an ether particle of nonvanishing radius is located at and displaced an infinitesimal distance from, the equilibrium point, the equation that actually applies is Poisson’s equation. This, by the way, vitiates the remainder of Earnshaw’s argument.Google Scholar
- 23.In the 1840s, when others had abandoned Mossotti’s theory, Faraday favorably referred to to it in his famous papers, “A Speculation Touching Electric Conduction and the Nature of Matter”
*[Phil*. Mag. 24, 136 (1844)] and “Thoughts on Ray-Vibrations” [Phil. Mag. 28, #188 (1846)J. And more than a decade later, shortly before his last major series of experiments, he again brought up Mossotti’s theory in his paper, “On the Conservation of Force” [Phil. Mag. 13, 225 (1857)].Google Scholar - 24.M. Faraday,
*Experimental Researches in Electricity*(Taylor and Francis, London, 1855), Vol. 3, p. 161.Google Scholar - 24a.L. Pearce Williams,
*Michael Faraday*(Chapman and Hall, London, 1965), pp. 465–470Google Scholar - 24b.W. Berkson,
*Fields of Force*(John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1974), pp. 112–116.Google Scholar - 24c.T. H. Levere, “Faraday, Matter, and Natural Theology— . . .,”
*Brit. J. Hist. Sci*. 4, 95 (1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 24d.P. M. Heimann, “Faraday’s Theories of Matter and Electricity,”
*Brit. J. Hist. Sci*. 5, 235 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 24e.J. E. McGuire, “Forces, Powers, Aethers, and Fields,” Boston Stud.
*Phil. Sci*. 14, 119 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 25.
*Expt, Res. Elec*. 3, 1–2 (1855).Google Scholar - 26.Diary, Vol. 5, p. 150.Google Scholar
- 27.Maxwell was one of the few to realize that Faraday had put his finger on a key problem in the issue of polarity. As he later remarked to Faraday, “You have also seen that the great mystery is not how like bodies repel and unlike attract but how like bodies attract (by gravation [sic.]).”
*Correspondence*,Vol. 2, p. 881.Google Scholar - 28.Diary, Vol. 5, p. 150.Google Scholar
- 29.Diary, Vol. 5, p. 151.Google Scholar
- 30.Recalling that inertial motion is the state of gravitational free-fall in general relativity theory, this view is subsumed under the proposition that gravitational radiation (as we would say today) is accompanied by electromagnetic radiation.Google Scholar
- 31.Diary, Vol, 5, p. 152.Google Scholar
- 32.Diary, Vol. 5, p. 152.Google Scholar
- 33.Diary, Vol. 5, p. 156.Google Scholar
- 34.
*Expt. Res. Elec*. 3, 168.Google Scholar - 35.J. C. F. Zöllner,
*Erklärung der L/niversellen Gravitation*(L. Staackmann, Leipzig, 1882).Google Scholar - 36.H. A. Lorentz, “Considerations on Gravitation,”
*Proc. R. Acad. Sci*., Amsterdam 2, 559 (1900).Google Scholar - 37.Faraday, Diary, Vol. 7, pp. 334–379.Google Scholar
- 38.A. Schuster, “Recent Total Solar Eclipses,”
*Proc. R. Institution*13, 273 (1890–92)Google Scholar - 38a.A. Schuster, “A Critical Examination of the Possible Causes of Terrestrial Magnetism,”
*Proc. Phys. Soc*. 24, 121 (1912).Google Scholar - 39.Kelvin (Wm. Thomson), in a presidential address to the Royal Society,
*Proc. R. Soc*. 52, 304 (1892).Google Scholar - 40.H. A. Wilson, “An Experiment on the Origin of the Earth’s Magnetic Field,” Proc. R. Soc.
*London Ser. A*104, 451 (1923).CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 41.W. F. G. Swann and A. Longacre, “An Attempt to Detect a Magnetic Field as the Result of the Rotation of a Copper Sphere at High Speed,” J.
*Franklin institute*206, 421 (1928).CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 42.P. M. S. Blackett, “The Magnetic Field of Massive Rotating Bodies,”
*Nature*159, 658 (1947).CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 43.P. M. S. Blackett, “A Negative Experiment Relating to Magnetism and the Earth’s Rotation,”
*Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London Ser*. A 245, 309 (1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 43a.C. W. F. Everitt, “Gravitation, Relativity and Precise Experimentation,” in Proc.
*First Marcel Grossmann Meeting on General Relativity*(ed. Ruffini, North Holland, 1977), p. 545.Google Scholar - 44.J. F. Woodward, “An Experimental Re-examination of Faradayan Electrogravitational Induction,”
*Gen. Rel. and Grav*., 12, 1055 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 45.This is the Faradayan equivalent of the Schuster-Wilson-Blackett hypothesis that rotating matter generates a magnetic field.Google Scholar
- 46.I might mention here that this is a nonnegligible problem. The guide bearings must be free-running, as any stiffness produces torsion that generates an effect comparable in magnitude to that sought. In the apparatus used, however, the torsionally induced charge was found to have the opposite sign (that is, positive) from that of the observed effect. Thus, it could be separated from the observed effect.Google Scholar
- 47.The chief modifications will be the use of gas bearings and an improved sample geometry.Google Scholar
- 48.J. Bailey, et al., “Final Report on the CERN Muon Storage Ring . . .,”
*Nucl. Phys*. B 150, 1 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 49.J. F. Woodward, “Electrogravitational Induction and Rotation,”
*Found, of Phys*. 12, 467 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar