Full resolution (JPEG) - On this page / på denna sida - Sidor ...
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has never been proofread. / Denna sida har aldrig korrekturlästs.
Pfeil (1893), Eberhard (Dissertation, Munich, 1893), Gerland (1905),
Holzmuller (1906) and Hoppe (1906), and it may be added H. L. Vogel
in Newcomb-Engelmann’s Populäre Astronomie (1905).
All of the above mentioned authors have considered Kant’s work
from the mechanical standpoint and have not concerned themselves with
the great leading ideas in their general scope. On the other liand a
philosopher König has in his work »Kant und die Naturwissenschaft»
(1907) ranked himself on the other side. C. Wolf also emphasizes tlie
thoughtful poesy — i. e., the philosophical depth — in Kant’s expressions.
Haeckel has also without doubt permitted himself to be gnided hy a
philosophical (monistic) manner of treatment in his »Natiirliche
Schöpf-ungsgeschichte».
It is therefore explained why the cosmological thoughts may be
called grand and wonderful, as for example Kaxt’s thoughts in this field,
although their execution does not agree with the laws of physics. Not
even the great master in the field of celestial mechanics, Laplace, has
completely escaped this fate. It is now recognized by all that his so
highly praised nebular theory in many points conflicts with the laws of
mechanics, although it indeed in that respect is far better thau Kant’s
attempt. And besides it is in conflict with various astronomical and
physical discoveries, among which at least one, that of the direction in
which the moons of Uranus revolve, was made when he was still in his
prime. There is however no one prepared to deny that this
cosmological work of Laplace, although it demands working over in almost
all details, nevertheless belongs to the most important scientific works
which have been executed.
To take another example, one of Kants predecessors in antiquity,
the famous natural philosopher Anaxagoras, taught that the original
chaos had heen gradually arranged in order, so that the heavenly bodies
which now exist were formed, that the sun was an enormous glowing
lump of iron and that the other stars were also glowing hy their rubbing
against the surrounding ether. Most thinkers are no doubt disposed lo
regard his expression that the sun is made of iron as a wortliless
curiosity. I however permit myself to entertain an altogether different
opinion as to this point. Spectrum analysis has taught us that iron
prohahly constitutes a most essential part of the sun’s matter. Observation
of the constitution of metallic meteorites teaches us that iron is without
comparison the most important metal in them, and from various
con-siderations we view it as probable that the earth’s chief mass is iron.
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
