The energy concept

Chapter I

Upon all sides to-day we hear emphasis put upon the energy concept in philosophy. Dynamism has superseded materialism. Activism, voluntarism, pragmatism, and philosophies of this active type are coming more and more to take the place of the older systems of mechanism. Students in philosophy are compelled to recognize the significant place which such systems as those of Leibnitz, Bergson, Ostwald, etc., are holding in the field of modern thought. If Leibnitz' philosophy were to be re-stated to-day from the standpoint of modern scientific thought and terminology, it would probably be termed a system of Energism. With Bergson life is one continuous process of Becoming, and fundamental in this process is the guiding agent which he calls the vital impetus. So active and vital is this inner principle that it would seem impossible to think of Bergson's philosophy out of relation to the energy concept. With Ostwald, energy is the primary concept; everything that exists is but a part of a great system of energies. Such energetic conceptions as these sound the keynote to modern philosophical thought and receive genuine support from recent scientific discoveries.

In physical science we are told that matter, under the scrutiny of experimental physics, has resolved itself into energy. When asked what this ultimate and final energy is, we are sometimes referred to another concept, that of electricity. And inasmuch as we shall endeavor to interpret reality in terms of energy and make a critical inquiry into the energy concept in its qualitative aspects, it becomes imperative therefore at this stage of philosophical inquiry to examine into this concept of energy and determine, if we can, its philosophical import.

Philosophers have been concerned with the problem of reality since the earliest history of thought, and to the question, What is reality ? many and varied answers have been given. We find that in the approach to this problem the scientific understanding of the ancients presents an interesting contrast with that of to-day. Instead of the four elements of Empedocles — earth, air, fire, and water — more than ninety elements have been found, entering into the make-up of the earth and all existing objects. "The spectroscope tells us that in the most distant stars the same elements exist as here, and that the periods of vibrations which cause them to emit light are identical with those of their terrestrial representatives.' ' All material things can be analyzed and resolved into these ninety elements.

In the philosophy of the early days we meet two opposing schools of thought — one teaching that everything is and nothing becomes; the other declaring that nothing is and everything is in a process of becoming.

Heracleitus, representing the latter school, believed all things to be in a state of flux; there is no such thing as rest. In this he anticipated a fundamental principle in modern science, for science to-day holds that matter is made up of a countless number of moving particles. In the decomposition and changes peculiar to inorganic matter, and in the myriads of living cells composing organic matter we find that there are no two successive moments when any single particle of substance fails to experience some genuine change.

BRIEF STATEMENT CONCERNING THE ATOMIC THEORY

As we proceed with our task it becomes evident that a study of the atomic theory, which has to do with the organization of these little moving particles, is fundamental to any treatment which might be made of matter and any search for facts which have to do with ultimate reality. It is a long road, however, from Democritus, the first real exponent of Atomism, to the present time, and many and varied have been the interpretations made of this system along the way.

With Democritus the atom is simply a hard little body moving mechanically through space. The atoms coming together are responsible for all changes. By this method in his system of materialism he would endeavor to explain all phenomena, from the most simple external occurrences to the deepest experiences of the mental life.

A new light was thrown on the atomic theory when Newton's law of gravitation took its place in the world of science. Instead of the atoms clashing at random and being held together in a chance way by means of their jagged surfaces, the element of attraction was introduced. "It was natural that, having explained the cosmical, and subsequently many terrestrial phenomena, successfully by the formula of attraction, Newton himself, and still more Laplace and his school, should have attempted the explanation of molecular phenomena by similar methods. The astronomical view spread into molecular physics. Newton himself made use of the notion of molecular attraction — i.e., of attraction existing only at very small distances — to explain the refraction and inflection of light passing from empty space, or from the atmosphere, into or in the neighborhood of solid bodies." 1

Boscovich was among the first to lose faith in a dependence on the impact of the atoms; nor could he be satisfied with allowing them extension. He felt that the fundamental essence of matter was to be found in atom points, situated in space, from which, as a basis, repulsive forces operated.

Dalton, who gave to each atom a definite weight, was responsible for the establishment of the atomic theory of the modern day. He taught that the small particles in all bodies are held together by an attractive force, and that there is also present and operating in matter a repulsive force. This introducing into the theory the element of forces was carried even further by such men as Fechner, Moigno, and Faraday, who would make the atoms simple centers of force, which

1 Merz, History of European Thought in the Nineteenth Century, Vol. i, pp. 354-356.

closely approaches a system of dynamism and paves the way to the energy concept.

In the analysis of substance according to the atomic theory, the smallest unit we meet is the molecule which can be further divided into atoms. In HN0 3 we have a molecule of nitric acid, containing one atom of hydrogen, one of nitrogen, and three of oxygen. The molecules differ according to the number of atoms constituting them. The atoms of the same element have been considered invariable in size, having a definite and fixed weight. It is believed to-day, however, that the so-called atomic weights are merely averages. Radium, thorium, and uranium have the heaviest atoms and hydrogen the lightest. "We are as certain of the existence of these atoms and of their uniformity and invariability as if we could count and measure them. Indeed they are actually counted in certain cases of radioactivity." 2

THE ELECTRONIC THEORY

The atomic theory has been a very profitable instrument in the hands of science for a long time, but acquired knowledge now enables us to make an analysis of Nature which transcends the limitations of the atom. Just as the molecule of substance was divided and the atom made the smallest measure of matter, so the atom to-day is analyzed and found to be composed of still smaller particles.

One of the most remarkable pieces of work accomplished by science in recent years has been this success-

2 Soddy, Matter and Energy, p. 55.

ful analysis of the atom. As the smallest unit of matter entering into the make-up of the elements, the atom has lost its prestige, and science to-day is thinking in terms of the electron instead. It is the development of the electronic theory which has not only popularized the energy concept but given it a well established place in modern scientific discovery and thought. It has confirmed the long-held belief in the presence of a dynamic force in Nature, and seems to show that ultimate reality itself is identical with what science has been calling electricity, but now looks upon as some form of energy.

According to Rutherford each atom is believed to be like a little solar system, being composed wholly of charges of negative electricity, electrons, revolving "in regular orbits" 3 about a core or nucleus which is a charge of positive electricity. More recent thought, however, is inclined to believe that the electrons are vibrating in certain regions, rather than revolving about a nucleus, within the atom. Motion results as the electrons repel each other and in their activities they are held in balance by the attraction of the positive unit. It is thought that the negative charges are equal to the free positive charge of the nucleus and in this fact the atom realizes a possible equilibrium.

Some writers consider the electron to be a unit of electricity whether negative or positive. For our present purpose we shall call only the unit of negative charge an electron. The electrons of the atom are all the same, no matter from whatever element's atoms they come. They are constituents of every atom, are

3 Gibson, Scientific Ideas of To-day, p. 53.

real electricity, which flowing, constitute electric current.

Concerning the nucleus of the atom, science does not have full knowledge. We are sure, however, that it is electricity and predominantly positive. In this nucleus have been found electrons which under certain conditions are set free. This core or positive charge is less than one ten thousandth the diameter of the atom and numerically equal to one half the atomic weight, 4 while "the whole atom is perhaps one hundred thousand times as large in diameter as the electrons." 5

The velocity of the electrons in their flight is almost inconceivable; thus they occupy but small space and constitute a solid. The immense possible velocity is suggested in the statement that "the velocity of the electron when impelled by strong electric force may reach sixty thousand miles per second when shot through a vacuum, the better the vacuum the higher the speed." e

Under certain conditions atoms gain and lose electrons. Sometimes the negative charges predominate and sometimes the positive, according to whether the atom has taken on or given off electrons. Some elements will give up electrons quicker than others. The stronger a metal, the stronger the tendency to give up electrons when exposed to the impact of light. The latest theory of color is based on the principle of the looseness of the electrons in the atom. The weight itself of an element is determined by the electrons. Thompson says "the atomic weight of an element is

4 Stewart, The Homiletic Review, Oct., 1914.

5 Mills, The Realities of Modern Science, p. 90.

6 Gibson, Scientific Ideas of To-day.

proportionate to the number of electrons contained in the atoms," So in hydrogen, the lightest atom, we find but one electron and in uranium, the heaviest known atom, there are ninety-two. To-day then, science does not have to stop with the atom, but can take that more ultimate particle, the electron, as a working basis.

This brings us safely to the place of assumption that electricity is a common, pervading factor peculiar to the finest particles in all matter, and the electron as a unit of energy presents itself as a general medium of permeation running through all forms of material existence, animate and inanimate. This is given partial confirmation in the fact that electrical excitation can very often get definite responses from animals, plants, and inorganic substances. "The everyday laboratory faith of the physicist is now not in visible material as formerly understood, but in the invisible thing we call electricity. He has repudiated the atom as a unit, observing in it a wonderful and complex system of unending interest and great experimental possibilities, and has accepted the atom of electricity as the basis for his scientific belief. . . . The reality of matter, as formerly conceived, is now abandoned, and the invisible becomes the everyday reality of the scientific laboratory." 7

As we now come face to face with Nature in its ultimate analysis, reality itself, we come face to face with what, in commercial as well as scientific language, has been called electricity. In this we foresee meanings

7 Stewart, The Homiletic Review, Oct., 1914.

and possibilities more far-reaching than was ever dreamed. And in dealing with this dynamic something, science is not willing any longer to talk in terms of what has been known as the electricity concept but endeavors to broaden and deepen its hold on truth and proceeds in this field of inquiry in the name of the energy concept.

THE ENERGY CONCEPT AND COSMIC EVOLUTION

A' study of cosmic evolution confirms the belief that there is and has been an all-prevailing something more fundamental than electricity, which something is energy, and which is manifesting itself to-day as electricity. When we find, the dynamic conception of reality prevailing in much of the best philosophy of all ages, in modern psychology, and even in to-day's philosophy of life, it is not strange that in its progress toward ultimate truth modern science should be confirming this interpretation by its strong and positive representation of the concept of energy. It seems necessary then for us to "reverse our thought in the search for causes and take steps toward an energy conception of the origin of life and energy conception of the nature of heredity." 8

As intimated in the foregoing, the history of the earth's evolution is fundamentally the history of the changes in forms of energy. Four of these have primarily manifested themselves in this process of cosmic development — heat, light, chemical affinity, and electricity. According to MacFarlane, 9 in the very primi-

8 Osborn, The Origin and Evolution of Life, p. 10.

9 MacFarlane, The Causes and Course of Organic Evolution.

tive state of the earth when everything was in a nebulous 10 state, energy manifested itself as heat. The intensity of the heat must have been extreme "in this gaseous state of the earth and according to Arldt a temperature of at least 15000c may have existed." 11 Associated with the intense heat was a corresponding rapidity in the motion of the constituents of this fiery mass; and in the development from this gaseous state the degree of motion of these particles increased, proportionate to the condensation of heat which took place. Here then in the condensation of heat energy we meet with motion and its cause as first experienced in the cosmic order.

In the gradual change from the gaseous to the liquid state, instead of energy primarily manifesting itself as heat, it began to assert itself as light. Then, as the energy continued its condensation, with an increased activity and higher degree of organization of the atoms we find that energy expressed itself as "chemical affinity." Thus as the earth progressed in its cooling process, associated with which was a definite progress in the organization of the centers of energy, bodies began to come into definite forms, of existence, reaching the highest and best condition in the solid state when energy expressed itself primarily as electricity. Thus when we study the transformation of energy

10 In suggesting this program we are fully aware that science in America, especially geology and biology, is giving precedence to the Planetesimal Hypothesis as over against the Nebular Hypothesis. But even so, this does not at all controvert our theory as to the part energy has played in the process of cosmic evolution.

11 MacFarlane, The Causes and Course, of Organic Evolution, p. 21, passim.

through the gaseous, liquid, and solid states, from original heat and light to electricity, we are not surprised to see electricity quickly and easily taking the forms of heat and light, harmonizing somewhat with Fanvell's view that electricity is a "highly condensed or latent heat." As Osborn would say, it is but the old forms of energy taking new directions.

According to our hypothesis then, in the ultimate analysis of all things we meet energy. In it wonderful possibilities and potentialities are to be found. It is the Alpha and Omega of all forms of existence, the different bodies being but different expressions of the same thing. Haeckel confirms this in saying that "mechanical and chemical energy, sound and heat, light and electricity are mutually convertible; they seem to be but different modes of one and the same fundamental force or energy. 12 That energy is a common principle underlying all existence, organic and inorganic, is also supported by Osborn: "No form of energy has thus far been discovered in living substances which is peculiar to them and not derived from the inorganic world." 13 "Thus the evolution of life may be written in terms of invisible energy as it has long since been written in terms of visible forms." 14

HE ENERGY CONCEPT AND THE UNITY OF NATURE

In the unity of Nature we have a situation which seemingly is best explained by the presence of some

12 Haeckel, Riddle of the Universe, p. 254. (Translated by McCabe.)

13 Osborn, The Origin and Evolution of Life, p. 12. 14: Ibid., p. 17.

universal, dynamic essence such as energy; and the more progress we make in our understanding of Nature the more we are impressed with the harmonious interactions and relationships existing between Nature's constituents. Marvin feels that if we could see Nature through perfect eyes all seeming discords would disappear. He says "the doctrine of evolution has made the forms of animal and plant life, the institutions, customs, and languages and arts of different peoples all seem but different chapters in one connected story of earthly life. In short, increased knowledge reveals increased interconnection and complete knowledge would reveal complete interconnection." 15 Since organic and inorganic bodies are composed of the same ingredients, all coming from the same elements, it is very natural to look upon the world as one great unitary whole.

Tagore, the poet-philosopher of India, protests against the idea that certain parts of Nature are set off from the rest. He advocates a real unity of Nature in saying that "in the west the prevalent feeling is that Nature belongs exclusively to inanimate things and to beasts, that there is a sudden, unaccountable break where human nature begins. According to it, everything that is law in the scale of beings is merely Nature, and whatever has the stamp of perfection on it, intellectual or moral, is human nature. It is like dividing the bud and the blossom into two separate categories and putting their grace to the credit of two different and antithetical principles." 16

15 Marvin, A First Book in Metaphysics, p. 92.

16 Tagore, Sadhana — The Realization of Life, pp. 6-7.

Not only no man liveth unto himself, but no thing liveth unto itself. There is a common chord running through all life. The interests of all forms of existing life are mutual. The tender, sympathetic strain common to all life is necessarily based upon a reciprocity in relationships.

Even between the lower animals and man a tender understanding is often experienced, and in many cases the responses obtained from them are almost incredible. The pipe organ not only thrills us as human beings but gets a sympathetic response from inanimate objects as well. We love to commune with Nature but the reality of this experience would vanish if we should try to make it a one-sided affair on our part. Being human we best understand man's feelings in relation to other existing things but that does not say that he contributes more than his proportionate share of appreciation to the unity and harmony of Nature. In this fact of mutual relationships there must be some element of reality upon which these interactions can ride back and forth. We find this principle of reality in energy into which man and beast and clod can be resolved.

Behind this attitude modern thought seems to be arraying itself. De Tunzelmann says "the observed correlation of mental and material phenomena definitely demonstrates the power of the human mind and the minds of other living beings, to influence and be influenced by, changes in the distribution of energy in their material environment." 17

17 de Tunzelmann, The Electrical Theory and Problem of the Universe, p. 471.

Some would go so far as to say "physical and psychical processes depend so on one another that it is possible to find in energy not only a possible unifying of Nature but an occasion for an efficient and moving cause." Energy seems to be established as the fundamental means of interaction and relationship between mind and matter, mind and mind, and matter and matter. Perry would get to the heart of the whole question and says: "Instead of conceiving a matter that manifests itself in forms and motions, why not stop at force and invest it with finality and universality ?" 18

Perhaps de Tunzelmann comes out strongest in championing the cause of energy as the ultimate basic element in all matter. He says we cannot conceive of a substance from which the uniform distribution of energy has been abstracted. Its very life would be taken away if the energy element were eliminated. He seems to sum up his attitude in saying, "All the phenomena of the material universe may therefore be considered as arising solely from changes in energy distribution. That is to say, energy is the sole ultimate phenomenal basis of matter." 19

It is very evident then that in recent years a great change has taken place in the field of science due to the development of the electronic theory of matter. In fact, we have come to that place where it can be said that "the old concept of stuff has been completely displaced by the new concept of radiant energy." 20 Thus it seems that the old scientist-philosophers, some of

18 Perry, Present Philosophical Tendencies, p. 70.

19 de Tunzelmann, The Electrical Theory and Problem of the Universe, p. 470.

20 Carr, Preface to Bergson's Mind-Energy, p. vi.

whose systems we shall review in the next chapter, in teaching the presence in matter of a dynamic element, were feeling after the real truth in the situation. For modern science not only confirms this attitude but, as has been suggested, goes still further, and by satisfactory experiments has come to the conclusion that "there is no difference between matter and energy" 21 and that the world in its ultimate essence, reality itself '; is energy.

21 Wendt, Lectures.

Chapter II THE DYNAMIC TREND IN THE HISTORY OF THOUGHT

As suggested in our first chapter the dynamic conception of the world is not at all new, and the attitude of modern science toward the energy concept has a strong background of support in the energetic conception of reality so evident in the history of thought. We shall now undertake as our immediate task to pass in review those thinkers, ancient and modern, who have dwelt upon the dynamic aspect of reality.

The men of the early Ionian school were the first to try to get into the heart of Nature and find out what is the abiding element in all changing things — that common substance from which all things come and into which they pass. 1 To understand the teaching of these early Greek thinkers it is necessary to understand the meaning of cpvcnz as used by them, for this seems to constitute the source and backbone of | their philosophy.

In the philosophy of these writers we find cpvau (Physis) to be a fiery, living, moving, ultimate essence permeating all things. From it, which knows no be-

1 Bakewell's Source Book in Philosophy, p. I.

ginning or end, through the media of water, air, and fire, by means of its own self-activity, have come all things, souls, gods, the world itself. $vGzg then, the substratum and essence of all bodies, 2 is a vitalistic, self -producing element from whose eternal mobility and life all existing forms receive impulses to activity, as it constantly plays the role of an urging, guiding, and determining factor. To Anaximander have been ascribed these words: "dddvarov ydp uai dvGoXedpov 7tepiex eiv G07tavra xai 7idvra Hvfieprav ." 3 This ultimate essence then is not only living and free but also divine.

HYLOZOISM

The first philosophy which will be taken up is that of the hylozoists as represented by Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, and Heracleitus, in which is prominent the idea that the whole world is a living being and that all matter is moving; living matter and moving matter being identical. All material elements of Nature are related in a common life. In this system we find evinced the belief that the universe is animated by an inner, fiery, vital principle which operates as a qualitatively psychic factor. This conception of an inner, moving principle of unity appears early among Greek thinkers, and naturally the question arose, what matter is most moving, most alive ? What is this ultimate reality which affords a basis for all moving and

2 Veazie, Studies in the History of Ideas, Ch. II, passim.

3 "Immortal and indestructible, surrounds all and directs all." (Fairbanks, The First Philosophers of Greece, pp. 8-9.)

changing, and which continues to exist after the changes occur?

In answer to this question Thales replied that it was water, seeing that moisture was very essential in animal and vegetable life; also perceiving it to be very subtle and versatile, appearing in the forms of a solid, liquid, and vapor. He felt that the plasticity of matter furnished the possibility for everything to change, through water as the medium; all things have their origin in water and go back into water again. The active vitality of matter so impressed Thales that he taught the existence of a world soul, and that a divine mind was constantly at work. He would say according to Aristotle: "All things are full of gods. The magnet is alive; for it has the power of moving iron." 4 Thales' water, "the soul substance, possesses a superhuman mana, a daemonic energy distinct from the natural properties of the water." 5

Plato quotes Thales as saying: "Is there any one who acknowledges this and yet holds that all things are not full of gods?" "Its motion and its power of generating things other than itself are due to its life (ipvxrf), an inward, spontaneous principle of activity." 6 Thus in the hylozoism of Thales we have a dynamic conception of Nature which is inseparable from the modern energy concept.

Anaximander also was keenly conscious of the presence of an unlimited, active, vital force in matter, but

4 Quoted from Burnet's Early Greek Philosophy, p. 48.

5 Quoted from Cornford's From Religion to Philosophy, p. 135. « Ibid., p. 128.

he did not give it the name of an element such as water. He called his the Unlimited or Infinite which is not only unlimited and infinite but is "without beginning, indestructible and immortal. ,, This dynamic, inner life surging through matter is endowed by Anaximander with the possibility of "encompassing and guiding all things." We find Theophrastus saying that "Anaximander . . . said that the material cause and first element of things was the Infinite, he being the first to introduce this name for the material cause. He says it is neither water nor any other of the so-called elements, but a substance different from them which is infinite, from which arise all the heavens and all the worlds within them. . . . He says that this is eternal and ageless and that it encompasses all the worlds . . . and besides this there was an eternal motion, in the course of which was brought about the origin of the worlds." 7

Anaximenes, continuing the same dynamic trend of thought, said that air, with an inner vitality and force peculiar to itself, was the underlying and pervading principle in everything. Air is continually in motion and has the same relation to the world as man's soul has to his body. According to Theophrastus, Anaximenes says : "Just as our soul, being air, holds us together, so do breath and air encompass the whole world."

7 Quoted from Burnet's Early Greek Philosophy, pp. 54-55.

HERACLEITUS

In Heracleitus also we meet with a remarkable anticipation of the modern energetic attitude toward reality. In his philosophy he reaches forward to a fundamental principle in modern science, teaching that everything moves; everything is in a state of flux. Nothing abides; all things in Nature are changing into one another — are in a constant process of becoming. He called his primary cosmic substance, fire. It is not what we mean by ordinary fire but a something which changes into all things and into which all things can be transformed. It so permeates the last iota of all substance that in all matter there is the "ever-living fire." These changing processes, which are expressions of a restless vitality, are fateful, rational and just. Thus the world is explained in terms of a cosmic substance, a transforming force, fire, which continually burns but never burns out; man himself being a spark of fire struck off from, and at death becomes lost in the great cosmic Fire.

In this whole system there is a marked element of harmony characterizing all Nature, back of which is a Universal Order, Divine Law, whose force is intelligent and efficient, governing all things. Heracleitus calls this all-prevailing principle intelligent Will, 8 Law, 9

8 Fragment 19 — There is one wisdom, to understand the intelligent will by which all things are governed through all.

9 Fragment 91 — The law of understanding is common to all. Those who speak with intelligence must hold fast to that which is common to all, even more strongly than a city holds fast to its law. For all human laws are dependent upon one divine law, for this rules as far as it wills, and suffices for all, and overbounds.

Justice, 10 Destiny or Fate, 11 Wisdom, 12 God. 13 It is both material and spiritual. In its fiery make-up it is identical with evident, tangible activities; as Law it becomes pure Form which abides amid all changing relationships. Do we not have here an interpretation of the world in its ultimate essence which is charged through and through with an unmistakable vitalism? Confirmation and emphasis are given this belief by the fact that to the original substance there is ascribed a spirit of appetency, which determined by Universal order — a rational Law — supplies the urge necessary to the conflicting activities by which Nature has come from a general substratum to the experience of specific individual identities. Heracleitus even carries this doctrine of activism over into his ethics and teaches that the "summum bonum" is reached chiefly through the medium of intellectual striving. 14 "