Show balt SALT LAKE CITY eop sep editor awret mews mems sir sin I 1 am at all times unwilling to intrude myself upon public attention unless duty ur urges 9 es me to do so but when I 1 find undue prominence b being e ng given to or taken by an individual as a scientific instructor I 1 cannot allow statements made byholm which are untrue to pass unnoticed I 1 allude to the lectures recently delivered by mr barker in the ward assembly bly rooms booms fortunately for us as a people we have revelation to appeal to upon all subjects which are of interest to us as human beings but as the individual I 1 allude to does not stand forth professedly as a religious teacher I 1 shall confine myself to the scientific views which he endeavors to present lle fie represents no school of philosophy which is of no importance to me if truth was fairly presented and probably would pass unchallenged by me if I 1 saw that truth was his aim alm I 1 may be mistaken but when any man assumes to be and publicly asserts that he is a master spirit I 1 have a right to be suspicious of and to demand proof of his assertions 1 I shall merely handle one part of this gent lemans lecture that relating to light sun as the source of light and I 1 shall do this not only in the interests of science but to show that he is not an exponent of truth as generally understood the gentleman takes the liberty of asserting that I 1 the newtonian theory of light is untrue and also that the theory is equally untrue if such assertions were made in the same spirit in the presence of any other people than the latter day saints he would woul bo be hissed whether these things are true or false intemperate language is intolerable in giving expression to mere 0 opinion pinion upon subjects which can only be conjectural 0 there is a courtesy due to the public in return for their attention which is not paid when men who stand preeminent pre eminent among their fellows follows and whose memories are respected are spoken of in offensive e terms more especially when their wo mo are impugned and their scientific discoveries are pronounced to be I 1 a lie ile I 1 I 1 especially by one who evidently is unacquainted with science we do not want to know what moses believed or taught in relation to the origin of thin things only so far as they are stamped wit with the impress of truth iffe if we want wank to know concerning these things we as a people have reliable information in the revelations given upon the subject and if there is not sufficient it is obtainable through the channel appointed by the lord but when any man professes to handle things sc scientifically lenti ilca ilea fi he has to be e dealt ca t with w th according to the manner anner of men clr r barker asserts that I 1 light is not emitted from objects in accordance with the emission theory that light ligh t does not pass off from the sun as particles of matter as taught by newton neither does any action of the sun cause a 11 bration vibration to a suppressed etherial substance which vibration is continued to other particles of this subtle ether so as to produce the phenomena of light both of these theories are pronounced to be false this may be true but who is to prove it most certainly ho he does not his substitute for these thee ories either of which may be true he tells us that a certain undefined action of certain fluids existing around us produces light what are we to understand by Es undefined action Is it vibration percussion oscillation or is it tion tiou which he denies again he asserts that tho the sun is merely an appearance mirage so is everything we see the light shines upon objects and is transmitted from them and when the light reaches the optic nerve an impression is made upon the senses without which we could not see objects at all there is no doubt at all in faiet fact nobody denies that we do not seethe see the sun but the gays of light or in other words the image ortho of the sun then he asserts that the sun is not 95 of miles from the earth this tr may be true but one thing is certain mercury cury and venus sometimes pass ass between the earth and the sun transit and therefore the sun is something far lher ther off than either of those planets and if wo we cannot have some better proof to the contrary than he ont oft offers lers it is as well to let it remain as it is with the same confidence we are told that light does not travel from the sun to the earth in eight minutes the astonishing velocity of light appears to be incredible to ehe the lecturer and the fact of light continuing its force throughout its long j journey ou r ney is said eaid to be impossible ko no dou doubt bt these things are very wonderful but this does not j justify anyone in denying n the facts with which science makes us familiar who can doubt the fact that which revolve round the planet jupiter are eclipsed at periods which are calculated with precision who can deny that when tho the earth is in that part of her orbit which is nearest to jupiter by the diameter of the earths orbit eclipses are seen sixteen minutes sooner than they would be if on the opposite cosite eside side of the earths orbit about the difference of time there can be no doubt if light does not travel but is visible everywhere at the same instant why does it take sixteen minutes longer ot ol shorter time to see the eclipses spoken of in proportion to position occupied by jupiter and the earth As to distances among the heavenly bodies we can only measure them by cal cu lation this is true of velocities also till we can determine distances that light does travel and that with the astonishing toni shing velocity represented by astronomers sis is established d be beyond yonda a doubt if the distances stances are correctly stated which unfortunately no one can determine without a higher knowledge than man yet possesses the lecturer asserts that space is dark there is no doubt of the truth of this assertion all writers upon the subject have assumed that such is tile the case but this does not prove that light cannot pass through it the room that I 1 sit in is now silent but sound could pass through it light passes readily through t a glass jar which is made perfectly fe etly empty by the air pump this proves that light will pass through a vac vae i and nd probably space itself permits ermias ilg light b t to pass even more rapidly fly than thau it would if more dense than our atmosphere for experience proves that light is refracted or broken off from its course by the atmosphere he asserts also and endeavors to illustrate this by a diagram that light only shines upon the earth that the rays of light do not pass by the earth in straight lines as generally taught experience peri ence teaches the contrary that 6 objects b j acts beyond the earth are illuminated by the sun unless they get in the earths shadow is proved every time an eclipse of the moon takes place and that light can be stopped iii in its course is proved by an eclipse of the sun which only occurs when the moon passes between the earth and chesun the t 11 asun sun this is also proved by the transits transita tran sits of mercury and venus which obscured the sun eun while assing aly near to produce a littly little e spot on the buns suns apparent disc all these are proofs that light can be interrupted or cut off in its passage and also that it is moves in straight lines the lecturer also asserts that gith th atmosphere acts as a lens there is no doubt of this every one may gather that information from tile the schoolbooks schoola 0 0 ks but when he asserts that it foca vocalizes focalizes 1 lizes izes the rays raya of light he is in error any one acquainted with copti optics knows that a concato convex lens which is 15 the form the atmosphere represents nor even a convex piano plano lens does not bring the rays of light to a focus it is fortunate the atmosphere does not act in the sense alluded to for if the suns rays were focalized vocalized they would melt the earth it is also asserted that I 1 light is incapable of acting except upon organized matter how this can be determined before we know what light is is as difficult to comprehend as the assertion that light is produced by the action of electricity acted upon by magnetism upon hydrogen which is converted into nitrogen this is to assert that nitrogen is hydrogen changed by the action of electricity and if it is true is capable of demonstration for both of those elements are within our reach it is not impossible that hydrogen may be changed into nitrogen and that light lightf and heat also ma may be evolved but this has never been ione lone done and until it is done it ia is only an opinion many difficulties in antagonism present themselves however with such an opinion there are no alterations in the condition of the atmosphere since observations were first made by chemists hydrogen which bears a very small proportion to the atmosphere and nitrogen exist in the same proportion that they did in 1776 when priestly discovered nitrogen to be a simple element now if the changes spoken of are continually going on hydrogen is being exhausted and nitrogen is increasing which is not the case when hydrogen is acted upon by repeated ch charges ar ge s of electricity passing through it n no 0 c change h ange takes place unless oxygen chlorine or some other element cleme nt Is present if the former gas is present an ex takes tabes place and abd water is formed what is it but light fight which produces our sun pictures any photographer can tell us that the chemical rays produce the change upon the acids used light can be analysed better than many more mele iele elements ments its heat giving elements can be separated sepe rated from its luminous rays and its chemical rays from both it is too late in the worlds history to quibble about the meaning of words when it is written by moses that light was called forth by tile the fiat flat of omnipotence he does noot toot say that it was created when be he asserts that the sun was to give light upon the earthy he does not say that it was to shine upon the earth alone he does not in fact name the sun at all but we may infer that the lights spoken of were I 1 for lights in the firmament of the heaven As to the ass assumptions u m t ons of the lecturer they are novel w where hp er e they are untrue and anything advanced by him which is true is presented in an unseemly manner his want of education would bo be no defect if he did not lack in humility it is pardonable to be unlearned but to be arrogant as well as ignorant is no mark of regard for true science the nature of which is to teach us that humility which characterises characterizes all who have learned the first lessons in true education self knowledge I 1 am sir yours faithfully A OF or TRUTH |