| OCR Text |
Show Essay on Nothing Confuses Scientist Since an essay may range between the epigram epi-gram and the treatise and may be on any interesting in-teresting phase of a subject, it is altogether fitting and proper that I should write upon nothing as it is the basis of everything. If nothing were something, that is, if it' had weight and occupied space, it would fill all the spaces between molecules and atoms, they would therefore become rigid and nonmovable because they would be held in place by this omnipresent substance. All life would cease to exist and the inorganic would rule the universe. However (and thank goodness!) this is not the case and nothing is a large ever-present area surrounding surround-ing and between everything and consists of a large expanse of void lifeless, immaterial nothing. no-thing. Therefore nothing rules the universe. However, is this void (we shall call it that to avoid confusion) really nothing? Scientists tell us that the earth's atmosphere may range about 150 miles. About one half of all air is below 20,000 feet. The rest of the air is stretched stretch-ed out between these two heights, about 146 miles. But, as in the caseof the precision frog who had a distance of 16 feet to jump first, he jumped half that distance, eight feet. He then jumped half the remaining distance of eight feet, 4 feet. He then jumped two feet, one foot, one-half foot, etc., etc. Each time he jumped half the remaining distance. But he never reached his goal of 16 feet. Couldn't air be equally stretched out in this manner to not cover just 150 miles but all of the atmospheres of all the universe, all the light of the universe, and all of the loose matter in the universe permeate per-meate the entire universe and therefore fill our wonderful void? Light itself, being energy, would be enough as light is always present, even in the blackest darkness. Modern scientists scien-tists cling to the idea that energy is matter and visa-versa. A well-founded theory, eh! Watson? Wat-son? If you say "yes", you are right and if you say "no" you are more observant than the average. It may be a well-founded theory, but it certainly cer-tainly is silly. However, it gave the author much fun and was therefore worth it. I remember remem-ber H. G. Wells wrote a number of super-science stories all of which seemed rather unnecessary unnec-essary and yet his were all published and read by the eminent men of the world. So you see, I consider it perfectly all right to express myself my-self in this manner. i Donald Spencer. |
