P. There seems to me an insurmountable objection to the idea

of absolute coalescence;--and that is the very slight resistance

experienced by the heavenly bodies in their revolutions through space--a

resistance now ascertained, it is true, to exist in some degree, but

which is, nevertheless, so slight as to have been quite overlooked by

the sagacity even of Newton. We know that the resistance of bodies

is, chiefly, in proportion to their density. Absolute coalescence

is absolute density. Where there are no interspaces, there can be no

yielding. An ether, absolutely dense, would put an infinitely more

effectual stop to the progress of a star than would an ether of adamant

or of iron.

V. Your objection is answered with an ease which is nearly in the

ratio of its apparent unanswerability.--As regards the progress of the

star, it can make no difference whether the star passes through the

ether or the ether through it. There is no astronomical error more

unaccountable than that which reconciles the known retardation of the

comets with the idea of their passage through an ether: for, however

rare this ether be supposed, it would put a stop to all sidereal

revolution in a very far briefer period than has been admitted by those

astronomers who have endeavored to slur over a point which they found

it impossible to comprehend. The retardation actually experienced is, on

the other hand, about that which might be expected from the friction

of the ether in the instantaneous passage through the orb. In the one

106

The Works of Edgar Allan Poe - Volume 2