To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
There are several differences between the theories of matter published by René Descartes in 1637 and 1644 which deserve attention. The differences follow from Descartes's well-known identification of substance with spatial extension, and his consequent rejection of the void. Since there was no void space, Descartes argued, a very finely divided subtle matter must extend throughout the universe in order to fill all space not otherwise occupied by the less finely divided ordinary matter. In the 1637 treatises La dioptrique and Les météores Descartes described only one kind of subtle matter, the primary function of which was to transmit the action of light. Yet when he came to write Principia philosophiae (1644), he believed that the subtle matter was divided into two separate elements. One of these remained an aether for light transmission, but the other had lost this property and was believed instead to be active in magnetic effects and in the electrification of glass, and to form part of the substance of flame.
In Italy the physical sciences had several decades of prosperity during the first half of the seventeenth century, largely because of the genius of Galileo Galilei and the efforts of a small constellation of his talented followers. But Galileo died in 1642, and before the end of the 1640s three of the most gifted of his disciples, Castelli, Renieri, and Torricelli, had also gone to a better life, to use the favourite euphemism of the time. Thereafter Tommaso Cornelio at Naples, Giovanni Alfonso Borelli at Messina and later at Pisa, as well as some lesser men, carried on the new science, and in 1657 the scientific enthusiasm of the Grand Duke Ferdinand II of Tuscany and his talented brother Leopold led to the short-lived Accademia del Cimento (1657–67), whose clear-cut and totally empirical programme of experimentation, reported on in 1667 but carried out mainly before 1662, was the last Tuscan flame to rise from the Galilean embers. Physiology and anatomy continued to develop, and north of the Apennines there was activity in astronomy and in optics, but the last was an isolated spark in the general gloom.
In recent years John Herapath has emerged as an important figure in the early history of the dynamical theory of gases. In a series of papers published in 1821 and 1822 he outlined an elaborate theory of the states of matter, specific and latent heats, vapours and gases, culminating in a theory of the gravitational ether. This work was based on the rejection of the caloric theory of heat and was founded instead on the idea that the particles of matter were in constant motion; the forces of caloric were replaced by the transfer of momentum. Herapath's is one of the earliest of dynamical theories of gases to be worked out in any mathematical detail.