Treatise on light _ In which are explained the causes of that which occurs in reflexion_ _ in refraction and particularly in the strange refraction of Iceland crystal Christiaan Hu

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Treatise on light
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will
have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using
this eBook.

Title: Treatise on light
In which are explained the causes of that which occurs in reflexion,
& in refraction and particularly in the strange refraction of
Iceland crystal

Author: Christiaan Huygens

Translator: Silvanus P. Thompson

Release date: January 18, 2005 [eBook #14725]
Most recently updated: October 28, 2024

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/14725

Credits: E-text prepared by Clare Boothby, Stephen Schulze, and the
Project Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK TREATISE ON
LIGHT ***

The Project Gutenberg eBook, Treatise on Light, by Christiaan Huygens,
Translated by Silvanus P. Thompson

TREATISE ON LIGHT
In which are explained
The causes of that which occurs
In REFLEXION, & in REFRACTION
And particularly
In the strange REFRACTION
OF ICELAND CRYSTAL

By

CHRISTIAAN HUYGENS
Rendered into English
By
SILVANUS P. THOMPSON

University of Chicago Press

PREFACE
wrote this Treatise during my sojourn in France twelve
years ago, and I communicated it in the year 1678 to the
learned persons who then composed the Royal Academy
of Science, to the membership of which the King had
done me the honour of calling, me. Several of that body
who are still alive will remember having been present
when I read it, and above the rest those amongst them
who applied themselves particularly to the study of Mathematics; of whom
I cannot cite more than the celebrated gentlemen Cassini, Römer, and De la
Hire. And, although I have since corrected and changed some parts, the
copies which I had made of it at that time may serve for proof that I have
yet added nothing to it save some conjectures touching the formation of
Iceland Crystal, and a novel observation on the refraction of Rock Crystal. I
have desired to relate these particulars to make known how long I have
meditated the things which now I publish, and not for the purpose of
detracting from the merit of those who, without having seen anything that I
have written, may be found to have treated of like matters: as has in fact
occurred to two eminent Geometricians, Messieurs Newton and Leibnitz,
with respect to the Problem of the figure of glasses for collecting rays when
one of the surfaces is given.
One may ask why I have so long delayed to bring this work to the light. The
reason is that I wrote it rather carelessly in the Language in which it
appears, with the intention of translating it into Latin, so doing in order to
obtain greater attention to the thing. After which I proposed to myself to
give it out along with another Treatise on Dioptrics, in which I explain the
effects of Telescopes and those things which belong more to that Science.
But the pleasure of novelty being past, I have put off from time to time the
execution of this design, and I know not when I shall ever come to an end if
it, being often turned aside either by business or by some new study.
Considering which I have finally judged that it was better worth while to
publish this writing, such as it is, than to let it run the risk, by waiting
longer, of remaining lost.

There will be seen in it demonstrations of those kinds which do not produce
as great a certitude as those of Geometry, and which even differ much
therefrom, since whereas the Geometers prove their Propositions by fixed
and incontestable Principles, here the Principles are verified by the
conclusions to be drawn from them; the nature of these things not allowing
of this being done otherwise.
It is always possible to attain thereby to a degree of probability which very
often is scarcely less than complete proof. To wit, when things which have
been demonstrated by the Principles that have been assumed correspond
perfectly to the phenomena which experiment has brought under
observation; especially when there are a great number of them, and further,
principally, when one can imagine and foresee new phenomena which
ought to follow from the hypotheses which one employs, and when one
finds that therein the fact corresponds to our prevision. But if all these
proofs of probability are met with in that which I propose to discuss, as it
seems to me they are, this ought to be a very strong confirmation of the
success of my inquiry; and it must be ill if the facts are not pretty much as I
represent them. I would believe then that those who love to know the
Causes of things and who are able to admire the marvels of Light, will find
some satisfaction in these various speculations regarding it, and in the new
explanation of its famous property which is the main foundation of the
construction of our eyes and of those great inventions which extend so
vastly the use of them.
I hope also that there will be some who by following these beginnings will
penetrate much further into this question than I have been able to do, since
the subject must be far from being exhausted. This appears from the
passages which I have indicated where I leave certain difficulties without
having resolved them, and still more from matters which I have not touched
at all, such as Luminous Bodies of several sorts, and all that concerns
Colours; in which no one until now can boast of having succeeded. Finally,
there remains much more to be investigated touching the nature of Light
which I do not pretend to have disclosed, and I shall owe much in return to
him who shall be able to supplement that which is here lacking to me in
knowledge. The Hague. The 8 January 1690.

NOTE BY THE TRANSLATOR
onsidering the great influence which this Treatise has
exercised in the development of the Science of Optics, it
seems strange that two centuries should have passed
before an English edition of the work appeared. Perhaps
the circumstance is due to the mistaken zeal with which
formerly everything that conflicted with the cherished
ideas of Newton was denounced by his followers. The
Treatise on Light of Huygens has, however, withstood the test of time: and
even now the exquisite skill with which he applied his conception of the
propagation of waves of light to unravel the intricacies of the phenomena of
the double refraction of crystals, and of the refraction of the atmosphere,
will excite the admiration of the student of Optics. It is true that his wave
theory was far from the complete doctrine as subsequently developed by
Thomas Young and Augustin Fresnel, and belonged rather to geometrical
than to physical Optics. If Huygens had no conception of transverse
vibrations, of the principle of interference, or of the existence of the ordered
sequence of waves in trains, he nevertheless attained to a remarkably clear
understanding of the principles of wave-propagation; and his exposition of
the subject marks an epoch in the treatment of Optical problems. It has been
needful in preparing this translation to exercise care lest one should import
into the author's text ideas of subsequent date, by using words that have
come to imply modern conceptions. Hence the adoption of as literal a
rendering as possible. A few of the author's terms need explanation. He uses
the word "refraction," for example, both for the phenomenon or process
usually so denoted, and for the result of that process: thus the refracted ray
he habitually terms "the refraction" of the incident ray. When a wave-front,
or, as he terms it, a "wave," has passed from some initial position to a
subsequent one, he terms the wave-front in its subsequent position "the
continuation" of the wave. He also speaks of the envelope of a set of
elementary waves, formed by coalescence of those elementary wave-fronts,
as "the termination" of the wave; and the elementary wave-fronts he terms
"particular" waves. Owing to the circumstance that the French word rayon

possesses the double signification of ray of light and radius of a circle, he
avoids its use in the latter sense and speaks always of the semi-diameter, not
of the radius. His speculations as to the ether, his suggestive views of the
structure of crystalline bodies, and his explanation of opacity, slight as they
are, will possibly surprise the reader by their seeming modernness. And
none can read his investigation of the phenomena found in Iceland spar
without marvelling at his insight and sagacity.
S.P.T.
June, 1912.

TABLE OF MATTERS
Contained in this Treatise

CHAP. I. On Rays Propagated in Straight Lines.
That Light is produced by a certain movement. p. 3
That no substance passes from the luminous
p. 3
object to the eyes.
That Light spreads spherically, almost as Sound
p. 4
does.
Whether Light takes time to spread. p. 4
Experience seeming to prove that it passes
p. 5
instantaneously.
Experience proving that it takes time. p. 8
How much its speed is greater than that of Sound. p. 10
In what the emission of Light differs from that of
p. 10
Sound.
That it is not the same medium which serves for
p. 11
Light and Sound.
How Sound is propagated. p. 12
How Light is propagated. p. 14
Detailed Remarks on the propagation of Light. p. 15
Why Rays are propagated only in straight lines. p. 20
How Light coming in different directions can
p. 22
cross itself.
CHAP. II. On Reflexion.
Demonstration of equality of angles of incidence
p. 23
and reflexion.
Why the incident and reflected rays are in the
same plane perpendicular to the reflecting p. 25
surface.

That it is not needful for the reflecting surface to
be perfectly flat to attain equality of the angles of p. 27
incidence and reflexion.
CHAP. III. On Refraction.
That bodies may be transparent without any
p. 29
substance passing through them.
Proof that the ethereal matter passes through
p. 30
transparent bodies.
How this matter passing through can render them
p. 31
transparent.
That the most solid bodies in appearance are of a
p. 31
very loose texture.
That Light spreads more slowly in water and in
p. 32
glass than in air.
Third hypothesis to explain transparency, and the
p. 32
retardation which Light suffers.
On that which makes bodies opaque. p. 34
Demonstration why Refraction obeys the known
p. 35
proportion of Sines.
Why the incident and refracted Rays produce one
p. 39
another reciprocally.
Why Reflexion within a triangular glass prism is
suddenly augmented when the Light can no p. 40
longer penetrate.
That bodies which cause greater Refraction also
p. 42
cause stronger Reflexion.
Demonstration of the Theorem of Mr. Fermat. p. 43
CHAP. IV. On the Refraction of the Air.
That the emanations of Light in the air are not
p. 45
spherical.
How consequently some objects appear higher
p. 47
than they are.
How the Sun may appear on the Horizon before
p. 49
he has risen.

That the rays of light become curved in the Air of
p. 50
the Atmosphere, and what effects this produces.
CHAP. V. On the Strange Refraction of Iceland Crystal.
That this Crystal grows also in other countries. p. 52
Who first-wrote about it. p. 53
Description of Iceland Crystal; its substance,
p. 53
shape, and properties.
That it has two different Refractions. p. 54
That the ray perpendicular to the surface suffers
refraction, and that some rays inclined to the p. 55
surface pass without suffering refraction.
Observation of the refractions in this Crystal. p. 56
That there is a Regular and an Irregular
p. 57
Refraction.
The way of measuring the two Refractions of
p. 57
Iceland Crystal.
Remarkable properties of the Irregular
p. 60
Refraction.
Hypothesis to explain the double Refraction. p. 61
That Rock Crystal has also a double Refraction. p. 62
Hypothesis of emanations of Light, within Iceland
Crystal, of spheroidal form, for the Irregular p. 63
Refraction.
How a perpendicular ray can suffer Refraction. p. 64
How the position and form of the spheroidal
p. 65
emanations in this Crystal can be defined.
Explanation of the Irregular Refraction by these
p. 67
spheroidal emanations.
Easy way to find the Irregular Refraction of each
p. 70
incident ray.
Demonstration of the oblique ray which traverses
p. 73
the Crystal without being refracted.
Other irregularities of Refraction explained. p. 76
That an object placed beneath the Crystal p. 81
appears double, in two images of different

heights.
Why the apparent heights of one of the images
change on changing the position of the eyes p. 85
above the Crystal.
Of the different sections of this Crystal which
produce yet other refractions, and confirm all this p. 88
Theory.
Particular way of polishing the surfaces after it
p. 91
has been cut.
Surprising phenomenon touching the rays which
pass through two separated pieces; the cause of p. 92
which is not explained.
Probable conjecture on the internal composition
of Iceland Crystal, and of what figure its particles p. 95
are.
Tests to confirm this conjecture. p. 97
Calculations which have been supposed in this
p. 99
Chapter.
CHAP. VI. On the Figures of transparent bodies which
serve for Refraction and for Reflexion.
General and easy rule to find these Figures. p. 106
Invention of the Ovals of Mr. Des Cartes for
p. 109
Dioptrics.
How he was able to find these Lines. p. 114
Way of finding the surface of a glass for perfect
p. 116
refraction, when the other surface is given.
Remark on what happens to rays refracted at a
p. 123
spherical surface.
Remark on the curved line which is formed by
p. 126
reflexion in a spherical concave mirror.

TREATISE ON LIGHT

CHAPTER I
ON RAYS PROPAGATED IN STRAIGHT LINES

s happens in all the sciences in which Geometry is
applied to matter, the demonstrations concerning Optics
are founded on truths drawn from experience. Such are
that the rays of light are propagated in straight lines;
that the angles of reflexion and of incidence are equal;
and that in refraction the ray is bent according to the law
of sines, now so well known, and which is no less
certain than the preceding laws.
The majority of those who have written touching the various parts of Optics
have contented themselves with presuming these truths. But some, more
inquiring, have desired to investigate the origin and the causes, considering
these to be in themselves wonderful effects of Nature. In which they
advanced some ingenious things, but not however such that the most
intelligent folk do not wish for better and more satisfactory explanations.
Wherefore I here desire to propound what I have meditated on the subject,
so as to contribute as much as I can to the explanation of this department of
Natural Science, which, not without reason, is reputed to be one of its most
difficult parts. I recognize myself to be much indebted to those who were
the first to begin to dissipate the strange obscurity in which these things
were enveloped, and to give us hope that they might be explained by
intelligible reasoning. But, on the other hand I am astonished also that even
here these have often been willing to offer, as assured and demonstrative,
reasonings which were far from conclusive. For I do not find that any one
has yet given a probable explanation of the first and most notable
phenomena of light, namely why it is not propagated except in straight
lines, and how visible rays, coming from an infinitude of diverse places,
cross one another without hindering one another in any way.
I shall therefore essay in this book, to give, in accordance with the
principles accepted in the Philosophy of the present day, some clearer and

more probable reasons, firstly of these properties of light propagated
rectilinearly; secondly of light which is reflected on meeting other bodies.
Then I shall explain the phenomena of those rays which are said to suffer
refraction on passing through transparent bodies of different sorts; and in
this part I shall also explain the effects of the refraction of the air by the
different densities of the Atmosphere.
Thereafter I shall examine the causes of the strange refraction of a certain
kind of Crystal which is brought from Iceland. And finally I shall treat of
the various shapes of transparent and reflecting bodies by which rays are
collected at a point or are turned aside in various ways. From this it will be
seen with what facility, following our new Theory, we find not only the
Ellipses, Hyperbolas, and other curves which Mr. Des Cartes has
ingeniously invented for this purpose; but also those which the surface of a
glass lens ought to possess when its other surface is given as spherical or
plane, or of any other figure that may be.
It is inconceivable to doubt that light consists in the motion of some sort of
matter. For whether one considers its production, one sees that here upon
the Earth it is chiefly engendered by fire and flame which contain without
doubt bodies that are in rapid motion, since they dissolve and melt many
other bodies, even the most solid; or whether one considers its effects, one
sees that when light is collected, as by concave mirrors, it has the property
of burning as a fire does, that is to say it disunites the particles of bodies.
This is assuredly the mark of motion, at least in the true Philosophy, in
which one conceives the causes of all natural effects in terms of mechanical
motions. This, in my opinion, we must necessarily do, or else renounce all
hopes of ever comprehending anything in Physics.
And as, according to this Philosophy, one holds as certain that the sensation
of sight is excited only by the impression of some movement of a kind of
matter which acts on the nerves at the back of our eyes, there is here yet one
reason more for believing that light consists in a movement of the matter
which exists between us and the luminous body.
Further, when one considers the extreme speed with which light spreads on
every side, and how, when it comes from different regions, even from those
directly opposite, the rays traverse one another without hindrance, one may

well understand that when we see a luminous object, it cannot be by any
transport of matter coming to us from this object, in the way in which a shot
or an arrow traverses the air; for assuredly that would too greatly impugn
these two properties of light, especially the second of them. It is then in
some other way that light spreads; and that which can lead us to
comprehend it is the knowledge which we have of the spreading of Sound
in the air.
We know that by means of the air, which is an invisible and impalpable
body, Sound spreads around the spot where it has been produced, by a
movement which is passed on successively from one part of the air to
another; and that the spreading of this movement, taking place equally
rapidly on all sides, ought to form spherical surfaces ever enlarging and
which strike our ears. Now there is no doubt at all that light also comes
from the luminous body to our eyes by some movement impressed on the
matter which is between the two; since, as we have already seen, it cannot
be by the transport of a body which passes from one to the other. If, in
addition, light takes time for its passage—which we are now going to
examine—it will follow that this movement, impressed on the intervening
matter, is successive; and consequently it spreads, as Sound does, by
spherical surfaces and waves: for I call them waves from their resemblance
to those which are seen to be formed in water when a stone is thrown into it,
and which present a successive spreading as circles, though these arise from
another cause, and are only in a flat surface.
To see then whether the spreading of light takes time, let us consider first
whether there are any facts of experience which can convince us to the
contrary. As to those which can be made here on the Earth, by striking
lights at great distances, although they prove that light takes no sensible
time to pass over these distances, one may say with good reason that they
are too small, and that the only conclusion to be drawn from them is that the
passage of light is extremely rapid. Mr. Des Cartes, who was of opinion that
it is instantaneous, founded his views, not without reason, upon a better
basis of experience, drawn from the Eclipses of the Moon; which,
nevertheless, as I shall show, is not at all convincing. I will set it forth, in a
way a little different from his, in order to make the conclusion more
comprehensible.

Let A be the place of the sun, BD a part of the orbit or annual path of the
Earth: ABC a straight line which I suppose to meet the orbit of the Moon,
which is represented by the circle CD, at C.
Now if light requires time, for example one hour, to traverse the space
which is between the Earth and the Moon, it will follow that the Earth
having arrived at B, the shadow which it casts, or the interruption of the
light, will not yet have arrived at the point C, but will only arrive there an
hour after. It will then be one hour after, reckoning from the moment when
the Earth was at B, that the Moon, arriving at C, will be obscured: but this
obscuration or interruption of the light will not reach the Earth till after
another hour. Let us suppose that the Earth in these two hours will have
arrived at E. The Earth then, being at E, will see the Eclipsed Moon at C,
which it left an hour before, and at the same time will see the sun at A. For
it being immovable, as I suppose with Copernicus, and the light moving
always in straight lines, it must always appear where it is. But one has
always observed, we are told, that the eclipsed Moon appears at the point of
the Ecliptic opposite to the Sun; and yet here it would appear in arrear of
that point by an amount equal to the angle GEC, the supplement of AEC.
This, however, is contrary to experience, since the angle GEC would be
very sensible, and about 33 degrees. Now according to our computation,
which is given in the Treatise on the causes of the phenomena of Saturn, the
distance BA between the Earth and the Sun is about twelve thousand
diameters of the Earth, and hence four hundred times greater than BC the
distance of the Moon, which is 30 diameters. Then the angle ECB will be
nearly four hundred times greater than BAE, which is five minutes; namely,
the path which the earth travels in two hours along its orbit; and thus the

angle BCE will be nearly 33 degrees; and likewise the angle CEG, which is
greater by five minutes.
But it must be noted that the speed of light in this argument has been
assumed such that it takes a time of one hour to make the passage from here
to the Moon. If one supposes that for this it requires only one minute of
time, then it is manifest that the angle CEG will only be 33 minutes; and if
it requires only ten seconds of time, the angle will be less than six minutes.
And then it will not be easy to perceive anything of it in observations of the
Eclipse; nor, consequently, will it be permissible to deduce from it that the
movement of light is instantaneous.
It is true that we are here supposing a strange velocity that would be a
hundred thousand times greater than that of Sound. For Sound, according to
what I have observed, travels about 180 Toises in the time of one Second, or
in about one beat of the pulse. But this supposition ought not to seem to be
an impossibility; since it is not a question of the transport of a body with so
great a speed, but of a successive movement which is passed on from some
bodies to others. I have then made no difficulty, in meditating on these
things, in supposing that the emanation of light is accomplished with time,
seeing that in this way all its phenomena can be explained, and that in
following the contrary opinion everything is incomprehensible. For it has
always seemed tome that even Mr. Des Cartes, whose aim has been to treat
all the subjects of Physics intelligibly, and who assuredly has succeeded in
this better than any one before him, has said nothing that is not full of
difficulties, or even inconceivable, in dealing with Light and its properties.
But that which I employed only as a hypothesis, has recently received great
seemingness as an established truth by the ingenious proof of Mr. Römer
which I am going here to relate, expecting him himself to give all that is
needed for its confirmation. It is founded as is the preceding argument upon
celestial observations, and proves not only that Light takes time for its
passage, but also demonstrates how much time it takes, and that its velocity
is even at least six times greater than that which I have just stated.
For this he makes use of the Eclipses suffered by the little planets which
revolve around Jupiter, and which often enter his shadow: and see what is
his reasoning. Let A be the Sun, BCDE the annual orbit of the Earth, F

Jupiter, GN the orbit of the nearest of his Satellites, for it is this one which
is more apt for this investigation than any of the other three, because of the
quickness of its revolution. Let G be this Satellite entering into the shadow
of Jupiter, H the same Satellite emerging from the shadow.
Let it be then supposed, the Earth being at B some
time before the last quadrature, that one has seen the
said Satellite emerge from the shadow; it must needs
be, if the Earth remains at the same place, that, after
42-1/2 hours, one would again see a similar
emergence, because that is the time in which it
makes the round of its orbit, and when it would
come again into opposition to the Sun. And if the
Earth, for instance, were to remain always at B
during 30 revolutions of this Satellite, one would see
it again emerge from the shadow after 30 times 42-
1/2 hours. But the Earth having been carried along
during this time to C, increasing thus its distance
from Jupiter, it follows that if Light requires time for
its passage the illumination of the little planet will
be perceived later at C than it would have been at B,
and that there must be added to this time of 30 times
42-1/2 hours that which the Light has required to
traverse the space MC, the difference of the spaces
CH, BH. Similarly at the other quadrature when the
earth has come to E from D while approaching toward Jupiter, the
immersions of the Satellite ought to be observed at E earlier than they
would have been seen if the Earth had remained at D.
Now in quantities of observations of these Eclipses, made during ten
consecutive years, these differences have been found to be very
considerable, such as ten minutes and more; and from them it has been
concluded that in order to traverse the whole diameter of the annual orbit
KL, which is double the distance from here to the sun, Light requires about
22 minutes of time.
The movement of Jupiter in his orbit while the Earth passed from B to C, or
from D to E, is included in this calculation; and this makes it evident that

one cannot attribute the retardation of these illuminations or the anticipation
of the eclipses, either to any irregularity occurring in the movement of the
little planet or to its eccentricity.
If one considers the vast size of the diameter KL, which according to me is
some 24 thousand diameters of the Earth, one will acknowledge the
extreme velocity of Light. For, supposing that KL is no more than 22
thousand of these diameters, it appears that being traversed in 22 minutes
this makes the speed a thousand diameters in one minute, that is 16-2/3
diameters in one second or in one beat of the pulse, which makes more than
11 hundred times a hundred thousand toises; since the diameter of the Earth
contains 2,865 leagues, reckoned at 25 to the degree, and each each league
is 2,282 Toises, according to the exact measurement which Mr. Picard made
by order of the King in 1669. But Sound, as I have said above, only travels
180 toises in the same time of one second: hence the velocity of Light is
more than six hundred thousand times greater than that of Sound. This,
however, is quite another thing from being instantaneous, since there is all
the difference between a finite thing and an infinite. Now the successive
movement of Light being confirmed in this way, it follows, as I have said,
that it spreads by spherical waves, like the movement of Sound.
But if the one resembles the other in this respect, they differ in many other
things; to wit, in the first production of the movement which causes them;
in the matter in which the movement spreads; and in the manner in which it
is propagated. As to that which occurs in the production of Sound, one
knows that it is occasioned by the agitation undergone by an entire body, or
by a considerable part of one, which shakes all the contiguous air. But the
movement of the Light must originate as from each point of the luminous
object, else we should not be able to perceive all the different parts of that
object, as will be more evident in that which follows. And I do not believe
that this movement can be better explained than by supposing that all those
of the luminous bodies which are liquid, such as flames, and apparently the
sun and the stars, are composed of particles which float in a much more
subtle medium which agitates them with great rapidity, and makes them
strike against the particles of the ether which surrounds them, and which are
much smaller than they. But I hold also that in luminous solids such as
charcoal or metal made red hot in the fire, this same movement is caused by
the violent agitation of the particles of the metal or of the wood; those of

them which are on the surface striking similarly against the ethereal matter.
The agitation, moreover, of the particles which engender the light ought to
be much more prompt and more rapid than is that of the bodies which cause
sound, since we do not see that the tremors of a body which is giving out a
sound are capable of giving rise to Light, even as the movement of the hand
in the air is not capable of producing Sound.
Now if one examines what this matter may be in which the movement
coming from the luminous body is propagated, which I call Ethereal matter,
one will see that it is not the same that serves for the propagation of Sound.
For one finds that the latter is really that which we feel and which we
breathe, and which being removed from any place still leaves there the
other kind of matter that serves to convey Light. This may be proved by
shutting up a sounding body in a glass vessel from which the air is
withdrawn by the machine which Mr. Boyle has given us, and with which
he has performed so many beautiful experiments. But in doing this of which
I speak, care must be taken to place the sounding body on cotton or on
feathers, in such a way that it cannot communicate its tremors either to the
glass vessel which encloses it, or to the machine; a precaution which has
hitherto been neglected. For then after having exhausted all the air one
hears no Sound from the metal, though it is struck.
One sees here not only that our air, which does not penetrate through glass,
is the matter by which Sound spreads; but also that it is not the same air but
another kind of matter in which Light spreads; since if the air is removed
from the vessel the Light does not cease to traverse it as before.
And this last point is demonstrated even more clearly by the celebrated
experiment of Torricelli, in which the tube of glass from which the
quicksilver has withdrawn itself, remaining void of air, transmits Light just
the same as when air is in it. For this proves that a matter different from air
exists in this tube, and that this matter must have penetrated the glass or the
quicksilver, either one or the other, though they are both impenetrable to the
air. And when, in the same experiment, one makes the vacuum after putting
a little water above the quicksilver, one concludes equally that the said
matter passes through glass or water, or through both.

As regards the different modes in which I have said the movements of
Sound and of Light are communicated, one may sufficiently comprehend
how this occurs in the case of Sound if one considers that the air is of such a
nature that it can be compressed and reduced to a much smaller space than
that which it ordinarily occupies. And in proportion as it is compressed the
more does it exert an effort to regain its volume; for this property along
with its penetrability, which remains notwithstanding its compression,
seems to prove that it is made up of small bodies which float about and
which are agitated very rapidly in the ethereal matter composed of much
smaller parts. So that the cause of the spreading of Sound is the effort which
these little bodies make in collisions with one another, to regain freedom
when they are a little more squeezed together in the circuit of these waves
than elsewhere.
But the extreme velocity of Light, and other properties which it has, cannot
admit of such a propagation of motion, and I am about to show here the
way in which I conceive it must occur. For this, it is needful to explain the
property which hard bodies must possess to transmit movement from one to
another.
When one takes a number of spheres of equal size, made of some very hard
substance, and arranges them in a straight line, so that they touch one
another, one finds, on striking with a similar sphere against the first of these
spheres, that the motion passes as in an instant to the last of them, which
separates itself from the row, without one's being able to perceive that the
others have been stirred. And even that one which was used to strike
remains motionless with them. Whence one sees that the movement passes
with an extreme velocity which is the greater, the greater the hardness of the
substance of the spheres.
But it is still certain that this progression of motion is not instantaneous, but
successive, and therefore must take time. For if the movement, or the
disposition to movement, if you will have it so, did not pass successively
through all these spheres, they would all acquire the movement at the same
time, and hence would all advance together; which does not happen. For the
last one leaves the whole row and acquires the speed of the one which was
pushed. Moreover there are experiments which demonstrate that all the
bodies which we reckon of the hardest kind, such as quenched steel, glass,

and agate, act as springs and bend somehow, not only when extended as
rods but also when they are in the form of spheres or of other shapes. That
is to say they yield a little in themselves at the place where they are struck,
and immediately regain their former figure. For I have found that on
striking with a ball of glass or of agate against a large and quite thick thick
piece of the same substance which had a flat surface, slightly soiled with
breath or in some other way, there remained round marks, of smaller or
larger size according as the blow had been weak or strong. This makes it
evident that these substances yield where they meet, and spring back: and
for this time must be required.
Now in applying this kind of movement to that which produces Light there
is nothing to hinder us from estimating the particles of the ether to be of a
substance as nearly approaching to perfect hardness and possessing a
springiness as prompt as we choose. It is not necessary to examine here the
causes of this hardness, or of that springiness, the consideration of which
would lead us too far from our subject. I will say, however, in passing that
we may conceive that the particles of the ether, notwithstanding their
smallness, are in turn composed of other parts and that their springiness
consists in the very rapid movement of a subtle matter which penetrates
them from every side and constrains their structure to assume such a
disposition as to give to this fluid matter the most overt and easy passage
possible. This accords with the explanation which Mr. Des Cartes gives for
the spring, though I do not, like him, suppose the pores to be in the form of
round hollow canals. And it must not be thought that in this there is
anything absurd or impossible, it being on the contrary quite credible that it
is this infinite series of different sizes of corpuscles, having different
degrees of velocity, of which Nature makes use to produce so many
marvellous effects.
But though we shall ignore the true cause of springiness we still see that
there are many bodies which possess this property; and thus there is nothing
strange in supposing that it exists also in little invisible bodies like the
particles of the Ether. Also if one wishes to seek for any other way in which
the movement of Light is successively communicated, one will find none
which agrees better, with uniform progression, as seems to be necessary,
than the property of springiness; because if this movement should grow
slower in proportion as it is shared over a greater quantity of matter, in

moving away from the source of the light, it could not conserve this great
velocity over great distances. But by supposing springiness in the ethereal
matter, its particles will have the property of equally rapid restitution
whether they are pushed strongly or feebly; and thus the propagation of
Light will always go on with an equal velocity.
And it must be known that although the particles of the
ether are not ranged thus in straight lines, as in our row
of spheres, but confusedly, so that one of them touches
several others, this does not hinder them from
transmitting their movement and from spreading it
always forward. As to this it is to be remarked that there
is a law of motion serving for this propagation, and
verifiable by experiment. It is that when a sphere, such
as A here, touches several other similar spheres CCC, if
it is struck by another sphere B in such a way as to exert
an impulse against all the spheres CCC which touch it, it
transmits to them the whole of its movement, and remains after that
motionless like the sphere B. And without supposing that the ethereal
particles are of spherical form (for I see indeed no need to suppose them so)
one may well understand that this property of communicating an impulse
does not fail to contribute to the aforesaid propagation of movement.
Equality of size seems to be more necessary, because otherwise there ought
to be some reflexion of movement backwards when it passes from a smaller
particle to a larger one, according to the Laws of Percussion which I
published some years ago.
However, one will see hereafter that we have to suppose such an equality
not so much as a necessity for the propagation of light as for rendering that
propagation easier and more powerful; for it is not beyond the limits of
probability that the particles of the ether have been made equal for a
purpose so important as that of light, at least in that vast space which is
beyond the region of atmosphere and which seems to serve only to transmit
the light of the Sun and the Stars.
I have then shown in what manner one may conceive Light to spread
successively, by spherical waves, and how it is possible that this spreading

is accomplished with as great a velocity as that
which experiments and celestial observations
demand. Whence it may be further remarked that
although the particles are supposed to be in
continual movement (for there are many reasons
for this) the successive propagation of the waves
cannot be hindered by this; because the
propagation consists nowise in the transport of
those particles but merely in a small agitation
which they cannot help communicating to those
surrounding, notwithstanding any movement
which may act on them causing them to be
changing positions amongst themselves.
But we must consider still more particularly the
origin of these waves, and the manner in which
they spread. And, first, it follows from what has been said on the production
of Light, that each little region of a luminous body, such as the Sun, a
candle, or a burning coal, generates its own waves of which that region is
the centre. Thus in the flame of a candle, having distinguished the points A,
B, C, concentric circles described about each of these points represent the
waves which come from them. And one must imagine the same about every
point of the surface and of the part within the flame.
But as the percussions at the centres of these waves possess no regular
succession, it must not be supposed that the waves themselves follow one
another at equal distances: and if the distances marked in the figure appear
to be such, it is rather to mark the progression of one and the same wave at
equal intervals of time than to represent several of them issuing from one
and the same centre.
After all, this prodigious quantity of waves which traverse one another
without confusion and without effacing one another must not be deemed
inconceivable; it being certain that one and the same particle of matter can
serve for many waves coming from different sides or even from contrary
directions, not only if it is struck by blows which follow one another closely
but even for those which act on it at the same instant. It can do so because
the spreading of the movement is successive. This may be proved by the

row of equal spheres of hard matter, spoken of above. If against this row
there are pushed from two opposite sides at the same time two similar
spheres A and D, one will see each of them rebound with the same velocity
which it had in striking, yet the whole row will remain in its place, although
the movement has passed along its whole length twice over. And if these
contrary movements happen to meet one another at the middle sphere, B, or
at some other such as C, that sphere will yield and act as a spring at both
sides, and so will serve at the same instant to transmit these two
movements.

But what may at first appear full strange and even incredible is that the
undulations produced by such small movements and corpuscles, should
spread to such immense distances; as for example from the Sun or from the
Stars to us. For the force of these waves must grow feeble in proportion as
they move away from their origin, so that the action of each one in
particular will without doubt become incapable of making itself felt to our
sight. But one will cease to be astonished by considering how at a great
distance from the luminous body an infinitude of waves, though they have
issued from different points of this body, unite together in such a way that
they sensibly compose one single wave only, which, consequently, ought to
have enough force to make itself felt. Thus this infinite number of waves
which originate at the same instant from all points of a fixed star, big it may
be as the Sun, make practically only one single wave which may well have
force enough to produce an impression on our eyes. Moreover from each
luminous point there may come many thousands of waves in the smallest
imaginable time, by the frequent percussion of the corpuscles which strike
the Ether at these points: which further contributes to rendering their action
more sensible.
There is the further consideration in the emanation of these waves, that each
particle of matter in which a wave spreads, ought not to communicate its
motion only to the next particle which is in the straight line drawn from the
luminous point, but that it also imparts some of it necessarily to all the
others which touch it and which oppose themselves to its movement. So it

arises that around each particle
there is made a wave of which that
particle is the centre. Thus if DCF is
a wave emanating from the
luminous point A, which is its
centre, the particle B, one of those
comprised within the sphere DCF,
will have made its particular or
partial wave KCL, which will touch
the wave DCF at C at the same
moment that the principal wave
emanating from the point A has
arrived at DCF; and it is clear that it
will be only the region C of the
wave KCL which will touch the
wave DCF, to wit, that which is in the straight line drawn through AB.
Similarly the other particles of the sphere DCF, such as bb, dd, etc., will
each make its own wave. But each of these waves can be infinitely feeble
only as compared with the wave DCF, to the composition of which all the
others contribute by the part of their surface which is most distant from the
centre A.
One sees, in addition, that the wave DCF is determined by the distance
attained in a certain space of time by the movement which started from the
point A; there being no movement beyond this wave, though there will be in
the space which it encloses, namely in parts of the particular waves, those
parts which do not touch the sphere DCF. And all this ought not to seem
fraught with too much minuteness or subtlety, since we shall see in the
sequel that all the properties of Light, and everything pertaining to its
reflexion and its refraction, can be explained in principle by this means.
This is a matter which has been quite unknown to those who hitherto have
begun to consider the waves of light, amongst whom are Mr. Hooke in his
Micrographia, and Father Pardies, who, in a treatise of which he let me see
a portion, and which he was unable to complete as he died shortly
afterward, had undertaken to prove by these waves the effects of reflexion
and refraction. But the chief foundation, which consists in the remark I have
just made, was lacking in his demonstrations; and for the rest he had

opinions very different from mine, as may be will appear some day if his
writing has been preserved.
To come to the properties of Light. We remark first that each portion of a
wave ought to spread in such a way that its extremities lie always between
the same straight lines drawn from the luminous point. Thus the portion BG
of the wave, having the luminous point A as its centre, will spread into the
arc CE bounded by the straight lines ABC, AGE. For although the particular
waves produced by the particles comprised within the space CAE spread
also outside this space, they yet do not concur at the same instant to
compose a wave which terminates the movement, as they do precisely at the
circumference CE, which is their common tangent.
And hence one sees the reason why light, at least if its rays are not reflected
or broken, spreads only by straight lines, so that it illuminates no object
except when the path from its source to that object is open along such lines.
For if, for example, there were an opening BG, limited by opaque bodies
BH, GI, the wave of light which issues from the point A will always be
terminated by the straight lines AC, AE, as has just been shown; the parts of
the partial waves which spread outside the space ACE being too feeble to
produce light there.
Now, however small we make the opening BG, there is always the same
reason causing the light there to pass between straight lines; since this
opening is always large enough to contain a great number of particles of the
ethereal matter, which are of an inconceivable smallness; so that it appears
that each little portion of the wave necessarily advances following the
straight line which comes from the luminous point. Thus then we may take
the rays of light as if they were straight lines.
It appears, moreover, by what has been remarked touching the feebleness of
the particular waves, that it is not needful that all the particles of the Ether
should be equal amongst themselves, though equality is more apt for the
propagation of the movement. For it is true that inequality will cause a
particle by pushing against another larger one to strive to recoil with a part
of its movement; but it will thereby merely generate backwards towards the
luminous point some partial waves incapable of causing light, and not a
wave compounded of many as CE was.

Another property of waves of light, and one of the most marvellous, is that
when some of them come from different or even from opposing sides, they
produce their effect across one another without any hindrance. Whence also
it comes about that a number of spectators may view different objects at the
same time through the same opening, and that two persons can at the same
time see one another's eyes. Now according to the explanation which has
been given of the action of light, how the waves do not destroy nor interrupt
one another when they cross one another, these effects which I have just
mentioned are easily conceived. But in my judgement they are not at all
easy to explain according to the views of Mr. Des Cartes, who makes Light
to consist in a continuous pressure merely tending to movement. For this
pressure not being able to act from two opposite sides at the same time,
against bodies which have no inclination to approach one another, it is
impossible so to understand what I have been saying about two persons
mutually seeing one another's eyes, or how two torches can illuminate one
another.

CHAPTER II
ON REFLEXION

aving explained the effects of waves of light which
spread in a homogeneous matter, we will examine next
that which happens to them on encountering other
bodies. We will first make evident how the Reflexion of
light is explained by these same waves, and why it
preserves equality of angles.
Let there be a surface AB; plane and polished, of some
metal, glass, or other body, which at first I will consider as perfectly
uniform (reserving to myself to deal at the end of this demonstration with
the inequalities from which it cannot be exempt), and let a line AC, inclined
to AD, represent a portion of a wave of light, the centre of which is so
distant that this portion AC may be considered as a straight line; for I
consider all this as in one plane, imagining to myself that the plane in which
this figure is, cuts the sphere of the wave through its centre and intersects
the plane AB at right angles. This explanation will suffice once for all.
The piece C of the wave AC, will in a certain space of time advance as far
as the plane AB at B, following the straight line CB, which may be
supposed to come from the luminous centre, and which in consequence is
perpendicular to AC. Now in this same space of time the portion A of the
same wave, which has been hindered from communicating its movement
beyond the plane AB, or at least partly so, ought to have continued its
movement in the matter which is above this plane, and this along a distance
equal to CB, making its own partial spherical wave, according to what has
been said above. Which wave is here represented by the circumference
SNR, the centre of which is A, and its semi-diameter AN equal to CB.
If one considers further the other pieces H of the wave AC, it appears that
they will not only have reached the surface AB by straight lines HK parallel
to CB, but that in addition they will have generated in the transparent air,

from the centres K, K, K,
particular spherical waves,
represented here by
circumferences the semi-
diameters of which are equal
to KM, that is to say to the
continuations of HK as far as
the line BG parallel to AC.
But all these circumferences
have as a common tangent
the straight line BN, namely
the same which is drawn
from B as a tangent to the
first of the circles, of which A
is the centre, and AN the
semi-diameter equal to BC,
as is easy to see.
It is then the line BN (comprised between B and the point N where the
perpendicular from the point A falls) which is as it were formed by all these
circumferences, and which terminates the movement which is made by the
reflexion of the wave AC; and it is also the place where the movement
occurs in much greater quantity than anywhere else. Wherefore, according
to that which has been explained, BN is the propagation of the wave AC at
the moment when the piece C of it has arrived at B. For there is no other
line which like BN is a common tangent to all the aforesaid circles, except
BG below the plane AB; which line BG would be the propagation of the
wave if the movement could have spread in a medium homogeneous with
that which is above the plane. And if one wishes to see how the wave AC
has come successively to BN, one has only to draw in the same figure the
straight lines KO parallel to BN, and the straight lines KL parallel to AC.
Thus one will see that the straight wave AC has become broken up into all
the OKL parts successively, and that it has become straight again at NB.
Now it is apparent here that the angle of reflexion is made equal to the
angle of incidence. For the triangles ACB, BNA being rectangular and
having the side AB common, and the side CB equal to NA, it follows that
the angles opposite to these sides will be equal, and therefore also the

angles CBA, NAB. But as CB, perpendicular to CA, marks the direction of
the incident ray, so AN, perpendicular to the wave BN, marks the direction
of the reflected ray; hence these rays are equally inclined to the plane AB.
But in considering the preceding demonstration, one might aver that it is
indeed true that BN is the common tangent of the circular waves in the
plane of this figure, but that these waves, being in truth spherical, have still
an infinitude of similar tangents, namely all the straight lines which are
drawn from the point B in the surface generated by the straight line BN
about the axis BA. It remains, therefore, to demonstrate that there is no
difficulty herein: and by the same argument one will see why the incident
ray and the reflected ray are always in one and the same plane
perpendicular to the reflecting plane. I say then that the wave AC, being
regarded only as a line, produces no light. For a visible ray of light,
however narrow it may be, has always some width, and consequently it is
necessary, in representing the wave whose progression constitutes the ray,
to put instead of a line AC some plane figure such as the circle HC in the
following figure, by supposing, as we have done, the luminous point to be
infinitely distant. Now it is easy to see, following the preceding
demonstration, that each small piece of this wave HC having arrived at the
plane AB, and there generating each one its particular wave, these will all
have, when C arrives at B, a common plane which will touch them, namely
a circle BN similar to CH; and this will be intersected at its middle and at
right angles by the same plane which likewise intersects the circle CH and
the ellipse AB.

One sees also that the said spheres of the partial waves cannot have any
common tangent plane other than the circle BN; so that it will be this plane

where there will be more reflected movement than anywhere else, and
which will therefore carry on the light in continuance from the wave CH.
I have also stated in the preceding demonstration that the movement of the
piece A of the incident wave is not able to communicate itself beyond the
plane AB, or at least not wholly. Whence it is to be remarked that though
the movement of the ethereal matter might communicate itself partly to that
of the reflecting body, this could in nothing alter the velocity of progression
of the waves, on which the angle of reflexion depends. For a slight
percussion ought to generate waves as rapid as strong percussion in the
same matter. This comes about from the property of bodies which act as
springs, of which we have spoken above; namely that whether compressed
little or much they recoil in equal times. Equally so in every reflexion of the
light, against whatever body it may be, the angles of reflexion and
incidence ought to be equal notwithstanding that the body might be of such
a nature that it takes away a portion of the movement made by the incident
light. And experiment shows that in fact there is no polished body the
reflexion of which does not follow this rule.
But the thing to be above all remarked in our demonstration is that it does
not require that the reflecting surface should be considered as a uniform
plane, as has been supposed by all those who have tried to explain the
effects of reflexion; but only an evenness such as may be attained by the
particles of the matter of the reflecting body being set near to one another;
which particles are larger than those of the ethereal matter, as will appear by
what we shall say in treating of the transparency and opacity of bodies. For
the surface consisting thus of particles put together, and the ethereal
particles being above, and smaller, it is evident that one could not
demonstrate the equality of the angles of incidence and reflexion by
similitude to that which happens to a ball thrown against a wall, of which
writers have always made use. In our way, on the other hand, the thing is
explained without difficulty. For the smallness of the particles of
quicksilver, for example, being such that one must conceive millions of
them, in the smallest visible surface proposed, arranged like a heap of
grains of sand which has been flattened as much as it is capable of being,
this surface then becomes for our purpose as even as a polished glass is:
and, although it always remains rough with respect to the particles of the
Ether it is evident that the centres of all the particular spheres of reflexion,

of which we have spoken, are almost in one uniform plane, and that thus the
common tangent can fit to them as perfectly as is requisite for the
production of light. And this alone is requisite, in our method of
demonstration, to cause equality of the said angles without the remainder of
the movement reflected from all parts being able to produce any contrary
effect.

CHAPTER III
ON REFRACTION

n the same way as the effects of Reflexion have been
explained by waves of light reflected at the surface of
polished bodies, we will explain transparency and the
phenomena of refraction by waves which spread within
and across diaphanous bodies, both solids, such as glass,
and liquids, such as water, oils, etc. But in order that it
may not seem strange to suppose this passage of waves
in the interior of these bodies, I will first show that one may conceive it
possible in more than one mode.
First, then, if the ethereal matter cannot penetrate transparent bodies at all,
their own particles would be able to communicate successively the
movement of the waves, the same as do those of the Ether, supposing that,
like those, they are of a nature to act as a spring. And this is easy to
conceive as regards water and other transparent liquids, they being
composed of detached particles. But it may seem more difficult as regards
glass and other transparent and hard bodies, because their solidity does not
seem to permit them to receive movement except in their whole mass at the
same time. This, however, is not necessary because this solidity is not such
as it appears to us, it being probable rather that these bodies are composed
of particles merely placed close to one another and held together by some
pressure from without of some other matter, and by the irregularity of their
shapes. For primarily their rarity is shown by the facility with which there
passes through them the matter of the vortices of the magnet, and that
which causes gravity. Further, one cannot say that these bodies are of a
texture similar to that of a sponge or of light bread, because the heat of the
fire makes them flow and thereby changes the situation of the particles
amongst themselves. It remains then that they are, as has been said,
assemblages of particles which touch one another without constituting a
continuous solid. This being so, the movement which these particles receive
to carry on the waves of light, being merely communicated from some of

them to others, without their going for that purpose out of their places or
without derangement, it may very well produce its effect without
prejudicing in any way the apparent solidity of the compound.
By pressure from without, of which I have spoken, must not be understood
that of the air, which would not be sufficient, but that of some other more
subtle matter, a pressure which I chanced upon by experiment long ago,
namely in the case of water freed from air, which remains suspended in a
tube open at its lower end, notwithstanding that the air has been removed
from the vessel in which this tube is enclosed.
One can then in this way conceive of transparency in a solid without any
necessity that the ethereal matter which serves for light should pass through
it, or that it should find pores in which to insinuate itself. But the truth is
that this matter not only passes through solids, but does so even with great
facility; of which the experiment of Torricelli, above cited, is already a
proof. Because on the quicksilver and the water quitting the upper part of
the glass tube, it appears that it is immediately filled with ethereal matter,
since light passes across it. But here is another argument which proves this
ready penetrability, not only in transparent bodies but also in all others.
When light passes across a hollow sphere of glass, closed on all sides, it is
certain that it is full of ethereal matter, as much as the spaces outside the
sphere. And this ethereal matter, as has been shown above, consists of
particles which just touch one another. If then it were enclosed in the sphere
in such a way that it could not get out through the pores of the glass, it
would be obliged to follow the movement of the sphere when one changes
its place: and it would require consequently almost the same force to
impress a certain velocity on this sphere, when placed on a horizontal plane,
as if it were full of water or perhaps of quicksilver: because every body
resists the velocity of the motion which one would give to it, in proportion
to the quantity of matter which it contains, and which is obliged to follow
this motion. But on the contrary one finds that the sphere resists the impress
of movement only in proportion to the quantity of matter of the glass of
which it is made. Then it must be that the ethereal matter which is inside is
not shut up, but flows through it with very great freedom. We shall
demonstrate hereafter that by this process the same penetrability may be
inferred also as relating to opaque bodies.

The second mode then of explaining transparency, and one which appears
more probably true, is by saying that the waves of light are carried on in the
ethereal matter, which continuously occupies the interstices or pores of
transparent bodies. For since it passes through them continuously and
freely, it follows that they are always full of it. And one may even show that
these interstices occupy much more space than the coherent particles which
constitute the bodies. For if what we have just said is true: that force is
required to impress a certain horizontal velocity on bodies in proportion as
they contain coherent matter; and if the proportion of this force follows the
law of weights, as is confirmed by experiment, then the quantity of the
constituent matter of bodies also follows the proportion of their weights.
Now we see that water weighs only one fourteenth part as much as an equal
portion of quicksilver: therefore the matter of the water does not occupy the
fourteenth part of the space which its mass obtains. It must even occupy
much less of it, since quicksilver is less heavy than gold, and the matter of
gold is by no means dense, as follows from the fact that the matter of the
vortices of the magnet and of that which is the cause of gravity pass very
freely through it.
But it may be objected here that if water is a body of so great rarity, and if
its particles occupy so small a portion of the space of its apparent bulk, it is
very strange how it yet resists Compression so strongly without permitting
itself to be condensed by any force which one has hitherto essayed to
employ, preserving even its entire liquidity while subjected to this pressure.
This is no small difficulty. It may, however, be resolved by saying that the
very violent and rapid motion of the subtle matter which renders water
liquid, by agitating the particles of which it is composed, maintains this
liquidity in spite of the pressure which hitherto any one has been minded to
apply to it.
The rarity of transparent bodies being then such as we have said, one easily
conceives that the waves might be carried on in the ethereal matter which
fills the interstices of the particles. And, moreover, one may believe that the
progression of these waves ought to be a little slower in the interior of
bodies, by reason of the small detours which the same particles cause. In
which different velocity of light I shall show the cause of refraction to
consist.

Before doing so, I will indicate the third and last mode in which
transparency may be conceived; which is by supposing that the movement
of the waves of light is transmitted indifferently both in the particles of the
ethereal matter which occupy the interstices of bodies, and in the particles
which compose them, so that the movement passes from one to the other.
And it will be seen hereafter that this hypothesis serves excellently to
explain the double refraction of certain transparent bodies.
Should it be objected that if the particles of the ether are smaller than those
of transparent bodies (since they pass through their intervals), it would
follow that they can communicate to them but little of their movement, it
may be replied that the particles of these bodies are in turn composed of
still smaller particles, and so it will be these secondary particles which will
receive the movement from those of the ether.
Furthermore, if the particles of transparent bodies have a recoil a little less
prompt than that of the ethereal particles, which nothing hinders us from
supposing, it will again follow that the progression of the waves of light
will be slower in the interior of such bodies than it is outside in the ethereal
matter.
All this I have found as most probable for the mode in which the waves of
light pass across transparent bodies. To which it must further be added in
what respect these bodies differ from those which are opaque; and the more
so since it might seem because of the easy penetration of bodies by the
ethereal matter, of which mention has been made, that there would not be
any body that was not transparent. For by the same reasoning about the
hollow sphere which I have employed to prove the smallness of the density
of glass and its easy penetrability by the ethereal matter, one might also
prove that the same penetrability obtains for metals and for every other sort
of body. For this sphere being for example of silver, it is certain that it
contains some of the ethereal matter which serves for light, since this was
there as well as in the air when the opening of the sphere was closed. Yet,
being closed and placed upon a horizontal plane, it resists the movement
which one wishes to give to it, merely according to the quantity of silver of
which it is made; so that one must conclude, as above, that the ethereal
matter which is enclosed does not follow the movement of the sphere; and
that therefore silver, as well as glass, is very easily penetrated by this

matter. Some of it is therefore present continuously and in quantities
between the particles of silver and of all other opaque bodies: and since it
serves for the propagation of light it would seem that these bodies ought
also to be transparent, which however is not the case.
Whence then, one will say, does their opacity come? Is it because the
particles which compose them are soft; that is to say, these particles being
composed of others that are smaller, are they capable of changing their
figure on receiving the pressure of the ethereal particles, the motion of
which they thereby damp, and so hinder the continuance of the waves of
light? That cannot be: for if the particles of the metals are soft, how is it that
polished silver and mercury reflect light so strongly? What I find to be most
probable herein, is to say that metallic bodies, which are almost the only
really opaque ones, have mixed amongst their hard particles some soft ones;
so that some serve to cause reflexion and the others to hinder transparency;
while, on the other hand, transparent bodies contain only hard particles
which have the faculty of recoil, and serve together with those of the
ethereal matter for the propagation of the waves of light, as has been said.
Let us pass now to the explanation
of the effects of Refraction,
assuming, as we have done, the
passage of waves of light through
transparent bodies, and the
diminution of velocity which these
same waves suffer in them.
The chief property of Refraction is
that a ray of light, such as AB,
being in the air, and falling
obliquely upon the polished surface
of a transparent body, such as FG, is
broken at the point of incidence B,
in such a way that with the straight
line DBE which cuts the surface perpendicularly it makes an angle CBE
less than ABD which it made with the same perpendicular when in the air.
And the measure of these angles is found by describing, about the point B, a
circle which cuts the radii AB, BC. For the perpendiculars AD, CE, let fall

from the points of intersection upon the straight line DE, which are called
the Sines of the angles ABD, CBE, have a certain ratio between themselves;
which ratio is always the same for all inclinations of the incident ray, at
least for a given transparent body. This ratio is, in glass, very nearly as 3 to
2; and in water very nearly as 4 to 3; and is likewise different in other
diaphanous bodies.
Another property, similar to this, is that the refractions are reciprocal
between the rays entering into a transparent body and those which are
leaving it. That is to say that if the ray AB in entering the transparent body
is refracted into BC, then likewise CB being taken as a ray in the interior of
this body will be refracted, on passing out, into BA.
To explain then the
reasons of these
phenomena according
to our principles, let
AB be the straight line
which represents a
plane surface bounding
the transparent
substances which lie
towards C and towards
N. When I say plane,
that does not signify a
perfect evenness, but
such as has been
understood in treating
of reflexion, and for the same reason. Let the line AC represent a portion of
a wave of light, the centre of which is supposed so distant that this portion
may be considered as a straight line. The piece C, then, of the wave AC,
will in a certain space of time have advanced as far as the plane AB
following the straight line CB, which may be imagined as coming from the
luminous centre, and which consequently will cut AC at right angles. Now
in the same time the piece A would have come to G along the straight line
AG, equal and parallel to CB; and all the portion of wave AC would be at
GB if the matter of the transparent body transmitted the movement of the
wave as quickly as the matter of the Ether. But let us suppose that it

transmits this movement less quickly, by one-third, for instance. Movement
will then be spread from the point A, in the matter of the transparent body
through a distance equal to two-thirds of CB, making its own particular
spherical wave according to what has been said before. This wave is then
represented by the circumference SNR, the centre of which is A, and its
semi-diameter equal to two-thirds of CB. Then if one considers in order the
other pieces H of the wave AC, it appears that in the same time that the
piece C reaches B they will not only have arrived at the surface AB along
the straight lines HK parallel to CB, but that, in addition, they will have
generated in the diaphanous substance from the centres K, partial waves,
represented here by circumferences the semi-diameters of which are equal
to two-thirds of the lines KM, that is to say, to two-thirds of the
prolongations of HK down to the straight line BG; for these semi-diameters
would have been equal to entire lengths of KM if the two transparent
substances had been of the same penetrability.
Now all these circumferences have for a common tangent the straight line
BN; namely the same line which is drawn as a tangent from the point B to
the circumference SNR which we considered first. For it is easy to see that
all the other circumferences will touch the same BN, from B up to the point
of contact N, which is the same point where AN falls perpendicularly on
BN.
It is then BN, which is formed by small arcs of these circumferences, which
terminates the movement that the wave AC has communicated within the
transparent body, and where this movement occurs in much greater amount
than anywhere else. And for that reason this line, in accordance with what
has been said more than once, is the propagation of the wave AC at the
moment when its piece C has reached B. For there is no other line below
the plane AB which is, like BN, a common tangent to all these partial
waves. And if one would know how the wave AC has come progressively to
BN, it is necessary only to draw in the same figure the straight lines KO
parallel to BN, and all the lines KL parallel to AC. Thus one will see that
the wave CA, from being a straight line, has become broken in all the
positions LKO successively, and that it has again become a straight line at
BN. This being evident by what has already been demonstrated, there is no
need to explain it further.

Now, in the same figure, if one draws EAF, which cuts the plane AB at right
angles at the point A, since AD is perpendicular to the wave AC, it will be
DA which will mark the ray of incident light, and AN which was
perpendicular to BN, the refracted ray: since the rays are nothing else than
the straight lines along which the portions of the waves advance.
Whence it is easy to recognize this chief property of refraction, namely that
the Sine of the angle DAE has always the same ratio to the Sine of the angle
NAF, whatever be the inclination of the ray DA: and that this ratio is the
same as that of the velocity of the waves in the transparent substance which
is towards AE to their velocity in the transparent substance towards AF. For,
considering AB as the radius of a circle, the Sine of the angle BAC is BC,
and the Sine of the angle ABN is AN. But the angle BAC is equal to DAE,
since each of them added to CAE makes a right angle. And the angle ABN
is equal to NAF, since each of them with BAN makes a right angle. Then
also the Sine of the angle DAE is to the Sine of NAF as BC is to AN. But
the ratio of BC to AN was the same as that of the velocities of light in the
substance which is towards AE and in that which is towards AF; therefore
also the Sine of the angle DAE will be to the Sine of the angle NAF the
same as the said velocities of light.
To see, consequently, what the refraction will be when the waves of light
pass into a substance in which the movement travels more quickly than in
that from which they emerge (let us again assume the ratio of 3 to 2), it is
only necessary to repeat all the same construction and demonstration which
we have just used, merely substituting everywhere 3/2 instead of 2/3. And it
will be found by the same reasoning, in this other figure, that when the
piece C of the wave AC shall have reached the surface AB at B, all the
portions of the wave AC will have advanced as far as BN, so that BC the
perpendicular on AC is to AN the perpendicular on BN as 2 to 3. And there
will finally be this same ratio of 2 to 3 between the Sine of the angle BAD
and the Sine of the angle FAN.
Hence one sees the reciprocal relation of the refractions of the ray on
entering and on leaving one and the same transparent body: namely that if
NA falling on the external surface AB is refracted into the direction AD, so
the ray AD will be refracted on leaving the transparent body into the
direction AN.

One sees also the reason for a
noteworthy accident which
happens in this refraction:
which is this, that after a
certain obliquity of the
incident ray DA, it begins to
be quite unable to penetrate
into the other transparent
substance. For if the angle
DAQ or CBA is such that in
the triangle ACB, CB is equal
to 2/3 of AB, or is greater,
then AN cannot form one side
of the triangle ANB, since it
becomes equal to or greater
than AB: so that the portion
of wave BN cannot be found anywhere, neither consequently can AN,
which ought to be perpendicular to it. And thus the incident ray DA does
not then pierce the surface AB.
When the ratio of the velocities of the waves is as two to three, as in our
example, which is that which obtains for glass and air, the angle DAQ must
be more than 48 degrees 11 minutes in order that the ray DA may be able to
pass by refraction. And when the ratio of the velocities is as 3 to 4, as it is
very nearly in water and air, this angle DAQ must exceed 41 degrees 24
minutes. And this accords perfectly with experiment.
But it might here be asked: since the meeting of the wave AC against the
surface AB ought to produce movement in the matter which is on the other
side, why does no light pass there? To which the reply is easy if one
remembers what has been said before. For although it generates an
infinitude of partial waves in the matter which is at the other side of AB,
these waves never have a common tangent line (either straight or curved) at
the same moment; and so there is no line terminating the propagation of the
wave AC beyond the plane AB, nor any place where the movement is
gathered together in sufficiently great quantity to produce light. And one
will easily see the truth of this, namely that CB being larger than 2/3 of AB,
the waves excited beyond the plane AB will have no common tangent if

about the centres K one then draws circles having radii equal to 3/2 of the
lengths LB to which they correspond. For all these circles will be enclosed
in one another and will all pass beyond the point B.
Now it is to be remarked that from the moment when the angle DAQ is
smaller than is requisite to permit the refracted ray DA to pass into the other
transparent substance, one finds that the interior reflexion which occurs at
the surface AB is much augmented in brightness, as is easy to realize by
experiment with a triangular prism; and for this our theory can afford this
reason. When the angle DAQ is still large enough to enable the ray DA to
pass, it is evident that the light from the portion AC of the wave is collected
in a minimum space when it reaches BN. It appears also that the wave BN
becomes so much the smaller as the angle CBA or DAQ is made less; until
when the latter is diminished to the limit indicated a little previously, this
wave BN is collected together always at one point. That is to say, that when
the piece C of the wave AC has then arrived at B, the wave BN which is the
propagation of AC is entirely reduced to the same point B. Similarly when
the piece H has reached K, the part AH is entirely reduced to the same point
K. This makes it evident that in proportion as the wave CA comes to meet
the surface AB, there occurs a great quantity of movement along that
surface; which movement ought also to spread within the transparent body
and ought to have much re-enforced the partial waves which produce the
interior reflexion against the surface AB, according to the laws of reflexion
previously explained.
And because a slight diminution of the angle of incidence DAQ causes the
wave BN, however great it was, to be reduced to zero, (for this angle being
49 degrees 11 minutes in the glass, the angle BAN is still 11 degrees 21
minutes, and the same angle being reduced by one degree only the angle
BAN is reduced to zero, and so the wave BN reduced to a point) thence it
comes about that the interior reflexion from being obscure becomes
suddenly bright, so soon as the angle of incidence is such that it no longer
gives passage to the refraction.
Now as concerns ordinary external reflexion, that is to say which occurs
when the angle of incidence DAQ is still large enough to enable the
refracted ray to penetrate beyond the surface AB, this reflexion should
occur against the particles of the substance which touches the transparent

body on its outside. And it apparently occurs against the particles of the air
or others mingled with the ethereal particles and larger than they. So on the
other hand the external reflexion of these bodies occurs against the particles
which compose them, and which are also larger than those of the ethereal
matter, since the latter flows in their interstices. It is true that there remains
here some difficulty in those experiments in which this interior reflexion
occurs without the particles of air being able to contribute to it, as in vessels
or tubes from which the air has been extracted.
Experience, moreover, teaches us that these two reflexions are of nearly
equal force, and that in different transparent bodies they are so much the
stronger as the refraction of these bodies is the greater. Thus one sees
manifestly that the reflexion of glass is stronger than that of water, and that
of diamond stronger than that of glass.
I will finish this theory of refraction by demonstrating a remarkable
proposition which depends on it; namely, that a ray of light in order to go
from one point to another, when these points are in different media, is
refracted in such wise at the plane surface which joins these two media that
it employs the least possible time: and exactly the same happens in the case
of reflexion against a plane surface. Mr. Fermat was the first to propound
this property of refraction, holding with us, and directly counter to the
opinion of Mr. Des Cartes, that light passes more slowly through glass and
water than through air. But he assumed besides this a constant ratio of
Sines, which we have just proved by these different degrees of velocity
alone: or rather, what is equivalent, he assumed not only that the velocities
were different but that the light took the least time possible for its passage,
and thence deduced the constant ratio of the Sines. His demonstration,
which may be seen in his printed works, and in the volume of letters of Mr.
Des Cartes, is very long; wherefore I give here another which is simpler and
easier.
Let KF be the plane surface; A the point in the medium which the light
traverses more easily, as the air; C the point in the other which is more
difficult to penetrate, as water. And suppose that a ray has come from A, by
B, to C, having been refracted at B according to the law demonstrated a
little before; that is to say that, having drawn PBQ, which cuts the plane at
right angles, let the sine of the angle ABP have to the sine of the angle CBQ

the same ratio as the velocity
of light in the medium where
A is to the velocity of light in
the medium where C is. It is
to be shown that the time of
passage of light along AB and
BC taken together, is the
shortest that can be. Let us
assume that it may have come
by other lines, and, in the first
place, along AF, FC, so that
the point of refraction F may
be further from B than the
point A; and let AO be a line
perpendicular to AB, and FO
parallel to AB; BH
perpendicular to FO, and FG to BC.
Since then the angle HBF is equal to PBA, and the angle BFG equal to
QBC, it follows that the sine of the angle HBF will also have the same ratio
to the sine of BFG, as the velocity of light in the medium A is to its velocity
in the medium C. But these sines are the straight lines HF, BG, if we take
BF as the semi-diameter of a circle. Then these lines HF, BG, will bear to
one another the said ratio of the velocities. And, therefore, the time of the
light along HF, supposing that the ray had been OF, would be equal to the
time along BG in the interior of the medium C. But the time along AB is
equal to the time along OH; therefore the time along OF is equal to the time
along AB, BG. Again the time along FC is greater than that along GC; then
the time along OFC will be longer than that along ABC. But AF is longer
than OF, then the time along AFC will by just so much more exceed the
time along ABC.
Now let us assume that the ray has come from A to C along AK, KC; the
point of refraction K being nearer to A than the point B is; and let CN be the
perpendicular upon BC, KN parallel to BC: BM perpendicular upon KN,
and KL upon BA.

Here BL and KM are the sines of angles BKL, KBM; that is to say, of the
angles PBA, QBC; and therefore they are to one another as the velocity of
light in the medium A is to the velocity in the medium C. Then the time
along LB is equal to the time along KM; and since the time along BC is
equal to the time along MN, the time along LBC will be equal to the time
along KMN. But the time along AK is longer than that along AL: hence the
time along AKN is longer than that along ABC. And KC being longer than
KN, the time along AKC will exceed, by as much more, the time along
ABC. Hence it appears that the time along ABC is the shortest possible;
which was to be proven.

CHAPTER IV
ON THE REFRACTION OF THE AIR

e have shown how the movement which
constitutes light spreads by spherical waves in
any homogeneous matter. And it is evident that
when the matter is not homogeneous, but of such
a constitution that the movement is
communicated in it more rapidly toward one side
than toward another, these waves cannot be
spherical: but that they must acquire their figure according to the different
distances over which the successive movement passes in equal times.
It is thus that we shall in the first place explain the refractions which occur
in the air, which extends from here to the clouds and beyond. The effects of
which refractions are very remarkable; for by them we often see objects
which the rotundity of the Earth ought otherwise to hide; such as Islands,
and the tops of mountains when one is at sea. Because also of them the Sun
and the Moon appear as risen before in fact they have, and appear to set
later: so that at times the Moon has been seen eclipsed while the Sun
appeared still above the horizon. And so also the heights of the Sun and of
the Moon, and those of all the Stars always appear a little greater than they
are in reality, because of these same refractions, as Astronomers know. But
there is one experiment which renders this refraction very evident; which is
that of fixing a telescope on some spot so that it views an object, such as a
steeple or a house, at a distance of half a league or more. If then you look
through it at different hours of the day, leaving it always fixed in the same
way, you will see that the same spots of the object will not always appear at
the middle of the aperture of the telescope, but that generally in the morning
and in the evening, when there are more vapours near the Earth, these
objects seem to rise higher, so that the half or more of them will no longer
be visible; and so that they seem lower toward mid-day when these vapours
are dissipated.

Those who consider refraction to occur only in the surfaces which separate
transparent bodies of different nature, would find it difficult to give a reason
for all that I have just related; but according to our Theory the thing is quite
easy. It is known that the air which surrounds us, besides the particles which
are proper to it and which float in the ethereal matter as has been explained,
is full also of particles of water which are raised by the action of heat; and it
has been ascertained further by some very definite experiments that as one
mounts up higher the density of air diminishes in proportion. Now whether
the particles of water and those of air take part, by means of the particles of
ethereal matter, in the movement which constitutes light, but have a less
prompt recoil than these, or whether the encounter and hindrance which
these particles of air and water offer to the propagation of movement of the
ethereal progress, retard the progression, it follows that both kinds of
particles flying amidst the ethereal particles, must render the air, from a
great height down to the Earth, gradually less easy for the spreading of the
waves of light.

Whence the configuration of the waves ought to become nearly such as this
figure represents: namely, if A is a light, or the visible point of a steeple, the
waves which start from it ought to spread more widely upwards and less
widely downwards, but in other directions more or less as they approximate
to these two extremes. This being so, it necessarily follows that every line

intersecting one of these waves at right angles will pass above the point A,
always excepting the one line which is perpendicular to the horizon.

Let BC be the wave which brings the light to the spectator who is at B, and
let BD be the straight line which intersects this wave at right angles. Now
because the ray or straight line by which we judge the spot where the object
appears to us is nothing else than the perpendicular to the wave that reaches
our eye, as will be understood by what was said above, it is manifest that
the point A will be perceived as being in the line BD, and therefore higher
than in fact it is.
Similarly if the Earth be AB, and the top of the Atmosphere CD, which
probably is not a well defined spherical surface (since we know that the air
becomes rare in proportion as one ascends, for above there is so much less
of it to press down upon it), the waves of light from the sun coming, for
instance, in such a way that so long as they have not reached the
Atmosphere CD the straight line AE intersects them perpendicularly, they
ought, when they enter the Atmosphere, to advance more quickly in
elevated regions than in regions nearer to the Earth. So that if CA is the
wave which brings the light to the spectator at A, its region C will be the
furthest advanced; and the straight line AF, which intersects this wave at

right angles, and which determines the apparent place of the Sun, will pass
above the real Sun, which will be seen along the line AE. And so it may
occur that when it ought not to be visible in the absence of vapours, because
the line AE encounters the rotundity of the Earth, it will be perceived in the
line AF by refraction. But this angle EAF is scarcely ever more than half a
degree because the attenuation of the vapours alters the waves of light but
little. Furthermore these refractions are not altogether constant in all
weathers, particularly at small elevations of 2 or 3 degrees; which results
from the different quantity of aqueous vapours rising above the Earth.
And this same thing is the cause why at certain times a distant object will be
hidden behind another less distant one, and yet may at another time be able
to be seen, although the spot from which it is viewed is always the same.
But the reason for this effect will be still more evident from what we are
going to remark touching the curvature of rays. It appears from the things
explained above that the progression or propagation of a small part of a
wave of light is properly what one calls a ray. Now these rays, instead of
being straight as they are in homogeneous media, ought to be curved in an
atmosphere of unequal penetrability. For they necessarily follow from the
object to the eye the line which intersects at right angles all the progressions
of the waves, as in the first figure the line AEB does, as will be shown
hereafter; and it is this line which determines what interposed bodies would
or would not hinder us from seeing the object. For although the point of the
steeple A appears raised to D, it would yet not appear to the eye B if the
tower H was between the two, because it crosses the curve AEB. But the
tower E, which is beneath this curve, does not hinder the point A from being
seen. Now according as the air near the Earth exceeds in density that which
is higher, the curvature of the ray AEB becomes greater: so that at certain
times it passes above the summit E, which allows the point A to be
perceived by the eye at B; and at other times it is intercepted by the same
tower E which hides A from this same eye.
But to demonstrate this curvature of the rays conformably to all our
preceding Theory, let us imagine that AB is a small portion of a wave of
light coming from the side C, which we may consider as a straight line. Let
us also suppose that it is perpendicular to the Horizon, the portion B being
nearer to the Earth than the portion A; and that because the vapours are less
hindering at A than at B, the particular wave which comes from the point A

spreads through a certain
space AD while the particular
wave which starts from the
point B spreads through a
shorter space BE; AD and BE
being parallel to the Horizon.
Further, supposing the
straight lines FG, HI, etc., to
be drawn from an infinitude
of points in the straight line
AB and to terminate on the
line DE (which is straight or
may be considered as such),
let the different
penetrabilities at the different
heights in the air between A
and B be represented by all
these lines; so that the
particular wave, originating from the point F, will spread across the space
FG, and that from the point H across the space HI, while that from the point
A spreads across the space AD.
Now if about the centres A, B, one describes the circles DK, EL, which
represent the spreading of the waves which originate from these two points,
and if one draws the straight line KL which touches these two circles, it is
easy to see that this same line will be the common tangent to all the other
circles drawn about the centres F, H, etc.; and that all the points of contact
will fall within that part of this line which is comprised between the
perpendiculars AK, BL. Then it will be the line KL which will terminate the
movement of the particular waves originating from the points of the wave
AB; and this movement will be stronger between the points KL, than
anywhere else at the same instant, since an infinitude of circumferences
concur to form this straight line; and consequently KL will be the
propagation of the portion of wave AB, as has been said in explaining
reflexion and ordinary refraction. Now it appears that AK and BL dip down
toward the side where the air is less easy to penetrate: for AK being longer
than BL, and parallel to it, it follows that the lines AB and KL, being

prolonged, would meet at the side L. But the angle K is a right angle: hence
KAB is necessarily acute, and consequently less than DAB. If one
investigates in the same way the progression of the portion of the wave KL,
one will find that after a further time it has arrived at MN in such a manner
that the perpendiculars KM, LN, dip down even more than do AK, BL. And
this suffices to show that the ray will continue along the curved line which
intersects all the waves at right angles, as has been said.

CHAPTER V
ON THE STRANGE REFRACTION OF ICELAND
CRYSTAL

1.
here is brought from Iceland, which is an Island in the
North Sea, in the latitude of 66 degrees, a kind of
Crystal or transparent stone, very remarkable for its
figure and other qualities, but above all for its strange
refractions. The causes of this have seemed to me to be
worthy of being carefully investigated, the more so
because amongst transparent bodies this one alone does
not follow the ordinary rules with respect to rays of light. I have even been
under some necessity to make this research, because the refractions of this
Crystal seemed to overturn our preceding explanation of regular refraction;
which explanation, on the contrary, they strongly confirm, as will be seen
after they have been brought under the same principle. In Iceland are found
great lumps of this Crystal, some of which I have seen of 4 or 5 pounds. But
it occurs also in other countries, for I have had some of the same sort which
had been found in France near the town of Troyes in Champagne, and some
others which came from the Island of Corsica, though both were less clear
and only in little bits, scarcely capable of letting any effect of refraction be
observed.
2. The first knowledge which the public has had about it is due to Mr.
Erasmus Bartholinus, who has given a description of Iceland Crystal and of
its chief phenomena. But here I shall not desist from giving my own, both
for the instruction of those who may not have seen his book, and because as
respects some of these phenomena there is a slight difference between his
observations and those which I have made: for I have applied myself with
great exactitude to examine these properties of refraction, in order to be
quite sure before undertaking to explain the causes of them.

3. As regards the hardness of this stone, and the property which it has of
being easily split, it must be considered rather as a species of Talc than of
Crystal. For an iron spike effects an entrance into it as easily as into any
other Talc or Alabaster, to which it is equal in gravity.
4. The pieces of it which are found
have the figure of an oblique
parallelepiped; each of the six faces
being a parallelogram; and it admits
of being split in three directions
parallel to two of these opposed
faces. Even in such wise, if you
will, that all the six faces are equal
and similar rhombuses. The figure
here added represents a piece of this
Crystal. The obtuse angles of all the
parallelograms, as C, D, here, are
angles of 101 degrees 52 minutes,
and consequently the acute angles,
such as A and B, are of 78 degrees 8 minutes.
5. Of the solid angles there are two opposite to one another, such as C and
E, which are each composed of three equal obtuse plane angles. The other
six are composed of two acute angles and one obtuse. All that I have just
said has been likewise remarked by Mr. Bartholinus in the aforesaid
treatise; if we differ it is only slightly about the values of the angles. He
recounts moreover some other properties of this Crystal; to wit, that when
rubbed against cloth it attracts straws and other light things as do amber,
diamond, glass, and Spanish wax. Let a piece be covered with water for a
day or more, the surface loses its natural polish. When aquafortis is poured
on it it produces ebullition, especially, as I have found, if the Crystal has
been pulverized. I have also found by experiment that it may be heated to
redness in the fire without being in anywise altered or rendered less
transparent; but a very violent fire calcines it nevertheless. Its transparency
is scarcely less than that of water or of Rock Crystal, and devoid of colour.
But rays of light pass through it in another fashion and produce those
marvellous refractions the causes of which I am now going to try to explain;

reserving for the end of this Treatise the statement of my conjectures
touching the formation and extraordinary configuration of this Crystal.
6. In all other transparent bodies that we know there is but one sole and
simple refraction; but in this substance there are two different ones. The
effect is that objects seen through it, especially such as are placed right
against it, appear double; and that a ray of sunlight, falling on one of its
surfaces, parts itself into two rays and traverses the Crystal thus.
7. It is again a general law in all other transparent bodies that the ray which
falls perpendicularly on their surface passes straight on without suffering
refraction, and that an oblique ray is always refracted. But in this Crystal
the perpendicular ray suffers refraction, and there are oblique rays which
pass through it quite straight.

8. But in order to explain these phenomena more particularly, let there be,
in the first place, a piece ABFE of the same Crystal, and let the obtuse angle
ACB, one of the three which constitute the equilateral solid angle C, be

divided into two equal parts by the straight line CG, and let it be conceived
that the Crystal is intersected by a plane which passes through this line and
through the side CF, which plane will necessarily be perpendicular to the
surface AB; and its section in the Crystal will form a parallelogram GCFH.
We will call this section the principal section of the Crystal.
9. Now if one covers the surface AB, leaving there only a small aperture at
the point K, situated in the straight line CG, and if one exposes it to the sun,
so that his rays face it perpendicularly above, then the ray IK will divide
itself at the point K into two, one of which will continue to go on straight by
KL, and the other will separate itself along the straight line KM, which is in
the plane GCFH, and which makes with KL an angle of about 6 degrees 40
minutes, tending from the side of the solid angle C; and on emerging from
the other side of the Crystal it will turn again parallel to JK, along MZ. And
as, in this extraordinary refraction, the point M is seen by the refracted ray
MKI, which I consider as going to the eye at I, it necessarily follows that
the point L, by virtue of the same refraction, will be seen by the refracted
ray LRI, so that LR will be parallel to MK if the distance from the eye KI is
supposed very great. The point L appears then as being in the straight line
IRS; but the same point appears also, by ordinary refraction, to be in the
straight line IK, hence it is necessarily judged to be double. And similarly if
L be a small hole in a sheet of paper or other substance which is laid against
the Crystal, it will appear when turned towards daylight as if there were two
holes, which will seem the wider apart from one another the greater the
thickness of the Crystal.
10. Again, if one turns the Crystal in such wise that an incident ray NO, of
sunlight, which I suppose to be in the plane continued from GCFH, makes
with GC an angle of 73 degrees and 20 minutes, and is consequently nearly
parallel to the edge CF, which makes with FH an angle of 70 degrees 57
minutes, according to the calculation which I shall put at the end, it will
divide itself at the point O into two rays, one of which will continue along
OP in a straight line with NO, and will similarly pass out of the other side
of the crystal without any refraction; but the other will be refracted and will
go along OQ. And it must be noted that it is special to the plane through
GCF and to those which are parallel to it, that all incident rays which are in
one of these planes continue to be in it after they have entered the Crystal

and have become double; for it is quite otherwise for rays in all other planes
which intersect the Crystal, as we shall see afterwards.
11. I recognized at first by these experiments and by some others that of the
two refractions which the ray suffers in this Crystal, there is one which
follows the ordinary rules; and it is this to which the rays KL and OQ
belong. This is why I have distinguished this ordinary refraction from the
other; and having measured it by exact observation, I found that its
proportion, considered as to the Sines of the angles which the incident and
refracted rays make with the perpendicular, was very precisely that of 5 to
3, as was found also by Mr. Bartholinus, and consequently much greater
than that of Rock Crystal, or of glass, which is nearly 3 to 2.
12. The mode of
making these
observations exactly is
as follows. Upon a leaf
of paper fixed on a
thoroughly flat table
there is traced a black
line AB, and two
others, CED and KML,
which cut it at right
angles and are more or
less distant from one
another according as it
is desired to examine a
ray that is more or less
oblique. Then place the
Crystal upon the intersection E so that the line AB concurs with that which
bisects the obtuse angle of the lower surface, or with some line parallel to it.
Then by placing the eye directly above the line AB it will appear single
only; and one will see that the portion viewed through the Crystal and the
portions which appear outside it, meet together in a straight line: but the
line CD will appear double, and one can distinguish the image which is due
to regular refraction by the circumstance that when one views it with both
eyes it seems raised up more than the other, or again by the circumstance
that, when the Crystal is turned around on the paper, this image remains

stationary, whereas the other image shifts and moves entirely around.
Afterwards let the eye be placed at I (remaining always in the plane
perpendicular through AB) so that it views the image which is formed by
regular refraction of the line CD making a straight line with the remainder
of that line which is outside the Crystal. And then, marking on the surface
of the Crystal the point H where the intersection E appears, this point will
be directly above E. Then draw back the eye towards O, keeping always in
the plane perpendicular through AB, so that the image of the line CD, which
is formed by ordinary refraction, may appear in a straight line with the line
KL viewed without refraction; and then mark on the Crystal the point N
where the point of intersection E appears.
13. Then one will know the length and position of the lines NH, EM, and of
HE, which is the thickness of the Crystal: which lines being traced
separately upon a plan, and then joining NE and NM which cuts HE at P,
the proportion of the refraction will be that of EN to NP, because these lines
are to one another as the sines of the angles NPH, NEP, which are equal to
those which the incident ray ON and its refraction NE make with the
perpendicular to the surface. This proportion, as I have said, is sufficiently
precisely as 5 to 3, and is always the same for all inclinations of the incident
ray.
14. The same mode of observation has also served me for examining the
extraordinary or irregular refraction of this Crystal. For, the point H having
been found and marked, as aforesaid, directly above the point E, I observed
the appearance of the line CD, which is made by the extraordinary
refraction; and having placed the eye at Q, so that this appearance made a
straight line with the line KL viewed without refraction, I ascertained the
triangles REH, RES, and consequently the angles RSH, RES, which the
incident and the refracted ray make with the perpendicular.
15. But I found in this refraction that the ratio of FR to RS was not constant,
like the ordinary refraction, but that it varied with the varying obliquity of
the incident ray.
16. I found also that when QRE made a straight line, that is, when the
incident ray entered the Crystal without being refracted (as I ascertained by
the circumstance that then the point E viewed by the extraordinary

refraction appeared in the line CD, as seen without refraction) I found, I say,
then that the angle QRG was 73 degrees 20 minutes, as has been already
remarked; and so it is not the ray parallel to the edge of the Crystal, which
crosses it in a straight line without being refracted, as Mr. Bartholinus
believed, since that inclination is only 70 degrees 57 minutes, as was stated
above. And this is to be noted, in order that no one may search in vain for
the cause of the singular property of this ray in its parallelism to the edges
mentioned.
17. Finally, continuing my
observations to discover the
nature of this refraction, I
learned that it obeyed the
following remarkable rule.
Let the parallelogram GCFH,
made by the principal section
of the Crystal, as previously
determined, be traced
separately. I found then that
always, when the inclinations
of two rays which come from
opposite sides, as VK, SK
here, are equal, their
refractions KX and KT meet
the bottom line HF in such
wise that points X and T are
equally distant from the point
M, where the refraction of the perpendicular ray IK falls; and this occurs
also for refractions in other sections of this Crystal. But before speaking of
those, which have also other particular properties, we will investigate the
causes of the phenomena which I have already reported.
It was after having explained the refraction of ordinary transparent bodies
by means of the spherical emanations of light, as above, that I resumed my
examination of the nature of this Crystal, wherein I had previously been
unable to discover anything.

18. As there were two different refractions, I conceived that there were also
two different emanations of waves of light, and that one could occur in the
ethereal matter extending through the body of the Crystal. Which matter,
being present in much larger quantity than is that of the particles which
compose it, was alone capable of causing transparency, according to what
has been explained heretofore. I attributed to this emanation of waves the
regular refraction which is observed in this stone, by supposing these waves
to be ordinarily of spherical form, and having a slower progression within
the Crystal than they have outside it; whence proceeds refraction as I have
demonstrated.
19. As to the other emanation which should produce the irregular refraction,
I wished to try what Elliptical waves, or rather spheroidal waves, would do;
and these I supposed would spread indifferently both in the ethereal matter
diffused throughout the crystal and in the particles of which it is composed,
according to the last mode in which I have explained transparency. It
seemed to me that the disposition or regular arrangement of these particles
could contribute to form spheroidal waves (nothing more being required for
this than that the successive movement of light should spread a little more
quickly in one direction than in the other) and I scarcely doubted that there
were in this crystal such an arrangement of equal and similar particles,
because of its figure and of its angles with their determinate and invariable
measure. Touching which particles, and their form and disposition, I shall,
at the end of this Treatise, propound my conjectures and some experiments
which confirm them.
20. The double emission of waves of light, which I had imagined, became
more probable to me after I had observed a certain phenomenon in the
ordinary [Rock] Crystal, which occurs in hexagonal form, and which,
because of this regularity, seems also to be composed of particles, of
definite figure, and ranged in order. This was, that this crystal, as well as
that from Iceland, has a double refraction, though less evident. For having
had cut from it some well polished Prisms of different sections, I remarked
in all, in viewing through them the flame of a candle or the lead of window
panes, that everything appeared double, though with images not very distant
from one another. Whence I understood the reason why this substance,
though so transparent, is useless for Telescopes, when they have ever so
little length.

21. Now this double refraction, according to my Theory hereinbefore
established, seemed to demand a double emission of waves of light, both of
them spherical (for both the refractions are regular) and those of one series
a little slower only than the others. For thus the phenomenon is quite
naturally explained, by postulating substances which serve as vehicle for
these waves, as I have done in the case of Iceland Crystal. I had then less
trouble after that in admitting two emissions of waves in one and the same
body. And since it might have been objected that in composing these two
kinds of crystal of equal particles of a certain figure, regularly piled, the
interstices which these particles leave and which contain the ethereal matter
would scarcely suffice to transmit the waves of light which I have localized
there, I removed this difficulty by regarding these particles as being of a
very rare texture, or rather as composed of other much smaller particles,
between which the ethereal matter passes quite freely. This, moreover,
necessarily follows from that which has been already demonstrated
touching the small quantity of matter of which the bodies are built up.
22. Supposing then these spheroidal waves besides the spherical ones, I
began to examine whether they could serve to explain the phenomena of the
irregular refraction, and how by these same phenomena I could determine
the figure and position of the spheroids: as to which I obtained at last the
desired success, by proceeding as follows.
23. I considered first the effect of
waves so formed, as respects the
ray which falls perpendicularly on
the flat surface of a transparent
body in which they should spread in
this manner. I took AB for the
exposed region of the surface. And,
since a ray perpendicular to a plane,
and coming from a very distant
source of light, is nothing else,
according to the precedent Theory,
than the incidence of a portion of
the wave parallel to that plane, I
supposed the straight line RC, parallel and equal to AB, to be a portion of a
wave of light, in which an infinitude of points such as RHhC come to meet

the surface AB at the points AKkB. Then instead of the hemispherical
partial waves which in a body of ordinary refraction would spread from
each of these last points, as we have above explained in treating of
refraction, these must here be hemi-spheroids. The axes (or rather the major
diameters) of these I supposed to be oblique to the plane AB, as is AV the
semi-axis or semi-major diameter of the spheroid SVT, which represents the
partial wave coming from the point A, after the wave RC has reached AB. I
say axis or major diameter, because the same ellipse SVT may be
considered as the section of a spheroid of which the axis is AZ
perpendicular to AV. But, for the present, without yet deciding one or other,
we will consider these spheroids only in those sections of them which make
ellipses in the plane of this figure. Now taking a certain space of time
during which the wave SVT has spread from A, it would needs be that from
all the other points KkB there should proceed, in the same time, waves
similar to SVT and similarly situated. And the common tangent NQ of all
these semi-ellipses would be the propagation of the wave RC which fell on
AB, and would be the place where this movement occurs in much greater
amount than anywhere else, being made up of arcs of an infinity of ellipses,
the centres of which are along the line AB.
24. Now it appeared that this common tangent NQ was parallel to AB, and
of the same length, but that it was not directly opposite to it, since it was
comprised between the lines AN, BQ, which are diameters of ellipses
having A and B for centres, conjugate with respect to diameters which are
not in the straight line AB. And in this way I comprehended, a matter which
had seemed to me very difficult, how a ray perpendicular to a surface could
suffer refraction on entering a transparent body; seeing that the wave RC,
having come to the aperture AB, went on forward thence, spreading
between the parallel lines AN, BQ, yet itself remaining always parallel to
AB, so that here the light does not spread along lines perpendicular to its
waves, as in ordinary refraction, but along lines cutting the waves obliquely.
25. Inquiring subsequently what might be the position and form of these
spheroids in the crystal, I considered that all the six faces produced
precisely the same refractions. Taking, then, the parallelopiped AFB, of
which the obtuse solid angle C is contained between the three equal plane
angles, and imagining in it the three principal sections, one of which is
perpendicular to the face DC and passes through the edge CF, another

perpendicular to the face BF
passing through the edge CA, and
the third perpendicular to the face
AF passing through the edge BC; I
knew that the refractions of the
incident rays belonging to these
three planes were all similar. But
there could be no position of the
spheroid which would have the
same relation to these three sections
except that in which the axis was
also the axis of the solid angle C.
Consequently I saw that the axis of
this angle, that is to say the straight line which traversed the crystal from the
point C with equal inclination to the edges CF, CA, CB was the line which
determined the position of the axis of all the spheroidal waves which one
imagined to originate from some point, taken within or on the surface of the
crystal, since all these spheroids ought to be alike, and have their axes
parallel to one another.
26. Considering after this the plane of one of these three sections, namely
that through GCF, the angle of which is 109 degrees 3 minutes, since the
angle F was shown above to be 70 degrees 57 minutes; and, imagining a
spheroidal wave about the centre C, I knew, because I have just explained it,
that its axis must be in the same plane, the half of which axis I have marked
CS in the next figure: and seeking by calculation (which will be given with
others at the end of this discourse) the value of the angle CGS, I found it 45
degrees 20 minutes.

27. To know from this the
form of this spheroid, that is
to say the proportion of the
semi-diameters CS, CP, of its
elliptical section, which are
perpendicular to one another,
I considered that the point M
where the ellipse is touched
by the straight line FH,
parallel to CG, ought to be so
situated that CM makes with
the perpendicular CL an
angle of 6 degrees 40
minutes; since, this being so, this ellipse satisfies what has been said about
the refraction of the ray perpendicular to the surface CG, which is inclined
to the perpendicular CL by the same angle. This, then, being thus disposed,
and taking CM at 100,000 parts, I found by the calculation which will be
given at the end, the semi-major diameter CP to be 105,032, and the semi-
axis CS to be 93,410, the ratio of which numbers is very nearly 9 to 8; so
that the spheroid was of the kind which resembles a compressed sphere,
being generated by the revolution of an ellipse about its smaller diameter. I
found also the value of CG the semi-diameter parallel to the tangent ML to
be 98,779.
28. Now passing to the investigation of the refractions which obliquely
incident rays must undergo, according to our hypothesis of spheroidal
waves, I saw that these refractions depended on the ratio between the
velocity of movement of the light outside the crystal in the ether, and that
within the crystal. For supposing, for example, this proportion to be such
that while the light in the crystal forms the spheroid GSP, as I have just said,
it forms outside a sphere the semi-diameter of which is equal to the line N
which will be determined hereafter, the following is the way of finding the
refraction of the incident rays. Let there be such a ray RC falling upon the
surface CK. Make CO perpendicular to RC, and across the angle KCO
adjust OK, equal to N and perpendicular to CO; then draw KI, which
touches the Ellipse GSP, and from the point of contact I join IC, which will
be the required refraction of the ray RC. The demonstration of this is, it will

be seen,
entirely
similar to
that of
which we
made use
in
explaining
ordinary
refraction.
For the
refraction
of the ray
RC is
nothing
else than
the progression of the portion C of the wave CO, continued in the crystal.
Now the portions H of this wave, during the time that O came to K, will
have arrived at the surface CK along the straight lines Hx, and will
moreover have produced in the crystal around the centres x some hemi-
spheroidal partial waves similar to the hemi-spheroidal GSPg, and similarly
disposed, and of which the major and minor diameters will bear the same
proportions to the lines xv (the continuations of the lines Hx up to KB
parallel to CO) that the diameters of the spheroid GSPg bear to the line CB,
or N. And it is quite easy to see that the common tangent of all these
spheroids, which are here represented by Ellipses, will be the straight line
IK, which consequently will be the propagation of the wave CO; and the
point I will be that of the point C, conformably with that which has been
demonstrated in ordinary refraction.
Now as to finding the point of contact I, it is known that one must find CD
a third proportional to the lines CK, CG, and draw DI parallel to CM,
previously determined, which is the conjugate diameter to CG; for then, by
drawing KI it touches the Ellipse at I.
29. Now as we have found CI the refraction of the ray RC, similarly one
will find Ci the refraction of the ray rC, which comes from the opposite
side, by making Co perpendicular to rC and following out the rest of the

construction as before. Whence one sees that if the ray rC is inclined
equally with RC, the line Cd will necessarily be equal to CD, because Ck is
equal to CK, and Cg to CG. And in consequence Ii will be cut at E into
equal parts by the line CM, to which DI and di are parallel. And because
CM is the conjugate diameter to CG, it follows that iI will be parallel to gG.
Therefore if one prolongs the refracted rays CI, Ci, until they meet the
tangent ML at T and t, the distances MT, Mt, will also be equal. And so, by
our hypothesis, we explain perfectly the phenomenon mentioned above; to
wit, that when there are two rays equally inclined, but coming from
opposite sides, as here the rays RC, rc, their refractions diverge equally
from the line followed by the refraction of the ray perpendicular to the
surface, by considering these divergences in the direction parallel to the
surface of the crystal.
30. To find the length of the line N, in proportion to CP, CS, CG, it must be
determined by observations of the irregular refraction which occurs in this
section of the crystal; and I find thus that the ratio of N to GC is just a little
less than 8 to 5. And having regard to some other observations and
phenomena of which I shall speak afterwards, I put N at 156,962 parts, of
which the semi-diameter CG is found to contain 98,779, making this ratio 8
to 5-1/29. Now this proportion, which there is between the line N and CG,
may be called the Proportion of the Refraction; similarly as in glass that of
3 to 2, as will be manifest when I shall have explained a short process in the
preceding way to find the irregular refractions.
31. Supposing then, in the next figure, as previously, the surface of the
crystal gG, the Ellipse GPg, and the line N; and CM the refraction of the
perpendicular ray FC, from which it diverges by 6 degrees 40 minutes. Now
let there be some other ray RC, the refraction of which must be found.
About the centre C, with semi-diameter CG, let the circumference gRG be
described, cutting the ray RC at R; and let RV be the perpendicular on CG.
Then as the line N is to CG let CV be to CD, and let DI be drawn parallel to
CM, cutting the Ellipse gMG at I; then joining CI, this will be the required
refraction of the ray RC. Which is demonstrated thus.

Let CO be perpendicular to CR, and across the angle OCG let OK be
adjusted, equal to N and perpendicular to CO, and let there be drawn the
straight line KI, which if it is demonstrated to be a tangent to the Ellipse at
I, it will be evident by the things heretofore explained that CI is the
refraction of the ray RC. Now since the angle RCO is a right angle, it is
easy to see that the right-angled triangles RCV, KCO, are similar. As then,
CK is to KO, so also is RC to CV. But KO is equal to N, and RC to CG:
then as CK is to N so will CG be to CV. But as N is to CG, so, by
construction, is CV to CD. Then as CK is to CG so is CG to CD. And
because DI is parallel to CM, the conjugate diameter to CG, it follows that
KI touches the Ellipse at I; which remained to be shown.
32. One sees then that as there is in the refraction of ordinary media a
certain constant proportion between the sines of the angles which the
incident ray and the refracted ray make with the perpendicular, so here there
is such a proportion between CV and CD or IE; that is to say between the
Sine of the angle which the incident ray makes with the perpendicular, and
the horizontal intercept, in the Ellipse, between the refraction of this ray and
the diameter CM. For the ratio of CV to CD is, as has been said, the same as
that of N to the semi-diameter CG.

33. I will add here, before passing away, that in comparing together the
regular and irregular refraction of this crystal, there is this remarkable fact,
that if ABPS be the spheroid by which light spreads in the Crystal in a
certain space of time (which spreading, as has been said, serves for the
irregular refraction), then the inscribed sphere BVST is the extension in the
same space of time of the light which serves for the regular refraction.
For we have stated before this, that the
line N being the radius of a spherical
wave of light in air, while in the crystal it
spread through the spheroid ABPS, the
ratio of N to CS will be 156,962 to
93,410. But it has also been stated that the
proportion of the regular refraction was 5
to 3; that is to say, that N being the radius
of a spherical wave of light in air, its
extension in the crystal would, in the
same space of time, form a sphere the
radius of which would be to N as 3 to 5.
Now 156,962 is to 93,410 as 5 to 3 less
1/41. So that it is sufficiently nearly, and
may be exactly, the sphere BVST, which
the light describes for the regular
refraction in the crystal, while it describes the spheroid BPSA for the
irregular refraction, and while it describes the sphere of radius N in air
outside the crystal.
Although then there are, according to what we have supposed, two different
propagations of light within the crystal, it appears that it is only in
directions perpendicular to the axis BS of the spheroid that one of these
propagations occurs more rapidly than the other; but that they have an equal
velocity in the other direction, namely, in that parallel to the same axis BS,
which is also the axis of the obtuse angle of the crystal.
34. The proportion of the refraction being what we have just seen, I will
now show that there necessarily follows thence that notable property of the
ray which falling obliquely on the surface of the crystal enters it without
suffering refraction. For supposing the same things as before, and that the

ray makes with the same surface gG
the angle RCG of 73 degrees 20
minutes, inclining to the same side
as the crystal (of which ray mention
has been made above); if one
investigates, by the process above
explained, the refraction CI, one
will find that it makes exactly a
straight line with RC, and that thus
this ray is not deviated at all,
conformably with experiment. This
is proved as follows by calculation.
CG or CR being, as precedently,
98,779; CM being 100,000; and the
angle RCV 73 degrees 20 minutes,
CV will be 28,330. But because CI
is the refraction of the ray RC, the proportion of CV to CD is 156,962 to
98,779, namely, that of N to CG; then CD is 17,828.
Now the rectangle gDC is to the square of DI as the square of CG is to the
square of CM; hence DI or CE will be 98,353. But as CE is to EI, so will
CM be to MT, which will then be 18,127. And being added to ML, which is
11,609 (namely the sine of the angle LCM, which is 6 degrees 40 minutes,
taking CM 100,000 as radius) we get LT 27,936; and this is to LC 99,324 as
CV to VR, that is to say, as 29,938, the tangent of the complement of the
angle RCV, which is 73 degrees 20 minutes, is to the radius of the Tables.
Whence it appears that RCIT is a straight line; which was to be proved.
35. Further it will be seen that the ray CI in emerging through the opposite
surface of the crystal, ought to pass out quite straight, according to the
following demonstration, which proves that the reciprocal relation of
refraction obtains in this crystal the same as in other transparent bodies; that
is to say, that if a ray RC in meeting the surface of the crystal CG is
refracted as CI, the ray CI emerging through the opposite parallel surface of
the crystal, which I suppose to be IB, will have its refraction IA parallel to
the ray RC.

Let the same things be
supposed as before;
that is to say, let CO,
perpendicular to CR,
represent a portion of a
wave the continuation
of which in the crystal
is IK, so that the piece
C will be continued on
along the straight line
CI, while O comes to
K. Now if one takes a
second period of time
equal to the first, the
piece K of the wave IK
will, in this second
period, have advanced
along the straight line KB, equal and parallel to CI, because every piece of
the wave CO, on arriving at the surface CK, ought to go on in the crystal
the same as the piece C; and in this same time there will be formed in the
air from the point I a partial spherical wave having a semi-diameter IA
equal to KO, since KO has been traversed in an equal time. Similarly, if one
considers some other point of the wave IK, such as h, it will go along hm,
parallel to CI, to meet the surface IB, while the point K traverses Kl equal
to hm; and while this accomplishes the remainder lB, there will start from
the point m a partial wave the semi-diameter of which, mn, will have the
same ratio to lB as IA to KB. Whence it is evident that this wave of semi-
diameter mn, and the other of semi-diameter IA will have the same tangent
BA. And similarly for all the partial spherical waves which will be formed
outside the crystal by the impact of all the points of the wave IK against the
surface of the Ether IB. It is then precisely the tangent BA which will be the
continuation of the wave IK, outside the crystal, when the piece K has
reached B. And in consequence IA, which is perpendicular to BA, will be
the refraction of the ray CI on emerging from the crystal. Now it is clear
that IA is parallel to the incident ray RC, since IB is equal to CK, and IA
equal to KO, and the angles A and O are right angles.

It is seen then that, according to our hypothesis, the reciprocal relation of
refraction holds good in this crystal as well as in ordinary transparent
bodies; as is thus in fact found by observation.
36. I pass now to the consideration of other sections of the crystal, and of
the refractions there produced, on which, as will be seen, some other very
remarkable phenomena depend.
Let ABH be a parallelepiped of crystal, and let the top surface AEHF be a
perfect rhombus, the obtuse angles of which are equally divided by the
straight line EF, and the acute angles by the straight line AH perpendicular
to FE.
The section which we have hitherto considered is that which passes through
the lines EF, EB, and which at the same time cuts the plane AEHF at right
angles. Refractions in this section have this in common with the refractions
in ordinary media that the plane which is drawn through the incident ray
and which also intersects the surface of the crystal at right angles, is that in
which the refracted ray also is found. But the refractions which appertain to
every other section of this crystal have this strange property that the
refracted ray always quits the plane of the incident ray perpendicular to the
surface, and turns away towards the side of the slope of the crystal. For
which fact we shall show the reason, in the first place, for the section
through AH; and we shall show at the same time how one can determine the
refraction, according to our hypothesis. Let there be, then, in the plane
which passes through AH, and which is perpendicular to the plane AFHE,
the incident ray RC; it is required to find its refraction in the crystal.

37. About the centre C, which I suppose to be in the intersection of AH and
FE, let there be imagined a hemi-spheroid QGqgM, such as the light would
form in spreading in the crystal, and let its section by the plane AEHF form
the Ellipse QGqg, the major diameter of which Qq, which is in the line AH,
will necessarily be one of the major diameters of the spheroid; because the
axis of the spheroid being in the plane through FEB, to which QC is
perpendicular, it follows that QC is also perpendicular to the axis of the
spheroid, and consequently QCq one of its major diameters. But the minor
diameter of this Ellipse, Gg, will bear to Qq the proportion which has been
defined previously, Article 27, between CG and the major semi-diameter of
the spheroid, CP, namely, that of 98,779 to 105,032.
Let the line N be the length of the travel of light in air during the time in
which, within the crystal, it makes, from the centre C, the spheroid QCqgM.
Then having drawn CO perpendicular to the ray CR and situate in the plane
through CR and AH, let there be adjusted, across the angle ACO, the
straight line OK equal to N and perpendicular to CO, and let it meet the
straight line AH at K. Supposing consequently that CL is perpendicular to

the surface of the crystal AEHF, and that CM is the refraction of the ray
which falls perpendicularly on this same surface, let there be drawn a plane
through the line CM and through KCH, making in the spheroid the semi-
ellipse QMq, which will be given, since the angle MCL is given of value 6
degrees 40 minutes. And it is certain, according to what has been explained
above, Article 27, that a plane which would touch the spheroid at the point
M, where I suppose the straight line CM to meet the surface, would be
parallel to the plane QGq. If then through the point K one now draws KS
parallel to Gg, which will be parallel also to QX, the tangent to the Ellipse
QGq at Q; and if one conceives a plane passing through KS and touching
the spheroid, the point of contact will necessarily be in the Ellipse QMq,
because this plane through KS, as well as the plane which touches the
spheroid at the point M, are parallel to QX, the tangent of the spheroid: for
this consequence will be demonstrated at the end of this Treatise. Let this
point of contact be at I, then making KC, QC, DC proportionals, draw DI
parallel to CM; also join CI. I say that CI will be the required refraction of
the ray RC. This will be manifest if, in considering CO, which is
perpendicular to the ray RC, as a portion of the wave of light, we can
demonstrate that the continuation of its piece C will be found in the crystal
at I, when O has arrived at K.
38. Now as in the Chapter on Reflexion, in demonstrating that the incident
and reflected rays are always in the same plane perpendicular to the
reflecting surface, we considered the breadth of the wave of light, so,
similarly, we must here consider the breadth of the wave CO in the diameter
Gg. Taking then the breadth Cc on the side toward the angle E, let the
parallelogram COoc be taken as a portion of a wave, and let us complete the
parallelograms CKkc, CIic, Klik, OKko. In the time then that the line Oo
arrives at the surface of the crystal at Kk, all the points of the wave COoc
will have arrived at the rectangle Kc along lines parallel to OK; and from
the points of their incidences there will originate, beyond that, in the crystal
partial hemi-spheroids, similar to the hemi-spheroid QMq, and similarly
disposed. These hemi-spheroids will necessarily all touch the plane of the
parallelogram KIik at the same instant that Oo has reached Kk. Which is
easy to comprehend, since, of these hemi-spheroids, all those which have
their centres along the line CK, touch this plane in the line KI (for this is to
be shown in the same way as we have demonstrated the refraction of the

oblique ray in the principal section through EF) and all those which have
their centres in the line Cc will touch the same plane KI in the line Ii; all
these being similar to the hemi-spheroid QMq. Since then the parallelogram
Ki is that which touches all these spheroids, this same parallelogram will be
precisely the continuation of the wave COoc in the crystal, when Oo has
arrived at Kk, because it forms the termination of the movement and
because of the quantity of movement which occurs more there than
anywhere else: and thus it appears that the piece C of the wave COoc has its
continuation at I; that is to say, that the ray RC is refracted as CI.
From this it is to be noted that the proportion of the refraction for this
section of the crystal is that of the line N to the semi-diameter CQ; by
which one will easily find the refractions of all incident rays, in the same
way as we have shown previously for the case of the section through FE;
and the demonstration will be the same. But it appears that the said
proportion of the refraction is less here than in the section through FEB; for
it was there the same as the ratio of N to CG, that is to say, as 156,962 to
98,779, very nearly as 8 to 5; and here it is the ratio of N to CQ the major
semi-diameter of the spheroid, that is to say, as 156,962 to 105,032, very
nearly as 3 to 2, but just a little less. Which still agrees perfectly with what
one finds by observation.
39. For the rest, this diversity of proportion of refraction produces a very
singular effect in this Crystal; which is that when it is placed upon a sheet
of paper on which there are letters or anything else marked, if one views it
from above with the two eyes situated in the plane of the section through
EF, one sees the letters raised up by this irregular refraction more than when
one puts one's eyes in the plane of section through AH: and the difference
of these elevations appears by comparison with the other ordinary refraction
of the crystal, the proportion of which is as 5 to 3, and which always raises
the letters equally, and higher than the irregular refraction does. For one
sees the letters and the paper on which they are written, as on two different
stages at the same time; and in the first position of the eyes, namely, when
they are in the plane through AH these two stages are four times more
distant from one another than when the eyes are in the plane through EF.
We will show that this effect follows from the refractions; and it will enable
us at the same time to ascertain the apparent place of a point of an object

placed immediately under the crystal, according to the different situation of
the eyes.
40. Let us see first by how much the irregular refraction of the plane
through AH ought to lift the bottom of the crystal. Let the plane of this
figure represent separately the section through Qq and CL, in which section
there is also the ray RC, and let the semi-elliptic plane through Qq and CM
be inclined to the former, as previously, by an angle of 6 degrees 40
minutes; and in this plane CI is then the refraction of the ray RC.
If now one considers the
point I as at the bottom of the
crystal, and that it is viewed
by the rays ICR, Icr, refracted
equally at the points Cc,
which should be equally
distant from D, and that these
rays meet the two eyes at Rr;
it is certain that the point I
will appear raised to S where
the straight lines RC, rc,
meet; which point S is in DP,
perpendicular to Qq. And if
upon DP there is drawn the
perpendicular IP, which will
lie at the bottom of the
crystal, the length SP will be
the apparent elevation of the point I above the bottom.
Let there be described on Qq a semicircle cutting the ray CR at B, from
which BV is drawn perpendicular to Qq; and let the proportion of the
refraction for this section be, as before, that of the line N to the semi-
diameter CQ.
Then as N is to CQ so is VC to CD, as appears by the method of finding the
refraction which we have shown above, Article 31; but as VC is to CD, so is
VB to DS. Then as N is to CQ, so is VB to DS. Let ML be perpendicular to
CL. And because I suppose the eyes Rr to be distant about a foot or so from

the crystal, and consequently the angle RSr very small, VB may be
considered as equal to the semi-diameter CQ, and DP as equal to CL; then
as N is to CQ so is CQ to DS. But N is valued at 156,962 parts, of which
CM contains 100,000 and CQ 105,032. Then DS will have 70,283. But CL
is 99,324, being the sine of the complement of the angle MCL which is 6
degrees 40 minutes; CM being supposed as radius. Then DP, considered as
equal to CL, will be to DS as 99,324 to 70,283. And so the elevation of the
point I by the refraction of this section is known.
41. Now let there be
represented the other section
through EF in the figure
before the preceding one; and
let CMg be the semi-ellipse,
considered in Articles 27 and
28, which is made by cutting
a spheroidal wave having
centre C. Let the point I,
taken in this ellipse, be
imagined again at the bottom
of the Crystal; and let it be
viewed by the refracted rays
ICR, Icr, which go to the two
eyes; CR and cr being
equally inclined to the
surface of the crystal Gg.
This being so, if one draws
ID parallel to CM, which I
suppose to be the refraction of the perpendicular ray incident at the point C,
the distances DC, Dc, will be equal, as is easy to see by that which has been
demonstrated in Article 28. Now it is certain that the point I should appear
at S where the straight lines RC, rc, meet when prolonged; and that this
point will fall in the line DP perpendicular to Gg. If one draws IP
perpendicular to this DP, it will be the distance PS which will mark the
apparent elevation of the point I. Let there be described on Gg a semicircle
cutting CR at B, from which let BV be drawn perpendicular to Gg; and let
N to GC be the proportion of the refraction in this section, as in Article 28.

Since then CI is the refraction of the radius BC, and DI is parallel to CM,
VC must be to CD as N to GC, according to what has been demonstrated in
Article 31. But as VC is to CD so is BV to DS. Let ML be drawn
perpendicular to CL. And because I consider, again, the eyes to be distant
above the crystal, BV is deemed equal to the semi-diameter CG; and hence
DS will be a third proportional to the lines N and CG: also DP will be
deemed equal to CL. Now CG consisting of 98,778 parts, of which CM
contains 100,000, N is taken as 156,962. Then DS will be 62,163. But CL is
also determined, and contains 99,324 parts, as has been said in Articles 34
and 40. Then the ratio of PD to DS will be as 99,324 to 62,163. And thus
one knows the elevation of the point at the bottom I by the refraction of this
section; and it appears that this elevation is greater than that by the
refraction of the preceding section, since the ratio of PD to DS was there as
99,324 to 70,283.
But by the regular refraction of the crystal, of which
we have above said that the proportion is 5 to 3, the
elevation of the point I, or P, from the bottom, will be
2/5 of the height DP; as appears by this figure, where
the point P being viewed by the rays PCR, Pcr,
refracted equally at the surface Cc, this point must
needs appear to be at S, in the perpendicular PD where
the lines RC, rc, meet when prolonged: and one knows
that the line PC is to CS as 5 to 3, since they are to one
another as the sine of the angle CSP or DSC is to the
sine of the angle SPC. And because the ratio of PD to
DS is deemed the same as that of PC to CS, the two
eyes Rr being supposed very far above the crystal, the
elevation PS will thus be 2/5 of PD.
42. If one takes a straight line AB for the thickness of the crystal, its point B
being at the bottom, and if one divides it at the points C, D, E, according to
the proportions of the elevations found, making AE 3/5 of AB, AB to AC as
99,324 to 70,283, and AB to AD as 99,324 to 62,163, these points will
divide AB as in this figure. And it will be found that this agrees perfectly
with experiment; that is to say by placing the eyes above in the plane which
cuts the crystal according to the shorter diameter of the rhombus, the
regular refraction will lift up the letters to E; and one will see the bottom,

and the letters over which it is placed, lifted up to D by the
irregular refraction. But by placing the eyes above in the plane
which cuts the crystal according to the longer diameter of the
rhombus, the regular refraction will lift the letters to E as
before; but the irregular refraction will make them, at the same
time, appear lifted up only to C; and in such a way that the
interval CE will be quadruple the interval ED, which one
previously saw.
43. I have only to make the remark here that in both the
positions of the eyes the images caused by the irregular
refraction do not appear directly below those which proceed
from the regular refraction, but they are separated from them by
being more distant from the equilateral solid angle of the
Crystal. That follows, indeed, from all that has been hitherto
demonstrated about the irregular refraction; and it is particularly
shown by these last demonstrations, from which one sees that
the point I appears by irregular refraction at S in the perpendicular line DP,
in which line also the image of the point P ought to appear by regular
refraction, but not the image of the point I, which will be almost directly
above the same point, and higher than S.
But as to the apparent elevation of the point I in other positions of the eyes
above the crystal, besides the two positions which we have just examined,
the image of that point by the irregular refraction will always appear
between the two heights of D and C, passing from one to the other as one
turns one's self around about the immovable crystal, while looking down
from above. And all this is still found conformable to our hypothesis, as any
one can assure himself after I shall have shown here the way of finding the
irregular refractions which appear in all other sections of the crystal,
besides the two which we have considered. Let us suppose one of the faces
of the crystal, in which let there be the Ellipse HDE, the centre C of which
is also the centre of the spheroid HME in which the light spreads, and of
which the said Ellipse is the section. And let the incident ray be RC, the
refraction of which it is required to find.
Let there be taken a plane passing through the ray RC and which is
perpendicular to the plane of the ellipse HDE, cutting it along the straight

line BCK; and having in the same plane through RC made CO
perpendicular to CR, let OK be adjusted across the angle OCK, so as to be
perpendicular to OC and equal to the line N, which I suppose to measure
the travel of the light in air during the time that it spreads in the crystal
through the spheroid HDEM. Then in the plane of the Ellipse HDE let KT
be drawn, through the point K, perpendicular to BCK. Now if one
conceives a plane drawn through the straight line KT and touching the
spheroid HME at I, the straight line CI will be the refraction of the ray RC,
as is easy to deduce from that which has been demonstrated in Article 36.
But it must be shown how
one can determine the point
of contact I. Let there be
drawn parallel to the line KT
a line HF which touches the
Ellipse HDE, and let this
point of contact be at H. And
having drawn a straight line
along CH to meet KT at T, let
there be imagined a plane
passing through the same CH
and through CM (which I
suppose to be the refraction
of the perpendicular ray),
which makes in the spheroid the elliptical section HME. It is certain that the
plane which will pass through the straight line KT, and which will touch the
spheroid, will touch it at a point in the Ellipse HME, according to the
Lemma which will be demonstrated at the end of the Chapter. Now this
point is necessarily the point I which is sought, since the plane drawn
through TK can touch the spheroid at one point only. And this point I is
easy to determine, since it is needful only to draw from the point T, which is
in the plane of this Ellipse, the tangent TI, in the way shown previously. For
the Ellipse HME is given, and its conjugate semi-diameters are CH and
CM; because a straight line drawn through M, parallel to HE, touches the
Ellipse HME, as follows from the fact that a plane taken through M, and
parallel to the plane HDE, touches the spheroid at that point M, as is seen
from Articles 27 and 23. For the rest, the position of this ellipse, with

respect to the plane through the ray RC and through CK, is also given; from
which it will be easy to find the position of CI, the refraction corresponding
to the ray RC.
Now it must be noted that the same ellipse HME serves to find the
refractions of any other ray which may be in the plane through RC and CK.
Because every plane, parallel to the straight line HF, or TK, which will
touch the spheroid, will touch it in this ellipse, according to the Lemma
quoted a little before.
I have investigated thus, in minute detail, the properties of the irregular
refraction of this Crystal, in order to see whether each phenomenon that is
deduced from our hypothesis accords with that which is observed in fact.
And this being so it affords no slight proof of the truth of our suppositions
and principles. But what I am going to add here confirms them again
marvellously. It is this: that there are different sections of this Crystal, the
surfaces of which, thereby produced, give rise to refractions precisely such
as they ought to be, and as I had foreseen them, according to the preceding
Theory.
In order to explain what these sections are, let ABKF be the principal
section through the axis of the crystal ACK, in which there will also be the
axis SS of a spheroidal wave of light spreading in the crystal from the
centre C; and the straight line which cuts SS through the middle and at right
angles, namely PP, will be one of the major diameters.
Now as in the natural section of the
crystal, made by a plane parallel to
two opposite faces, which plane is
here represented by the line GG, the
refraction of the surfaces which are
produced by it will be governed by
the hemi-spheroids GNG, according
to what has been explained in the
preceding Theory. Similarly, cutting
the Crystal through NN, by a plane
perpendicular to the parallelogram
ABKF, the refraction of the surfaces

will be governed by the hemi-spheroids NGN. And if one cuts it through PP,
perpendicularly to the said parallelogram, the refraction of the surfaces
ought to be governed by the hemi-spheroids PSP, and so for others. But I
saw that if the plane NN was almost perpendicular to the plane GG, making
the angle NCG, which is on the side A, an angle of 90 degrees 40 minutes,
the hemi-spheroids NGN would become similar to the hemi-spheroids
GNG, since the planes NN and GG were equally inclined by an angle of 45
degrees 20 minutes to the axis SS. In consequence it must needs be, if our
theory is true, that the surfaces which the section through NN produces
should effect the same refractions as the surfaces of the section through GG.
And not only the surfaces of the section NN but all other sections produced
by planes which might be inclined to the axis at an angle equal to 45
degrees 20 minutes. So that there are an infinitude of planes which ought to
produce precisely the same refractions as the natural surfaces of the crystal,
or as the section parallel to any one of those surfaces which are made by
cleavage.
I saw also that by cutting it by a plane taken through PP, and perpendicular
to the axis SS, the refraction of the surfaces ought to be such that the
perpendicular ray should suffer thereby no deviation; and that for oblique
rays there would always be an irregular refraction, differing from the
regular, and by which objects placed beneath the crystal would be less
elevated than by that other refraction.
That, similarly, by cutting the crystal by any plane through the axis SS, such
as the plane of the figure is, the perpendicular ray ought to suffer no
refraction; and that for oblique rays there were different measures for the
irregular refraction according to the situation of the plane in which the
incident ray was.
Now these things were found in fact so; and, after that, I could not doubt
that a similar success could be met with everywhere. Whence I concluded
that one might form from this crystal solids similar to those which are its
natural forms, which should produce, at all their surfaces, the same regular
and irregular refractions as the natural surfaces, and which nevertheless
would cleave in quite other ways, and not in directions parallel to any of
their faces. That out of it one would be able to fashion pyramids, having
their base square, pentagonal, hexagonal, or with as many sides as one

desired, all the surfaces of which should have the same refractions as the
natural surfaces of the crystal, except the base, which will not refract the
perpendicular ray. These surfaces will each make an angle of 45 degrees 20
minutes with the axis of the crystal, and the base will be the section
perpendicular to the axis.
That, finally, one could also fashion out of it triangular prisms, or prisms
with as many sides as one would, of which neither the sides nor the bases
would refract the perpendicular ray, although they would yet all cause
double refraction for oblique rays. The cube is included amongst these
prisms, the bases of which are sections perpendicular to the axis of the
crystal, and the sides are sections parallel to the same axis.
From all this it further appears that it is not at all in the disposition of the
layers of which this crystal seems to be composed, and according to which
it splits in three different senses, that the cause resides of its irregular
refraction; and that it would be in vain to wish to seek it there.
But in order that any one who has some of this stone may be able to find, by
his own experience, the truth of what I have just advanced, I will state here
the process of which I have made use to cut it, and to polish it. Cutting is
easy by the slicing wheels of lapidaries, or in the way in which marble is
sawn: but polishing is very difficult, and by employing the ordinary means
one more often depolishes the surfaces than makes them lucent.
After many trials, I have at last found that for this service no plate of metal
must be used, but a piece of mirror glass made matt and depolished. Upon
this, with fine sand and water, one smoothes the crystal little by little, in the
same way as spectacle glasses, and polishes it simply by continuing the
work, but ever reducing the material. I have not, however, been able to give
it perfect clarity and transparency; but the evenness which the surfaces
acquire enables one to observe in them the effects of refraction better than
in those made by cleaving the stone, which always have some inequality.
Even when the surface is only moderately smoothed, if one rubs it over
with a little oil or white of egg, it becomes quite transparent, so that the
refraction is discerned in it quite distinctly. And this aid is specially
necessary when it is wished to polish the natural surfaces to remove the
inequalities; because one cannot render them lucent equally with the

surfaces of other sections, which take a polish so much the better the less
nearly they approximate to these natural planes.
Before finishing the treatise on this Crystal, I will add one more marvellous
phenomenon which I discovered after having written all the foregoing. For
though I have not been able till now to find its cause, I do not for that
reason wish to desist from describing it, in order to give opportunity to
others to investigate it. It seems that it will be necessary to make still further
suppositions besides those which I have made; but these will not for all that
cease to keep their probability after having been confirmed by so many
tests.

The phenomenon is, that by taking two pieces of this crystal and applying
them one over the other, or rather holding them with a space between the
two, if all the sides of one are parallel to those of the other, then a ray of
light, such as AB, is divided into two in the first piece, namely into BD and
BC, following the two refractions, regular and irregular. On penetrating
thence into the other piece each ray will pass there without further dividing
itself in two; but that one which underwent the regular refraction, as here
DG, will undergo again only a regular refraction at GH; and the other, CE,
an irregular refraction at EF. And the same thing occurs not only in this

disposition, but also in all those cases in which the principal section of each
of the pieces is situated in one and the same plane, without it being needful
for the two neighbouring surfaces to be parallel. Now it is marvellous why
the rays CE and DG, incident from the air on the lower crystal, do not
divide themselves the same as the first ray AB. One would say that it must
be that the ray DG in passing through the upper piece has lost something
which is necessary to move the matter which serves for the irregular
refraction; and that likewise CE has lost that which was necessary to move
the matter which serves for regular refraction: but there is yet another thing
which upsets this reasoning. It is that when one disposes the two crystals in
such a way that the planes which constitute the principal sections intersect
one another at right angles, whether the neighbouring surfaces are parallel
or not, then the ray which has come by the regular refraction, as DG,
undergoes only an irregular refraction in the lower piece; and on the
contrary the ray which has come by the irregular refraction, as CE,
undergoes only a regular refraction.
But in all the infinite other positions, besides those which I have just stated,
the rays DG, CE, divide themselves anew each one into two, by refraction
in the lower crystal so that from the single ray AB there are four, sometimes
of equal brightness, sometimes some much less bright than others,
according to the varying agreement in the positions of the crystals: but they
do not appear to have all together more light than the single ray AB.
When one considers here how, while the rays CE, DG, remain the same, it
depends on the position that one gives to the lower piece, whether it divides
them both in two, or whether it does not divide them, and yet how the ray
AB above is always divided, it seems that one is obliged to conclude that
the waves of light, after having passed through the first crystal, acquire a
certain form or disposition in virtue of which, when meeting the texture of
the second crystal, in certain positions, they can move the two different
kinds of matter which serve for the two species of refraction; and when
meeting the second crystal in another position are able to move only one of
these kinds of matter. But to tell how this occurs, I have hitherto found
nothing which satisfies me.
Leaving then to others this research, I pass to what I have to say touching
the cause of the extraordinary figure of this crystal, and why it cleaves

easily in three different senses, parallel to any one of its surfaces.
There are many bodies, vegetable, mineral, and congealed salts, which are
formed with certain regular angles and figures. Thus among flowers there
are many which have their leaves disposed in ordered polygons, to the
number of 3, 4, 5, or 6 sides, but not more. This well deserves to be
investigated, both as to the polygonal figure, and as to why it does not
exceed the number 6.
Rock Crystal grows ordinarily in hexagonal bars, and diamonds are found
which occur with a square point and polished surfaces. There is a species of
small flat stones, piled up directly upon one another, which are all of
pentagonal figure with rounded angles, and the sides a little folded inwards.
The grains of gray salt which are formed from sea water affect the figure, or
at least the angle, of the cube; and in the congelations of other salts, and in
that of sugar, there are found other solid angles with perfectly flat faces.
Small snowflakes almost always fall in little stars with 6 points, and
sometimes in hexagons with straight sides. And I have often observed, in
water which is beginning to freeze, a kind of flat and thin foliage of ice, the
middle ray of which throws out branches inclined at an angle of 60 degrees.
All these things are worthy of being carefully investigated to ascertain how
and by what artifice nature there operates. But it is not now my intention to
treat fully of this matter. It seems that in general the regularity which occurs
in these productions comes from the arrangement of the small invisible
equal particles of which they are composed. And, coming to our Iceland
Crystal, I say that if there were a pyramid such as ABCD, composed of
small rounded corpuscles, not spherical but flattened spheroids, such as
would be made by the rotation of the ellipse GH around its lesser diameter
EF (of which the ratio to the greater diameter is very nearly that of 1 to the
square root of 8)—I say that then the solid angle of the point D would be
equal to the obtuse and equilateral angle of this Crystal. I say, further, that if
these corpuscles were lightly stuck together, on breaking this pyramid it
would break along faces parallel to those that make its point: and by this
means, as it is easy to see, it would produce prisms similar to those of the
same crystal as this other figure represents. The reason is that when broken
in this fashion a whole layer separates easily from its neighbouring layer
since each spheroid has to be detached only from the three spheroids of the
next layer; of which three there is but one which touches it on its flattened

surface, and the other two at the edges. And the reason why the surfaces
separate sharp and polished is that if any spheroid of the neighbouring
surface would come out by attaching itself to the surface which is being
separated, it would be needful for it to detach itself from six other spheroids
which hold it locked, and four of which press it by these flattened surfaces.
Since then not only the angles of our crystal but also the manner in which it
splits agree precisely with what is observed in the assemblage composed of
such spheroids, there is great reason to believe that the particles are shaped
and ranged in the same way.
There is even probability enough that the prisms
of this crystal are produced by the breaking up
of pyramids, since Mr. Bartholinus relates that
he occasionally found some pieces of
triangularly pyramidal figure. But when a mass
is composed interiorly only of these little
spheroids thus piled up, whatever form it may
have exteriorly, it is certain, by the same
reasoning which I have just explained, that if
broken it would produce similar prisms. It
remains to be seen whether there are other
reasons which confirm our conjecture, and
whether there are none which are repugnant to
it.
It may
be objected that this crystal, being
so composed, might be capable of
cleavage in yet two more fashions;
one of which would be along planes
parallel to the base of the pyramid,
that is to say to the triangle ABC;
the other would be parallel to a
plane the trace of which is marked
by the lines GH, HK, KL. To which
I say that both the one and the
other, though practicable, are more
difficult than those which were parallel to any one of the three planes of the

pyramid; and that therefore, when striking on the crystal in order to break it,
it ought always to split rather along these three planes than along the two
others. When one has a number of spheroids of the form above described,
and ranges them in a pyramid, one sees why the two methods of division
are more difficult. For in the case of that division which would be parallel
to the base, each spheroid would be obliged to detach itself from three
others which it touches upon their flattened surfaces, which hold more
strongly than the contacts at the edges. And besides that, this division will
not occur along entire layers, because each of the spheroids of a layer is
scarcely held at all by the 6 of the same layer that surround it, since they
only touch it at the edges; so that it adheres readily to the neighbouring
layer, and the others to it, for the same reason; and this causes uneven
surfaces. Also one sees by experiment that when grinding down the crystal
on a rather rough stone, directly on the equilateral solid angle, one verily
finds much facility in reducing it in this direction, but much difficulty
afterwards in polishing the surface which has been flattened in this manner.
As for the other method of division along the plane GHKL, it will be seen
that each spheroid would have to detach itself from four of the
neighbouring layer, two of which touch it on the flattened surfaces, and two
at the edges. So that this division is likewise more difficult than that which
is made parallel to one of the surfaces of the crystal; where, as we have
said, each spheroid is detached from only three of the neighbouring layer:
of which three there is one only which touches it on the flattened surface,
and the other two at the edges only.
However, that which has made me know that in the crystal there are layers
in this last fashion, is that in a piece weighing half a pound which I possess,
one sees that it is split along its length, as is the above-mentioned prism by
the plane GHKL; as appears by colours of the Iris extending throughout this
whole plane although the two pieces still hold together. All this proves then
that the composition of the crystal is such as we have stated. To which I
again add this experiment; that if one passes a knife scraping along any one
of the natural surfaces, and downwards as it were from the equilateral
obtuse angle, that is to say from the apex of the pyramid, one finds it quite
hard; but by scraping in the opposite sense an incision is easily made. This
follows manifestly from the situation of the small spheroids; over which, in

the first manner, the knife glides; but in the other manner it seizes them
from beneath almost as if they were the scales of a fish.
I will not undertake to say anything touching the way in which so many
corpuscles all equal and similar are generated, nor how they are set in such
beautiful order; whether they are formed first and then assembled, or
whether they arrange themselves thus in coming into being and as fast as
they are produced, which seems to me more probable. To develop truths so
recondite there would be needed a knowledge of nature much greater than
that which we have. I will add only that these little spheroids could well
contribute to form the spheroids of the waves of light, here above supposed,
these as well as those being similarly situated, and with their axes parallel.
Calculations which have been supposed in this Chapter.
Mr. Bartholinus, in his treatise of this Crystal, puts at 101 degrees the
obtuse angles of the faces, which I have stated to be 101 degrees 52
minutes. He states that he measured these angles directly on the crystal,
which is difficult to do with ultimate exactitude, because the edges such as
CA, CB, in this figure, are generally worn, and not quite straight. For more
certainty, therefore, I preferred to measure actually the obtuse angle by
which the faces CBDA, CBVF, are inclined to one another, namely the
angle OCN formed by drawing CN perpendicular to FV, and CO
perpendicular to DA. This angle OCN I found to be 105 degrees; and its
supplement CNP, to be 75 degrees, as it should be.
To find from this the obtuse
angle BCA, I imagined a
sphere having its centre at C,
and on its surface a spherical
triangle, formed by the
intersection of three planes
which enclose the solid angle
C. In this equilateral triangle,
which is ABF in this other
figure, I see that each of the
angles should be 105 degrees,
namely equal to the angle

OCN; and that each of the sides should be of as many degrees as the angle
ACB, or ACF, or BCF. Having then drawn the arc FQ perpendicular to the
side AB, which it divides equally at Q, the triangle FQA has a right angle at
Q, the angle A 105 degrees, and F half as much, namely 52 degrees 30
minutes; whence the hypotenuse AF is found to be 101 degrees 52 minutes.
And this arc AF is the measure of the angle ACF in the figure of the crystal.
In the same figure, if the plane CGHF cuts the crystal
so that it divides the obtuse angles ACB, MHV, in the
middle, it is stated, in Article 10, that the angle CFH is
70 degrees 57 minutes. This again is easily shown in
the same spherical triangle ABF, in which it appears
that the arc FQ is as many degrees as the angle GCF in
the crystal, the supplement of which is the angle CFH.
Now the arc FQ is found to be 109 degrees 3 minutes.
Then its supplement, 70 degrees 57 minutes, is the
angle CFH.
It was stated, in Article 26, that the straight line CS, which in the preceding
figure is CH, being the axis of the crystal, that is to say being equally
inclined to the three sides CA, CB, CF, the angle GCH is 45 degrees 20
minutes. This is also easily calculated by the same spherical triangle. For by
drawing the other arc AD which cuts BF equally, and intersects FQ at S,
this point will be the centre of the triangle. And it is easy to see that the arc
SQ is the measure of the angle GCH in the figure which represents the
crystal. Now in the triangle QAS, which is right-angled, one knows also the
angle A, which is 52 degrees 30 minutes, and the side AQ 50 degrees 56
minutes; whence the side SQ is found to be 45 degrees 20 minutes.
In Article 27 it was required to show that PMS being an ellipse the centre of
which is C, and which touches the straight line MD at M so that the angle
MCL which CM makes with CL, perpendicular on DM, is 6 degrees 40
minutes, and its semi-minor axis CS making with CG (which is parallel to
MD) an angle GCS of 45 degrees 20 minutes, it was required to show, I say,
that, CM being 100,000 parts, PC the semi-major diameter of this ellipse is
105,032 parts, and CS, the semi-minor diameter, 93,410.

Let CP and CS be prolonged and meet the tangent DM at D and Z; and from
the point of contact M let MN and MO be drawn as perpendiculars to CP
and CS. Now because the angles SCP, GCL, are right angles, the angle PCL
will be equal to GCS which was 45 degrees 20 minutes. And deducting the
angle LCM, which is 6 degrees 40 minutes, from LCP, which is 45 degrees
20 minutes, there remains MCP, 38 degrees 40 minutes. Considering then
CM as a radius of 100,000 parts, MN, the sine of 38 degrees 40 minutes,
will be 62,479. And in the right-angled triangle MND, MN will be to ND as
the radius of the Tables is to the tangent of 45 degrees 20 minutes (because
the angle NMD is equal to DCL, or GCS); that is to say as 100,000 to
101,170: whence results ND 63,210. But NC is 78,079 of the same parts,
CM being 100,000, because NC is the sine of the complement of the angle
MCP, which was 38 degrees 40 minutes. Then the whole line DC is
141,289; and CP, which is a mean proportional between DC and CN, since
MD touches the Ellipse, will be 105,032.
Similarly, because the angle OMZ
is equal to CDZ, or LCZ, which is
44 degrees 40 minutes, being the
complement of GCS, it follows that,
as the radius of the Tables is to the
tangent of 44 degrees 40 minutes,
so will OM 78,079 be to OZ
77,176. But OC is 62,479 of these
same parts of which CM is 100,000,
because it is equal to MN, the sine
of the angle MCP, which is 38
degrees 40 minutes. Then the whole
line CZ is 139,655; and CS, which
is a mean proportional between CZ
and CO will be 93,410.
At the same place it was stated that GC was found to be 98,779 parts. To
prove this, let PE be drawn in the same figure parallel to DM, and meeting
CM at E. In the right-angled triangle CLD the side CL is 99,324 (CM being
100,000), because CL is the sine of the complement of the angle LCM,
which is 6 degrees 40 minutes. And since the angle LCD is 45 degrees 20
minutes, being equal to GCS, the side LD is found to be 100,486: whence

deducting ML 11,609 there will remain MD 88,877. Now as CD (which
was 141,289) is to DM 88,877, so will CP 105,032 be to PE 66,070. But as
the rectangle MEH (or rather the difference of the squares on CM and CE)
is to the square on MC, so is the square on PE to the square on Cg; then also
as the difference of the squares on DC and CP to the square on CD, so also
is the square on PE to the square on gC. But DP, CP, and PE are known;
hence also one knows GC, which is 98,779.
Lemma which has been supposed.
If a spheroid is touched by a straight line, and also by two or more planes
which are parallel to this line, though not parallel to one another, all the
points of contact of the line, as well as of the planes, will be in one and the
same ellipse made by a plane which passes through the centre of the
spheroid.
Let LED be the spheroid touched by the line BM at the point B, and also by
the planes parallel to this line at the points O and A. It is required to
demonstrate that the points B, O, and A are in one and the same Ellipse
made in the spheroid by a plane which passes through its centre.
Through the line BM, and through the points O and A, let there be drawn
planes parallel to one another, which, in cutting the spheroid make the
ellipses LBD, POP, QAQ; which will all be similar and similarly disposed,
and will have their centres K, N, R, in one and the same diameter of the
spheroid, which will also be the diameter of the ellipse made by the section
of the plane that passes through the centre of the spheroid, and which cuts
the planes of the three said Ellipses at right angles: for all this is manifest by
proposition 15 of the book of Conoids and Spheroids of Archimedes.
Further, the two latter planes, which are drawn through the points O and A,
will also, by cutting the planes which touch the spheroid in these same
points, generate straight lines, as OH and AS, which will, as is easy to see,
be parallel to BM; and all three, BM, OH, AS, will touch the Ellipses LBD,
POP, QAQ in these points, B, O, A; since they are in the planes of these
ellipses, and at the same time in the planes which touch the spheroid. If now
from these points B, O, A, there are drawn the straight lines BK, ON, AR,
through the centres of the same ellipses, and if through these centres there
are drawn also the diameters LD, PP, QQ, parallel to the tangents BM, OH,

AS; these will be conjugate to
the aforesaid BK, ON, AR.
And because the three
ellipses are similar and
similarly disposed, and have
their diameters LD, PP, QQ
parallel, it is certain that their
conjugate diameters BK, ON,
AR, will also be parallel. And
the centres K, N, R being, as
has been stated, in one and
the same diameter of the
spheroid, these parallels BK,
ON, AR will necessarily be in
one and the same plane,
which passes through this
diameter of the spheroid, and,
in consequence, the points R,
O, A are in one and the same
ellipse made by the
intersection of this plane. Which was to be proved. And it is manifest that
the demonstration would be the same if, besides the points O, A, there had
been others in which the spheroid had been touched by planes parallel to the
straight line BM.

CHAPTER VI
ON THE FIGURES OF THE TRANSPARENT BODIES

Which serve for Refraction and for Reflexion.

fter having explained how the properties of reflexion
and refraction follow from what we have supposed
concerning the nature of light, and of opaque bodies,
and of transparent media, I will here set forth a very
easy and natural way of deducing, from the same
principles, the true figures which serve, either by
reflexion or by refraction, to collect or disperse the rays
of light, as may be desired. For though I do not see yet that there are means
of making use of these figures, so far as relates to Refraction, not only
because of the difficulty of shaping the glasses of Telescopes with the
requisite exactitude according to these figures, but also because there exists
in refraction itself a property which hinders the perfect concurrence of the
rays, as Mr. Newton has very well proved by experiment, I will yet not
desist from relating the invention, since it offers itself, so to speak, of itself,
and because it further confirms our Theory of refraction, by the agreement
which here is found between the refracted ray and the reflected ray. Besides,
it may occur that some one in the future will discover in it utilities which at
present are not seen.

To proceed then to these figures, let us suppose first that it is desired to find
a surface CDE which shall reassemble at a point B rays coming from
another point A; and that the summit of the surface shall be the given point
D in the straight line AB. I say that, whether by reflexion or by refraction, it
is only necessary to make this surface such that the path of the light from
the point A to all points of the curved line CDE, and from these to the point
of concurrence (as here the path along the straight lines AC, CB, along AL,
LB, and along AD, DB), shall be everywhere traversed in equal times: by
which principle the finding of these curves becomes very easy.
So far as relates to the reflecting
surface, since the sum of the lines
AC, CB ought to be equal to that of
AD, DB, it appears that DCE ought
to be an ellipse; and for refraction,
the ratio of the velocities of waves
of light in the media A and B being
supposed to be known, for example
that of 3 to 2 (which is the same, as
we have shown, as the ratio of the
Sines in the refraction), it is only
necessary to make DH equal to 3/2
of DB; and having after that
described from the centre A some arc FC, cutting DB at F, then describe
another from centre B with its semi-diameter BX equal to 2/3 of FH; and
the point of intersection of the two arcs will be one of the points required,
through which the curve should pass. For this point, having been found in
this fashion, it is easy forthwith to demonstrate that the time along AC, CB,
will be equal to the time along AD, DB.
For assuming that the line AD represents the time which the light takes to
traverse this same distance AD in air, it is evident that DH, equal to 3/2 of
DB, will represent the time of the light along DB in the medium, because it
needs here more time in proportion as its speed is slower. Therefore the
whole line AH will represent the time along AD, DB. Similarly the line AC
or AF will represent the time along AC; and FH being by construction equal
to 3/2 of CB, it will represent the time along CB in the medium; and in
consequence the whole line AH will represent also the time along AC, CB.

Whence it appears that the time along AC, CB, is equal to the time along
AD, DB. And similarly it can be shown if L and K are other points in the
curve CDE, that the times along AL, LB, and along AK, KB, are always
represented by the line AH, and therefore equal to the said time along AD,
DB.
In order to show further that the surfaces, which these curves will generate
by revolution, will direct all the rays which reach them from the point A in
such wise that they tend towards B, let there be supposed a point K in the
curve, farther from D than C is, but such that the straight line AK falls from
outside upon the curve which serves for the refraction; and from the centre
B let the arc KS be described, cutting BD at S, and the straight line CB at R;
and from the centre A describe the arc DN meeting AK at N.
Since the sums of the times along AK, KB, and along AC, CB are equal, if
from the former sum one deducts the time along KB, and if from the other
one deducts the time along RB, there will remain the time along AK as
equal to the time along the two parts AC, CR. Consequently in the time that
the light has come along AK it will also have come along AC and will in
addition have made, in the medium from the centre C, a partial spherical
wave, having a semi-diameter equal to CR. And this wave will necessarily
touch the circumference KS at R, since CB cuts this circumference at right
angles. Similarly, having taken any other point L in the curve, one can show
that in the same time as the light passes along AL it will also have come
along AL and in addition will have made a partial wave, from the centre L,
which will touch the same circumference KS. And so with all other points
of the curve CDE. Then at the moment that the light reaches K the arc KRS
will be the termination of the movement, which has spread from A through
DCK. And thus this same arc will constitute in the medium the propagation
of the wave emanating from A; which wave may be represented by the arc
DN, or by any other nearer the centre A. But all the pieces of the arc KRS
are propagated successively along straight lines which are perpendicular to
them, that is to say, which tend to the centre B (for that can be demonstrated
in the same way as we have proved above that the pieces of spherical waves
are propagated along the straight lines coming from their centre), and these
progressions of the pieces of the waves constitute the rays themselves of
light. It appears then that all these rays tend here towards the point B.

One might also determine the point C, and all the others, in this curve
which serves for the refraction, by dividing DA at G in such a way that DG
is 2/3 of DA, and describing from the centre B any arc CX which cuts BD
at N, and another from the centre A with its semi-diameter AF equal to 3/2
of GX; or rather, having described, as before, the arc CX, it is only
necessary to make DF equal to 3/2 of DX, and from-the centre A to strike
the arc FC; for these two constructions, as may be easily known, come back
to the first one which was shown before. And it is manifest by the last
method that this curve is the same that Mr. Des Cartes has given in his
Geometry, and which he calls the first of his Ovals.
It is only a part of this oval which serves for the refraction, namely, the part
DK, ending at K, if AK is the tangent. As to the, other part, Des Cartes has
remarked that it could serve for reflexions, if there were some material of a
mirror of such a nature that by its means the force of the rays (or, as we
should say, the velocity of the light, which he could not say, since he held
that the movement of light was instantaneous) could be augmented in the
proportion of 3 to 2. But we have shown that in our way of explaining
reflexion, such a thing could not arise from the matter of the mirror, and it is
entirely impossible.

From what has been demonstrated about this oval, it will be easy to find the
figure which serves to collect to a point incident parallel rays. For by
supposing just the same construction, but the point A infinitely distant,
giving parallel rays, our oval becomes a true Ellipse, the construction of
which differs in no way from that of the oval, except that FC, which
previously was an arc of a circle, is here a straight line, perpendicular to
DB. For the wave of light DN, being likewise represented by a straight line,
it will be seen that all the points of this wave, travelling as far as the surface
KD along lines parallel to DB, will advance subsequently towards the point
B, and will arrive there at the same time. As for the Ellipse which served for
reflexion, it is evident that it will here become a parabola, since its focus A
may be regarded as infinitely distant from the other, B, which is here the
focus of the parabola, towards which all the reflexions of rays parallel to
AB tend. And the demonstration of these effects is just the same as the
preceding.

But that this curved line CDE which serves for refraction is an Ellipse, and
is such that its major diameter is to the distance between its foci as 3 to 2,
which is the proportion of the refraction, can be easily found by the calculus
of Algebra. For DB, which is given, being called a; its undetermined
perpendicular DT being called x; and TC y; FB will be a - y; CB will be
sqrt(xx + aa - 2ay + yy). But the nature of the curve is such that 2/3 of TC
together with CB is equal to DB, as was stated in the last construction: then
the equation will be between (2/3)y + sqrt(xx + aa - 2ay + yy) and a; which
being reduced, gives (6/5)ay - yy equal to (9/5)xx; that is to say that having
made DO equal to 6/5 of DB, the rectangle DFO is equal to 9/5 of the
square on FC. Whence it is seen that DC is an ellipse, of which the axis DO
is to the parameter as 9 to 5; and therefore the square on DO is to the square
of the distance between the foci as 9 to 9 - 5, that is to say 4; and finally the
line DO will be to this distance as 3 to 2.
Again, if one supposes
the point B to be
infinitely distant, in
lieu of our first oval we
shall find that CDE is a
true Hyperbola; which
will make those rays
become parallel which
come from the point A.
And in consequence
also those which are
parallel within the
transparent body will
be collected outside at
the point A. Now it
must be remarked that
CX and KS become straight lines perpendicular to BA, because they
represent arcs of circles the centre of which is infinitely distant. And the
intersection of the perpendicular CX with the arc FC will give the point C,
one of those through which the curve ought to pass. And this operates so
that all the parts of the wave of light DN, coming to meet the surface KDE,
will advance thence along parallels to KS and will arrive at this straight line

at the same time; of which the proof is again the same as that which served
for the first oval. Besides one finds by a calculation as easy as the preceding
one, that CDE is here a hyperbola of which the axis DO is 4/5 of AD, and
the parameter equal to AD. Whence it is easily proved that DO is to the
distance between the foci as 3 to 2.
These are the two cases
in which Conic
sections serve for
refraction, and are the
same which are
explained, in his
Dioptrique, by Des
Cartes, who first found
out the use of these
lines in relation to
refraction, as also that
of the Ovals the first of
which we have already
set forth. The second
oval is that which
serves for rays that
tend to a given point; in which oval, if the apex of the surface which
receives the rays is D, it will happen that the other apex will be situated
between B and A, or beyond A, according as the ratio of AD to DB is given
of greater or lesser value. And in this latter case it is the same as that which
Des Cartes calls his 3rd oval.
Now the finding and construction of this second oval is the same as that of
the first, and the demonstration of its effect likewise. But it is worthy of
remark that in one case this oval becomes a perfect circle, namely when the
ratio of AD to DB is the same as the ratio of the refractions, here as 3 to 2,
as I observed a long time ago. The 4th oval, serving only for impossible
reflexions, there is no need to set it forth.
As for the manner in which Mr. Des Cartes discovered these lines, since he
has given no explanation of it, nor any one else since that I know of, I will
say here, in passing, what it seems to me it must have been. Let it be

proposed to find the
surface generated by
the revolution of the
curve KDE, which,
receiving the incident
rays coming to it from
the point A, shall
deviate them toward
the point B. Then
considering this other
curve as already
known, and that its
apex D is in the straight
line AB, let us divide it
up into an infinitude of
small pieces by the
points G, C, F; and
having drawn from
each of these points,
straight lines towards A to represent the incident rays, and other straight
lines towards B, let there also be described with centre A the arcs GL, CM,
FN, DO, cutting the rays that come from A at L, M, N, O; and from the
points K, G, C, F, let there be described the arcs KQ, GR, CS, FT cutting
the rays towards B at Q, R, S, T; and let us suppose that the straight line
HKZ cuts the curve at K at right-angles.

Then AK being an incident ray, and KB its refraction within the medium, it
needs must be, according to the law of refraction which was known to Mr.
Des Cartes, that the sine of the angle ZKA should be to the sine of the angle
HKB as 3 to 2, supposing that this is the proportion of the refraction of
glass; or rather, that the sine of the angle KGL should have this same ratio
to the sine of the angle GKQ, considering KG, GL, KQ as straight lines
because of their smallness. But these sines are the lines KL and GQ, if GK
is taken as the radius of the circle. Then LK ought to be to GQ as 3 to 2; and
in the same ratio MG to CR, NC to FS, OF to DT. Then also the sum of all
the antecedents to all the consequents would be as 3 to 2. Now by
prolonging the arc DO until it meets AK at X, KX is the sum of the
antecedents. And by prolonging the arc KQ till it meets AD at Y, the sum of
the consequents is DY. Then KX ought to be to DY as 3 to 2. Whence it
would appear that the curve KDE was of such a nature that having drawn
from some point which had been assumed, such as K, the straight lines KA,
KB, the excess by which AK surpasses AD should be to the excess of DB
over KB, as 3 to 2. For it can similarly be demonstrated, by taking any other
point in the curve, such as G, that the excess of AG over AD, namely VG, is
to the excess of BD over DG, namely DP, in this same ratio of 3 to 2. And
following this principle Mr. Des Cartes constructed these curves in his
Geometric; and he easily recognized that in the case of parallel rays, these
curves became Hyperbolas and Ellipses.
Let us now return to our method and let us see how it leads without
difficulty to the finding of the curves which one side of the glass requires

when the other side is of a given figure; a figure not only plane or spherical,
or made by one of the conic sections (which is the restriction with which
Des Cartes proposed this problem, leaving the solution to those who should
come after him) but generally any figure whatever: that is to say, one made
by the revolution of any given curved line to which one must merely know
how to draw straight lines as tangents.
Let the given figure be that made by the revolution of some curve such as
AK about the axis AV, and that this side of the glass receives rays coming
from the point L. Furthermore, let the thickness AB of the middle of the
glass be given, and the point F at which one desires the rays to be all
perfectly reunited, whatever be the first refraction occurring at the surface
AK.
I say that for this the sole requirement is that the outline BDK which
constitutes the other surface shall be such that the path of the light from the
point L to the surface AK, and from thence to the surface BDK, and from
thence to the point F, shall be traversed everywhere in equal times, and in
each case in a time equal to that which the light employs, to pass along the
straight line LF of which the part AB is within the glass.
Let LG be a ray falling on the arc AK. Its refraction GV will be given by
means of the tangent which will be drawn at the point G. Now in GV the
point D must be found such that FD together with 3/2 of DG and the
straight line GL, may be equal to FB together with 3/2 of BA and the
straight line AL; which, as is clear, make up a given length. Or rather, by
deducting from each the length of LG, which is also given, it will merely be
needful to adjust FD up to the straight line VG in such a way that FD
together with 3/2 of DG is equal to a given straight line, which is a quite
easy plane problem: and the point D will be one of those through which the
curve BDK ought to pass. And similarly, having drawn another ray LM, and
found its refraction MO, the point N will be found in this line, and so on as
many times as one desires.
To demonstrate the effect of the curve, let there be described about the
centre L the circular arc AH, cutting LG at H; and about the centre F the arc
BP; and in AB let AS be taken equal to 2/3 of HG; and SE equal to GD.
Then considering AH as a wave of light emanating from the point L, it is

certain that during the time in
which its piece H arrives at G the
piece A will have advanced within
the transparent body only along AS;
for I suppose, as above, the
proportion of the refraction to be as
3 to 2. Now we know that the piece
of wave which is incident on G,
advances thence along the line GD,
since GV is the refraction of the ray
LG. Then during the time that this
piece of wave has taken from G to
D, the other piece which was at S
has reached E, since GD, SE are
equal. But while the latter will
advance from E to B, the piece of
wave which was at D will have
spread into the air its partial wave,
the semi-diameter of which, DC
(supposing this wave to cut the line
DF at C), will be 3/2 of EB, since
the velocity of light outside the
medium is to that inside as 3 to 2.
Now it is easy to show that this
wave will touch the arc BP at this
point C. For since, by construction,
FD + 3/2 DG + GL are equal to FB
+ 3/2 BA + AL; on deducting the
equals LH, LA, there will remain
FD + 3/2 DG + GH equal to FB +
3/2 BA. And, again, deducting from
one side GH, and from the other
side 3/2 of AS, which are equal, there will remain FD with 3/2 DG equal to
FB with 3/2 of BS. But 3/2 of DG are equal to 3/2 of ES; then FD is equal
to FB with 3/2 of BE. But DC was equal to 3/2 of EB; then deducting these
equal lengths from one side and from the other, there will remain CF equal
to FB. And thus it appears that the wave, the semi-diameter of which is DC,

touches the arc BP at the moment when the light coming from the point L
has arrived at B along the line LB. It can be demonstrated similarly that at
this same moment the light that has come along any other ray, such as LM,
MN, will have propagated the movement which is terminated at the arc BP.
Whence it follows, as has been often said, that the propagation of the wave
AH, after it has passed through the thickness of the glass, will be the
spherical wave BP, all the pieces of which ought to advance along straight
lines, which are the rays of light, to the centre F. Which was to be proved.
Similarly these curved lines can be found in all the cases which can be
proposed, as will be sufficiently shown by one or two examples which I will
add.
Let there be given the surface of the glass AK, made by the revolution about
the axis BA of the line AK, which may be straight or curved. Let there be
also given in the axis the point L and the thickness BA of the glass; and let
it be required to find the other surface KDB, which receiving rays that are
parallel to AB will direct them in such wise that after being again refracted
at the given surface AK they will all be reassembled at the point L.
From the point L let there be drawn to some point of the given line AK the
straight line LG, which, being considered as a ray of light, its refraction GD
will then be found. And this line being then prolonged at one side or the
other will meet the straight line BL, as here at V. Let there then be erected
on AB the perpendicular BC, which will represent a wave of light coming
from the infinitely distant point F, since we have supposed the rays to be
parallel. Then all the parts of this wave BC must arrive at the same time at
the point L; or rather all the parts of a wave emanating from the point L
must arrive at the same time at the straight line BC. And for that, it is
necessary to find in the line VGD the point D such that having drawn DC
parallel to AB, the sum of CD, plus 3/2 of DG, plus GL may be equal to 3/2
of AB, plus AL: or rather, on deducting from both sides GL, which is given,
CD plus 3/2 of DG must be equal to a given length; which is a still easier
problem than the preceding construction. The point D thus found will be
one of those through which the curve ought to pass; and the proof will be
the same as before. And by this it will be proved that the waves which come
from the point L, after having passed through the glass KAKB, will take the
form of straight lines, as BC; which is the same thing as saying that the rays

will become parallel. Whence it
follows reciprocally that parallel
rays falling on the surface KDB
will be reassembled at the point L.
A
ga
in,
let
th
er
e
be
gi
ve
n
th
e
su
rf
ac
e AK, of any desired form, generated by
revolution about the axis AB, and let the
thickness of the glass at the middle be AB.
Also let the point L be given in the axis behind the glass; and let it be
supposed that the rays which fall on the surface AK tend to this point, and
that it is required to find the surface BD, which on their emergence from the
glass turns them as if they came from the point F in front of the glass.
Having taken any point G in the line AK, and drawing the straight line IGL,
its part GI will represent one of the incident rays, the refraction of which,
GV, will then be found: and it is in this line that we must find the point D,
one of those through which the curve DG ought to pass. Let us suppose that
it has been found: and about L as centre let there be described GT, the arc of
a circle cutting the straight line AB at T, in case the distance LG is greater
than LA; for otherwise the arc AH must be described about the same centre,
cutting the straight line LG at H. This arc GT (or AH, in the other case) will
represent an incident wave of light, the rays of which tend towards L.

Similarly, about the centre F let there be described the circular arc DQ,
which will represent a wave emanating from the point F.
Then the wave TG, after having passed through the glass, must form the
wave QD; and for this I observe that the time taken by the light along GD in
the glass must be equal to that taken along the three, TA, AB, and BQ, of
which AB alone is within the glass. Or rather, having taken AS equal to 2/3
of AT, I observe that 3/2 of GD ought to be equal to 3/2 of SB, plus BQ;
and, deducting both of them from FD or FQ, that FD less 3/2 of GD ought
to be equal to FB less 3/2 of SB. And this last difference is a given length:
and all that is required is to draw the straight line FD from the given point F
to meet VG so that it may be thus. Which is a problem quite similar to that
which served for the first of these constructions, where FD plus 3/2 of GD
had to be equal to a given length.
In the demonstration it is to be observed that, since the arc BC falls within
the glass, there must be conceived an arc RX, concentric with it and on the
other side of QD. Then after it shall have been shown that the piece G of the
wave GT arrives at D at the same time that the piece T arrives at Q, which
is easily deduced from the construction, it will be evident as a consequence
that the partial wave generated at the point D will touch the arc RX at the
moment when the piece Q shall have come to R, and that thus this arc will
at the same moment be the termination of the movement that comes from
the wave TG; whence all the rest may be concluded.
Having shown the method of finding these curved lines which serve for the
perfect concurrence of the rays, there remains to be explained a notable
thing touching the uncoordinated refraction of spherical, plane, and other
surfaces: an effect which if ignored might cause some doubt concerning
what we have several times said, that rays of light are straight lines which
intersect at right angles the waves which travel along them.
For in the case of rays which, for example, fall parallel upon a spherical
surface AFE, intersecting one another, after refraction, at different points, as
this figure represents; what can the waves of light be, in this transparent
body, which are cut at right angles by the converging rays? For they can not
be spherical. And what will these waves become after the said rays begin to
intersect one another? It will be seen in the solution of this difficulty that

something very remarkable comes
to pass herein, and that the waves
do not cease to persist though they
do not continue entire, as when they
cross the glasses designed
according to the construction we
have seen.
According to what has been shown
above, the straight line AD, which
has been drawn at the summit of the
sphere, at right angles to the axis
parallel to which the rays come,
represents the wave of light; and in
the time taken by its piece D to
reach the spherical surface AGE at
E, its other parts will have met the
same surface at F, G, H, etc., and
will have also formed spherical
partial waves of which these points
are the centres. And the surface EK
which all those waves will touch,
will be the continuation of the wave
AD in the sphere at the moment when the piece D has reached E. Now the
line EK is not an arc of a circle, but is a curved line formed as the evolute of
another curve ENC, which touches all the rays HL, GM, FO, etc., that are
the refractions of the parallel rays, if we imagine laid over the convexity
ENC a thread which in unwinding describes at its end E the said curve EK.
For, supposing that this curve has been thus described, we will show that
the said waves formed from the centres F, G, H, etc., will all touch it.
It is certain that the curve EK and all the others described by the evolution
of the curve ENC, with different lengths of thread, will cut all the rays HL,
GM, FO, etc., at right angles, and in such wise that the parts of them
intercepted between two such curves will all be equal; for this follows from
what has been demonstrated in our treatise de Motu Pendulorum. Now
imagining the incident rays as being infinitely near to one another, if we
consider two of them, as RG, TF, and draw GQ perpendicular to RG, and if

we suppose the curve FS which intersects GM at P to have been described
by evolution from the curve NC, beginning at F, as far as which the thread
is supposed to extend, we may assume the small piece FP as a straight line
perpendicular to the ray GM, and similarly the arc GF as a straight line. But
GM being the refraction of the ray RG, and FP being perpendicular to it, QF
must be to GP as 3 to 2, that is to say in the proportion of the refraction; as
was shown above in explaining the discovery of Des Cartes. And the same
thing occurs in all the small arcs GH, HA, etc., namely that in the
quadrilaterals which enclose them the side parallel to the axis is to the
opposite side as 3 to 2. Then also as 3 to 2 will the sum of the one set be to
the sum of the other; that is to say, TF to AS, and DE to AK, and BE to SK
or DV, supposing V to be the intersection of the curve EK and the ray FO.
But, making FB perpendicular to DE, the ratio of 3 to 2 is also that of BE to
the semi-diameter of the spherical wave which emanated from the point F
while the light outside the transparent body traversed the space BE. Then it
appears that this wave will intersect the ray FM at the same point V where it
is intersected at right angles by the curve EK, and consequently that the
wave will touch this curve. In the same way it can be proved that the same
will apply to all the other waves above mentioned, originating at the points
G, H, etc.; to wit, that they will touch the curve EK at the moment when the
piece D of the wave ED shall have reached E.
Now to say what these waves become after the rays have begun to cross one
another: it is that from thence they fold back and are composed of two
contiguous parts, one being a curve formed as evolute of the curve ENC in
one sense, and the other as evolute of the same curve in the opposite sense.
Thus the wave KE, while advancing toward the meeting place becomes abc,
whereof the part ab is made by the evolute bC, a portion of the curve ENC,
while the end C remains attached; and the part bc by the evolute of the
portion bE while the end E remains attached. Consequently the same wave
becomes def, then ghk, and finally CY, from whence it subsequently spreads
without any fold, but always along curved lines which are evolutes of the
curve ENC, increased by some straight line at the end C.
There is even, in this curve, a part EN which is straight, N being the point
where the perpendicular from the centre X of the sphere falls upon the
refraction of the ray DE, which I now suppose to touch the sphere. The
folding of the waves of light begins from the point N up to the end of the

curve C, which point is formed by taking AC to CX in the proportion of the
refraction, as here 3 to 2.
As many other points as may be desired in the curve NC are found by a
Theorem which Mr. Barrow has demonstrated in section 12 of his Lectiones
Opticae, though for another purpose. And it is to be noted that a straight
line equal in length to this curve can be given. For since it together with the
line NE is equal to the line CK, which is known, since DE is to AK in the
proportion of the refraction, it appears that by deducting EN from CK the
remainder will be equal to the curve NC.
Similarly the waves that are folded back in reflexion by a concave spherical
mirror can be found. Let ABC be the section, through the axis, of a hollow
hemisphere, the centre of which is D, its axis being DB, parallel to which I
suppose the rays of light to come. All the reflexions of those rays which fall
upon the quarter-circle AB will touch a curved line AFE, of which line the
end E is at the focus of the hemisphere, that is to say, at the point which
divides the semi-diameter BD into two equal parts. The points through
which this curve ought to pass are found by taking, beyond A, some arc AO,
and making the arc OP double the length of it; then dividing the chord OP at
F in such wise that the part FP is three times the part FO; for then F is one
of the required points.
And as the parallel rays are merely
perpendiculars to the waves which
fall on the concave surface, which
waves are parallel to AD, it will be
found that as they come
successively to encounter the
surface AB, they form on reflexion
folded waves composed of two
curves which originate from two
opposite evolutions of the parts of
the curve AFE. So, taking AD as an
incident wave, when the part AG
shall have met the surface AI, that
is to say when the piece G shall have reached I, it will be the curves HF, FI,
generated as evolutes of the curves FA, FE, both beginning at F, which

together constitute the propagation of the part AG. And a little afterwards,
when the part AK has met the surface AM, the piece K having come to M,
then the curves LN, NM, will together constitute the propagation of that
part. And thus this folded wave will continue to advance until the point N
has reached the focus E. The curve AFE can be seen in smoke, or in flying
dust, when a concave mirror is held opposite the sun. And it should be
known that it is none other than that curve which is described by the point E
on the circumference of the circle EB, when that circle is made to roll
within another whose semi-diameter is ED and whose centre is D. So that it
is a kind of Cycloid, of which, however, the points can be found
geometrically.
Its length is exactly equal to 3/4 of the diameter of the sphere, as can be
found and demonstrated by means of these waves, nearly in the same way
as the mensuration of the preceding curve; though it may also be
demonstrated in other ways, which I omit as outside the subject. The area
AOBEFA, comprised between the arc of the quarter-circle, the straight line
BE, and the curve EFA, is equal to the fourth part of the quadrant DAB.

END.

INDEX
Archimedes, 104.
Atmospheric refraction, 45.

Barrow, Isaac, 126.
Bartholinus, Erasmus, 53, 54, 57, 60, 97, 99.
Boyle, Hon. Robert, 11.

Cassini, Jacques, iii.
Caustic Curves, 123.
Crystals, see Iceland Crystal, Rock Crystal.
Crystals, configuration of, 95.

Descartes, Rénê, 3, 5, 7, 14, 22, 42, 43, 109, 113.
Double Refraction, discovery of, 54, 81, 93.

Elasticity, 12, 14.
Ether, the, or Ethereal matter, 11, 14, 16, 28.
Extraordinary refraction, 55, 56.

Fermat, principle of, 42.
Figures of transparent bodies, 105.

Hooke, Robert, 20.

Iceland Crystal, 2, 52 sqq.
Iceland Crystal, Cutting and Polishing of, 91, 92, 98.

Leibnitz, G.W., vi.
Light, nature of, 3.
Light, velocity of, 4, 15.

Molecular texture of bodies, 27, 95.

Newton, Sir Isaac, vi, 106.

Opacity, 34.
Ovals, Cartesian, 107, 113.

Pardies, Rev. Father, 20.
Rays, definition of, 38, 49.
Reflexion, 22.
Refraction, 28, 34.
Rock Crystal, 54, 57, 62, 95.
Römer, Olaf, v, 7.
Roughness of surfaces, 27.

Sines, law of, 1, 35, 38, 43.
Spheres, elasticity of, 15.
Spheroidal waves in crystals, 63.
Spheroids, lemma about, 103.
Sound, speed of, 7, 10, 12.

Telescopes, lenses for, 62, 105.
Torricelli's experiment, 12, 30.
Transparency, explanation of, 28, 31, 32.

Waves, no regular succession of, 17.
Waves, principle of wave envelopes, 19, 24.
Waves, principle of elementary wave fronts, 19.
Waves, propagation of light as, 16, 63.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK TREATISE ON
LIGHT ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be
renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law
means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the
Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States
without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying
and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a
registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook,
except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying
royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge
anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg
eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do
practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by
U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license,
especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any
other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you
agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg License
available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing
Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic work,
you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the
terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright)
agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement,
you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy
of or access to a Project Gutenberg electronic work and you do not agree to
be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on
or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can
do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works even without complying
with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a
lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg electronic works if you
follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to
Project Gutenberg electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation”
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual
work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are

located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are
removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing
Project Gutenberg works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
keeping the Project Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can
easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you
share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a
constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the
laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before
downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating
derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg work.
The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status
of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied
or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with
this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in
the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country
where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived from
texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice
indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the
work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without
paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a
work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on
the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs
1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted with the
permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply
with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed
by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project
Gutenberg License for all works posted with the permission of the
copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg License
terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any
other work associated with Project Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently
displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or
immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format other than “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the
official Project Gutenberg website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no
additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of
exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work
in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format
must include the full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph
1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works unless you comply
with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to
or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the
use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you
already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the
owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate
royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about
donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in
this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project

Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works
not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and
the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as,
but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription
errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that
damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except
for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to
you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE
THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT
EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE
THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you
discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you
can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund.
If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to

you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work
electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you
may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR
FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or
the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or
limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable
to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum
disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity
or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause
to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg
work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project
Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic
works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the

efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of
life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance
they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals and ensuring
that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely available for
generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for
Project Gutenberg and future generations. To learn more about the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations
can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)
(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of
Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service.
The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541.
Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s
laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza #516,
Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and
official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the
number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment

including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort,
much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not
received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have
not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against
accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us
with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any
statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the
United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods
and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg
electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with
anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg
eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions,
all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a

copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in
compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility:
www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including how
to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email
newsletter to hear about new eBooks.