It is true that the conservation of energy is a law dealing with velocities, not accelerations. But in
calculations which use this law it is still accelerations that have to be employed.
As for the changes introduced by quantum mechanics, they are very profound, but still, to some
degree, a matter of controversy and uncertainty.
There is one change from the Newtonian philosophy which must be mentioned now, and that is
the abandonment of absolute space and time. The reader will remember a mention of this question
in connection with Democritus. Newton believed in a space composed of points, and a time
composed of instants, which had an existence independent of the bodies and events that occupied
them. As regards space, he had an empirical argument to support his view, namely that physical
phenomena enable us to distinguish absolute rotation. If the water in a bucket is rotated, it climbs
up the sides and is depressed in the centre; but if the bucket is rotated while the water is not, there
is no such effect. Since his day, the experiment of Foucault's pendulum has been devised, giving
what has been considered a demonstration of the earth's rotation. Even on the most modern views,
the question of absolute rotation presents difficulties. If all motion is relative, the difference
between the hypothesis that the earth rotates and the hypothesis that the heavens revolve is purely
verbal; it is no more than the difference between "John is the father of James" and "James is the
son of John." But if the heavens revolve, the stars move faster than light, which is considered
impossible. It cannot be said that the modern answers to this difficulty are completely satisfying,
but they are sufficiently satisfying to cause almost all physicists to accept the view that motion and
space are purely relative. This, combined with the amalgamation of space and time into space-
time, has considerably altered our view of the universe from that which resulted from the work of
Galileo and Newton. But of this, as of quantum theory, I will say no more at this time.
-540-CHAPTER VII Francis BaconFRANCIS BACON ( 1561-1626), although his philosophy is in many ways unsatisfactory, has
permanent importance as the founder of modern inductive method and the pioneer in the attempt
at logical systematization of scientic procedure.
He was a son of Sir Nicholas Bacon, Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, and his aunt was the wife of
Sir William Cecil, afterwards Lord Burghley; he thus grew up in the atmosphere of state affairs.
He entered Parliament at the age of twenty-three, and became adviser to Essex. None the less,
when Essex fell from favour he helped in his prosecution. For this he has been severely blamed:
Lytton Strachey, for example, in his Elizabeth and Essex, represents Bacon as a monster of
treachery and ingratitude. This is quite unjust. He worked with Essex while Essex was loyal, but
abandoned him when continued loyalty to him would have been treasonable; in this there was
nothing that even the most rigid moralist of the age could condemn.
In spite of his abandonment of Essex, he was never completely in favour during the lifetime of
Queen Elizabeth. With James's accession, however, his prospects improved. In 1617 he acquired
his father's office of Keeper of the Great Seal, and in 1618 he became Lord Chancellor. But after
he had held this great position for only two years, he was prosecuted for accepting bribes from
litigants. He admitted the truth of accusation, pleading only that presents never influenced his
decision. As to that, any one may form his own opinion, since there can be no evidence as to the
decisions that Bacon would have come to in other circumstances. He was condemned to a fine of
£40,000, to imprisonment in the Tower during the king's pleasure, to perpetual banishment from
court and inability to hold office. This sentence was only very partially executed. He was not
forced to pay the fine, and he was kept in the Tower for only four days. But he was