<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns:np="http://www.newtonproject.sussex.ac.uk/ns/nonTEI" xml:id="NATP00005" type="transcription">
<teiHeader>
<fileDesc>
<titleStmt>
<title>Robert Hooke's Critique of Newton's Theory of Light and Colors (delivered 1672)</title>
<author xml:id="rh"><persName key="nameid_22" sort="Hooke, Robert" ref="nameid_22" xml:base="http://www.newtonproject.sussex.ac.uk/catalogue/xml/persNames.xml">Robert Hooke</persName></author>

</titleStmt>
<extent><hi rend="italic">c.</hi> <num n="word_count" value="2404">2,404</num> words</extent>

<publicationStmt>
<authority>Newton Project</authority>
<pubPlace>London</pubPlace>
<date>2007-03-17</date>
<publisher>Newton Project, University of Sussex</publisher>
<availability n="lic-text" status="restricted"><licence target="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/"><p>This text is licensed under a <ref target="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License</ref>.</p></licence></availability>
</publicationStmt>
<notesStmt>
<note type="metadataLine">1672, in English, <hi rend="italic">c.</hi> 2,402 words, 6pp.</note>
<note n="pages">6pp.</note>
<note n="language">
<p>in English</p>
</note>
<note n="related_texts">
<linkGrp n="document_relations" xml:base="http://www.newtonproject.sussex.ac.uk/view/normalized/"><ptr type="is_responded_by" target="NATP00028">Mr Isaac Newtons Answer to some Considerations [of Robert Hooke] upon his doctrine of Light and Colors [<hi rend="italic">Philosophical Transactions</hi> 88 (18 November 1672)]</ptr><ptr type="is_response_to" target="NATP00006">A Letter of Mr. Isaac Newton … containing his New Theory about Light and Colors [<hi rend="italic">Philosophical Transactions</hi> 80 (19 Feb. 1671/2)]</ptr></linkGrp>
</note>
</notesStmt>
<sourceDesc><bibl type="simple" n="custodian_3" sortKey="zz-considerations_upon_mr._newtons_discourse_on_light_and_colours_in_the_history_of_the_royal_society,_thomas_birch_(ed.),_vol._3_(london:_1757),_pp._10-15." subtype="Printed">‘Considerations upon Mr. NEWTON'S discourse on light and colours’ in  <hi rend="italic">The History of the Royal Society</hi>, Thomas Birch (ed.), vol. 3 (London: 1757), pp. 10-15.</bibl>
<biblStruct>
    <analytic>
        <author><persName ref="nameid_22" xml:base="http://www.newtonproject.sussex.ac.uk/catalogue/xml/persNames.xml"><forename>Robert</forename> <surname>Hooke</surname></persName></author>
        <title>Considerations upon Mr. NEWTON'S discourse on light and colours</title>
    </analytic>
<monogr>
<editor role="editor">Thomas Birch</editor>
<title>The History of the Royal Society</title>
<title type="short">History of the Royal Society</title>
<imprint>
<pubPlace>London</pubPlace>
<publisher>Printed for A. Millar in the Strand</publisher>
<date>1757</date>
<biblScope type="vol">3</biblScope>
<biblScope type="pp">10-15</biblScope>
</imprint>
</monogr>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc>
<creation>
<origDate when="1672-02-20">1672</origDate>
</creation>
<langUsage>
<language ident="eng">English</language>
</langUsage>
<handNotes>
<handNote xml:id="printer" scribe="print">Print</handNote>
</handNotes>
</profileDesc>
<encodingDesc>
<classDecl><taxonomy><category><catDesc n="Science">Science</catDesc><category><catDesc n="Optics">Optics</catDesc></category></category></taxonomy></classDecl>
</encodingDesc>
<revisionDesc>
<change when="2001-01-01" type="metadata">Catalogue information compiled by Rob Iliffe, Peter Spargo &amp; John Young</change>
<change when="2003-02-01">Tagged transcription by <name xml:id="lc">Linda Cross</name></change>
<change when="2003-09-21" status="released">Checked against original by <name xml:id="rhiggitt">Rebekah Higgitt</name></change>
<change when="2007-03-01">Coding converted to modified TEI DTD and proofed by <name xml:id="mjh">Michael Hawkins</name></change>
<change when="2009-04-20">Updated to Newton V3.0 (TEI P5 Schema) by <name>Michael Hawkins</name></change>
<change when="2011-09-29" type="metadata">Catalogue exported to teiHeader by <name>Michael Hawkins</name></change>
</revisionDesc>
</teiHeader>
<text>
<body>
<pb xml:id="p10" n="10"/><fw type="pag" place="topRight">10</fw>
<div>
<p xml:id="par1">Mr. HOOKE'S considerations upon Mr. NEWTON'S discourse on light and co<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l1"/>lours were read. Mr. Hooke was thanked for the pains taken in bringing in <lb xml:id="l2"/>such ingenious reflections; and it was ordered, that this paper should be registred<hi rend="superscript">3</hi><anchor xml:id="n001-01"/> <note target="#n001-01"><hi rend="superscript">3</hi> Register, vol. iv. p. 148.</note>, <lb xml:id="l3"/>and a copy of it immediately sent to Mr. NEWTON: and that in the mean time <lb xml:id="l4"/>the printing of Mr. NEWTON'S discourse by itself might go on, and if he did not con<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l5"/>tradict it; and that Mr. HOOKE'S paper might be printed afterwards, it not be<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l6"/>ing thought fit to print them together, lest Mr. NEWTON should look upon it <lb xml:id="l7"/>as a disrespect, in printing so sudden a refutation of a discourse of his, which had <lb xml:id="l8"/>met with so much applause at the Society but a few days before.</p>
<p xml:id="par2">Mr. HOOKE'S paper was as follows:</p>
<p xml:id="par3">"I have perused the discourse of Mr. NEWTON about colours and refractions, <lb xml:id="l9"/>and I was not a little pleased with the niceness and curiosity of his observations. <lb xml:id="l10"/>But, tho' I wholly agree with him as to the truth of those he hath alledged, <fw type="catch" place="bottomRight">as</fw><pb xml:id="p11" n="11"/><fw type="pag" place="topRight">11</fw> as having, by many hundreds of trials, found them so; yet as to his hypo<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l11"/>thesis of solving the phenomæna of colours thereby, I confess, I cannot see yet <lb xml:id="l12"/>any undeniable argument to convince me of the certainty threof. For all <lb xml:id="l13"/>the experiments and observations I have hitherto made, nay, and even those <lb xml:id="l14"/>very experiments, which he alledgeth, do seem to me to prove, that <hi rend="italic">white</hi> <lb xml:id="l15"/>is nothing but a pulse or motion, propagated through an homogeneous, uni<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l16"/>form and transparent medium: and that colour is nothing but the disturb<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l17"/>ance of that light, by the communication of that pulse to other transparent me<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l18"/>diums, that is, by the refraction thereof: that <hi rend="italic">whiteness</hi> and <hi rend="italic">blackness</hi> are no<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l19"/>thing but the plenty or scarcity of the undisturbed rays of light: and that <lb xml:id="l20"/>the two colours (than the which there are not more uncompounded in nature) <lb xml:id="l21"/>are nothing but the effects of a compounded pulse, or disturbed propagation <lb xml:id="l22"/>of motion caused by refraction.</p>
<p xml:id="par4">But, how certain soever I think myself of my hypothesis (which I did not take <lb xml:id="l23"/>up without first trying some hundreds of experiments) yet I should be very glad <lb xml:id="l24"/>to meet with one <hi rend="italic">experimentum crucis</hi> from Mr. NEWTON, that should divorce me <lb xml:id="l25"/>from it. But it is not that, which he so calls, will do the turn; for the same phæ<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l26"/>nomenom will be solved by my hypothesis, as well as by his, without any man<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l27"/>ner of difficulty or straining: nay, I will undertake to shew another hypothesis, differing from both his and mine, that shall do the same thing.</p>
<p xml:id="par5">That the ray of light is as it were split or rarified by refraction, is most cer<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l28"/>tain; and that thereby a differing pulse is propagated, both on those sides, and <lb xml:id="l29"/>in all the middle parts of the ray, is easy to be conceived: and also, that differ<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l30"/>ing pulses or compound motions should make differing impressions on the eye, <lb xml:id="l31"/>brain, or sense, is also easy to be conceived: and that, whatever refracting me<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l32"/>dium does again reduce it to its primitive simple motion by destroying the ad<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l33"/>ventitious, does likewise restore it to its primitive whiteness and simplicity.</p>
<p xml:id="par6">But why there is a neccessity, that all those motions, or whatever else it be <lb xml:id="l34"/>that makes colours, should be originally in the simple rays of light, I do not <lb xml:id="l35"/>yet understand the necessity of, no more than that all those sounds must be in <lb xml:id="l36"/>the air of the bellows, which are afterwards heard to issue from the organ-<lb xml:id="l37"/>pipes; or in the string, which are afterwards, by different stoppings and strik<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l38"/>ings produced; which string (by the way) is a pretty representation of the shape <lb xml:id="l39"/>of a refracted ray to the eye; and the manner of it may be somewhat imagined <lb xml:id="l40"/>by the similitude thereof: for the ray is like the string, strained between the <lb xml:id="l41"/>luminous object and the eye, and the stop or fingers is like the refracting sur<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l42"/>face, on the one side of which the string hath no motion, on the other a vi<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l43"/>brating one. Now we may say indeed and imagine, that the rest or streight<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l44"/>ness of the string is caused by the cessation of motions, or coalition of all vi<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l45"/>brations; and that all the vibrations are dormant in it: but yet it seems more <lb xml:id="l46"/>natural to me to imagine it the other way.</p>
<fw type="catch" place="bottomRight">And</fw><fw type="sig" place="bottomCenter">C 2</fw><pb xml:id="p12" n="12"/><fw type="pag" place="topRight">12</fw>
<p xml:id="par7">And I am a little troubled, that this supposition should make Mr. NEWTON <lb xml:id="l47"/>wholly lay aside the thoughts of improving telescopes and microscopes by re<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l48"/>fractions; since it is not improbable, but that he, that hath made so very good an <lb xml:id="l49"/>improvement of telescopes by his own trials upon reflection, would, if he had <lb xml:id="l50"/>prosecuted it, have done more by refraction. And that reflection is not the <lb xml:id="l51"/>only way of improving telescopes, I may possibly hereafter shew some proof <lb xml:id="l52"/>of. The truth is, the difficulty of removing that inconvenience of the split<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l53"/>ting of the ray, and consequently of the effect of colours, is very great; but <lb xml:id="l54"/>yet not insuperable. I have made many trials, both for telescopes and mi<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l55"/>croscopes by reflection, which I have mentioned in my Micrographia, but de<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l56"/>serted it as to telescopes, when I considered, that the focus of the spherical con<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l57"/>cave is not a point but a line, and that the rays are less true reflected to a <lb xml:id="l58"/>point by a concave, than refracted by a convex; which made me seek that by <lb xml:id="l59"/>refraction, which I found could not rationally be expected by reflection: nor <lb xml:id="l60"/>indeed could I find any effect of it by one of six foot radius, which, about se<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l61"/>ven or eight years since, Mr. REEVE made for Mr. GREGORY, with which I <lb xml:id="l62"/>made several trials; but it now appears it was for want of a good encheiria <lb xml:id="l63"/>(from which cause many good experiments have been lost) both which consi<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l64"/>derations discouraged me from attempting further that way; especially since I <lb xml:id="l65"/>found the parabola much more difficult to describe, than the hyperbola or el<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l66"/>lipsis. And I was wholly taken from the thoughts of it, by lighting on divers <lb xml:id="l67"/>ways, which in theory answered all I could wish for; tho' having much more <lb xml:id="l68"/>business, I could not attend to bring them into use for telescopes; tho' for mi<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l69"/>croscopes I have a good while used it. Thus much as to the preamble; I <lb xml:id="l70"/>shall now consider the propositions themselves.</p>
<p xml:id="par8">First then, Mr. NEWTON alledgeth, that as rays of light differ in re<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l71"/>frangibility, so they differ in their disposition to exibit this or that colour: <lb xml:id="l72"/>with which I do in the main agree; that is, that the ray by refraction is, as it <lb xml:id="l73"/>were, split or rarified, and that the one side, namely that which is most refracted, <lb xml:id="l74"/>gives a <hi rend="italic">blue</hi>, and that which is least a <hi rend="italic">red</hi>: the intermediate are the dilutings <lb xml:id="l75"/>and intermixtures of those two, which I thus explain. The motion of light in <lb xml:id="l76"/>an uniform medium, in which it is generated, is propagated by simple and <lb xml:id="l77"/>uniform pulses or waves, which are at right angles with the line of direction; <lb xml:id="l78"/>but falling obliquely on the refracting meduim, it receives another impression <lb xml:id="l79"/>or motion, which disturbs the former motion, somewhat like the vibration of a <lb xml:id="l80"/>string: and that, which was before a line, now becomes a triangular superfi<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l81"/>cies, in which the pulse is not propagated at right angles with its line of direc<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l82"/>tion, but ascew, as I have more at large explained in my Micrographia; and <lb xml:id="l83"/>that, which makes excursions on the one side, impresses a compound motion on <lb xml:id="l84"/>the bottom of the eye, of which we have the imagination of <hi rend="italic">red</hi>; and that, <lb xml:id="l85"/>which makes excursions on the other, causes a sensation, which we imagine a <lb xml:id="l86"/><hi rend="italic">blue</hi>; and so of all the intermediate dilutings of those colours. Now, that the <lb xml:id="l87"/>intermediate are nothing but the dilutings of those two primary, I hope I have <lb xml:id="l88"/>sufficiently proved by the experiment of the two wedge-like boxes, described <lb xml:id="l89"/>in my Micrographia. Upon this account I cannot assent to the latter part of <fw type="catch" place="bottomRight">the</fw><pb xml:id="p13" n="13"/><fw type="pag" place="topRight">13</fw> the proposition, that colours are not qualifications of light, derived from refrac<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l90"/>tions, or reflections of natural bodies, but original and connate properties, &amp;c.</p>
<p xml:id="par9">The second proposition I wholly allow, not exactly in the sense there meant, <lb xml:id="l91"/>but with my manner of expressing it; that is, that part of the split ray, which is <lb xml:id="l92"/>most bent, exhibits a blue, that which is least, a red, and the middle parts midling <lb xml:id="l93"/>colours; and that those parts will always exhibit those colours till the com<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l94"/>pound motions are destroyed, and reduced by other motions to one simple and <lb xml:id="l95"/>uniform pulse as it was at first.</p>
<p xml:id="par10">And this will easily explain and give a reason of the phænomena of the third <lb xml:id="l96"/>proposition, to which I do readily assent in all cases, except where the split ray <lb xml:id="l97"/>is made by another refraction, to become intire and uniform, again to diverge <lb xml:id="l98"/>and separate, which explains his fourth proposition.</p>
<p xml:id="par11">But as to the fifth, that there are an indefinite variety of primary or original <lb xml:id="l99"/>colours, amongst which are yellow, green, violet, purple, orange, &amp;c. and <lb xml:id="l100"/>an infinite number of intermediate gradations, I cannot assent thereunto, as <lb xml:id="l101"/>suppposing it wholly useless to multiply entities without necessity, since I have <lb xml:id="l102"/>elsewhere shewn, that all the varieties of colours in the world may be made <lb xml:id="l103"/>of two. I agree in the sixth, but cannot approve of his way of explicating <lb xml:id="l104"/>the seventh. How the split ray being made doth produce a clear and uniform <lb xml:id="l105"/>light, I have before shewed; that is, by being united thereby from a superfi<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l106"/>cial motion, which is susceptible of two, to a lineary, which is susceptible of <lb xml:id="l107"/>one only motion; and it is as easy to conceive how all those motions again ap<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l108"/>pear after the rays are again split or rarified. He, that shall but a little consider <lb xml:id="l109"/>the undulations on the surface of a small river of water, in a gutter, or the <lb xml:id="l110"/>like, will easily see the whole manner curiously exemplified.</p>
<p xml:id="par12">The eighth proposition I cannot at all assent to, for the reasons above; and <lb xml:id="l111"/>the reasons of the blue flame of brimstone, of the yellow of a candle, the <lb xml:id="l112"/>green of copper, and the various colours of the stars, and other luminous bo<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l113"/>dies, I take to proceed from quite another cause, easily explained by my for<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l114"/>mer hypothesis.</p>
<p xml:id="par13">I agree with the observations of the ninth, tenth, and eleventh, though not <lb xml:id="l115"/>with his theory, as finding it not absolutely necessary, being as easily and na<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l116"/>turally explained and solved by my hypothesis.</p>
<p xml:id="par14">The reason of the phænomena of my experiment, which he alledgeth, is <lb xml:id="l117"/>as easily solvable by my hypothesis as by his; as are also those, which are men<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l118"/>tioned in the thirteenth. I do not therefore see any absolute necessity to be<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l119"/>lieve his theory demonstrated, since I can assure Mr. NEWTON, I cannot only <lb xml:id="l120"/>solve all the phænomena of light and colours by the hypoythesis I have for<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l121"/>merly printed, and now explicate them by, but by two or three other very dif<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l122"/><fw type="catch" place="bottomRight">fering</fw><pb xml:id="p14" n="14"/><fw type="pag" place="topRight">14</fw>fering from it, and from this, which he hath described in his ingenious dis<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l123"/>course.</p>
<p xml:id="par15">Nor would I be understood to have said all this against his theory, as it is <lb xml:id="l124"/>an hypothesis; for I do most readily agree with them in every part thereof, and <lb xml:id="l125"/>esteem it very subtil and ingenious, and capable of solving all the phænomena <lb xml:id="l126"/>of colours: but I cannot think it to be the only hypothesis, nor so certain as <lb xml:id="l127"/>mathematical demonstrations.</p>
<p xml:id="par16">But grant his first proposition, that light is a body, and that as many co<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l128"/>lours as degrees thereof as there may be, so many sorts of bodies there may <lb xml:id="l129"/>be, all which compounded together would make white; and grant further, <lb xml:id="l130"/>that all luminous bodies are compounded of such substances condensed, and <lb xml:id="l131"/>that whilst they shine, they do continually send out an indefinite quantity there<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l132"/>of, every way in orbem, which in a moment of time doth disperse itself to the <lb xml:id="l133"/>utmost and most indefinite bounds of the universe; granting these, I say, I <lb xml:id="l134"/>do suppose there will be no great difficulty to demonstrate all the rest of his <lb xml:id="l135"/>curious theory: though yet, methinks, all the coloured bodies in the world <lb xml:id="l136"/>compounded together should not make a white body, and I should be glad <lb xml:id="l137"/>to see an experiment of that kind done on the other side. If my supposition <lb xml:id="l138"/>be granted, that light is nothing but a simple and uniform motion, or pulse <lb xml:id="l139"/>of a homogeneous and adopted (that is a transparent) medium, propagated from <lb xml:id="l140"/>the luminous body in orbem, to all imaginable distances in a moment of time, <lb xml:id="l141"/>and that that motion is first begun by some other kind of motion in the lu<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l142"/>minous body; such as by the dissolution of sulphureous bodies by the air, or <lb xml:id="l143"/>by the working of the air, or the several component parts one upon another, <lb xml:id="l144"/>in rotten wood, or putrifying fish, or by an external stroke, as in diamond, su<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l145"/>gar, the sea-water, or two flints or crystal rubbed together; and that this <lb xml:id="l146"/>motion is propagated through all bodies susceptible thereof, but is blended or <lb xml:id="l147"/>mixt with other adventitious motions, generated by the obliquity of the stroke <lb xml:id="l148"/>upon a refracting body; and that, so long as those motions remain distinct in <lb xml:id="l149"/>the same part of the medium or propagated ray, so long they produce the same <lb xml:id="l150"/>effect, but when blended by other motions, they produce other effects: and <lb xml:id="l151"/>supposing, that by a direct contrary motion to the newly impressed, that ad<lb type="hyphenated" xml:id="l152"/>ventitious one be destroyed and reduced to the first simple motion; I believe <lb xml:id="l153"/>Mr. NEWTON will think it no difficult matter, by my hypothesis, to solve all the <lb xml:id="l154"/>phænomena, not only of the prism, tinged liquors, and solid bodies, but of <lb xml:id="l155"/>the colours of plated bodies, which seem to have the greatest difficulty. It <lb xml:id="l156"/>is true, I can, in my supposition, conceive the white or unifrom motion of <lb xml:id="l157"/>light to be compounded of the compound motions of all the other colours, <lb xml:id="l158"/>as in any one strait and uniform motion may be compounded of thousands of <lb xml:id="l159"/>compound motions, in the same manner as DESCARTES explicates the reason <lb xml:id="l160"/>of the refraction; but I see no necessity of it. If Mr. NEWTON hath any <lb xml:id="l161"/>argument, that he supposes as absolute demonstration of his theory, I should be <fw type="catch" place="bottomRight">very</fw><fw type="sig" place="bottomCenter">8</fw><pb xml:id="p15" n="15"/><fw type="pag" place="topRight">15</fw> very glad to be convinced by it, the phænomena of light and colours being, in <lb xml:id="l162"/>my opinion, as well worthy of contemplation, as any thing else in the world."</p>
</div>
</body>
</text>
</TEI>