Skip to content
WithinSource
WithinSource

Opticks

Page 206 of 233, printed 206

appears that those Dispositions were in the Rays originally, and suffer'd no alteration by the first Refraction, and that by means of those Dispositions the Rays were refracted at their Incidence on the first Surface of the first Crystal, some of them after the usual, and some of them after the unusual manner, accordingly as their Sides of unusual Refraction were then turn'd towards the Coast of the unusual Refraction of that Crystal, or sideways from it. Every Ray of Light has therefore two opposite Sides, originally endued with a Property on which the unusual Refraction depends, and the other two opposite Sides not endued with that Property. And it remains to be enquired, whether there are not more Properties of Light by which the Sides of the Rays differ, and are distinguished from one another. In explaining the difference of the Sides of the Rays above mention'd, I have supposed that the Rays fall perpendicularly on the first Crystal. But if they fall obliquely on it, the Success is the same. Those Rays which are refracted after the usual manner in the first Crystal, will be refracted after the unusual manner in the second Crystal, supposing the Planes of perpendicular Refraction to be at right Angles with one another, as above; and on the contrary. If the Planes of the perpendicular Refraction of the two Crystals be neither parallel nor perpendicular to one another, but contain an acute Angle: The two beams of Light which emerge out of the first Crystal, will be each of them divided into two more at their Incidence on the second Crystal. For in this case the Rays in each of the two beams will some of them have their Sides of unusual Refraction, and some of them their other Sides turn'd towards the Coast of the unusual Refraction of the second Crystal. _Qu._ 27. Are not all Hypotheses erroneous which have hitherto been invented for explaining the Ph nomena of Light, by new Modifications of the Rays? For those Ph nomena depend not upon new Modifications, as has been supposed, but upon the original and unchangeable Properties of the Rays. _Qu._ 28. Are not all Hypotheses erroneous, in which Light is supposed to consist in Pression or Motion, propagated through a fluid Medium? For in all these Hypotheses the Ph nomena of Light have been hitherto 206
An unhandled error has occurred. Reload

Rejoining the server...

Rejoin failed... trying again in seconds.

Failed to rejoin.
Please retry or reload the page.

The session has been paused by the server.

Failed to resume the session.
Please retry or reload the page.