We have found that where science has progressed the farthest, the mind has but regained from nature that which the mind has put into nature. We have found a strange foot-print on the shores of the unknown. We have devised profound theories, one after another, to account for its origin. At last, we have succeeded in reconstructing the creature that made the foot-print. And Lo! it is our own.

Oh leave the Wise our measures to collate. One thing at least is certain, light has weight. One thing is certain and the rest debate. Light rays, when near the Sun, do not go straight.

Let us suppose that an ichthyologist is exploring the life of the ocean. He casts a net into the water and brings up a fishy assortment. Surveying his catch, he proceeds in the usual manner of a scientist to systematise what it reveals. He arrives at two generalisations: No sea-creature is less than two inches long. (2) All sea-creatures have gills. These are both true of his catch, and he assumes tentatively that they will remain true however often he repeats it.

The idea of a universal mind or Logos would be, I think, a fairly plausible inference from the present state of scientific theory.

If an army of monkeys were strumming on typewriters, they might write all the books in the British Museum.

For the truth of the conclusions of physical science, observation is the supreme Court of Appeal.

In the most modern theories of physics probability seems to have replaced aether as "the nominative of the verb 'to undulate'."