differential calculus, the difference of action itself to be infinitely small, but terms it finite, and treats it also as such; whence it is immediately apparent that he in fact treats that which is infinitely small at an infinitely short distance as finite. Disregarding however the great certainty and distinctness which accompany our manner of representation, there might still be something more to say, and perhaps with some justice, against Laplace's mode of treatment in favour of ours, in this respect, that the former takes not the least account of the possible nature of the given elements of bodies, but merely has to do with imaginary elements of space, by which the physical nature of the bodies is almost entirely lost sight of. We may, to render our assertion intelligible by an example, undoubtedly imagine bodies in nature which consist only of homogeneous elements, but whose position to each other, taken in one direction, might be different than when in another direction; such bodies, as our mode of representation immediately shows, might conduct the electricity in one direction in a different manner than in another, notwithstanding that they might appear uniform and equally dense. In such a case, did it occur, we should have to take refuge, according to Laplace, in considerations which have remained entirely foreign to the general process. On the other hand, the mode in which bodies conduct affords us the means by which we are enabled to judge of their internal structure, which, from our almost total ignorance on the subject, cannot be immediately shown. Lastly, we may add, that this, our hitherto developed view of molecular actions, unites in itself the two advanced by Laplace and by Fourier in his theory of heat, and reconciles them with each other.
8. We need now no longer hesitate about allowing the electrical action of an element not to extend beyond the adjacent surrounding elements, so that the action entirely disappears at every finite distance, however small. The extremely limited circle of action with the almost infinite velocity with which electricity passes through many bodies might indeed appear suspicious; but we did not overlook on its admission, that our comparison in such cases is only effected by an imaginary relative standard, which is deceitful, and does therefore not justify us to vary a law so simple and independent until the conclusions drawn from it are in contradiction to nature, which in our subject, however, does not seem to be the case.
