[61] out right from such wrong fundamental premises. It is needless to argue the matter with those whose rudimentary knowledge of mathematics did not enable them to understand relative motion, and I would not have introduced the topic, had it not been made the sole criterion of the merits of this work. To such critics, I would suggest that centuries elapsed during which our forefathers and the forefathers of Europeana did not even dream of the possibility of this firm and fixed earth's spinning like a top round its axis, far less of its rushing onwards with headlong speed. Chandrasekhara had not the advantage of our modern schools, and has not imbibed the spirit of taking such things on trust. His is a work of un- aided effort, and it would be surprising if he, along with the schoolboy, talked of the movements of the earth. On the contrary, a miserable Uria translation of a Bengali compi- lation from English popular astronomy made him a confirmed believer in the stationary condition of the earth. The argu- ments put forth in the book to establish the movements of the earth may be sufficient to satisfy those who do not try to realize the matter, but unfortunately were not convincing to a man who struggled hard to reconcile the new ides in all ita bearings with his own observations. Indeed, the translation and anothor of like nature were the only sources from which Chandrasekhara learnt some- thing of western knowledge. They may have so far influenced him as to modify his ideas about physical astronomy, vague indications of which will be seen in certain passages of this Digitized by Google
