Observations on the Hypotheses Which Have Been Assumed to Account for the Cause of Gravitation from Mechanical Principles

Observations On The Hypotheses Which Have Been Assumed To Account For The Cause Of Gravitation From Mechanical Principles — Samuel Vince. This 1806 treatise surveys the principal mechanical explanations for gravity and subjects them to critical examination against the law that a gravitational influence varies as the inverse square of distance. Vince reviews Des Cartes’ vortices, Sir Isaac Newton’s elastic fluid theory, Bernoulli’s vortex–based system, and Huygens’ vortex ideas. He demonstrates that none of these accounts can reproduce the observed planetary motions or apsidal advances without contradiction, and that any proposed elastic medium or density gradients fails to yield a force varying with distance as the inverse square. He also argues that combining multiple powers or considering a single density law cannot generate the correct law, casting doubt on purely mechanical explanations. The Preface discusses the Royal Society’s reception of the paper, its intended Bakerian Lecture, and concludes with the claim that divine agency governs celestial mechanics when mechanical causes prove insufficient.