Essay Review: Newton as Alchemist: The Foundations of Newton's Alchemy,or “The Hunting of the Greene Lyon”

Boas M. & Hall A. R. , “Newton's chemical experiments”, Archives internationales d'histoire des sciences, xi (1958), 113–52.

A version agreeing nearly literally with Newton's “Manna” manuscript written by another hand exists—apart from his own additions—in the Sloane MS 2585, fol. 90a–105a (seventeenth century Philalethes Circle). The unknown scribe refers in it (fol. 99b) to other copies: “ut scribitur in aliquibus Copijs”. Elias Ashmole, too, is thought to have possessed this manuscript: A descriptive analytical and critical catalogue of the manuscripts bequeathed unto the University of Oxford by Elias Ashmole (Oxford, 1845), column 1143, nr 1419.

(a) “Foxcroft, Ezechiel. Adm. at King's (age 16) a scholar from Eton, May 5, 1649. S. of George, of London, merchant, Matric. 1649 B.A. 1652–53; M.A. 1656, Fellow, 1652–75, Senior Proctor, 1673–74. (Harwood; Vis. of London, 1634)” (Alumni Cantabrigienses, A biographical list of all known students, graduates and holders of office at the University of Cambridge, from the earliest times to 1900, compiled by J. Venn and J. A. Venn, part I (from the earliest times to 1751), vol. ii (Cambridge, 1922), 170; also in: The book of matriculations and degrees: A catalogue of those who have been matriculated or been admitted to any degree in the University of Cambridge from 1544 to 1659, compiled by Venn J. and Venn J. A. (Cambridge, 1913), 263).

(b) “Foxcroft 1645(?)–1649. Ezechiel; eld. s. of George F. Merchant of London and agent of the East India Company at Fort St. George and Elizabeth dau. of Christopher Whichcote of Stoke co. Salop; b. in London; K.S.; adm. scholar of King's College Cambridge 5 May 1649; matric. 1649; B.A. 1652/53; M.A. 1656; fellow of King's 1652–1674; mathematical lecturer in the University; d. unm. 1674; admon. King's 1675 (Ledger Book VI, f. 247). Believer in and supporter of Valentine Greatrakes ‘the Stroker’” ( Sterry Wasey Sir , Eton College Register, 1441–1698 (Eton, 1943), 129). The error in Alumni Cantabrigienses seems to be due to the “Admonition” to Foxcroft dating only from the year 1675.

The numbered recipes are not given in a straight sequence. E.g., in Keynes MS 31, fol. 2r there are the numbers 16, 19, 20, 26, 13, 11, 12. Scattered, almost personal-looking notes seem to have been often added by Newton himself, e.g., fol. 2r: “In my nosegay lib[er] libr[or]um” fol. 3v: “this is my hony comb”.

This view is still expressed in the mature “Index chemicus”. Keynes MS 30, item: “Mercurius corporum dicitur sole jam reincrudato & in primam suam materiam resoluto, quando materia vocatur Rebis & Chaos & omnia operi necessaria continet.” By “sol” is meant here the mature, fixed, conglomerated body.

Burndy 16 (=Sotheby Lot 113), “Of natures obvious laws & processes in vegetation”. On p. 202 Professor Dobbs incorrectly identifies Burndy 16 with Sotheby Lot 516, and wrongly makes the assertion that this manuscript is not listed under the heading of the Alchemical Manuscripts. She clearly relies for the identification of this earlier manuscript solely on the secondary literature, without herself referring to the catalogue (see Rattansi P. M. , “Newton's alchemical studies”, in Debus A. G. (editor), Science, medicine and society in the Renaissance (2 vols, New York, 1972), ii, 170, 180).

ULC, Add. MS 3975, fol. 41v (Newton p. 80).

Keynes MS 29, fol. 2r: Et Hermes ait tres sapientes suo tempore floruisses [sic !] caelum um & um) sicut in aurea i aetate fuisse fingitur quae 4 aetates Chymicae viz regnet nigredine, albedine, ♀ flavedine aut imperfecta rubedine & ♂ in colore Tyrio. Rex vestem nigram ao servo dominante recipit & dominium est penes qui debet subjici ⊙i”. [Explanation of the symbols: = Saturn (lead), = Jupiter (tin), ♀ = Venus (copper), ♂ = Mars (iron), = Mercury (quicksilver), ⊙ = Sun (gold).]

Opticks, Query 31 (Dover Edition, New York, 1952, 380 ff.). The “precipitation series” suggested there, starting from the least noble active metal, describes the following sequence: Lapis Calaminaris, zinc carbonate (ZnCO₃) → iron (Fe) → copper (Cu) → lead (Pb) → mercury (Hg) → … [the most inactive, noblest metal gold is not present here].

(a) E.g., Keynes MS 62. After, on fol. 3r, the preparation with “Arsnick & Saltpeeter” and copper had been described, on fol. 3v we find the following: “There is a nearer way wth silver sublimate & Tinn. Some mingle & boyle 21b. of brasse [tin and copper amalgam] wth saltpeter & Arsnick ana 3. And this is ye shop of adulterate money”.

(b) “An Accompt of a New Catadioptrical Telescope invented by Mr. Newton, Fellow of the R. Society and Professor …”, Philosophical transactions, vii (1672), 4004–9:

2. He not having tried, as he saith, many proportions of the Arsenick and Metall, does not affirm, which is absolutely best, but thinks, there may conveniently be used any quantity of Arsenick equalling in weight between a sixt and eight part of the Copper, a greater proportion making the Metal brittle.

The way, which he used, was this. He first melted the Copper alone, then put in the Arsenick, which being melted, he stirred them a little together, bewaring in the mean time, not to draw in breath near the pernicious fumes. After this, he put in Tin, and again so soon as that was melted (which was very suddenly) he stirred them well together, and immediately powred them off.

He saith, he knows not whether by letting them stand longer on the fire after the Tin was melted, a higher degree of fusion would have made the metall porous; but he thought that way he proceeded to be safest. He adds, that in that metall, which he sent to London, there was no Arsenick, but a small proportion of Silver; as he remembers, one shilling in three ounces of metall. But he thought withall, that the Silver did as much harm in making the metall soft, and so less fit to be polish't, as good in rendring it white and luminous.

At another time he mixed Arsenick one ounce, Copper six ounces, and Tin two ounces: And this an Acquaintance of his hath, as he intimates, polish't better, than he did the other”.

(The items italicized to draw attention to the substances are not so in the original text).

“An Accompt …”, op. cit. (ref. 10), 4006.

Keynes MS 62, fol. lr, lv under the title “Ex Johanno Paupere”.

E.g., Opticks (Dover Publications, New York, 1952), 382 f.

E.g., Freind J. , Praelectiones chymicae. In quibus omnes fere operationes chymicae ad vera principia & ipsius naturae leges rediguntur, Oxonii habitae (Amsterdam, 1710), 53 ff. A good and clearly set out presentation of Freind's “attraction theory” is given, e.g., in Partington J. R. , A history of chemistry, ii (London, 1961), 480 ff.

Sloane MS 3711: “Codex Veritatis Sive Arcana Naturae referata & Exposita per Ignem. Ex Igne Virtus George Stirke [G.S. his booke] 1653–56”, e.g., fol. 6v.

The description of the process can, for instance, be found in “Johannis Ferdinandi Hertodt à Todtenfeldt … Orphei ad Collegas Ephemeridum Collectores Epistola“. The version published in J. J. Manget, Bibliotheca chemica curiosa … (Geneva, 1702), ii, 697 ff. agrees nearly literally with the MS notes in the Sloane MS 646, fol. 2r-4r.

Keynes MS 30 (Index chemicus): (a) Item: “Aurum nostrum quomodo ex septies vel novies sublimato extrahendum Intr. apert. p. 22, 29, 45 1.8, 53, 54, 63, 66, 72, 75, 77, Philaletha in experimentis …”.

(b) Item: “Diana, Luna solis uxor vel sponsa, lapis lunaris Arcan. Herm. p. 32, 38. Introit. apert. p. 6, 12, 13, 16, 17, 54, 63. Regulus ♂ is in o solutus Philal. in Ripl. Epist. p.24”.

Sloane MS 646, fol. 2a–2b: “Cur autem philaletha habere velit Regulum ii ♂alem has proponit rationes, 1. Ut vulgi utpote frigidus et humidus per ⊙is volatile quod in ♂te est calidus efficiatur exiccetur ipsissimoque re Aurifico impregnatur. 2.: Ut propter is huius volatilis impregnationem fiat Mas, et ex Materia sua maneat faemina, adeoque sit Hermaphroditus; Quia autem ex ♂te haberi nequit. Solis volatile nisi per m; quod tanquam Magnes Chalibem suum, i.e. ♂tis ⊙reum volatile absorbet, propterea cum io et ♂te parat regulum illumque Chaos appellat, tanquam in illo essent potentia Omnia metalla. Hinc totam ii Philaletici Compositionem breviter sequenti Schemate describo.” (This enumeration of reasons can be found nearly literally the same on fol. 7b).

English translation: “But as to why Philaleth wanted to have the iron regulus of antimony, he states the following reasons: (1) So that the ordinary, namely cold and moist, mercury is made effective through the volatile sulphur of gold which is in iron, is dried out and impregnated by its own goldmaking sulphur. (2) So that the male should come into being through the impregnation of this volatile sulphur and that the female should persist until he is a hermaphrodite. But because one can only obtain the volatile sulphur of gold by means of antimony which should absorb, as it were, like the magnes its chalybs, i.e., like the sulphur of iron the volatile gold, therefore he [Philalethes] prepares the regulus with antimony and iron and calls it Chaos, just as if all metals were potentially contained in it. Here I am going to describe briefly the whole composition of the “Philalethic” mercury in the following scheme”.

Mystagogus Cleidophorus , Mercury's Caducean rod: Or, the great and wonderful office of the universal mercury … (London, 1702), i, 17ff.

“A Course of Chymistry under Signior Vigani Professor of Chymistry in the University of Cambridge at the Laboratory in Trin. Coll. Novbr. & December 1707”, fol. 2f, 7f. (now: Queens' College Library, Cambridge).

The antimony regulus which comes into being through the union of mineral ore (mercury, water) and metallic iron (sulphur, body), corresponds as hermaphodite as well to chaos (death) as to the materia prima (birth). Newton's fundamental conviction on the transitional and ambiguous position of the dark, putrid chaos containing already a new germ of life, can be discerned several times in the “Index chemicus” (Keynes MS 30), e.g., items “Marteck” and “Materia prima”: “Marteck, mardeck, materia in statu transeundi a nigredine ad albedinem inclusive. Est enim materia nigra putrefacta… Martec pro Marte per errorem scribi vult Consil. Conjug. p. 67 Martach, Lithargyrum Kircher in mund. subter… Materia prima est quae formae omni per putrefactionem denudatur ut forma nova introduci possit, nempe materia nigra in regimine Saturni … sulphur et argentum vivum, Leo viridis … Materia Prima, sal album naturae”.

Newton stresses in this connection that Mardeck as Materia Prima in no wise corresponds to Mars (iron) but rather to the complete “union” of iron with antimony. The term Lithargyrum (white lead) is obviously not referring to the lead compound known by this name (basic lead carbonate), but, in the same way, to the homogenous product of the opposites (dark Saturn, i.e. lead, and whiteness).

The way of writing in Keynes MS 18, fol. 1r “Regulus is” does not seem to agree in any way with the sign for “Leo” used by Newton in his laboratory experiments (ULC, Add. MS 3975, fol. 101), or (ULC, Add. MS 3975, fol. 106), although one might read this identification of the antimony regulus with Leo into his alchemical manuscripts: E.g., Keynes MS 30, item: Leo: “At Leo est non per se sed ubi sulphuri unitum est. Philal. in Ripl. port. p. 29. 30. Marrow of Alk. part. 2, pag. 5”.

It is much more likely that the symbol of Keynes MS 18 would correspond to , the sign used for the cauda draconis (descending node of the Moon) by Elias Ashmole ( Josten C. H. , Elias Ashmole, 1617–1692 , i (Oxford, 1966), 306), which is the mirror image of the caput draconis (ascending node of the Moon) . In astronomy, eclipses only take place when the Moon is in its nodes. The old conviction that this cosmic phenomenon is due to the world dragon devouring the Sun or the Moon is still reflected today in the signs used by the astronomers.

In the Keynes MS 41 to be dated around 1695, which apparently represents Newton's own version, there is the following excerpt on fol.13r: “Aurum autem ter purgari debet per Draconem patrem, dein pugnat cum patre in igne …”. What is apparently meant here by dragon is antimony, the purifying effect of which on gold has been mentioned several times before by Professor Dobbs.

Hartlaub G. F. , Der Stein der Weisen (München, 1959), 41.

Keynes MS 29, fol. 2v: “Itaque sit artifex expeditus ne reliqua metalla (quae per totam ij substantiam diffusa sunt) fundum petant, neque sit nimia ti copia ⊙o admixta”. Just as in the “Clavis” manuscript here, too, the adept's experimental experience is decisive.

In ULC, Add. MS 3975, fol. 81, Newton indicates the following descending sequence of metals: ♂ (iron), ♀ (copper), (antimony), (tin), (lead), which does not agree with the one in Keynes MS 29, fol. 2v: (silver), ♂ (iron), (tin), ♀ (copper), (lead).

Keynes MS 30, item: “Leo, sol, aes nostrum, sulphur, Philal. de Metal. metamorph. c. 6. p. 38 …, Leo … At Leo est non per se, sed ubi sulphuri unitum est Philal. in Ripl. port. p. 29, 30. Marrow of Alk. part. 2, pag. 5”.

Keynes MS. 30, item: “Sal naturae, aqua sicca, primum ens salium … Fit ex et ♂ junctis Philal. in Ripl. Epist. p. 21”.

Vigani, “Course of Chymistry” (cf. ref. 20), fol. 7, 8.

(a) Cf. ref. 27.

(b) Keynes MS 30, item: “Sal armoniacacum [sic!], sal album naturae … est clavis artis. Non dat colorem sed dat introitum praeparat et purgat”.

(c) Keynes MS 30, item: “Aqua sicca … mercurius qui totus est sal … semen omnium metallorum”.

(d) The identification of: Sal album naturae → aqua sicca → materia prima → ens primum salium, can be gathered from comparing the corresponding items.

Here the term “net” is used in the description of the preparation of the iron-antimony regulus with copper added afterwards, a term also used by Newton in his laboratory notes=Sloane MS 2585: “Anotationes quedam ex Medulla Alchimia Edita per Georgium Starkey M.D. Bristoensis, Author Gabriel Plater”, fol. 106a.

Opticks, Query 31 (Dover edition, 386f).

(a) Cf. refs 5, 21, 27.

(b) Keynes MS 30, item: “Hyle materia prima … terra nigra putrefacta … materia prima, sal philosophorum, Azoth, semen omnium metallorum e corpore Lunariae et Magnesiae extractum, rerum omnium principium, non humida nec sicca non terra nec aqua, non lucida nec tenebrosa, sed confusa commixtio”.

Kubrin D. , “Newton and the cyclical cosmos: Providence and the mechanical philosophy”, Journal of the history of ideas, xxviii (1967), 325–46.

Opticks, Query 31 (Dover edition, 383).

Of the four planned studies the following have been published: Dobbs B. J. , “Studies in the natural philosophy of Sir Kenelm Digby, Part I”, Ambix, xviii (1971), 1–25; idem, “Studies in the natural philosophy of Sir Kenelm Digby, Part II”, Ambix, xx (1973), 143–63.

Keynes MS 30, item: “Sulphur, mercurius maturus aurum fixum vel nostrum, vel vulgi, vel etiam lapis tingens… sulphur immaturum, mercurius, aqua philosophica, quae sulphur aliud nempe solem consequitur ut magnes ferrum”.

Quite a convincing proof results from comparing the text of Keynes MS 55 (“Sendivogius explained”), fol. 3v, 4r with an alchemical treatise published about half a century later by the (until now) anonymous and unidentified Cleidophorus Mystagogus, Mercury's Caducean rod: Or, The great and wonderful office of the universal mercury … (London, 1702), i, 54f. Both versions agree word for word in the important definition of the elementary seed as the 1:8200th part of the whole body, but in this they differ quite definitely from the original text of Sendivogius's Novum lumen chymicum on which this view is based. Cleidophorus Mystagogus ascribes the differently worded formulations expressly to Philalethes, whose commentary he mentions explicitly in another passage (Part II of Mercury's Caducean rod, A philosophical epistle, discovering the unrevealed mystery of the three fires of the sophi, 23).

Gregory David , Isaac Newton and their circle: Extracts from David Gregory's memoranda, 1677–1708, ed. by Hiscock W. G. (Oxford, 1937), 25: “[?1705] The best way of overcoming a difficult Probleme is to solve it in some particular easy cases. This gives much light into the general solution. By this way Sr Isaac Newton says he overcame the most difficult things”.

While the two first editions of the Opticks (English, 1704; Latin, 1706) contain only very vague allusions to the “composition theory”, it is formulated more precisely in the second English edition of 1717 (Book II, Pt 3, Prop. VIII=Dover edition, 268f).

David Gregory, Isaac Newton and their circle (ref. 38), 30f. Extracts from the diary entry of 21 December, 1705: “One of the great scruples that Men commonly have about matter's being proportional to weight, is that water that is more than 12 times lighter than Gold, & Gold scarce half full, as appears by many experiments; that water is one part of twenty full matter, & yet by the strongest machine incomprehensible. Sr. Isaac Newton proposes this as one theory of making bodys in any degree porous & yet solid. The smallest parts, or of the first Row, are so cast together (and kept by their mutual attraction) as to leave half void: Then those masses thus formed, by their mutual attraction are kept together in one mass, so that the void of this last Composition is one half, reckoning the masses of the first row intirely solid, so that in such a Mass as this (which we shall call of the 2d composition or row) there is but a fourth part matter, and 3/4 void. If now these masses be cast together so as to touch one another, and leave 1/2 void, and make up a mass of the 3d row, the matter in such a body is but 1/8 of full matter. And in this progression, the affair stands thus: Row 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Matter 1/2 1/4 1/8 1/16 1/32 Void 1/2 3/4 7/8 15/16 31/32 and generally if the row (or order, or composition) be a; the void left in the interstices of the parts of every row 1/b; then the quantity of matter in every row will be 1/ba and the void in that row will be (ba – 1)/ba”.

This doctrine has been most clearly stressed by St John the Evangelist. St John's Gospel, and then in particular the Book of Revelation, formed the chief Biblical sources of the Rosicrucian tradition. Newton, too, wrote on the subject: Observations upon the Apocalypse of St. John , ed. Horsley S. (London, 1779–85), v, 439ff.

Keynes MS 33, fol. 5r,v (Newton's supplementary remarks to the treatise “Manna” which he received in 1675 from Mr. F.): “It may seem an admirable & new Paradox yt Alchemy should have concurrence wth Antiquity & Theology; ye one seeming merely humane & ye other divine; & yet Moses, yt ancient Theologus describing & expressing ye most wonderfull Architecture of this great world tells us yt ye spirit of God moved upon ye water wch was an indigested chaos, or mass created before by God wth confused earth in mixture; yet in his Alchemical extraction separation sublimation & conjunction so ordered & conjoyned again as they are manifestly seen apart & sundred … That spiritual mover of ye first motive God, hath inspired all ye creatures of this universal world wth yt spirit of life, wch may be truly called the spirit of ye world, wch naturally moveth & secretly acteth in all creatures, giving them existence in three, viz: Salt sulphur & mercury none of them being wthout their salt, the chiefest means by whose help nature bringeth forth all vegetables, minerals & animals: So yt of these three whatsoever is in nature hath its original & compo … of them so mingled wth ye four Elements that they make one body their friend. This divine Alchimy through ye operation of ye spirit (wthout wch ye Elemental & material character letter & form profiteth not) was the beginning of time … terrestrial existence by wch all things have moved and have their being, consisting of body soul & spirit whether they be vegetables minerals or Animals, only wth this difference, that ye souls of men & Angles are reasonable & immortall according to ye image of God himself, & sensual as Beasts: & such not so. Moreover as ye omnipotent God hath in ye beginning of his divine wisdom created ye things of the heaven & of ye earth in weight number & measure, depending upon most wonderful proportions & harmony to serve ye time wch he hath appointed, so in ye fulness & last period of time wch approacheth fast as ye four Elements whereof all creatures consist, having in every of them two other Elements, the one putrifying & combustible, the other eternal & incombustible as ye Heavens … shall by Gods great Alchemy be metamorphosed & changed. For ye combustible having in them corrupt stinking feces or drossy matter wch maketh subject to corruption, & shall in ye period & general refining day be purged through fire, & then God will make new heavens & new Earth & bring all things to a crystalline clearness & will also make ye four elements perfect fixt & simple in themselves, that all things may be reduced to a Quintescence of Eternity. Thus you have a paradox & no paradox, & an Hieroglyphic plainly deciphered. For alchemy tradeth not with metalls as ignorant vulgars think, wch error hath made them distrust that noble science; but she hath also material veins of whose nature God created Handmaids to conceive & bring forth his creatures. For it is proper to God alone to create somthing of nothing, but its natures task to form that wch he hath [created]… This Philosophy both speculative & active is not only to be found in ye volume of nature but also in ye sacred scriptures …”.

ULC, Add. MS 4005, fol. 28–29 (printed in Hall A. R. and Hall M. Boas , Unpublished scientific papers of Isaac Newton (Cambridge, 1962), 314, 316f).

Vigani, “Course of Chymistry” (ref. 20), fol. 70: “… & put iron into this water wch is not greasie, it will seperate ye Copper from ye Salt magnetically, as wee observe yt all Metalls do attract one another magnetically, as copper does silver wn diluted, Quicksilver diluted Gold, loadstone Iron, so that their Bodies are not inanimate, but have their Motions & effluvias as other animals in their own Sphere”.

Musaeum Hermeticum reformatum et amplificatum (Frankfurt, 1678); e.g., pp. 559, 613.

(a) Figala K. , “Die Alchemistenzahl 8200”, Travaux du ler Congrès international de la Métrologie Historique (held in Zagreb, 28–30 October 1975), ii, 415–30. (b) Concerning the ideas of Sendivogius-Newton based on the “Prisca Sapientia”, and the hermetic Platonic tradition, cf.: Fleckenstein J. O. , “Metrologische Methodik und metrosophische Spekulation in der Wissenschaftsgeschichte”, ibid., 445–59.

Keynes MS 52: “Sr George Ripley his Epistle to K[ing] Edward unfolded.” 48. Keynes MS 52, fol. 2r: “This is not adhaerent to ye perfect metalls, nor to argent vive or , wch have onely a metalline , by the mediation of wch those mettalls may be corroded”.

Keynes MS 52, fol. 2r: “The metalline wch is in Gold & Silver & from wch they have their perfective determination is also in other mettalls, yet wth this difference, yt in Gold & silver it is pure, in ye other mettalls lesse pure, in them therefore it is mature & fixt, in these it is crude & fugitive”.

Keynes MS 52, fol. 2r: “ye remaining then is voyd of all save yt wch may bee called its centrall incoaguable , on wch no corrosive can then work, nor can it by any salts be sublimed, or by any waters or degree of heat precipitated, but remains unaltered by all things & inalterable by any thing whatsoever in the world save only the tinging Elixar”.

Keynes MS 52, fol. 3r: “… by wch meanes, it is enabled to dissolve ye perfect body of ⊙ wch by its heat of nature doth dry up all ye hydropick moisture wch did infect eaven from its first infancy, by wch meanes ye wch was crude & imperfect is maturated by decoction, & ye ⊙ wch was analytically perfect is first made to retrograde by incrudations & is exalted to a transendent plusquam perfection”.

Keynes MS 52, fol. 9r: “The one is most pure red sulphur of Gold, wch is in manifesto & mercury in occulto, & ye other is most pure white mercury wch is indeed true quicksilver in manifesto & in occulto. These are our two principles”.

ULC, Add MS 3973, fol. 14a f. Here Newton gives to the following mixture the name of Diana: When these experiments were imitated they were based on the “symbolic signs” normally used without considering other possible alchemical interpretations. The result of this is: 1 part bismuth ore, 9 parts tin and 30 parts bismuth. Diana was given the specific weight of 7·94. This is somewhat higher than the value indicated by Freind for the regulus of antimony, iron, copper respectively, for tin with 7·5 and seems to represent an even nobler, inner form (cf. Figure 3b). Diana's silver appearance stressed by Newton in other alchemical manuscripts (e.g., Babson [420], fol. 4, 5; Keynes MS 30, item: Diana) has also been confirmed by modern imitations of the processes. The resulting melting point (192°) is extremely low and lies considerably below that of the original substances (bismuth ore more than 1000°, tin 232°, bismuth 271°), facts which also point to a nobler, more homogeneous quicksilver-like composition which is turned more emphatically towards the core.

Keynes MS 52, fol. 7r: “So then ye fire in ye work wch wee for distinction doe call ours is this hidden internal , nor yt in its pondus & substance, but in its caelestiall spirituall vertue, wch is noe other yn ye invisible heaven in these subterranean compounds, wch ye noble Helmont calls his odor fermentalis, wch odor doth produce actuall visible & corporeous effects; they were not then out of the truth who held & taught yt ye world & all things in it took their originall ab invisibilibus, this is Sendivogius his centrall fire, & ye invisible motor of the Ancients wch is uniform in all things, but distinguished as to effect in them per genera et species, it resembles an Enternall [sic!] intelligence governing its charge according as outward rules are observed or violated, never ceasing (unlesse it bee interrupted) till ye end bee attained, in wch it rests & sabbatizeth”.

If one writes the general number sequence a₀, a₁, a₂, a₃, …, a_n, … for: (1) a_n = 2 ⁿ -1 (degree of rarefication) (2) a_-n = 2 ^-n = 1:2 ⁿ (left-hand sulphuric side of matter) (3) a_-n = 2 ^-n (2 ⁿ -1) = (2 ⁿ -1): 2 ⁿ (right-hand mercurial side of void) then the following law of recurrence is always valid: 3a_n = 2a_n-1 + 1a_n+1.

Heimann P. M. , “‘Nature is a perpetual worker’: Newton's aether and eighteenth century natural philosophy”, Ambix, xx (1973), 1–25.