On the following day Barbicane, fearing that indiscreet questions might be put to Michel Ardan, was desirous of reducing the number of the audience to a few of the initiated, his own colleagues for instance. He might as well have tried to check the Falls of Niagara!He was compelled, therefore, to give up the idea, and let his new friend run the chances of a public conference.The place chosen for this monster meeting was a vast plain situated in the rear of the town.In a few hours, thanks to the help of the shipping in port, an immense roofing of canvas was stretched over the parched prairie, and protected it from the burning rays of the sun.There three hundred thousand people braved for many hours the stifling heat while awaiting the arrival of the Frenchman.Of this crowd of spectators a first set could both see and hear;a second set saw badly and heard nothing at all;and as for the third, it could neither see nor hear anything at all.At three o'clock Michel Ardan made his appearance, accompanied by the principal members of the Gun Club.He was supported on his right by President Barbicane, and on his left by J.T.Maston, more radiant than the midday sun, and nearly as ruddy.Ardan mounted a platform, from the top of which his view extended over a sea of black hats.
He exhibited not the slightest embarrassment;he was just as gay, familiar, and pleasant as if he were at home. To the hurrahs which greeted him he replied by a graceful bow;then, waving his hands to request silence, he spoke in perfectly correct English as follows:
“Gentlemen, despite the very hot weather I request your patience for a short time while I offer some explanations regarding the projects which seem to have so interested you. I am neither an orator nor a man of science, and I had no idea of addressing you in public;but my friend Barbicane has told me that you would like to hear me, and I am quite at your service.Listen to me, therefore, with your six hundred thousand ears, and please excuse the faults of the speaker.Now pray do not forget that you see before you a perfect ignoramus whose ignorance goes so far that he cannot even understand the difficulties!It seemed to him that it was a matter quite simple, natural, and easy to take one's place in a projectile and start for the moon!That journey must be undertaken sooner or later;and, as for the mode of locomotion adopted, it follows simply the law of progress.Man began by walking on all-fours;then, one fine day, on two feet;then in a carriage;then in a stage-coach;and lastly by railway.Well, the projectile is the vehicle of the future, and the planets themselves are nothing else!Now some of you, gentlemen, may imagine that the velocity we propose to impart to it is extravagant.It is nothing of the kind.All the stars exceed it in rapidity, and the earth herself is at this moment carrying us round the sun at three times as rapid a rate, and yet she is a mere lounger on the way compared with many others of the planets!And her velocity is constantly decreasing.Is it not evident, then, I ask you, that there will some day appear velocities far greater than these, of which light or electricity will probably be the mechanical agent?
“Yes, gentlemen,”continued the orator,“in spite of the opinions of certain narrow-minded people, who would shut up the human race upon this globe, as within some magic circle which it must never outstep, we shall one day travel to the moon, the planets, and the stars, with the same facility, rapidity, and certainty as we now make the voyage from Liverpool to New York!Distance is but a relative expression, and must end by being reduced to zero.”
The assembly, strongly predisposed as they were in favor of the French hero, were slightly staggered at this bold theory. Michel Ardan perceived the fact.
“Gentlemen,”he continued with a pleasant smile,“you do not seem quite convinced. Very good!Let us reason the matter out.Do you know how long it would take for an express train to reach the moon?Three hundred days;no more!And what is that?The distance is no more than nine times the circumference of the earth;and there are no sailors or travelers, of even moderate activity, who have not made longer journeys than that in their lifetime.And now consider that I shall be only ninety-seven hours on my journey.Ah!I see you are reckoning that the moon is a long way off from the earth, and that one must think twice before making the experiment.What would you say, then, if we were talking of going to Neptune, which revolves at a distance of more than one thousand one hundred and forty-seven millions of miles from the sun!And yet what is that compared with the distance of the fixed stars, some of which, such as Arcturus, are billions of miles distant from us?And then you talk of the distance which separates the planets from the sun!And there are people who affirm that such a thing as distance exists.Absurdity, folly, idiotic nonsense!Would you know what I think of our own solar universe?Shall I tell you my theory?It is very simple!In my opinion the solar system is a solid homogeneous body;the planets which compose it are in actual contact with each other;and whatever space exists between them is nothing more than the space which separates the molecules of the densest metal, such as silver, iron, or platinum!I have the right, therefore, to affirm, and I repeat, with the conviction which must penetrate all your minds,‘Distance is but an empty name;distance does not really exist!'”
“Hurrah!”cried one voice(need it be said it was that of J. T.Maston).“Distance does not exist!”And overcome by the energy of his movements, he nearly fell from the platform to the ground.He just escaped a severe fall, which would have proved to him that distance was by no means an empty name.
“Gentlemen,”resumed the orator,“I repeat that the distance between the earth and her satellite is a mere trifle, and undeserving of serious consideration. I am convinced that before twenty years are over one-half of our earth will have paid a visit to the moon.Now, my worthy friends, if you have any question to put to me, you will, I fear, sadly embarrass a poor man like myself;still I will do my best to answer you.”
Up to this point, the president of the Gun Club had been satisfied with the turn which the discussion had assumed. It became now, however, desirable to divert Ardan from questions of a practical nature, with which he was doubtless far less conversant.Barbicane, therefore, hastened to get in a word, and began by asking his new friend whether he thought that the moon and the planets were inhabited.
“You put before me a great problem, my worthy president,”replied the orator, smiling.“Still, men of great intelligence, such as Plutarch, Swedenborg, Bernardin de St. Pierre, and others have, if I mistake not, pronounced in the affirmative.Looking at the question from the natural philosopher's point of view, I should say that nothing useless existed in the world;and, replying to your question by another, I should venture to assert, that if these worlds are habitable, they either are, have been, or will be inhabited.”
“No one could answer more logically or fairly,”replied the president.“The question then reverts to this:Are these worlds habitable?For my own part I believe they are.”
“For myself, I feel certain of it,”said Michel Ardan.
“Nevertheless,”retorted one of the audience,“there are many arguments against the habitability of the worlds. The conditions of life must evidently be greatly modified upon the majority of them.To mention only the planets, we should be either broiled alive in some, or frozen to death in others, according as they are more or less removed from the sun.”
“I regret,”replied Michel Ardan,“that I have not the honor of personally knowing my contradictor, for I would have attempted to answer him. His objection has its merits, I admit;but I think we may successfully combat it, as well as all others which affect the habitability of other worlds.If I were a natural philosopher, I would tell him that if less of caloric were set in motion upon the planets which are nearest to the sun, and more, on the contrary, upon those which are farthest removed from it, this simple fact would alone suffice to equalize the heat, and to render the temperature of those worlds supportable by beings organized like ourselves.If I were a naturalist, I would tell him that, according to some illustrious men of science, nature has furnished us with instances upon the earth of animals existing under very varying conditions of life;that fish respire in a medium fatal to other animals;that amphibious creatures possess a double existence very difficult of explanation;that certain denizens of the seas maintain life at enormous depths, and there support a pressure equal to that of fifty or sixty atmospheres without being crushed;that several aquatic insects, insensible to temperature, are met with equally among boiling springs and in the frozen plains of the Polar Sea;in fine, that we cannot help recognizing in nature a diversity of means of operation oftentimes incomprehensible, but not the less real.If I were a chemist, I would tell him that the aerolites, bodies evidently formed exteriorly of our terrestrial globe, have, upon analysis, revealed indisputable traces of carbon, a substance which owes its origin solely to organized beings, and which, according to the experiments of Reichenbach, must necessarily itself have been endued with animation.And lastly, were I a theologian, I would tell him that the scheme of the Divine Redemption, according to St.Paul, seems to be applicable, not merely to the earth, but to all the celestial worlds.But, unfortunately, I am neither theologian, nor chemist, nor naturalist, nor philosopher;therefore, in my absolute ignorance of the great laws which govern the universe, I confine myself to saying in reply,‘I do not know whether the worlds are inhabited or not;and since I do not know, I am going to see!'”
Whether Michel Ardan's antagonist hazarded any further arguments or not it is impossible to say, for the uproarious shouts of the crowd would not allow any expression of opinion to gain a hearing. On silence being restored, the triumphant orator contented himself with adding the following remarks:
“Gentlemen, you will observe that I have but slightly touched upon this great question. There is another altogether different line of argument in favor of the habitability of the stars, which I omit for the present.I only desire to call attention to one point.To those who maintain that the planets are not inhabited one may reply:you might be perfectly in the right, if you could only show that the earth is the best possible world, in spite of what Voltaire has said.She has but one satellite, while Jupiter, Uranus, Saturn, Neptune have each several, an advantage by no means to be despised.But that which renders our own globe so uncomfortable is the inclination of its axis to the plane of its orbit.Hence the inequality of days and nights;hence the disagreeable diversity of the seasons.On the surface of our unhappy spheroid we are always either too hot or too cold;we are frozen in winter, broiled in summer;it is the planet of rheumatism, coughs, bronchitis;while on the surface of Jupiter, for example, where the axis is but slightly inclined, the inhabitants may enjoy uniform temperatures.It possesses zones of perpetual springs, summers, autumns, and winters;every Jovian may choose for himself what climate he likes, and there spend the whole of his life in security from all variations of temperature.You will, I am sure, readily admit this superiority of Jupiter over our own planet, to say nothing of his years, which each equal twelve of ours!Under such auspices and such marvelous conditions of existence, it appears to me that the inhabitants of so fortunate a world must be in every respect superior to ourselves.All we require, in order to attain such perfection, is the mere trifle of having an axis of rotation less inclined to the plane of its orbit!”
“Hurrah!”roared an energetic voice.“Let us unite our efforts, invent the necessary machines, and rectify the earth's axis!”
A thunder of applause followed this proposal, the author of which was, of course, no other than J. T.Maston.And, in all probability, if the truth must be told, if the Yankees could only have found a point of application for it, they would have constructed a lever capable of raising the earth and rectifying its axis.It was just this deficiency which baffled these daring mechanicians.
翌日,巴比凱恩擔(dān)心有人會提出一些讓米歇爾·阿爾當(dāng)難以作答的問題,因此想把到場的人限制在很少的一部分專家中,比如說他的同事們。但是,這如同想筑上一道大堤壩以擋住尼亞加拉大瀑布一樣困難。于是,他不得不放棄他的這一想法,只好讓他的這位新朋友在一場公開演講會上碰碰運(yùn)氣了。會場選的是城外的一處寬闊的原野。只幾個鐘頭,原野上的陽光便被遮擋住了。港口停泊的船只上,船帆、索具、吊桿以及桅桁應(yīng)有盡有,足以建起一個巨型帳篷。有三十萬人待在帳篷里,不顧悶熱難耐,一連好幾個小時在等待著那個法國人的大駕光臨。在這如云的與會者中,前面三分之一的人可以看見發(fā)言者和聽見發(fā)言;中間三分之一的人勉強(qiáng)能夠看見,但卻聽不見;而最后那三分之一的人則什么也看不見,更聽不見,但他們同樣在熱烈鼓掌。下午三點(diǎn),米歇爾·阿爾當(dāng)在大炮俱樂部的主要成員的陪同下,步入會場。巴比凱恩主席挽著他的右臂,J.T.馬斯頓挽著他的左臂,他顯得神采奕奕,比正午的太陽還要光彩奪目。阿爾當(dāng)?shù)巧现v臺,眼睛向臺下掃視了一番,只見黑壓壓一片帽子的海洋。
他看上去毫不緊張,毫不裝模作樣,像是在自己的家中一樣,高高興興、無拘無束、和藹可親。面對聽眾們的熱情歡呼,他優(yōu)雅自然地回禮答謝。然后,他揮了揮手,讓大家安靜下來,開始用英語發(fā)言,十分得體地侃侃而談。
“先生們,盡管天氣炎熱,我仍然想占用你們的一點(diǎn)兒寶貴時間,跟你們說說你們似乎感興趣的一些計(jì)劃。我既不是演說家,也不是科學(xué)家,我根本也未曾打算要在公開場合說上一番。但是,我的朋友巴比凱恩跟我說,我來說一說,你們會很高興的,所以我就來了。因此,在場的三十萬觀眾,用你們的六十萬只耳朵聽我說,如果我有什么說錯了的地方,請予以諒解。首先,請你們不要忘記,站在你們面前的是一個無知的人;不過,他的無知卻讓他無視任何困難。他覺得,坐著炮彈飛向月球,是一件相當(dāng)簡單、自然、容易的事。月球旅行是遲早都將進(jìn)行的事,至于應(yīng)采用的交通方式,那就只能根據(jù)科學(xué)的進(jìn)步規(guī)律來決定了。人類起先是手腳并用走路的;后來,有一天,就用兩只腳直立行走了;接著又是四輪馬車、公共馬車;最后乘火車。好!我要告訴大家,炮彈就是我們未來的交通工具,其實(shí),所有的行星也只不過是一些炮彈而已。先生們,你們中的有些人,可能以為賦予‘炮彈車’的速度太高了,其實(shí)并非如此;所有星球的運(yùn)行速度都超過了它,而地球在圍繞太陽運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)的過程當(dāng)中,其速度比它自轉(zhuǎn)時要快三倍。更何況同其他行星相比,它只不過是在漫步,而且這個速度還變得越來越慢!不久的將來,它難道不會被其他一些速度更快的星體所超越嗎?而那些速度更快的星體的電和光極有可能是它們的速度的原動力?!?/p>
“會的,親愛的聽眾們,”他接著又說道,“按照某些目光短淺的人——這個形容詞非常適合他們——的看法,人類將可能被局限在地球上,被囿于一個魔法圈里,永遠(yuǎn)別想鉆出來。幸而事實(shí)并非如此!我們即將飛往月球,還將飛向其他行星,飛向恒星;如同我們今天從利物浦到紐約一樣,方便、快速、安全,距離只是一個相對的概念,最終距離將歸于零?!?/p>
全場的人雖然對這位法國英雄十分崇敬,激動萬分,但是,對他的這個大膽的理論卻不禁感到有點(diǎn)兒驚愕。米歇爾·阿爾當(dāng)似乎也能理解這一點(diǎn)。
“先生們,”他又笑容可掬地接著說道,“你們好像并不信服。好吧!我們來推算一下。你們知道一列快速列車到達(dá)月球需要多長時間嗎?三百天。不會超過三百天的!那么,這是個什么概念呢?這個距離甚至都不到地球周長的九倍,而任何一名水手或旅行者一生中所走過的路無不超過這一距離。所以,請諸位想一想,我飛往月球只不過需要九十七小時而已!??!你們總是以為月球離地球非常遙遠(yuǎn),非得考慮再三之后才能去冒這個險!可是,如果是去海王星呢,它可是在十一億四千七百萬法里外圍繞太陽轉(zhuǎn)的!喏!朋友們,如果拿海王星到太陽的距離與它同其他恒星的距離相比較,那么,它到太陽的距離簡直不值一提了。說什么這個距離是存在的!錯!大錯特錯!純屬謬論!你們知道我對這個以光芒四射的星球?yàn)槠鹗迹院M跣菫榻Y(jié)束的太陽系的看法嗎?你們想不想知道我的理論?這個理論非常簡單!在我看來,太陽系是一個均質(zhì)的固體,組成它的那些行星擁擠在一起,互相貼近,彼此挨著,它們之間的距離小而又小,如同銀、鐵或鉑這樣一些大密度金屬的分子間的間隙那么?。∫虼?,我有理由認(rèn)定,并且以將使你們大家心服口服的一種信心再次強(qiáng)調(diào)指出:‘距離是一個空泛的詞,它根本就不存在!’”
“對!”J.T.馬斯頓比其他任何人的嗓門兒都大地叫喊道,“距離并不存在!”可是,他由于動作太大,身體失去平衡,難以控制,差點(diǎn)兒便從臺上摔到地上去了。不過,他還是站穩(wěn)了,總算沒有摔下去,否則這一摔將會向他證明,距離可能不是一個空泛的詞。
“先生們,”米歇爾·阿爾當(dāng)繼續(xù)說道,“我重申一次,地球和月球之間的距離根本不值一提,不值得為此過分憂慮。我相信,不出二十年,地球上將會有一半的人訪問月球!現(xiàn)在,尊敬的朋友們,如果你們有什么問題要問我的話,你們顯然會讓一個我這樣的可憐人尷尬難堪的,但是,我將盡我所能地回答你們?!?/p>
直到這時為止,大炮俱樂部主席對討論的情況都十分滿意。但是,必須阻止米歇爾·阿爾當(dāng)扯到實(shí)際問題上去,那肯定不是他的強(qiáng)項(xiàng)。因此,巴比凱恩連忙搶過話頭,問他的這位新朋友是否認(rèn)為月球或行星上有人居住。
“你這可是問了我一個很大的問題呀,我尊敬的主席?!毖葜v者笑吟吟地說道,“不過,如果我沒弄錯的話,一些才智過人的人,比如普魯塔克、斯威登伯格、貝納丹·德·圣比埃爾和其他許多人,都認(rèn)為是有的。如果從自然哲學(xué)的觀點(diǎn)去看待這個問題的話,我趨向于贊同他們的看法。我認(rèn)為但凡這個世界上所存在的,就沒有什么是無用的。不過,巴比凱恩朋友,如果通過另一個問題來回答你的問題的話,我冒昧地?cái)嘌裕绻行求w都是可以居住的話,那么,它們現(xiàn)在就住著人,或者曾經(jīng)住過人,或者將來會住人?!?/p>
“這個回答太符合邏輯了,太正確了!”大炮俱樂部主席回應(yīng)道,“所以現(xiàn)在的問題應(yīng)歸結(jié)為:所有的星球是否都適合居???以我個人來看,我認(rèn)為是的?!?/p>
“我也對這一點(diǎn)深信無疑?!泵仔獱枴ぐ柈?dāng)回答道。
“但是,”聽眾中有一位反駁道,“有很多證據(jù)表明其他星球是不可以居住的。很顯然,這些星球中的大部分的生存條件顯然必須要大大改善。光就行星而言,由于距離太陽的遠(yuǎn)近不同,有些行星上的人就會被熱死,而另一些行星上的人則會被凍死。”
“很遺憾,”米歇爾·阿爾當(dāng)回答道,“我本人并不認(rèn)識這位尊敬的反對者,否則我將盡量地回答他。我承認(rèn),他的意見有其意義;不過,我認(rèn)為我可以成功地駁倒它,而且所有有關(guān)天體不具備可居住性的觀點(diǎn)也都是可以駁倒的。如果我是自然哲學(xué)家的話,我就會說,假如緊鄰太陽的行星運(yùn)行中產(chǎn)生的卡路里少的話,那么,相反,遠(yuǎn)離太陽的行星在運(yùn)行中所產(chǎn)生的卡路里就多。這種簡單的現(xiàn)象就足以平衡熱量,使得這些天體的溫度變得能夠適合像我們這樣的有機(jī)生物承受。如果我是博物學(xué)家的話,我就會告訴他,根據(jù)一些杰出的科學(xué)家的觀點(diǎn),在地球上,大自然向我們提供了一些生活在不同條件下的動物的實(shí)例;告訴他魚類可以在其他動物會窒息而死的條件下呼吸;兩棲動物有著難以解釋的雙重的生存方式;海洋里的某些生物能夠生活在很深的海底,而不被五六十個大氣壓壓碎;各種各樣的水生昆蟲對溫度并不敏感,既能在沸騰的熱泉里生活,又能在北冰洋的冰原下生活;另外,必須承認(rèn),大自然存在著多種多樣的生存方式,它們往往很難為我們所理解,但卻是真實(shí)地存在著的。如果我是化學(xué)家,我就會告訴他說,隕石這種顯然是在地球外形成的物體,通過分析研究,可以看到一些無可爭辯的碳的痕跡,而這種物質(zhì)只能來源于有機(jī)生物;而且,根據(jù)賴興巴赫的試驗(yàn)來看,它一定是‘動物質(zhì)化’了的物質(zhì)。而如果我是神學(xué)家的話,我就會告訴他說,根據(jù)圣保羅的看法,神的救贖似乎不僅施于地球,還施于所有的宇宙天體。不過,我既不是神學(xué)家、化學(xué)家,也不是博物學(xué)家、哲學(xué)家,因此,我對于支配著宇宙的那些偉大的規(guī)律毫無所知,所以我只能回答說:‘我不知道這些天體上面是否住著人?!牵?yàn)槲也恢?,我就更要去那上面看一看!?/p>
反對米歇爾·阿爾當(dāng)理論的那位是不是又提出了一些反對意見?這一點(diǎn)無法說清,因?yàn)槿巳涸诏偪竦睾敖?,什么意見也聽不清了。直到離講臺最遠(yuǎn)處的聽眾們也安靜下來之后,得意揚(yáng)揚(yáng)的演講者才又補(bǔ)充了幾句:
“先生們,你們很清楚,關(guān)于這個大問題,我只是很粗淺地涉及了一點(diǎn)。尚有很多很多的論據(jù)表明,天體上是有人居住的。我暫且不談這個問題。我只是請大家允許我堅(jiān)持一點(diǎn),對于那些堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為行星上無人居住的人,必須回答他們說:‘你們可能說得有道理,如果你們能證明地球是最佳星體的話;但是無論伏爾泰對此有何見解,卻都并非如此?!厍蛑挥幸粋€衛(wèi)星,而木星、天王星、土星、海王星卻有好幾個衛(wèi)星圍繞著它們,這個優(yōu)勢是絕不可小覷的。不過,讓我們的地球變得不那么適于居住的最大原因是,它的地軸與軌道平面之間有一個交角,因此造成白晝和黑夜不一樣長,季節(jié)的惱人變化也因此而產(chǎn)生。我們這個不幸的星球,不是太熱就是太冷;冬天凍死人,夏天熱死人。這是一個風(fēng)濕病、咳嗽病和支氣管炎多發(fā)的星球。而比如說木星就不然,它的軸的傾斜度很小[48];它的居民們就可以享受四季如一的恒溫;木星上也有四季分明的春天、夏天、秋天和冬天;每一位木星人都可以選擇他所喜歡的氣候,一生一世都不必忍受氣候變化之苦。你們毫無疑問地會承認(rèn)木星勝過我們地球的這一優(yōu)勢,更何況木星的一年相當(dāng)于我們地球人的十二年!還有,我認(rèn)為,在這些有利因素和極佳的生存條件之下,這個幸運(yùn)星球上的居民們是一些高級生物。我們的星球還需要補(bǔ)充些什么才能達(dá)到這么完美的程度?只要地球自轉(zhuǎn)軸與它的軌道平面間的交角不那么大就行了?!?/p>
“那好!”一個洪亮的聲音喊道,“那我們就團(tuán)結(jié)我們的力量,發(fā)明一些機(jī)器,把地球自轉(zhuǎn)軸矯正一些!”
這一建議引起了雷鳴般的掌聲,而提此建議者并非別人,只能是J.T.馬斯頓。如果他們知道了阿基米德尋找的支點(diǎn)之所在的話,這些美國佬想必就會制造一根能夠撬起地球的杠桿,把地球的軸心撬正了。但是,那個支點(diǎn),那些魯莽的機(jī)械師還沒有找到。
瘋狂英語 英語語法 新概念英語 走遍美國 四級聽力 英語音標(biāo) 英語入門 發(fā)音 美語 四級 新東方 七年級 賴世雄 zero是什么意思保定市天瑞馨居英語學(xué)習(xí)交流群