Generative Adversarial Networks for Image-to-

Image Translation 1st Edition Arun Solanki pdf

download

https://ebookmeta.com/product/generative-adversarial-networks-
for-image-to-image-translation-1st-edition-arun-solanki/

Download more ebook from https://ebookmeta.com

We believe these products will be a great fit for you. Click
the link to download now, or visit ebookmeta.com
to discover even more!

The Internet Of Drones: AI Applications for Smart

Solutions 1st Edition Arun Solanki

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-internet-of-drones-ai-
applications-for-smart-solutions-1st-edition-arun-solanki/

Convolutional Neural Networks with Swift for

Tensorflow: Image Recognition and Dataset
Categorization 1st Edition Brett Koonce

https://ebookmeta.com/product/convolutional-neural-networks-with-
swift-for-tensorflow-image-recognition-and-dataset-
categorization-1st-edition-brett-koonce/

Generative Adversarial Learning Architectures and

Applications 1st Edition Roozbeh Razavi-Far

https://ebookmeta.com/product/generative-adversarial-learning-
architectures-and-applications-1st-edition-roozbeh-razavi-far/

The Changing Landscape of Youth Work Theory and

Practice for an Evolving Field 1st Edition Kristen M
Pozzoboni Ben Kirshner

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-changing-landscape-of-youth-
work-theory-and-practice-for-an-evolving-field-1st-edition-
kristen-m-pozzoboni-ben-kirshner/
Periodontitis Advances in Experimental Research
Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology 1373
Julien Santi-Rocca (Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/periodontitis-advances-in-
experimental-research-advances-in-experimental-medicine-and-
biology-1373-julien-santi-rocca-editor/

Tissue Engineering 3rd Edition Clemens Van Blitterswijk

https://ebookmeta.com/product/tissue-engineering-3rd-edition-
clemens-van-blitterswijk/

ON THE MATHEMATICAL STRUCTURE OF QUANTUM MEASUREME

THEORY 9th Edition Geoffrey Sewell

https://ebookmeta.com/product/on-the-mathematical-structure-of-
quantum-measurement-theory-9th-edition-geoffrey-sewell/

Complexity of Infinite Domain Constraint Satisfaction

Lecture Notes in Logic Series Number 52 Manuel
Bodirsky

https://ebookmeta.com/product/complexity-of-infinite-domain-
constraint-satisfaction-lecture-notes-in-logic-series-
number-52-manuel-bodirsky/

American Sniper The Autobiography of the Most Lethal

Sniper in U S Military History Chris Kyle Scott Mcewen
Jim Defelice

https://ebookmeta.com/product/american-sniper-the-autobiography-
of-the-most-lethal-sniper-in-u-s-military-history-chris-kyle-
scott-mcewen-jim-defelice/
A Hierarchical Vision of Order Understanding Chinese
Foreign Policy in Asia 1st Edition Antoine Roth

https://ebookmeta.com/product/a-hierarchical-vision-of-order-
understanding-chinese-foreign-policy-in-asia-1st-edition-antoine-
roth/
GENERATIVE
ADVERSARIAL
NETWORKS FOR
IMAGE-TO-IMAGE
TRANSLATION
GENERATIVE
ADVERSARIAL
NETWORKS FOR
IMAGE-TO-IMAGE
TRANSLATION
Edited by

ARUN SOLANKI
Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science and
Engineering, Gautam Buddha University, Greater
Noida, India
ANAND NAYYAR
Lecturer, Researcher and Scientist, Duy Tan University,
Da Nang, Viet Nam
MOHD NAVED
Assistant Professor, Analytics Department, Jagannath
University, Delhi NCR, India
Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier
125 London Wall, London EC2Y 5AS, United Kingdom
525 B Street, Suite 1650, San Diego, CA 92101, United States
50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States
The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies
and our arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency,
can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions.
This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as
may be noted herein).
Notices
Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our
understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary.

Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any
information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they
should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional
responsibility.
To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability for
any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any
use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN: 978-0-12-823519-5

For information on all Academic Press publications

visit our website at https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals

Publisher: Mara Conner

Acquisitions Editor: Chris Katsaropoulos
Editorial Project Manager: Gabriela D. Capille
Production Project Manager: Niranjan Bhaskaran
Cover Designer: Christian J. Bilbow
Typeset by SPi Global, India
Contributors

Er. Aarti
Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Lovely Professional University, Phagwara,
Punjab, India

Supavadee Aramvith
Multimedia Data Analytics and Processing Research Unit, Department of Electrical Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand

Tanvi Arora
Department of CSE, CGC College of Engineering, Landran, Mohali, Punjab, India

Betul Ay
Firat University Computer Engineering Department, Elazig, Turkey

Galip Aydin
Firat University Computer Engineering Department, Elazig, Turkey

Junchi Bin
University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada

Erik Blasch
MOVEJ Analytics, Dayton, OH, United States

Udaya Mouni Boppana

Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn
Malaysia, Parit Raja, Johor, Malaysia

Najihah Chaini
Faculty of Applied Sciences and Technology, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Parit Raja,
Johor, Malaysia

Amir H. Gandomi
University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW, Australia

Aashutosh Ganesh
Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Thittaporn Ganokratanaa
Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Chulalongkorn University,
Bangkok, Thailand

xi
xii Contributors

Koshy George
SRM University—AP, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh, India

Meenu Gupta
Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Chandigarh University, Ajitgarh, Punjab,
India

Álvaro S. Hervella
CITIC Research Center; VARPA Research Group, Biomedical Research Institute of A Coruña
(INIBIC), University of A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain

Kavikumar Jacob
Faculty of Applied Sciences and Technology, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Parit Raja,
Johor, Malaysia

Rachna Jain
Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Bharati Vidyapeeth’s College of Engineering,
Delhi, India

S. Jayalakshmy
IFET College of Engineering, Villupuram, India

Leta Tesfaye Jule

Department of Physics, College of Natural and Computational Science; Centre for Excellence in
Indigenous Knowledge, Innovative Technology Transfer and Entrepreneurship, Dambi Dollo
University, Dambi Dollo, Ethiopia

A. Sampath Kumar
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Dambi Dollo University, Dambi Dollo,
Ethiopia

Meet Kumari
Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering, Chandigarh University, Ajitgarh,
Punjab, India

Lakshay
Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Bharati Vidyapeeth’s College of Engineering,
Delhi, India

Zheng Liu
University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada

H.R Mamatha
Department of CSE, PES University, Bengaluru, India

Omkar Metri
Department of CSE, PES University, Bengaluru, India
 Contributors xiii

Aida Mustapha
Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn
Malaysia, Parit Raja, Johor, Malaysia

D. Nagarajan
Department of Mathematics, Hindustan Institute of Technology and Science, Chennai, India

Jorge Novo
CITIC Research Center; VARPA Research Group, Biomedical Research Institute of A Coruña
(INIBIC), University of A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain

Marcos Ortega
CITIC Research Center; VARPA Research Group, Biomedical Research Institute of A Coruña
(INIBIC), University of A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain

Lakshmi Priya
Manakula Vinayaga Institute of Technology, Pondicherry, India

Krishnaraj Ramaswamy
Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Knowledge, Innovative Technology Transfer and
Entrepreneurship; Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dambi Dollo University, Dambi
Dollo, Ethiopia

S. Mohamed Mansoor Roomi

Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Thiagarajar College of
Engineering, Madurai, India

Jose Rouco
CITIC Research Center; VARPA Research Group, Biomedical Research Institute of A Coruña
(INIBIC), University of A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain

Angel D. Sappa
ESPOL Polytechnic University, CIDIS-FIEC, Guayaquil, Ecuador; Computer Vision Center,
Edifici O, Campus UAB, Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain

K. Saruladha
Pondicherry Engineering College, Department of Computer Science and Engineering,
Puducherry, India

A. Sasithradevi
School of Electronics Engineering, VIT University, Chennai, India

R. Sivaranjani
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Sethu Institute of Technology,
Madurai, India

Rituraj Soni
Department of CSE, Engineering College Bikaner, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
xiv Contributors

S. Sountharrajan
School of Computing Science and Engineering, VIT Bhopal University, Bhopal, India

Patricia L. Suárez
ESPOL Polytechnic University, CIDIS-FIEC, Guayaquil, Ecuador

Gnanou Florence Sudha

Pondicherry Engineering College, Pondicherry, India

E. Thirumagal
Pondicherry Engineering College, Department of Computer Science and Engineering,
Puducherry; REVA University, Bengaluru, India

Boris X. Vintimilla
ESPOL Polytechnic University, CIDIS-FIEC, Guayaquil, Ecuador

N. Yuuvaraj
Research and Development, ICT Academy, Chennai, India

Ran Zhang
University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada
CHAPTER 1

Super-resolution-based GAN for image

processing: Recent advances and future
trends
Meenu
a
Guptaa, Meet Kumarib, Rachna Jainc, and Lakshayc
Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Chandigarh University, Ajitgarh, Punjab, India
b
Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering, Chandigarh University, Ajitgarh, Punjab, India
c
Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Bharati Vidyapeeth’s College of Engineering, Delhi, India

1.1 Introduction
One can think of the term machine as older than the computer itself. In 1950, the com-
puter scientist, logician, and mathematician Alan Turing penned a paper for the gener-
ations to come, “Computing Machinery and Intelligence” [1]. Today, computers can not
only match humans but have outperformed them completely. Sometimes people think
about not achieving the superhumanity face recognition or cleaning the medical image of
the patient accurately, even for the small algorithm, as a machine learning algorithm is the
best at pattern reorganization in existing image data using features for tasks such as clas-
sification and regression. When we try to generate new data, however, the computer has
struggled [2]. An algorithm can easily defeat a chess grandmaster, classify whether a trans-
action is fraudulent or not, and classify in a medical report whether the given medical
report has any disease or not, but fail on humanity’s most basic and essential
capacities—including crafting an original creation or a pleasant conversation. Mahdiza-
dehaghdam et al. [3] proposed some tests named the Imitation game, also known as the
Turing Test. Behind a closed door, an unknown observer talks with two counterparts
means a computer and a human.
In 2014, all of the above problems were solved when Ian Goodfellow invented gen-
erative adversarial networks (GANs). This technique has enabled computers to generate
realistic data by using two separate neural networks. Before GANs, different ways have
been proposed by the programmer to analyze the generated data. But the result received
from the generated data was not up to the mark. When GANs were introduced the first
time, it showed a remarkable result as there was no difference between the generated fake
images or photograph-image and gave the same result as the real-world-like quality.
GANs turn scribbled images to a photograph-like image [4].

Generative Adversarial Networks for Image-to-Image Translation Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823519-5.00030-0 All rights reserved. 1
2 Generative adversarial networks for image-to-Image translation

Fig. 1.1 Improves realism of the image as general adversarial networks varies [4].

In recent years, how far GANs have changed the meaning of generating or improving
the real image is shown in Fig. 1.1. Fig. 1.1 was first produced by GAN in 2014 and shows
how human faces continuously improve in generating fake images. The machine could
produce as a blurred image, and even that achievement is celebrated as a success. In just
the next 3 years, we could not classify which is fake or which qualifies as high-resolution
portrait photographs [5].
GANs are a category of machine learning techniques that uses two simultaneously
trained models: the first is the generator to generate fake data and the discriminator is
used to discrete the raw data from the real dataset images. The word generative indicates
creating new data from the given data. GAN generates the data which learn from the
choice of the given training set. The term adversarial points to maintaining the dynamic
between the two models that are the generator and the discriminator. Here two networks
are continually trying to trick the other as the generator generates better fake images to
get convincing data. The better discriminator is trying to distinguish the real data exam-
ples from the fake generated ones. The word networks indicates the class of machine
models. The generator and the discriminator commonly use the neural network. As a
complex, the neural network is more complex than the implementation of GAN [6].
GAN has two models. First, it works where we put the input and then we get the
output. The goal is to form two models that combine and run simultaneously so that
the first discriminator receives input from the real data that come from the training data-
set, and the second time onward there are two input sources that are the actual data and
the fake examples coming from the given generator. A random number vectors is passed
through the generator. The output acquired from the generator is Fake examples that try
to convince as far as possible the real data. The discriminator predicted the probability of
the input real. The main purpose of creating two models separately is to overcome the
problem of fake data that is generated from the training dataset. The discriminator’s goal is
to differentiate between the fake data generated from the generator and the real input
example from the dataset. This section further discusses the training parts of the discrim-
inator and the generator in Sections 1.1.1 and 1.1.2 [7].
 Super-resolution-based GAN for image processing 3

(a)

(c) and (d)

x

x* Discriminator Classification
error
(b)

Generator

Fig. 1.2 Train the discriminator.

1.1.1 Train the discriminator

Fig. 1.2 discusses the trained model of the discriminator and the steps are as follows [8]:
(a) First, get a random real example x from the given training dataset.
(b) Now get a new random vector z and, utilizing the generator network, synthesize a
fake example as x*.
(c) Utilize the discriminator network to distinguish between x* and x.
(d) Find the classification error and back-propagate. Then try to minimize the classifi-
cation error to update the discriminator biases and weight.

1.1.2 Train the generator

Fig. 1.3 shows the trained model of the generator as you can see the labeling of these steps
as follows:
(a) First, choose a random new image from the dataset as vector z, using a generator to
create an x*, i.e., a fake example.
(b) It used a discriminator to categorize real and fake examples.
(c) Find the classification error and back-propagate. Then try to minimize the classifi-
cation error due to which the total error to renovate the discriminator biases and
weight [9].

1.1.3 Organization of the chapter

This chapter is further classified into different sections. Section 1.2 discusses the back-
ground study of this work and also different research views. Section 1.3 discusses the
SR GAN model for image processing. Section 1.4 discusses the application-based
GAN case studies to enhance object detection. Section 1.5 discusses the open issues
and challenges faced in the working of GAN. Section 1.6 concludes the chapter with
its future scope.
4 Generative adversarial networks for image-to-Image translation

(b) and (c)

r x

Discriminator Classification
x` error
(a)

Generator

Fig. 1.3 Train the generator.

1.2 Background study

The goal of Perera et al. [10] is to determine whether the given query is from the same
class or different class. Their solution is based on learning the latent representation of an
in-class example using a de-noising and auto-encoder network. This method gives good
results for COIL, MINST f-MINST dataset.
They give a new thinking to GANs as in face recognition we create fake images,
which help to identity theft and privacy breaches. In this chapter, they proposed a tech-
nique to recognize the forensic face. They use the deep face recognition system as a core
for their model and create fake images repeatedly to help data augmentation [11].
Tripathy et al. [12] present a generic face animator that controls the pose and expres-
sion using a given face image. They implemented a two-stage neural network model,
which is learned in a self-supervised manner.
Rathgeb et al. [13] proposed a supervised deep learning algorithm using CNNs to
detect synthetic images. The proposed algorithm gives an accuracy of 99.83 for distin-
guishing real images from dataset and fake images generated using GANs.
Yu et al. [14] have shown advances to complete a new level as they proposed a
method to visualize forensic and model attribution. The model supports image attribu-
tion, enables fine-grained model authentication, persists across different image frequen-
cies, fingerprint frequencies and paths, and is not biased.
Lian et al. [15] provide a guidance module that is introduced in FG-SRGAN, which
is utilized to reduce the space of possible mapping functions and helps to learn the correct
 Super-resolution-based GAN for image processing 5

mapping function from a low-resolution domain to a high-resolution domain. The guid-

ance module is used to greatly reduce adversarial loss.
Takano and Alaghband [16] proposed the SRGAN model. In this chapter, they
solved the problem of sharpening the images. It can give a slight hint on how the real
image looks like from the blurry image as they convert a low-resolution image to a
high-resolution image.
Dou et al. [17] proposed PCA-GAN, which greatly improves the performance of
GAN-based models on super-resolving face images. The model focuses on cumulative
discrimination in the orthogonal projection space spanned by PCA projection to details
into the discriminator.
Jiang et al. [18] proposed to improve the perception of the CT image using SRGAN,
which leads to greatly enhance the spatial resolution of the image, as perception increases
the disease analysis on a tiny portion of areas and pathological features. They introduced a
diluted convolution module. The mean structural similarity (MSSIM) loss is also intro-
duced to improve the perceptual loss function.
Li et al. [19] provide an improvement method of SRGAN and a solution for the prob-
lem of image distortion in textile flow detection, a super-resolution image reconstruc-
tion. Here the result of an experiment shows that the PNSR of SRGAN is 0.83
higher than that of the Bilinear, and the SSIM is higher than 0.0819. SRGAN can
get a clearer image and reconstruct a richer texture, with more high-frequency details,
and that is easier to identify defects, which is important in the flaw detection of fabrics.
Wang et al. [20] decided to use dense convolutional network blocks (dense blocks),
which connect each layer to every other layer in a feed-forward manner as our very deep
generator networks. GAN solves the problem of spectral normalization as the method
offers better training stability and visual improvements.
Nan et al. [21] solved the complex computation, unstable network, and slow learning
speed problems of a generative adversarial network for image super-resolution
(SRGAN). We proposed a single image super-resolution reconstruction model called
Res_WGAN based on ResNeXt.
Li et al. [22] discussed an edge-enhanced super-resolution network (EESR), which
proposed better generation of high-frequency structures in blind super-resolution. EESR
is able to recover textures with 4 times upsampling and gained a PTS of 0.6210 on the
DIV2K test set, which is much better than the state-of-the-art methods.
Sood et al. [23] worked on magnetic resonance (MR) images to obtain high-
resolution images for which the patients have to wait for a long time in a still state.
Obtaining low-resolution images and then converting them to high-resolution images
uses four models: SRGAN, SRCNN, SRResNet, and sparse representation; among
them, SRGAN gives the best result.
6 Generative adversarial networks for image-to-Image translation

Lee et al. [24] present a super-resolution model specialized for license plate images,
CSRGAN, trained with a novel character-based perceptual loss. Specifically, they focus
on character-level recognizability of super-resolved images rather than pixel-level
reconstruction.
Chen et al. [25] divided the technique into two different parts: the first one is to
improve PSNR and the second one is to improve visual quality. They propose a new
dense block, which uses complex connections between each layer to build a more pow-
erful generator. Next, to improve perceptual quality, they found a new set of feature
maps to compute the perceptual loss, which would make the output image look more
real and natural.
Jeon et al. [26] proposed a method to increase the similarity between pixels by per-
forming the operation of the ResNet module, which has an effect similar to that of the
ensemble operation. That gives a better high-resolution image.
As the resolutions of remote sensing images are low, to improve the performance we
required high-level resolution. In this chapter, they first optimize the generator and
residual-in-residual dense without BN (batch normalization) is used. Firtstly GAN (rel-
ativistic generative adversarial network) is introduced and then the sensation loss is
improved [27].

1.3 SR-GAN model for image processing

Image super-resolution is defined as an increase in the size image, but trying to not
decrease the quality of the image keeps the reduction in quality to a minimum or creates
a high-resolution image from a low-resolution image by using the details from the orig-
inal image. This problem has some difficulties as for an input low-resolution image, and
there are some multiple solutions available. SR-GAN has numerous applications like
medical image processing, satellite image, aerial image analysis, etc. [28].

1.3.1 Architecture of SR-GAN

Many programs that are good, fast, and accurate get a single image super-resolution. But
still, something that is missing is the texture of the original features of the image. That is
the way where we recover the low-resolution image so that the image produce is not
distorted. Later we recover these errors, but it is not complete all errors that are produced.
The main error shows that result has a peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) high thus pro-
vides good image quality results, but lacking high-frequency details. The previous result
also sees the similarity in pixel space, which leads to a blurry or unsatisfying image. Due to
this, we introduce SR-GAN, a model that can capture the perceptual difference in the
ground truth image and the model output. Fig. 1.4 discusses the architecture of
SRGAN [29].
 Super-resolution-based GAN for image processing 7

HR Images

Discriminator GAN
Loss

LR SR
Generator Content Loss Image
Image

Fig. 1.4 Architecture of SRGAN [29].

The training algorithm of SRGAN is shown in the following steps:

(a) We run the HR (high-resolution) images to get sample LR (low-resolution) images.
To train our dataset, we required both LR and HR images.
(b) Then allow LR images to pass through the generator, which increases the samples
and provides SR (super-resolution) images.
(c) LR and HR images are classified by passing through the discriminator and back-
propagated [30].
Fig. 1.5 presents the network between the generator and the discriminator. It contains
convolution layers, parameterized ReLu(PrelU), and batch normalization. The genera-
tor also implements skip connections similar to ResNet [31].

1.3.2 Network architecture

Residual blocks are defined as seep learning networks that are difficult to train. The resid-
ual learning framework makes the training easier for the networks and enables them to go
deep substantially, to improve the performance. In the generator, there are a total of
16 residual blocks used [32].
As in Generator 2, a subpixel is used for getting the feature map up-sampling. Every
time pixel shuffle is applied it rearranges the elements of the L*B*H*r*r tensor and trans-
forms into the rL*rB*H tensor. With increase in computation, the bicubic filter from the
pipeline has been removed. We use parameterized rely on instead of Relu pr LeakyRelu.
Prelude adds a learnable parameter, which leads to learning the negative part coefficient
adaptively. The convolution layer “k3n64s1” represents kernel filters of 3*3 outputting
channels 64 along with stride 1. Similarly, “k3n256s1” and “K9n3s1” are other convo-
lution layers added [33].

1.3.3 Perceptual loss

As in the below equation, LSR shows the perceptual loss, and it is a commonly used
model based on the mean square error. As the equation is a loss function, it calculates
the loss function and gives a solution concerning characteristics. Here LSRx is notated
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
voluntary Motions, are to go, to speak, to move any of our limbs, in
such manner as is first fancied in our minds: And because going,
speaking, and the like voluntary motions, depend always upon a
precedent thought of whither, which way, and what, it is evident,
that the Imagination is the first Internal beginning of all voluntary
Motion. Thus far your Author. Whereof in short I give you my
opinion, first concerning Vital Motions, that it appears improbable if
not impossible to me, that Generation should be the cause and
beginning of Life, because Life must of necessity be the cause of
Generation, life being the Generator of all things, for without life
motion could not be, and without motion not any thing could be
begun, increased, perfected, or dissolved. Next, that Imagination is
not necessary to Vital Motions, it is probable it may not, but yet
there is required Knowledg, which I name Reason; for if there were
not Knowledg in all Generations or Productions, there could not any
distinct Creature be made or produced, for then all Generations
would be confusedly mixt, neither would there be any distinct kinds
or sorts of Creatures, nor no different Faculties, Proprieties, and the
like. Thirdly, concerning Animal Motions, which your Author names
Voluntary Motions, as to go, to speak, to move any of our limbs, in
such manner as is first fancied in our minds, and that they depend
upon a precedent thought of whither, which way, and what, and that
Imagination is the first Internal beginning of them; I think, by your
Authors leave, it doth imply a contradiction, to call them Voluntary
Motions, and yet to say they are caused and depend upon our
Imagination; for if the Imagination draws them this way, or that way,
how can they be voluntary motions, being in a manner forced and
necessitated to move according to Fancy or Imagination? But when
he goes on in the same place and treats of Endeavour, Appetite,
Desire, Hunger, Thirst, Aversion, Love, Hate, and the like, he derives
one from the other, and treats well as a Moral Philosopher; but
whether it be according to the truth or probability of Natural
Philosophy, I will leave to others to judge, for in my opinion Passions
and Appetites are very different, Appetites being made by the
motions of the sensitive Life, and Passions, as also Imagination,
Memory, &c. by the motions of the rational Life, which is the cause
that Appetites belong more to the actions of the Body then the
Mind: 'Tis true, the Sensitive and Rational self-moving matter doth
so much resemble each other in their actions, as it is difficult to
distinguish them. But having treated hereof at large in my other
Philosophical Work, to cut off repetitions, I will refer you to that, and
desire you to compare our opinions together: But certainly there is
so much variety in one and the same sort of Passions, and so of
Appetites, as it cannot be easily express'd. To conclude, I do not
perceive that your Author tells or expresses what the cause is of
such or such actions, onely he mentions their dependance, which is,
as if a man should converse with a Nobleman's Friend or Servant,
and not know the Lord himself. But leaving him for this time, it is
sufficient to me, that I know your Ladyship, and your Ladyship
knows me, that I am,
Madam,
Your faithful Friend, and humble Servant.
[1] Leviathan, part. 1. c. 6.

XIII.
Madam,
Having obey'd your Commands in giving you my opinion of the First
Part of the Book of that famous and learned Author you sent me, I
would go on; but seeing he treats in his following Parts of the
Politicks, I was forced to stay my Pen, because of these following
Reasons. First, That a Woman is not imployed in State Affairs, unless
an absolute Queen. Next, That to study the Politicks, is but loss of
Time, unless a man were sure to be a Favourite to an absolute
Prince. Thirdly, That it is but a deceiving Profession, and requires
more Craft then Wisdom. All which considered, I did not read that
part of your Author: But as for his Natural Philosophy, I will send you
my opinion so far as I understand it: For what belongs to Art, as to
Geometry, being no Scholar, I shall not trouble my self withal. And
so I'l take my leave of you, when I have in two or three words
answered the Question you sent me last, which was, Whether
Nature be the Art of God, Man the Art of Nature, and a Politick
Government the Art of Man? To which I answer, 'Tis probable it may
be so; onely I add this, That Nature doth not rule God, nor Man
Nature, nor Politick Government Man; for the Effect cannot rule the
Cause, but the Cause doth rule the Effect: Wherefore if men do not
naturally agree, Art cannot make unity amongst them, or associate
them into one Politick Body and so rule them; But man thinks he
governs, when as it is Nature that doth it, for as nature doth unite or
divide parts regularly or irregularly, and moves the several minds of
men and the several parts of mens bodies, so war is made or peace
kept: Thus it is not the artificial form that governs men in a Politick
Government, but a natural power, for though natural motion can
make artificial things, yet artificial things cannot make natural
power; and we might as well say, nature is governed by the art of
nature, as to say man is ruled by the art and invention of men. The
truth is, Man rules an artificial Government, and not the Government
Man, just like as a Watch-maker rules his Watch, and not the Watch
the Watch-maker. And thus I conclude and rest,
Madam,
Your faithful Friend
and Servant.

XIV.
MADAM,
Concerning the other Book of that learned Author Hobbs you sent
me, called Elements of Philosophy, I shall likewise according to your
desire, give you my judgment and opinion of it as I have done of the
former, not that I intend to prejudice him any ways thereby, but
onely to mark those places wherein I seem to dissent from his
opinions, which liberty, I hope, he will not deny me; And in order to
this, I have read over the first Chapter of the mentioned Book,
treating of Philosophy in General, wherein amongst the rest,
discoursing of the Utility of Natural Philosophy, and relating the
commodities and benefits which proceed from so many arts and
sciences, he is pleased to say,[1] that they are injoyed almost by all
people of Europe, Asia, and some of Africa, onely the Americans,
and those that live neer the Poles do want them: But why, says he,
have they sharper wits then these? Have not all men one kind of
soul, and the same faculties of mind? To which, give me leave,
Madam, to add, That my opinion is, that there is a difference
between the Divine and the Natural soul of man, and though the
natural mind or soul is of one kind, yet being made of rational
matter, it is divideable and composeable, by which division and
composition, men may have more or less wit, or quicker and slower
wit; the like for Judgments, Imaginations, Fancies, Opinions, &c. For
were the natural rational mind individeable, all men would have the
like degree of wit or understanding, all men would be Philosophers
or fools, which by reason they are not, it proves the natural rational
mind is divideable and composeable, making variations of its own
several parts by self-motion; for it is not the several outward objects,
or forreign instructions, that make the variety of the mind; neither is
wit or ingenuity alike in all men; for some are natural Poets,
Philosophers, and the like, without learning, and some are far more
ingenious then others, although their breeding is obscure and mean,
Neither will learning make all men Scholars, for some will continue
Dunces all their life time; Neither doth much experience make all
men wise, for some are not any ways advanced in their wisdom by
much and long experiences; And as for Poetry, it is according to the
common Proverb; a Poet is born, not made; Indeed learning doth
rather hurt Fancy, for great Scholars are not always good Poets, nor
all States-men Natural Philosophers, nor all Experienced Men Wise
Men, nor all Judges Just, nor all Divines Pious, nor all Pleaders or
Preachers Eloquent, nor all Moral Philosophers Vertuous; But all this
is occasioned by the various Motions of the rational self-moving
matter, which is the Natural Mind. And thus much for the present of
the difference of wits and faculties of the mind; I add no more, but
rest,
Madam,
Your faithful Friend,
and Servant.
[1] Art. 7.

XV.
MADAM,
My Discourse for the present shall be of Infinite, and the question
shall be first Whether several Finite parts, how many soever there
be, can make an Infinite. Your Author says,[1] that several Finite
parts when they are all put together make a whole Finite; which, if
his meaning be of a certain determinate number, how big soever, of
finite parts, I do willingly grant, for all what is determinate and
limited, is not Infinite but Finite; neither is there any such thing, as
Whole or All in Infinite; but if his meaning be, that no Infinite can be
made of finite parts, though infinite in number, I deny it; Next he
says there can be no such thing as One in Infinite, because No thing
can be said One, except there be another to compare it withal;
which in my opinion doth not follow, for there is but One God, who
is Infinite, and hath none other to be compared withal, and so there
may be but one Onely Infinite in Nature, which is Matter. But when
he says, there cannot be an Infinite and Eternal Division, is very
true, viz., in this sense, that one single part cannot be actually
infinitely divided, for the Compositions hinder the Divisions in
Nature, and the Divisions the Compositions, so that Nature, being
Matter, cannot be composed so, as not to have parts, nor divided so,
as that her parts should not be composed, but there are
nevertheless infinite divided parts in Nature, and in this sense there
may also be infinite divisions, as I have declared in my Book of
Philosophy[2]. And thus there are Infinite divisions of Infinite parts in
Nature, but not Infinite actual divisions of one single part; But
though Infinite is without end, yet my discourse of it shall be but
short and end here, though not my affection, which shall last and
continue with the life of
Madam,
Your Faithful Friend
and Humble Servant.
[1] Elem. of Philos. c. 7. a. 1 2.
[2] P. 1. c. 8.

XVI.
MADAM,
An Accident, says your Author,[1] is nothing else, but the manner of
our Conception of body, or that Faculty of any body, by which it
works in us a Conception of it self; To which I willingly consent; but
yet I say, that these qualities cannot be separated from the body, for
as impossible it is that the essence of Nature should be separable
from Nature, as impossible is it that the various modes or
alterations, either of Figures or Motions, should be separable from
matter or body; Wherefore when he goes on, and says,[2] An
accident is not a body, but in a body, yet not so, as if any thing were
contained therein, as if for example, redness were in blood in the
same manner as blood is in a bloody cloth; but as magnitude is in
that which is great, rest in that which resteth, motion in that which
is moved; I answer, that in my opinion, not any thing in Nature can
be without a body, and that redness is as well in blood, as blood is in
a bloody cloth, or any other colour in any thing else; for there is no
colour without a body, but every colour hath as well a body as any
thing else, and if Colour be a separable accident, I would fain know,
how it can be separated from a subject, being bodiless, for that
which is no body is nothing, and nothing cannot be taken away from
any thing; Wherefore as for natural Colour it cannot be taken away
from any creature, without the parts of its substance or body; and
as for artificial Colours, when they are taken away, it is a separation
of two bodies, which joyned together; and if Colour, or Hardness, or
Softness do change, it is nothing else but an alteration of motions
and not an annihilation, for all changes and alterations remain in the
power of Corporeal motions, as I have said in other places; for we
might as well say, life doth not remain in nature, when a body turns
from an animal to some other figure, as believe that those, they
name accidents, do not remain in Corporeal Motions; Wherefore I
am not of your Authors mind, when he says,[3] that when a White
thing is made black, the whiteness perishes; for it cannot perish,
although it is altered from white to black, being in the power of the
same matter, to turn it again from black to white, so as it may make
infinite Repetitions of the same thing; but by reason nature takes
delight in variety, she seldom uses such repetitions; nevertheless
that doth not take away the Power of self-moving matter, for it doth
not, and it cannot, are two several things, and the latter doth not
necessarily follow upon the former; Wherefore not any, the least
thing, can perish in Nature, for if this were possible, the whole body
of nature might perish also, for if so many Figures and Creatures
should be annihilated and perish without any supply or new
Creation, Nature would grow less, and at last become nothing;
besides it is as difficult for Nature to turn something into nothing, as
to Create something out of nothing; Wherefore as there is no
annihilation or perishing in Nature, so there is neither any new
Creation in Nature. But your Author makes a difference between
bodies and accidents, saying, that bodies are things and not
generated, but accidents are Generated and not things. Truly,
Madam, these accidents seem to me to be like Van Helmont's Lights,
Gases, Blazes and Ideas; and Dr More's Immaterial Substances or
Dæmons, onely in this Dr More hath the better, that his Immaterial
Substances, are beings, which subsist of themselves, whereas
accidents do not, but their existence is in other bodies; But what
they call Accidents, are in my opinion nothing else but Corporeal
Motions, and if these accidents be generated, they must needs be
bodies, for how nothing can be Generated in nature, is not
conceivable, and yet your Author denies,[4] that Accidents are
something, namely some part of a natural thing; But as for
Generations, they are onely various actions of self-moving matter, or
a variety of Corporeal Motions, and so are all Accidents whatsoever,
so that there is not any thing in nature, that can be made new, or
destroyed, for whatsoever was and shall be, is in nature, though not
always in act, yet in power, as in the nature and power of Corporeal
motions, which is self-moving matter, And as there is no new
Generation of Accidents, so there is neither a new Generation of
Motions; wherefore when your Author says,[5] That, when the hand,
being moved, moveth the pen, the motion doth not go out of the
hand into the pen, for so the writing might be continued, though the
hand stood still, but a new motion is generated in the pen, and is
the pens motion: I am of his opinion, that the motion doth not go
out of the hand into the pen, and that the motion of the pen, is the
pens own motion; but I deny, that after holding the hand a little
while still, and beginning to write again, a new motion of the pen is
generated; for it is onely a repetition, and not a new generation, for
the Hand, Pen and Ink, repeat but the same motion or action of
writing: Besides, Generation is made by Connexion or Conjunction of
parts, moving by consent to such or such Figures, but the motion of
the Hand or the Pen is always one and the same; wherefore it is but
the variation and repetition in and of the same motion of the Hand,
or Pen, which may be continued in that manner infinitely, just as the
same Corporeal Motions can make infinite variations and repetitions
of one and the same Figure, repeating it as oft as they please, as
also making Copy of Copy; And although I do not deny, but there
are Generations in Nature, yet not annihilations or perishings, for if
any one motion or figure should perish, the matter must perish also;
and if any one part of matter can perish, all the matter in nature
may perish also; and if there can any new thing be made or created
in nature, which hath not been before, there may also be a new
Nature, and so by perishings and new Creations, this World would
not have continued an age; But surely whatsoever is in Nature, hath
been existent always. Wherefore to conclude, it is not the generation
and perishing of an Accident that makes its subject to be changed,
but the production and alteration of the Form, makes it said to be
generated or destroyed, for matter will change its motions and
figures without perishing or annihilating; and whether there were
words or not, there would be such causes and effects; But having
not the art of Logick to dispute with artificial words, nor the art of
Geometry to demonstrate my opinions by Mathematical Figures, I
fear they will not be so well received by the Learned; However, I
leave them to any mans unprejudiced Reason and Judgment, and
devote my self to your service, as becomes,
Madam,
Your Ladiships
humble and faithful Servant.
[1] Elem. of Philos. c. 8. art. 2.
[2] Art. 3.
[3] Art. 20.
[4] Art. 2.
[5] Art. 21.
 XVII.
MADAM,
Your Author concerning Place and Magnitude says,[1], that Place is
nothing out of the mind, nor Magnitude any thing within it; for Place
is a meer Phantasme of a body of such quantity and figure, and
Magnitude a peculiar accident of the body; but this doth not well
agree with my reason, for I believe that Place, Magnitude and Body
are but one thing, and that Place is as true an extension as
Magnitude, and not a feigned one; Neither am I of his opinion, that
Place is Immoveable, but that place moves, according as the body
moveth, for not any body wants place, because place and body is
but one thing, and wheresoever is body, there is also place, and
wheresoever is place, there is body, as being one and the same;
Wherefore Motion cannot be a relinquishing of one place and
acquiring another,[2] for there is no such thing as place different
from body, but what is called change of place, is nothing but change
of corporeal motions; for, say an house stands in such a place, if the
house be gone, the place is gone also, as being impossible that the
place of the house should remain, when the house is taken away;
like as a man when he is gone out of his chamber, his place is gone
too; 'Tis true, if the ground or foundation do yet remain, one may
say, there stood such an house heretofore, but yet the place of the
house is not there really at that present, unless the same house be
built up again as it was before, and then it hath its place as before;
Nevertheless the house being not there, it cannot be said that either
place or house are annihilated, viz., when the materials are
dissolved, no not when transformed into millions of several other
figures, for the house remains still in the power of all those several
parts of matter; and as for space, it is onely a distance betwixt some
parts or bodies; But an Empty place signifies to my opinion Nothing,
for if place and body are one and the same, and empty is as much
as nothing; then certainly these two words cannot consist together,
but are destructive to one another. Concerning, that your Author
says,[3] Two bodies cannot be together in the same place, nor one
body in two places at the same time, is very true, for there are no
more places then bodies, nor more bodies then places, and this is to
be understood as well of the grosser, as the purest parts of nature,
of the mind as well as of the body, of the rational and sensitive
animate matter as well as of the inanimate, for there is no matter,
how pure and subtil soever, but is imbodied, and all that hath body
hath place. Likewise I am of his opinion,[4] That one body hath
always one and the same magnitude; for, in my opinion, magnitude,
place and body do not differ, and as place, so magnitude can never
be separated from body. But when he speaks of Rest, I cannot
believe there is any such thing truly in Nature, for it is impossible to
prove, that any thing is without Motion, either consistent, or
composing, or dissolving, or transforming motions, or the like,
although not altogether perceptible by our senses, for all the Matter
is either moving or moved, and although the moved parts are not
capable to receive the nature of self-motion from the self-moving
parts, yet these self-moving parts, being joyned and mixt with all
other parts of the moved matter, do always move the same; for the
Moved or Inanimate part of Matter, although it is a Part of it self, yet
it is so intermixt with the self-moving Animate Matter, as they make
but one Body; and though some parts of the Inanimate may be as
pure as the Sensitive Animate Matter, yet they are never so subtil as
to be self-moving; Wherefore the Sensitive moves in the Inanimate,
and the Rational in the Sensitive, but often the Rational moves in it
self. And, although there is no rest in nature, nevertheless Matter
could have been without Motion, when as it is impossible that Matter
could be without place or magnitude, no more then Variety can be
without motion; And thus much at this present: I conclude, and rest,
Madam,
Your Faithful Friend
and Servant.
[1] Part. 2. c. 8. a. 5.
 [2] Art. 10.
[3] Art. 8.
[4] Art. 5.

XVIII.
MADAM,
Passing by those Chapters of your Authors, that treat of Power and
Act, Identy and Difference, Analogisme, Angle and Figure, Figures
deficient, dimension of Circles, and several others, most of which
belong to art, as to Geometry, and the like; I am come to that
wherein he discourses of Sense and Animal Motion, saying,[1] That
some Natural bodies have in themselves the patterns almost of all
things, and others of none at all; Whereof my opinion is, that the
sensitive and rational parts of Matter are the living and knowing
parts of Nature, and no part of nature can challenge them onely to it
self, nor no creature can be sure, that sense is onely in Animal-kind,
and reason in Man-kind; for can any one think or believe that Nature
is ignorant and dead in all her other parts besides Animals? Truly this
is a very unreasonable opinion; for no man, as wise as he thinks
himself, nay were all Man-kind joyned into one body, yet they are
not able to know it, unless there were no variety of parts in nature,
but onely one whole and individeable body, for other Creatures may
know and perceive as much as Animals, although they have not the
same Sensitive Organs, nor the same manner or way of Perception.
Next your Author says,[2] The cause of Sense or Perception consists
herein, that the first organ of sense is touched and pressed; For
when the uttermost part of the organ is pressed, it no sooner yields,
but the part next within it is pressed also, and in this manner the
pressure or motion is propagated through all the parts of the organ
to the innermost. And thus also the pressure of the uttermost part
proceeds from the pressure of some more remote body, and so
continually, till we come to that, from which, as from its fountain, we
derive the Phantasme or Idea, that is made in us by our sense: And
this, whatsoever it be, is that we commonly call the object; Sense
therefore is some Internal motion in the Sentient, generated by
some Internal motion of the Parts of the object, and propagated
through all the media to the innermost part of the organ. Moreover
there being a resistance or reaction in the organ, by reason of its
internal motion against the motion propagated from the object,
there is also an endeavour in the organ opposite to the endeavour
proceeding from the object, and when that endeavour inwards is the
last action in the act of sense, then from the reaction a Phantasme
or Idea has its being. This is your Authors opinion, which if it were
so, perception could not be effected so suddenly, nay I think the
sentient by so many pressures in so many perceptions, would at last
be pressed to death, besides the organs would take a great deal of
hurt, nay totally be removed out of their places, so as the eye would
in time be prest into the centre of the brain; And if there were any
Resistance, Reaction or Indeavour in the organ, opposite to the
Endeavour of the object, there would, in my opinion, be always a
war between the animal senses and the objects, the endeavour of
the objects pressing one way, and the senses pressing the other
way, and if equal in their strengths, they would make a stop, and the
sensitive organs would be very much pained. Truly, Madam, in my
opinion, it would be like that Custom which formerly hath been used
at Newcastle, when a man was married, the guests divided
themselves, behind and before the Bridegroom, the one party
driving him back, the other forwards, so that one time a Bridegroom
was killed in this fashion; But certainly Nature hath a more quick and
easie way of giving intelligence and knowledg to her Creatures, and
doth not use such constraint and force in her actions; Neither is
sense or sensitive perception a meer Phantasme or Idea, but a
Corporeal action of the sensitive and rational matter, and according
to the variation of the objects or patterns, and the sensitive and
rational motions, the perception also is various, produced not by
external pressure, but by internal self-motion, as I have declared
heretofore; and to prove, that the sensitive and rational corporeal
motions are the onely cause of perception; I say, if those motions in
an animal move in another way, and not to such perceptions, then
that animal can neither hear, see, taste, smell nor touch, although all
his sensitive organs be perfect, as is evident in a man falling into a
swoon, where all the time he is in a swoon, the pressure of the
objects is made without any effect; Wherefore, as the sensitive and
rational corporeal motions make all that is in nature; so likewise they
make perception, as being perception it self, for all self-motion is
perception, but all perception is not animal perception; or after an
animal way; and therefore sense cannot decay nor die, but what is
called a decay or death, is nothing else but a change or alteration of
those Motions. But you will say, Madam, it may be, that one body, as
an object, leaves the print of its figure, in the next adjoyning body,
until it comes to the organ of sense, I answer that then soft bodies
onely must be pressed, and the object must be so hard as to make a
print, and as for rare parts of matter, they are not able to retain a
print without self-motion; Wherefore it is not probable that the parts
of air should receive a print, and print the same again upon the
adjoyning part, until the last part of the air print it upon the eye; and
that the exterior parts of the organ should print upon the interior, till
it come to the centre of the Brain, without self-motion. Wherefore in
my opinion, Perception is not caused either by the printing of
objects, nor by pressures, for pressures would make a general stop
of all natural motions, especially if there were any reaction or
resistence of sense; but according to my reason, the sensitive and
rational corporeal motions in one body, pattern out the Figure of
another body, as of an exterior object, which may be done easily
without any pressure or reaction; I will not say, that there is no
pressure or reaction in Nature, but pressure and reaction doth not
make perception, for the sensitive and rational parts of matter make
all perception and variety of motion, being the most subtil parts of
Nature, as self-moving, as also divideable, and composeable, and
alterable in their figurative motions, for this Perceptive matter can
change its substance into any figure whatsoever in nature, as being
not bound to one constant figure. But having treated hereof before,
and being to say more of it hereafter, this shall suffice for the
present, remaining always,
Madam,
Your constant Friend,
and faithful Servant.
[1] C. 25. a. 1.
 [2] Art. 2.

XIX.
MADAM,
To discourse of the World and Stars, is more then I am able to do,
wanting the art of Astronomy and Geometry; wherefore passing by
that Chapter of your Author, I am come to that[1] wherein he treats
of Light, Heat and Colours; and to give you my opinion of Light, I
say, it is not the light of the Sun, that makes an Animal see, for we
can see inwardly in Dreams without the Suns light, but it is the
sensitive and rational Motions in the Eye and Brain that make such a
figure as Light; For if Light did press upon the Eye, according to your
Authors opinion, it might put the Eye into as much pain as Fire doth,
when it sticks its points into our skin or flesh. The same may be said
of Colours, for the sensitive motions make such a figure, which is
such a Colour, and such a Figure, which is such a Colour; Wherefore
Light, Heat and Colour, are not bare and bodiless qualities, but such
figures made by corporeal self-motions, and are as well real and
corporeal objects as other figures are; and when these figures
change or alter, it is onely that their motions alter, which may alter
and change heat into cold, and light into darkness, and black colour
into white. But by reason the motions of the Sun are so constant, as
the motions of any other kind of Creatures, it is no more subject to
be altered then all the World, unless Nature did it by the command
of God; for though the Parts of self-moving Matter be alterable, yet
all are not altered; and this is the reason, that the figure of Light in
our eye and brain is altered, as well as it is alterable, but not the real
figure of the Sun, neither doth the Sun enter our eyes; and as the
Light of the Sun is made or patterned in the eye, so is the light of
Glow-worms-tails, and Cats-eyes, that shine in the dark, made not
by the Sun's, but their own motions in their own parts; The like
when we dream of Light, the sensitive corporeal motions working
inwardly, make the figure of light on the inside of the eye, as they
did pattern out the figure of light on the outside of the eye when
awake, and the objects before them; for the sensitive motions of the
eye pattern out the figure of the object in the eye, and the rational
motions make the same figure in their own substance. But there is
some difference between those figures that perceive light, and those
that are light themselves; for when we sleep, there is made the
figure of light, but not from a copy; but when the eye seeth light,
that figure is made from a copy of the real figure of the Sun; but
those lights which are inherent, as in Glow-worms-tails, are original
lights, in which is as much difference as between a Man and his
Picture; and as for the swiftness of the Motions of light, and the
violence of the Motions of fire, it is very probable they are so, but
they are a certain particular kind or sort of swift and violent motions;
neither will all sorts of swift and violent motions make fire or light,
as for example the swift and violent Circular motion of a Whirlewind
neither makes light nor fire; Neither is all fire light, nor all light fire,
for there is a sort of dead fire, as in Spices, Spirits, Oyles, and the
like; and several sorts of lights, which are not hot, as the light which
is made in Dreams, as also the inherent lights in Glow-worms, Cats-
eyes, Fish-bones, and the like; all which several fires and lights are
made by the self-moving matter and motions distinguishable by their
figures, for those Motions make such a figure for the Suns light, such
a figure for Glow-worms light, such a figure for Cats-eyes light, and
so some alteration in every sort of light; The same for Fire, onely
Fire-light is a mixt figure, as partly of the figure of Fire, and partly of
the figure of Light: Also Colours are made after the like manner, viz.
so many several Colours, so many several Figures; and as these
Figures are less or more different, so are the Colours.
Thus, Madam, whosoever will study Nature, must consider the
Figures of every Creature, as well as their Motions, and must not
make abstractions of Motion and Figure from Matter, nor of Matter
from Motion and Figure, for they are inseparable, as being but one
thing, viz. Corporeal Figurative Motions; and whosoever conceives
any of them as abstract, will, in my opinion, very much erre; but
men are apt to make more difficulties and enforcements in nature
then nature ever knew. But to return to Light: There is no better
argument to prove that all objects of sight are figured in the Eye, by
the sensitive, voluntary or self-motions, without the pressure of
objects, but that not onely the pressure of light would hurt the
tender Eye, but that the eye doth not see all objects according to
their Magnitude, but sometimes bigger, sometimes less: as for
example, when the eye looks through a small passage, as a
Perspective-glass, by reason of the difficulty of seeing a body
through a small hole, and the double figure of the glass being
convex and concave, the corporeal motions use more force, by
which the object is enlarged, like as a spark of fire by force is dilated
into a great fire, and a drop of water by blowing into a bubble; so
the corporeal motions do double and treble their strength, making
the Image of the object exceeding large in the eye; for though the
eye be contracted, yet the Image in the eye is enlarged to a great
extension; for the sensitive and rational matter is extremely subtil,
by reason it is extreamly pure, by which it hath more means and
ways of magnifying then the Perspective-glass. But I intend to write
more of this subject in my next, and so I break off here, resting,
Madam,
Your Faithful Friend
and Servant.
[1] Ch. 27.

XX.
MADAM,
Some perhaps will question the truth or probability of my saying,
that Light is a Body, objecting that if light were a body, when the
Sun is absent or retires under our Horizon, its light would leave an
empty place, or if there were no empty place but all full, the light of
the Sun at its return would not have room to display it self,
especially in so great a compass as it doth, for two bodies cannot be
in one place at one time. I answer, all bodies carry their places along
with them, for body and place go together and are inseparable, and
when the light of the Sun is gone, darkness succeeds, and when
darkness is gone, light succeeds, so that it is with light and darkness
as with all Creatures else; For you cannot believe, that if the whole
World were removed, there would be a place of the world left, for
there cannot be an empty nothing, no more then there can be an
empty something; but if the world were annihilated, the place would
be annihilated too, place and body being one and the same thing;
and therefore in my opinion, there be no more places then there are
bodies, nor no more bodies then there are places.
Secondly, They will think it absurd that I say, the eye can see
without light; but in my opinion it seems not absurd, but very
rational, for we may see in dreams, and some do see in the dark,
not in their fancy or imagination, but really; and as for dreams, the
sensitive corporeal motions make a light on the inside of the organ
of sight really, as I have declared in my former Letter. But that we do
not see ordinarily without exterior Light, the reason is, that the
sensitive Motions cannot find the outward objects to pattern out
without exterior light, but all perception doth not proceed from light,
for all other perception besides animal sight requires not light.
Neither in my opinion, doth the Perception of sight in all Creatures
but Animals, but yet Animals do often see in the dark, and in sleep: I
will not say but that the animate matter which by self-motion doth
make the Perception of light with other perceptive Figures, and so
animal perceptive light may be the presenter or ground perceptive
figure of sight; yet the sensitive corporeal motions can make other
figures without the help of light, and such as light did never present:
But when the eye patterns out an exterior object presented by light,
it patterns also out the object of light; for the sensitive motions can
make many figures by one act, not onely in several organs, but in
one organ; as for example, there is presented to sight a piece of
Imbroydery, wherein is silk, silver and gold upon Sattin in several
forms or figures, as several flowers, the sensitive motions streight by
one and the same act, pattern out all those several figures of
flowers, as also the figures of Silk, Silver, Gold and Sattin, without
any pressure of these objects, or motions in the medium, for if they
all should press, the eye would no more see the exterior objects,
then the nose, being stopt, could smell a presented perfume.
Thirdly, They may ask me, if sight be made in the eye, and proceeds
not from the outward object, what is the reason that we do not see
inwardly, but outwardly as from us? I answer, when we see objects
outwardly, as from us, then the sensitive motions work on the
outside of the organ, which organ being outwardly convex, causes
us to see outwardly, as from us, but in dreams we see inwardly; also
the sensitive motions do pattern out the distance together with the
object: But you will say, the body of the distance, as the air, cannot
be perceived, and yet we can perceive the distance; I answer, you
could not perceive the distance, but by such or such an object as is
subject to your sight; for you do not see the distance more then the
air, or the like rare body, that is between grosser objects; for if there
were no stars, nor planets, nor clouds, nor earth, nor water, but
onely air, you would not see any space or distance; but light being a
more visible body then air, you might figure the body of air by light,
but so, as in an extensive or dilating way; for when the mind or the
rational matter conceives any thing that hath not such an exact
figure, or is not so perceptible by our senses; then the mind uses
art, and makes such figures, which stand like to that; as for
example, to express infinite to it self, it dilates it parts without
alteration, and without limitation or circumference; Likewise, when it
will conceive a constant succession of Time, it draws out its parts
into the figure of a line; and if eternity, it figures a line without
beginning, and end. But as for Immaterial, no mind can conceive
that, for it cannot put it self into nothing, although it can dilate and
rarifie it self to an higher degree, but must stay within the circle of
natural bodies, as I within the circle of your Commands, to express
my self
Madam,
Your faithful Friend,
and obedient Servant.

XXI.
MADAM,
Heat and Cold, according to your Authors opinion, are made by
Dilation and Contraction: for says he,[1] When the Motion of the
ambient æthereal substance makes the spirits and fluid parts of our
bodies tend outwards, we acknowledg heat, but by the indeavour
inwards of the same spirits and humors we feel cold: so that to cool
is to make the exterior parts of the body endeavour inwards, by a
motion contrary to that of calefaction, by which the internal parts
are called outwards. He therefore that would know the cause of
Cold, must find by what motion the exterior parts of any body
endeavour to retire inwards. But I desire you to consider, Madam,
that there be moist Colds, and dry Heats, as well as dry Colds, and
moist Heats; wherefore all sorts of Cold are not made by the retyring
of parts inwards, which is contraction or attraction; neither are all
sorts of Heat made by parts tending outwards, which is dilation or
rarefaction; for a moist cold is made by dilation, and a dry heat by
contraction, as well as a moist heat is made by dilation, and a dry
cold by contraction: But your Author makes not this difference, but
onely a difference between a dilated heat, and a contracted cold;
but because a cold wind is made by breath blown thorow pinched or
contracted lips, and an hot wind by breath through opened and
extended lips, should we judg that all heat and cold must be made
after one manner or way? The contracted mouth makes Wind as well
as the dilated, but yet Wind is not made that way, as heat and cold;
for it may be, that onely the air pressed together makes wind, or it
may be that the corporeal motions in the air may change air into
wind, as they change water into vapour, and vapour into air; or it
may be something else that is invisible and rare, as air; and there
may be several sorts of wind, air, heat, cold, as of all other
Creatures, more then man is capable to know. As for your Authors
opinion concerning the congealing of Water, and how Ice is made, I
will not contradict it, onely I think nature hath an easier way to
effect it, then he describes; Wherefore my opinion is, that it is done
by altering motions; as for example, the corporeal motions making
the figure of water by dilation in a Circle figure, onely alter from
such a dilating circular figure into a contracted square, which is Ice,
or into such a contracted triangle, as is snow: And thus water and
vapour may be changed with ease, without any forcing, pressing,
raking, or the like. The same may be said of hard and bent bodies;
and of restitution, as also of air, thunder and lightning, which are all
done by an easie change of motion, and changing into such or such
a figure is not the motion of Generation, which is to build a new
house with old materials, but onely a Transformation; I say a new
house with old materials; not that I mean there is any new Creation
in nature, of any thing that was not before in nature; for nature is
not God, to make new beings out of nothing, but any thing may be
called new, when it is altered from one figure into another. I add no
more at this time, but rest,
Madam,
Your faithful Friend
and Servant.
[1] C. 28. a. 1.

XXII.
MADAM,
The Generation of sound, according to your worthy Authors opinion,
is as follows: As Vision, says he,[1] so hearing is Generated by the
medium, but not in the same manner; for sight is from pressure,
that is, from an endeavour, in which there is no perceptible
progression of any of the parts of the medium, but one part urging
or thrusting on another, propagateth that action successively to any
distance whatsoever; whereas the motion of the medium, by which
sound is made, is a stroke; for when we hear, the drum of the Ear,
which is the first organ of hearing, is strucken, and the drum being
stricken, the Pia Mater is also shaken, and with it the arteries
inserted into it, by which the action propagated to the heart it self,
by the reaction of the heart a Phantasme is made which we call
Sound. Thus far your Author: To which give me leave to reply, that I
fear, if the Ear was bound to hear any loud Musick, or another sound
a good while, it would soundly be beaten, and grow sore and
bruised with so many strokes; but since a pleasant sound would be
rendred very unpleasant in this manner, my opinion is, that like as in
the Eye, so in the Ear the corporeal sensitive motions do pattern out
as many several figures, as sounds are presented to them; but if
these motions be irregular, then the figure of the sound in the ear is
not perfect according to the original; for if it be, that the motions are
tyred with figuring, or the object of sound be too far distant from the
sensitive organ, then they move slowly and weakly, not that they are
tyred or weak in strength, but with working and repeating one and
the same object, and so through love to variety, change from
working regularly to move irregularly, so as not to pattern outward
objects as they ought, and then there are no such patterns made at
all, which we call to be deaf; and sometimes the sensitive motions
do not so readily perceive a soft sound near, as a stronger farther
off. But to prove it is not the outward object of sound with its
striking or pressing motion, nor the medium, that causes this
perception of sense, if there be a great solid body, as a wall, or any
other partition betwixt two rooms, parting the object and the
sensitive organ, so, as the sound is not able to press it, nevertheless
the perception will be made; And as for pipes to convey sounds, the
perception is more fixt and perfecter in united then in dilated or
extended bodies, and then the sensitive motions can make perfecter
patterns; for the stronger the objects are, the more perfect are the
figures and patterns of the objects, and the more perfect is the
perception. But when the sound is quite out of the ear, then the
sensitive motions have altered the patterning of such figures to
some other action; and when the sound fadeth by degrees, then the
figure or pattern alters by degrees; but for the most part the
sensitive corporeal motions alter according as the objects are
presented, or the perception patterns out. Neither do they usually
make figures of outward objects, if not perceived by the senses,
unless through Irregularities as in Mad men, which see such and
such things, when as these things are not neer, and then the
sensitive motions work by rote, or after their own voluntary
invention. As for Reflexion, it is a double perception, and so a double
figure of one object; like as many pictures of one man, where some
are more perfect then others, for a copy of a copy is not so perfect
as a copy of an original. But the recoyling of sound is, that the
sensitive motions in the ear begin a new pattern, before they
dissolved the former, so as there is no perfect alteration or change,
from making to dissolving, but pattern is made upon pattern, which
causes a confusion of figures, the one being neither perfectly
finished, nor the other perfectly made. But it is to be observed, that
not always the sensitive motions in the organs take their pattern
from the original, but from copies; as for example, the sensitive
motions in the eye, pattern out the figure of an eye in a glass, and
so do not take a pattern from the original it self, but by an other
pattern, representing the figure of the eye in a Looking-glass; The
same doth the Ear, by patterning out Ecchoes, which is but a pattern
of a pattern; But when as a man hears himself speak or make a
sound, then the corporeal sensitive motions in the Ear, pattern out
the object or figure made by the motions of the tongue and the
throat, which is voice; By which we may observe, that there may be
many figures made by several motions from one original; as for
example, the figure of a word is made in a mans mouth, then the
copy of that figure is made in the ear, then in the brain, and then in
the memory, and all this in one Man: Also a word being made in a
mans mouth, the air takes a copy or many copies thereof; but the
Ear patterns them both out, first the original coming from the
mouth, and then the copy made in the air, which is called an Eccho,
and yet not any strikes or touches each others parts, onely perceives
and patterns out each others figure. Neither are their substances the
same, although the figures be alike; for the figure of a man may be
carved in wood, then cut in brass, then in stone, and so forth, where
the figure may be always the same, although the substances which
do pattern out the figure are several, viz. Wood, Brass, Stone, &c.
and so likewise may the figure of a stone be figured in the fleshy
substance of the Eye, or the figure of light or colour, and yet the
substance of the Eye remains full the same; neither doth the
substantial figure of a stone, or tree, patterned out by the sensitive
corporeal motions, in the flesh of an animal eye, change from being
a vegetable or mineral, to an animal, and if this cannot be done by
nature, much less by art; for if the figure of an animal be carved in
wood or stone, it doth not give the wood or stone any animal
knowledg, nor an animal substance, as flesh, bones, blood, &c. no
more doth the patterning or figuring of a Tree give a vegetable
knowledg, or the substance of wood to the eye, for the figure of an
outward object doth not alter the substance that patterns it out or
figures it, but the patterning substance doth pattern out the figure,
in it self, or in its own substance, so as the figure which is pattern'd,
hath the same life and knowledg with the substance by and in which
it is figured or pattern'd, and the inherent motions of the same
substance; and according as the sensitive and rational self-moving
matter moves, so figures are made; and thus we see, that lives,
knowledges, motions and figures are all material, and all Creatures
are indued with life, knowledg, motion and figure, but not all alike or
after the same manner. But to conclude this discourse of perception
of Sound, the Ear may take the object of sound afar off, as well as at
a near distance; not onely if many figures of the same sound be
made from that great distance, but if the interposing parts be not so
thick, close, or many as to hinder or obscure the object from the
animal Perception in the sensitive organ; for if a man lays his Ear
near to the Ground, the Ear may hear at a far distance, as well as
the Eye can see, for it may hear the noise of a troop afar off,
perception being very subtil and active; Also there may several
Copies be made from the Original, and from the last Copy nearest to
the Ear, the Ear may take a pattern, and so pattern out the noise in
the organ, without any strokes to the Ear, for the subtil matter in all
Creatures doth inform and perceive. But this is well to be observed,
that the figures of objects are as soon made, as perceived by the
sensitive motions in their work of patterning. And this is my Opinion
concerning the Perception of Sound, which together with the rest I
leave to your Ladyships and others wiser Judgment, and rest,
Madam,
Your faithful Friend
and Servant.
[1] Ch. 29. a. 1.

XXIII.
MADAM,
I perceive by your last, that you cannot well apprehend my meaning,
when I say that the print or figure of a Body Printed or Carved, is
not made by the motions of the body Printing or Carving it, but by
the motions of the body or substance Printed or Carved; for say you,
Doth a piece of Wood carve it self, or a black Patch of a Lady cut its
own figure by its own motions? Before I answer you, Madam, give
me leave to ask you this question, whether it be the motion of the
hand, or the Instrument, or both, that print or carve such or such a
body? Perchance you will say, that the motion of the hand moves the
Instrument, and the Instrument moves the Wood which is to be
carved: Then I ask, whether the motion that moves the Instrument,
be the Instruments, or the Hands? Perchance you will say the
Hands; but I answer, how can it be the Hands motion, if it be in the
Instrument? You will say, perhaps, the motion of the hand is
transferred out of the hand into the instrument, and so from the
instrument into the carved figure; but give me leave to ask you, was
this motion of the hand, that was transferred, Corporeal or
Incorporeal? If you say, Corporeal, then the hand must become less
and weak, but if Incorporeal, I ask you, how a bodiless motion can
have force and strength to carve and cut? But put an Impossible
proposition, as that there is an Immaterial motion, and that this
Incorporeal motion could be transferred out of one body into
another; then I ask you, when the hand and instrument cease to
move, what is become of the motion? Perhaps you will say, the
motion perishes or is annihilated, and when the hand and the
instrument do move again, to the carving or cutting of the figure,
then a new Incorporeal Motion is created; Truly then there will be a
perpetual creation and annihilation of Incorporeal motions, that is, of
that which naturally is nothing; for an Incorporeal being is as much
as a natural No-thing, for Natural reason cannot know nor have
naturally any perception or Idea of an Incorporeal being: besides, if
the motion be Incorporeal, then it must needs be a supernatural
Spirit, for there is not any thing else Immaterial but they, and then it
will be either an Angel or a Devil, or the Immortal Soul of man; but
if you say it is the supernatural Soul, truly I cannot be perswaded
that the supernatural Soul should not have any other imployment
then to carve or cut prints, or figures, or move in the hands, or
heels, or legs, or arms of a Man; for other animals have the same
kind of Motions, and then they might have a Supernatural Soul as
well as Man, which moves in them. But if you say, that these
transferrable motions are material, then every action whereby the
hand moves to the making or moving of some other body, would
lessen the number of the motions in the hand, and weaken it, so
that in the writing of one letter, the hand would not be able to write
a second letter, at least not a third. But I pray, Madam, consider
rationally, that though the Artificer or Workman be the occasion of
the motions of the carved body, yet the motions of the body that is
carved, are they which put themselves into such or such a figure, or
give themselves such or such a print as the Artificer intended; for a
Watch, although the Artist or Watch-maker be the occasional cause
that the Watch moves in such or such an artificial figure, as the
figure of a Watch, yet it is the Watches own motion by which it
moves; for when you carry the Watch about you, certainly the
Watch-makers hand is not then with it as to move it; or if the motion
of the Watch-makers hand be transferred into the Watch, then
certainly the Watch-maker cannot make another Watch, unless there
be a new creation of new motions made in his hands; so that God
and Nature would be as much troubled and concerned in the making
of Watches, as in the making of a new World; for God created this
World in six days, and rested the seventh day, but this would be a
perpetual Creation; Wherefore I say that some things may be
Occasional causes of other things, but not the Prime or Principal
causes; and this distinction is very well to be considered, for there
are no frequenter mistakes then to confound these two different
causes, which make so many confusions in natural Philosophy; and
this is the Opinion of,
Madam,
Your Faithful Friend
and Servant.

XXIV.
MADAM,
In answer to your question, What makes Eccho, I say, it is that
which makes all the effects of Nature, viz. self-moving matter; I
know, the common opinion is, that Eccho is made like as the figure
of a Face, or the like, in a Looking-glass, and that the Reverberation
of sound is like the Reflection of sight in a Looking-glass; But I am
not of that opinion, for both Eccho, and that which is called the
Reflection in a Looking-glass, are made by the self-moving matter,
by way of patterning and copying out. But then you will ask me,
whether the glass takes the copy of the face, or the face prints its
copy on the glass, or whether it be the medium of light and air that
makes it? I answer, although many Learned men say, that as all
perception, so also the seeing of ones face in a Looking-glass, and
Eccho, are made by impression and reaction; yet I cannot in my
simplicity conceive it, how bodies that come not near, or touch each
other, can make a figure by impression and reaction: They say it
proceeds from the motions of the Medium of light, or air, or both,
viz. that the Medium is like a long stick with two ends, whereof one
touches the object, the other the organ of sense, and that one end
of it moving, the other moves also at the same point of Time, by
which motions it may make many several figures; But I cannot
conceive, how this motion of pressing forward and backward should
make so many figures, wherein there is so much variety and
curiosity. But, say light and air are as one figure, and like as a seal
do print another body; I answer, if any thing could print, yet it is not
probable, that so soft and rare bodies as light and air, could print
such solid bodies as glass, nor could air by reverberation make such
a sound as Eccho. But mistake me not, for, I do not say, that the
Corporeal motions of light or air, cannot, or do not pencil, copie, or
pattern out any figure, for both light and air are very active in such
sorts of Motions, but I say, they cannot do it on any other bodies but
their own. But to cut off tedious and unnecessary disputes, I return
to the expressing of my own opinion, and believe, that the glass in
its own substance doth figure out the copy of the face, or the like,
and from that copy the sensitive motions in the eyes take another
copy, and so the rational from the sensitive; and in this manner is
made both rational and sensitive perception, sight and knowledg.
The same with Ecchoes; for the air patterns out the copy of the
sound, and then the sensitive corporeal motions in the ear pattern
again this copy from the air, and so do make the perception and
sense of hearing. You may ask me, Madam, if it be so, that the glass
and the air copy out the figure of the face and of sound, whether
the Glass may be said to see and the Air to speak? I answer, I
cannot tell that; for though I say, that the air repeats the words, and
the glass represents the face, yet I cannot guess what their
perceptions are, onely this I may say, that the air hath an elemental,
and the glass a mineral, but not an animal perception. But if these
figures were made by the pressures of several objects or parts, and
by reaction, there could not be such variety as there is, for they
could but act by one sort of motion: Likewise is it improbable, that
sounds, words or voices, should like a company of Wild-Geese fly in
the air, and so enter into the ears of the hearers, as they into their
nests: Neither can I conceive, how in this manner a word can enter
so many ears, that is, be divided into every ear, and yet strike every
ear with an undivided vocal sound; You will say, as a small fire doth
heat and warm all those that stand by; for the heat issues from the
fire, as the light from the Sun. I answer, all what issues and hath
motion, hath a Body, and yet most learned men deny that sound,
light and heat have bodies: But if they grant of light that it has a
body, they say it moves and presses the air, and the air the eye, and
so of heat; which if so, then the air must not move to any other
motion but light, and onely to one sort of light, as the Suns light; for
if it did move in any other motion, it would disturb the light; for if a
Bird did but fly in the air, it would give all the region of air another
motion, and so put out, or alter the light, or at least disturb it; and
wind would make a great disturbance in it. Besides, if one body did
give another body motion, it must needs give it also substance, for
motion is either something or nothing, body or no body, substance
or no substance; if nothing, it cannot enter into another body; if
something, it must lessen the bulk of the body it quits, and increase
the bulk of the body it enters, and so the Sun and Fire with giving
light and heat, would become less, for they cannot both give and
keep at once, for this is as impossible, as for a man to give to
another creature his human Nature, and yet to keep it still.
Wherefore my opinion is for heat, that when many men stand round
about a fire, and are heated and warmed by it, the fire doth not give
them any thing, nor do they receive something from the fire, but the
sensitive motions in their bodies pattern out the object of the fires
heat, and so they become more or less hot according as their
patterns are numerous or perfect; And as for air, it patterns out the
light of the Sun, and the sensitive motions in the eyes of animals
pattern out the light in the air. The like for Ecchoes, or any other
sound, and for the figures which are presented in a Looking-glass.
And thus millions of parts or creatures may make patterns of one or
more objects, and the objects neither give nor loose any thing. And
this I repeat here, that my meaning of Perception may be the better
understood, which is the desire of,
Madam,
Your faithful Friend,
and Servant.

XXV.
MADAM
I perceive you are not fully satisfied with my former Letter
concerning Eccho, and a figure presented in a Looking-glass; for you
say, how is it possible, if Eccho consists in the ears patterning out of
a voice or sound, but that it will make a confusion in all the parts of
the air? My answer is, that I doe not say that Eccho is onely made
by the patterning out of the voice or sound, but by repeating the
same voice or sound, which repetition is named an Eccho, for
millions of ears in animals may pattern out a voice or words, and yet
never repeat them, and so may millions of parts of the air;
wherefore Eccho doth not consist in the bare patterning out, but in
the repetition of the same sound or words, which are pattern'd out;
and so some parts of the air may at one and the same time pattern
out a sound and not repeat it, and some may both pattern out, and
repeat it, but some may neither pattern out, nor repeat it, and
therefore the Repetition, not the bare Patterning out is called Eccho: