“With humanity the more complicated the friendship, the more easily it is dissolved; so with atomic compounds. Sulphuric acid is a complicated compound. If it be forced to endure much hardship, it will break up. Heat it in alcohol, and we get alcohol water and olefiant gas. The acid has been completely dissolved.”

“We also know that suffering, worry, care, and other evils at times so change one that even his friends fail to recognize him. This is true in the case of atomic compounds, and even with some of the atoms. If carbon dioxide be put under great pressure, at a low temperature, it is converted into a liquid; and none of its friends recognize it in its new form. It is a form it hates; and when left at liberty, begins rapidly to resume its former state.”

“There are certain persons between whom friendship is almost impossible; yet such are known to become attached to each other, and to combine against a common enemy, or because of common danger. Thus with the atoms. Oxygen seems to hate nitrogen, refusing under ordinary circumstances to have anything to do with it. If however they happen near each other, surrounded by great heat, in the presence of metals (in this instance a common enemy), they will unite, and form cyanides.”

“So also if you put the heated end of a stick into a test-tube one-fourth filled with concentrated nitric acid [HNO3], the charcoal [C] will continue to burn, giving a bright light, even though it be beneath the surface of the liquid. This shows how easily the oxygen forsakes its companions, hydrogen and nitrogen, and cleaves to its newly found friend, carbon.”

“Potassium and phosphorus entertain such a violent passion for oxygen that even under water they burn—i.e. unite themselves with the beloved object.”

— Ludwig Buchner (c.1855), Publication; cited by Henry Finck (1887), Libb Thims (2007) [8]

“Sometimes persons brought together through common suffering are driven asunder when exposed to greater evils. So if barium oxide [BaO] be heated in a current of air at a temperature above 400°C, it will leave its companion, and take up ‘single blessedness’ again.”

2H2 + O2 → 2H2O

“We all know how unstable newly formed friendship is. It takes but little trial, little hardship, little suffering to sunder such ties. So if potassium iodide be added to a solution of a mercurous salt, mercurous iodide [Hg2I2] is formed; but the friendship is unstable: on little suffering, exposure, it breaks up into mercury [Hg] and mercuric iodide, the former going one way and the latter another.”

HgS + Fe + heat → Hg + FeS

MxFy1 + Fy2 + heat → MxFy2 + Fy1

“If you heat mercuric sulphide with iron filings, the sulfur will unite with the iron, letting the mercury in the lurch; so in like manner if a man or wife be brought into the company of a third party of the opposite sex who has greater attraction than has the wedded mate, the result will be the severance of the bonds of wedlock, and the formation of a new union. This is just what happened in the case of the sulfur. The cause of the severance of the old relations, and the manner through which new were formed, are exactly similar; there was the temptation of a third party, and the more powerful attraction of the new acquaintance.”

An illustration of Bray’s assertion that heating will bring about dissolution in mercury(II) oxide HgO into its components, namely liquid mercury Hg, which will precipitate on the glass of the test tube, and oxygen O2 which will leave as gas (see: vid); just as it will the dissolution of weak friendships into its components (non-friends); and conversely that the heating of Hg in oxygen O2, at roughly 350°C, will bring about the red form of HgO (Ѻ), just as the when the same sexes are “exposed to excitation” (e.g. shaky bridge experiment) (Ѻ)(Ѻ) or “allurement and blandishments” will two more likely tend to fall in love and form a union according to Bray.

2 HgO + heat → 2 Hg + 2O2

“When red mercuric oxide is heated in a test-tube, it disappears, oxygen being liberated, and mercury deposited on the sides of the test-tube. In like manner when intimate friends impose on each other, and take undue advantage of their relations, we find a dissolution of friendship.”

“Again, when mercury is slowly heated in oxygen, we get the compound red mercuric oxide. In like manner when the sexes [men and women] are exposed to excitation, allurement and blandishments, we have the probability always of 'falling in love', and forming a union.”

“The atom has reason and consciousness of itself; being infinitely little, its mental qualities are in like degree small; man being comparatively infinitely large, his mental qualities are in like degree great. But neither mind, nor consciousness, nor feeling is relatively greater in the one than the other.”

“In love-matters as in atomic affinity the manifestation of choice is the common activity, or phenomenon; and this same activity is the one common element of all intellectual endeavor, whether infinitely little or infinitely great; whether in the consciousness of an atom, an amoeba, or that of a Newton. The difference is one of degree only.”

See also: Darwin on higher and lower

“The chief barrier that has prevented and does prevent man from seeing himself as others see him, is his inborn egoism — the result of principles inculcated not merely during one short life, or one century, but during many thousands of years. I do not think that any candid scholar can find in man anything more wonderful than in ten thousand other existences. Indeed, he is much less wonderful than many of the most complex and highly developed plants and flowers; and certainly there are various insects fully as complex and wonderful as man, and many animals far more graceful and beautiful. Nor does man in general give any evidence of a higher origin; for speaking from extensive experience I am sure that the great majority of men live very irrationally.”

Bray's 1888 statement that the aggregate of the forces constituting and atom and oak tree are the same, and following monism speculations on matter and mind, caused him to be disposed from the ministry; similar to what happen to Pierre Teilhard in the 1920s.

“That the force constituting an oak tree is only an aggregation of the forces which constitute an atom, we have no reasonable doubt whatever; but an atom is not an oak. What then we ask is this essence which must be common to both? It is certain that if this essence be neither so-called matter nor so-called mind, whatever it may be, it must be unknown to us. This unknown essence must be the substance, the cause, of all things. In this unknown essence must so-called matter and so-called mind have their common unity, their true being; and in it must subject and object be united. What then shall we call this essence? We answer, since it can be neither so-called matter nor so-called mind, and yet must be the true essence of all things, we may call it the ultimate reality, the universal substance. To this ultimate substance must be referred all the phenomena of mind and matter; and in it must all existences blend, and have their true being. It must be the womb of all the forces in the universe; it must be the ‘thinking monon’, the universal intelligence, the ‘universal will’; and in this ‘universal monon’ must the body and soul of the universe be united. Here and here only can we find the explanation of so-called matter and so-called mind, and more than all of man's will.”

Bray's mind from matter diagram, wherein he asserts that they both arise from force.

“An atom of so-called matter may not appear to the unphilosophical to have anything in common with so-called mind; but we may be sure there is a close relationship between them. We look at the sides of a triangle, and perhaps know that the sides A and B subtend an angle of 30°. The sides A and B are seen to be specifically different; but on a closer inspection they are each seen to arise from a common point, a common origin. At first they are not to be distinguished, nor can we detect the point itself in which they originate; but as they grow wider apart, we become able to distinguish them, and we call them A and B. Thus is it with mind and matter; they are phenomena arising from, or branching out of, the same common origin or force. This origin we do not, nor is it likely we ever shall, know. As we know the sides of the triangle and not the point of origin; so we know mind and matter, which are but two sides of the same thing, having their common origin in a point, or substance, or force unknown to us, and, as I believe, forever unknowable to finite intelligence. This ‘universal being’ or ‘substance’ will become more and more known to man, as the ages roll by, and he has time and opportunity for study and contemplation; but that it will ever be fully known to us, philosophy forbids us to hope.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds III, pg. 176-77)

Bray's 70 element periodic table, which he gives at the end of his chapter 8 "Atomic and Molecular Worlds III".

“As the word ‘atom’ was coined to represent the smallest particle of matter in existence, or a mere point of force [see: Boscovich-Priestly atomic theory; point atom]; so the word ‘molecule’ is used to represent the smallest portion of matter that can exist in a free state [compare: bound state]. If we represent the molecule by a building, each stone in the building would represent an atom. A house is built of stones, and a molecule is built of atoms; as a house may be demolished, so may the molecule; the one not unfitly represents the other.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds III, pg. 176-77)

“I have said that a molecule is the least particle of matter that can exist in a free state. For instance, if you put into a glass-tube two volumes of hydrogen and one of oxygen, the gases will remain perfectly mixed, but will not cohere. But should you touch the mouth of the tube with a lighted taper, the two gases will immediately combine, causing an explosion, and forming water. If electricity be passed through the gases, the same result will take place. Now, the smallest particle of water imaginable will have the same number of volumes of these gases, namely two of hydrogen and one of water. Therefore we say that a molecule of matter is the smallest portion that can exist in a free state.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds, pg. 177-78)

“Again, if you put into a bottle equal volumes of hydrogen and chlorine gases, and throw it into the air, so that it may be struck by the actinic solar ray, you will hear a violent explosion, the gases having combined to form hydrochloric acid. Of the acid thus formed it will again be found that however inconceivably small a portion you examine, it will contain one atom of chlorine and one of hydrogen.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds, pg. 178)

Bray's scaled up definition of "atom", as the smallest particle of [human] matter that exists as a force point, and "molecule", the smallest "free state" portion of [human] atoms necessarily forced into unions.

“The molecule is therefore the smallest portion of matter that can exist in a free state. The solitary atom is like the human being necessarily forced, on the presentation of the first opportunity, to associate itself with others. Aristotle tells us (Politics I, 2, 9) that man is a political animal, ‘[Greek]’; and in another place (Politics I, 1, 2) that it is necessary for man and woman to unite their lives in order to prevent the disappearance of their own species: ‘[Greek]’. When brought face to face with the physical facts of the case, the chemist is almost led to infer a like social feeling existing in atoms, and by a little larger stretch of his imagination, he might suppose that with them too there exists a not altogether dissimilar necessity for union.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds III, pg. 176-78)

“Psychic phenomena manifesting themselves in these [protozoa-like] momentary existences, these mere points of organisms, it does not appear unscientific to hold that potential life, and all the phenomena attending it, from the government of an Oklahoma village to that of the British empire, exists in the atom itself, even in the atom of hydrogen or helium.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds III, pg. 181-82)

“Matter can never exist and be active without mind, nor can mind exist without matter.”

— Johann Goethe (c.1820), in: The Living Universe (pg. 180)

“The idea of the unity of organic and inorganic nature is now firmly established. . . . All natural bodies which are known to us are equally animated, and the distinction which has been made between animals and inanimate bodies does not exist.”

— Ernst Haeckel (c.1890), in: The Living Universe (pg. 180)

“A spirit exists in all things, and no body is so small but contains a part of the divine substance within itself, by which it is animated.”

— Giordano Bruno (c.1590), in: The Living Universe (pg. 180)

Bray, in his chemical affinity section, discussed how the formation of iron sulfate FeSO4 as akin to a sultan with a harem of four women (see: polyhumanide molecule); which is akin to Christopher Hirata's circa 2000 labeling of such model as a "middle-Eastern polygamous molecule", which he symbolically defined as X4Y.

“The force which presides over chemical combinations, is called chemical affinity; and it is in the exhibition of this that atoms act so much like the forms of higher organisms. To illustrate: oxygen has but little affinity or atomic love, call it which you please, for copper, under general conditions; but as in the case of higher beings when you array them in their best, and make them as alluring as possible, so here,—if you heat the copper in the air oxygen will immediately rush to it, and with it form oxide of copper [Cu2O]. Their affinity for each other is now so great that they cannot be divorced, under ordinary circumstances. But even now if you mix this oxide with powdered charcoal, and then heat the mixture, a moment arrives when the affinity of the charcoal for the oxygen is greater than that of the copper, causing the oxygen to forsake the copper and unite with the charcoal to form carbonic acid [H2CO3]. The allurements of the charcoal suffice at last to cause the oxygen to leave its first love, and go with its new affinity.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds, pg. 182)

“We see similar action often in the case of men and women. Again, the attraction of hydrogen [H2] for oxygen [O2] is very great under ordinary circumstances, causing them to live in the greatest harmony, as, for instance, in water [H2O]; but as at times a third party is seen to insinuate himself into a household, destroy its peace, and ultimately break up its union, so here if an atom of potassium [K], for instance, finds its way into a molecule of water, the peace of the molecular family is at once destroyed and jealousy and a murderous quarrel ensue, the metal burning brightly, and darting hither and thither on the surface of the water, exulting as it were in the mischief it works. In this contest of atomic affinity or love, the potash wins the day [H2O + K → KOH + H2], taking away with itself two blushing damsels for its harem, and leaving an atom of hydrogen [H2] like the last rose of summer to droop and die of a broken heart.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds, pg. 182-83)

“The atoms that combine to form a new family or molecule do not absolutely touch one another, because each atom, being a point of force, must have a certain portion of space to vibrate in; but comparatively speaking the spaces that separate the atoms of a molecule one from another are reduced to zero by chemical affinity. As in the highest manifestations of consciousness, so in the atomic world, affinity sweeps all before it, being satisfied with nothing less than oneness of life. The spaces between contiguous molecules are much greater than those between contiguous atoms; for molecules are bound together by the force of cohesion, while atoms are bound together by that of chemical affinity. The difference between chemical affinity and cohesion is similar to that between mere friendship and a real union of hearts. Still, as each heart, however closely united to another, must have some room for independent act and thought, so has every atom its own little orbit of motion independent of the movement of the molecule as a whole. These spaces are supposed, and very properly so, to be full of ether, a substance near to the original force out of which this mighty fabric of a universe has been spun.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds, pg. 183)

“As in the family too great independent action, or the striving after individual rather than joint welfare, must inevitably bring disruption of family ties, so in what is termed the inorganic world, excessive atomic or molecular activity brings disruption of the whole. In the family the assertion of excessive individuality may follow inflamed passions, and this is not without its parallel in the inorganic world. If you heat a solid body, the force thus applied expends itself partly in raising the body's temperature, and partly in increasing the distances which separate the molecules and atoms. As the heat is continued this independent molecular activity increases until the force of cohesion is almost entirely overcome. The molecules begin to slide freely over one another, as in the liquid state, no longer keeping their relative positions. In this state they move not unlike a straying comet or wandering star, or a human being who allured by the charmer, is on the very verge of forsaking both consort and children. If the heat be further increased, the molecules grow wider and wider apart until they move about independently of one another, as they do in the gaseous state, where each tries to possess the whole territory for itself.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds, pg. 184)

“But as in the case of young people, if you encourage their acquaintance, and make marriage appear a gain to both, wedlock will probably ensue; so in the case of the triturated iron and sulphur mixed together; if you heat this mixture the sulphur will be seen first to melt, like a young lady unable to withstand further the tears and groans of her lover; then the whole mass will blacken, if the temperature be sufficiently elevated; and after cooling the substance will be found to be perfectly homogeneous. No power now can discriminate the iron from the sulphur. Both have disappeared as such, having formed a new substance known as sulphide of iron.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds, pg. 185)

“If now this sulphide of iron be allowed to remain in a damp atmosphere, an efflorescence will be seen to collect on its surface composed of a saline matter. The sulphide of iron has here attracted to its family-life certain other individuals. Like a sultan, or Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob of old; so the iron, not being content with one young damsel, takes to itself four others, fair as the moon in its fullness, in the persons of four atoms of oxygen from the air, forming what is known as green vitriol or sulphate of iron.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds, pg. 185-86)

Bray shown fence sitting on whether atoms are alive [see: living atom]; by virtue of the paradoxical situation that he can't figure out where he came "alive" in the descent down the great chain of being in respect to the forces in nature and in atoms?

“On this ground very many atomic phenomena, not otherwise easily explained, are capable of ready solution. And while we may not have conclusive scientific reason for regarding atoms as living substances, it is more certain still that we are unable to say where life begins in the forces of nature.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds III, pg. 182)

“It is said the pure in heart see god. This saying is doubtless true. But he who has not eyes to see this god in the rippling brook, the sprouting seed, the budding tree, the suns that roll, or the hydrogen atoms, will look long ere he sees him elsewhere. I cannot doubt that one of the surest stepping-stones to a higher life, is the learning to love the beauties of nature as she displays them in her infinite variety of ever changing forms. The true student of nature sees in her not the dead thing which the unthoughtful imagine. Indeed, he is conscious that almost every form of power manifested by the highest human intelligence, is in some degree manifested by the most loathesome animalcule that we destroy without a thought of the wonderful powers shut up in this microscopic organism. As with the organic atom, so with the inorganic, — to the soul schooled to appreciate nature's revelations, nothing seems to be dead, nothing seems to be common.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§6: Atomic and Molecular Worlds I, pg. 159)

“What is life may be subject of dispute; but it is far from true that we are no better able to answer this question to-day than last century. For ourselves we hold that life is immanent in substance; and we think it may be safely stated that modern science does not believe that it needs a truly organized structure for the manifestation of life. It is true we do not recognize conscious stones, nor conscious trees; but this does not prove that life is not universally diffused, and that the whole of nature is not indeed and in truth alive.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (pg. 204)

“In considering the origin and manifestation of life, it would be foolish to suppose that a being with the very limited powers of man, could possibly discriminate between the manifestation of so-called dead force and so-called living [living force], when having under consideration objects of such infinitely small proportions. Because therefore man cannot see the muscles of an atom contract, or its lips articulating, or watch its organs perform their various functions, there is no reason for affirming that the atom is not a living being. When the thing itself is infinitely beyond the understanding of the greatest mind, it were only madness to suppose that we could know all its attributes and qualities. If I have affirmed, and if I believe that the atom is a thinking conscious being, it is not because I have scientifically demonstrated its intelligence or personality; but because of far higher reasons than those of physical science: I am a thinking conscious being; and whatever is in me, must be in the atom either actually or potentially, it matters not which.”

Friedrich Wohler's 1828 urea synthesis, which according to Bray "bridged the gap" between organic and inorganic or the "living and the dead" as Bray puts it.

“Some years ago chemistry was divided into inorganic and organic branches, on the supposition that what is known as the life-principle was somehow a necessary factor in the formation of the organic compounds; but since very many of these compounds have been made, and are now daily making, in all the laboratories of the world, this supposed principle of differentiation has to be given up. Today organic chemistry is sometimes called, ‘chemistry of the carbon compounds’; sometimes, ‘chemistry of the hydro-carbons and their derivatives’. By whatever name one may call it, chemists no longer believe that organic chemistry is dependent on any so-called life principle for the formation of its compounds. Especially is this true since potassium cyanide [KCN], urea [CH4N2O], potassium formate [HCO2K], and acetylene [C2H2] were formed by Wohler and Berthelot: and since in our own day carbon compounds exactly as they exist in the bodies of plants and animals are prepared hourly with simply chemical means. Thus therefore the supposed chasm between the so-called living and the so-called dead has been most certainly bridged [compare: unbridgeable gap].”

“The idea of the unity of organic and inorganic nature is now firmly established. . . . All natural bodies which are known to us are equally animated, and the distinction which has been made between animals and inanimate bodies does not exist.”

— Ernst Haeckel (1862), The History of Creation (pg. 22); in: The Living Universe (pg. 180)

Bray's §19: “Atomic and Human Affinities”, wherein he begins to get into the meat of his discussion; an equivalent modern title would be “Atomic and Human Free Energies”, being that affinity and free energy are equivalent, via the Goethe-Helmholtz equation.

“It may be said that all the changes that occur in the so-called material world are the result of chemical affinity; and in like manner that all the changes that occur in so-called higher life, are generally speaking the result of the attraction of the one sex for the other. Not a brick would be made, nor plank sawed, nor mortar mixed, nor shingle cut, not tent pitched, nor wheel turned, nor axle oiled, nor fire built, nor exertion seen, nor hope expressed, were it not for the fact of the mutual longing of the sexes for each other. Analyze thoroughly human activities, and you will find that the final cause of all endeavor is the realization of those relations to which the sexual instinct is ever turning.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (pg. 257)

“We often hear today of family ties severed because of the appearance in the family circle of ‘affinities’; and although such severance must frequently give pain to the party forsaken, and bring evil to the progeny, if there be such, it nevertheless remains a fact that where freedom of action is permissible such severance is unavoidable. This is paralleled in the case of the atoms.

Oxygen has a stronger affinity for hydrogen than for nitrogen. Indeed it seems almost to hate the latter, even though by force of circumstances united with it. We often see this condition manifested in family life. Men and women are driven frequently to marry by the force of circumstances, men because of their passions, women for the sake of having a home. Seldom is the tie, thus formed, willingly preserved unbroken.

In general, formed without thought, or for an unworthy end, the tie is snapped asunder, and the parties to it assume their former individual liberty. It cannot be denied that as one element has greater attraction for one than for another; so one man or woman may have greater attraction for one person of the opposite sex than for another; nor can it be denied that when this attraction, this natural inclination, is fully satisfied or fully reciprocated, the union is more agreeable and lasting.

Artificial rules, legal restraint, may force compliance with undesired conditions, or hold together those unwillingly bound or hating their yoke; but only nature can keep the opposite sexes willingly, gladly, and permanently united. The mutual love of the opposite sexes is rational and proper, as it is also the strongest and most irrepressible of all animal forces.”

Bray’s oxygen=nitrogen + hydrogen comparison to unwilled married couple plus single person, from his §19: “Atomic and Human Affinities” (pgs. 258-59), wherein, in short, he states that oxygen O bonded to nitrogen N, i.e. nitric oxide NO, owing to “circumstances” could be similar to a “man and woman driven to marry by the force of circumstances”, in which “seldom is the tie, thus formed, willingly preserved unbroken”, according to which if hydrogen H, which has a “stronger affinity for oxygen than for nitrogen”, is introduced into the system, the laws of force will prevail, and oxygen (or male A) will detach from nitrogen (or female B) and attach to hydrogen (or female C). In modern terms, nitrogen oxide reacts with hydrogen to form nitrogen and water vapor, via the following reaction: (Ѻ) 2NO(g) + 2H2(g) → N2(g) +2H2O(g) Thus, Bray says, “If three persons stand side by side, two married and the third single, the fact that two are wedded will not prevent them disregarding their wedlock, if the third party has the natural affinity requisite for separating them, provided that the parties are allowed complete freedom of action.”

“We have said that all earthly changes and developments are the results of the mutual love of the sexes; but we can with equal certainty affirm that all chemical changes occurring in the world are the result of chemical affinity. In this case we use a word to express atomic attraction that sometimes straying lovers use to express the object of their illicit longings. That the word should be admissible in the one activity and forbidden in the other, is not natural to say the least.

If three persons stand side by side, two married and the third single, the fact that two are wedded will not prevent them disregarding their wedlock, if the third party has the natural affinity requisite for separating them, provided that the parties are allowed complete freedom of action.”

“Indeed, I am convinced from my knowledge of men and women, based on very extensive observations, and very wide relations, that were complete liberty of choice allowed in their intercourse one with another, no more than one in ten of those married would choose to continue their former relations rather than select new companions.”

“Think as we may, make what laws we please, we may suppress nature in these matters; but feelings repressed, and eruptive longings we cannot altogether hide, however much we would escape censure, or spare the feelings of others.

“Similar forces to those that thus bring together the opposite sexes are everywhere evident and acting in the so-called material world, and in the judgment of the writer, equally natural and all-conquering. In our conceit and blindness we call the one force ‘love’, and the other force ‘affinity’; but mere alteration of words cannot alter the fact that the two words are the expression of the same force in nature.”

“If we ask what is love, we can answer only as we answer the question what is chemical affinity. In the former case it is the mutual attraction and longings of the opposite sexes of human adults, which when according to nature bring them and hold them together; in the latter case it is the mutual attraction (and probably longings) of atoms, which being natural unites, and binds them together with the strongest ties known to natural law. Whatever mystery is involved in the one case, is in like manner involved in the other.”

“The skeptic may say, ‘But in man and woman there are feeling and consciousness, while in the case of atomic affinity there is neither.’ I answer, you speak carelessly, unscientifically, without knowledge. How do you know there is no feeling nor consciousness with the atoms? Have you asked them?”

“Have you been able to make yourself one of them in order to study their modes and activities, as sometimes man does, when trying to learn of the habits and manners of obscure and less civilized tribes? Has the atom not the same right to deny that man has either consciousness or feeling, because it has never witnessed its exhibition?”

“As bodies they act and interact, pass and repass, attract and repell, shun the society of some and seek that of others; and they build up, and as far as mortal man can know, keep in order the system to which they belong, as if their little cosmos were presided over, as we believe it is, by intelligent forces [see: higher power].”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (pg. 203)

“It is not at all probable that the author will ever write another book; nor would he be inclined to publish this, did he not feel that he owes it to the world. Socrates told the court that he was moved by the indwelling spirit to teach as he had taught; and thousands of others before and since have felt compelled to give utterance to thoughts not altogether originating in themselves. Without professing to have said the final word on the subjects concerning which the arguments and theories in this book are made, being a hard student and having been one all his life, and in addition to his natural love of study and assiduity in prosecuting it, having had a broader and more varied experience than but a few of his kind, and completed full courses in medicine, law, divinity, science and arts, and philosophy, receiving no less than six degrees from such well-known institutions of learning as Victoria University, Toronto University, Michigan University, Drew Theological School, and Hahnemann Medical College, Chicago, the author feels he is, and believers that the reader should consider him, comparatively well conversant with the subjects here investigated; and he does not doubt that the conclusions drawn from his life's studies and experience, and carefully set down in these pages, will stand the test of all true scholarship of the present, and be increasingly approved in the future.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (Preface, pgs. 5-6)

“Since my name is not Socrates or Einstein and I hold only one of the seven or eight PhD degrees this problem requires, readers are quite justified in questioning my qualifications to testify as such a multidisciplinary expert.”

— George Scott (1985), mini-introduction (pg. viii) to Atoms of the Living Flame

“The universe has its definite store of force which works in it under ever varying forms; is indestructible, not to be increased, everlasting and unchangeable like matter itself.”

— Hermann Helmholtz (c.1870), in: The Living Universe (pg. 14)

“The heat annually received on each square foot of the earth’s surface, if employed in a perfect heat engine, would hoist sixty tons to the height of a mile.”

— Charles Young (1889), General Astronomy (pg. 218); in: The Living Universe (pgs. 16-17)

“The scientist does not behold in nature what the poet does. He sees no blind chance, no miracles, no fate, unless you call perfection by that name.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (pg. 216)

“Neither fate nor chance is found, but everywhere law and harmony, that make the mighty cosmos one.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (pg. 226)

See main: Social Newton term analysis

Scientific terms	Religious terms	Elements	Metaphysical
Force (Ѻ) | 100+ Matter (Ѻ) | 100+ Atom (Ѻ) | 78+ Work (Ѻ) | 75+ Motion (Ѻ) | 61+ Molecule (Ѻ) | 46+ Heat (Ѻ) | 45+ Chemical (Ѻ) | 31+ Energy (Ѻ) | 30+ Affinity (Ѻ) | 14+ Affinities (Ѻ) | 10+ Electricity (Ѻ) | 5+ Mechanical (Ѻ) | 5+ Bond (Ѻ) | 1+	Life (Ѻ) | 100+ God (Ѻ) | 82+ Death (Ѻ) | 73+ Soul (Ѻ) | 52+ Spirit (Ѻ) | 22+	Hydrogen (Ѻ) | 38+ Iron (Ѻ) | 23+ Oxygen (Ѻ) | 20+ Carbon (Ѻ) | 13+ Sulphur (Ѻ) | 8+ Nitrogen (Ѻ) | 7+ Phosphorus (Ѻ) | 4+ Calcium (Ѻ) | 3+ etc.	Love (Ѻ) | 29+ Ether (Ѻ) | 22+ Hate (Ѻ) | 4+
_________________	______________	__________________	______________

“It will no doubt be interesting to others besides Episcopalians to know that Henry Bray has become an author since leaving here and of the most pronounced radical type. His great ability and still greater aggressiveness will be remembered. When here he was a high-church-man of the narrowest type. The apostolic succession of priests, or rather bishops, of the English church was a position he was ready to defend against all comers. But he was well read in both modern science and philosophy. These seem at length to have got the better of his Athanasian theology, and historical criticism has upset his former views upon miracles and the Christian evidences. It appears that he is now out of the church, whether driven out or gone of his own accord we are not informed. Still the church that can still keep within its communion and priesthood Heber Newton ought to have a place for Henry Truro Bray if he wished to remain.”

— David Boyd (1890), A History of Greeley and the Union Colony of Colorado [5]

“Until 1888, Henry Bray imposed his theological views, which were not favorably accepted by the congregation. However, before he departed, he married Miss Mary Wormald, a member of the Boonville parish. Several years later he asked the bishop to depose him because his views were no longer in accordance with the teachings of the Episcopal Church.”

— Anon (c.1890), "Memorabilia of Cooper County" [6]

“One should [strive to] distinguish true riches from mere possessions, whether of gold or of cattle on a thousand hills, who although born onward by their fellows in the latter’s mad rush and senseless strife for position, fame, or wealth, never cease to point out the shadowy, delusive, and debasing nature of that.”

— Henry Bray (1910) “Dedication”, in The Living Universe (pg. 3)

“As in temperate zones civilization best flourishes, so chemical union is most active with no extremes of temperature. With excessive heat atomic individuality is excessively asserted; with excessive cold the atomic freedom is almost swallowed up in its servile subjection to molecular power.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds, pg. 186)

“Without any doubt death is a part of the order of nature, and therefore a real good, whether it be the end of man's individuality, his metempsychosis, his change into some other form of being, or his entrance, as some believe, into a glorious immortality.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (§8: Atomic and Molecular Worlds, pg. 187)

“The thinking man is not unfrequently moved with a burning desire to know what nature has in store for him.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (pg. 213)

“Aristotle, the greatest of all minds, tells us that it is through wonder men begin to philosophize, at first trying to unfold the more readily explicable, afterwards proceeding to the more difficult: the philosopher may therefore be considered a wise fool; for he who wonders at things, finding himself at a loss to explain the phenomena, is called ignorant.”

— Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe (pg. 351)