We see why the outer planets and satellites are larger than the interior ones; why the larger planets rotate rapidly, and the small ones slowly; why of the satellites the outer planets have more, the inner fewer.

We are furnished with indications of the time of revolution of the planets in their orbits, and of the satellites in theirs; we perceive the mode of formation of Saturn's rings.

We find an explanation of the physical condition of the sun, and the transitions of condition through which the earth and moon have passed, as indicated by their geology.
But two exceptions to the above peculiarities have been noted; they are in the cases of Uranus and Neptune.
The existence of such a nebulous mass once admitted, all the rest follows as a matter of necessity.

Is there not, however, a most serious objection in the way?
Is not this to exclude Almighty God from the worlds he has made?
First, we must be satisfied whether there is any solid evidence for admitting the existence of such a nebulous mass.
The nebular hypothesis rests primarily on the telescopic discovery made by Herschel I., that there are scattered here and there in the heavens pale, gleaming patches of light, a few of which are large enough to be visible to the naked eye.

Of these, many may be resolved by a sufficient telescopic power into a congeries of stars, but some, such as the great nebula in Orion, have resisted the best instruments hitherto made.
It was asserted by those who were indisposed to accept the nebular hypothesis, that the non-resolution was due to imperfection in the telescopes used.