diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/69892-h/69892-h.htm')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/69892-h/69892-h.htm | 8332 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 8332 deletions
diff --git a/old/69892-h/69892-h.htm b/old/69892-h/69892-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index f76ac26..0000000 --- a/old/69892-h/69892-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,8332 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> - -<head> - <meta charset="UTF-8"> - <title> - Zetetic Astronomy. Earth not a Globe!, by “Parallax.”—A Project Gutenberg eBook - </title> - - <link rel="icon" href="images/cover.jpg" type="image/x-cover"> - - <style> - - a - {text-decoration: none;} - a:hover - {text-decoration: underline;} - body - {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; max-width: 65em;} - .bot - {vertical-align: bottom;} - .bt - {border-top: solid thin;} - .caption - {font-size: .9em; text-align: center; text-indent: 0;} - .center - {text-align: center; text-indent: 0;} - .chapter - {page-break-before: always;} - .container - {margin: 1.25em auto; padding: 0; text-align: center; max-width: 100%; page-break-inside: avoid;} - .container.left - {margin: 0 .75em 0 0; float: left; max-width: 30%;} - .container.right - {margin: 0 0 0 .75em; float: right; max-width: 30%;} - .fnanchor - {vertical-align: top; font-size: .7em; text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap;} - .footnote - {margin: .75em 2em .75em 4em; font-size: .9em;} - .x-ebookmaker .footnote {margin-left: 1em;} - .footnote .label - {float: left; font-size: .8em; vertical-align: top; margin: 0; text-indent: -4em; padding: 0;} - .x-ebookmaker .footnote .label {float: none; margin-left: 1em; text-indent: 0;} - .footnote p - {margin-top: .25em; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; text-indent: 1em;} - .fsize60 - {font-size: .6em;} - .fsize70 - {font-size: .7em;} - .fsize80 - {font-size: .8em;} - .fsize110 - {font-size: 1.1em;} - .fsize125 - {font-size: 1.25em;} - .fsize150 - {font-size: 1.5em;} - .fsize175 - {font-size: 1.75em;} - .fsize200 - {font-size: 2em;} - .gesp1 - {letter-spacing: .1em; margin-right: -.1em;} - .gesp2 - {letter-spacing: .2em; margin-right: -.2em;} - h1, - h2, - h3, - h4, - h5, - h6 - {text-align: center; font-size: 1em; font-weight: normal;} - h1 - {line-height: 2em; margin-top: 2em; font-size: 1.5em; font-weight: bold;} - h2 - {margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: .75em; font-size: 1.25em;} - h2.nobreak, - h3.nobreak - {page-break-before: avoid;} - h2 .chaptitle - {word-spacing: .2em;} - h2 .secno - {font-size: 1.5em; font-weight: bold; line-height: 5em;} - .horsplit - {display: inline-block; vertical-align: middle; text-align: center; white-space: nowrap; padding: 0; text-indent: 0; - font-size: 90%;} - .horsplit .bot - {padding: 0 .25em; display: block; vertical-align: top; text-indent: 0;} - .horsplit .top - {border-bottom: solid thin; padding: 0 .25em; display: block; vertical-align: bottom; text-indent: 0;} - hr - {width: 34%; margin: 2em 33%; color: black; clear: none;} - hr.chap - {width: 26%; margin: 3em 37%;} - hr.footnote - {width: 10%; margin: .5em 90% .5em 0;} - hr.full - {width: 100%; margin: 2em 0; clear: both;} - img - {max-width: 100%; height: auto;} - .left - {text-align: left;} - .oldtype - {font-family: "Old English Text MT",sans-serif;} - p - {margin-top: .75em; text-align: justify; margin-bottom: 0; text-indent: 1em;} - p.blankafter6 - {margin-bottom: 6em;} - p.blankbefore75 - {margin-top: .75em;} - p.blankbefore2 - {margin-top: 2em;} - p.blankbefore6 - {margin-top: 6em;} - p.center - {text-align: center; text-indent: 0;} - p.highline15 - {line-height: 1.5em;} - p.highline2 - {line-height: 2em;} - p.highline25 - {line-height: 2.5em;} - p.highline6 - {line-height: 6em;} - p.noindent - {text-indent: 0;} - p.poemcredit - {font-size: .9em; margin: -.75em 0 .75em 50%;} - .padl2 - {padding-left: 1em;} - .padl6 - {padding-left: 3em;} - .padr2 - {padding-right: 1em;} - .padr4 - {padding-right: 2em;} - .padr6 - {padding-right: 3em;} - .pagenum - {position: absolute; right: 2%; font-size: .75em; text-align: right; color: gray; text-decoration: none; - font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-indent: 0;} - .poetry-container - {text-align: center;} - .poetry - {text-align: left; margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 5%; font-size: .9em; display: inline-block;} - .poetry .stanza - {margin: .75em auto;} - .poetry .verse - {text-indent: -3em; padding-left: 3em;} - .poetry .verse.indent00 - {padding-left: 2.6em;} - .poetry .verse.indent0 - {padding-left: 3em;} - .x-ebookmaker .poetry - {display: block;} - .quote - {margin-top: 1.25em; margin-bottom: 1.25em; font-size: .9em;} - .quote .pagenum - {font-size: .8em;} - .right - {text-align: right;} - .righttext - {float: right; text-align: right; padding-left: 1em; display: inline-block;} - .x-ebookmaker .righttext {float: right; display: block; white-space: nowrap;} - .smcap - {font-variant: small-caps;} - .smcapall - {text-transform: lowercase; font-variant: small-caps;} - sub - {font-size: .7em; vertical-align: -10%;} - sup - {font-size: .7em; vertical-align: 25%;} - .syllogism - {margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0;} - .syllogism p - {line-height: 1.25em;} - table - {border-collapse: collapse; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;} - table.standard - {margin-top: 1.25em; margin-bottom: 1.25em; font-size: .9em;} - table.standard .fn - {margin-left: -.5em;} - table.standard td - {padding-left: .25em; padding-right: .25em;} - table.standard td.text - {text-align: left; vertical-align: top; padding-left: 1.25em; text-indent: -1em;} - table.standard td.numbers - {text-align: center; vertical-align: bottom; white-space: nowrap;} - table.sunaltitude - {margin-top: 1.25em; margin-bottom: 1.25em; font-size: .9em; white-space: nowrap;} - table.sunaltitude td - {padding-left: .25em; padding-right: .25em;} - table.sunaltitude td.angle - {text-align: left; padding-right: 2em;} - table.sunaltitude td.brace - {width: .001em; padding: 0;} - table.sunaltitude td.number - {text-align: center;} - table.sunaltitude td.text - {text-align: left;} - td.brace - {width: .001em; padding: 0;} - th - {font-weight: normal; white-space: nowrap; text-align: center; vertical-align: bottom; padding-left: .1em; - padding-right: .1em;} - .titlepage - {margin: 2em auto; padding: 2em; text-align: center; border: solid medium; max-width: 30em;} - .titlepage hr.short - {margin: .5em 45%; width: 10%;} - .titlepage p - {text-align: center; text-indent: 0;} - .tnbot - {border: dashed thin; margin: 1em 10%; padding: .5em;} - .tnbot h2 - {font-size: 1em;} - .tnbot p - {text-indent: -1em; margin-left: 1em; margin-top: .25em;} - .tnbot p.blankbefore75 - {margin-top: .75em;} - .tnbox - {border: dashed thin; margin: 1em 20%; padding: 1em;} - .toc - {margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 2em;} - .toc .tocsec - {text-align: center; text-indent: 0; line-height: 2em; margin-top: 1.25em;} - .toc .tocsectit - {text-align: center; text-indent: 0; line-height: 1.25em;} - .top - {vertical-align: top;} - .wauto - {width: auto;} - .w03em - {width: 3em;} - .w05em - {width: 5em;} - .w30em - {width: 30em;} - .w35em - {width: 35em;} - .w40em - {width: 40em;} - .w45em - {width: 45em;} - .w50em - {width: 50em;} - .ws2 - {word-spacing: .2em;} - - </style> - -</head> -<body> -<p style='text-align:center; font-size:1.2em; font-weight:bold'>The Project Gutenberg eBook of Zetetic astronomy, by Samual Birley Rowbotham</p> -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online -at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you -are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the -country where you are located before using this eBook. -</div> - -<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Title: Zetetic astronomy</p> -<p style='display:block; margin-left:2em; text-indent:0; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:1em;'>Earth not a globe! An experimental inquiry into the true figure of the earth etc.</p> -<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Author: Samual Birley Rowbotham</p> -<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Release Date: January 28, 2023 [eBook #69892]</p> -<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Language: English</p> - <p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em; text-align:left'>Produced by: deaurider, Harry Lamé and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)</p> -<div style='margin-top:2em; margin-bottom:4em'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ZETETIC ASTRONOMY ***</div> - -<div class="tnbox"> - -<p class="noindent">Please see the <a href="#TN">Transcriber’s Notes</a> at the end of this text.</p> - -<p class="noindent blankbefore75">The cover image has been created for this e-text, and is in the public domain.</p> - -</div><!--tnbox--> - -<hr class="chap"> - -<div class="container w35em x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<img src="images/cover.jpg" alt="Cover image"> - -<hr class="chap"> - -</div><!--container--> - -<div class="titlepage"> - -<p class="highline15">[<i>Entered at Stationer’s Hall.</i>]</p> - -<hr class="short"> - -<h1>ZETETIC ASTRONOMY.<br> -<span class="fsize125 gesp1">EARTH NOT A GLOBE!</span></h1> - -<p class="highline25">AN EXPERIMENTAL INQUIRY<br> -<span class="fsize70">INTO THE</span><br> -<span class="fsize150">TRUE FIGURE OF THE EARTH:</span><br> -<span class="fsize175 gesp2 ws2"><b>PROVING IT A PLANE,</b></span><br> -<span class="fsize60">WITHOUT AXIAL OR ORBITAL MOTION;<br> -AND THE</span><br> -<span class="fsize200"><b>ONLY MATERIAL WORLD</b></span><br> -<span class="fsize60">IN</span><br> -<span class="fsize200"><b>THE UNIVERSE!</b></span></p> - -<hr class="short"> - -<p class="highline2 fsize125">BY “PARALLAX.”</p> - -<p class="highline15 blankbefore2 gesp1"><span class="oldtype"><b>London:</b></span><br> -<span class="fsize80">SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, AND CO., STATIONERS’ HALL COURT.</span><br> -<span class="oldtype"><b>Bath:</b></span><br> -<span class="fsize80">S. HAYWARD, GREEN STREET.</span><br> -1865.<br> -[<i>The Right of Translation is Reserved by the Author.</i>]</p> - -</div><!--title page--> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<p class="center fsize80 blankbefore6 blankafter6 highline2">BATH:<br> -PRINTED BY S. HAYWARD, GREEN STREET.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Pageiii">[iii]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak">GENERAL CONTENTS.</h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<div class="toc"> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec1">SECTION I</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">Introduction—Experiments proving the Earth to be a Plane.</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec2">SECTION II</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">The Earth no Axial or Orbital Motion.</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec3">SECTION III</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">The true distance of the Sun and Stars.</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec4">SECTION IV</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">The Sun moves in a Circle over the Earth, concentric with -the North Pole.</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec5">SECTION V</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">Diameter of Sun’s path constantly changing.</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec6">SECTION VI</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">Cause of Day and Night, Seasons, &c.</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec7">SECTION VII</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">Cause of “Sun rise” and “Sun set.”</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec8">SECTION VIII</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">Cause of Sun appearing larger when “Arising” and “Setting” -than when on the Meridian.</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec9">SECTION IX</a>.<span class="pagenum" id="Pageiv">[iv]</span></p> - -<p class="tocsectit">Cause of Solar and Lunar Eclipses.</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec10">SECTION X</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">Cause of Tides.</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec11">SECTION XI</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">Constitution, Condition, and ultimate Destruction of the Earth -by Fire.</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec12">SECTION XII</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">Miscellanea—Moon’s Phases—Moon’s appearance—Planet -Neptune—Pendulum Experiments as Proofs of Earth’s motion.</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec13">SECTION XIII</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">Perspective on the Sea.</p> - -<p class="tocsec"><a href="#Sec14">SECTION XIV</a>.</p> - -<p class="tocsectit">General Summary—Application—“<span class="smcap">Cui Bono</span>.”</p> - -</div><!--toc--> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page3">[3]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec1">ZETETIC ASTRONOMY.</h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent">The term “zetetic” is derived from the Greek -verb <i>zeteo</i>; which means to search or examine—to -proceed only by inquiry. None can doubt -that by making special experiments and collecting -manifest and undeniable facts, arranging -them in logical order, and observing what is -naturally and fairly deducible, the result will be -far more consistent and satisfactory than by -framing a theory or system and assuming the -existence of causes for which there is no direct -evidence, and which can only be admitted “for -the sake of argument.” All theories are of this -character—“supposing instead of inquiring, -imagining systems instead of learning from -observation and experience the true constitution -of things. Speculative men, by the force of genius -may invent systems that will perhaps be greatly -admired for a time; these, however, are phantoms -which the force of truth will sooner or later -dispel; and while we are pleased with the deceit, -true philosophy, with all the arts and improvements -that depend upon it, suffers. The real -state of things escapes our observation; or, if it -presents itself to us, we are apt either to reject it<span class="pagenum" id="Page4">[4]</span> -wholly as fiction, or, by new efforts of a vain ingenuity -to interweave it with our own conceits, and -labour to make it tally with our favourite schemes. -Thus, by blending together parts so ill-suited, -the whole comes forth an absurd composition of -truth and error. * * These have not done near -so much harm as that pride and ambition which -has led philosophers to think it beneath them to -offer anything less to the world than a complete -and finished system of nature; and, in order to -obtain this at once, to take the liberty of inventing -certain principles and hypotheses, from which -they pretend to explain all her mysteries.”<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="label">[1]</a> “An Account of Sir Isaac Newton’s Discoveries.” By -Professor Maclaurin, M.A., F.R.S., of the Chair of Mathematics -in the University of Edinburgh.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>Copernicus admitted, “It is not necessary that -hypotheses should be true, or even probable; it -is sufficient that they lead to results of calculation -which agree with calculations. * * Neither -let any one, so far as hypotheses are concerned, -expect anything <i>certain</i> from astronomy; since -that science can afford nothing of the kind; -lest, in case he should adopt for truth things -feigned for another purpose, he should leave this -study more foolish than he came. * * The -hypothesis of the terrestrial motion was <i>nothing -but an hypothesis</i>, valuable only so far as it -explained phenomena, and not considered with -reference to absolute truth or falsehood.” The<span class="pagenum" id="Page5">[5]</span> -Newtonian and all other “systems of nature” -are little better than the “hypothesis of the -terrestrial motion” of Copernicus. The foundations -or premises are always unproved; no proof -is ever attempted; the necessity for it is denied; -it is considered sufficient that the assumptions -shall <i>seem</i> to explain the phenomena selected. -In this way it is that one theory supplants -another; that system gives way to system as one -failure after another compels opinions to change. -This will ever be so; there will always exist in -the mind a degree of uncertainty; a disposition -to look upon philosophy as a vain pretension; a -something almost antagonistic to the highest -aspirations in which humanity can indulge, unless -the practice of theorising be given up, and the -method of simple inquiry, the “zetetic” process -be adopted. “Nature speaks to us in a peculiar -language; in the language of phenomena, she -answers at all times the questions which are put -to her; and such questions are experiments.”<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> -Not experiments only which corroborate what -has previously been <i>assumed</i> to be true; but -experiments in every form bearing on the subject -of inquiry, before a conclusion is drawn or -premises affirmed.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="label">[2]</a> “Liebig’s Agricultural Chemistry,” p. 39.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>We have an excellent example of zetetic -reasoning in an arithmetical operation; more<span class="pagenum" id="Page6">[6]</span> -especially so in what is called the “Golden Rule,” -or the “Rule-of-Three.” If one hundred weight of -any article is worth a given sum, what will some -other weight of that article be worth? The -separate figures may be considered as the -elements or facts of the inquiry; the placing and -working of these as the logical arrangement; -and the quotient or answer as the fair and natural -deduction. Hence, in every zetetic process, the -conclusion arrived at is essentially a quotient, -which, if the details be correct, must, of necessity, -be true beyond the reach or power of contradiction.</p> - -<p>In our courts of Justice we have also an -example of the zetetic process. A prisoner is -placed at the bar; evidence for and against him -is advanced; it is carefully arranged and -patiently considered; and only such a verdict -given as could not in justice be avoided. Society -would not tolerate any other procedure; it would -brand with infamy whoever should assume a -prisoner to be guilty, and prohibit all evidence -but such as would corroborate the assumption. -Yet such is the character of theoretical -philosophy!</p> - -<p>The zetetic process is also the natural method -of investigation; nature herself teaches it. -Children invariably seek information by asking -questions—by earnestly inquiring from those<span class="pagenum" id="Page7">[7]</span> -around them. Question after question in rapid -and exciting succession will often proceed from -a child, until the most profound in learning and -philosophy will feel puzzled to reply. If then -both nature and justice, as well as the common -sense and practical experience of mankind -demand, and will not be content with less or -other than the zetetic process, why should it be -ignored and violated by the learned in philosophy? -Let the practice of theorising be cast aside as one -fatal to the full development of truth; oppressive -to the reasoning power; and in every sense -inimical to the progress and permanent improvement -of the human race.</p> - -<p>If then we adopt the zetetic process to ascertain -the true figure and condition of the Earth, -we shall find that instead of its being a globe, -and moving in space, it is the directly contrary—<span class="smcap">A -Plane</span>; without motion, and unaccompanied -by anything in the Firmament analogous to -itself.</p> - -<p>If the Earth is a globe, and 25,000 miles in -circumference, the surface of all standing water -must have a certain degree of convexity—every -part must be an arc of a circle, curvating from -the summit at the rate of 8 inches per mile -multiplied by the square of the distance. That -this may be sufficiently understood, the following -quotation is given from the <i>Encyclopædia<span class="pagenum" id="Page8">[8]</span> -Britannica</i>, art. “Levelling.” “If a line which -crosses the plumb-line at right angles be -continued for any considerable length it will rise -above the Earth’s surface (the Earth being -globular); and this rising will be as the square -of the distance to which the said right line is -produced; that is to say, it is raised eight inches -very nearly above the Earth’s surface at one -mile’s distance; four times as much, or 32 inches, -at the distance of two miles; nine times as -much, or 72 inches, at the distance of three -miles. This is owing to the globular figure of -the Earth, and this rising is the difference -between the true and apparent levels; the curve -of the Earth being the true level, and the tangent -to it the apparent level. So soon does the -difference between the true and apparent levels -become perceptible that it is necessary to make -an allowance for it if the distance betwixt the -two stations exceeds two chains.</p> - -<div class="container left" id="Fig01"> - -<img src="images/fig01.png" alt="Diagram"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 1.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p class="noindent">Let B. D. be a small -portion of the Earth’s -circumference, whose -centre of curvature is -A. and consequently all -the points of this arc -will be on a level. But -a tangent B. C. meeting -the vertical line A. D. in C. will be the apparent<span class="pagenum" id="Page9">[9]</span> -level at the point B. and therefore D. C. is the -difference between the apparent and the true -level at the point B.</p> - -<p>The distance C. D. must be deducted from the -observed height to have the true difference of -level; or the differences between the distances -of two points from the surface of the Earth or -from the centre of curvature A. But we shall -afterwards see how this correction may be avoided -altogether in certain cases. To find an expression -for C. D. we have Euclid, third book, 36 prop. -which proves that B. C² = C. D. (2 <i>A D</i> × <i>C D</i>); -but since in all cases of levelling C. D. is exceedingly -small compared with 2 A. D., we may -safely neglect C. D² and then B C² = 2 A. D × C. D. or -C. D = <span class="horsplit"><span class="top">B. C²</span> -<span class="bot">2 A. D</span></span>. -Hence the depression of -the true level is equal to the square of the -distance divided by twice the radius of the -curvature of the Earth.</p> - -<p>For example, taking a distance of four miles, -the square of 4 = 16, and putting down twice the -radius of the Earth’s curvature as in round -figures about 8000 miles, we make the depression -on four miles = <span class="horsplit"><span class="top">16</span><span class="bot">8000</span></span> -of a mile = <span class="horsplit"><span class="top">16 × 1760</span><span class="bot">8000</span></span> -yards = <span class="horsplit"><span class="top">176</span><span class="bot">50</span></span> -yards = <span class="horsplit"><span class="top">528</span><span class="bot">50</span></span>feet, -or rather better than 10¹⁄₂ feet.</p> - -<p>Or, if we take the mean radius of the Earth as -the mean radius of its curvature, and consequently -2 A. D = 7,912 miles, then 5,280 feet -being 1 mile, we shall have C. D. the depression -in inches <span class="horsplit"><span class="top">5280 × 12 × B C²</span> -<span class="bot">7912</span></span> = 8008 B. C² inches. - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page10">[10]</span></p> - -<p>The preceding remarks suppose the visual -ray C. B. to be a straight line, whereas on -account of the unequal densities of the air at -different distances from the Earth, the rays of -light are incurvated by refraction. The effect of -this is to lessen the difference between the true -and apparent levels, but in such an extremely -variable and uncertain manner that if any constant -or fixed allowance is made for it in formulæ -or tables, it will often lead to a greater error than -what it was intended to obviate. For though -the refraction may at a mean compensate for -about a seventh of the curvature of the earth, it -sometimes exceeds a fifth, and at other times -does not amount to a fifteenth. We have, therefore, -made no allowance for refraction in the -foregone formulæ.”</p> - -<p>If the Earth is a globe, there cannot be a -question that, however irregular the <i>land</i> may -be in form, the <i>water</i> must have a convex surface. -And as the difference between the true and -apparent level, or the degree of curvature would -be 8 inches in one mile, and in every succeeding -mile 8 inches multiplied by the square of the -distance, there can be no difficulty in detecting -either its actual existence or proportion. Experiments -made upon the sea have been objected to on -account of its constantly-changing altitude; and -the existence of banks and channels which produce<span class="pagenum" id="Page11">[11]</span> -a “a crowding” of the waters, currents, and -other irregularities. Standing water has therefore -been selected, and many important experiments -have been made, the most simple of which is -the following:—In the county of Cambridge -there is an artificial river or canal, called the -“Old Bedford.” It is upwards of twenty miles -long, and passes in a straight line through that -part of the fens called the “Bedford level” The -water is nearly stationery—often entirely so, and -throughout its entire length has no interruption -from locks or water-gates; so that it is in every -respect well adapted for ascertaining whether -any and what amount of convexity really exists. -A boat with a flag standing three feet above the -water, was directed to sail from a place called -“Welney Bridge,” to another place called -“Welche’s Dam.” These two points are six -statute miles apart. The observer, with a good -telescope, was seated in the water as a bather (it -being the summer season), with the eye not -exceeding eight inches above the surface. The -flag and the boat down to the water’s edge -were clearly <i>visible throughout the whole distance!</i> -From this observation it was concluded -that the water did not decline to any degree -from the line of sight; whereas the water would -be 6 feet higher in the centre of the arc of 6 -miles extent than at the two places Welney<span class="pagenum" id="Page12">[12]</span> -Bridge and Welche’s Dam; but as the eye of -the observer was only eight inches above the -water, the highest point of the surface would be -at one mile from the place of observation; below -which point the surface of the water at the end -of the remaining five miles would be 16 feet 8 -inches (5² × 8 = 200 inches). This will be rendered -clear by the following diagram:—</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig02"> - -<img src="images/fig02.png" alt="Boating experiment"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 2.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p class="noindent">Let A B represent the arc of water from Welney -Bridge to Welche’s Dam, six miles in length; -and A L the line of sight, which is now a -tangent to the arc A B; the point of contact, -T, is 1 mile from the eye of the observer at A; -and from T to the boat at B is 5 miles; the -square of 5 miles multiplied by 8 inches is 200 -inches, or, in other words, that the boat at B -would have been 200 inches or above 16 feet -below the surface of the water at T; and the -flag on the boat, which was 3 feet high, would -have been 13 feet below the line-of-sight, A T L!!</p> - -<p>From this experiment it follows that the -surface of standing water is <i>not convex</i>, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page13">[13]</span> -therefore <i>that the Earth</i> <span class="smcap">is not a Globe</span>! On -the Contrary, this simple experiment is all-sufficient -to prove that the surface of the water is -parallel to the line-of-sight, and is therefore -horizontal, and that the Earth <i>cannot</i> be other -than <span class="smcap">a Plane</span>! In diagram <a href="#Fig03">Figure 3</a> this is -perfectly illustrated.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig03"> - -<img src="images/fig03.png" alt="Boating experiment"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 3.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p class="noindent">A B is the line-of-sight, and C D the surface -of the water equidistant from or parallel to it -throughout the whole distance observed.</p> - -<p>Although, on account of the variable state -of the water, objections have been raised to -experiments made upon the sea-shore to test the -convexity of the flood or ebb-tide level, none -can be urged against observations made from -higher altitudes. For example,—the distance -across the Irish Sea between Douglas Harbour, -in the Isle of Man, and the Great Orm’s Head -in North Wales is 60 miles. If the earth is a -globe, the surface of the water would form an -arc 60 miles in length, the centre of which would -be 1,944 feet higher than the coast line at either -end, so that an observer would be obliged to -attain this altitude before he could see the Welsh<span class="pagenum" id="Page14">[14]</span> -coast from the Isle of Man: as shown in the -diagram, <a href="#Fig04">Figure 4</a>.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig04"> - -<img src="images/fig04.png" alt="Irish Sea"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 4.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>It is well known, however, that from an -altitude not exceeding 100 feet the Great -Orm’s Head is visible in clear weather from -Douglas Harbour. The altitude of 100 feet -could cause the line of sight to touch the -horizon at the distance of nearly 13 miles; and -from the horizon to Orm’s Head being 47 miles, -the square of this number multiplied by 8 inches -gives 1472 feet as the distance which the Welsh -coast line would be below the line of sight -B C.—A representing the Great Orm’s Head, -which, being 600 feet high, its summit would -be 872 feet below the horizon.</p> - -<p>Many similar experiments have been made -across St. George’s Channel, between points -near Dublin and Holyhead, and always with -results entirely incompatible with the doctrine -of rotundity.</p> - -<p>Again, it is known that the horizon at sea, -whatever distance it may extend to the right<span class="pagenum" id="Page15">[15]</span> -and left of the observer on land, always appears -as a straight line. The following experiment -has been tried in various parts of the country. -At Brighton, on a rising ground near the race -course, two poles were fixed in the earth six -yards apart, and directly opposite the sea. -Between these poles a line was tightly stretched -parallel to the distant horizon. From the centre -of the line the view embraced not less than 20 -miles on each side, making a distance of 40 -miles. A vessel was observed sailing directly -westwards; the line cut the rigging a little above -the bulwarks, which it did for several hours or -until the vessel had sailed the whole distance of -40 miles. This will be understood by reference -to the diagram, <a href="#Fig05">Figure 5</a>.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig05"> - -<img src="images/fig05.png" alt="Brighton experiment"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 5.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>If the Earth were a globe, the appearance -would be as represented in <a href="#Fig06">Figure 6</a>.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig06"> - -<img src="images/fig06.png" alt="Brighton experiment"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 6.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page16">[16]</span></p> - -<div class="container right" id="Fig07"> - -<img src="images/fig07.png" alt="Brighton experiment"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 7.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>The ship coming into view from the east -would have to ascend an inclined plane for 20 -miles until it arrived at the centre of the arc -A B, whence it would have to descend for the -same distance. The square of 20 miles multiplied -by 8 inches gives 266 feet as the amount -the vessel would be below the line C D at the -beginning and at the end of the 40 miles.</p> - -<p>If we stand upon the deck of a ship, or mount -to the mast head; or go to the top of a mountain, -or ascend above the Earth in a balloon, -and look over the sea, the surface appears as a -vast inclined plane rising up until in the distance -it intercepts the line of sight. If a good mirror -be held in the opposite direction, the horizon -will be reflected as a well-defined mark or line -across the centre, as represented in diagram, -<a href="#Fig07">Figure 7</a>.</p> - -<p>Ascending or descending, the distant horizon -does the same. It rises and falls with the<span class="pagenum" id="Page17">[17]</span> -observer, and is always on a level with his eye. -If he takes a position where the water surrounds -him—as at the mast-head of a ship out of sight -of land, or on the summit of a small island far -from the mainland, the surface of the sea appears -to rise up on all sides equally and to surround -him like the walls of an immense amphitheatre. -He seems to be in the centre of a large concavity, -the edges of which expand or contract as he -takes a higher or lower position. This appearance -is so well known to sea-going travellers -that nothing more need be said in its support. -But the appearance from a balloon is familiar -only to a small number of observers, and therefore -it will be useful to quote from those who -have written upon the subject.</p> - -<div class="quote"> - -<p>“<i>The Apparent Concavity of the Earth as seen from a -Balloon.</i>—A perfectly-formed circle encompassed the visible -planisphere beneath, or rather the concavo-sphere it might -now be called, for I had attained a height from which the -surface of the Earth assumed a regularly hollowed or concave -appearance—an optical illusion which increases as you recede -from it. At the greatest elevation I attained, which was about -a mile-and-a-half, the appearance of the World around -me assumed a shape or form like that which is made by placing -two watch-glasses together by their edges, the balloon apparently -in the central cavity all the time of its flight at that elevation.”—<i>Wise’s -Aeronautics.</i></p> - -<p class="blankbefore75">“Another curious effect of the aerial ascent was, that the -Earth, when we were at our greatest altitude, positively -appeared <i>concave</i>, looking like a huge dark bowl, rather than<span class="pagenum" id="Page18">[18]</span> -the convex sphere such as we naturally expect to see it. * * * -The horizon always appears to be on a level with our eye, and -seems to rise as we rise, until at length the elevation of -the circular boundary line of the sight becomes so marked -that the Earth assumes the anomalous appearance as we have -said of a <i>concave</i> rather than a <i>convex</i> body.”—<i>Mayhew’s -Great World of London.</i></p> - -</div><!--quote--> - -<p>Mr. Elliott, an American æronaut, in a letter -giving an account of his ascension from Baltimore, -thus speaks of the appearance of the Earth -from a balloon:—</p> - -<div class="quote"> - -<p>“I don’t know that I ever hinted heretofore that the æronaut -may well be the most sceptical man about the rotundity of the -Earth. Philosophy imposes the truth upon us; but the view -of the Earth from the elevation of a balloon is that of an immense -terrestrial basin, the deeper part of which is that directly -under one’s feet. As we ascend, the Earth beneath us seems -to recede—actually to sink away—while the horizon gradually -and gracefully lifts a diversified slope stretching away farther -and farther to a line that, at the highest elevation, seems to close -with the sky. Thus upon a clear day, the æronaut feels as if -suspended at about an equal distance between the vast blue -oceanic concave above, and the equally expanded terrestrial -basin below.”</p> - -<p class="blankbefore75">“The chief peculiarity of the view from a balloon, at a -considerable elevation, was the altitude of the horizon, which -remained practically on a level with the eye at an elevation of -two miles, causing the surface of the Earth to appear <i>concave</i> -instead of <i>convex</i>, and to recede during the rapid ascent, whilst -the horizon and the balloon seemed to be stationary.”—<i>London -Journal</i>, July 18, 1857.</p> - -</div><!--quote--> - -<p>During the important balloon ascents recently -made for scientific purposes by Mr. Coxwell and<span class="pagenum" id="Page19">[19]</span> -Mr. Glaisher, of the Royal Greenwich Observatory, -the same phenomenon was observed—</p> - -<div class="quote"> - -<p>“The horizon always appeared on a level with the car.”—Vide -“Glaisher’s Report.”</p> - -</div><!--quote--> - -<p>The following diagram represents this appearance:—</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig08"> - -<img src="images/fig08.png" alt="Balloon"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 8.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p class="noindent">The surface of the earth C D appears to rise to -the line-of-sight from the balloon, and “seems to -close with the sky” at the points H H in the -same manner that the ceiling and the floor of a -long room, or the top and bottom of a tunnel -appear to approach each other, and from the -same cause, viz.: that they are <i>parallel to the -line-of-sight, and therefore horizontal</i>.</p> - -<p>If the Earth’s surface were convex the observer, -looking from a balloon, instead of seeing it -gradually ascend to the level of the eye, would<span class="pagenum" id="Page20">[20]</span> -have to look downwards to the horizon H H, as -represented in <a href="#Fig09">figure 9</a>, and the amount of dip -in the line-of-sight C H would be the greatest -at the highest elevation.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig09"> - -<img src="images/fig09.png" alt="Balloon flight"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 9.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>Many more experiments have been made than -are here described, but the selection now given -is amply sufficient to prove that the surface of -water is horizontal, and that the Earth, taken as -a whole, its land and water together, is not a -globe, has really no degree of sphericity; but is -“to all intents and purposes” <span class="smcapall">A PLANE</span>!</p> - -<p>If we now consider the fact that when we -travel by land or sea, and from any part of the -known world, in a direction towards the North -polar star, we shall arrive at one and the same -point, we are forced to the conclusion that what -has hitherto been called the North Polar region, -is really <span class="smcap">the Centre of the Earth</span>. That<span class="pagenum" id="Page21">[21]</span> -from this northern centre the land diverges and -stretches out, of necessity, towards a circumference, -which must now be called <span class="smcap">the Southern -Region</span>: which is a vast circle, and not a pole -or centre. That there is <span class="smcap">One Centre</span>—<span class="smcap">the -North</span>, and <span class="smcap">One Circumference</span>—<span class="smcap">the South</span>. -This language will be better understood by -reference to the diagram <a href="#Fig10">Figure 10</a>.</p> - -<div class="container w50em" id="Fig10"> - -<img src="images/fig10.jpg" alt="Map of flat earth"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 10.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p class="noindent">N represents the northern centre; and S S S -the southern circumference—both icy or frozen<span class="pagenum" id="Page22">[22]</span> -regions. That the south is an immense ring, or -glacial boundary, is evident from the fact, that -within the antarctic circle the most experienced, -scientific, and daring navigators have failed in -their attempts to sail, in a direct manner, completely -round it. Lieut. Wilkes, of the American -Navy, after great and prolonged efforts, and -much confusion in his reckoning, and seeing no -prospect of success, was obliged to give up his -attempt and return to the north. This he acknowledged -in a letter to Captain Sir James Clarke -Ross, with whose intention to explore the south -seas he had become acquainted, in which the -following words occur: “I hope you intend to -circumnavigate the antarctic circle. I made 70 -degrees of it.” Captain Ross, however, was himself -greatly confused in his attempts to navigate -the southern region. In his account of the -voyage he says, at page 96—“We found ourselves -every day from 12 to 16 miles by observation -in advance of our reckoning.” “By our -observations we found ourselves 58 miles to the -eastward of our reckoning in two days.” And -in this and other ways all the great navigators -have been frustrated in their efforts, and have -been more or less confounded in their attempts -to sail round the Earth upon or beyond the -antarctic circle. But if the southern region is a -pole or centre, like the north, there would be<span class="pagenum" id="Page23">[23]</span> -little difficulty in circumnavigating it, for the -distance round would be comparatively small. -When it is seen that the Earth is not a sphere, -but a plane, having only one centre, the north; -and that the south is the vast icy boundary of -the world, the difficulties experienced by circumnavigators -can be easily understood.</p> - -<p>Having given a surface or bird’s-eye view of -the Earth, the following sectional representation -will aid in completing the description.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig11"> - -<img src="images/fig11.png" alt="Section through earth"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 11.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p class="noindent">E E represents the Earth; W W the “great deep,” -or the waters which surround the land; N the -northern centre; and S S sections of the southern -ice. As the present description is purely zetetic, -and as every fact must therefore have its fullest -value assigned to it, and its consequences represented, -a peculiarity must be pointed out in the -foregoing diagram. It will be observed that from -about the points E E the surface of the water -rises towards the south S S. It is clearly -ascertained that the altitude of the water in -various parts of the world is much influenced by -the pressure of the atmosphere—however this<span class="pagenum" id="Page24">[24]</span> -pressure is caused—and it is well known that -the atmospheric pressure in the south is constantly -less than it is in the north, and therefore -the water in the southern region must always be -considerably higher than it is in the northern. -Hence the peculiarity referred to in the diagram. -The following quotation from Sir James Ross’s -voyages, p. 483, will corroborate the above statements:—“Our -barometrical experiments appear -to prove that a gradual diminution of atmospheric -pressure occurs as we proceed southwards from -the tropic of Capricorn. * * * It has -hitherto been considered that the mean pressure -of the atmosphere at the level of the sea was -nearly the same in all parts of the world, as no -material difference occurs between the equator -and the highest northern latitudes. * * * -The causes of the atmospheric pressure being so -<i>very much less</i> in the southern than in the -northern hemispheres remains to be determined.”</p> - -<p>Thus, putting all theories aside, we have seen -that direct experiment demonstrates the important -truth, <i>that the Earth is an extended -Plane</i>. Literally, “Stretched out upon the -waters;” “Founded on the seas and established -on the floods;” “Standing in the water and out -of the water.” How far the southern icy region -extends horizontally, or how deep the waters -upon and in which the earth stands or is<span class="pagenum" id="Page25">[25]</span> -supported are questions which cannot yet be -answered. In Zetetic philosophy the foundation -must be well secured, progress must be made -step by step, making good the ground as we -proceed; and whenever a difficulty presents -itself, or evidence fails to carry us farther, we -must promptly and candidly acknowledge it, -and prepare for future investigation; but never -fill up the inquiry by theory and assumption. -In the present instance there is no practical -evidence as to the extent of the southern ice and -the “great deep.” Who shall say whether the -depth and extent of the “mighty waters” <i>have</i> a -limit, or constitute the “World without end?”</p> - -<p>Having advanced direct and special evidence -that the surface of the earth is not convex, but, -on the contrary, a vast and irregular plane, it -now becomes important that the leading phenomena -upon which the doctrine of rotundity has -been founded should be carefully examined. -First, it is contended that because the hull of an -outward-bound vessel disappears before the mast -head, the water is convex, and therefore the -Earth is a globe. In this conclusion, however, -there is an assumption involved, viz., that such -a phenomenon <i>can only</i> result from a convex -surface. Inquiry will show that this is erroneous. -If we select for observation a few miles of straight -and level railway, we shall find that the rails,<span class="pagenum" id="Page26">[26]</span> -which are parallel, appear in the distance to -approach each other. But the two rails which -are nearest together do so more rapidly than -those which are farthest asunder, as shown in -the following diagram, <a href="#Fig12">Figure 12</a>.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig12"> - -<img src="images/fig12.png" alt="Railway perspective"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 12.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p class="noindent">Let the observer stand at the point A, looking -in the direction of the arrows; and the rails -1.2.3.4. will appear to join at the point B, but -the rail 5.6 will appear to have converged only -as far as C towards B.</p> - -<p>Again, let a train be watched from the point -A in <a href="#Fig13">Figure 13</a>.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig13"> - -<img src="images/fig13.png" alt="Railway perspective"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 13.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p class="noindent">The observer looking from A, with his eye midway -between the bottom of the carriage and the -rail, will see the diameter of the wheels gradually -diminish as they recede. The lines 1.2 and 1.4 -will appear to approach each other until at the -point B they will come together, and the space,<span class="pagenum" id="Page27">[27]</span> -including the wheels, between the bottom of the -carriage and the rail will there disappear. The -floor of the carriage will seem to be sliding without -wheels upon the rail 1.2; but the lines 5.6 -and 7.8 will yet have converged only to C -and D.</p> - -<p>The same phenomenon may be observed with -a long row of lamps, where the ground is a -straight line throughout its entire length as -represented in <a href="#Fig14">Figure 14</a>.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig14"> - -<img src="images/fig14.png" alt="Street lamps perspective"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 14.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p class="noindent">The lines 1.2 and A D will converge at the -point D and the pedestal of the lamp at D will -seem to have disappeared, but the line 3.4, -which represents the true altitude of the lamps, -will only have converged to the point C.</p> - -<p>A narrow bank running along the side of a -straight portion of railway, upon which poles are -placed for supporting the wires of the electric -telegraph will produce the same appearance, as -shown in <a href="#Fig15">Figure 15</a>.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig15"> - -<img src="images/fig15.png" alt="Railway perspective"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 15.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page28">[28]</span></p> - -<p class="noindent">The bank having the altitude 1.3 and 2.4 will, -in the distance of two or three miles (according -to its depth) disappear to the eye of an observer -placed at Figure 1; and the telegraph pole at -Figure 2 will seem not to stand upon a bank at -all, but upon the actual railway. The line 3.4 -will merge into the line 1.2 at the point B, while -the line 5.6 will only have descended to the -position C.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig16"> - -<img src="images/fig16.png" alt="Ship in perspective"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 16.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>Many other familiar instances could be given -to show the true law of perspective; which is, that -parallel lines appear in the distance to converge -to one and the same datum line, but to reach it -at different distances if themselves dissimilarly -distant. This law being remembered, it is easy -to understand how the hull of an outward-bound -ship, although sailing upon a plane surface disappears -before the mast-head. In <a href="#Fig16">Figure 16</a>, -let A B represent the surface of the water; -C H the line of sight; and E D the altitude -of the mast-head. Then, as A B and C H are -nearer to each other than A B and E D, they -will converge and appear to meet at the point<span class="pagenum" id="Page29">[29]</span> -H, which is the practical, or, as it would be -better to call it, the <i>optical</i> horizon. The hull -of the vessel being contained within the lines -A B and C H, must gradually diminish as these -converge, until at H, or the horizon, it enters -the vanishing point and disappears; but the -mast-head represented by the line E D is still -<i>above</i> the horizon at H, and will require to sail -more or less, according to its altitude, beyond -the point H before it sinks to the line C H, or, -in other words, before the lines A B and E D -form the same angle as A B and C H.</p> - -<p>It will be evident also that should the elevation -of the observer be greater than at C, the -horizon or vanishing point would not be formed -at H, but at a greater distance; and therefore -the hull of the vessel would be longer visible. -Or, if, when the hull has disappeared at H, -the observer ascends from the elevation at C -to a higher position nearer to E, it will again -be seen. Thus all these phenomena which -have so long been considered as proofs of the -Earth’s rotundity are really optical sequences of -the contrary doctrine. To argue that because -the lower part of an outward-bound ship disappears -before the highest the water must be -round, is to <i>assume</i> that a <i>round</i> surface <i>only</i> -can produce this effect! But it is now shown -that a <i>plane</i> surface <i>necessarily</i> produces this<span class="pagenum" id="Page30">[30]</span> -effect; and therefore the assumption is not -required, and the argument involved is fallacious!</p> - -<p>It may here be observed that no help can be -given to this doctrine of rotundity by quoting -the prevailing theory of perspective. The law -represented in the foregoing diagrams is the -“law of nature.” It may be seen in every layer -of a long wall, in every hedge and bank of the -roadside, and indeed in every direction where -lines and objects run parallel to each other; but -no illustration of the contrary perspective is ever -to be seen! except in the distorted pictures, -otherwise cleverly and beautifully drawn as they -are, which abound in our public and private -collections.</p> - -<p>The theory which affirms that parallel lines -converge only to one and the same point upon -the eye-line is an error. It is true only of lines -equidistant from the eye-line. It is true that -parallel lines converge to one and the same <i>eye-line</i>, -but <i>meet it at different distances when -more or less apart from each other</i>. This is the -true law of perspective as shown by Nature -herself; any other idea is fallacious and will -deceive whoever may hold and apply it to -practice.</p> - -<p>As it is of great importance that the difference -should be clearly understood, the following<span class="pagenum" id="Page31">[31]</span> -diagram is given. Let E L (<a href="#Fig17">Figure 17</a>) represent -the eye-line and C the vanishing point of -the lines, 1 C 2 C; then the lines 3.4.5.6, although -converging <i>somewhere</i> to the line E L, will -not do so to the point C, but 3 and 4 will -proceed to D and 5 and 6 to H. It is repeated, -that lines <i>equidistant</i> from the <i>datum</i> will converge -on the <i>same point</i> and at the <i>same -distance</i>; but lines <i>not</i> equidistant will converge -on the same <i>datum</i> but at <i>different distances</i>! -A very good illustration of the difference is given -in <a href="#Fig18">Figure 18</a>. Theoretic perspective would bring -the lines 1, 2, and 3 to the same <i>datum</i> line -E L and to the <i>same point</i> A. But the true<span class="pagenum" id="Page32">[32]</span> -or natural law would bring the lines 2 and 3 to -the point A because equidistant from the eye-line -E L; but the line 1 being farther from -E L than either 2 or 3, would be taken beyond -the point A on towards C, until it formed the -<i>same angle</i> upon the line E L as 2 and 3 form -at the point A.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig17"> - -<img src="images/fig17.png" alt="Vanishing points"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 17.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<div class="container" id="Fig18"> - -<img src="images/fig18.png" alt="Vanishing points"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 18.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>The subject of perspective will not be rendered -sufficiently clear unless an explanation be given -of the cause and character of what is technically -called the “vanishing point.” Why do objects, -even when raised above the earth, vanish at a -given distance? It is known, and can easily be -proved by experiment, that “the range of the -eye, or diameter of the field of vision is 110°; -consequently this is the <i>largest</i> angle under -which an object can be seen. The range of vision -is from 110° to 1°. * * The <i>smallest</i> angle -under which an object can be seen is upon an -average for different sights the 60th part of a -degree, or <i>one minute</i> in space; so that when an -object is removed from the eye 3000 times its -own diameter, it will only just be distinguishable; -consequently, the greatest distance at which we -can behold an object, like a shilling, of an inch -in diameter is 3000 inches or 250 feet.”<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> It -may, therefore, be very easily understood that a -line passing over the hull of a ship, and continuing<span class="pagenum" id="Page33">[33]</span> -parallel to the surface of the water, -must converge to the vanishing point at the -distance of about 3000 times its own elevation; -in other words, if the surface of the hull be -10 feet above the water it will vanish at -3,000 times 10 feet; or nearly six statute -miles; but if the mast-head be 30 feet above -the water, it will be visible for 90,000 feet or -over 17 miles; so that it could be seen upon -the horizon for a distance of eleven miles <i>after -the hull had entered the vanishing point</i>! Hence -the phenomenon of a receding ship’s hull being -the first to disappear, which has been so universally -quoted and relied upon as proving the -rotundity of the Earth is fairly and logically -a proof of the very contrary! It has been misapplied -in consequence of an erroneous view of -the law of perspective, and the desire to support -a theory. That it is valueless for such a purpose -has already been shown; and that, even if there -were no question of the Earth’s form involved, -it could not arise from the convexity of the -water, is proved by the following experiment:—Let -an observer stand upon the sea-shore with -the eye at an elevation of about six feet above -the water, and watch a vessel until it is just -“hull down.” If now a good telescope be applied -the hull will be distinctly <i>restored to sight</i>! -From which it must be concluded that it had<span class="pagenum" id="Page34">[34]</span> -disappeared through the influence of perspective, -and not from having sunk behind the summit -of a convex surface! Had it done so it would -follow that the telescope had either carried the -line-of-sight through the mass of water, or over -its surface and down the other side! But the -power of “looking round a corner” or penetrating -a dense and extensive medium has never yet -been attributed to such an instrument! If the -elevation of the observer be much greater than -six feet the distance at which the vanishing point -is formed will be so great that the telescope may -not have power enough to magnify or enlarge -the angle constituting it; when the experiment -would appear to fail. But the failure would -only be apparent, for a telescope of sufficient -power to magnify at the horizon or vanishing -point would certainly restore the hull at the -greater distance.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="label">[3]</a> “Wonders of Science,” by Mayhew, p. 357.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<div class="container w40em" id="Fig19"> - -<img src="images/fig19.jpg" alt="Flat earth map"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 19.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>An illustration or proof of the Earth’s -rotundity is also supposed to be found in the -fact that navigators by sailing due east or west -return in the opposite direction. Here, again, a -supposition is involved, viz., that upon a globe -<i>only</i> could this occur. But it is easy to prove -that it could take place as perfectly upon a -circular plane as upon a sphere. Let it first be -clearly understood what is really meant by -sailing <i>due east and west</i>. Practically it is<span class="pagenum" id="Page35">[35]</span> -sailing at right angles to north and south: this -is determined ordinarily by the mariners’ -compass, but more accurately by the meridian -lines which converge to the northern centre of -the Earth. Bearing this in mind, let N -in <a href="#Fig19">Figure 19</a> represent the northern centre; -and the lines N. S. the directions north and -south. Then let the small arrow, Figure 1, -represent a vessel on the meridian of Greenwich, -with its head W. at right angles, or due west; -and the stern E due east. It is evident that in<span class="pagenum" id="Page36">[36]</span> -passing to the position of the arrow, Figure 2, -which is still due west or square to the meridian, -the arc 1.2 must be described; and in sailing -still farther under the same condition, the arcs -2.3, 3.4, and 4.1 will be successively passed over -until the meridian of Greenwich, Figure 1, is -arrived at, which was the point of departure. -Thus a mariner, by keeping the head of his -vessel due west, or at right angles to the north -and south, practically circumnavigates a plane -surface; or, in other words, he describes a circle -<i>upon a plane</i>, at a greater or lesser distance -from the centre N, and being at all times square -to the radii north and south, he is <i>compelled</i> to -do so—<i>because</i> the earth is a plane, having a -central region, towards which the compass and -the meridian lines which guide him, converge. -So far, then, from the fact of a vessel sailing due -west coming home from the east, and <i>vice versa</i>, -being a proof of the earth’s rotundity, it is simply -a phenomenon, consistent with and dependent -upon its being a plane! The subject may be -perfectly illustrated by the following simple -experiment:—Take a round table, fix a pin in -the centre; to this attach a thread, and extend -it to the edge. Call the centre the north and -the circumference the south; then, at any -distance between the centre and the circumference, -a direction at right angles to the thread<span class="pagenum" id="Page37">[37]</span> -will be due east and west; and a small object, as -a pencil, placed across or square to the thread, -to represent a ship, may be carried completely -round the table without its right-angled position -being altered; or, the right-angled position -firmly maintained, the vessel must of necessity -describe a circle on being moved from right to -left or left to right. Referring again to the -diagram, <a href="#Fig19">Figure 19</a>, the vessel may sail from the -north towards the south, upon the meridian -Figure 1, and there turning due west, may pass -Cape Horn, represented by D, and continue its -westerly course until it passes the point C, or -the Cape of Good Hope, and again reaches the -meridian, Figure 1, upon which it may return to -the north. Those, then, who hold that the earth -is a globe because it can be circumnavigated, -have an argument which is logically incomplete -and fallacious. This will be seen at once by -putting it in the syllogistic form:—</p> - -<div class="syllogism"> - -<p>A globe <i>only</i> can be circumnavigated:</p> - -<p>The Earth has been circumnavigated:</p> - -<p>Therefore the Earth is a globe.</p> - -</div><!--syllogism--> - -<p>It has been shown that a <i>plane</i> can be -circumnavigated, and therefore the first or major -proposition is false; and, being so, the conclusion -is false. This portion of the subject furnishes a -striking instance of the necessity of, at all times,<span class="pagenum" id="Page38">[38]</span> -proving a proposition by direct and immediate -evidence, instead of quoting a natural phenomenon -as a proof of what has previously been -assumed. But a theory will not admit of this -method, and therefore the zetetic process, or -inquiry before conclusion, entirely eschewing -assumption, is the only course which can lead to -simple and unalterable truth. Whoever creates -or upholds a theory, adopts a monster which -will sooner or later betray and enslave him, or -make him ridiculous in the eyes of practical -observers.</p> - -<p>Closely following the subject of circumnavigation, -the gain and loss of time discovered on -sailing east and west is referred to as another -proof of rotundity. But this illustration is -equally fallacious with the last, and from the -same cause, viz., the assumption that a <i>globe -only</i> could produce the effect observed. It will -be seen, by reference to diagram, <a href="#Fig19">Figure 19</a>, that -the effect must take place equally upon a plane -as upon a globe. Let the ship, W E, upon the -meridian, Figure 1, at 12 at noon, begin to sail -towards the position, Figure 2, which it will -reach the next day at 12, or in 24 hours: the sun -during the same 24 hours will have returned -only to Figure 1, and will require to move for -another hour or more until it reaches the ship -at Figure 2, making 25 hours instead of 24, in<span class="pagenum" id="Page39">[39]</span> -which the sun would have returned to the ship, -if it had remained at Figure 1. In this way, the -sun is more and more behind the meridian time -of the ship, as it proceeds day after day upon its -westerly course, so that on completing the -circumnavigation the ship’s time is a day later -than the solar time, reckoning to and from the -meridian of Greenwich. But the contrary follows -if the ship sails from Figure 1 towards Figure 4, -or the east, because it will meet the sun one -hour earlier than the 24 hours which would be -required for it to pass on to Figure 1. Hence, -on completing the circle 1.4.3.2.1, the time at the -ship would be one day in advance of the time at -Greenwich, or the position Figure 1. Captain -Sir J. C. Ross, at page 132, vol. 2, says—“November -25, having by sailing to the eastward -gained 12 hours, it became necessary, on -crossing the 180th degree and entering upon -west longitude, in order to have our time -correspond with that of England, to have two -days following of the same date, and by -this means lose the time we had gained, -and still were gaining, as we sailed to the -eastward.”</p> - -<p>In further illustration of this matter, and to -impress the mind of the readers with its importance -as an evidence in support of the theory of<span class="pagenum" id="Page40">[40]</span> -the earth’s sphericity, several authors have given -the following story:—Two brothers, twins, born -within a few minutes of each other, and therefore -of the same age, on growing to manhood went -to sea. They both circumnavigated the earth, -but in opposite directions; and when they -again met, one was a day older than the -other!</p> - -<p>Whatever truth there may be in this account, -it is here shown to be no more favourable to the -idea of rotundity than it is to the opposite fact -that the earth is a plane; as both forms will -permit of the same effect.</p> - -<p>Another phenomenon supposed to prove rotundity, -is found in the fact that Polaris, or the -north polar star, gradually sinks to the horizon -as the mariner approaches the equator, on -passing which it becomes invisible. First, it is -an ordinary effect of perspective for an object -to appear lower and lower as the observer -recedes. Let any one try the experiment of -looking at a lighthouse, church spire, monument, -gas-lamp, or other elevated object, from the -distance of a few yards, and notice the angle at -which it is observed: on going farther away, the -angle will diminish and the object appear lower, -until, if the distance be sufficiently great, the -line-of-sight to the object, and the apparently<span class="pagenum" id="Page41">[41]</span> -ascending surface of the Earth upon which it -stands will converge to the angle which constitutes -the vanishing point; at a single yard -beyond which it will be invisible. This, then, is -the necessary result of the everywhere visible -law of perspective operating between the eye-line -and the plane surface upon which the object -stands; and has no relation whatever to rotundity.</p> - -<p>It is not denied that a similar depression of -a distant object would take place upon a globe; -it is simply contended that it would not occur -upon a globe exclusively. But if the Earth is a -sphere and the pole star hangs over the northern -axis, it would be impossible to see it for a single -degree beyond the equator, or 90 degrees from -the pole. The line-of-sight would become a -tangent to the sphere, and consequently several -thousand miles out of and divergent from the -direction of the pole-star. Many cases, however, -are on record of the north polar star being -visible far beyond the equator, as far even as the -tropic of Capricorn. In the <i>Times</i> newspaper -of May 13, 1862, under the head of “Naval and -Military Intelligence,” it is stated that Captain -Wilkins distinctly saw the Southern Cross and -the polar star at midnight in 23·53 degrees -of latitude, and longitude 35·46.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page42">[42]</span></p> - -<div class="container w40em" id="Fig20"> - -<img src="images/fig20.jpg" alt="Earth as a globe"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 20.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>This would be utterly impossible if the Earth -were a globe, as shown in the diagram, <a href="#Fig20">Figure 20</a>. -Let N represent the north pole, E E the equator, -C C the tropic of Capricorn, and P the polar -star. It will be evident that the line-of-sight -C D being a tangent to the Earth beyond the -equator E must diverge from the axis N and -could not by any known possibility cause the -star P to be visible to an observer at C. No -matter how distant the star P, the line C D -being divergent from the direction N P could -never come in contact with it. The fact, then, -that the polar star has often been seen from -many degrees beyond the equator, is really an<span class="pagenum" id="Page43">[43]</span> -important argument against the doctrine of the -Earth’s rotundity.</p> - -<p>It has been thought that because a pendulum -vibrates more rapidly in the northern region -than at the equator, the Earth is thereby proved -to be a globe; and because the variation in the -velocity is not exactly as it should be if all the -surface of the Earth were equidistant from the -centre, it has been concluded that the Earth is -an oblate spheroid, or that its diameter is rather -less through the poles than it is through the -equator. The difference was calculated by Newton -to be the 235th part of the whole diameter; -or that the polar was to the equatorial diameter -as 689 to 692. Huygens gave the proportion as -577 to 875 or a difference of about one-third of -the whole diameter. Others have given still -different proportions; but recently the difference -of opinion has become so great that many have -concluded that the Earth is really instead of -oblate an <i>oblong</i> spheroid. It is certain that -the question when attempted to be answered by -measuring arcs of the meridian, is less satisfactory -than was expected. This will be evident -from the following quotation from the account -of the ordnance survey of Great Britain, which -was conducted by the Duke of Richmond, Col. -Mudge, General Roy, Mr. Dalby, and others,<span class="pagenum" id="Page44">[44]</span> -who measured base lines on Hounslow Heath -and Salisbury Plain with glass rods and steel -chains: “when these were connected by a chain -of triangles and the length computed the result -did not differ more than one inch from the -actual measurements—a convincing proof of the -accuracy with which all the operations had been -conducted.</p> - -<p>The two stations, of Beachy Head in Sussex -and Dunnose in the Isle of Wight, are visible -from each other, and more than 64 miles -asunder, nearly in a direction from east to west; -their exact distance was found by the geodetical -operations to be 339,397 feet (64 miles and 1477 -feet). The azimuth, or bearing of the line -between them with respect to the meridian, and -also the latitude of Beachy Head, were determined -by astronomical observations. From -these data the length of a degree perpendicular -to the meridian was computed; and this, compared -with the length of a meridional degree -in the same latitude, gave the proportion of the -polar to the equatorial axis. The result thus -obtained, however, differed considerably from -that obtained by meridional degrees. It has been -found impossible to explain the want of agreement -in a satisfactory way. * * By comparing -the celestial with the terrestrial arcs, the length -of degrees in various parallels was determined<span class="pagenum" id="Page45">[45]</span> -as in the following table:—</p> - -<table class="standard"> - -<tr> -<th> </th> -<th colspan="3">Latitude of<br>middle<br>point.</th> -<th><span class="padl2 padr2">Fathoms.</span></th> -</tr> - -<tr> -<th> </th> -<th>°</th> -<th>′</th> -<th>″</th> -<th> </th> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text"><span class="padr4">Arbury Hill and Clifton</span></td> -<td class="numbers">52</td> -<td class="numbers">50</td> -<td class="numbers">29·8</td> -<td class="numbers">60,766</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text"><span class="padr4">Blenheim and Clifton</span></td> -<td class="numbers">52</td> -<td class="numbers">38</td> -<td class="numbers">56·1</td> -<td class="numbers">60,769</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text"><span class="padr4">Greenwich and Clifton</span></td> -<td class="numbers">52</td> -<td class="numbers">28</td> -<td class="numbers"> 5·7</td> -<td class="numbers">60,794</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text"><span class="padr4">Dunnose and Clifton</span></td> -<td class="numbers">52</td> -<td class="numbers"> 2</td> -<td class="numbers">19·8</td> -<td class="numbers">60,820</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text"><span class="padr4">Arbury Hill and Greenwich</span></td> -<td class="numbers">51</td> -<td class="numbers">51</td> -<td class="numbers"> 4·1</td> -<td class="numbers">60,849</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text"><span class="padr4">Dunnose and Arbury Hill</span></td> -<td class="numbers">51</td> -<td class="numbers">35</td> -<td class="numbers">18·2</td> -<td class="numbers">60,864</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text"><span class="padr4">Blenheim and Dunnose</span></td> -<td class="numbers">51</td> -<td class="numbers">13</td> -<td class="numbers">18·2</td> -<td class="numbers">60,890</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text"><span class="padr4">Dunnose and Greenwich</span></td> -<td class="numbers">51</td> -<td class="numbers"> 2</td> -<td class="numbers">54·2</td> -<td class="numbers">60,884</td> -</tr> - -</table> - -<p>This table presents a singular deviation from -the common rule; for instead of the degrees -<i>increasing</i> as we proceed from north to south, -they appear to <i>decrease</i>, as if the Earth were an -<i>oblong</i> instead of an <i>oblate</i> spheroid. * * The -measurements of small arcs of the meridian in -other countries have presented similar instances.”<a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="label">[4]</a> Encyclopedia of Geography, by Hugh Murray and -several Professors in the University of Edinburgh.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>A number of French Academicians who -measured above three degrees of the meridian -in Peru, gave as the result of their labours the -first degree of the meridian from the equator as -56,653 toises; whilst another company of Academicians, -who proceeded to Bothnia in Lapland, -gave as the result of their calculation 57,422 -toises for the length of a degree cutting the -polar circle. But a more recent measurement -made by the Swedish Astronomers in Bothnia -shows the French to have been incorrect, having<span class="pagenum" id="Page46">[46]</span> -given the degree there 196 toises more than the -true length. Other observations have been made, -but as no two sets of experiments agree in result, -it would be very unsatisfactory to conclude from -them that the Earth is an oblate spheroid.</p> - -<p>Returning to the pendulum, it will be found -to be equally unsatisfactory as a proof of this -peculiar rotundity of the Earth. It is argued -that as the length of a seconds pendulum at the -equator is 39,027 inches, and 39,197 inches at -the north pole, that the Earth must be a globe, -having a less diameter through its axis than -through its equator. But this proceeds upon -the <i>assumption</i> that the Earth <i>is</i> a globe having -a “centre of attraction of gravitation,” towards -which all bodies gravitate or fall; and as the -pendulum is a falling body under certain -restraint, the fact that it oscillates or falls more -rapidly at the north than it does at the equator, -is a proof that the north is nearer to the centre -of attraction, or the centre of the Earth, than is -the equatorial region; and, of course, if nearer, -the radius must be shorter; and therefore the -“Earth is a spheroid flattened at the poles.” -This is very ingenious and very plausible, but, -unfortunately for its character as an argument, -the essential evidence is wanting that the Earth -is a globe at all! whether oblate or oblong, or -truly spherical, are questions logically misplaced.<span class="pagenum" id="Page47">[47]</span> -It should also be first proved that <i>no other</i> -cause could operate besides greater proximity to -the centre of gravity, to produce the variable -oscillations of a pendulum. This not being -attempted, the whole subject must be condemned -as logically insufficient, irregular, and worthless -for its intended purpose. Many philosophers -have ascribed the alterations in the oscillations -of a pendulum to the diminished temperature -of the northern centre. That the heat gradually -and almost uniformly diminishes on passing -from the equator to the north is well ascertained. -“The mean annual temperature of the whole -Earth at the level of the sea is 50° Fah. For -different latitudes it is as under:—</p> - -<table class="standard"> - -<tr> -<th colspan="3"> </th> -<th>Degrees.</th> -<th colspan="3"> </th> -<th>Inches.</th> -<th> </th> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">Latitude</td> -<td class="text">(Equator)</td> -<td class="numbers"><span class="padr2"> 0</span></td> -<td class="numbers">84·2</td> -<td class="text">Length</td> -<td class="text">of</td> -<td class="text">Pendulum</td> -<td class="numbers">39,027</td> -<td rowspan="9"> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="numbers"><span class="padr2">10</span></td> -<td class="numbers">82·6</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td rowspan="9"> </td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="numbers"><span class="padr2">20</span></td> -<td class="numbers">78·1</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="numbers"><span class="padr2">30</span></td> -<td class="numbers">71·1</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="numbers"><span class="padr2">40</span></td> -<td class="numbers">62·6</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="text">(London)</td> -<td class="numbers"><span class="padr2">50</span></td> -<td class="numbers">53·6</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="numbers">39,139</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="numbers"><span class="padr2">60</span></td> -<td class="numbers">45·0</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="numbers"><span class="padr2">70</span></td> -<td class="numbers">38·1</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="numbers"><span class="padr2">80</span></td> -<td class="numbers">33·6</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="text">(Pole)</td> -<td class="numbers"><span class="padr2">90</span></td> -<td class="numbers">00·0</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="numbers">39,197</td> -<td class="left"><span class="fn"><a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" -class="fnanchor">[5]</a><span class="fsize110">”</span></span></td> -</tr> - -</table> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="label">[5]</a> “Million of Facts,” by Sir Richard Phillips, p. 475.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>“All the solid bodies with which we are -surrounded are constantly undergoing changes -of bulk corresponding to the variations of temperature. -* * The expansion and contraction -of metals by heat and cold form subjects of<span class="pagenum" id="Page48">[48]</span> -serious and careful attention to chronometer -makers, as will appear by the following statements:—The -length of the pendulum vibrating -seconds, in vacuo, in the latitude of London -(51° 31′ 8″ north), at the level of the sea, and at -the temperature of 62°, has been ascertained -with the greatest precision to be 39·13929 inches: -now, as the metal of which it is composed is -constantly subject to variation of temperature, it -cannot but happen that its <i>length</i> is constantly -varying; and when it is further stated that if -the “bob” be let down ¹⁄₁₀₀th of an inch, the -clock will lose 10 seconds in 24 hours; that the -elongation of ¹⁄₁₀₀₀th of an inch will cause it -to lose one second per day; and that a change -of temperature equal to 30° Fah. will alter its -length ¹⁄₅₀₀₀th part and occasion an error in -the rate of going of 8 seconds per day, it will -appear evident that some plan must be devised -for obviating so serious an inconvenience.”<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="label">[6]</a> “Noad’s Lectures on Chemistry,” p. 41.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>From these data it is readily seen that the -variations in the rate of a pendulum as it is -carried from the equator towards the north are -sufficiently explained, without supposing that -they arise from a peculiar spheroidal form of -the Earth.</p> - -<p>Others have attributed the variable motions -of the pendulum to increased density of the air<span class="pagenum" id="Page49">[49]</span> -on going northwards. That the condition of the -air must have some influence in this respect will -be seen from the following extract from experiments -on pendulums by Dr. Derham, recorded -in numbers 294 and 480 of the <i>Philosophical -Transactions</i>:—“The arches of vibration <i>in -vacuo</i> were larger than in the open air, or in the -receiver before it was exhausted; the enlargement -or diminution of the arches of vibration -were <i>constantly proportional</i> to the <i>quantity of -air</i>, or rarity, or density of it, which was left in -the receiver of the air-pump. And as the -<i>vibrations</i> were <i>longer</i> or <i>shorter</i>, <i>so</i> the <i>times</i> -were accordingly, viz., two seconds in an hour -when the vibrations were longest, and less and -less as the air was re-admitted, and the vibrations -shortened.”</p> - -<p>Thus there are two distinct and tangible -causes which necessarily operate to produce the -variable oscillations of a pendulum, without -supposing any distortion in the supposed -rotundity of the Earth. First, if the pendulum -vibrates in the air, which is colder and therefore -denser in the north than at the equator, it must -be more or less resisted in its passage through -it; and, secondly, if it vibrates <i>in vacuo</i>, the -temperature being less, the length must be less, -the arcs of vibration less, and the velocity greater. -In going towards the equator, the temperature<span class="pagenum" id="Page50">[50]</span> -increases, the length becomes greater, the arcs -increase, and the times of vibration diminish.</p> - -<p>Another argument for the globular form of -the Earth is the following:—The degrees of -longitude radiating from the north pole gradually -increase in extent as they approach the equator; -beyond which they again converge towards the -south. To this it is replied that no actual -measurement of a degree of longitude has ever -been made south of the equator! If it be said -that mariners have sailed round the world in the -southern region and have <i>computed</i> the length -of the degrees, it is again replied that such -evidence is unfavourable to the doctrine of -rotundity. It will be seen from the following -table of what the degrees of longitude would be -if the earth were a globe of 25,000 miles circumference, -and comparing these with the results of -practical navigation, that the diminution of -degrees of longitude beyond the equator is -purely imaginary.</p> - -<p>Latitudes at different longitudes:—</p> - -<table class="standard"> - -<colgroup> -<col span="4" class="wauto"> -<col span="2" class="w03em"> -<col class="wauto"> -</colgroup> - -<tr> -<td rowspan="20" class="text">Latitude</td> -<td class="numbers"> 1</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">59·99</td> -<td class="text">nautical -<td class="text">miles.</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">10</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">59·09</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">20</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">56·38</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">30</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">51·96</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">34</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">49·74</td> -<td colspan="3" class="text">(Cape Town)</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">40</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">45·96</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">45</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">42·45</td> -<td colspan="3" class="text">(Port Jackson, Sydney)</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">50</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">38·57</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">56</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">33·55</td> -<td colspan="3" class="text">(Cape Horn)</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">60</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">30·00</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers"><span class="pagenum" id="Page51">[51]</span>65</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">25·36</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">70</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">20·52</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">75</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">15·53</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">80</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers">10·42</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">85</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers"> 5·53</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">86</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers"> 4·19</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">87</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers"> 3·14</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">88</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers"> 2·09</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">89</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers"> 1·05</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="numbers">90</td> -<td class="center bot">=</td> -<td class="numbers"> 0·00</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td> </td> -</tr> - -</table> - -<p>According to the above table (which is copied -from a large Mercator’s chart in the library of -the Mechanics’ Institute, Royal Hill, Greenwich), -the distance round the Earth at the Antarctic -circle would only be about 9,000 miles. But -practical navigators give the distance from the -Cape of Good Hope to Port Jackson as 8,000 -miles; from Port Jackson to Cape Horn as -8,000 miles; and from Cape Horn to the Cape -of Good Hope, 6,000 miles, making together -22,000 miles. The average longitude of these -places is 45°, at which parallel the circuit of the -Earth, if it be a globe, should only be 14,282 -miles. Here, then, is an error between the -theory of rotundity and practical sailing of 7,718 -miles. But there are several statements made -by Sir James Clarke Ross which tend to make -the disparity even greater: at page 236, vol. 2, -of “South Sea Voyages,” it is said “From near -Cape Horn to Port Philip (in Melbourne, Australia) -the distance is 9,000 miles.” These two -places are 143 degrees of longitude from each<span class="pagenum" id="Page52">[52]</span> -other. Therefore the whole extent of the Earth’s -circumference is a mere arithmetical question. -If 143 degrees make 9,000 miles, what will be -the distance made by the whole 360 degrees -into which the surface is divided? The answer -is, 22,657 miles; or, 8,357 miles more than the -theory of rotundity would permit. It must be -borne in mind, however, that the above distances -are nautical measure, which, reduced to statute -miles, gives the actual distance round the Southern -region at a given latitude as 26,433 statute -miles; or nearly 1,500 miles more than the -largest circumference ever assigned to the Earth -at the equator.</p> - -<p>But actual measurement of a degree of longitude -in Australia or some other land far south -of the equator can alone place this matter beyond -dispute. The problem to be solved might be -given as the following:—A degree of longitude -in England at the latitude of 50° N. is 38·57 -nautical or 45 statute miles; at the latitude of -Port Jackson in Australia, which is 45° S., a -degree of longitude, if the Earth is a globe, -should be 42·45 nautical or 49·52 statute miles. -But if the Earth is a plane, and the distances -above referred to as given by nautical men are -correct, a degree of longitude on the parallel of -Port Jackson will be 69·44 statute miles, being -a difference of 19·92 or nearly 20 statute miles.<span class="pagenum" id="Page53">[53]</span> -In other words, a degree of longitude along the -southern part of Australia ought to be, <i>if the -Earth is a plane</i>, nearly 20 miles greater than -a degree of longitude on the southern coast of -England. This is the point which has yet to be -settled. The day is surely not far distant when -the scientific world will demand that the question -be decided by proper geodetical operations! -And this not altogether for the sake of determining -the true figure of the Earth, but also for -the purpose of ascertaining, if possible, the cause -of the many anomalies observed in navigating -the southern region. These anomalies have led -to the loss of many vessels and the sacrifice of -a fearful amount of life and property. “In the -southern hemisphere, navigators to India have -often fancied themselves east of the Cape when -still West, and have been driven ashore on the -African coast, which according to their reckoning -lay behind them. This misfortune happened to -a fine frigate, the “Challenger,” in 1845.”<a id="FNanchor_7" href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> -“Assuredly there are many shipwrecks from -alleged errors in reckoning which <i>may</i> arise -from a somewhat false idea of the general form -and measurement of the Earth’s surface. Such -a subject, therefore, ought to be candidly and -boldly discussed.”<a id="FNanchor_8" href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_7" href="#FNanchor_7" class="label">[7]</a> “Tour through Creation,” by the Rev. Thomas -Milner, M.A.</p> - -<p><a id="Footnote_8" href="#FNanchor_8" class="label">[8]</a> “The Builder,” Sept. 20, 1862, in a “review” of a -recently-published work on Astronomy.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page54">[54]</span></p> - -<p>It is commonly believed that surveyors when -laying out railways and canals, are obliged to -allow 8 inches per mile for the Earth’s curvature; -and that if this were not done in the latter case -the water would not be stationary, but would -flow on until at the end of one mile in each -direction, although the canal should have the -same depth throughout, the surface would stand -8 inches higher in the middle than at the ends. -In other words, that the bottom of a canal in -which the allowance of 8 inches per mile had -not been made, would be a chord to the surface -of the contained water, which would be an arc -of a circle. To this it is replied, that both in -regard to railways and canals, wherever an -allowance has been attempted the work has not -been satisfactory; and so irregular were the results -in the earlier days of railway, canal, and other -surveying, that, the most eminent engineers -abandoned the practice of the old “forward -levelling” and allowing for convexity; and -adopted what is now called the “double sight” -or “back-and-fore sight” method. It was considered -that whether the surface were convex or -horizontal, or whether the convexity were more -or less than the supposed degree, would be of no -consequence in practice if the spirit level or -theodolite were employed to read both backwards -and forwards; for whatever degree of convexity<span class="pagenum" id="Page55">[55]</span> -existed, one “sight” would compensate for the -other; and if the surface were horizontal, the -same mode of levelling would apply. So important -did the ordnance department of the Government -consider this matter, that it was deemed -necessary to make the abandonment of all ideas -of rotundity compulsory, and in a standing order -(No. 6) of the House of Lords as to the preparation -of sections for railways, &c., the following -language is used, “That the section be drawn to -the same <i>horizontal</i> scale as the plan; and -to a vertical scale of not less than one inch -to every one hundred feet; and shall show the -surface of the ground marked on the plan, the -intended level of the proposed work, the height -of every embankment, and the depth of every -cutting; and a <i>datum</i> <span class="smcapall">HORIZONTAL LINE</span>, which -shall be <i>the same throughout the whole length -of the work</i>, or any branch thereof respectively; -and shall be referred to some fixed point stated -in writing on the section, near some portion of -such work; and in the case of a canal, cut, navigation, -turnpike, or other carriage road, or -railway, near either of the termini.” No. 44 of -the standing orders of the House of Commons is -similar to the above order (No. 6) of the House -of Lords.</p> - -<p>Thus it is evident that the doctrine of the -Earth’s rotundity cannot be mixed up with the<span class="pagenum" id="Page56">[56]</span> -practical operations of civil engineers and -surveyors, and to prevent the waste of time and -the destruction of property which necessarily -followed the doings of some who were determined -to involve the convexity of the Earth’s -surface in their calculations, the very Government -of the country has been obliged to interfere! -Every survey of this and other countries, whether -ordnance or otherwise, is now carried out in -connection with a horizontal datum, and therefore, -as no other method proves satisfactory, it -is virtually an admission by all the most practical -scientific men of the day that the Earth <i>cannot -be other than a plane</i>!</p> - -<p>An argument for the Earth’s convexity is -thought by many to be found in the following -facts:—“Fluid or semi-fluid substances in a -state of motion invariably assume the globular -form, as rain, hail, dew, mercury, and melted -lead, which, poured from a great height becomes -divided into spherical masses, as in the manufacture -of small shot, &c.” “There is abundant -evidence from geology that the Earth has been -a fluid or semi-fluid mass, and it could not, -therefore, continue in a state of motion through -space without becoming spherical.” Without -denying that the Earth has been, at some former -period, in a pulpy or semi-fluid state, it is -requisite to prove beyond all doubt that it has a<span class="pagenum" id="Page57">[57]</span> -motion upon axes and through space, or the -conclusion that it is therefore spherical is -premature and illogical. It will be shown in a -subsequent part of this work, that such axial -and orbital motion does not exist, and therefore -any argument founded upon and including it as -a fact is necessarily fallacious. In addition to -this, it may be remarked that the tendency in -falling fluids to become globular is owing to -what has been called “attraction of cohesion” -(not “attraction of gravitation”), which is very -limited in its operation. It is confined to small -quantities of matter. If, in the manufacture of -small shot, the melted metal is allowed to fall in -masses of several ounces or pounds, instead of -being divided into particles weighing only a few -grains, it will never take a spherical form, and -shot of an inch in diameter could not be made -by this process. Bullets of even half-an-inch -diameter can only be made by casting the metal -into spherical moulds. In tropical countries, the -rain instead of falling in drops or small globules, -often comes down in large irregular masses, -which have no approximation whatever to -sphericity. So that it is manifestly unjust to -affirm of large masses of matter like the Earth -that which only belongs to minute portions or a -few grains in weight. The whole matter taken -together entirely fails as an argument for the -Earth’s rotundity.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page58">[58]</span></p> - -<p>Those who hold that the Earth is a globe -will often affirm, with visible enthusiasm, that in -an eclipse of the Moon there is proof positive of -rotundity. That the shadow of the Earth upon -the Moon is always round; and that nothing -but a globe could, in all positions, cast a circular -shadow. Here again the essential requirements -of an argument are wanting. It is <i>not proved</i> -that the Moon is eclipsed <i>by a shadow</i>. It is -<i>not proved</i> that the <i>Earth moves</i> in an orbit, -and therefore takes <i>different positions</i>. It is <i>not -proved</i> that the Moon receives her light from -the Sun, and that therefore her surface is -darkened by the Earth intercepting the Sun’s -light. It will be shown in the proper place that -the Earth has no motion in space or on axes; -that it is not a shadow which eclipses the Moon; -that the Moon is not a reflector of the Sun’s light, -but is <i>self-luminous</i>; and therefore could not -possibly be obscured by <i>a shadow</i> from any -object whatever. The subject is only introduced -here because it forms one of the category of -supposed evidences of the Earth’s rotundity. -But to call that an argument where every -necessary proposition is assumed, is to stultify -both the judgment and the reasoning powers!</p> - -<p>Many place great reliance upon what is called -the “spherical excess” observed in levelling, as -a proof of the Earth’s rotundity. In Castle’s<span class="pagenum" id="Page59">[59]</span> -Treatise on Levelling it is stated that “the angles -taken between any three points on the surface -of the Earth by the theodolite, are, strictly -speaking, spherical angles, and their sum must -exceed 180 degrees; and the lines bounding -them are not the chords as they should be, but -the tangents to the Earth. This excess is -inappreciable in common cases, but in the larger -triangles it becomes necessary to allow for it, and -to diminish each of the angles of the observed -triangle by one-third of the spherical excess. -To calculate this excess, divide the area of the -triangle in feet by the radius of the Earth in -seconds and the quotient is the excess.”</p> - -<p>The following observation as made by surveyors, -also bears upon the subject:—If a spirit-level -or theodolite be “levelled,” and a given point -be read upon a graduated staff at the distance of -about or more than 100 chains, this point will -have an altitude slightly in excess of the altitude -of the cross-hair of the theodolite; and if the -theodolite be removed to the position of the -graduated staff and again levelled, and a backward -sight taken to the distance of 100 chains, -another excess of altitude will be observed; and -this excess will go on increasing as often as the -experiment or backward and forward observation -is repeated. From this it is argued that -the line of sight from the spirit-level or<span class="pagenum" id="Page60">[60]</span> -theodolite is a tangent, and that the surface of -the Earth is therefore spherical.</p> - -<p>Of a similar character is the following -observation:—If a theodolite or spirit-level be -placed upon the sea-shore, and “levelled,” and -directed towards the sea, the line of the horizon -will be observed to be a given amount below the -cross-hair of the instrument, to which a certain -dip, or inclination from the level will have to be -given to bring the cross-hair and the sea horizon -together. It is concluded that as the sea horizon -is always observed to be below the cross-hair of -the “levelled” theodolite, the line of sight is a -tangent, the surface of the water convex, and -therefore the Earth is a globe.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig21"> - -<img src="images/fig21.png" alt="Magnifying glass"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 21.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>The conclusion derived from the last three -observations is exceedingly plausible, and would -completely satisfy the minds of scientific men as -to the Earth’s sphericity if a perfect explanation -could not be given. The whole matter has been -specially and carefully examined; and one very -simple experiment will show that the effects -observed do not arise from rotundity in the -Earth’s surface, but from a certain peculiarity in -the instruments employed. Take a convex -lens or a magnifying glass and hold it over -a straight line drawn across a sheet of paper. -If the glass be so held that a part of the straight -line can be seen <i>through</i> it, and another part seen<span class="pagenum" id="Page61">[61]</span> -<i>outside</i> it, a difference in the <i>direction</i> of the line -will be observed, as shown in the diagram <a href="#Fig21">Figure -21</a>. Let A B C represent a straight line. If a -lens is now held an inch, or more, according to -its focal length, over the part of the line A B, -and the slightest amount out of its centre, that -part of the line A B which passes under the lens -will be seen in the direction of the figures 1.2; -but if the lens be now moved a little out of its -central position in the opposite direction, the -line B C will be observed at 3.4, or below B C. -A lens is a magnifying glass because it <i>dilates</i> -or spreads out from its centre the objects -observed through it Therefore whatever is -magnified by it is seen a little out of its axis or -centre. This is again necessitated by the fact -that the axis or actual centre is always occupied -by the cross-hair. Thus the line-of-sight in the -theodolite or spirit-level not being axial or<span class="pagenum" id="Page62">[62]</span> -absolutely central, reads upon a graduated staff -a position which is necessarily slightly divergent -from the axis of vision; and this is the source -of that “spherical excess” which has so long -been considered by surveyors as an important -proof of the Earth’s rotundity. In this instance, -as, indeed, in all the others given as evidence -that the Earth is a globe, the premises do not -fully warrant the conclusion—which is premature,—drawn -before the whole subject is fairly -examined; and when other causes are amply -sufficient to explain the effects observed.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page63">[63]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec2"><span class="secno">SECTION 2.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">THE EARTH NO AXIAL OR ORBITAL -MOTION.</span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent">If a ball be allowed to drop from the mast-head -of a ship <i>at rest</i>, it will strike the deck at the -foot of the mast. If the same experiment be -tried with a ship <i>in motion</i>, the same result will -be observed. Because, in the latter case, the -ball is acted upon simultaneously by two forces at -right angles to each other—one, the momentum -given to it by the moving ship in the direction -of its own motion, and the other the force of -gravity, the direction of which is square to that -of the momentum. The ball being acted upon -by the two forces together will not go in the -direction of either, but will take a diagonal<span class="pagenum" id="Page64">[64]</span> -course, as shown in the following diagram, -<a href="#Fig22">Figure 22</a>.</p> - -<div class="container w30em" id="Fig22"> - -<img src="images/fig22.png" alt="Ball on ship"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 22.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<div class="container w45em" id="Fig23"> - -<img src="images/fig23.png" alt="Ball on ship"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 23.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>The ball passing from A to C by the force -of gravity, and having at the moment of -its liberation received a momentum from the -ship in the direction A B, will by the conjoint -action of the two forces, take the direction A D, -falling at D, just as it would have fallen at C -had the vessel remained at rest. In this way, it -is contended by those who hold that the Earth -is a moving sphere, a ball allowed to fall from -the mouth of a deep mine reaches the bottom in -an apparently vertical direction, the same as it -would if the Earth were motionless. So far, -there need be no discussion—the explanation is -granted. But now let the experiment be -modified in the following way:—Let the ball be -thrown <i>upwards from</i> the mast-head of a -moving vessel; it will partake as before of two<span class="pagenum" id="Page65">[65]</span> -motions, the upward and the horizontal, and -will take a diagonal course upwards and with the -vessel until the two forces expend themselves, -when it will begin to fall by the force of gravity -only, and drop into the water far behind the -ship, which is still moving horizontally. -Diagram <a href="#Fig23">Figure 23</a> will illustrate this effect. -The ball being thrown upwards in the direction -A C, and the vessel moving from A to B, will -cause it to pass in the direction A D, arriving at -D when the vessel reaches B; the two forces<span class="pagenum" id="Page66">[66]</span> -having expended themselves when the ball -arrives at D, it will begin to descend by the -force of gravity in the direction D B H, but -during its fall the vessel will have reached the -position S, so that the ball will drop far behind -it at the point H. To bring the ball from D to -S <i>two forces</i> would be required, as D H and -D W; but as D W does not exist, the force of -gravity operates <i>alone</i>, and the ball necessarily -falls behind the vessel at a distance proportionate -to the altitude attained at D, and the time -occupied in falling from D to H.</p> - -<p>The same result will be observed on throwing -a ball directly upwards from a railway carriage -when in rapid motion, as shown in the following -<a href="#Fig24">Figure 24</a>. While the carriage or tender passes -from A to B, the ball thrown from A to C will -reach the position D, but while the ball then<span class="pagenum" id="Page67">[67]</span> -comes down by the force of gravity, <i>operating -alone</i>, to the point H, the carriage will have -advanced to W, so that the ball will always drop -more or less behind the carriage, according to -the force first given to it in the direction A C -and the time occupied in ascending to D, and -thence descending to H. It is therefore demanded -that if the Earth had a motion upon -axes from west to east, and a ball, instead of -being dropped down a mine or allowed to fall -from the mast head of a ship, be <i>shot upwards</i> -into the air; from the moment of its beginning -to descend the surface of the Earth would turn -from under its direction, and it would fall behind -or to the west of its line of descent. On making -the experiment <i>no such effect is observed</i>, and -therefore the conclusion is unavoidable, that the -Earth <span class="smcapall">DOES NOT MOVE UPON AXES</span>!</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig24"> - -<img src="images/fig24.png" alt="Ball on train"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 24.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<div class="container w40em" id="Fig25"> - -<img src="images/fig25.png" alt="Gun shot"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 25.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>The following experiment has been tried, with -the object of obtaining definite results. If the -Earth is a globe, having a circumference of 25,000 -miles at the equator, the circumference at the -latitude of London (51°) will be about 16,000 -statute miles; so that the motion of the Earth’s -surface, if 25,000 miles in 24 hours at the -equator, in England would be more than 700 feet -per second. An air-gun was firmly fixed to a -strong post, as shown at A in <a href="#Fig25">Figure 25</a>, and -carefully adjusted by a plumb-line, so that it was<span class="pagenum" id="Page68">[68]</span> -perfectly vertical. On discharging the gun, the -ball ascended in the direction A C, and invariably -(during several trials) descended within a few -inches of the gun at A; twice it fell back upon -the very mouth of the barrel. The average -time that the ball was in the atmosphere was 16 -seconds; and, as half the time would be required -for the ascent and half for the descent, it is -evident that if the Earth had a motion once -round its axis in 24 hours, the ball would have -passed in 8 seconds to the point D, while the -air-gun would have reached the position B H. -The ball then commencing its descent, requiring -also 8 seconds, would in that time have fallen to -the point H, while the Earth and the gun would<span class="pagenum" id="Page69">[69]</span> -have advanced as far as W. The time occupied -being 8 seconds, and the Earth’s velocity being -700 feet per second, the progress of the Earth -and the air-gun to W, in advance of the ball at -H, would be 5,600 feet! In other words, in -these experiments, the ball, which always fell -back to the place of its detachment, should have -fallen 5,600 feet, or considerably more than one -statute mile to the west of the air-gun! Proving -beyond all doubt that the supposed axial motion -of the Earth <span class="smcapall">DOES NOT EXIST</span>!</p> - -<p>The same experiment ought to suffice as -evidence against the assumed motion of the -Earth in an orbit; for it is difficult, if not -impossible, to understand how the behaviour of -the ball thrown from a vertical air-gun should -be other in relation to the Earth’s forward -motion in space than it is in regard to its -motion upon axes. Besides, if it is proved <i>not</i> -to move upon axes, the assumption that it -moves in an orbit round the Sun is useless for -theoretical purposes, and there is no necessity -for either denying or in any way giving it -farther consideration. But that no point may be -taken without direct evidence, let the following -experiment be tried:—Take two carefully-bored -iron tubes, about two yards in length, and place -them, one yard asunder, on the opposite sides of -a wooden frame, or a solid block of wood or<span class="pagenum" id="Page70">[70]</span> -masonry; so adjust them that their axes of vision -shall be perfectly parallel to each other, and direct -them to the plane of some notable fixed star, a -few seconds previous to its meridian time. Let -an observer be stationed at each tube; and the -moment the star appears in the first tube, let a -knock or other signal be given, to be repeated -by the observer at the second tube when he first -sees the star. A distinct period of time will -elapse between the signals given, showing that -the same star is not visible at the same moment -by two lines of sight parallel to each other and -only one yard asunder. A slight inclination of -the second tube towards the first would be -required for the star to be seen at the same -moment. If now the tubes be left in their -position for six months, the same star will be -visible at the same meridian time, without the -slightest alteration being required in the direction -of the tubes. From which result it is -concluded that if the Earth had moved <i>a single -yard</i> in an orbit through space there would at -least be the difference of time indicated by the -signals, and the slight inclination of the tube -which the difference in position of one yard -required. But as no such difference in the -direction of the tube is required, the conclusion -is unavoidable that in six months a given -meridian upon the Earth has not moved a single<span class="pagenum" id="Page71">[71]</span> -yard, and that therefore the Earth has not the -slightest degree of orbital motion—or motion -at right angles to the meridian of a given star! -It will be useless to say in explanation that the -stars are so infinitely distant that a difference in -the angle of inclination of the tube in six -months could not be expected, as it will be -proved in a subsequent section that <i>all</i> the stars -are within a few thousand miles from the Earth’s -surface!</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page72">[72]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec3"><span class="secno">SECTION 3.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">THE TRUE DISTANCE OF THE -SUN AND STARS.</span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent">As it is now demonstrated that the Earth is a -plane, the distance of the Sun and Stars may -readily be measured by plane trigonometry. -The base line in any operation being horizontal -and always a carefully measured one, the process -becomes exceedingly simple. Let the altitude -of the Sun be taken on a given day at 12 o’clock -at the high-water mark on the sea shore at -Brighton, in Sussex; and at the same hour at -the high-water mark of the River Thames, near -London Bridge; the difference in the Sun’s -altitude taken simultaneously from two stations -upon the same meridian, and the distance -between the stations, or the length of the base -line ascertained, are all the elements required -for calculating the exact distance of the Sun<span class="pagenum" id="Page73">[73]</span> -from London or Brighton; but as this distance -is the hypothenuse of a triangle, whose base is -the Earth’s surface, and vertical side the zenith -distance of the Sun, it follows that the distance -of the Sun from that part of Earth to which it is -vertical is less than the distance from London. -In the Diagram, <a href="#Fig26">Figure 26</a>, let L B represent -the base line from London to Brighton, a -distance of 51 statute miles. The altitude at L -and at B taken at the same moment of time will -give the distance L S or B S. The angle of -altitude at L or B, with the length of L S or B S, -will then give the vertical distance of the Sun S -from E, or the place which is immediately -underneath it. This distance will be thus found -to be considerably less than 4,000 miles.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig26"> - -<img src="images/fig26.png" alt="Height of sun"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 26.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>The following are the particulars of an -observation made, a few years ago, by the officers -engaged in the Ordnance survey. Altitude of -the Sun at London 55° 13′; altitude taken at<span class="pagenum" id="Page74">[74]</span> -the same time, on the grounds of a public school, -at Ackworth, in Yorkshire, 53° 2′; the distance -between the two places in a direct line, as -measured by triangulation, is 151 statute miles. -From these elements the true distance of the -Sun may be readily computed; and proved to -be under 4,000 miles!</p> - -<p>Since the above was written, an officer of the -Royal Engineers, in the head-quarters of the -Ordnance Survey, at Southampton, has furnished -the following elements of observations recently -made:—</p> - -<table class="standard"> - -<colgroup> -<col class="w05em"> -<col span="5" class="wauto"> -<col class="w05em"> -</colgroup> - -<tr> -<td rowspan="2"> </td> -<td class="text">Southern</td> -<td class="text">Station,</td> -<td class="text">Sun’s</td> -<td class="text">altitude,</td> -<td class="numbers">45°</td> -<td rowspan="2"> </td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">Northern</td> -<td class="center">ditto,</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="numbers">38°</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td colspan="7" class="center">Distance between the two stations, 800 statute miles.</td> -</tr> - -</table> - -<p>The calculation made from these elements gives -the same result, viz., that the actual distance of -the Sun from the Earth is less than 4,000 miles.</p> - -<p>The same method of measuring distances -applies equally to the Stars; and it is easy to -demonstrate, beyond the possibility of doubt, so -long as assumed premises are excluded, that all -the visible objects in the firmament are contained -within the distance of 6,000 miles!</p> - -<p>From these demonstrable distances it follows -unavoidably that the <i>magnitude</i> of the Sun, -Moon, Stars, &c., is very small—much smaller -than the Earth from which they are measured; -and to which therefore they cannot possibly be -other than secondary, and subservient.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page75">[75]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec4"><span class="secno">SECTION 4.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">THE SUN MOVES IN A CIRCLE OVER -THE EARTH, CONCENTRIC WITH -THE NORTH POLE.</span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent">As the Earth has been shown to be fixed, the -motion of the Sun is a visible reality; and if it -be observed from any northern latitude, and for -any period before and after the time of southing, -or passing the meridian, it will be seen to -describe an arc of a circle; an object moving in -an arc cannot return to the centre of such arc -without having completed a circle. This the -Sun does visibly and daily. To place the matter -beyond doubt, the observation of the Arctic -navigators may be referred to. Captain Parry, -and several of his officers, on ascending high -land in the vicinity of the north pole, repeatedly -saw, for 24 hours together, the sun describing a -circle upon the southern horizon.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page76">[76]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec5"><span class="secno">SECTION 5.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">THE DIAMETER OF THE SUN’S -PATH IS CONSTANTLY CHANGING—DIMINISHING -FROM DECEMBER -21<span class="smcapall">ST</span> TO JUNE 15<span class="smcapall">TH</span>, AND ENLARGING -FROM JUNE TO DECEMBER.</span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent">This is a matter of absolute certainty, proved by -what is called, in technical language, the northern -and southern declination, which is simply saying -that the Sun’s path is nearest the north pole in -summer, and farthest away from it in winter. -This difference in position gives rise to the -difference of altitude, as observed at various -periods of the year, and which is shewn in the -following table, given in “The Illustrated London -Almanack,” for 1848, by Mr. Glaisher, of the -Royal Observatory, Greenwich.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page77">[77]</span></p> - -<p>“Sun’s altitude at the time of Southing, or -being on the meridian:—</p> - -<table class="sunaltitude"> - -<tr> -<th colspan="5"> </th> -<th class="padr4">Sun’s<br>altitude.</th> -<th colspan="3">Time of Southing.</th> -</tr> - -<tr> -<th colspan="6"> </th> -<th><span class="fsize80">M.</span></th> -<th><span class="fsize80">S.</span></th> -<th><span class="fsize80">(Common clock, or<br>London mean time.)</span></th> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">June</td> -<td class="number">15</td> -<td rowspan="17" colspan="3"> </td> -<td class="angle">62°</td> -<td class="number"> 0</td> -<td class="number"> 4</td> -<td class="text">before noon.</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="number">30</td> -<td class="angle">61²⁄₃°</td> -<td class="number"> 3</td> -<td class="number">18</td> -<td class="text">afternoon.</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">July</td> -<td class="number">15</td> -<td class="angle">59²⁄₃°</td> -<td class="number"> 5</td> -<td class="number">38</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="number">31</td> -<td class="angle">56¹⁄₂°</td> -<td class="number"> 6</td> -<td class="number"> 4</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">Aug.</td> -<td class="number">15</td> -<td class="angle">52¹⁄₂°</td> -<td class="number"> 0</td> -<td class="number">11</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="number">31</td> -<td class="angle">47°</td> -<td class="number"> 0</td> -<td class="number"> 5</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">Sep.</td> -<td class="number">15</td> -<td class="angle">38²⁄₃°</td> -<td class="number"> 4</td> -<td class="number">58</td> -<td class="text">before noon.</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="number">30</td> -<td class="angle">35¹⁄₂°</td> -<td class="number">10</td> -<td class="number"> 6</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">Oct.</td> -<td class="number">31</td> -<td class="angle">24°</td> -<td class="number">16</td> -<td class="number">14</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">Nov.</td> -<td class="number">30</td> -<td class="angle">17°</td> -<td class="number">10</td> -<td class="number">58</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">Dec.</td> -<td class="number">21</td> -<td class="angle">12°</td> -<td class="number"> 0</td> -<td class="number">27</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="number">31</td> -<td class="angle">15°</td> -<td class="number"> 3</td> -<td class="number">29</td> -<td class="text">afternoon.</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">Jan.</td> -<td class="number"> 1</td> -<td class="angle">15¹⁄₂°</td> -<td class="number"> 3</td> -<td class="number">36</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="number">15</td> -<td class="angle">17°</td> -<td class="number"> 9</td> -<td class="number">33</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="number">31</td> -<td class="angle">21°</td> -<td class="number">13</td> -<td class="number">41</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">Feb.</td> -<td class="number">15</td> -<td class="angle">25°</td> -<td class="number">14</td> -<td class="number">28</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="number">29</td> -<td class="angle">30¹⁄₂°</td> -<td class="number">12</td> -<td class="number">43</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td rowspan="2" class="text">March</td> -<td rowspan="2" class="number">15 -<td rowspan="2" class="brace"><span class="fsize200">{</span></td> -<td rowspan="2" class="center">On the Equator<br>at 6 a.m.</td> -<td rowspan="2" class="brace"><span class="fsize200">}</span></td> -<td class="angle">36°</td> -<td class="number"> 9</td> -<td class="number"> 2</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="angle">38¹⁄₂°</td> -<td class="number"> 0</td> -<td class="number"> 0</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="number">21</td> -<td rowspan="5" colspan="3"> </td> -<td class="angle">42¹⁄₂°</td> -<td class="number"> 4</td> -<td class="number">10</td> -<td class="text">before noon.</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">April</td> -<td class="number">15</td> -<td class="angle">48°</td> -<td class="number"> 0</td> -<td class="number"> 8</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="number">30</td> -<td class="angle">53°</td> -<td class="number"> 2</td> -<td class="number">58</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="text">May</td> -<td class="number">15</td> -<td class="angle">57°</td> -<td class="number"> 3</td> -<td class="number">54</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -<tr> -<td class="center">„</td> -<td class="number">31</td> -<td class="angle">60°</td> -<td class="number"> 2</td> -<td class="number">37</td> -<td class="center">„</td> -</tr> - -</table> - -<p>In the following diagram (<a href="#Fig27">Fig. 27</a>) A A A -represent the Sun’s daily path on December -21st, and B B B the same on June 15th. N the -North Pole, S the Sun, E Great Britain. The -figures 1 2 3 the Arctic Circle, and 4 5 6 the<span class="pagenum" id="Page78">[78]</span> -extent of sunlight. The arrows show the -direction of the Sun’s motion.</p> - -<div class="container w40em" id="Fig27"> - -<img src="images/fig27.jpg" alt="Map of flat world"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 27.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page79">[79]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec6"><span class="secno">SECTION 6.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">CAUSE OF DAY AND NIGHT, -SEASONS, &c.</span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent">The Sun S describes the circle A A A on the -21st December once in 24 hours; hence in that -period day and night occur to every part of the -Earth, except within the Arctic circle. The light -of the Sun gradually diminishing from S, to the -Arctic circle 1 2 3, where it becomes twilight, -does so according to the well-known law of -radiation, equally in all directions—hence, the -circle 4 5 6 represents the whole extent of the -Sun’s light at any given time. The arc 4 E is -the advancing or morning twilight, and 6 E the -receding or evening twilight; to every place -underneath a line drawn across the circle through -S to N it is noonday. It will now be easily -understood that as the Sun S moves in the -direction of the arrows or from right to left, and -completes the circle A A A in 24 hours, it will -produce in that period morning, noon, evening, -and night to all parts of the Earth in succession. -On referring to the diagram, it will be seen that -to England, E, the length of the day at this time -of the year is the <i>shortest</i>, the amount of light -being represented by the arc E E E; and also -that the northern centre N remains in darkness<span class="pagenum" id="Page80">[80]</span> -during the whole daily revolution of the Sun, the -light of which terminates at the Arctic circle -1 2 3. Thus, morning, noon, evening, midnight, -the <i>shortest</i> days, or the Winter season, and the -constant or six months’ darkness at the pole are -all a part of one general phenomenon. As the -Sun’s path begins now to diminish every day -until in six months, or on the 15th of June, -it describes the circle B B B, it is evident that -the same extent of sunlight will reach over or -beyond the pole N, as shown in the following -diagram (<a href="#Fig28">Fig. 28</a>), when morning, noon, evening, -and night will again occur as before; but the<span class="pagenum" id="Page81">[81]</span> -amount of light passing over England, represented -by the arc E E E, is now much larger than when -the Sun was upon the circle A A A, and represents -the <i>longest</i> days, or the <i>Summer</i> season, -and the constant, or six months’ light at the -pole. Thus, day and night, long and short days, -Winter and Summer, the long periods of alternate -light and darkness at the pole, arise simply from -the Sun’s position in relation to the north pole.</p> - -<div class="container w40em" id="Fig28"> - -<img src="images/fig28.jpg" alt="Map of flat world"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 28.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>If the Earth is a globe, it is evident that -Winter and Summer, and long and short days, -will be of the same character and duration in -corresponding latitudes, in the southern as in -the northern hemisphere. But we find that in -many respects there is a marked difference; for -instance, in New Zealand, where the latitude is -about the same as in England, a remarkable -difference exists in the length of day and -night. In the Cook’s Strait Almanack, for 1848, -it is stated, “At Wellington, New Zealand, -December 21, Sun rises 4h. 31m., and sets at -7h. 29m., the day being 14 hours 58 minutes. -June 21st, Sun rises at 7h. 29m., and sets at -4h. 31m., the day being 9 hours and 2 minutes. -In England the longest day is 16h. 34m., and -the shortest day is 7h. 45m. Thus the <i>longest -day</i> in New Zealand is 1 hour and 36 minutes -<i>shorter</i> than the <i>longest day</i> in England; and -the <i>shortest day</i> in New Zealand is 1 hour and<span class="pagenum" id="Page82">[82]</span> -17 minutes <i>longer</i> than the shortest day in -England.”</p> - -<p>In a recently published pamphlet, by W. -Swainson, Esq., Attorney General, the following -passage occurs:—“Compared with an English -summer, that of Auckland is but little warmer, -though much longer; but the nights in New -Zealand are always cool and refreshing.... -The days are <i>one hour shorter</i> in the -summer, and <i>one hour longer</i> in the winter than -in England! of <i>twilight</i> there is <i>little</i> or <i>none</i>.”</p> - -<p>From a work, also recently published, on New -Zealand, by Arthur S. Thompson, M.D., the -following sentences are quoted:—“The summer -mornings, even in the warmest parts of the -colony are sufficiently fresh to exhilarate without -chilling; and the seasons glide imperceptibly -into each other. The days are <i>an hour shorter</i> -at <i>each end</i> of the day in summer, and an hour -longer in winter than in England.”</p> - -<p>A letter from a correspondent in New Zealand, -dated Nelson, September 15, 1857, contains the -subjoined passages:—“Even in summer people -here have no notion of going without fires in the -evening; but then, though the days are very -warm and sunny, the nights are always cold. -For seven months last summer we had not one -day that the Sun did not shine as brilliantly as it -does in England in the finest day in June; and<span class="pagenum" id="Page83">[83]</span> -though it has more power here, the heat is not -nearly so oppressive.... But then there is -not the twilight which you get in England. Here -it is light till about eight o’clock; then, in a few -minutes, it becomes too dark to see anything, -and the change comes over in almost no time.” -“Twilight lasts but a short time in so low a -latitude as 28 degrees, and no sooner does the -Sun peep above the horizon, than all the -gorgeous parade by which he is preceded is -shaken off, and he comes in upon us in the most -abrupt and unceremonious way imaginable.”<a id="FNanchor_9" href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> -These various peculiarities could not exist in the -southern region if the Earth were spherical and -moved upon axes, and in an orbit round the -Sun. If the Sun is fixed, and the Earth revolves -underneath it, the same phenomena should exist -at the same distance on each side of the Equator. -But such is not the case! What can operate to -cause the twilight in New Zealand to be so much -more sudden than it is in England? The -southern “hemisphere” cannot revolve more -rapidly than the northern! The distance round -<i>a globe</i> would be the same at 50° south as at -50° north, and as the whole globe would revolve -once in 24 hours, the surface at the two places -would move underneath the Sun with the same -velocity, and the light would approach in the<span class="pagenum" id="Page84">[84]</span> -morning and recede in the evening in exactly the -same manner; yet the <i>very contrary</i> is the fact! -The twilight in England in summer is slow and -gradual, but in New Zealand it is rapid and -abrupt; a difference which is altogether incompatible -with the doctrine of the Earth’s rotundity. -But, the Earth a plane, and it is a simple -“matter of course.” Let E, in <a href="#Fig28">Figure 28</a>, -represent England, and W New Zealand; the -radius N E and the consequent circle round N -is much less than the radius N W and its -consequent circle round the same point. But as -the larger circle, radius N W is passed over by -the sunlight in the same time (24 hours) as the -smaller circle, radius N E, the velocity is -proportionately greater. The velocity is the -space passed over multiplied by the time in -passing, and as the space over New Zealand is -much greater than the space over England, the -velocity of the Sun-light must be much greater, -and its morning and evening twilight necessarily -more “abrupt and unceremonious;” and <i>therefore</i>, -it might be said with strictly logical -accuracy, the Earth is a Plane, and cannot -possibly be a Globe!</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_9" href="#FNanchor_9" class="label">[9]</a> Captain Basil Hall, R.N., F.R.S.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page85">[85]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec7"><span class="secno">SECTION 7.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">CAUSE OF “SUNRISE” AND “SUNSET.”</span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<div class="container" id="Fig29"> - -<img src="images/fig29.png" alt="Sunrise"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 29.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p class="noindent">Although the Sun is at all times above and -parallel to the Earth’s surface, he appears to -ascend the firmament from morning until noon, -and to descend and sink below the horizon at -evening. This arises from a simple and everywhere -visible law of perspective. A flock of -birds, when passing over a flat or marshy -country, always appears to descend as it recedes; -and if the flock is extensive, the first bird -appears lower, or nearer to the horizon than the -last. When a balloon sails from an observer -without increasing or decreasing its altitude, it -appears gradually to approach the horizon. The -farthest light in a row of lamps appears the -lowest, although each one has the same altitude. -Bearing these phenomena in mind, it will easily -be seen how the Sun, although always parallel to -the surface of the Earth, must appear to ascend -when approaching, and descend after leaving the -meridian or noon-day position. Let the line<span class="pagenum" id="Page86">[86]</span> -A B, <a href="#Fig29">Fig. 29</a>, represent a portion of the Earth’s -surface; C D of the Sun’s path, and H H, the -line of sight. The surface of the Earth, A B, -will appear to ascend from B to H, forming the -horizon. When the Sun is traversing the line C D, -in the direction of the arrows, he will appear to -emerge from the horizon H, and to gradually -ascend the line H D. When in the position 1, -he will <i>appear</i> to be at the point 2; and when at -3, the apparent position will be at 4; but when -he arrives upon the meridian D, his apparent -and actual, or noon-day position, will be the -same. But now, from the point D, the Sun will -appear to descend, as in <a href="#Fig30">Fig. 30</a>, and when he -has passed from D to 1, he will appear at 2, and -when really at 3 will appear at 4; and thus<span class="pagenum" id="Page87">[87]</span> -continuing his course in the direction D C, he -will reach the horizon at H, and disappear or -“set” to the observer at H A. Thus “Sunrise” -and “Sunset” are phenomena dependent entirely -upon the fact that horizontal lines parallel to -each other appear to approach or converge in -the distance, the surface of the Earth being -horizontal, and the line-of-sight of the observer -and the Sun’s path being parallel with it, -necessarily produce the observed phenomena.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig30"> - -<img src="images/fig30.png" alt="Sunset"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 30.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page88">[88]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec8"><span class="secno">SECTION 8.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">CAUSE OF SUN APPEARING -LARGER WHEN RISING AND SETTING -THAN WHEN ON THE MERIDIAN.</span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent">It is well known that when a light of any kind -shines through a dense medium it will appear -larger than when seen through a lighter medium. -This will be more remarkable when the medium -holds aqueous particles in solution,—as in a -damp or foggy atmosphere the light of a gas-lamp -will seem greater at a given distance than -it will under ordinary circumstances. In the -diagram, <a href="#Fig30">Figure 30</a>, it is evident that H D is -less than H 1, H 3, or H 5. The latter (H 5) -represents the greater amount of atmosphere -which the Sun has to shine through when -approaching the horizon; and as the air near -the Earth is both more dense and more damp, -or holds more watery particles in solution, the -light of the Sun must be dilated or enlarged as -well as modified in colour. But the enlarged<span class="pagenum" id="Page89">[89]</span> -appearance of the Sun when rising and setting -is only an optical impression, as proved by -actual measurement. “If the angle of the -Sun or Moon be taken either with a tube or -micrometer when they appear so large to the eye -in the horizon, the measure is identical when -they are in the meridian and appear to the eye -and mind but half the size. The apparent -distance of the horizon is three or four times -greater than the zenith. Hence the mental -mistake of horizontal size, for the angular -dimensions are equal; the first 5° is apparently -to the eye equal to 10° or 15° at 50° or 60° of -elevation; and the first 15° fill a space to the -eye equal to a third of the quadrant. This is -evidently owing to the ‘habit of sight,’ for with -an accurate instrument the measure of 5° near -the horizon is equal to 5° in the zenith.”<a id="FNanchor_10" href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_10" href="#FNanchor_10" class="label">[10]</a> “Million of Facts,” by Sir Richard Philips, p. 537.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page90">[90]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec9"><span class="secno">SECTION 9.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">CAUSE OF SOLAR AND LUNAR -ECLIPSES.</span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent">An Eclipse of the Sun is caused simply by the -Moon passing before it, or between it and the -observer on the Earth. Of this no question has -been raised. But that an Eclipse of the Moon -arises from a shadow of the Earth is in every -respect unsatisfactory. The Earth has been -proved to have no motion, either upon axes or -in an orbit round the Sun, and therefore it could -never come between the Sun and the Moon. -The Earth is proved to be a Plane, always underneath -the Sun and Moon, and therefore to speak -of its intercepting the light of the Sun and thus -casting its own shadow upon the Moon, is to say -that which is impossible. Besides this, cases are -on record of the Sun and Eclipsed Moon being -above the horizon together. “The full Moon -has sometimes been seen above the horizon -before the Sun was set. A remarkable instance -of this kind was observed at Paris on the 19th of<span class="pagenum" id="Page91">[91]</span> -July, 1750, when the Moon appeared visibly -Eclipsed while the Sun was distinctly to be seen -above the horizon.”<a id="FNanchor_11" href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> “On the 20th of April, -1837, the Moon appeared to rise Eclipsed before -the Sun had set. The same phenomenon was -observed on the 20th of September, 1717.”<a id="FNanchor_12" href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> -“In the lunar Eclipses of July 17, 1590; Nov. -3, 1648; June 16, 1666; and May 26, 1668, the -Moon rose Eclipsed whilst the Sun was still -apparently above the horizon. Those <i>horizontal</i> -Eclipses were noticed as early as the time of -Pliny.”<a id="FNanchor_13" href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> The Moon’s entire surface, or that -portion presented to the Earth has also been -distinctly seen during the whole time of a total -Eclipse, a phenomenon utterly incompatible with -the doctrine that the Earth’s shadow is the cause -of it. “The Moon has sometimes shown during -a total Eclispe with an almost unaccountable -distinctness. On Dec. 22, 1703, the Moon, when -totally immersed in the Earth’s shadow, was -visible at Avignon by a ruddy light of such -brilliancy that one might have imagined her -body to be transparent, and to be enlightened -from behind; and on March 19th, 1848, it is<span class="pagenum" id="Page92">[92]</span> -stated that so bright was the Moon’s surface -during its total immersion, that many persons -could not be persuaded that it was eclipsed. -Mr. Forster, of Bruges, states, in an account of -that eclipse, that the light and dark places on -the moon’s surface could be almost as well made -out as in an ordinary dull moonlight night.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_11" href="#FNanchor_11" class="label">[11]</a> “Astronomy and Astronomical Instruments,” p. 105, by -Geo. G. Carey.</p> - -<p><a id="Footnote_12" href="#FNanchor_12" class="label">[12]</a> “McCulloch’s Geography,” p. 85.</p> - -<p><a id="Footnote_13" href="#FNanchor_13" class="label">[13]</a> “Illustrated London Almanack for 1864,” the astronomical -part in which is by James Glaisher, Esq., of the -Greenwich Observatory.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>“Sometimes, in a total lunar eclipse, the -moon will appear quite obscure in some parts of -its surface, and in other parts will exhibit a high -degree of illumination. * * * To a certain -extent I witnessed some of these phenomena -during the merely partial eclipse of February -7th, 1860. * * * I prepared, during the -afternoon of February 6th for witnessing the -eclipse, without any distinct expectation of seeing -much worthy of note. I knew, however, that -upwards of eight-tenths of the disc would be -covered, and I was anxious to observe with what -degree of distinctness the eclipsed portion could -be viewed, partly as an interesting fact, and -partly with a view of verifying or discovering the -weak points of an engraving (in which I am -concerned) of a lunar eclipse.</p> - -<p>“After seeing the increasing darkness of the -penumbra softly merging into the true shadow -at the commencement of the eclipse (about 1 -o’clock a.m., Greenwich time) I proceeded with -pencil and paper, dimly lighted by a distant lamp,<span class="pagenum" id="Page93">[93]</span> -to note by name the different lunar mountains -and plains (the so-called seas) over which the -shadow passed. * * * During the first hour -and ten minutes I had seen nothing unexpected. -* * * I had repeatedly written down my -observations of the remarkable clearness with -which the moon’s eclipsed outline could be seen, -both with the naked eye, and with the telescope; -at 1 hour 58 minutes, however, I suddenly -noted the ruddy colour of a <i>portion</i> of the moon. -I may as well give my notes in the original -words, as copied next day in a more connected -form:—1h. 58m., Greenwich time. I am suddenly -struck by the fact that the whole of the -western seas of the moon are showing through -the shadow with singular sharpness, and that the -whole region where they lie has assumed a -decidedly reddish tinge, attaining its greatest -brightness at a sort of temporary polar region, -having ‘Endymion’ about the position of its -imaginary pole. I particularly notice that the -‘Lake of Sleep’ has disappeared in this brightness, -instead of standing out in a darker shade: -and I notice that this so-called polar region is -not parallel with the rim of the shadow, but -rather west of it.—2h. 15m. Some clouds, -though very thin and transparent, now intervene.—2h. -20m. The sky is now cleared, How -extraordinary is the appearance of the Moon<span class="pagenum" id="Page94">[94]</span> -<i>Reddish</i> is not the word to express it; it is red—red -hot! I endeavour to think of various red -objects with which to compare it, and nothing -seems so like as a <i>red-hot penny</i>—a red-hot -penny with a little <i>white</i>-hot piece at its lower -edge, standing out against a dark-blue back -ground; only it is evidently not a mere disc, but -beautifully rounded by shading.</p> - -<p>“Such is its appearance with the naked eye: -with the telescope its surface varies more in tint -than with the naked eye, and is not of quite so -bright a red as when thus viewed. The redness -continues to be most perceptible at a distance -from the shadow’s southern edge, and to be -greatest about the region of ‘Endymion.’ The -Hercynian mountains (north of Grimaldus) are, -however, of rather a bright red, and Grimaldus -shows well. Mare Crisium and the western seas -are wonderfully distinct. Not a trace to be seen -of Aristarchus or Plato.—2h. 27m. It is now -nearly the middle of the eclipse. The red colour -is very brilliant to the naked eye. * * * -After this, I noticed a progressive change of tint -in the Moon.—2h. 50m. The Moon does not -seem to the naked eye of so bright a red as -before; and again I am reminded by its tint of -red-hot copper, or rather copper which has -begun to cool. The whole of Grimaldi is now -uncovered. Through the telescope I notice a<span class="pagenum" id="Page95">[95]</span> -decided grey shade at the lower part of the -eclipsed portion, and the various small craters -give it a stippled effect, like the old aqua-tint -engravings. The upper part is reddish, but two -graceful bluish curves, like horns, mark the form -of the Hercynian mountains, and the bright -region on the other limb of the Moon. These -are visible also to the naked eye.</p> - -<p>“At 3h. 5m. the redness had almost disappeared; -a very few minutes afterwards, no -trace of it remained, and ere long clouds came -on. I watched the Moon, however, occasionally -gaining a glimpse of its disc, till a quarter to -four o’clock, when, for the last time on that -occasion, I saw it faintly appearing through the -clouds, nearly a full Moon again; and then I -took leave of it, feeling amply repaid for my -vigil by the beautiful spectacle which I had -seen.”<a id="FNanchor_14" href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_14" href="#FNanchor_14" class="label">[14]</a> The Hon. Mrs. Ward, Trimleston House, near Dublin, -in “Recreative Science,” p. 281.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>Mr Walkey, who observed the lunar eclipse -of March 19th, 1848, near Collumpton, says—“The -appearances were as usual till 20 minutes -past 9; at that period, and for the space of the -next hour, instead of an eclipse, or the shadow -(umbra) of the Earth being the cause of the total -obscurity of the Moon, the whole phase of that -body became very quickly and most beautifully<span class="pagenum" id="Page96">[96]</span> -<i>illuminated</i>; and assumed the appearance of -the glowing heat of fire from the furnace, rather -tinged with a <i>deep red</i>. * * * The whole -disc of the Moon being as <i>perfect with light</i> as -if there had been <i>no eclipse whatever</i>! * * * -The Moon positively gave <i>good light from its -disc during the total eclipse</i>!”<a id="FNanchor_15" href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_15" href="#FNanchor_15" class="label">[15]</a> “Philosophical Magazine,” No. 220, for August, 1848.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>In the astronomical portion of the “Illustrated -London Almanack for 1864,” by Mr. Glaisher, a -beautiful tinted engraving is given representing -the appearance of the Moon during the total -eclipse of June 1, 1863, when all the light and -dark places—the so-called mountains, seas, &c., -were plainly visible. In the accompanying -descriptive chapter, the following sentences -occur:—“At the time of totality the Moon -presented a soft woolly appearance, apparently -more globular in form than when fully illuminated. -Traces of the larger and brighter -mountains were visible at the time of totality, -and particularly the bright rays proceeding from -Tycho, Kepler, and Aristarchus. * * * At -first, when the obscured part was of small -dimensions, it was of an iron grey tint, but as it -approached totality, the reddish light became so -apparent that it was remarked that the Moon -‘seemed to be on fire;’ and when the totality -had commenced, it certainly looked like a fire<span class="pagenum" id="Page97">[97]</span> -smouldering in its ashes, and almost going -out.”</p> - -<p>If then, the Sun and Moon have many times -been seen above the horizon when the latter was -eclipsed, how can it be said that the Earth’s -shadow was the cause of a lunar eclipse, when the -Earth was not between or in a line with the Sun -and Moon? And how can the Moon’s non-luminous -surface be distinctly visible and illuminated -during the very totality of an eclipse, if -all the light of the Sun is intercepted by the -Earth?</p> - -<p>Again, if the Moon is a sphere, which it is -declared to be, how can its surface <i>reflect</i> the -light of the Sun? If her surface was a mass of -polished silver, it could not reflect from more -than a mere point! Let a silvered glass ball or -globe of considerable size be held before a lamp -or fire of any magnitude, and it will be seen that -instead of the whole surface reflecting light, -there will be a very small portion only -illuminated. But the Moon’s <i>whole surface</i> is -brilliantly illuminated! a condition or effect -utterly impossible if it be spherical. The surface -<i>might</i> be <i>illuminated</i> from the Sun, or any -other source if opaque, instead of polished, like -an ordinary silvered mirror, but it could not -shine intensely from every part, and brightly -illuminate the objects before it, as the Moon<span class="pagenum" id="Page98">[98]</span> -does so beautifully when full and in a clear -firmament. If the Earth <i>were admitted</i> to be -globular, and to move, and to be capable of -throwing a shadow by intercepting the light of -the Sun, it would be impossible for a lunar -eclipse to occur thereby, unless at the same time -the Moon be proved to be non-luminous, and to -shine only by reflection. But this is not proved; -it is only assumed as an essential part of a -theory. The <i>contrary</i> is capable of proof, and -proof beyond the power of doubt, viz., that the -Moon is <i>self-luminous</i>, or shines with a light -peculiar to herself, and therefore independently -of the Sun. A reflector necessarily gives off -what it receives. If a mass of red-hot metal be -placed before a plane or concave surface, <i>heat</i> -will be reflected. If snow or ice be similarly -placed, <i>cold</i> will be reflected. If light, ordinary -or coloured, be presented, the <i>same</i> will be -reflected. If sound of a given pitch be produced, -the same pitch will be reflected. If the note A -be sounded upon a musical instrument, a -reflector would not return the note B or C, but -the <i>same note</i>, altered only in degree or intensity, -but not in “pitch.” A reflector receiving a red -light would not return a blue or yellow light. A -reflector collecting the cold from a mass of ice, -would not throw off heat; nor the contrary. -Nor could the Moon, if a reflector, radiate or<span class="pagenum" id="Page99">[99]</span> -throw down upon the Earth any other light -than such as she receives from the Sun. No -difference could exist in the quality or character -of the light, and it could differ in no respect but -the quantity or intensity.</p> - -<p>The light of the Sun and of the Moon are -different in their general appearance—in the -colour and action upon the eye.</p> - -<p>The Sun’s light is drying and preservative, or -antiseptic. The Moon’s light is damp and -putrefactive.</p> - -<p>The Sun’s rays will put out a common fire; -the Moon’s light will increase the combustion. -The light of the Sun falling upon certain -chemical substances, produces a change of -colour, as in photographic and other processes. -The light of the Moon fails to produce the same -effect. Dr. Lardner, at page 121 of his excellent -work, “The Museum of Science,” says—“The -most striking instance of the effect of certain -rays of solar light in blackening a light-colored -substance, is afforded by chloride of silver, -which is a white substance, but which immediately -becomes black when acted upon by the -rays near the violet extremity of the spectrum. -This substance, however, highly susceptible as it -is of having its colour affected by light, is, -nevertheless, found not to be changed in any -sensible degree when exposed to the light of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page100">[100]</span> -Moon, even when that light is condensed by the -most powerful burning lenses.”</p> - -<p>The Sun’s light when concentrated by a number -of mirrors, or a large burning lens, produces -a focus which is entirely non-luminous, but in -which the heat is so great that metallic and -alkaline substances are quickly fused; earthy -and mineral compounds almost immediately -vitrified; and all animal and vegetable structures -in a few seconds burned up and destroyed. -But the Moon’s light so concentrated produces a -brilliant focus, so luminous that it is difficult to -look upon it; and yet there is no increase of -temperature! “If the most delicate thermometer -be exposed to the full light of the Moon, shining -with its greatest lustre, the mercury is not elevated -a hair’s breadth, neither would it be if -exposed in the focus of her rays concentrated by -the most powerful lenses. This has been proved -by actual experiment.”<a id="FNanchor_16" href="#Footnote_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> “This question has -been submitted to the test of direct experiment. -* * * The bulb of a thermometer sufficiently -sensitive to render apparent a change of temperature -amounting to the thousandth part of a -degree, was placed in the focus of a concave -reflector of vast dimensions, which, being directed -to the Moon, the lunar rays were collected with -great power upon it. Not the slightest change,<span class="pagenum" id="Page101">[101]</span> -however, was produced in the thermometric -column, proving that a concentration of rays -sufficient to fuse gold, if they proceeded <i>from the -Sun</i>, does not produce a change of temperature -so great as the thousandth part of a degree, when -they proceed <i>from the Moon</i>.”<a id="FNanchor_17" href="#Footnote_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_16" href="#FNanchor_16" class="label">[16]</a> “All the Year Round,” by Dickens.</p> - -<p><a id="Footnote_17" href="#FNanchor_17" class="label">[17]</a> Dr. Lardner’s Museum of Science, p. 115.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>“The light of the Moon though concentrated -by the most powerful burning glass, is incapable -of raising the temperature of the most delicate -thermometer. M. De La Hire collected the rays -of the full Moon when on the meridian, by -means of a burning glass thirty-five inches in -diameter, and made them fall on the bulb of a -delicate air-thermometer. <i>No effect was produced</i>, -though the lunar rays by this glass were -concentrated 300 times.” “Professor Forbes -concentrated the Moon’s light by a lens thirty -inches in diameter, its focal distance being about -forty-one inches, and having a power of concentration -exceeding 6,000 times. The image of -the Moon which was only eighteen hours past -full, and less than two hours from the meridian, -was brilliantly thrown by this lens on the extremity -of a commodious thermo-pile. Although -the observations were made in the most unexceptional -manner, and (supposing that half the -rays were reflected, dispersed, and absorbed) -though the light of the Moon was concentrated<span class="pagenum" id="Page102">[102]</span> -<i>3000 times, not the slightest thermo-effect was -produced</i>!<a id="FNanchor_18" href="#Footnote_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> In the “Lancet” (medical journal) -for March 14th, 1856, particulars are given of -several experiments, which proved that the -Moon’s rays when concentrated actually <i>reduced</i> -the temperature upon a thermometer more than -8 degrees!</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_18" href="#FNanchor_18" class="label">[18]</a> Dr. Noad’s Lectures on Chemistry, p. 334.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent00">“The cold chaste Moon, the Queen</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Of Heaven’s bright Isles;</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Who makes all beautiful</div> - <div class="verse indent0">On which she smiles:</div> - <div class="verse indent0">That wandering shrine of soft</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Yet <i>icy flame</i>,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Which ever is transformed</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Yet still the same;</div> - <div class="verse indent0">And <i>warms not</i> but <i>illumes</i>.”</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<p class="poemcredit">—<span class="smcap">Shelley.</span></p> - -<p>The “pale <i>cold</i> Moon” is an expression not -only beautiful poetically but evidently true -philosophically.</p> - -<p>If, as we have now seen, the very nature -of a reflector demands certain conditions and -the Moon does not manifest these conditions, -it must of necessity be concluded that the -Moon is <i>not</i> a <i>reflector</i>, but a <i>self-luminous -body</i>. If self-luminous her surface could not be -darkened or eclipsed by a shadow of the Earth—supposing -such were thrown upon it. The -luminosity instead of being diminished would be -greater in proportion to the greater density or<span class="pagenum" id="Page103">[103]</span> -darkness of the shadow. As the light in a -lantern shines most brightly in the darkest -places, so would the Moon’s self-luminous surface -be most intense in the deepest part of the Earth’s -shadow. It is thus rendered undeniable that a -Lunar Eclipse <i>does</i> not and <i>could</i> not arise from -a shadow of the Earth! As a <i>Solar</i> Eclipse -occurs from the Moon passing over the Sun; so -from the evidence it is clear that a Lunar Eclipse -<i>can only</i> arise from a similar cause—a body -semi-transparent and well-defined passing before -the Moon, or between her surface and the -observer on the surface of the Earth. That such -a body exists is admitted by several distinguished -astronomers. In the report of the Council of -the Royal Astronomical Society for June, 1850, -it is stated, “We may well doubt whether that -body which we call the Moon is the <i>only -satellite</i> of the Earth.” In the report of the -Academy of Sciences for October 12, 1846, and -again for August, 1847, the Director of one of -the French Observatories gives a number of -observations and calculations which have led -him to conclude that “there is at least <i>one non-luminous -body</i> of considerable magnitude which -is attached as a <i>satellite to this Earth</i>.”<a id="FNanchor_19" href="#Footnote_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_19" href="#FNanchor_19" class="label">[19]</a> Referred to in Lardner’s “Museum of Science,” p. 159.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>Persons who are unacquainted with the -methods of calculating Eclipses and other<span class="pagenum" id="Page104">[104]</span> -astronomical phenomena, are prone to look -upon the correctness of these calculations as -powerful arguments in favour of the doctrine of -the Earth’s rotundity and the Newtonian philosophy -generally. But this is erroneous. Whatever -theory is adopted, or if all theories are -discarded, the same results may follow, because -the necessary data may be tabulated and employed -independently of all theory, or may be -mixed up with any, even the most opposite -doctrines, or kept distinct from every system, -just as the operator may decide. The tables of -the Moon’s relative positions for almost any -second of time are purely practical, the result of -long continued observation, and may or may not -be mixed up with hypothesis. In Smith’s -“Rise and progress of Astronomy,” speaking of -Ptolemy, who lived in the 2nd century of the -Christian Era, it is said, “The (considered) -defects of his system did not prevent him from -calculating all the Eclipses that were to happen -for 600 years to come.” Professor Partington, at -page 370 of his Lectures on Natural Philosophy, -says, “The most ancient observations of which -we are in possession, that are sufficiently accurate -to be employed in astronomical calculations, are -those made at Babylon about 719 before the -Christian Era, of three Eclipses of the Moon. -Ptolemy, who has transmitted them to us,<span class="pagenum" id="Page105">[105]</span> -employed them for determining the period of -the Moon’s mean motion; and therefore had -probably none more ancient on which he could -depend. The Chaldeans, however, must have -made a long series of observations before they -could discover their “Saros” or lunar period of -6,585¹⁄₃ days, or about 18 years; at which time, -as they had learnt, the place of the Moon, her -<i>node</i> and <i>apogee</i> return nearly to the same -situation with respect to the Earth and the Sun, -and, of course, a series of nearly similar Eclipses -occur.”</p> - -<p>Sir Richard Phillips, in his “Million of Facts,” -at page 388, says:—“The precision of astronomy -arises, not from theories, but from prolonged -observations, and the regularity of the motions, -or the ascertained uniformity of their irregularities. -Ephemerides of the planets’ places, of -Eclipses, &c., have been published for above 300 -years, and were nearly as precise as at present.”</p> - -<p>“No particular theory is required to calculate -Eclipses; and the calculations may be made -with equal accuracy <i>independent of every -theory</i>.”<a id="FNanchor_20" href="#Footnote_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_20" href="#FNanchor_20" class="label">[20]</a> Somerville’s Physical Sciences, p. 46.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page106">[106]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec10"><span class="secno">SECTION 10.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">CAUSE OF TIDES.</span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent">The doctrine of the Earth’s rotundity being -fallacious, all ideas of “centre of attraction of -gravitation,” “mutual attraction of Earth and -Moon,” &c., &c., must be given up; and the -cause of tides in the ocean must be sought for -in another direction. It is certain that there is a -constant pressure of the atmosphere upon the -surface of the Earth and ocean. This is proved -by ordinary barometrical observations, many -Pneumatic experiments, and by the fact that -during the most fearful storms at sea the surface -only is disturbed; at the depth of a hundred -feet the water is always calm—except in the path -of well-marked currents and local submarine -phenomena. The following quotations gathered -from casual reading fully corroborate this statement. -“It is amazing how superficial is the -most terrible tempest. Divers assure us that -in the greatest storms calm water is found at the -depth of 90 feet.”<a id="FNanchor_21" href="#Footnote_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_21" href="#FNanchor_21" class="label">[21]</a> Chambers’s Journal, No. 100, p. 379.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>“This motion of the surface of the sea is not -perceptible to a great depth. In the strongest<span class="pagenum" id="Page107">[107]</span> -gale it is supposed not to extend beyond 72 feet -below the surface; and at the depth of 90 feet -the sea is perfectly still.”<a id="FNanchor_22" href="#Footnote_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_22" href="#FNanchor_22" class="label">[22]</a> Penny Cyclopædia, Article Sea.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>“The people are under a great mistake who -believe that the substance of the water moves to -any considerable depth in a storm at sea. It is -only the form or shadow which hurries along -like a spirit, or like a thought over the countenance -of the ‘great deep,’ at the rate of some -forty miles an hour. Even when the ‘Flying -Dutchman’ is abroad the great mass of water -continues undisturbed and nearly motionless a -few feet below the surface.”<a id="FNanchor_23" href="#Footnote_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_23" href="#FNanchor_23" class="label">[23]</a> London Saturday Journal, August 8, 1840, p. 71.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>“The unabraded appearance of the shells -brought up from great depths, and the almost -total absence of the mixture of any <i>detritus</i> from -the sea, or foreign matter, suggest most forcibly -the idea of <i>perfect repose</i> at the bottom of the -deep sea.”<a id="FNanchor_24" href="#Footnote_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_24" href="#FNanchor_24" class="label">[24]</a> Physical Geography of the Sea, by Lieut. Maury, p. 265.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>Bearing this fact in mind, that there exists a -continual pressure of the atmosphere upon the -Earth, and associating it with the fact that the -Earth is a vast plane “stretched out upon the -waters,” and it will be seen that it must of -necessity slightly fluctuate, or slowly rise and -fall in the water. As by the action of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page108">[108]</span> -atmosphere the Earth is slowly depressed, the -water moves towards the receding shores and -produces the flood tide; and when by the -reaction of the resisting oceanic medium the -Earth gradually ascends the waters recede, and -the ebb tide is produced. This is the <i>general</i> -cause of tides. Whatever peculiarities are -observable they may be traced to the reaction of -channels, bays, headlands, and other local causes.</p> - -<p>If a raft, or a ship, or any other structure -floating upon water be carefully observed, it will -be seen to have a gentle fluctuating motion. -However calm the water and the atmosphere -may be, this gradual rising and falling of the -floating mass is always more or less observable. -If vessels of different sizes are floating near each -other they will be seen to fluctuate with different -velocities, the largest and heaviest will move the -least rapidly. This motion will be observable -whether the vessels be held by their anchors, or -moored to buoys, or freely floating in still water. -A large and heavily laden vessel will make -several fluctuations in a minute of time; the -Earth once only in about twelve hours, because -it is proportionately larger.</p> - -<p>To this simple condition of the Earth,—the -action or pressure upon it of the atmosphere, -and the reaction or resistance to it of the water, -may be traced all the leading peculiarities of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page109">[109]</span> -tides. The simultaneous ebb and flow upon -meridians 180° apart. The absence of high and -low water in large inland seas and lakes; which -being contained within and fluctuating with the -Earth cannot therefore show a relative change in -the altitude of the surface. The flux and reflux -observed in several inland wells and basins -though far from the sea, but being connected -with it by subterranean passages, necessarily -show a relative difference in the surface levels of -the earth and water. And the regular ebb and -flood of the water in the great Polar sea recently -discovered by Dr. Kane, although it is separated -from the great tidal current of the Atlantic -Ocean by deep barriers of ice—as will be seen by -the following quotation:—“Dr. Kane reported -an open sea north of the parallel of 82°. To -reach it his party crossed a barrier of ice 80 or -100 miles broad. Before gaining this open -water he found the thermometer to show the -extreme temperature of -60°. Passing this ice-bound -region by travelling North, he stood on -the shores of an iceless sea extending in an -unbroken sheet of water as far as the eye could -reach towards the pole. Its waves were dashing -on the beach with the swell of a boundless ocean. -The tides ebbed and flowed in it, and I apprehend -that the tidal wave from the Atlantic can -no more pass under this icy barrier to be propagated<span class="pagenum" id="Page110">[110]</span> -in seas beyond than the vibrations of a -musical string can pass with its notes a ‘fret’ -upon which the musician has placed his finger. -* * * These tides therefore must have been -born in that cold sea, having their cradle about -the North Pole; and we infer that most, if not -all, the unexplored regions about the Pole are -covered with deep water; for, were this unexpected -area mostly land, or shallow water, it -could not give birth to regular tides.”<a id="FNanchor_25" href="#Footnote_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_25" href="#FNanchor_25" class="label">[25]</a> Physical Geography of the Sea, by Lieut. Maury, p. 176.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>That the Earth has a vibratory or tremulous -motion, such as must necessarily belong to a -floating and fluctuating structure, is abundantly -proved by the experience of astronomers and -surveyors. If a delicate spirit-level be firmly -placed upon a rock or upon the most solid -foundation which it is possible to construct, the -very curious phenomenon will be observed of -constant change in the position of the air-bubble. -However carefully the “level” may be adjusted, -and the instrument protected from the atmosphere, -the “bubble” will not maintain its position -many seconds together. A somewhat similar -influence has been noticed in astronomical -observatories, where instruments of the best construction -and placed in the most approved -positions cannot always be relied upon without -occasional re-adjustment.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page111">[111]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec11"><span class="secno">SECTION 11.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">CONSTITUTION, CONDITION, -AND ULTIMATE DESTRUCTION OF THE -EARTH BY FIRE.</span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent">Chemical analysis proves to us the important -fact that the great bulk of the Earth—meaning -thereby the <i>land</i> as distinct from the waters—is -composed of metallic oxides or metals in combination -with oxygen. When means are adopted -to remove the oxygen it is found that most of -these metallic bases are highly combustible. -The different degrees of affinity existing among -the elements of the Earth, give rise to all the -rocks, minerals, ores, deposits, and strata which -constitute the material habitable world. The -different specific gravities or relative densities -which these substances are found to possess, and -the numerous evidences which exist of their -former plastic or semi-fluid condition, afford -positive proof that from a once commingled or -chaotic state regular but rapid precipitation, -stratification, crystallization, and concretion successively<span class="pagenum" id="Page112">[112]</span> -occurred; and that in some way not yet -clear to us sufficient chemical action was produced -to ignite a great portion of the Earth, and -to reduce it to a molten incandescent state, the -volatile products of which being forcibly eliminated -have broken up the stratified formations, -and produced the irregular confused condition -which we now observe. That such an incandescent -molten state of a great portion of the -lower parts of the Earth still exists is a matter -of certainty; and there is evidence that the heat -thus internally generated is gradually increasing.</p> - -<p>“The uppermost strata of the soil share in all -the variations of temperature which depend upon -the seasons; and this influence is exerted to a -depth which, although it varies with the latitude, -is never very great. Beyond this point the -temperature rises in proportion as we descend to -greater depths, and it has been shown, by -numerous and often-repeated experiments, that -the increase of temperature is on average one -degree (Fahrenheit) for about every 545 feet. -Hence it results that at a depth of about twelve -miles from the surface, we should be on the -verge of an incandescent mass.”<a id="FNanchor_26" href="#Footnote_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_26" href="#FNanchor_26" class="label">[26]</a> Rambles of a Naturalist, by M. de Quatrefages.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>“So great is the heat within the Earth, that -in Switzerland, and other countries where the -springs of water are very deep, they bring to the<span class="pagenum" id="Page113">[113]</span> -surface the warm mineral waters so much used -for baths and medicine for the sick; and it is -said, that if you were to dig very deep down into -the Earth, the temperature would increase at the -rate of one degree of the thermometer for every -100 feet; so that, at the depth of 7000 feet, or -one mile and a half, all the water that you found -would be boiling; and at the depth of about ten -miles all the rocks would be melted. * * * -A day will yet come when this earth will be -burned up by the fire. There is fire, as you -have heard, within it, ready to burst forth at any -moment.”<a id="FNanchor_27" href="#Footnote_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> “This earth, although covered all -round with a solid crust, is all on fire -within. Its interior is supposed to be a -burning mass of melted, glowing metals, fiery -gas, and boiling lava. * * * * * The -solid crust which covers this inward fire -is supposed not to be much more than -from 9 to 12 miles in thickness. Whenever -this crust breaks open, or is cleft in -any place, there rush out lava, fire, melted -rocks, fiery gases, and ashes, sometimes in such -floods as to bury whole cities. From time to -time we read of the earth quaking, trembling, -and sometimes opening, and of mountains and -small islands (which are mountains in the sea)<span class="pagenum" id="Page114">[114]</span> -being thrown up in a day.”<a id="FNanchor_28" href="#Footnote_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_27" href="#FNanchor_27" class="label">[27]</a> “The World’s Birthday,” by Professor Gaussen, Geneva, -p. 43.</p> - -<p><a id="Footnote_28" href="#FNanchor_28" class="label">[28]</a> “The World’s Birthday,” by Professor Gaussen, Geneva, -p. 42.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>In a periodical called “Recreative Science,” -at the end of an interesting article on volcanoes, -&c., the following sentence occurs:—“The -conclusion is therefore inevitable, that the -general distribution all over the earth of volcanic -vents, their similarity of action and products, their -enormous power and seeming inexhaustibility, -their extensiveness of action in their respective -sites, the continuance of their energies during -countless years, and the incessant burning day -and night, from year to year, of such craters as -Stromboli; and lastly, the apparent inefficiency -of external circumstances in controlling their -operations, eruptions happening beneath the sea -as beneath the land, in the frigid as in the torrid -zone, for these and many less striking phenomena, -we must seek for some great and general -cause, such only as the central heat of the earth -affords us.”</p> - -<p>Sir Richard Phillips says, “at the depth of 50 -feet (from the sea level) the temperature of the -earth is the same winter and summer.” * * * -“The deepest coal mine in England is at Killingworth, -near Newcastle-upon-Tyne, and the -mean annual temperature at 400 yards below -the surface is 77°; and at 300 yards, 70°; while<span class="pagenum" id="Page115">[115]</span> -at the surface it is but 48°, being about one -degree of increase for every 15 yards. Hence, -at 3,300 yards, the heat would be equal to boiling -water, taking 20 yards to a degree. This explains -the origin of hot springs. The heat of the Bath -waters is 116°, hence they would appear to rise -from a depth of 1,320 yards. By experiments -made at the Observatory of Paris for ascertaining -the increase of temperature from the surface of -the earth towards the interior, 51 feet, or 17 -yards, corresponds to the increase of one degree -Fahrenheit’s thermometer. Hence, the temperature -of boiling water would be at 8,212 feet, -or about 1¹⁄₂ English miles under Paris.”</p> - -<p>Professor Silliman, of America, states “that -in boring the Artesian wells in Paris, the -temperature increased at the rate of 1 degree for -every 50 feet downwards; and, reasoning from -causes known to exist, the whole of the interior -part of the earth, or, at least, a great part of it, is -an ocean of melted rock agitated by violent -winds.”</p> - -<p>Sir Charles Lyell, in his address to the British -Association, assembled at Bath, September, 1864, -speaking of hot springs generally, said “An -increase of heat is always experienced as we -descend into the interior of the earth. * * * -The estimate deduced by Mr. Hopkins, from an -accurate series of observations made in the<span class="pagenum" id="Page116">[116]</span> -Monkwearmouth shaft, near Durham, and in the -Dukenfield shaft, near Manchester, each of -them 2,000 feet in depth. In these shafts the -temperature was found to rise at the rate of 1° -Fah. for every increase of depth of from 65 to 70 -feet.”</p> - -<p>“The observations made by M. Arago, in -1821, that the deepest Artesian wells are the -warmest, threw great light on the origin of -thermal springs, and on the establishment of the -law, that terrestrial heat increases with increasing -depth. It is a remarkable fact, which has but -recently been noticed, that at the close of the third -century St Patricius, probably Bishop of Partusa, -was led to adopt very correct views regarding -the phenomenon of the hot springs at Carthage. -On being asked what was the cause of boiling -water bursting from the earth, he replied, ‘Fire -is nourished in the clouds, and in the interior of -the earth, as Etna and other mountains near -Naples may teach you. The subterranean -waters rise as if through siphons. The cause of -hot springs is this: waters which are more -remote from the subterranean fire are colder, -whilst those which rise nearer the fire, are -heated by it, and bring with them to the surface -which we inhabit, an insupportable degree of -heat.’”<a id="FNanchor_29" href="#Footnote_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_29" href="#FNanchor_29" class="label">[29]</a> “Humboldt’s Cosmos,” p. 220.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page117">[117]</span></p> - -<p>The investigations which have been made, -and the evidence which has been brought -together, render it undeniable that the lower -parts of the earth are on fire. Of the intensity -of the combustion, no practical idea can be -formed. It is fearful beyond comparison. The -lava thrown out from a volcano in Mexico, “was -so hot that it continued to smoke for twenty -years; and after three years and a half, a piece -of wood took fire in it, at a distance of five miles -from the crater.” In various parts of the world, -large islands have been thrown up from the sea, -in a red-hot glowing condition, and so intensely -heated, that after being forced through many -fathoms of salt water, and standing in the midst -of it, exposed to wind and rain for several -months, they were not sufficiently cooled for -persons to approach and stand upon them. “A -notable fact is the force exerted in volcanic -action, Cotopaxi, in 1738, threw its fiery rockets -3,000 feet above its crater, while in 1744 the -blazing mass, struggling for an outlet, roared -like a furnace, so that its awful voice was heard -at a distance of more than six hundred miles. -In 1797, the crater of Tunguragua, one of the -great peaks of the Andes, flung out torrents of -mud, which dammed up rivers, opened new -lakes, and in valleys of a thousand feet wide -made deposits six hundred feet deep. The<span class="pagenum" id="Page118">[118]</span> -stream from Vesuvius which, in 1737, passed -through Torre del Greco, contained thirty-three -million cubic feet of solid matter; and, in 1794, -when Torre del Greco was destroyed a second -time, the mass of lava amounted to forty-five -million cubic feet. In 1669 Etna poured forth a -flood which covered 84 square miles of surface, -and measured nearly 100,000,000 cubic feet. -On this occasion the sand and scoriæ formed the -Monte Rossi, near Nicolosi, a cone two miles in -circumference, and four hundred and fifty feet high. -The stream thrown out by Etna, in 1819, was in -motion, at the rate of a yard per day, for nine -months after the eruption; and it is on record -that the lavas of the same mountain, after a -terrible eruption, were not thoroughly cooled -and consolidated ten years after the event. In -the eruption of Vesuvius, A.D. 79, the scoriæ -and ashes vomited forth far exceeded the entire -bulk of the mountain; while, in 1660, Etna -disgorged more than twenty times its own mass. -* * * Vesuvius has thrown its ashes as far -as Constantinople, Syria, and Egypt; it hurled -stones eight pounds in weight to Pompeii, a -distance of six miles; while similar masses were -tossed up 2,000 feet above its summit. Cotopaxi -has projected a block one hundred cubic yards -in volume a distance of nine miles, while Sumbawa, -in 1815, during the most terrible eruption<span class="pagenum" id="Page119">[119]</span> -on record, sent its ashes as far as Java, a distance -of three hundred miles. * * * In viewing -these evidences of enormous power, we are -forcibly struck with the similarity of action with -which they have been associated; and, carrying -our investigation a step further, the same -similarity of the producing power is hinted at -in the identity of the materials ejected. Thus, -if we classify the characteristics of all recorded -eruptions, we shall find that the phenomena are -all reducible to upheavals of the earth, rumblings -and explosions, ejections of carbonic acid, fiery -torrents of lava, cinders, and mud, with accompanying -thunder and lightning. The last-named -phenomena are extrajudicial in character; -they are merely the result of the atmospheric -disturbance consequent on the escape of great -heat from the earth, just as the burning of an -American forest causes thunder and rain. The -connection that apparently exists, too, between -neighbouring craters is strongly confirmed by -the fact that in every distinct volcanic locus but -<i>one</i> crater is usually active at a time. Since -Vesuvius has resumed his activity, the numerous -volcanic vents on the other side of the bay have -sunk into comparative inactivity; for ancient -writers, who are silent respecting the former, -speak of the mephitic vapours of the Lake -Avernus as destructive to animal existence, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page120">[120]</span> -in earlier days than these Homer pictures the -Phlegrean Fields as the entrance to the infernal -regions, placed at the limits of the habitable -world, unenlightened by rising or setting sun, -and enveloped in eternal gloom. * * * * -The earth contains within it a mass of heated -material; nay, it is a heated and incandescent -body, habitable only because surrounded with a -cool crust—the crust being to it a mere shell, -within which the vast internal fires are securely -inclosed: and yet not securely, perhaps, unless -such vents existed as those to which we apply -the term volcano. * * * * Every volcano -is a safety-valve, ready to relieve the pressure -from within when that pressure rises to a certain -degree of intensity; or permanently serving for -the escape of conflagrations, which, if not so provided -with escape, might rend the habitable -crust to pieces.”<a id="FNanchor_30" href="#Footnote_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_30" href="#FNanchor_30" class="label">[30]</a> Recreative Science, p.p. 257 to 260.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>Thus it is certain, from the phenomena of -earthquakes, submarine and inland volcanoes -which exist in every part of the earth from the -frozen to the tropical regions, hot and boiling -springs, fountains of mud and steam, lakes of -burning sulphur, jets and blasts of destructive -gases, and the choke and fire damps of our coal -mines, that at a few miles only below the surface -of the earth there exists a vast region of combustion,<span class="pagenum" id="Page121">[121]</span> -the intensity and power of which are -indescribable, and cannot be compared with -anything within the range of human experience.</p> - -<p>As the earth is an extended plane resting in -and upon the waters of the “great deep” it may -fitly be compared to a large vessel or ship -floating at anchor, with her “Hold” or lower -compartments beneath the water-line filled with -burning materials; and, from our knowledge of -the nature and action of fire, it is difficult to -understand in what way the combustion can be -prevented from extending, when it is known to -be surrounded with highly inflammable substances. -Wherever a fire is surrounded with -heterogeneous materials—some highly combustible -and others partially and indirectly -combustible—it is not possible for it to remain -continually in the same condition nor to -diminish in extent and intensity, it must increase -and extend itself. That the fire in the earth is -so surrounded with inflammable materials is -matter of certainty; the millions of tons of coals, -peat, turf, mineral oils, rock tar, pitch, asphalte, -bitumen, petroleum, mineral naphtha, and numerous -other hydro-carbons which exist in -various parts of the earth, and much of these -far down below the surface, prove this condition -to exist. The products of volcanic action being -chiefly carbon in combination with hydrogen<span class="pagenum" id="Page122">[122]</span> -and oxygen, prove also that these carbon compounds -already exist in a state of combustion, -and that as such immense quantities of the same -fuel still exist, it is quite within the range of -possibility that some of the lower strata of combustible -matter may take fire and the action -rapidly extend itself through the various and -innumerable veins which ramify in every direction -throughout the whole earth. Should such -an action commence, knowing, as we do, that -the rocks and minerals of the earth are but -oxides of inflammable bases, and that the -affinities of these bases are greatly weakened and -almost suspended in the presence of highly -heated carbon, we see clearly that such chemical -action or fire would quickly extend and increase -in intensity until the whole earth with everything -entering into its composition, would rapidly -decompose, volatilise, and burst into one vast -indescribable, annihilating conflagration!</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page123">[123]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec12"><span class="secno">SECTION 12.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">MISCELLANEA.</span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent"><span class="smcap">Moon’s Phases.</span>—It has been shown that the -Moon is not a reflector of the Sun’s light, but is -self-luminous. That the luminosity is confined -to one-half its surface is sufficiently shown by -the fact that at “New Moon” the whole circle or -outline of the Moon is often distinctly visible; -but the darker outline is less, or the circle is -smaller than the segment which is illuminated. -From this it is easily seen that “New Moon,” -“Full Moon,” and “Gibbous Moon” are but the -different proportions of the illuminated surface -which are presented to the observer on earth.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Moon’s Appearance.</span>—Astronomers have indulged -their imagination to such a degree that -the Moon has been considered to be a solid, -opaque, spherical world, having mountains, -valleys, lakes, volcanic craters, and other conditions -analogous to the surface of the earth. So -far has this fancy been carried, that the whole -visible disc has been mapped out, and special -names given to its various peculiarities, as<span class="pagenum" id="Page124">[124]</span> -though they had been carefully observed and -measured by a party of terrestrial ordnance -surveyors. All this has been done in direct -opposition to the fact that whoever looks, without -previous bias, through a powerful telescope at -the Moon’s surface, will be puzzled to say what -it is really like, or how to compare it with anything -known. The comparison which may be -made, will depend greatly upon the state of -mind of the observer. It is well known that -persons looking at the rough bark of a tree, or -at the irregular lines or veins in certain kinds -of marble and stone, or gazing at the red -embers in a dull fire, will, according to the -degree of activity of the imagination, be able -to see different forms, even the outlines of -animals and human faces. It is in this way -that persons may fancy that the Moon’s surface -is broken up into hills and valleys and -other arrangements such as are found on -earth. But that anything really similar to the -surface of our own world is anywhere visible -upon the Moon is altogether fallacious. This is -admitted by some of those who have written -upon the subject “Some persons when they -look into a telescope for the first time, -having heard that mountains are to be seen, -and discovering nothing but these (previously -described) unmeaning figures, break off in<span class="pagenum" id="Page125">[125]</span> -disappointment, and have their faith in these -things rather diminished than increased. I -would advise, therefore, before the student takes -even his <i>first view</i> of the Moon through a -telescope, to form as clear an idea as he can how -mountains, and valleys, and caverns situated at -such a distance <i>ought</i> to look, and by what -marks they may be recognised. Let him seize, -if possible, the most favourable periods (about -the time of the first quarter), and previously -<i>learn from drawings</i> and explanations how to -<i>interpret</i> everything he sees.”<a id="FNanchor_31" href="#Footnote_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> “Whenever -we exhibit celestial objects to inexperienced -observers it is usual to precede the view with -good <i>drawings</i> of the objects, accompanied by -an explanation of what each appearance exhibited -in the telescope <i>indicates</i>. The novice is told -that mountains and valleys can be seen in the -Moon by the aid of the telescope; but on looking -he sees a confused mass of light and shade, and -<i>nothing</i> which <i>looks</i> to him <i>like either mountains -or valleys</i>! Had his attention been previously -directed to a plain <i>drawing</i> of the Moon, and -each particular appearance <i>interpreted</i> to him, -he would then have looked through the telescope -with intelligence and satisfaction!”<a id="FNanchor_32" href="#Footnote_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> -Thus it is<span class="pagenum" id="Page126">[126]</span> -admitted by those who teach that the Moon is a -spherical world, having hills and dales like the -earth, can only see such things in imagination. -“Nothing but unmeaning figures” are really -visible, and “the students break off in disappointment, -and have their faith in such things -rather diminished than increased,” “until they -previously learn from <i>drawings</i> and explanations -how to <i>interpret</i> everything seen.” But who -<i>first made</i> the drawings? Who <i>first interpreted</i> -the “unmeaning figures” and the “confused -mass of light and shade?” Who first declared -them to indicate mountains and valleys, and -ventured to make drawings and give explanations -and interpretations for the purpose of biasing -the minds, and fixing or guiding the imaginations -of subsequent observers? Whoever they -were, they at least had “given the reins to -Fancy,” and afterwards took upon themselves to -dogmatise and teach their crude and unwarranted -imaginings to succeeding investigators. And this -is the kind of evidence and “reasoning” which -is obtruded in our seats of learning, and spread -out in the numerous works which are published -for the edification of society!</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_31" href="#FNanchor_31" class="label">[31]</a> “Mechanism of the Heavens,” by Denison Olmsted, -LL.D., Professor of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy in Gale -College, U.S.</p> - -<p><a id="Footnote_32" href="#FNanchor_32" class="label">[32]</a> Mitchell’s “Orbs of Heaven,” p. 232.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p><span class="smcap">The Planet Neptune.</span>—For some years the -advocates of the earth’s rotundity, and of the -Newtonian philosophy generally, were accustomed -to refer with an air of pride and triumph<span class="pagenum" id="Page127">[127]</span> -to the discovery of a new planet, which was -called Neptune, as an undeniable evidence of -the truth of their system or theory. The -existence of this luminary was said to have been -predicated from calculation only, and for a -considerable period before it had been seen by -the telescope. It was urged that therefore the -system which would permit of such a discovery -must be true. But the whole matter subsequently -proved to be unsatisfactory. That a proper -conception may be formed of the actual value of -the calculations and their supposed verification, -the following account will be useful. “In the year -1781, on March 13, Uranus was discovered by -Sir William Herschel, who was examining some -small stars near the feet of Gemini; and he -observed one of them to have a sensible amount -of diameter and less brightness than the others, -and it was soon found to be a planet. It, -however, had been seen before—first, by Flamstead, -on December 23rd, 1690; and between -this time and 1781 it had been observed 16 -times by Flamstead, Bradley, Mayer, and -Lemonnier; these astronomers had classed it -as a star of the sixth magnitude. Between 1781 -and 1820 it was of course very frequently -observed; and it was hoped that at the latter -time sufficient data existed to construct accurate -tables of its motions. This task was undertaken<span class="pagenum" id="Page128">[128]</span> -by M. Bouvard, Member <i>de L’Academie des -Sciences</i>, but he met with unforeseen difficulties. -It was found utterly impossible to construct -tables which would represent the 17 ancient -observations, and at the same time the more -numerous modern ones; and it was finally -concluded that the ancient observations were -erroneous, or that some strange and unknown -action disturbed, or had disturbed, the planet; -consequently M. Bouvard discarded entirely the -old observations, and used only those taken -between 1781 and 1820, in constructing the -tables of Uranus. For some years past it has -been found that the tables thus constructed do -not agree any better with modern observations, -than they do with the ancient observations; -<i>consequently it was evident that the planet was -under the influence of some unknown cause</i>. -Several hypotheses have been suggested as to -the nature of this cause; some persons talked of -a resisting medium; others of a great satellite -which might accompany Uranus; some even -went so far as to suppose that the vast distance -Uranus is from the Sun caused the law of -gravitation to lose some of its force; others -thought that the rapid flight of a comet had -disturbed its regular movements; others thought -of the existence of a planet beyond Uranus, -whose disturbing force caused the anomalous<span class="pagenum" id="Page129">[129]</span> -motions of the planet; but no one did otherwise -than follow the bent of his inclination, and did -not support his assertion by any positive -considerations.</p> - -<p>“Thus was the theory of Uranus surrounded -with difficulties, when M. Le Verrier, an eminent -French mathematician, undertook to investigate -the irregularities in its motions. His first paper -appeared on the 10th November, 1845, and his -second on June 1, 1846 (published in the -Comptes Rendûs). In this second paper, after -a most elaborate and careful investigation, he -proves the utter incompatibility of any of the -preceding hypotheses to account for the planet’s -motions, except only that of the last one, viz., -that of a new planet. He then successively -proves that this planet cannot be situated either -between the Sun and Saturn, or between Saturn -and Uranus; but that it must be beyond -Uranus. And in this paper he asks the following -questions:—‘Is it possible that the irregularities -of Uranus can be owing to the action of a planet -situated in the ecliptic, at a distance of twice the -mean distance of Uranus from the Sun? If so, -where is it actually situated? What is its mass? -What are the elements of the orbit it describes?”</p> - -<p>This was the problem he set himself to work -upon, by the means of solving the inverse -problem of the perturbations; for instead of<span class="pagenum" id="Page130">[130]</span> -having to measure the action of a determined -planet, he had to deduce the elements of the -orbit of the disturbing planet, and its place in -the heavens from the recognised inequalities of -Uranus. And this problem M. Le Verrier has -successfully solved. In his second paper he -deduces the place in the heavens that the body -must be as 325° of helio-centric longitude. On -the 31st August last he published his third -paper. In this he has calculated that the period -of the planet is 217 years; and that it moves in -an orbit at the distance of more than 3,000 -millions of miles from the Sun; that its mean -longitude on January 1st, 1847, will be 318° 17′; -its true longitude 326° 32′; and that the -longitude of its perihelion will be 284° 45′; that -it will appear to have a diameter of 3¹⁄₄ seconds -of arc as seen from the earth; and that it is -now about 5° E. of <i>Delta Capricorni</i>.</p> - -<p>“These remarkable calculations have pointed -out a position which has very nearly proved to -be the true one.</p> - -<p>“On September 23, Dr. Galle at Berlin discovered -a star of the eighth magnitude, which -has proved to be the planet. Its place at the -time was five degrees from <i>Delta Capricorni</i>. -It was found to have a disc of 3 seconds as -predicted; and its longitude at the time differs -less than a degree from the longitude computed<span class="pagenum" id="Page131">[131]</span> -from the above elements. Its daily motion, too, -is found to agree very closely with the predicted; -and, judging from this last circumstance, the -planet’s distance, as stated above, must be nearly -the truth.</p> - -<p>“Thus the result of these calculations was the -discovery of a new planet in the place assigned -to it by theory, whose mass, distance, position -in the heavens, and orbit it describes round the -Sun, were all approximately determined before -the planet had ever been seen; and all agrees -with observations, so far as can at present be -determined. It is found to have a disc, and its -diameter cannot be much less than 40,000 miles, -and may be more; its motions are very slow; it -is at present in the constellation of Aquarius as -indicated by theory; and it will be in the -constellation of Capricornus all the year 1847. -It may be readily seen in a telescope of -moderate power.</p> - -<p>“Whatever view we take of this noble discovery -it is most gratifying, whether at the -addition of another planet to our list; whether -at the proving the correctness of the theory of -universal gravitation; or in what view soever, it -must be considered as a splendid discovery, and -the merit is chiefly due to theoretical astronomy. -This discovery is perhaps the greatest triumph<span class="pagenum" id="Page132">[132]</span> -of astronomical science that has ever been -recorded.”<a id="FNanchor_33" href="#Footnote_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_33" href="#FNanchor_33" class="label">[33]</a> “Illustrated London Almanack for 1847.”</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>If such things as criticism, experience, and -comparative observation did not exist, the tone -of exultation in which the above article indulges -might be properly shared in by the astronomical -student; but let the following extracts be carefully -read, and it will be seen that such a tone -was premature and unwarranted. “Paris, Sept. -15, 1848. The only sittings of the Academy of -late in which there was anything worth recording, -and even this was not of a practical character, were -those of the 29th ult. and the 11th inst. On the -former day M. Babinet made a communication -respecting the planet Neptune, which has been -generally called M. Le Verrier’s planet, the -discovery of it having, as it was said, been made -by him from theoretical deductions, which -astonished and delighted the scientific public. -What M. Le Verrier had inferred from the -action on other planets of some body which -ought to exist was verified, at least so it was -thought at the time, by actual vision. Neptune -was actually seen by other astronomers, and the -honour of the theorist obtained additional luster. -But it appears from a communication of M. -Babinet that <i>this is not the planet</i> of M. Le -Verrier. He had placed his planet at a distance<span class="pagenum" id="Page133">[133]</span> -from the Sun equal to thirty-six times the limit -of the terrestrial orbit; Neptune revolves at a -distance equal to thirty times of these limits, -which makes a difference of nearly <i>two hundred -millions of leagues</i>! M. Le Verrier had -assigned to his planet a body equal to thirty-eight -times that of the earth; Neptune has only -<i>one third</i> of this volume! M. Le Verrier had -stated the revolutions of his planet round the -Sun to take place in two hundred and seventeen -years; Neptune performs its revolutions in -one hundred and sixty-six years! Thus then -Neptune is not M. Le Verrier’s planet; and -all his theory as regards that planet falls to -the ground! M. Le Verrier may find another -planet, but it will not answer the calculations -which he had made for Neptune. In the -sitting of the 14th, M. Le Verrier noticed the -communication of M. Babinet, and to a great -extent admitted his own error! He complained -indeed that much of what he said was taken in -too absolute a sense; but he evinces much more -candour than might have been expected from a -disappointed explorer. M. Le Verrier may -console himself with the reflection that if he has -not been so successful as he thought he had been, -others might have been equally unsuccessful, and -as he has still before him an immense field for -the exercise of observation and calculation, we<span class="pagenum" id="Page134">[134]</span> -may hope that he will soon make some discovery -which will remove the vexation of his present -disappointment.”<a id="FNanchor_34" href="#Footnote_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_34" href="#FNanchor_34" class="label">[34]</a> “Times” Newspaper, Monday, Sept. 18, 1848.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>“As the data of Le Verrier and Adams stand -at present there is a discrepancy between the -predicted and the true distance; and in some -other elements of the planet. It remains, therefore, -for these or future astronomers to reconcile -theory with fact; or, perhaps, as in the case of -Uranus, to make the new planet the means of -leading to yet greater discoveries. It would -appear, from the most recent observations, that -the mass of Neptune, instead of being as at first -stated one nine thousand three hundredth is -only one twenty three thousandth that of the -Sun; whilst its periodic time is now given with -a greater probability at 166 years; and its mean -distance from the Sun nearly thirty. Le Verrier -gave the mean distance from the Sun thirty-six -times that of the Earth; and the period of -revolution 217 years.<a id="FNanchor_35" href="#Footnote_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_35" href="#FNanchor_35" class="label">[35]</a> “Cosmos,” by Humboldt, p. 75.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>“May 14, 1847. A Paper was read before the -Royal Astronomical Society, by Professor Schumacher, -‘on the identity of the planet Neptune -(M. Le Verrier’s) with a star observed by M. -Lalande in May, 1795.’”<a id="FNanchor_36" href="#Footnote_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_36" href="#FNanchor_36" class="label">[36]</a> “Report of Royal Astronomical Society,” for Feb. 11, -1848, No. 4, vol. 8.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page135">[135]</span></p> - -<p>Such mistakes as the above ought at least to -make the advocates of the Newtonian theory less -positive, and more ready to acknowledge that at -best their system is but hypothetical and must -sooner or later give place to a philosophy the -premises of which are demonstrable, and which -is in all its details sequent and consistent.</p> - -<h3>PENDULUM EXPERIMENTS AS PROOFS -OF EARTH’S MOTION.</h3> - -<p class="noindent">In the early part of the year 1851, the scientific -journals and nearly all the newspapers published -in Great Britain and on the Continents of Europe -and America were occupied in recording and -discussing certain experiments with the pendulum, -first made by M. Foucault, of Paris; and -the public were startled by the announcement -that the results furnished a practical proof of the -Earth’s rotation.</p> - -<p>The subject was referred to in the <i>Literary -Gazette</i>, in the following words:—“Everybody -knows what is meant by a pendulum in its -simplest form, a weight hanging by a thread to -a fixed point. Such was the pendulum experimented -upon long ago by Galileo, who discovered -the well-known law of isochronous vibrations, -applicable to the same. The subject has since<span class="pagenum" id="Page136">[136]</span> -received a thorough examination, as well theoretical -as practical, from mathematicians and -mechanicians; and yet, strange to say, the most -remarkable feature of the phenomenon has -remained unobserved and wholly unsuspected -until within the last few weeks, when a young -and promising French physicist, M. Foucault, -who was induced by certain reflections to repeat -Galileo’s experiments in the cellar of his mother’s -house at Paris, succeeded in establishing the -existence of a fact connected with it which gives -an immediate and visible demonstration of the -Earth’s rotation. Suppose the pendulum already -described to be set moving in a vertical plane -from north to south, the plane in which it -vibrates, to ordinary observation, would appear -to be stationary. M. Foucault, however, has -succeeded in showing that this is not the case, -but that the plane is itself slowly moving round -the fixed point as a centre in a direction contrary -to the Earth’s rotation, <i>i.e.</i>, with the apparent -heavens, from east to west. His experiments -have since been repeated in the hall of the -observatory, under the superintendence of M. -Arago, and fully confirmed. If a pointer be -attached to the weight of a pendulum suspended -by a long and fine wire, capable of turning -round in all directions, and nearly in contact -with the floor of a room, the line which this<span class="pagenum" id="Page137">[137]</span> -pointer appears to trace on the ground, and -which may easily be followed by a chalk mark, -will be found to be slowly, but visibly, and -constantly moving round, like the hand of a -watch dial; and the least consideration will show -that this ought to be the case, and will excite -astonishment that so simple a consequence as -this is, of the most elementary laws of Geometry -and Mechanics, should so long have remained -unobserved. * * * The subject has created a -great sensation in the mathematical and physical -circles of Paris. It is proposed to obtain permission -from the Government to carry on further -observations by means of a pendulum suspended -from the dome of the Pantheon, length of -suspension being a desideratum in order to make -the result visible on a larger scale, and secure -greater constancy and duration in the experiment. -The time required for the performance -of a complete revolution of the plane of vibration -would be about 32 hours 8 minutes for the -parallel of Paris; 30 hours 40 minutes for that -of London; and at 30 degrees from the equator -exactly 48 hours. Certainly any one who should -have proposed not many weeks back to prove -the rotation of the Earth upon which we stand -by means of direct experiment made upon its -surface would have run the risk, with the mob of -gentlemen who write upon mechanics, of being<span class="pagenum" id="Page138">[138]</span> -thought as mad as if he were to have proposed -reviving Bishop Wilkins’s notable plan for going -to the North American colonies in a few hours, -by rising in a balloon from the Earth and gently -floating in the air until the Earth, in its diurnal -rotation, have turned the desired quarter towards -the suspended æronaut, whereupon as gently to -descend; so necessary and wholesome is it -occasionally to reconsider the apparently simplest -and best established conclusions of science.”</p> - -<p>The following is from the <i>Scotsman</i>, which -has always been distinguished for the accuracy -of its scientific papers. The article bears the -initials “C. M.,” which will at once be recognised -as those of Mr. Charles Maclaren, for many years -the accomplished editor of that journal:—“The -beautiful experiment contrived by M. Foucault to -demonstrate the rotation of the globe, has -deservedly excited universal interest. * * * -A desire has always been felt that some method -could be devised of rendering this rotation -palpable to the senses. Even the illustrious -Laplace participated in this feeling and has left -it on record. ‘Although,’ he says, ‘the rotation -of the Earth is now established with all the -certainty which the physical sciences require, -still a direct proof of that phenomenon ought to -interest both geometricians and astronomers.’ -No man ever knew the laws of the planetary<span class="pagenum" id="Page139">[139]</span> -motions better than Laplace, and before penning -such a sentence, it is probable that he had -turned the subject in his mind, and without -discovering any process by which the object -could be attained; but it does not follow that -if he had applied the whole force of his genius -to the task, he would not have succeeded. Be -this as it may, here we have the problem solved -by a man not probably possessing a tithe of his -science or talent; and, what is very remarkable, -after the discovery was made, it was found to be -legitimately deducible from mathematical principles. -* * * In this, as in many other -cases, the <i>fact</i> comes first, and takes us by -surprise; after which we find that we had long -been in possession of the principles from which -it flowed, and that, with the clue we had in our -hands, theory should have revealed the fact to -us long before. M. Foucault’s communication -describing his experiments is in the <i>Comptes -Rendus</i> of the Academy of Sciences, for 3rd -February, 1851. His first experiments were -made with a pendulum only two metres -(6ft. 6¹⁄₄in.) in length, consisting of a steel wire -from ⁶⁄₁₀ths to ¹¹⁄₁₀ths of a millimetre in -diameter (the millimetre is the 25th part of an -inch); to the lower end of which was attached -a polished brass ball, weighing 5 kilogrammes, -or 11 English pounds. * * * A metallic<span class="pagenum" id="Page140">[140]</span> -point projecting below the ball, and so directed -as if it formed a continuation of the suspension -wire, served as an index to mark the change of -position more precisely. The pendulum hung -from a steel plate in such a manner as to move -freely in any vertical plane. To start the -oscillatory movement without giving the ball -any bias, it was drawn to one side with a cord, -which held the ball by a loop; the cord was -then burned, after which the loop fell off, and -the vibrations (generally limited to an arc of -15 or 20 degrees) commenced. In one minute -the ball had sensibly deviated from the original -plane of vibration towards the observer’s left. -Afterwards he experimented at the Observatory -with a pendulum 11 metres (30 feet) long, and -latterly at the Pantheon with one still longer. -The advantage of a large pendulum, as compared -with a small one, is, that a longer time elapses -before it comes to a state of rest; for machinery -cannot be employed here, as in a clock, to -continue the motion. The pendulum is suspended -over the centre of a circular table, whose -circumference is divided into degrees and -minutes. The vibrations are begun in the -manner above described, and in a short time it -is observed that the pendulum, instead of -returning to the same point of the circle from -which it started, has shifted to the left. If<span class="pagenum" id="Page141">[141]</span> -narrowly observed, the change in the plane of -vibration (says M. Foucault) is perceptible in -one minute, and in half an hour, “Il saute -aux yeux,” it is quite palpable. At Paris the -change exceeds 11 degrees in an hour. Thus, -supposing the oscillations to commence in a -plane directed south and north, in two hours -the oscillations will point SSW. and NNE.; in -four hours they will point SW. and NE.; and in -eight hours the oscillations will point due east -and west, or at right angles to their original -direction. To a spectator the change seems to -be in the pendulum, which, without any visible -cause, has shifted round a quarter of a circle; -but the real change is in the table, which, resting -on the Earth, and accompanying it in its -rotation, has performed a fourth (and something -more) of its diurnal revolution.</p> - -<p>No one anticipated such a result; and the -experiment has been received by some with -incredulity, by all with wonderment; and one -source of the incredulity arises from the difficulty -of conceiving how, amidst the ten thousand -experiments of which the pendulum has been -the subject, so remarkable a fact could have -escaped notice so long. Fully admitting that -these experiments have generally been conducted -with pendulums which had little freedom of -motion horizontally, we still think odd that<span class="pagenum" id="Page142">[142]</span> -somebody did not stumble upon the curious fact.</p> - -<p>Though all the parts of the Earth complete -their revolution in the same space of time, it is -found that the rate of horizontal motion in -Foucault’s pendulum varies with the latitude of -the place where the experiment is made. At the -pole, the pendulum would pass over 15 degrees -in an hour, like the Earth itself, and complete -its circuit in 24 hours. At Edinburgh, the -pendulum would pass over 12¹⁄₂ degrees in an -hour, and would complete its revolution in 29 -hours 7 minutes. At Paris, the rate of motion -is 11 degrees and 20 minutes per hour, and the -revolution should be completed in 32 hours.</p> - -<div class="container w40em" id="Fig31"> - -<img src="images/fig31.png" alt="Schematic representation of surface"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 31.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page143">[143]</span></p> - -<p>Let the above figure represent a portion of -the Earth’s surface near the north pole N. -Suppose the pendulum to be set in motion at <i>m</i>, -so as to vibrate in the direction <i>x y</i>, which -coincides with that of the meridian <i>m</i> N or <i>m r</i>. -The Earth in the meantime is pursuing its -easterly course, and the meridian line <i>m</i> N has -come in six hours into the position <i>n</i> N. It has -been hitherto supposed that the pendulum -would now vibrate in the new direction <i>n</i> N, -assumed by the meridian, but thanks to M. -Foucault, we now know that this is a mistake. -The pendulum will vibrate in a plane <i>x n y</i>, -parallel to its original plane at <i>m</i>, as will be -manifest if the plane of vibration points to some -object in absolute space, such as a star. While -the meridian line <i>m</i> N will in the course of 24 -hours range round the whole circle of the heavens, -and point successively in the direction <i>n</i> N, <i>o</i> N, -<i>p</i> N, <i>r</i> N, <i>s</i> N, <i>t</i> N, and <i>u</i> N, the pendulum’s -plane of vibration <i>x y</i>, whether at <i>m</i>, at <i>n</i>, at <i>o</i>, -at <i>p</i>, at <i>r</i>, at <i>s</i>, at <i>t</i>, or at <i>u</i>, will always be -parallel to itself, pointing invariably to the same -star, and were a circular table placed under the -pendulum, its plane of vibration, while really -stationary, would appear to perform a complete -revolution.</p> - -<p>This stationary position of the plane of -vibration at the pole seems to present little<span class="pagenum" id="Page144">[144]</span> -difficulty. We impress a peculiar motion on the -pendulum in setting it a going. The Earth is -at the same time carrying the pendulum -eastward, but <i>at the pole</i> the one motion will not -interfere with the other. The only action of the -Earth on the pendulum there is that of attracting -it towards its own (the Earth’s) centre. But -this attraction is exactly in the plane of vibration -and merely tends to continue the oscillatory -motion without disturbing it. It is otherwise if -the experiment is made at some other point, say -20 degrees distant from the pole. Supposing -the vibrations to commence in the plane of the -meridian, then as the tendency of the pendulum -is to continue its vibrations in planes absolutely -parallel to the original plane, it will be seen, if -we trace both motions, that, while it is carried -eastward with the Earth along a parallel of -latitude, this tendency will operate to draw the -plane of vibration away from a ‘great circle’ -into a ‘small circle’ (that is, from a circle -dividing the globe into two <i>equal</i> parts, into one -dividing it into two <i>unequal</i> parts). But the -pendulum <i>must</i> necessarily move in a ‘great -circle,’ and hence to counteract its tendency to -deviate into a ‘small circle,’ a correctory movement -is constantly going on, to which the -lengthening of the period necessary to complete -a revolution must be ascribed. At Edinburgh<span class="pagenum" id="Page145">[145]</span> -the period is about 29 hours, at Paris 32, at -Cairo 48, at Calcutta 63. At the Equator, the -period stretches out to infinity. M. Foucault’s -rule is, that the angular space passed over by -the pendulum at any latitude in a given time, is -equal to the angular motion of the Earth in the -period, multiplied by the sine of the latitude. -The angular motion of the Earth is 15 degrees -per hour; and at the latitude of 30, for example, -the sine being to radius as 500 to 1000, the -angular motion of the pendulum will consequently -be 7¹⁄₂ degrees per hour. It is, therefore, -easily found. It follows that the motions of the -pendulum may be employed in a rough way to -indicate the latitude of a place.”<a id="FNanchor_37" href="#Footnote_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_37" href="#FNanchor_37" class="label">[37]</a> -Supplement of the <i>Manchester Examiner</i>, of May 24, 1851.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>Notwithstanding the apparent certainty of -these pendulum experiments, and the supposed -exactitude of the conclusions deducible therefrom, -many of the same school of philosophy -differed with each other, remained dissatisfied, -and raised very serious objections both to the -value of the experiments themselves, and to the -supposed proof which they furnished of the -Earth’s rotation. One writer in the <i>Times</i> -newspaper of the period, who signs himself -“B. A. C.,” says, “I have read the accounts of -the Parisian experiment as they have appeared -in many of our papers, and must confess that I<span class="pagenum" id="Page146">[146]</span> -still remain unconvinced of the reality of the -phenomenon. It appears to me that, except at -the pole where the point of suspension is immovable, -no result can be obtained. In other -cases the shifting of the direction of passage -through the lowest point that takes place during -an excursion of the pendulum, from that point -in one direction and its return to it again, will -be exactly compensated by the corresponding -shifting in the contrary direction during the -pendulum’s excursion on the opposite side. -Take a particular case. Suppose the pendulum -in any latitude to be set oscillating in the -meridian plane, and to be started from the -vertical towards the south. It is obvious that -the wire by which it is suspended <i>does not -continue to describe a plane</i>, but a species of -conoidal surface; that when the pendulum has -reached its extreme point its direction is to the -south-west, and that as the tangent plane to the -described surface through the point of suspension -necessarily contains the normal to the Earth at -the same point, the pendulum on its return -passes through the same point in the direction -north-east. Now, starting again from this point, -we have exactly the circumstances of the last -case, the primary plane being shifted slightly out -of the meridian; when, therefore, the pendulum -has reached its extreme point of excursion the<span class="pagenum" id="Page147">[147]</span> -direction of the wire is to the west of this plane, -and when it returns to the vertical the direction -of passage through the lowest point is as much -to the west of this plane as it was in the former -case to the west of the meridian plane; but -since it is now moving from north to south -instead of from south to north, as in the former -case, its former deviation receives complete -compensation, and the primary plane returns -again to the meridian, when the whole process -recurs.”</p> - -<p>In the <i>Liverpool Mercury</i> of May 23, 1851, -the following letter appeared:—“The supposed -manifestation of the Rotation of the Earth.—The -French, English, and European continental -journals have given publicity to an experiment -made in Paris with a pendulum; which experiment -is said to have had the same results when -made elsewhere. To the facts set forth no -contradiction has been given, and it is therefore -to be hoped that they are true. The correctness -of the inferences drawn from the facts is another -matter. The first position of these theorists is, -that in a complete vacuum beyond the sphere of -the Earth’s atmosphere, a pendulum will continue -to oscillate in one and the same original -plane. On that supposition their whole theory -is founded. In making this supposition the fact -is overlooked that there <i>is no vibratory motion</i><span class="pagenum" id="Page148">[148]</span> -unless through atmospheric resistance, or by -force opposing impulse. Perpetual progress in -rectilinear motion may be imagined, as in the -corpuscular theory of light; circular motion may -also be found in the planetary systems; and -parabolic and hyperbolic motions in those of -comets; but vibration is artificial and of limited -duration. No body in nature returns the same -road it went, unless artificially constrained to do -so. The supposition of a permanent vibratory -motion such as is presumed in the theory -advanced, is <i>unfounded in fact</i>, and absurd in -idea; and the whole affair of this proclaimed -discovery falls to the ground. It is what the -French call a ‘mystification’—anglice a ‘humbug.’ -Liverpool, 22nd May, 1851.” -<span class="righttext"><span class="padr4">“T.”</span></span></p> - -<p>Another writer declared that he and others -had made many experiments and had discovered -that the plane of vibration had nothing whatever -to do with the meridian longitude nor with -the Earth’s motion, but followed the plane of the -magnetic meridian.</p> - -<p>“A scientific gentleman in Dundee recently -tried the pendulum experiment, and he says—‘that -the pendulum is capable of showing the -Earth’s motion I regard as a <i>gross delusion</i>; but -that it tends to the <i>magnetic meridian</i> I have -found to be a fact.’”<a id="FNanchor_38" href="#Footnote_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_38" href="#FNanchor_38" class="label">[38]</a> <i>Liverpool Journal</i>, May 17, 1851.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page149">[149]</span></p> - -<p>In many cases the experiments have not shown -a change at all in the plane of oscillation of the -pendulum; in others the alteration in the plane -of vibration has been in the <i>wrong direction</i>; -and very often the <i>rate of variation</i> has been -altogether different to that which theory indicated. -The following is a case in illustration:—“On -Wednesday evening the Rev. H. H. Jones, -F.R.A.S., exhibited the apparatus of Foucault to -illustrate the diurnal rotation of the Earth, in -the Library Hall of the Manchester Athenæum. -The preparations were simple. A circle of chalk -was drawn in the centre of the floor, immediately -under the arched skylight. The circle was -exactly 360 inches in its circumference, every -inch being intended to represent one degree. -According to a calculation Mr. Jones had made, -and which he produced at the Philosophical -Society six weeks ago, the plane of oscillation of -the pendulum would, at Manchester, diverge -about one degree in five minutes, or perhaps a -very little less. He therefore drew this circle -exactly 360 inches round, and marked the inches -on its circumference. The pendulum was hung -from the skylight immediately over the centre of -the circle, the point of suspension being 25 feet -high. At that length of wire, it should require -2¹⁄₂ seconds to make each oscillation across the -circle. The brazen ball, which at the end of a<span class="pagenum" id="Page150">[150]</span> -fine wire constituted the pendulum, was furnished -with a point, to enable the spectator to observe -the more easily its course. A long line was drawn -through the diameter of the circle, due north and -south, and the pendulum started so as to swing -exactly along this line; to the westward of which, -at intervals of three inches at the circumference, -two other lines were drawn, passing through the -centre. According to the theory, the pendulum -should diverge from its original line towards the -west, at the rate of one inch or degree in five -minutes. This, however, Mr. Jones explained, -was a perfection of accuracy only attainable in a -vacuum, and rarely could be approached where -the pendulum had to pass through an atmosphere -subject to disturbances; besides, it was difficult to -avoid giving it some slight lateral bias at starting. -In order to obviate this as much as possible, -the steel wire was as fine as would bear the -weight, ¹⁄₃₀th of an inch thick; and the point -of suspension was adjusted with delicate nicety. -An iron bolt was screwed into the frame-work of -the skylight; into it a brass nut was inserted—the -wire passed through the nut (the hollow sides -of which were bell-shaped, in order to give it fair -play), and at the top the wire ended in a globular -piece, there being also a fine screw to keep it -from slipping. * * * The pendulum was -gently drawn up to one side, at the southern end<span class="pagenum" id="Page151">[151]</span> -of the diametrical line, and attached by a thread -to something near. When it hung quite still -the thread was burnt asunder, and the pendulum -began to oscillate to and fro across the circle. -* * * Before it had been going on quite -seven minutes, it had reached nearly the third -degree towards the west, whereas it <i>ought</i> to have -occupied a quarter of an hour in getting thus far -from its starting line, even making no allowance -for the resistance of the atmosphere.”<a id="FNanchor_39" href="#Footnote_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_39" href="#FNanchor_39" class="label">[39]</a> “Manchester Examiner” (Supplement), May 24, 1851.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>Besides the irregularities so often observed in -the time and direction of the pendulum vibrations, -and which are quite sufficient to render them -worthless as evidence of the Earth’s motion, the -use which the Newtonian astronomers made of -the general fact that the plane of oscillation is -variable, was most unfair and illogical. It was -proclaimed to the world as a visible proof of the -Earth’s diurnal motion; but the motion was -<i>assumed to exist</i>, and then employed to explain -the cause of the fact which was first called a -proof of the thing assumed! A greater violation -of the laws of investigation was never perpetrated! -The whole subject as developed and applied -by the theoretical philosophers is to the fullest -degree unreasonable and absurd—not a “jot or -tittle” better than the reasoning contained in the -following letter:—“Sir,—Allow me to call your<span class="pagenum" id="Page152">[152]</span> -serious and polite attention to the extraordinary -phenomenon, demonstrating the rotation of the -Earth, which I at this present moment experience, -and you yourself or anybody else, I have not the -slightest doubt, would be satisfied of, under -similar circumstances. Some sceptical and -obstinate individuals may doubt that the Earth’s -motion is visible, but I say from personal observation -its a positive fact. I don’t care about -latitude or longitude, or a vibratory pendulum -revolving round the sine of a tangent on a -spherical surface, nor axes, nor apsides, nor -anything of the sort. That is all rubbish. All -I know is, I see the ceiling of this coffee-room -going round. I perceive this distinctly with the -naked eye—only my sight has been sharpened -by a slight stimulant. I write after my sixth -go of brandy-and-water, whereof witness my -hand,”—“Swiggins”—<i>Goose and Gridiron, May -5, 1851.</i>—“P.S. Why do two waiters come when -I only call one?”<a id="FNanchor_40" href="#Footnote_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_40" href="#FNanchor_40" class="label">[40]</a> “Punch,” May 10, 1851.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>The whole matter as handled by the astronomical -theorists is fully deserving of the ridicule -implied in the above quotation from <i>Punch</i>; but -because great ingenuity has been shewn, and -much thought and devotion manifested in connection -with it, and the general public thereby -greatly deceived, it is necessary that the subject<span class="pagenum" id="Page153">[153]</span> -should be fairly and seriously examined. What -are the facts?</p> - -<p>First.—When a pendulum, constructed according -to the plan of M. Foucault, is allowed to -vibrate, its plane of vibration is often variable—<i>not -always</i>. The variation when it <i>does</i> occur, -is <i>not uniform</i>—is not always the same in the -same place; nor always the same either in its -rate or velocity, or in its direction. It cannot -therefore be taken as evidence; for that which is -inconstant cannot be used in favour of or -against any given proposition. It therefore <i>is -not evidence and proves nothing</i>!</p> - -<p>Secondly.—If the plane of vibration <i>is</i> observed -to change, where is the connection between such -change and the supposed motion of the Earth? -What principle of reasoning guides the experimenter -to the conclusion that it is the Earth -which moves underneath the pendulum, and not -the pendulum which moves over the Earth? -What logical right or necessity forces one conclusion -in preference to the other?</p> - -<p>Thirdly.—Why was not the peculiar arrangement -of the point of suspension of the pendulum -specially considered, in regard to its possible -influence upon the plane of oscillation? Was it -not known, or was it overlooked, or was it, in the -climax of theoretical revelry, ignored that a “ball-and-socket” -joint is one which facilitates <i>circular</i><span class="pagenum" id="Page154">[154]</span> -motion more readily than any other? and that a -pendulum so suspended (as was M. Foucault’s), -could not, after passing over one arc of vibration, -return through the same arc without there being -many chances to one that its globular point of -suspension would slightly turn or twist in its bed, -and therefore give to the return or backward -oscillation a slight change of direction? Let the -<i>immediate cause</i> of the pendulum’s liability to -change its plane of vibration be traced; and it -will be found not to have the slightest connection -with the motion or non-motion of the surface -over which it vibrates.</p> - -<p>At a recent meeting of the French Academy -of sciences, “M. Dehaut sent in a note, stating -that M. Foucault (whose experiments on the -pendulum effected a few years ago at the -Pantheon, are of European notoriety) is not the -first discoverer of the fact that the plane of -oscillation of the free pendulum is invariable; -but that the honour of the discovery is due to -Poinsinet de Sivry, who, in 1782, stated, in a -note to his translation of ‘Pliny,’ that a mariner’s -compass might be constructed without a magnet, -by making a pendulum and setting it in motion -in a given direction; because, provided the -motion were continually kept up, the pendulum -would continue to oscillate in the same direction, -no matter by how many points, or how often the -ship might happen to change her course.”</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page155">[155]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec13"><span class="secno">SECTION 13.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">PERSPECTIVE ON THE SEA.</span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent">It has been shown (at <a href="#Page25">pages 25</a> to <a href="#Page34">34</a>) that the -law of perspective, as commonly taught in our -Schools of Art, is fallacious and contrary to -everything seen in nature. If an object be held -up in the air, and gradually carried away from -an observer who maintains his position, it is -true that all its parts will converge to one and -the same point; but if the same object be placed -upon the ground and similarly moved away from -a fixed observer, the same predicate is false. In -the first case the <i>centre</i> of the object is the -<i>datum</i> to which every point of the exterior -converges; but in the second case the <i>ground</i> -becomes the <i>datum</i>, in and towards which every -part of the object converges in succession, -beginning with the lowest, or that nearest to it.</p> - -<p>Instances:—A man with light trousers and -black boots walking along a level path, will -appear at a certain distance as though the boots -had been removed, and the trousers brought in -contact with the ground.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page156">[156]</span></p> - -<p>A young girl, with short garments terminating -ten or twelve inches above the feet, will, in -walking forward, appear to sink towards the -Earth, the space between which and the bottom -of the clothes will appear to gradually diminish, -and in the distance of half-a-mile the limbs, -which were first seen for ten or twelve inches, -will be invisible—the bottom of the garment will -seem to touch the ground.</p> - -<p>A small dog running along will appear to -gradually shorten by the legs, which, in less -than half a mile, will be invisible, and the body -appear to glide upon the earth.</p> - -<p>Horses and cattle moving away from a given -point will seem to have lost their hoofs, and to -be walking upon the outer bones of the limbs.</p> - -<p>Carriages similarly receding will seem to lose -that portion of the rim of the wheels which -touches the Earth; the axles will seem to get -lower; and at the distance of a few miles, the -body will appear to drag along in contact with -the ground. This is very remarkable in the case -of a railway carriage when moving away upon a -straight and level portion of line several miles -in length. These instances, which are but a few -of what might be quoted, will be sufficient to -prove, beyond the power of doubt or the necessity -for controversy, that upon a plane or horizontal -surface, the <i>lowest part</i> of bodies receding from<span class="pagenum" id="Page157">[157]</span> -a given point of observation will disappear <i>before -the higher</i>. This is precisely what is observed -in the case of a ship at sea, when outward bound—the -<i>lowest</i> part—the hull, disappearing before -the higher parts—the sails and mast head. -Abstractedly, when the lowest part of a receding -object thus disappears by entering the “vanishing -point,” it could be seen again to any and -every extent by a telescope, if the power were -sufficient to magnify at the distance observed. -This is to a great extent practicable upon smooth -horizontal surfaces, as upon frozen lakes or -canals; and upon long straight lines of railway. -But the power of restoring such objects is greatly -modified and diminished where the surface is -undulating or otherwise moveable, as in large -and level meadows, and pasture lands generally; -in the vast prairies and grassy plains of America; -and especially so upon the ocean, where the -surface is always more or less in an undulating -condition. In Holland and other level countries, -persons have been seen in winter, skating upon -the ice, at distances varying from ten to twenty -miles. On some of the straight and “level” -lines of railway which cross the prairies of -America, the trains have been observed for more -than twenty miles; but upon the sea the conditions -are altered, and the hull of a receding -vessel can only be seen for a few miles, and this<span class="pagenum" id="Page158">[158]</span> -will depend very greatly—the altitude of the -observer being the same, upon the state of the -water. When the surface is calm, the hull may -be seen much farther than when it is rough and -stormy; but under ordinary circumstances, when -to the naked eye the hull has just become -invisible, or is doubtfully visible, it may be seen -again distinctly by the aid of a powerful telescope. -Although abstractedly or mathematically there -should be no limit to this power of restoring by -a telescope a lost object upon a smooth horizontal -surface, upon the sea this limit is soon -observed; the water being variable in its degree -of agitation, the limit of sight over its surface is -equally variable, as shown by the following -experiments:—In May, 1864, on several occasions -when the water was unusually calm, from the -landing stairs of the Victoria pier at Portsmouth, -and from an elevation of 2 ft. 8 in. above the -water, the greater part of the hull of the Nab -Light-ship was, through a good telescope, distinctly -visible; but on other experiments being -made, when the water was less calm, no portion -of it could be seen from the same elevation, -notwithstanding that the most powerful telescopes -were employed. At other times half the hull, and -sometimes only the upper part of the bulwarks, -were visible. If the hull had been invisible -from the rotundity of the Earth, the following<span class="pagenum" id="Page159">[159]</span> -calculation will show that it should at all times -have been 24 feet below the horizon:—The -distance of the light-ship from the pier is 8 -statute miles. The elevation of the observer -being 32 inches above the water, would require -2 miles to be deducted as the distance of the -supposed convex horizon; for the square of 2 -multiplied by 8 inches (the fall in the first mile -of the Earth’s curvation) equals 32 inches. This -deducted from the 8 miles, will leave 6 miles as -the distance from the horizon to the light ship. -Hence 6² × 8 in. = 288 inches, or 24 feet. The -top of the bulwarks, it was said, rose about 10 ft. -above the water line; hence, deducting 10 from -24 feet, under all circumstances, even had the -water been perfectly smooth and stationary, the -top of the hull should have been 14 feet below -the summit of the arc of water, or beneath the -line of sight! This one fact is entirely fatal to -the doctrine of the Earth’s rotundity. But such -facts have been observed in various other places—the -north-west light-ship in Liverpool Bay, -and the light vessels of many other channels -near the southern, eastern, and western shores -of Great Britain. From the beach of Southsea -Common, near Portsmouth, the observer lying -down near the water, above the surface of which -the eye was 2¹⁄₂ feet, and with a telescope looking -across Spithead to the quarantine ship lying in<span class="pagenum" id="Page160">[160]</span> -the “Roads,” between Ryde and Cowes, in the -Isle of Wight, a distance of 7 miles, the copper -sheathing of that vessel was distinctly seen, the -depth of which was about 2 feet. Making the -usual calculation in accordance with the doctrine -of the Earth’s convexity, it will be seen that an -arc of water ought to have existed between -the two points, the summit of which arc should -have been 16 feet above the copper sheathing of -the vessel!</p> - -<p>From an elevation of 2¹⁄₂ feet above the water -opposite the Royal Yacht Club House, in West -Cowes, Isle of Wight, the pile work and -promenade of the pier at Stake’s Bay, near -Gosport, and nearly opposite Osborne House, were -easily distinguished through various telescopes: -the distance is 7 miles, the altitude of the -promenade 10 feet, and the usual calculation -will show that this pier ought to have been many -feet below the horizon!</p> - -<p>It is a well-known fact that the light of the -Eddystone lighthouse is often plainly visible from -the beach in Plymouth Sound; and sometimes, -when the sea is very calm, persons can see it -distinctly when sitting in ordinary rowing boats -in that part of the Sound which will allow the -line of sight to pass between Drake’s Island and -the western end of the Breakwater. The distance -is 14 statute miles. In a list of lighthouses in a<span class="pagenum" id="Page161">[161]</span> -work called “The Lighthouses of the World,” -by A. G. Findlay, F.R.G.S., published in 1862, by -Richard H. Lawrie, 53, Fleet Street, London, it -is said, at page 28:—“In the Tables the height -of the flame above the highest tide high water -level is given, so that it is the <i>minimum</i> range -of the light; to this elevation 10 feet is added -for the height of the deck of the ship above the -sea. Besides the increased distance to which -low water will cause the light to be seen, the -effect of refraction will also sometimes increase -their range.” In the “Tables” above referred -to, at page 36 the Eddystone light is said to -be visible 13 miles. But these 13 miles are -nautical measure; and as 3 nautical miles equal -3¹⁄₂ statute miles, the distance at which the -Eddystone light is visible is over 15 statute -miles. Notwithstanding that the Eddystone -light is actually visible at a distance of 15 -statute miles, and admitted to be so both by the -Admiralty authorities and by calculation according -to the doctrine of rotundity, very often at -the same distance, the lantern is not visible -at an elevation of 4 feet from the water; showing -that the law of perspective, previously referred -to, is greatly influenced by the state of the -surface of the water over which the line of sight -is directed. A remarkable illustration of this -influence is given in the <i>Western Daily Mercury</i>,<span class="pagenum" id="Page162">[162]</span> -published in Plymouth, of October 25, 1864. -Several discussions had previously taken place -at the Plymouth Athenæum and the Devonport -Mechanics’ Institute, on the true figure of the -Earth; subsequent to which a committee was -formed for the purpose of making experiments -bearing on the question at issue. The names of the -gentlemen as given in the above-named journal -were “Parallax” (the author of this work), -“Theta” (Mr. Henry, a teacher in Her Majesty’s -Dock-yard, Devonport), and Messrs. Osborne, -Richards, Rickard, Mogg, Evers, and Pearce, all -of Plymouth. From the report published as -above stated, the following quotation is made:—Observation -6th: “<i>On the beach, at 5 feet from -the water level, the Eddystone was entirely out -of sight</i>.”</p> - -<p>The matter may be summarized as follows:—At -any time when the sea is calm and the -weather clear, the Light of the Eddystone, which -is 89 feet above the foundation on the rock, -may be distinctly seen from an elevation of 5 -feet above the water level; according to the -Admiralty directions, it “may be seen 13 nautical -(or 15 statute) miles,”<a id="FNanchor_41" href="#Footnote_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a> or one mile still farther -away than the position of the observers on the -above-named occasion; and yet <i>on that occasion</i>, -and at a distance of only 14 statute miles, notwithstanding<span class="pagenum" id="Page163">[163]</span> -that it was a very fine autumn day, -and a clear back ground existed, not only was -the lantern, which is 89 feet high, not visible, -but the <i>top of the vane</i>, which is 100 feet above -the foundation was, as stated in the report, -“<i>entirely out of sight</i>.”</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_41" href="#FNanchor_41" class="label">[41]</a> “Lighthouses of the World,” p. 36.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<div class="container" id="Fig32"> - -<img src="images/fig32.png" alt="Lighthouse"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 32.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>That vessels and lighthouses are sometimes -more distinctly seen than at others; and that -the lower parts of such objects are sooner lost -sight of when the sea is rough than when it is -calm, are items in the experience of seafaring -people as common as their knowledge of the -changes in the weather; and prominence is only -given here to the above case because it was -verified by persons of different opinions upon -the subject of the Earth’s form, and in the -presence of several hundreds of the most learned -and respectable inhabitants of Plymouth and -the neighbourhood. The conclusion which such -observations necessitate and force upon us is, -that the law of perspective which is everywhere -visible on land, is <i>modified</i> when observed in -connection with objects upon or near the sea. -But <i>how</i> modified? If the water of the ocean -were frozen and at perfect rest, any object upon -its surface would be seen as far as telescopic or -magnifying power could be brought to bear -upon it. But because this is not the case—because -the water is always more or less in<span class="pagenum" id="Page164">[164]</span> -motion, not only of progression but of fluctuation, -the swells and waves, into which the surface -is broken operate to prevent the line of sight -from passing parallel to the horizontal surface of -the water. It has been shown at pages 16 to -20, and also at 25 to 33, that the surface of the -Earth and Sea appears to rise up to the level, or -altitude of the eye; and that at a certain distance -the line of sight and the surface which is -parallel to it appear to converge to a “vanishing -point;” which point is “the horizon.” If this -horizon, or vanishing point, were formed by the -apparent junction of two <i>perfectly stationary</i> -parallel lines, it could be penetrated by a telescope -of sufficient power to magnify at the distance; -but because upon the sea the surface of -the water is <i>not stationary</i>, the line of sight at -the vanishing point becomes angular instead of -parallel, and telescopic power is of little avail in -restoring objects beyond this point. The following -diagram will render this clear:—The horizontal -line C D E and the line of sight A B are -parallel to each other, and appear to meet at the -vanishing point B. But at and about this point<span class="pagenum" id="Page165">[165]</span> -the line A B is intercepted by the undulating, -or fluctuating surface of the water; the degree of -which is variable, being sometimes very great and -at others inconsiderable, and having to pass over -the crest of the waves, as at H, is obliged to -become A H, instead of A B, and will therefore -fall upon a ship, lighthouse, or other object at -the point S, or higher or lower as such objects -are more or less beyond the point H.</p> - -<p>It is worthy of note that the waves at the -point H, whatever their real magnitude may be, -are <i>magnified</i> and rendered more obstructive -by the very instrument—the telescope—which -is employed to make the objects beyond more -plainly visible: and thus the phenomenon is often -very strikingly observed—that while a powerful -telescope will render the sails and rigging of a -ship when beyond the point H, or the optical -horizon, so distinct that the very ropes are easily -distinguished, not the slightest portion of the -hull can be seen. The “crested waters” form a -barrier to the horizontal line-of-sight, as substantial -as would the summit of an intervening rock -or island.</p> - -<p>In the report which appeared in the <i>Western -Daily Mercury</i>, of Oct. 25, 1864, the following -observations were also recorded:—“On the sea-front -of the Camera house, and at an elevation -of 110 feet from the mean level of the sea, a<span class="pagenum" id="Page166">[166]</span> -plane mirror was fixed, by the aid of a plumb-line, -in a <i>true vertical position</i>. In this mirror -the distant horizon was distinctly visible on a -level with the eye of the observer. This was the -simple fact, as observed by the several members -of the committee which had been appointed. -But some of the observers remarked that the -line of the horizon in the mirror rose and fell -with the eye, as also did every thing else which -was reflected, and that this ought to be recorded -as an <i>addendum</i>—granted. The surface of the -sea appeared to regularly ascend from the base -of the Hoe to the distant horizon. The horizon -from the extreme east to the west, as far as the -eye could see, was parallel to a horizontal line.”</p> - -<p>The following version was recorded in the -same journal, of the same date, and was furnished -by one of the committee who had manifested a -very marked aversion to the doctrine that the -surface of all water is horizontal:—“A vertical -looking-glass was suspended from the Camera -and the horizon seen in it, as well as various -other objects reflected, rising and falling with -the eye. The water was seen in the glass to -ascend from the base of the Hoe to the horizon. -The horizon appeared parallel to a horizontal -line.”</p> - -<p>It will be observed that the two reports are -substantially the same, and very strongly corroborate<span class="pagenum" id="Page167">[167]</span> -the remarks made at <a href="#Page15">pages 15</a>, <a href="#Page16">16</a>, and -<a href="#Page17">17</a> of this work. Indeed no other report could -have been given without the author’s becoming -subject to the charge of glaring, obstinate, and -wilful misrepresentation. What then has again -been demonstrated? That the surface of all -water <i>is horizontal</i>, and that, therefore, the -Earth cannot possibly be anything other than a -Plane. All appearances to the contrary have -been shown to be purely optical and adventitious.</p> - -<div class="container" id="Fig33"> - -<img src="images/fig33.png" alt="Horizontal sea"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 33.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<div class="container" id="Fig34"> - -<img src="images/fig34.png" alt="Curved sea"> - -<p class="caption">FIG. 34.</p> - -</div><!--container--> - -<p>Another proof that the surface of all water is -horizontal and that therefore the Earth cannot -be a globe is furnished by the following experiment, -which was made in May, 1864, on the new -pier at Southsea, near Portsmouth:—A telescope -was fixed upon a stand and directed across the -water at Spithead to the pier head at Ryde, in -the Isle of Wight, as shown in the subjoined -diagram. The line of sight crossed a certain -part of the funnel of one of the regular steamers -trading between Portsmouth and the Isle of -Wight; and it was observed to cut or fall upon -the same part during the whole of the passage to -Ryde Pier, thus proving that the water between<span class="pagenum" id="Page168">[168]</span> -the two piers is horizontal, because it was parallel -to the line of sight from the telescope fixed at -Southsea. If the Earth were a globe the channel -between Ryde and Southsea would be an arc of -a circle, and as the distance across is 4¹⁄₂ statute -miles the centre of the arc would be 40 inches -higher than the two sides; and the steamer -would have ascended an inclined plane for 2¹⁄₄ -miles, or to the centre of the channel, and afterwards -descended for the same distance towards -Ryde. This ascent and descent would have been -marked by the line of sight falling 40 inches -nearer to the deck of the steamer when on the -centre of the arc of water, as represented in the -following diagram; but as the line of sight did -not cut the steamer lower down when in the -centre of the channel, and no such ascent and -descent was observed, it follows necessarily that -the surface of the water between Southsea and -the Isle of Wight is <i>not convex</i>, and therefore -the Earth as a whole is <i>not a globe</i>. The -evidence against the doctrine of the Earth’s -rotundity is so clear and perfect, and so completely -fulfils the conditions required in special<span class="pagenum" id="Page169">[169]</span> -and independent investigations, that it is impossible -for any person who can put aside the -bias of previous education to avoid the opposite -conclusion that the <i>Earth is a plane</i>. This conclusion -is greatly confirmed by the experience of -mariners in regard to certain lighthouses. Where -the light is fixed and very brilliant it can be -seen at a distance, which the present doctrine of -the Earth’s rotundity would render altogether -impossible. For instance, at page 35 of “Lighthouses -of the World,” the Ryde Pier Light, -erected in 1852, is described as a bright fixed -light, 21 feet above high water, and visible from -an altitude of 10 feet at the distance of 12 -nautical or 14 statute miles. The altitude of 10 -feet would place the horizon at the distance of 4 -statute miles from the observer. The square of -the remaining 10 statute miles multiplied by -8 inches will give a fall or curvature downwards -from the horizon of 66 feet. Deduct from this -21 feet, the altitude of the light, and we have 45 -feet as the amount which the light ought to be -<i>below the horizon</i>!</p> - -<p>By the same authority, at page 39, the Bidston -Hill Lighthouse, near Liverpool, is 228 feet -above high water, one bright fixed light, visible -23 nautical or very nearly 27 statute miles. -Deducting 4 miles for the height of the observer, -squaring the remaining 23 miles and multiplying<span class="pagenum" id="Page170">[170]</span> -that product by 8 inches we have a downward -curvature of 352 feet; from this deduct the -altitude of the light, 228 feet, and there remains -124 feet as the distance which the light should -be <i>below the horizon</i>!</p> - -<p>Again, at page 40:—“The lower light on the -‘Calf of Man’ is 282 feet above high water, and -is visible 23 nautical miles.” The usual calculation -will show that it ought to be 70 feet <i>below -the horizon</i>!</p> - -<p>At page 41 the Cromer light is described as -having an altitude of 274 feet above high water, -and is visible 23 nautical miles, whereas it ought -to be at that distance 78 feet <i>below the horizon</i>!</p> - -<p>At page 9 it is said:—“The coal fire (which -was once used) on the Spurn Point Lighthouse, -at the mouth of the Humber, which was constructed -on a good principle for burning, has -been seen 30 miles off.” If the miles here given -are nautical measure they would be equal to 35 -statute miles. Deducting 4 miles as the usual -amount for the distance of the horizon, there -will remain 31 miles, which squared and -multiplied by 8 inches will give 640 feet as the -declination of the water from the horizon to the -base of the Lighthouse, the altitude of which is -given at page 42 as 93 feet above high water. -This amount deducted from the above 640 feet -will leave 547 feet as the distance which the<span class="pagenum" id="Page171">[171]</span> -Spurn Light ought to have been <i>below the -horizon</i>!</p> - -<p>The two High Whitby Lights are 240 feet -above high water (see page 42), and are visible -23 nautical miles at sea. The proper calculation -will be 102 feet <i>below the horizon</i>!</p> - -<p>At page 43, it is said that the Lower Farne -Island Light is visible for 12 nautical or 14 -statute miles, and the height above high water -is 45 feet. The usual calculation will show that -this light ought to be 67 feet <i>below the horizon</i>!</p> - -<p>The Hekkengen Light, on the west coast of -Norway (see page 54), is 66 feet above high -water, and visible 16 statute miles. It ought to -be sunk beneath the horizon 30 feet!</p> - -<p>The Trondhjem Light (see p. 55), on the -Ringholm Rock, west coast of Norway, is 51 feet -high, and is visible 16 statute miles; but ought -to be 45 feet below the horizon!</p> - -<p>The Rondö Light, also on the west coast of -Norway (see p. 55), is 161 feet high, and is -visible for 25 statute miles; the proper calculation -will prove that it ought to be above 130 -feet below the horizon!</p> - -<p>The Egerö Light, on west point of Island, -south coast of Norway (see p. 56), and which is -fitted up with the first order of the dioptric -lights, is visible for 28 statute miles, and the -altitude above high water is 154 feet; making<span class="pagenum" id="Page172">[172]</span> -the usual calculation we find this light ought to -be depressed, or sunk, below the horizon 230 -feet!</p> - -<p>The Dunkerque Light, on the north coast of -France (see p. 71), is 194 feet high, and visible -28 statute miles. The ordinary calculation will -show that it ought to be 190 feet below the -horizon!</p> - -<p>The Goulfar Bay Light, on the west coast of -France, is said at page 77, to be visible 31 -statute miles, and to have an altitude at high -water of 276 feet, at the distance given it ought -to be 210 feet below the horizon!</p> - -<p>At page 78, the Cordonan Light, on the River -Gironde, west coast of France, is given as being -visible 31 statute miles, and its altitude 207 feet, -which would give its depression below the horizon -as nearly 280 feet!</p> - -<p>The Light at Madras (p. 104), on the Esplanade, -is 132 feet high, and visible 28 statute -miles, whereas at that distance it ought to be -beneath the horizon above 250 feet!</p> - -<p>The Port Nicholson Light, in New Zealand, -erected in 1859 (p. 110), is visible 35 statute -miles, the altitude is 420 feet above high water, -and ought, if the water is convex, to be 220 feet -below the horizon!</p> - -<p>The Light on Cape Bonavista, Newfoundland, -is 150 feet above high water, and is visible 35<span class="pagenum" id="Page173">[173]</span> -statute miles (p. 111), this will give on calculation -for the Earth’s rotundity, 491 feet that the -Light should be below the horizon!</p> - -<p>Many other cases could be given from the -same work, shewing that the practical observations -of mariners, engineers, and surveyors, -entirely ignore the doctrine that the Earth is a -globe. The following cases taken from miscellaneous -sources will be interesting as bearing -upon and leading to the same conclusion. In -the <i>Illustrated London News</i> of Oct. 20, 1849, -an engraving is given of a new Lighthouse -erected on the Irish coast, The accompanying -descriptive matter contains the following sentence:—“Ballycotton -Island rises 170 feet above -the level of the sea; the height of the Lighthouse -is 60 feet including the Lantern; giving -the light an elevation of 230 feet, which is -visible upwards of 35 miles to sea.” If the 35 -miles are nautical measure the distance in statute -measure would be over 40 miles; and allowing -the usual distance for the horizon, there would -be 36 miles from thence to the Lighthouse. -The square of 36 multiplied by 8 inches amounts -to 864 feet; deduct the total altitude of the -Lantern, 230 feet, and the remainder, 634 feet, -is the distance which the Light of Ballycotton -ought to be below the horizon!</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page174">[174]</span></p> - -<p>In the <i>Times</i> newspaper of Monday, Oct. 16, -1854, in an account of her Majesty’s visit to Great -Grimsby from Hull, the following paragraph -occurs:—“Their attention was first naturally -directed to a gigantic tower which rises from the -centre pier to the height of 300 feet, and can be -seen 60 miles out at sea.” The 60 miles if -nautical, and this is always understood when -referring to distances at sea, would make 70 -statute miles, to which the fall of 8 inches -belongs, and as all observations at sea are considered -to be made at an elevation of 10 feet -above the water, for which four miles must be -deducted from the whole distance, 66 statute -miles will remain, the square of which multiplied -by 8 inches, gives a declination towards the -tower of 2,904 feet; deducting from this the -altitude of the tower, 300 feet, we obtain -the startling conclusion that the tower should -be at the distance at which it is visible, (60 -nautical miles,) more than 2,600 feet <i>below the -horizon</i>!</p> - -<p>The only modification which can be made or -allowed in the preceding calculations is that for -refraction, which is considered by surveyors -generally to amount to about ¹⁄₁₂th of the -altitude of the object observed. If we make this -allowance it will reduce the various quotients -by ¹⁄₁₂th, which is so little that the whole will<span class="pagenum" id="Page175">[175]</span> -be substantially the same. Take the last -quotation as an instance—2,600 feet divided -by 12 gives 206, which deducted from 2,600 -leaves 2,384 as the corrected amount for -refraction.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page176">[176]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="Sec14"><span class="secno">SECTION 14.</span><br> -<span class="chaptitle">GENERAL SUMMARY—APPLICATION—<i>CUI -BONO?</i></span></h2> - -</div><!--chapter--> - -<p class="noindent">In the preceding sections it has been shown -that the Copernican, or Newtonian theory of -Astronomy is “an absurd composition of truth -and error;” and, as admitted by its founder, -“not necessarily true or even probable,” and -that instead of its being a general conclusion -derived from known and admitted facts, it is a -heterogeneous compound of assumed premises, -isolated truths, and variable appearances in -nature. Its advocates are challenged to show a -single instance wherein a phenomenon is explained, -a calculation made, or a conclusion -advanced without the aid of an avowed or -implied assumption! The very construction -of a theory at all, and especially such as the -Copernican, is a complete violation of that -natural and legitimate mode of investigation -to which the term <i>zetetic</i> has been applied. -The doctrine of the universality of gravitation -is an assumption, made only in accordance<span class="pagenum" id="Page177">[177]</span> -with that “pride and ambition which has -led philosophers to think it beneath them to -offer anything less to the world than a complete -and finished system of nature.” It was -said, in effect, by Newton, and has ever since -been insisted upon by his disciples—“Allow us, -without proof, the existence of two universal -forces—centrifugal and centripetal, or attraction -and repulsion, and we will construct a system -which shall explain all the leading mysteries of -nature. An apple falling from a tree, or a stone -rolling downwards, and a pail of water tied to a -string set in rapid motion were assumed to be -types of the relations existing among all the -bodies in the universe. The moon was assumed -to have a tendency to fall towards the Earth, and -the Earth and Moon together towards the Sun. -The same relation was assumed to exist between -all the smaller and larger luminaries in the -firmament; and it soon became necessary to -extend this assumption to infinity. The universe -was parcelled out into systems—co-existent and -illimitable. Suns, Planets, Satellites, and Comets -were assumed to exist, infinite in number and -boundless in extent; and to enable the theorists -to explain the alternating and constantly recurring -phenomena which were everywhere observable, -these numberless and for-ever-extending -objects were assumed to be spheres. The Earth<span class="pagenum" id="Page178">[178]</span> -we inhabit was called a <i>planet</i>; and because it -was thought to be reasonable that the luminous -objects in the firmament which were called -<i>planets</i> were <i>spherical</i> and had <i>motion</i>, so it was -only reasonable to suppose that as the Earth was -a planet it must also be spherical and have -motion—<i>ergo</i>, the Earth is a globe, and moves -upon axes and in an orbit round the Sun! And -as the Earth is a globe, and is inhabited, so again -it is only reasonable to conclude that the planets -are worlds like the Earth, and are inhabited by -sentient beings! What reasoning! Assumption -upon assumption, and the conclusion derived -therefrom called a thing proved, to be employed -as a truth to substantiate the first assumption! -Such a “juggle and jumble” of fancies and falsehoods, -extended and intensified as it is in -theoretical astronomy, is calculated to make the -unprejudiced inquirer revolt in horror from the -terrible conjuration which has been practised -upon him; to sternly resolve to resist its further -progress; to endeavour to overthrow the entire -edifice, and to bury in its ruins the false honours -which have been associated with its fabricators, -and which still attach to its devotees. For -the learning, the patience, the perseverance, and -devotion for which they have ever been examples, -honour and applause need not be withheld; but -their false reasoning, the advantages they have<span class="pagenum" id="Page179">[179]</span> -taken of the general ignorance of mankind in respect -to astronomical subjects, and the unfounded -theories they have advanced and defended, cannot -but be regretted, and ought to be resisted. -It has become a duty, paramount and imperative, -to meet them in open, avowed, and -unyielding rebellion; to declare that their unopposed -reign of error and confusion is over; -and that henceforth, like a falling dynasty, they -must shrink and disappear, leaving the throne -and the kingdom to those awakening intellects -whose numbers are constantly increasing, and -whose march is rapid and irresistible. The -soldiers of truth and reason have drawn the -sword, and ere another generation has been -educated, will have forced the usurper to abdicate. -The axe is lifted—it is falling, and in a -very few years will have “cut the cumberer -down.”</p> - -<p>The Earth a Globe, and it is necessarily -demanded that it has a diurnal and an annual -and various other motions; for a globular world -without motion would be useless—day and night, -winter and summer, the half year’s light and -darkness at the “North Pole,” and other phenomena -could not be explained by the supposition -of rotundity without the assumption also of -rapid and constant motion. Hence it is <i>assumed</i> -that the Earth and Moon, and all the Planets<span class="pagenum" id="Page180">[180]</span> -and their Satellites move in relation to each -other, and that the whole move together in different -planes round the Sun. The Sun and its -“system” of revolving bodies are now assumed -to have a general and all-inclusive motion, in -common with an endless series of other Suns -and systems, around some other and “central -Sun” which has been assumed to be the true -axis and centre of the Universe! These assumed -general motions with the particular and peculiar -motions which are assigned to the various bodies -in detail, together constitute a system so confused -and complicated that it is almost impossible and -always difficult of comprehension by the most -active and devoted minds. The most simple -and direct experiments, however, may be shown -to prove that the Earth has no progressive -motion whatever; and here again the advocates -of this interminable and entangling arrangement -are challenged to produce a single instance of so -called proofs of these motions which does not -involve an assumption—often a glaring falsehood—but -always a point which is not, or cannot -be demonstrated.</p> - -<p>The magnitudes, distances, velocities, and -periodic times which these assumed motions -eliminate, are all glaringly fictitious, because -they are only such as a false theory creates a -necessity for. It is geometrically demonstrable<span class="pagenum" id="Page181">[181]</span> -that all the visible luminaries in the firmament -are within a distance of a few thousand miles, -not more than the space which stretches between -the North Pole and the Cape of Good Hope; -and the principle of measurement—that of plane -triangulation—which demonstrates this important -fact, is one which no mathematician, demanding -to be considered a master in the science, dare -for a moment deny. All these luminaries then, -and the Sun itself, being so near to us, cannot -be other than very small as compared with the -Earth we inhabit. They are all in motion over -the Earth, which is alone immoveable, and -therefore they cannot be anything more than -secondary and subservient structures, ministering -to this fixed material world, and to its inhabitants. -This is a plain, simple, and in every -respect demonstrable philosophy, agreeing with -the evidence of our senses, borne out by every -fairly instituted experiment, and never requiring -a violation of those principles of investigation -which the human mind has ever recognized, -and depended upon in its every day life. The -modern, or Newtonian Astronomy, has none of -these characteristics. The whole system taken -together constitutes a most monstrous absurdity. -It is false in its foundation; irregular, unfair, -and illogical in its details; and in its conclusions -inconsistent and contradictory. Worse than all,<span class="pagenum" id="Page182">[182]</span> -it is a prolific source of irreligion and of atheism, -of which its advocates are, practically, supporters! -By defending a system which is directly opposite -to that which is taught in connection with all -religions, they lead the more critical and daring -intellects to reject the scriptures altogether, to -ignore the worship, and doubt and deny the -existence of a Supreme Ruler of the world. Many -of the primest minds are thus irreparably injured, -robbed of those present pleasures, and that cheering -hope of the future which the earnest christian -devotee holds as of far greater value than all -earthly wealth and grandeur; or than the mastery -of all the philosophical complications which the -human mind ever invented.</p> - -<p>The doctrine of the Earth’s rotundity and -motion is now shown to be unconditionally false; -and therefore the scriptures which assert the -contrary, are, in their philosophical teachings at -least, <i>literally true</i>. In practical science therefore, -atheism and denial of scriptural authority have -no foundation. If human theories are cast aside, -and the facts of nature, and legitimate reasoning -alone depended upon, it will be seen that religion -and true philosophy are not antagonistic, and -that the hopes which both encourage may be -fully relied upon. To the religious mind this -matter is most important, it is indeed no less -than a sacred question, for it renders complete<span class="pagenum" id="Page183">[183]</span> -the evidence that the Jewish and Christian scriptures -are true, and must have been communicated -to mankind by an anterior and supernal Being. -For if after so many ages of mental struggling, -of speculation and trial, and change and counterchange, -we have at length discovered that all -astronomical theories are false, that the Earth -is a plane, and motionless, and that the various -luminaries above it are lights only and not -worlds; and that these very doctrines have been -taught and recorded in a work which has been -handed down to us from the earliest times; from -a time, in fact, when mankind could not have -had sufficient experience to enable them to -criticise and doubt, much less to invent, it -follows that whoever dictated and caused such -doctrines to be recorded and preserved to all -future generations, must have been superhuman, -omniscient, and, to the Earth and its inhabitants -pre-existent.</p> - -<p>To the dogged Atheist, whose “mind is made -up” not to enter into any further investigation, -and not to admit of possible error in his past -conclusions, this question is of no more account -than it is to an Ox. He who cares not to re-examine -from time to time his state of mind, -and the result of his accumulated experience is -in no single respect better than the lowest -animal in creation. He may see nothing higher,<span class="pagenum" id="Page184">[184]</span> -more noble, more intelligent or beautiful than -himself; and in this his pride, conceit, and -vanity find an incarnation. To such a creature -there is no God, for he is himself an equal with -the highest being he has ever recognised! Such -Atheism exists to an alarming extent among the -philosophers of Europe and America; and it has -been mainly fostered by the astronomical and -geological theories of the day. Besides which, -in consequence of the differences between the -language of Scripture and the teachings of -modern Astronomy, there is to be found in the -very hearts of Christian and Jewish congregations -a sort of “smouldering scepticism;” kind of -faint suspicion which causes great numbers to -manifest a cold and visible indifference to -religious requirements. It is this which has led -thousands to desert the cause of earnest, active -Christianity, and which has forced the majority -of those who still remain in the ranks of religion -to declare “that the Scriptures were not intended -to teach correctly other than moral and religious -doctrines; that the references so often made to -the physical world, and to natural phenomena -generally, are given in language to suit the prevailing -notions and the ignorance of the people.” -A Christian philosopher who wrote almost a -century ago in reference to remarks similar to -the above, says, “Why should we suspect that<span class="pagenum" id="Page185">[185]</span> -Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon, and the later -prophets and inspired writers have counterfeited -their sentiments concerning the order of the -universe, from pure complaisance, or being in -any way obliged to dissemble with a view to -gratify the prepossessions of the populace? These -eminent men being kings, lawgivers, and generals -themselves, or always privileged with access to -the courts of sovereign princes, besides the -reverence and awful dignity which the power of -divination and working of miracles procured to -them, had great worldly and spiritual authority.... -They had often in charge to command, -suspend, revert, and otherwise interfere with the -course and laws of nature, and were never -daunted to speak out the truth before the most -mighty potentates on earth, much less would -they be overawed by the <i>vox populi</i>.” To say -that the Scriptures were not intended to teach -science truthfully, is in substance to declare that -God himself has stated, and commissioned His -prophets to teach things which are utterly false! -Those Newtonian philosophers who still hold -that the sacred volume is the Word of God, are -thus placed in a fearful dilemma. How can the -two systems, so directly opposite in character, -be reconciled? Oil and water alone will not -combine—mix them by violence as we may, they -will again separate when allowed to rest. Call<span class="pagenum" id="Page186">[186]</span> -oil oil, and water water, and acknowledge them -to be distinct in nature and value; but let no -“hodge-podge” be attempted, and passed off as -a genuine compound of oil and water. Call -Scripture the Word of God—the Creator and -Ruler of all things, and the Fountain of all -Truth; and call the Newtonian or Copernican -Astronomy the word and work of man, of man, -too, in his vainest mood—so vain and conceited -as not to be content with the direct and simple -teachings of his Maker, but who must rise up in -rebellion and conjure into existence a fanciful -complicated fabric, which being insisted upon as -true, creates and necessitates the dark and -horrible interrogatives—Is God a deceiver? Has -He spoken direct and unequivocal falsehood? -Can we no longer indulge in the beautiful and -consoling thought that God’s justice, and love, -and truth are unchanging and reliable for ever? -Let Christians—for Sceptics and Atheists may -be left out of the question—to whatever division -of the Church they belong, look at this matter -calmly and earnestly. Let them determine to -uproot the deception which has led them to -think that they can altogether ignore the plainest -astronomical teaching of Scripture, and endorse -a system to which it is in every sense opposed. -The following language is quoted as an instance -of the manner in which the doctrine of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page187">[187]</span> -Earth’s rotundity and the plurality of worlds -interferes with Scriptural teachings:—“The -theory of original sin is confuted (by our astronomical -and geological knowledge), and I cannot -permit the belief, when I know that our world is -but a mere speck, a perishable atom in the vast -space of creation, that God should just select -this little spot to descend upon and assume our -form, and clothe Himself in our flesh, to become -visible to human eyes, to the tiny beings of this -comparatively insignificant world.... -Thus millions of distant worlds, with the beings -allotted to them, were to be extirpated and -destroyed in consequence of the original sin of -Adam. No sentiment of the human mind can -surely be more derogatory to the Divine attributes -of the Creator, nor more repugnant to the -known economy of the celestial bodies. For in -the first place, who is to say, among the infinity -of worlds, whether Adam was the <i>only creature</i> -who was tempted by Satan and fell, and by his -fall involved all the other worlds in his guilt.”<a id="FNanchor_42" href="#Footnote_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_42" href="#FNanchor_42" class="label">[42]</a> Encyclopædia Londenensis, p. 457, vol. 2.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>The difficulty experienced by the author of -the above remarks is clearly one which can no -longer exist, when it is seen that the doctrine -of a plurality of worlds is an impossibility. That -it is an impossibility is shown by the fact that -the Sun, Moon, and Stars are very small bodies,<span class="pagenum" id="Page188">[188]</span> -and very near to the earth; this fact is proved -by actual non-theoretical measurement; this -measurement is made on the principle of plane -trigonometry: this principle of plane trigonometry -is adopted because the Earth is a Plane; and all -the base lines employed in the triangulation are -horizontal. By the same practical method of -reasoning, all the difficulties which, upon geological -and astronomical grounds, have been raised -to the literal teachings of the scriptures, may be -completely destroyed. Instances:—The scriptures -repeatedly declare that the Sun moves -over the Earth—“His going forth is from the -end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends -of it.” “He ariseth and goeth down, and hasteth -to his place whence he arose.” “The sun stood -still in the midst of heaven.” “Great is the -Earth, high is the heaven, swift is the Sun in his -course.” In the religious poems of all ages the -same fact is presented. Christians especially, -of every denomination, are familiar with, and -often read and sing with delight such poetry as -the following:—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent00">“My God who makes the Sun to know</div> - <div class="verse indent0">His proper hour to rise,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">And to give light to all below</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Doth send him <i>round the skies</i>.”</div> - </div> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent00">“When from the chambers of the east</div> - <div class="verse indent0">His <i>morning race</i> begins,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">He never tires <i>nor stops to rest</i>,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">But round the world he shines.”</div><span class="pagenum" id="Page189">[189]</span> - </div> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent00">“God of the morning, at whose voice,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">The cheerful sun makes haste to rise,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">And, like a giant, doth rejoice,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">To <i>run his journey through the skies</i>.”</div> - </div> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent00">“He sends the sun <i>his circuit round</i>,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">To cheer the fruits and warm the ground.”</div> - </div> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent00">“How fair has the day been!</div> - <div class="verse indent0">How bright was the Sun!</div> - <div class="verse indent0">How lovely and joyful</div> - <div class="verse indent0">The <i>course that he run</i>.”</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<p>All the expressions of scripture are consistent -with the fact of the Sun’s motion. They never -declare anything to the contrary. Whenever -they speak of the subject it is in the same manner. -The direct evidence of our senses confirms it; and -actual and special observations, as well as the most -practical scientific experiments, declare the same -thing. The progressive and concentric motion -of the Sun over the Earth is in every sense -demonstrable; yet the Newtonian astronomers -insist upon it that the Sun does not really move, -that it only <i>appears</i> to move, and that this -appearance arises from the motion of the Earth; -that when, as the scriptures affirm, the “Sun -stood still in the midst of heaven,” it was the -<i>Earth</i> which stood still and <i>not</i> the Sun! that -the scriptures therefore speak falsely, and the -experiments of science, and the observations and -applications of our senses are never to be relied -upon. Whence comes this bold and arrogant -denial of the value of our senses and judgement,<span class="pagenum" id="Page190">[190]</span> -and the authority of scripture? The Earth or -the Sun moves. Our senses tell us, and the -scriptures declare that the Earth is fixed and -that it is the Sun which moves above and around -it; but a <i>theory</i>, which is absolutely false in its -groundwork, and ridiculously illogical in its -details, demands that the Earth is round and -moves upon axes, and in several other and -various directions; and that these motions are -<i>sufficient to account for</i> certain phenomena without -supposing that the Sun moves, <i>therefore</i> the -Sun is a fixed body, and his motion is <i>only -apparent</i>! Such <i>reasoning</i> is a disgrace to -philosophy, and fearfully dangerous to the -religious interests of humanity!</p> - -<p>Christian ministers and commentators find it a -most unwelcome task when called upon to reconcile -the plain and simple philosophy of the scriptures -with the monstrous teachings of theoretical -astronomy. Dr. Adam Clark, in a letter to the -Rev. Thomas Roberts, of Bath,<a id="FNanchor_43" href="#Footnote_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a> speaking of the -progress of his commentary, and of his endeavours -to reconcile the statements of scripture -with the modern astronomy, says: “Joshua’s -Sun and Moon standing still, have kept me -going for nearly three weeks! That one chapter -has afforded me more vexation than anything I -have ever met with; and even now I am but<span class="pagenum" id="Page191">[191]</span> -about half satisfied with my own solution of all -the difficulties, though I am confident that I -have removed mountains that were never touched -before; shall I say that I am heartily weary of -my work, so weary that I have a thousand times -wished I had never written one page of it, and -am repeatedly purposing to give it up.”</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_43" href="#FNanchor_43" class="label">[43]</a> Life of Adam Clark, 8vo Edition.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>The Rev. John Wesley, in his journal, writes -as follows:—“The more I consider them the -more I doubt of all systems of astronomy. I doubt -whether we can with certainty know either the -distance or magnitude of any star in the firmament; -else why do astronomers so immensely -differ, even with regard to the distance of the -Sun from the Earth? Some affirming it to be -only three and others ninety millions of miles.”<a id="FNanchor_44" href="#Footnote_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_44" href="#FNanchor_44" class="label">[44]</a> Extracts from works of Rev. J. Wesley, 3rd Edition, 1829. -Published by Mason, London, p. 392, vol. 2.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>In vol. 3, page 203, the following entry -occurs:—“January 1st, 1765.—This week I -wrote an answer to a warm letter published in -the <i>London Magazine</i>, the author whereof is -much displeased that I presume to doubt of the -‘modern astronomy.’ I cannot help it. Nay, -the more I consider the more my doubts increase; -so that at present I doubt whether any man on -earth knows either the distance or magnitude, I -will not say of a fixed Star, but Saturn or Jupiter—yea -of the Sun or Moon.”</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page192">[192]</span></p> - -<p>In vol. 13, page 359, he says:—“And so the -whole hypothesis of innumerable Suns and worlds -moving round them vanishes into air.” And -again at page 430 of same volume, the following -words occur:—“The planets revolutions we are -acquainted with, but who is able to this day, -regularly to demonstrate either their magnitude -or their distance? Unless he will prove, as is -the usual way, the magnitude from the distance, -and the distance from the magnitude. * * * -Dr. Rogers has evidently demonstrated that no -conjunction of the centrifugal and centripetal -forces can possibly account for this, or even cause -any body to move in an ellipsis.” There are -several other incidental remarks to be found in -his writings which shew that the Rev. John -Wesley was well acquainted with the then modern -astronomy; and that he saw clearly both its -self-contradictory and its anti-scriptural character.</p> - -<p>It is a very popular idea among modern -astronomers that the stellar universe is an endless -congeries of systems, of Suns and attendant -worlds peopled with sentient beings analogous in -the purpose and destiny of their existence to the -inhabitants of this earth. This doctrine of a -plurality of worlds, although it conveys the most -magnificent ideas of the universe, is purely -fanciful, and may be compared to the “dreams -of the alchemists” who laboured with unheard<span class="pagenum" id="Page193">[193]</span> -of enthusiasm to discover the “philosopher’s -stone,” the <i>elixir vitæ</i>, and the “universal -solvent.” However grand the first two projects -might have been in their realisation, it is known -that they were never developed in a practical -sense, and the latter idea of a solvent which -would dissolve everything was suddenly and -unexpectedly destroyed by the few remarks of a -simple but critical observer, who demanded to -know what service a substance would be to them -which would dissolve all things? What could -they keep it in? for it would dissolve every vessel -wherein they sought to preserve it! This idea -of a plurality of worlds is but a natural and -reasonable conclusion drawn from the doctrine -of the Earth’s rotundity. But this doctrine being -false its off shoot is equally so. The supposition -that the heavenly bodies are Suns and -inhabited worlds is demonstrably impossible in -nature, and has no foundation whatever in -Scripture. “In the beginning God created the -Heaven and <i>the Earth</i>.” One Earth <i>only</i> is -created; and the fact is more especially described -in Genesis, ch. i., v. 10. Where, instead of the -word “Earth” meaning both land and water as -together forming a globe, as it does in the -Newtonian astronomy, only the <i>dry land</i> was -called <i>earth</i>,” and “the gathering together of the -waters called He seas.” The Sun, Moon, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page194">[194]</span> -Stars are described as lights only and not worlds. -A great number of passages might be quoted -which prove that no other material world is -ever in the slightest manner referred to by the -sacred writers. The creation of the world; the -origin of evil, and the fall of man; the plan of -redemption by the death of Christ; the day of -judgement, and the final consummation of all -things are invariably associated with <i>this Earth -alone</i>. The expression in Hebrews, ch. i., v. 2, -“by whom also he made the <i>worlds</i>,” and in -Heb., ch. ii., v. 3, “through faith we understand -that the <i>worlds</i> were framed,” are known to be a -comparatively recent rendering from the original -Greek documents. The word which has been -translated <i>worlds</i> is fully as capable of being -rendered in the singular number as the plural; -and previous to the introduction of the Copernican -Astronomy was always translated “<i>the world</i>.” -The Roman Catholic and the French Protestant -Bibles still contain the singular number; and in -a copy of an English Protestant Bible printed in -the year 1608, the following translation is -given:—“Through faith we understand that <i>the -world</i> was ordained.” So that either the plural -expression “worlds” was used in later translations -to accord with the astronomical notions then -recently introduced, or it was meant to include -the Earth and the spiritual world, as referred to -in:—</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page195">[195]</span></p> - -<p><i>Hebrews</i> ii., 5—“For unto angels hath he not -put into subjection <i>the world to come</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Ephesians</i> i., 21—“Far above all principality -and power, and might, and dominion, and every -name that is named not only in <i>this world</i>, but -also in <i>that which is to come</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Luke</i> xviii., 29, 30—“There is no man that -hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, -or children, for the kingdom of God’s sake, who -shall not receive manifold more in this <i>present -time</i>, and in <i>the world to come</i> life everlasting.”</p> - -<p><i>Matthew</i> xii., 32—“Whosoever speaketh -against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven -him, neither in <i>this world</i> neither in the <i>world -to come</i>.”</p> - -<p>The Scriptures teach that in the day of the -Lord “the Heavens shall pass away with a great -noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent -heat,” and the “stars of Heaven fall unto the Earth -even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs when -shaken of a mighty wind.” The Newtonian -system of astronomy declares that the stars and -planets are mighty worlds—nearly all of them -much larger than this Earth. The fixed stars -are considered to be suns, equal to if not greater -than our own sun, which is said to be above -800,000 miles in diameter. All this is proveably -false, but to those who have been led to believe -it, the difficult question arises,—“How can<span class="pagenum" id="Page196">[196]</span> -thousands of stars fall upon the Earth, which is -many times less than any one of them?” How -can the Earth with a supposed diameter of 8000 -miles receive the numerous suns of the firmament -many of which are said to be a million miles in -diameter?</p> - -<p>These stars are assumed to have positions so -far from the Earth that the distance is almost -inexpressible; figures indeed may be arranged -on paper but in reading them no practical idea -is conveyed to the mind. Many of them are -said to be so distant that should they fall -with the velocity of light or above one hundred -and sixty thousand miles in a second, or six -hundred millions of miles per hour, they would -require nearly two millions of years to reach the -Earth! Sir William Herschel in a paper on -“The power of telescopes to penetrate into -space,” published in the <i>Philosophical Transactions</i> -for the year 1800, affirms, that with his -powerful instruments he discovered brilliant -luminaries so far from the Earth that the light -from them “could not have been less than <i>one -million nine hundred thousand years in its -progress</i>.” Again the difficulty presents itself—“If -the stars of Heaven begin to fall to-day, and -with the greatest imaginable velocity, millions of -years must elapse before they reach the Earth!” -But the Scriptures declare that these changes<span class="pagenum" id="Page197">[197]</span> -shall occur suddenly—shall come, indeed, “as -a thief in the night.”</p> - -<p>The same theory, with its false and inconceivable -distances and magnitudes, operates to destroy -all the ordinary, common sense, and scripturally -authorised chronology. Christian and Jewish -commentators, unless astronomically educated, -hold and teach that the Earth, as well as the Sun, -Moon, and Stars, were created about 4,000 years -before the birth of Christ, or less than 6,000 years -before the present time. But if many of these -luminaries are so distant that their light would -require above a million of years to reach us; -and if, as we are taught, bodies are visible to us -because of the light which they reflect or radiate, -then their light <i>has</i> reached us, because we have -been able to see them, and therefore they must -have been shining, and must have been created at -least <i>one million nine hundred thousand years -ago</i>! The chronology of the bible indicates that -a period of six thousand years has not yet elapsed -since “the Heavens and the Earth were finished, -and <i>all</i> the Host of them.”</p> - -<p>In the modern astronomy, Continents, Oceans, -Seas, and Islands, are considered as together -forming one vast Globe of 25,000 miles in circumference. -This has been shown to be fallacious, -and it is clearly contrary to the plain, literal -teaching of the scriptures. In the first chapter<span class="pagenum" id="Page198">[198]</span> -of Genesis, we find the following language: “and -God said let the waters under the heaven be -gathered unto one place, and let the <i>dry land</i> -appear; and it was so. And God called the dry -land <i>Earth</i>, and the gathering together of the -waters called He Seas.” Here the Earth and -Seas—Earth and the great body of waters, are -described as two distinct and independent regions, -and not as together forming one Globe -which astronomers call “the Earth.” This description -is confirmed by several other passages -of scripture.</p> - -<p>2 <i>Peter</i>, iii., 5—“For this they willingly are -ignorant of, that by the Word of God the -Heavens were of old, and the Earth <i>standing -out of the waters and in the waters</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Psalms</i> cxxxvi., 6—“O give thanks to the Lord -of Lords, that by wisdom made the heavens, and -that <i>stretchet out the earth above the waters</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Psalms</i> xxiv., 1, 2—“The earth is the Lord’s -and the fulness thereof; the world and they that -dwell therein: for he hath <i>founded it upon the -seas, and established it upon the floods</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Hermes</i> (New Testament Apocrypha)—“Who -with the word of his strength fixed the heaven; -and <i>founded the earth upon the waters</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Job</i> xxvi., 7—“He stretcheth out the north -over the empty place, and hangeth the Earth -upon nothing.”</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page199">[199]</span></p> - -<p>Some think that the latter part of this verse, -“hangeth the Earth upon nothing,” favours the -idea that the Earth is a globe revolving in space -without visible support; but Dr. Adam Clark, -although himself a Newtonian philosopher, says, -in his commentary upon this passage in Job, the -literal translation is, “on the hollow or empty -waste,” and he quotes a Chaldee version of the -passage which runs as follows: “He layeth the -Earth upon the waters nothing sustaining it.”</p> - -<p>It is not that He “hangeth the Earth upon -nothing,” but “hangeth or layeth it upon the -waters” which were empty or waste, and where -before there was nothing. This is in strict accordance -with the other expressions, that “the -Earth was founded upon the waters,” &c., and -also with the expression in Genesis, “that the face -of the deep was covered only with darkness.”</p> - -<p>If the Earth were a globe, it is evident that -everywhere the water of its surface, the seas, -lakes, oceans, and rivers, must be sustained -the land, the Earth must be under the water; -but if the land and the waters are distinct, and -the Earth is “founded upon the seas,” then -everywhere the sea must sustain the land as it -does a ship or any other floating mass, and there -is water below the earth. In this particular as -in all the others, the scriptures are beautifully -sequential and consistent:—</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page200">[200]</span></p> - -<p><i>Exodus</i> xx, 4—“Thou shalt not make unto -thee any likeness of anything in heaven above or -in the Earth beneath, or in the <i>waters under -the Earth</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Genesis</i> xliv, 25—“The Almighty shall bless -thee with the blessings of heaven above, and -blessings of the <i>deep that lieth under</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Deut.</i> xxxiii, 13—“Blessed be his land, for -the precious things of heaven; for the dew; and -for the <i>deep which couched beneath</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Deut.</i> iv, 18—“Take ye therefore good heed -unto yourselves, and make no similitude of anything -on the Earth, or the likeness of anything -that is in the <i>waters beneath the Earth</i>.”</p> - -<p>The same idea prevailed among the ancients -generally. In Ovid’s Metamorphoses, Jupiter, in -an assembly of the gods, is made to say, “I swear -by the infernal <i>waves which glide under the -Earth</i>.”</p> - -<p>If the earth is a distinct structure standing in -and upon the waters of the “great deep,” it -follows that, unless it can be shown that something -else sustains the waters, that the depth is -fathomless. As there is no evidence whatever of -anything existing underneath the “great deep,” -and as in many parts of the Atlantic and Pacific -Oceans no bottom has been found by the most -scientific and efficient means which human -ingenuity could invent, we are forced to the<span class="pagenum" id="Page201">[201]</span> -conclusion that the depth is boundless. This -conclusion is again confirmed by the scriptures.</p> - -<p><i>Jeremiah</i> xxxi, 37—“Thus saith the Lord, -which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the -ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a -light by night, which divideth the sea when the -waves thereof roar, the Lord of Hosts is His -name. If these ordinances depart from before -me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also -shall cease from being a nation before me for -ever. Thus saith the Lord: if heaven above can -be measured, and the <i>foundations</i> of the <i>Earth -searched out beneath</i>, I will also cast off all the -seed of Israel.”</p> - -<p>From the above it will be seen that God’s -promises to his people could no more be broken -than could the height of heaven, or the depths -of the Earth’s foundations be searched out. The -fathomless deep beneath—upon which the -Earth is founded, and the infinitude of heaven -above, are here given as emblems of the boundlessness -of God’s power, and of the certainty that -all his ordinances will be fulfilled. When God’s -power can be limited, heaven above will no -longer be infinite; and the mighty waters, the -foundations of the earth may be fathomed. But -the scriptures plainly teach us that the power -and wisdom of God, the heights of Heaven, and -the depths of the waters under the Earth are<span class="pagenum" id="Page202">[202]</span> -alike unfathomable; and no true philosophy -ever avers, nor ever did nor ever can aver, a -single fact to the contrary.</p> - -<p>In all the religions of the Earth the words -“up” and “above” are associated with a region -of peace and happiness. Heaven is always -spoken of as <i>above</i> the <i>Earth</i>. The scriptures -invariable convey the same idea:—</p> - -<p><i>Deut.</i> xxvi., 15—“Look <i>down</i> from Thy holy -habitation, from Heaven, and bless Thy people -Israel.”</p> - -<p><i>Exodus</i> xix., 20—“And the Lord came <i>down</i> -upon Mount Sinai.”</p> - -<p><i>Psalm</i> cii., 19—“For he hath looked <i>down</i> -from the height of his sanctuary: from Heaven -did the Lord behold the Earth.”</p> - -<p><i>Isaiah</i> lxiii., 15—“Look <i>down</i> from Heaven, -and behold from the habitation of Thy holiness -and of Thy glory.”</p> - -<p><i>Psalm</i> ciii., 11—“For as the Heaven is high -<i>above the Earth</i>.”</p> - -<p>2 <i>Kings</i> ii., 11—“And Elijah went <i>up</i> by a -whirlwind into Heaven.”</p> - -<p><i>Mark</i> xvi., 10—“So then after the Lord had -spoken unto them he was received <i>up into -Heaven</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Luke</i> xxiv., 51—“And it came to pass, while -He blessed them, He was parted from them, and -carried <i>up into Heaven</i>.”</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page203">[203]</span></p> - -<p>If the Earth is a globe revolving at the rate of -above a thousand miles an hour all this language -of scripture is necessarily fallacious. The terms -“up” and “down,” and “above” and “below,” -are words without meaning, at best are merely -relative—indicative of no absolute or certain -direction. That which is “up” at noon-day, is -directly “down” at midnight. Heaven can only -be spoken of as “above,” and the scriptures can -only be read correctly for a single moment out -of the twenty-four hours; for before the sentence -“Heaven is high above the Earth” could be -uttered, the speaker would be descending from -the meridian where Heaven was above him, and -his eye although unmoved would be fixed upon -a point millions of miles away from his first -position. Hence in all the ceremonials of -religion, where the hands and eyes are raised -upwards to Heaven, nay when Christ himself -“lifted up his eyes to Heaven and said, Father, -the hour is come,” his gaze would be sweeping -along the firmament at rapidly varying angles, -and with such incomprehensible velocity that a -fixed point of observation, and a definite position, -as indicating the seat or throne of “Him that -sitteth in the Heavens” would be an impossibility.</p> - -<p>Again: the religious world have always believed -and meditated upon the word “Heaven” as representing -an infinite region of joy and safety, of<span class="pagenum" id="Page204">[204]</span> -rest and happiness unspeakable; as “the place of -God’s residence, the dwelling place of angels and -the blessed; the true palace of God, entirely -separated from the impurities and imperfections, -the alterations and changes of the lower world; -where He reigns in eternal peace. * * It is -the sacred mansion of light, and joy, and glory.<a id="FNanchor_45" href="#Footnote_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a>” -But if there is a plurality of worlds, millions -upon millions, nay, an “infinity of worlds,” if -the universe is filled with innumerable systems -of burning suns, and rapidly revolving planets, -intermingled with rushing comets and whirling -satellites, all dashing and sweeping through -space in directions, and with velocities surpassing -all human comprehension, and terrible even -to contemplate, where is the place of rest and -safety? Where is the true and unchangeable -“palace of God?” In what direction is Heaven -to be found? Where is the liberated human -soul to find its home—its refuge from change -and motion, from uncertainty and danger? Is -it to wander for ever in a labyrinth of rolling -worlds? To struggle for ever in a never ending -maze of revolving suns and systems? To be -never at rest, but for ever seeking to avoid -some vortex of attraction—some whirlpool of -gravitation? The belief in the existence of -Heaven, as a region of peace and harmony<span class="pagenum" id="Page205">[205]</span> -“extending (above the Earth) through all extent,” -and beyond the influence of natural laws -and restless elements, is jeopardised, if not -destroyed, by a false and usurping astronomy, -which has no better foundation than human -conceit and presumption. If this ill-founded, -unsupported philosophy is admitted by the religious -mind, it can no longer say that—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent00">“Far above the sun, and stars, and skies,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">In realms of endless light and love,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">My Father’s mansion lies.”</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_45" href="#FNanchor_45" class="label">[45]</a> Cruden’s Concordance, article “Heaven.”</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>The modern theoretical astronomy affirms that -the Moon is a solid opaque, non-luminous body; -that it is, in fact, nothing less than a material -world. It has even been mapped out into continents, -islands, seas, lakes, volcanoes, &c., &c. -The nature of its atmosphere and character of -its productions and possible inhabitants have -been discussed with as much freedom as though -our philosophers were quite as familiar with it -as they are with the different objects and localities -upon Earth. The light, too, with which the -Moon so beautifully illuminates the firmament -is declared to be only borrowed—to be only the -light of the Sun intercepted and reflected upon -the Earth. These doctrines are not only opposed -by a formidable array of well-ascertained facts -(as given in previous sections), but they are -totally denied by the scriptures. The Sun and<span class="pagenum" id="Page206">[206]</span> -Moon and Stars are never referred to as worlds, -but simply as <i>lights</i> to rule alternately in the -firmament.</p> - -<p><i>Genesis</i> i., 14, 16—“And God said let there -be <i>lights</i> in the firmament of the Heaven to -divide the day from the night. * * * And -God made two <i>great lights</i>—the greater light to -rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the -night.”</p> - -<p><i>Psalm</i> cxxxvi., 7, 9—“O give thanks to Him -that made <i>great lights</i>: the Sun to rule by day, -the Moon and Stars to rule by night.”</p> - -<p><i>Jeremiah</i>, xxxi., 35—“The Sun is given for a -light by day, and the ordinances of the Moon -and of the Stars for a light by night.”</p> - -<p><i>Ezekiel</i>, xxxii., 7, 8—“I will cover the Sun with -a cloud; and the Moon shall not give <i>her light</i>.” -“All the bright lights of Heaven will I make -dark over thee.”</p> - -<p><i>Psalm</i> cxlviii., 3—“Praise him Sun and Moon, -praise him all ye Stars of light.”</p> - -<p><i>Isaiah</i> xiii., 10—“The Sun shall be darkened -in his going forth, and the Moon shall not cause -<i>her</i> light to shine.”</p> - -<p><i>Matthew</i> xxiv., 29—“Immediately after the -tribulation of those days shall the Sun be darkened, -and the Moon shall not give her light.”</p> - -<p><i>Isaiah</i> ix., 19, 20—“The Sun shall be no more -thy light by day; neither for brightness shall<span class="pagenum" id="Page207">[207]</span> -the <i>Moon give light</i> unto thee. * * Thy Sun -shall no more go down; neither shall thy Moon -withdraw itself.”</p> - -<p><i>Psalm</i> cxxxvi., 7 to 9—“To him that made -great lights, the Sun to rule by day, the Moon -and Stars to rule by night.”</p> - -<p><i>Job</i> xxv., 5—“Behold even to the Moon, and -<i>it</i> shineth not.”</p> - -<p><i>Ecclesiastes</i> xii., 2—“While the Sun, or the -light, or the Moon, or the Stars be not darkened.”</p> - -<p><i>Isaiah</i> xxx., 26—“The light of the Moon -shall be as the light of the Sun; and the light of -the Sun shall be sevenfold.”</p> - -<p><i>Deuteronomy</i> xxxiii., 14—“And for the precious -fruits brought forth by the Sun, and for -the precious things put forth by the Moon.”</p> - -<p>In the very first of the passages above quoted -the doctrine is enunciated that various distinct -and independent <i>lights</i> were created. But that two -<i>great</i> lights were specially called into existence -for the purpose of ruling the day and the night. -The Sun and the Moon are declared to be these -great and alternately ruling lights. Nothing is -here said, nor is it in any other part of scripture -said, that the Sun is a great light, and that -the Moon shines only by reflection. The Sun is -called the “greater light to rule the day,” and -the Moon the “lesser light to rule the night.” -Although of these two “great lights” one is<span class="pagenum" id="Page208">[208]</span> -less than the other, each is declared to shine -with its own light. Hence in Deuteronomy, -c. 33, v. 14, it is affirmed that certain fruits are -specially brought forth by the influence of the -Sun’s light, and that certain other productions -are “put forth by the Moon.” That the light of -the sun is influential in encouraging the growth -of certain natural products; and that the light -of the Moon has a distinct influence in promoting -the increase of certain other natural substances, -is a matter well known to those who are familiar -with horticultural and agricultural phenomena; -and it is abundantly proved by chemical evidence -that the two lights are distinct in character -and in action upon various elements. This -distinction is beautifully preserved throughout -the sacred scriptures. In no single instance are -the two lights confounded. On the contrary, in -the New Testament, St. Paul affirms with authority, -that “there is one glory of the Sun, and -another glory of the Moon, and another glory of -the Stars.”</p> - -<p>The same fact of the difference in the two -lights, and their independence of each other is -maintained in the scriptures to the last. “The -Sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the -Moon became as blood.” If the Moon is only a -reflector, the moment the Sun becomes black -her surface will be blackened also, and not remain<span class="pagenum" id="Page209">[209]</span> -as blood, while the Sun is dark and black as -sackcloth of hair!</p> - -<p>Again: the modern system of astronomy -teaches that this earth cannot possibly receive -light from the Stars, because of their supposed -great distance from it: that the fixed Stars are -only burning spheres, or Sun’s to their own -systems of planets and satellites: and that their -light terminates, or no longer produces an active -luminosity at the distance of nearly two thousand -millions of miles. Here again the scriptures -affirm the contrary doctrine.</p> - -<p><i>Genesis</i> i., 16-17—“He made the Stars also; -and God set them in the firmament <i>to give light -upon the earth</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Isaiah</i> xiii., 10—“For the Stars of Heaven and -the constellations thereof shall not <i>give their -light</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Ezekiel</i> xxxii., 7—“I will cover the Heaven, -and make the <i>Stars</i> thereof <i>dark</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Joel</i> ii., 10—“The Sun and the Moon shall be -dark, and the <i>Stars</i> shall withdraw <i>their shining</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Psalm</i> cxlviii., 3—“Praise him Sun and -Moon: promise him all ye <i>Stars of Light</i>.”</p> - -<p><i>Jeremiah</i> xxxi., 35—“Thus saith the Lord, -which giveth the Sun for a light by day; and -the ordinances of the Moon and of <i>the Stars</i> for -a <i>light by night</i>.”</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page210">[210]</span></p> - -<p><i>Daniel</i> xii., 3—“They that turn many to -righteousness shall <i>shine</i> as the <i>Stars</i> for ever -and ever.”</p> - -<p>These quotations place it beyond doubt that -the Stars were made expressly to shine in the -firmament, and “to give light upon the Earth.” -In addition to this language of scripture, we -have the evidence of our own eyes that the Stars -give abundant light. “What beautiful star-light!” -is a common expression: and we all -remember the difference between a dark and -starless night, and one when the firmament is as -it were studded with brilliant luminaries. Travellers -inform us that in many parts of the -world, where the sky is clear and free from -clouds and vapours for weeks together, the Stars -appear both larger and brighter than they do -in England; and that their light is sufficiently -intense to enable them to read and write, and -to travel with safety through the most dangerous -places.</p> - -<p>If it be true that the Stars and the Planets are -not simply lights, as the scriptures affirm them -to be, but magnificent worlds, for the most part -much larger than this earth, then it is a very -proper question to ask—“are they inhabited?” -If the answer be in the affirmative, it is equally -proper to inquire “have the first parents in -each world been tempted?” If so, “have they<span class="pagenum" id="Page211">[211]</span> -fallen?” if so, “Have they required redemption?” -And “have they been redeemed?” “Has -each world had a separate Redeemer? or has -Christ been the Redeemer for every world in the -universe?” And if so, “did His suffering and -crucifixion on this Earth suffice for the redemption -of the fallen inhabitants of all other worlds? -Or had He to suffer and die in each world successively? -Did the fall of Adam in this world -involve in his guilt the inhabitants of all other -worlds? Or was the baneful influence of Satan -confined to the first parents of this Earth? If -so, why so? and if not, why not? But, and if, -and why, and again—but it is useless thus to -ponder! The Christian philosopher must be -confounded! If his religion be to him a living -reality, he will turn with loathing or spurn with -indignation and disgust, as he would a poisonous -reptile, a system of astronomy which creates in -his mind so much confusion and uncertainty! -But as the system which necessitates such doubts -and difficulties has been shown to be purely -theoretical; and to have not the slightest foundation -in fact, the religious mind has really no -cause for apprehension. Not a shadow of doubt -remains that this World is the only one created; -that the sacred Scriptures contain, in addition -to religious and moral doctrines, a true and consistent -philosophy; that they were written for<span class="pagenum" id="Page212">[212]</span> -the good of mankind, at the direct instigation of -God himself; and that all their teachings and -promises are truthful, consistent, and reliable. -Whoever holds the contrary conclusion is the -victim of an arrogant false astronomy, of an -equally false and presumptuous geology, or a -suicidal method of reasoning—a logic which -never demands a proof of its premises, and -which therefore leads to conclusions which are -contrary to nature, to human experience, and to -the direct teaching of God’s word, and therefore -contrary to the deepest and most lasting interests -of humanity. “God has spoken to man in two -voices, the voice of inspiration and the voice of -nature. By man’s ignorance they have been -made to disagree; but the time will come, and -cannot be far distant, when these two languages -will strictly accord; when the science of nature -will no longer contradict the science of scripture.”<a id="FNanchor_46" href="#Footnote_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_46" href="#FNanchor_46" class="label">[46]</a> Professor Hunt.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p><span class="smcap">Cui Bono.</span>—“Of all terrors to the generous -soul, that <i>Cui bono</i> is the one to be the most -zealously avoided. Whether it be proposed to -find the magnetic point, or a passage impossible -to be utilised if discovered, or a race of men of -no good to any human institution extant, and of -no good to themselves; or to seek the Unicorn -in Madagascar, and when we had found him not<span class="pagenum" id="Page213">[213]</span> -to be able to make use of him; or the great -central plateau of Australia, where no one could -live for centuries to come; or the great African -lake, which, for all the good it would do us -English folk might as well be in the Moon; or -the source of the Nile, the triumphant discovery -of which would neither lower the rents nor take -off the taxes anywhere—whatever it is, the <i>Cui -bono</i> is always a weak and cowardly argument: -essentially short-sighted too, seeing that, according -to the law of the past, by which we may -always safely predicate the future, so much falls -into the hands of the seeker, for which he was -not looking, and of which he never even knew -the existence. The area of the possible is very -wide still, and very insignificant and minute, the -angle we have staked out and marked impossible. -What do we know of the powers which -nature has yet in reserve, of the secrets she has -still untold, the wealth still concealed? Every -day sees new discoveries in the sciences we can -investigate at home. What, then, may not lie -waiting for the explorers abroad? Weak and -short-sighted commercially, the <i>cui bono</i> is worse -than both, morally. When we remember the -powerful manhood, the patience, unselfishness, -courage, devotion, and nobleness of aim which -must accompany a perilous enterprise, and which -form so great an example, and so heart-stirring<span class="pagenum" id="Page214">[214]</span> -to the young and to the wavering, it is no return -to barbaric indifference to life to say, better -indeed a few deaths for even a commercially -useless enterprise—better a few hearths made -desolate, and a few wives and mothers left to -bear their stately sorrow to the end of time, -that the future may rejoice and be strong: -better a thousand failures, and a thousand -useless undertakings, than the loss of national -manhood or the weakening of the national fibre. -Quixotism is a folly when the energy which -might have achieved conquests over misery and -wrong, if rightfully applied, is wasted in fighting -windmills; but to forego any great enterprise for -fear of the dangers attending, or to check a -grand endeavour by the <i>cui bono</i> of ignorance -and moral scepticism, is worse than a folly—it -is baseness, and a cowardice.<a id="FNanchor_47" href="#Footnote_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a>”</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_47" href="#FNanchor_47" class="label">[47]</a> <i>Daily News</i> of April 5, 1865.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>The above quotation is an excellent general -answer to all those who may, in reference to the -subject of this work, or to anything which is not -of immediate worldly interest, obtrude the <i>cui -bono</i>? But as a special reply it may be claimed -for the subject of these pages—</p> - -<p>First,—It is more edifying, more satisfactory, -and in every sense far better that we should -know the true and detect the false. Thereby the -mind becomes fixed, established upon an eternal<span class="pagenum" id="Page215">[215]</span> -foundation, and no longer subject to those -waverings and changes, those oscillations and -fluctuations which are ever the result of falsehood. -To know the truth and to embody it in our lives -and purposes our progress must be safe and -rapid, and almost unlimited in extent. None -can say to what it may lead or where it may -culminate. Who shall dare to set bounds to the -capabilities of the mind, or to fix a limit to -human progress? Whatever may be the destiny -of the human race truth alone will help and -secure its realisation.</p> - -<p>Second,—Having detected the fundamental -falsehoods of modern astronomy, and discovered -that the Earth is a plane, and motionless, and -the only material world in existence, we are able -to demonstrate the actual character of the -Universe. In doing this we are enabled to prove -that all the so-called arguments with which so -many scientific but irreligious men have assailed -the scriptures, are absolutely false; have no -foundation except in their own astronomical and -geological theories, which being demonstrably -fallacious, they fall to the ground as valueless. -They can no longer be wielded as weapons against -religion. If used at all it can only be that their -weakness and utter worthlessness will be exposed. -Atheism and every other form of Infidelity are -thus rendered helpless. Their sting is cut away,<span class="pagenum" id="Page216">[216]</span> -and their poison dissipated. The irreligious -philosopher can no longer obtrude his theories -as things proved wherewith to test the teachings -of scripture. He must now himself be tested. -He must be forced to demonstrate his premises, -a thing which he has never yet attempted; and -if he fails in this respect his impious vanity, -self-conceit and utter disregard of justice, will -become so clearly apparent that his presence in -the ranks of science will no longer be tolerated. -All theory must be put aside, and the questions -at issue must be decided by independent and -practical evidence. This has been done. The -process—the <i>modus operandi</i>, and the conclusions -derived therefrom have been given in the -early sections of this work. They are entirely -consonant with the teachings of scripture. The -scriptures are therefore literally true, and must -henceforth either alone or in conjunction with -practical science be used as a standard by which -to test the truth or falsehood of every system -which does or may hereafter exist. Philosophy -is no longer to be employed as a test of scriptural -truth, but the scriptures may and ought to be -the test of all philosophy. Not that they are to -be used as a test of philosophy simply because -they are <i>thought</i> or <i>believed</i> to be the word of -God, but because their literal teachings in regard -to science and natural phenomena, are demonstrably<span class="pagenum" id="Page217">[217]</span> -correct. It is quite as faulty and unjust -for the religious devotee to urge the scriptures -against the theories of the philosopher simply -because he <i>believes</i> them to be true, as it is for -the philosopher to urge his theories against the -scriptures only because he disbelieves the one -and believes the other. The whole matter must -be taken out of the region of belief and disbelief. -The Christian will be strengthened and his mind -more completely satisfied by having it in his -power to demonstrate that the scriptures are -philosophically true, than he could possibly be -by the simple belief in their validity, unsupported -by practical evidence. On the other hand -the Atheist who is met by the Christian upon -purely scientific grounds, and who is not -belaboured with enunciations of what his antagonist -believes, will be led to listen and to pay -more regard and respect to the reasons advanced -than he could possibly concede to the purely -religious argument, or to an argument founded -upon faith alone. If it can be shown to the -atheistical philosopher that his astronomical and -geological theories are fallacious, and that all the -expressions in the scriptures which have reference -to natural phenomena are literally true, he will -of necessity be led to admit that, apart from all -other considerations, if the <i>philosophy</i> of the -scriptures is demonstrably correct, then possibly<span class="pagenum" id="Page218">[218]</span> -their <i>spiritual</i> and <i>moral</i> teachings may also -be true; and if so, they may and indeed must -have had a divine origin; and if so they are -truly the “word of God,” and after all, religion is -a grand reality; and the theories which speculative -adventurous philosophers have advanced -are nothing better than treacherous quicksands -into which many of the deepest thinkers have -been engulphed and lost. By this process many -highly intelligent minds have been led to desert -the ranks of Atheism and to rejoin the army of -Christian soldiers and devotees. Many have -rejoiced almost beyond expression that the subject -of the Earth’s true form and position in the -universe had ever been brought under their -notice; and doubtless great numbers will yet be -induced to return to that allegiance which plain -demonstrable truth demands and deserves. To -induce numbers of earnest thinking human beings -to leave the rebellious cause of Atheism and false -philosophy; to return to a full recognition of -the beauty and truthfulness of the scriptures, -and to a participation in the joy and satisfaction -which religion can alone supply, is a grand and -cheering result, and one which furnishes the -noblest possible answer to the ever ready “<span class="smcap">Cui -Bono</span>.”</p> - -<p>In addition to the numerous quotations which -have been given from sacred scriptures, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page219">[219]</span> -proved to be true and consistent, it may be -useful briefly to refer to the following difficulties -which have been raised by the scientific objectors -to scriptural authority:—“As the earth is a -globe, and as all its vast collections of water—its -oceans, lakes, &c., are sustained by the earthy -crust beneath them, and as beneath this ‘crust -of the earth’ everything is in a red-hot molten -condition to what place could the excess of -waters retire which are said in the scriptures to -have overwhelmed the whole world? It could -not sink into the centre of the earth, for the fire -is there so intense that the whole would be -rapidly volatilised, and driven away as vapour. -It could not evaporate, for when the atmosphere -is charged with watery vapour beyond a certain -degree it begins to condense and throw back the -water in the form of rain; so that the waters of -the flood could not sink from the earth’s surface, -nor remain in the atmosphere; therefore if the -earth had ever been deluged at all, it would -have remained so to this day. But as it is not -universally flooded so it never could have been, -and the account given in the scriptures is false.” -All this specious reasoning is founded upon the -assumption that the earth is a globe: this -doctrine, however, being false, all the difficulties -quickly vanish. The earth being “founded on -the seas” would be as readily cleared of its superfluous<span class="pagenum" id="Page220">[220]</span> -water as would the deck of a ship on -emerging from a storm. Or as a rock in the -ocean would be cleared after the raging waves -which for a time overwhelmed it had subsided.</p> - -<p>“Thou coveredst the Earth with the deep -as with a garment; the waters stood above the -mountains. At thy rebuke they fled; and at -the voice of thy thunder they hasted away ... -down by the valleys unto the place which thou -hast founded for them.”<a id="FNanchor_48" href="#Footnote_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_48" href="#FNanchor_48" class="label">[48]</a> Psalm civ.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>“Thou didst cleave the Earth with rivers; -and the overflowing of the waters passed by; -and the deep uttered his voice and lifted up his -hands on high.”<a id="FNanchor_49" href="#Footnote_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_49" href="#FNanchor_49" class="label">[49]</a> Hab. iii. 9-10.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>The surface of the Earth standing above the -level of the surrounding seas, the waters of the -flood would simply and naturally run down by -the valleys and rivers into the “great deep,”—into -which “the waters returned from off the -earth continually ... until the tenth month, -and on the first day of the month were the tops -of the mountains seen.”<a id="FNanchor_50" href="#Footnote_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_50" href="#FNanchor_50" class="label">[50]</a> Gen. viii. 2-5.</p> - -</div><!--footnote--> - -<p>Again; as the Earth is a Globe and in continual -motion, how could Jesus on being “taken -up into an exceedingly high mountain see all -the kingdoms of the world, in a moment of -time?” Or, when “He cometh with clouds and -every eye shall see him,” how could it be possible,<span class="pagenum" id="Page221">[221]</span> -seeing that at least twenty-four hours would -elapse before every part of the Earth would be -turned to the same point? But it has been -demonstrated that the Earth is a Plane and -motionless, and that from a great eminence -every part of its surface could be seen at once; -and, at once—at the same moment, could every -eye behold Him, when “coming in a cloud with -power and great glory.”</p> - - -<p class="center highline6">FINIS.</p> - - -<p class="center fsize80"><span class="padl6 padr6 bt">S. HAYWARD, PRINTER, GREEN STREET, BATH.</span></p> - -<hr class="full"> - -<div class="tnbot" id="TN"> - -<h2>Transcriber’s Notes</h2> - -<p>Inconsistent and unusual spelling, punctuation etc. have been retained; accents on (French) words have not been -corrected. The inconsistent nesting and pairing of quote marks often makes it difficult to determine where a -quote starts or ends.</p> - -<p>Page 20: ... as represented in figure 10 ... changed to ... as represented in figure 9 .... - -<p>Page 13, A B is the line-of-sight, and C D the surface of the water ...: C nor D are depicted in the illustration.</p> - -<p>Page 27, Fig. 15 and accompanying text: the number 4 in the illustration appears to be misplaced.</p> - -<p>Page 77, “Sun’s altitude at the time of Southing ...: there is no closing quote mark.</p> - -<p>Page 142, 143 and Fig. 31: the lower case reference letters are present as upper case letters in the illustration.</p> - -<p>Page 193, ... only the dry land was called earth,” ...: the opening quote marks are missing.</p> - -<p>Page 198, ... stretchet out the earth above the waters ...: as printed in the source document; both -"stretched" and "stretcheth" appear in other sources.</p> - -<p>Page 211, ... “did His suffering and crucifixion ...: the closing quote mark is lacking.</p> - -<p class="blankbefore75">Changes made:</p> - -<p>Footnotes and illustrations have been moved out of text paragraphs.</p> - -<p>Some obvious minor typographical and punctuation errors have been corrected silently.</p> - -<p>Terrestial has been changed to terrestrial (3x), trignometry to trigonometry (2x), incondescent to incandescent -(3x).</p> - -<p>Illustration captions for Figs. 27, 28 and 31-34 have been added.</p> - -<p>Page 10: ... to lesson the difference ... changed to ... to lessen the difference ....</p> - -<p>Page 51: ... from Port Jackson to Cape Horn as 8.000 miles ... changed to ... -from Port Jackson to Cape Horn as 8,000 miles ....</p> - -<p>Page 64-65: replicated text deleted.</p> - -<p>Page 133: exclamation mark inserted after Neptune has only <i>one third</i> of this volume (as in surrounding text).</p> - -<p>Page 134: Professer Schumacher changed to Professor Schumacher.</p> - -<p>Page 139: M. Foucalt’s communication describing his experiments ... changed -to M. Foucault’s communication describing his experiments ....</p> - -<p>Page 141: Ille sante aux yeux ... changed to Il saute aux yeux ....</p> - -<p>Page 171: ... south cost of Norway ... changed to ... south coast of Norway ...; -The Troudhjem Light ... changed to The Trondhjem Light ...; Lower Farn Island Light changed to Lower Farne -Island Light.</p> - -<p>Page 193: ... the heavenly bodies are Sun’s ... changed to ... the heavenly bodies are Suns ....</p> - -</div><!--tnbot--> - -<div style='display:block; margin-top:4em'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ZETETIC ASTRONOMY ***</div> -<div style='text-align:left'> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will -be renamed. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. -</div> - -<div style='margin-top:1em; font-size:1.1em; text-align:center'>START: FULL LICENSE</div> -<div style='text-align:center;font-size:0.9em'>THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE</div> -<div style='text-align:center;font-size:0.9em'>PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project -Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person -or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the -Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when -you share it without charge with others. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work -on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the -phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: -</div> - -<blockquote> - <div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most - other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions - whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms - of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online - at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you - are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws - of the country where you are located before using this eBook. - </div> -</blockquote> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project -Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg™ License. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format -other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain -Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -provided that: -</div> - -<div style='margin-left:0.7em;'> - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation.” - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ - works. - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works. - </div> -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right -of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™ -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread -public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state -visit <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/donate/">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. -</div> - -</div> -</body> -</html> |