Time and Clocks: A Description of Ancient and Modern Methods of Measuring Time

by Sir Henry H. Cunynghame

Let us now go on to examine the second fallacy that was derived from the Aristotelians, and that so long impeded the advance of science, namely, that the earth must be at rest.

The principal reason given for this was that if bodies were thrown up from the earth they ought, if the earth were in motion, to remain behind. Now, if this were so, then it would follow that if a person in a train which was moving rapidly threw a ball vertically, that is perpendicularly, up into the air, the ball, instead of coming back into his hand, ought to hit the side of the carriage behind him. The next time any of my readers travel by train he can easily satisfy himself that this is not so. But there are other ways of proving it. For instance, if a little waggon running on rails has a spring gun fixed in it in a perpendicular position, so arranged that when the waggon comes to a particular point on the rails a catch releases the trigger and shoots a ball perpendicularly upwards, it will be found that the ball, instead of going upwards in a vertical line, is carried along over the waggon, and the ball as it ascends and descends keeps always above the waggon, just as a hawk might hover over a running mouse, and finally falls not behind the waggon, but into it.

So, again, if an article is dropped out of the window of a train, it will not simply be left behind as it falls, but while it falls it will also partake of the motion of the train, and touch the ground, not behind the point from which it was dropped, but just underneath it.

The reason is, that when the ball is dropped or thrown it acquires not only the motion given to it by the throw, or by gravity, but it takes also the motion of the train from which it is thrown. If a ball is thrown from the hand, it derives its motion from the motion of the hand, and if at the time of throwing the person who does so is moving rapidly along in a train, his hand has not only the outward motion of the throw, but also the onward motion of the train, and the ball therefore acquires both motions simultaneously. Hence then it is not correct reasoning to say, because a ball thrown up vertically falls vertically back to the spot from which it was thrown, that therefore the earth must be at rest; the same result will happen whether the earth is at rest or in motion. You can no more tell whether the earth is at rest or in motion from the behaviour of falling bodies than you can tell whether a ship on the ocean is at rest or in motion from the behaviour of bodies on it.

But you will say. Then why do we feel sea-sick on a ship? The answer is, that that is because the motion of the ship is not uniform. If the earth, instead of turning round uniformly, were to rock to and fro, everything on it would be flung about in the wildest fashion. For as soon as the earth had communicated its motion to a body which then moved with the earth, if the earth’s motion were reversed, the body would go on like a passenger in a train on which the break is quickly applied, and he would be shot up against the side of the room. Nay, more, the houses would be shaken off their foundations. Changes of motion are perceptible so long as the change is going on. We are therefore justified in inferring from the behaviour of bodies on the earth, not that the earth is at rest, but that it is either at rest, or else, if it is in motion, that its motion is uniform and not in jerks or variable.

Fig. 23.

For if it were not so, consider what would be happening around us. The earth is about 8,000 miles in diameter, and a parallel of latitude through London is therefore about 19,000 miles long, and this space is travelled in twenty-four hours. So that London is spinning through space at the rate of over 1,000 feet a second, due to the earth’s rotary motion alone, not to speak of the motion due to the earth’s path round the sun. If a boy jumped up two and a half feet into the air, he would take about half a second to go up and come down, but if in jumping he did not partake of the earth’s motion, he would land more than 500 feet to the westward of the point from which he jumped up, and if he did it in a room, he would be dashed against the wall with a force greater than he would experience from a drop down from the top of Mont Blanc. He would be not only killed, but dashed into an indistinguishable mass. If the earth suddenly stood still, everything on it would be shaken to pieces. It is bad enough to have the concussion of a train going thirty miles an hour when dashed against some obstacle. But the concussion due to the earth’s stoppage would be as of a train going about 800 miles an hour, which would smash up everything and everybody.

Thus, then, the first effect of the new ideas formulated by Galileo was to show that the Copernican theory that the earth moved round on its axis, and round the sun, was in agreement with the laws of motion. In fact, he introduced quite new ideas of force, and these ideas I must now endeavour to explain.

Let us consider what is meant by the word “force.” If I press my hand against the table, I exert force. The harder I press, the more force there is. If I put a weight on a stand, the weight presses the stand down with a force. If I squeeze a spring, the spring tries to recover itself and exerts a certain force. In all these cases force is considered as a pressure. And I can measure the force by seeing how much it will press things. If I take a spring, and press it in an inch, it takes perhaps a force of 1 lb. It will take a force of 2 lbs. to press it in another inch. Or again, if I pull it out an inch, it takes a force of 1 lb. If I pull it out another inch, it takes a force of 2 lbs. We thus always get into the habit of conceiving forces as producing pressures and being measured by pressures.