Outlines of a mechanical theory of storms

by Thomas Bassnett

From the invariability of the axis of rotation, we must conclude that whatever form is the true form, it is one of equilibrium. In casting our eyes over the map of the world, we perceive that the surface is very unequally divided into land and sea; and that the land is very unequally arranged, both north and south, and east and west. If we compare the northern and southern hemisphere, we find the land to the water about 3 to 1. If we take the Pacific portion, and consider the north end of New Zealand as a centre, we can describe a great circle taking in one half the globe, which shall not include one-tenth of the whole land. Yet the average height of the remaining nine-tenths, above the level of the sea, is nearly 1,000 feet. Call this nine-tenths nearly equal to one-fourth of the whole surface, and the protuberant land in the hemisphere, opposite the South Pacific, amounts to 1 ⁄ 30,000 part of the whole mass of the earth, or about 1 ⁄ 700 of the mass of the moon. Again, the mean density of the earth is about 5 ½—water being unity,—and the mean density of the surface land is only about half this: but three-fourths of the whole surface is water. Hence, we see that the materials of the interior of the earth must be either metallic or very compressible. To assign a metallic nucleus to the earth, is repugnant to analogy; and it is not rendered even probable by facts, as we find volcanic emissions to contain no heavier elements than the sedimentary layers. Besides, there are indications of a gradual increase of density downwards, such as would arise from the compressibility of the layers. Seeing, therefore, the equilibrium of the whole mass, and the consequent hydrostatic balance of the land in the sea,—seeing also the small compressibility of the solid portions, and the great compressibility of the fluid, the inference is legitimate that the whole is hydrostatically balanced, and that our globe is a globe of water, with an intermediate shell of land, specifically lighter than the fluid in which it is suspended. Where this shell is of great thickness, it penetrates to greater depths, and attains to greater elevations above the surface of the aqueous globe; where it is less thick, it is found below the surface, and forms the bottom of the upper ocean. Recent soundings give much greater depths to some parts of the ocean, than the most elevated land upon the globe. Captain Denham, of H. B. M. ship Herald, lately sounded in 37° south and 37° west, and found bottom at 7,706 fathoms, or about nine English miles.

As the interior portions of our globe are totally unknown, and the compressibility of water is well established, it is just as sane to consider water the most abundant element of nature, as solid land. The great question to ask is, whether there may not be other phenomena incompatible with this supposition? It is plain that the permanency of terrestrial latitudes and longitudes would be unaffected by the conditions we have supposed. Would the precession of the equinoxes be also unaffected? Mr. Hopkins has entered into such an investigation, and concludes: “Upon the whole, then, we may venture to assert that the minimum thickness of the crust of the globe, which can be deemed consistent with the observed amount of precession, cannot be less than one-fourth or one-fifth of the radius of the earth.”These investigations were made on the hypothesis of the interior fluidity being caused by the fusion of the central portions of a solid globe; but it is evident that the analytical result would be the same if these central parts were water, inclosed by an irregularly-spherical shell of land. Nor would the result be affected, if we considered certain portions of the interior of this solid shell to be in a state of fusion, as no doubt is the case.

May not the uncertainty of the mass of the moon, be owing to the fact that this shell is not so rigidly compacted but that it may yield a little to external force, and thus also account for the tides in the Pacific groups, rather obeying the centrifugal force due to the orbit velocity of the earth, than the attraction of the moon?

Since the days of Hipparchus the sidereal day has not diminished by the hundredth part of a second; and, consequently, seeing that the contraction of the mass must be limited by the time of rotation, it is inferred that the earth has not lost 1 ⁄ 508th of one degree of heat since that time. This conclusion, sound as it is, is scarcely credible, when we reflect on the constant radiation into a space 60° below zero. Admit that the globe is a globe of water, whose average temperature is the temperature it receives from the sun, and the difficulty vanishes at once. Its diameter will be invariable, and the only effect of the cooling of the solid parts will be to immerse them deeper in the water, to change the relative level of the sea without changing its volume. This is no puerile argument when rightly considered; but there is another phenomenon which, if fairly weighed, will also conduct us to the same views.

It is now a fact uncontroverted, that the sea does actually change its level, or rather, that the elevation of continents is not only apparent but real. The whole coast of Sweden and Finland is rising at the present day at the rate of four feet in a century, while on the south a contrary effect is produced. Various hypotheses have been formed concerning this interesting fact. Yet from the indications of geology, it must have been an universal phenomenon in the early ages of the world, in order to account for the emersion of sedimentary deposits from the fluid which deposited them. May not internal fires be yet spreading, and the continents expanding instead of contracting? And may there not be an inequality in this process, so as necessarily to immerse in one direction nearly as much as to elevate in another? One fact is certain, the elements are scattering the materials of the land along its Oceanic coasts, which of itself must produce a very minute effect in disturbing the hydrostatic balance; but a more efficient agent is the earthquake and volcano.

The upheaving of tracts of land by earthquakes, as on the coast of Chili would thus be satisfactorily explained, by attributing a certain resistance due to cohesion or friction preventing a gradual change of level, but producing it suddenly by the jar of the earthquakes. May we not inquire also, whether the facility with which the earth seems moved by this destructive agent, does not point to the same solution as the irregularity of the figure of the earth?

This is a subject on which it is allowable to speculate, especially if any light can be thereby thrown on the still more mysterious source of terrestrial magnetism. It is for such a purpose that we have permitted ourselves to digress from that subject. In this connection we also may acknowledge our indebtedness to the sacred volume for the first germ of this theory of the weather.

Believing in the authenticity of the Mosaic history of the deluge, the author found it difficult to refer that event to other than natural causes, called into action by the operation of other causes, and all simultaneous with the going forth of the fiat of Omnipotence. Thus reasoning, he was led to regard the deluge as a physical phenomenon inviting solution, and as a promising exponent to the climatology of the early world. He looked upon the bow of promise, as the autograph of the Creator, the signature to a solemn bond, upon which the eye of man had never before rested. But if there was no rainbow before the deluge, there was no rain; and following up this clue, he was not only enabled to solve the problem, but also led to the true cause, which produces the principal commotions in our atmosphere.

Science boasts of being the handmaid of religion; yet there are names of note in her ranks who have labored rather to invest this phenomenon with the mantle of fable, and to force it into collision with the records graven on the rocky pages of geognosy. But the world is ever prone to be captivated by the brilliancy of misapplied talents, instead of weighing merit by its zeal in reconciling the teachings of those things which are seen, with those which are revealed.

If our globe be constituted as we suppose, the land might experience repeated submersions, without involving the necessity of any great departure from established laws. And we might refer to the historical record of one of these, with all the minute particulars as positive data, imposing on us the necessity of admitting that the solid parts of the globe are hydrostatically balanced in the sea. But, modern science is not always correctly defined when called the pursuit of truth, nor human learning the means of discovering it.