A third fundamental discovery, that of the diurnal change in the declination, is usually credited to George Graham (1675-1751), a London instrument maker. Previous observers, e.g. Gellibrand, had obtained slightly different values for the declination at different hours of the day, but it was natural to assign them to instrumental uncertainties. In those days the usual declination instrument was the compass with pivoted needles, and Graham himself at first assigned the differences he observed to friction. The observations on which he based his conclusions were made in 1722; an account of them was communicated to the Royal Society and published in the Philosophical Transactions for 1724.
The movements of the compass needle throughout the average day represent partly a regular diurnal variation, and partly irregular changes in the declination. The distinction, however, was not at first very clearly realized. Between 1756 and 1759 J. Canton observed the declination-changes on some 600 days, and was thus able to deduce their general character. He found that the most prominent part of the regular diurnal change in England consisted of a westerly movement of the north-pointing pole from 8 or 9 a.m. to 1 or 2 p.m., followed by a more leisurely return movement to the east. He also found that the amplitude of the movement was considerably larger in summer than in winter. Canton further observed that in a few days the movements were conspicuously irregular, and that aurora was then visible. This association of magnetic disturbance and aurora had, however, been observed somewhat before this time, a description of one conspicuous instance being contributed to the Royal Society in 1750 by Pehr Vilhelm Wargentin (1717-1783), a Swede.
Another landmark in the history of terrestrial magnetism was the discovery towards the end of the 18th century that the intensity of the resultant magnetic force varies at different parts of the earth. The first observations clearly showing this seem to be those of a Frenchman, Paul de Lamanon, who observed in 1785-1787 at Teneriffe and Macao, but his results were not published at the time. The first published observations seem to be those made by the great traveller Humboldt in tropical America between 1798 and 1803. The delay in this discovery may again be attributed to instrumental imperfections. The method first devised for comparing the force at different places consisted in taking the time of oscillation of the dipping needle, and even with modern circles this is hardly a method of high precision. Another discovery worth chronicling was made by Arago in 1827. From observations made at Paris he found that the inclination of the dipping needle and the intensity of the horizontal component of the magnetic force both possessed a diurnal variation.
§ 2. Whilst Italy, England and France claim most of the early observational discoveries, Germany deserves a large share of credit for the great improvement in instruments and methods during the first half of the 19th century. Measurements of the intensity of the magnetic force were somewhat crude until Gauss showed how absolute results could be obtained, and not merely relative data based on observations with some particular needle. Gauss also devised the bifilar magnetometer, which is still largely represented in instruments measuring changes of the horizontal force; but much of the practical success attending the application of his ideas to instruments seems due to Johann von Lamont (1805-1879), a Jesuit of Scottish origin resident in Germany.
The institution of special observatories for magnetic work is largely due to Humboldt and Gauss. The latter’s observatory at Göttingen, where regular observations began in 1834, was the centre of the Magnetic Union founded by Gauss and Weber for the carrying out of simultaneous magnetic observations and it was long customary to employ Göttingen time in schemes of international co-operation.
In the next decade, mainly through the influence of Sir Edward Sabine (1788-1883), afterwards president of the Royal Society, several magnetic observatories were established in the British colonies, at St Helena, Cape of Good Hope, Hobarton (now Hobart) and Toronto. These, with the exception of Toronto, continued in full action for only a few years; but their records—from their widely distributed positions—threw much fresh light on the differences between magnetic phenomena in different regions of the globe. The introduction of regular magnetic observatories led ere long to the discovery that there are notable differences between the amplitudes of the regular daily changes and the frequency of magnetic disturbances in different years. The discovery that magnetic phenomena have a period closely similar to, if not absolutely identical with, the “eleven year” period in sun-spots, was made independently and nearly simultaneously about the middle of the 19th century by Lamont, Sabine and R. Wolf.
The last half of the 19th century showed a large increase in the number of observatories taking magnetic observations. After 1890 there was an increased interest in magnetic work. One of the contributory causes was the magnetic survey of the British Isles made by Sir A. Rücker and Sir T. E. Thorpe, which served as a stimulus to similar work elsewhere; another was the institution by L. A. Bauer of a magazine. Terrestrial Magnetism, specially devoted to the subject. This increased activity added largely to the stock of information, sometimes in forms of marked practical utility; it was also manifested in the publication of a number of papers of a speculative character. For historical details the writer is largely indebted to the works of E. Walker[1] and L. A. Bauer.[3]
§ 3. All the more important magnetic observatories are provided with instruments of two kinds. Those of the first kind give the absolute value of the magnetic elements at the time of observation. The unifilar magnetometer (q.v.), for Observational Methods and Records. instance, gives the absolute values of the declination and horizontal force, whilst the inclinometer (q.v.) or dip circle gives the inclination of the dipping needle. Instruments of the second kind, termed magnetographs (q.v.), are differential and self-recording, and show the changes constantly taking place in the magnetic elements. The ordinary form of magnetograph records photographically. Light reflected from a fixed mirror gives a base line answering to a constant value of the element in question; the light is cut off every hour or second hour so that the base line also serves to make the time. Light reflected from a mirror carried by a magnet gives a curved line answering to the changes in position of the magnet. The length of the ordinate or perpendicular drawn from any point of the curved line on to the base line is proportional to the extent of departure of the magnet from a standard position. If then we know the absolute value of the element which corresponds to the base line, and the equivalent of 1 cm. of ordinate, we can deduce the absolute value of the element answering to any given instant of time. In the case of the declination the value of 1 cm. of ordinate is usually dependent almost entirely on the distance of the mirror carried by the magnet from the photographic paper, and so remains invariable or very nearly so. In the case of the horizontal force and vertical force magnetographs—these being the two force components usually recorded—the value of 1 cm. of ordinate alters with the strength of the magnet. It has thus to be determined from time to time by observing the deflection shown on the photographic paper when an auxiliary magnet of known moment, at a measured distance, deflects the magnetograph magnet. Means are provided for altering the sensitiveness, for instance, by changing the effective distance in the bifilar suspension of the horizontal force magnet, and by altering the height of a small weight carried by the vertical force magnet. It is customary to aim at keeping the sensitiveness as constant as possible. A very common standard is to have 1 cm. of ordinate corresponding to 10′ of arc in the declination and to 50γ (1γ ≡ 0.00001 C.G.S.) in the horizontal and vertical force magnetographs.
As an example of how the curves are standardized, suppose that absolute observations of declination are taken four times a month, and that in a given month the mean of the observed values is 16° 34′.6 W. The curves are measured at the places which correspond to the times of the four observations, and the mean length of the four ordinates is, let us say, 2.52 cms. If 1 cm. answers to 10′, then 2.52 cms. represents 25′.2, and thus the value of the base line—i.e. the value which the declination would have if the curve came down to the base line—is for the month in question 16° 34′.6 less 25′.2 or 16° 9′.4. If now we wish to know the declination at any instant in this particular month all we have to do is to measure the corresponding ordinate and add its value, at the rate of 10′ per cm., to the base value 16° 9′.4 just found. Matters are a little more complicated in the case of the horizontal and vertical force magnetographs. Both instruments usually possess a sensible temperature coefficient, i.e. the position of the magnet is dependent to some extent on the temperature it happens to possess, and allowance has thus to be made for the difference from a standard temperature. In the case of the vertical force an “observed” value is derived by combining the observed value of the inclination with the simultaneous value of the horizontal force derived from the horizontal force magnetograph after the base value of the latter has been determined. In themselves the results of the absolute observations are of minor interest. Their main importance is that they provide the means of fixing the value of the base line in the curves. Unless they are made carefully and sufficiently often the information derivable from the curves suffers in accuracy, especially that relating to the secular change. It is from the curves that information is derived as to the regular diurnal variation and irregular changes. In some observatories it is customary to publish a complete record of the values of the magnetic elements at every hour for each day of the year. A useful and not unusual addition to this is a statement of the absolutely largest and smallest values of each element recorded during each day, with the precise times of their occurrence. On days of large disturbance even hourly readings give but a very imperfect idea of the phenomena, and it is customary at some observatories, e.g. Greenwich, to reproduce the more disturbed curves in the annual volume. In calculating the regular diurnal variation it is usual to consider each month separately. So far as is known at present, it is entirely or almost entirely a matter of accident at what precise hours specially high or low values of an element may present themselves during an individual highly disturbed day; whilst the range of the element on such a day may be 5, 10 or even 20 times as large as on the average undisturbed day of the month. It is thus customary when calculating diurnal inequalities to omit the days of largest disturbance, as their inclusion would introduce too large an element of uncertainty. Highly disturbed days are more than usually common in some years, and in some months of the year, thus their omission may produce effects other than that intended. Even on days of lesser disturbance difficulties present themselves. There may be to and fro movements of considerable amplitude occupying under an hour, and the hour may come exactly at the crest or at the very lowest part of the trough. Thus, if the reading represents in every case the ordinate at the precise hour a considerable element of chance may be introduced. If one is dealing with a mean from several hundred days such “accidents” can be trusted to practically neutralize one another, but this is much less fully the case when the period is as short as a month. To meet this difficulty it is customary at some observatories to derive hourly values from a freehand curve of continuous curvature, drawn so as to smooth out the apparently irregular movements. Instead of drawing a freehand curve it has been proposed to use a planimeter, and to accept as the hourly value of the ordinate the mean derived from a consideration of the area included between the curve, the base line and ordinates at the thirty minutes before and after each hour.
§ 4. Partly on account of the uncertainties due to disturbances, and partly with a view to economy of labour, it has been the practice at some observatories to derive diurnal inequalities from a comparatively small number of undisturbed or quiet days. Beginning with 1890, five days a month were selected at Greenwich by the astronomer royal as conspicuously quiet. In the selection regard was paid to the desirability that the arithmetic mean of the five dates should answer to near the middle of the month. In some of the other English observatories the routine measurement of the curves was limited to these selected quiet days. At Greenwich itself diurnal inequalities were derived regularly from the quiet days alone and also from all the days of the month, excluding those of large disturbance. If a quiet day differed from an ordinary day only in that the diurnal variation in the latter was partly obscured by irregular disturbances, then supposing enough days taken to smooth out irregularities, one would get the same diurnal inequality from ordinary and from quiet days. It was found, however, that this was hardly ever the case (see §§ 29 and 30). The quiet day scheme thus failed to secure exactly what was originally aimed at; on the other hand, it led to the discovery of a number of interesting results calculated to throw valuable sidelights on the phenomena of terrestrial magnetism.