Fig. 8.Fig. 8.
From these statements, you will acquire some faint idea of the extreme difficulty of making perfect astronomical instruments, especially where they are intended to measure such minute angles as one second. Indeed, the art of constructing astronomical instruments is one which requires such refined mechanical genius,—so superior a mind to devise, and so delicate a hand to execute,—that the most celebrated instrument-makers take rank with the most distinguished astronomers; supplying, as they do, the means by which only the latter are enabled to make these great discoveries. Astronomers have sometimes made their own telescopes; but they have seldom, if ever, possessed the refined manual skill which is requisite for graduating delicate instruments.
Thesextantis also one of the most valuable instruments for taking celestial arcs, or the distance between any two points on the celestial sphere, being applicable to a much greater number of purposes than the instruments already described. It is particularly valuable for measuring celestial arcs at sea, because it is not, like most astronomical instruments, affected by the motion of the ship. The principle of the sextant may be briefly described, as follows: it gives the angular distance between any two bodies on the celestial sphere, by reflecting the image of one of the bodies so as to coincide with the other body, as seen directly. The arc through which the reflector is turned, to bring the reflected body to coincide with the other body, becomes a measure of the angular distance between them. By keeping this principle in view, you will be able to understand the use of the several parts of the instrument, as they are exhibited in the diagram, Fig. 9, page 58.
It is, you observe, of a triangular shape, and it is made strong and firm by metallic cross-bars. It has two reflectors, I and H, called, respectively, the index glass and the horizon glass, both of which are firmly fixed perpendicular to the plane of the instrument. The index glass is attached to the movable arm, ID, and turns as this is moved along the graduated limb, EF. This arm also carries avernier, at D, a contrivance which, like the micrometer, enables us to take off minute parts of the spaces into which the limb is divided. The horizon glass, H, consists of two parts; the upper part being transparent or open, so that the eye, lookingthrough the telescope, T, can see through it a distant body, as a star at S, while the lower part is a reflector.
Fig. 9.Fig. 9.
Suppose it were required to measure the angular distance between the moon and a certain star,—the moon being at M, and the star at S. The instrument is held firmly in the hand, so that the eye, looking through the telescope, sees the star, S, through the transparent part of the horizon glass. Then the movable arm, ID, is moved from F towards E, until the image of M is reflected down to S, when the number of degrees and parts of a degree reckoned on the limb, from F to the index at D, will show the angular distance between the two bodies.
"From old Eternity's mysterious orbWas Time cut off, and cast beneath the skies."—Young.
"From old Eternity's mysterious orbWas Time cut off, and cast beneath the skies."—Young.
Havinghitherto been conversant only with the many fine and sentimental things which the poets have sung respecting Old Time, perhaps you will find some difficulty in bringing down your mind to the calmer consideration of what time really is, and according to what different standards it is measured for different purposes. You will not, however, I think, find the subject even in our matter-of-fact and unpoetical way of treating it, altogether uninteresting. What, then, is time?Time is a measured portion of indefinite duration.It consists of equal portions cut off from eternity, as a line on the surface of the earth is separated from its contiguous portions that constitute a great circle of the sphere, by applying to it a two-foot scale; or as a few yards of cloth are measured off from a piece of unknown or indefinite extent.
Any thing, or any event which takes place at equal intervals, may become a measure of time. Thus, the pulsations of the wrist, the flowing of a given quantity of sand from one vessel to another, as in the hourglass, the beating of a pendulum, and the revolution of a star, have been severally employed as measures of time. But the great standard of time is the period of the revolution of the earth on its axis, which, by the most exact observations, is found to be always the same. I have anticipated a little of this subject, in giving an account of the transit instrument and clock, but I propose, in this letter, to enter into it more at large.
The time of the earth's revolution on its axis, as already explained, is called a sidereal day, and is determined by the revolution of a star in the heavens. Thisinterval is divided into twenty-foursiderealhours. Observations taken on numerous stars, in different ages of the world, show that they all perform their diurnal revolution in the same time, and that their motion, during any part of the revolution, is always uniform. Here, then, we have an exact measure of time, probably more exact than any thing which can be devised by art.Solar timeis reckoned by the apparent revolution of the sun from the meridian round to the meridian again. Were the sun stationary in the heavens, like a fixed star, the time of its apparent revolution would be equal to the revolution of the earth on its axis, and the solar and the sidereal days would be equal. But, since the sun passes from west to east, through three hundred and sixty degrees, in three hundred and sixty-five and one fourth days, it moves eastward nearly one degree a day. While, therefore, the earth is turning round on its axis, the sun is moving in the same direction, so that, when we have come round under the same celestial meridian from which we started, we do not find the sun there, but he has moved eastward nearly a degree, and the earth must perform so much more than one complete revolution, before we come under the sun again. Now, since we move, in the diurnal revolution, fifteen degrees in sixty minutes, we must pass over one degree in four minutes. It takes, therefore, four minutes for us tocatch upwith the sun, after we have made one complete revolution. Hence the solar day is about four minutes longer than the sidereal; and if we were to reckon the sidereal day twenty-four hours, we should reckon the solar day twenty-four hours four minutes. To suit the purposes of society at large, however, it is found more convenient to reckon the solar days twenty-four hours, and throw the fraction into the sidereal day. Then,
24h. 4m. : 24h. :: 24h. : 23h. 56m. 4s.
That is, when we reduce twenty-four hours and four minutes to twenty-four hours, the same proportion will require that we reduce the sidereal day from twenty-four hours to twenty-three hours fifty-six minutes four seconds; or, in other words, a sidereal day is such a part of a solar day. The solar days, however, do not always differ from the sidereal by precisely the same fraction, since they are not constantly of the same length. Time, as measured by the sun, is calledapparent time, and a clock so regulated as always to keep exactly with the sun, is said to keep apparent time.Mean timeis time reckoned by theaveragelength of all the solar days throughout the year. This is the period which constitutes thecivilday of twenty-four hours, beginning when the sun is on the lower meridian, namely, at twelve o'clock at night, and counted by twelve hours from the lower to the upper meridian, and from the upper to the lower. Theastronomicalday is the apparent solar day counted through the whole twenty-four hours, (instead of by periods of twelve hours each, as in the civil day,) and begins at noon. Thus it is now the tenth of June, at nine o'clock, A.M., according to civil time; but we have not yet reached the tenth of June by astronomical time, nor shall we, until noon to-day; consequently, it is now June ninth, twenty-first hour of astronomical time. Astronomers, since so many of their observations are taken on the meridian, are always supposed to look towards the south. Geographers, having formerly been conversant only with the northern hemisphere, are always understood to be looking towards the north. Hence, left and right, when applied to the astronomer, mean east and west, respectively; but to the geographer the right is east, and the left, west.
Clocks are usually regulated so as to indicate mean solar time; yet, as this is an artificial period not marked off, like the sidereal day, by any natural event, it is necessary to know how much is to be added to, or subtracted from, the apparent solar time, in order to give the corresponding mean time. The interval, by which apparent time differs from mean time, is called theequation of time. If one clock is so constructed as to keep exactly with the sun, going faster or slower, according as the lengths of the solar days vary, and another clockis regulated to mean time, then the difference of the two clocks, at any period, would be the equation of time for that moment. If the apparent clock werefasterthan the mean, then the equation of time must be subtracted; but if the apparent clock were slower than the mean, then the equation of time must be added, to give the mean time. The two clocks would differ most about the third of November, when the apparent time is sixteen and one fourth minutes greater than the mean. But since apparent time is sometimes greater and sometimes less than mean time, the two must obviously be sometimes equal to each other. This is, in fact, the case four times a year, namely, April fifteenth, June fifteenth, September first, and December twenty-fourth.
Astronomical clocks are made of the best workmanship, with every advantage that can promote their regularity. Although they are brought to an astonishing degree of accuracy, yet they are not as regular in their movements as the stars are, and their accuracy requires to be frequently tested. The transit instrument itself, when once accurately placed in the meridian, affords the means of testing the correctness of the clock, since one revolution of a star, from the meridian to the meridian again, ought to correspond exactly to twenty-four hours by the clock, and to continue the same, from day to day; and the right ascensions of various stars, as they cross the meridian, ought to be such by the clock, as they are given in the tables, where they are stated according to the accurate determinations of astronomers. Or, by taking the difference of any two stars, on successive days, it will be seen whether the going of the clock is uniform for that part of the day; and by taking the right ascensions of different pairs of stars, we may learn the rate of the clock at various parts of the day. We thus learn, not only whether the clock accurately measures the length of the sidereal day, but also whether it goes uniformly from hour to hour.
Although astronomical clocks have been brought to a great degree of perfection, so as hardly to vary a second for many months, yet none are absolutely perfect, and most are so far from it, as to require to be corrected by means of the transit instrument, every few days. Indeed, for the nicest observations, it is usual not to attempt to bring the clock to a state of absolute correctness, but, after bringing it as near to such a state as can conveniently be done, to ascertain how much it gains or loses in a day; that is, to ascertain therateof its going, and to make allowance accordingly.
Having considered the manner in which the smaller divisions of time are measured, let us now take a hasty glance at the larger periods which compose the calendar.
As adayis the period of the revolution of the earth on its axis, so ayearis the period of the revolution of the earth around the sun. This time, which constitutes theastronomical year, has been ascertained with great exactness, and found to be three hundred and sixty-five days five hours forty-eight minutes and fifty-one seconds. The most ancient nations determined the number of days in the year by means of thestylus, a perpendicular rod which casts its shadow on a smooth plane bearing a meridian line. The time when the shadow was shortest, would indicate the day of the Summer solstice; and the number of days which elapsed, until the shadow returned to the same length again, would show the number of days in the year. This was found to be three hundred and sixty-five whole days, and accordingly, this period was adopted for the civil year. Such a difference, however, between the civil and astronomical years, at length threw all dates into confusion. For if, at first, the Summer solstice happened on the twenty-first of June, at the end of four years, the sun would not have reached the solstice until the twenty-second of June; that is, it would have been behind its time. At the end of the next four years, the solstice would fall on the twenty-third; and in process of time, it would fall successively on every day of the year. The same would be true of any other fixed date.
Julius Cæsar, who was distinguished alike for the variety and extent of his knowledge, and his skill in arms, first attempted to make the calendar conform to the motions of the sun.
"Amidst the hurry of tumultuous war,The stars, the gods, the heavens, were still his care."
"Amidst the hurry of tumultuous war,The stars, the gods, the heavens, were still his care."
Aided by Sosigenes, an Egyptian astronomer, he made the first correction of the calendar, by introducing an additional day every fourth year, making February to consist of twenty-nine instead of twenty-eight days, and of course the whole year to consist of three hundred and sixty-six days. This fourth year was denominatedBissextile, because the sixth day before the Kalends of March was reckoned twice. It is also called Leap Year.
The Julian year was introduced into all the civilized nations that submitted to the Roman power, and continued in general use until the year 1582. But the true correction was not six hours, but five hours forty-nine minutes; hence the addition was too great by eleven minutes. This small fraction would amount in one hundred years to three fourths of a day, and in one thousand years to more than seven days. From the year 325 to the year 1582, it had, in fact, amounted to more than ten days; for it was known that, in 325, the vernal equinox fell on the twenty-first of March, whereas, in 1582, it fell on the eleventh. It was ordered by the Council of Nice, a celebrated ecclesiastical council, held in the year 325, that Easter should be celebrated upon the first Sunday after the first full moon, next following the vernal equinox; and as certain other festivals of the Romish Church were appointed at particular seasons of the year, confusion would result from such a want of constancy between any fixed date and a particular season of the year. Suppose, for example, a festival accompanied by numerous religious ceremonies, was decreed by the Church to be held at the time when the sun crossed the equator in the Spring, (an event hailed with great joy, as the harbinger of the return of Summer,) and that, in the year 325, Marchtwenty-first was designated as the time for holding the festival, since, at that period, it was on the twenty-first of March when the sun reached the equinox; the next year, the sun would reach the equinox a little sooner than the twenty-first of March, only eleven minutes, indeed, but still amounting in twelve hundred years to ten days; that is, in 1582, the sun reached the equinox on the eleventh of March. If, therefore, they should continue to observe the twenty-first as a religious festival in honor of this event, they would commit the absurdity of celebrating it ten days after it had passed by. Pope Gregory the Thirteenth, who was then at the head of the Roman See, was a man of science, and undertook to reform the calendar, so that fixed dates would always correspond to the same seasons of the year. He first decreed, that the year should be brought forward ten days, by reckoning the fifth of October the fifteenth; and, in order to prevent the calendar from falling into confusion afterwards, he prescribed the following rule:Every year whose number is not divisible by four, without a remainder, consists of three hundred and sixty-five days; every year which is so divisible, but is not divisible by one hundred, of three hundred and sixty-six; every year divisible by one hundred, but not by four hundred, again, of three hundred and sixty-five; and every year divisible by four hundred, of three hundred and sixty-six.
Thus the year 1838, not being divisible by four, contains three hundred and sixty-five days, while 1836 and 1840 are leap years. Yet, to make every fourth year consist of three hundred and sixty-six days would increase it too much, by about three fourths of a day in a century; therefore every hundredth year has only three hundred and sixty-five days. Thus 1800, although divisible by four, was not a leap year, but a common year. But we have allowed awholeday in a hundred years, whereas we ought to have allowed onlythree fourthsof a day. Hence, in four hundred years, we should allow a day too much, and therefore, we let thefour hundredth remain a leap year. This rule involves an error of less than a day in four thousand two hundred and thirty-seven years.
The Pope, who, you will recollect, at that age assumed authority over all secular princes, issued his decree to the reigning sovereigns of Christendom, commanding the observance of the calendar as reformed by him. The decree met with great opposition among the Protestant States, as they recognised in it a new exercise of ecclesiastical tyranny; and some of them, when they received it, made it expressly understood, that their acquiescence should not be construed as a submission to the Papal authority.
In 1752, the Gregorian year, orNew Style, was established in Great Britain by act of Parliament; and the dates of all deeds, and other legal papers, were to be made according to it. As above a century had then passed since the first introduction of the new style, eleven days were suppressed, the third of September being called the fourteenth. By the same act, the beginning of the year was changed from March twenty-fifth to January first. A few persons born previously to 1752 have come down to our day, and we frequently see inscriptions on tombstones of those whose time of birth is recorded in old style. In order to make this correspond to our present mode of reckoning, we must add eleven days to the date. Thus the same event would be June twelfth of old style, or June twenty-third of new style; and if an event occurred between January first and March twenty-fifth, the date of the year would be advanced one, since February 1st, 1740, O.S. would be February 1st, 1741, N.S. Thus, General Washington was born February 11th, 1731, O.S., or February 22d, 1732, N.S. If we inquire how any present event may be made to correspond in date to the old style, we must subtract twelve days, and put the year back one, if the event lies between January first and March twenty-fifth. Thus, June tenth, N.S. corresponds to May twenty-ninth, O.S.; and March 20th, 1840, toMarch 8th, 1839. France, being a Roman Catholic country, adopted the new style soon after it was decreed by the Pope; but Protestant countries, as we have seen, were much slower in adopting it; and Russia, and the Greek Church generally, still adhere to the old style. In order, therefore, to make the Russian dates correspond to ours, we must add to them twelve days.
It may seem to you very remarkable, that so much pains should have been bestowed upon this subject; but without a correct and uniform standard of time, the dates of deeds, commissions, and all legal papers; of fasts and festivals, appointed by ecclesiastical authority; the returns of seasons, and the records of history,—must all fall into inextricable confusion. To change the observance of certain religious feasts, which have been long fixed to particular days, is looked upon as an impious innovation; and though the times of the events, upon which these ceremonies depend, are utterly unknown, it is still insisted upon by certain classes in England, that the Glastenbury thorn blooms on Christmas day.
Although the ancient Grecian calendar was extremely defective, yet the common people were entirely averse to its reformation. Their superstitious adherence to these errors was satirized by Aristophanes, in his comedy of the Clouds. An actor, who had just come from Athens, recounts that he met with Diana, or the moon, and found her extremely incensed, that they did not regulate her course better. She complained, that the order of Nature was changed, and every thing turned topsyturvy. The gods no longer knew what belonged to them; but, after paying their visits on certain feast-days, and expecting to meet with good cheer, as usual, they were under the disagreeable necessity of returning back to heaven without their suppers.
Among the Greeks, and other ancient nations, the length of the year was generally regulated by the course of the moon. This planet, on account of the different appearances which she exhibits at her full, change, andquarters, was considered by them as best adapted of any of the celestial bodies for this purpose. As one lunation, or revolution of the moon around the earth, was found to be completed in about twenty-nine and one half days, and twelve of these periods being supposed equal to one revolution of the sun, their months were made to consist of twenty-nine and thirty days alternately, and their year of three hundred and fifty-four days. But this disagreed with the annual revolution of the sun, which must evidently govern the seasons of the year, more than eleven days. The irregularities, which such a mode of reckoning would occasion, must have been too obvious not to have been observed. For, supposing it to have been settled, at any particular time, that the beginning of the year should be in the Spring; in about sixteen years afterwards, the beginning would have been in Autumn; and in thirty-three or thirty-four years, it would have gone backwards through all the seasons, to Spring again. This defect they attempted to rectify, by introducing a number of days, at certain times, into the calendar, as occasion required, and putting the beginning of the year forwards, in order to make it agree with the course of the sun. But as these additions, orintercalations, as they were called, were generally consigned to the care of the priests, who, from motives of interest or superstition, frequently omitted them, the year was made long or short at pleasure.
Theweekis another division of time, of the highest antiquity, which, in almost all countries, has been made to consist of seven days; a period supposed by some to have been traditionally derived from the creation of the world; while others imagine it to have been regulated by the phases of the moon. The names, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday, are obviously derived from Saturn, the Sun, and the Moon; while Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, are the days of Tuisco, Woden, Thor, and Friga, which are Saxon names for Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, and Venus.[4]
The common year begins and ends on the same day of the week; but leap year ends one day later than it began. Fifty-two weeks contain three hundred and sixty-four days; if, therefore, the year begins on Tuesday, for example, we should complete fifty-two weeks on Monday, leaving one day, (Tuesday,) to complete the year, and the following year would begin on Wednesday. Hence, any day of the month is one day later in the week, than the corresponding day of the preceding year. Thus, if the sixteenth of November, 1838, falls on Friday, the sixteenth of November, 1837, fell on Thursday, and will fall, in 1839, on Saturday. But if leap year begins on Sunday, it ends on Monday, and the following year begins on Tuesday; while any given day of the month is two days later in the week than the corresponding date of the preceding year.
"He took the golden compasses, preparedIn God's eternal store, to circumscribeThis universe, and all created things;One foot he centred, and the other turnedRound through the vast profundity obscure,
"He took the golden compasses, preparedIn God's eternal store, to circumscribeThis universe, and all created things;One foot he centred, and the other turnedRound through the vast profundity obscure,
Inthe earliest ages, the earth was regarded as one continued plane; but, at a comparatively remote period, as five hundred years before the Christian era, astronomers began to entertain the opinion that the earth is round. We are able now to adduce various arguments which severally prove this truth. First, when a ship is coming in from sea, we first observe only the very highest parts of the ship, while the lower portions come successively into view. Were the earth a continued plane, the lower parts of the ship would be visible as soon as the higher, as is evident from Fig. 10, page 70.
Fig. 10.Fig. 10.
Since light comes to the eye in straight lines, by which objects become visible, it is evident, that no reason exists why the parts of the ship near the water should not be seen as soon as the upper parts. But if the earth be a sphere, then the line of sight would pass above the deck of the ship, as is represented in Fig. 11; and as the ship drew nearer to land, the lower parts would successively rise above this line and come into view exactly in the manner known to observation. Secondly,in a lunar eclipse, which is occasioned by the moon's passing through the earth's shadow, the figure of the shadow is seen to be spherical, which could not be the case unless the earth itself were round. Thirdly, navigators, by steering continually in one direction, as east or west, have in fact come round to the point from which they started, and thus confirmed the fact of the earth's rotundity beyond all question. One may also reach a given place on the earth, by taking directly opposite courses. Thus, he may reach Canton in China, by a westerly route around Cape Horn, or by an easterly route around the Cape of Good Hope. All these arguments severally prove that the earth is round.
Fig. 11.Fig. 11.
But I propose, in this Letter, to give you some account of the unwearied labors which have been performed to ascertain theexactfigure of the earth; for although the earth is properly described in general language as round, yet it is not an exact sphere. Were it so, all its diameters would be equal; but it is known that a diameter drawn through the equator exceeds one drawn from pole to pole, giving to the earth the form of aspheroid,—a figure resembling an orange, where the ends are flattened a little and the central parts are swelled out.
Although it would be a matter of very rational curiosity, to investigate the precise shape of the planet on which Heaven has fixed our abode, yet the immense pains which has been bestowed on this subject has not all arisen from mere curiosity. No accurate measurements can be taken of the distances and magnitudes of the heavenly bodies, nor any exact determinations made of their motions, without a knowledge of the exact figure of the earth; and hence is derived a powerful motive for ascertaining this element with all possible precision.
The first satisfactory evidence that was obtained of the exact figure of the earth was derived from reasoning on the effects of the earth'scentrifugal force, occasioned by its rapid revolution on its own axis. When water is whirled in a pail, we see it recede from thecentre and accumulate upon the sides of the vessel; and when a millstone is whirled rapidly, since the portions of the stone furthest from the centre revolve much more rapidly than those near to it, their greater tendency to recede sometimes makes them fly off with a violent explosion. A case, which comes still nearer to that of the earth, is exhibited by a mass of clay revolving on a potter's wheel, as seen in the process of making earthen vessels. The mass swells out in the middle, in consequence of the centrifugal force exerted upon it by a rapid motion. Now, in the diurnal revolution, the equatorial parts of the earth move at the rate of about one thousand miles per hour, while the poles do not move at all; and since, as we take points at successive distances from the equator towards the pole, the rate at which these points move grows constantly less and less; and since, in revolving bodies, the centrifugal force is proportioned to the velocity, consequently, those parts which move with the greatest rapidity will be more affected by this force than those which move more slowly. Hence, the equatorial regions must be higher from the centre than the polar regions; for, were not this the case, the waters on the surface of the earth would be thrown towards the equator, and be piled up there, just as water is accumulated on the sides of a pail when made to revolve rapidly.
Huyghens, an eminent astronomer of Holland, who investigated the laws of centrifugal forces, was the first to infer that such must be the actual shape of the earth; but to Sir Isaac Newton we owe the full developement of this doctrine. By combining the reasoning derived from the known laws of the centrifugal force with arguments derived from the principles of universal gravitation, he concluded that the distance through the earth, in the direction of the equator, is greater than that in the direction of the poles. He estimated the difference to be about thirty-four miles.
But it was soon afterwards determined by the astronomers of France, to ascertain the figure of the earth byactual measurements, specially instituted for that purpose. Let us see how this could be effected. If we set out at the equator and travel towards the pole, it is easy to see when we have advanced one degree of latitude, for this will be indicated by the rising of the north star, which appears in the horizon when the spectator stands on the equator, but rises in the same proportion as he recedes from the equator, until, on reaching the pole, the north star would be seen directly over head. Now, were the earth a perfect sphere, the meridian of the earth would be a perfect circle, and the distance between any two places, differing one degree in latitude, would be exactly equal to the distance between any other two places, differing in latitude to the same amount. But if the earth be a spheroid, flattened at the poles, then a line encompassing the earth from north to south, constituting the terrestrial meridian, would not be a perfect circle, but an ellipse or oval, having its longer diameter through the equator, and its shorter through the poles. The part of this curve included between two radii, drawn from the centre of the earth to the celestial meridian, at angles one degree asunder, would be greater in the polar than in the equatorial region; that is, the degrees of the meridian would lengthen towards the poles.
The French astronomers, therefore, undertook to ascertain by actual measurements of arcs of the meridian, in different latitudes, whether the degrees of the meridian are of uniform length, or, if not, in what manner they differ from each other. After several indecisive measurements of an arc of the meridian in France, it was determined to effect simultaneous measurements of arcs of the meridian near the equator, and as near as possible to the north pole, presuming that if degrees of the meridian, in different latitudes, are really of different lengths, they will differ most in points most distant from each other. Accordingly, in 1735, the French Academy, aided by the government, sent out two expeditions, one to Peru and the other to Lapland. Three distinguished mathematicians, Bouguer, La Condamine, and Godin, were despatched to the former place, and four others, Maupertius, Camus, Clairault, and Lemonier, were sent to the part of Swedish Lapland which lies at the head of the Gulf of Tornea, the northern arm of the Baltic. This commission completed its operations several years sooner than the other, which met with greater difficulties in the way of their enterprise. Still, the northern detachment had great obstacles to contend with, arising particularly from the extreme length and severity of their Winters. The measurements, however, were conducted with care and skill, and the result, when compared with that obtained for the length of a degree in France, plainly indicated, by its greater amount, a compression of the earth towards the poles.
Mean-while, Bouguer and his party were prosecuting a similar work in Peru, under extraordinary difficulties. These were caused, partly by the localities, and partly by the ill-will and indolence of the inhabitants. The place selected for their operations was in an elevated valley between two principal chains of the Andes. The lowest point of their arc was at an elevation of a mile and a half above the level of the sea; and, in some instances, the heights of two neighboring signals differed more than a mile. Encamped upon lofty mountains, they had to struggle against storms, cold, and privations of every description, while the invincible indifference of the Indians, they were forced to employ, was not to be shaken by the fear of punishment or the hope of reward. Yet, by patience and ingenuity, they overcame all obstacles, and executed with great accuracy one of the most important operations, of this nature, ever undertaken. To accomplish this, however, took them nine years; of which, three were occupied in determining the latitudes alone.[5]
I have recited the foregoing facts, in order to give you some idea of the unwearied pains which astronomers have taken to ascertain the exact figure of the earth.You will find, indeed, that all their labors are characterized by the same love of accuracy. Years of toilsome watchings, and incredible labor of computation, have been undergone, for the sake of arriving only a few seconds nearer to the truth.
The length of a degree of the meridian, as measured in Peru, was less than that before determined in France, and of course less than that of Lapland; so that the spheroidal figure of the earth appeared now to be ascertained by actual measurement. Still, these measures were too few in number, and covered too small a portion of the whole quadrant from the equator to the pole, to enable astronomers to ascertain the exact law of curvature of the meridian, and therefore similar measurements have since been prosecuted with great zeal by different nations, particularly by the French and English. In 1764, two English mathematicians of great eminence, Mason and Dixon, undertook the measurement of an arc in Pennsylvania, extending more than one hundred miles.
Fig. 12.Fig. 12.
These operations are carried on by what is called a system oftriangulation. Without some knowledge of trigonometry, you will not be able fully to understand this process; but, as it is in its nature somewhat curious, and is applied to various other geographical measurements, as well as to the determination of arcs of the meridian, I am desirous that you should understand its general principles. Let us reflect, then, that it must be a matter of the greatest difficulty, to execute with exactness the measurement of a line of any great length in one continued direction on the earth's surface. Even if we select a level and open country, more or less inequalities of surface will occur; rivers must be crossed, morasses must be traversed, thickets must be penetrated, and innumerable other obstacles must be surmounted; and finally, every time we apply an artificial measure, as a rod, for example, we obtain a result not absolutely perfect. Each error may indeed be very small, but small errors, often repeated, may produce aformidable aggregate. Now, one unacquainted with trigonometry can easily understand the fact, that, when we know certain parts of a triangle, we can find the other parts by calculation; as, in the rule of three in arithmetic, we can obtain the fourth term of a proportion, from having the first three terms given. Thus, in the triangle A B C, Fig. 12, if we know the side A B, and the angles at A and B, we can find by computation, the other sides, A C and B C, and the remaining angle at C. Suppose, then, that in measuring an arc of the meridian through any country, the line were to pass directly through A B, but the ground was so obstructed between A and B, that we could not possibly carry our measurement through it. We might then measure another line, as A C, which was accessible, and with a compass take the bearing of B from the points A and C, by which means we should learn the value of the angles at A and C. From these data we might calculate, by the rules of trigonometry, the exact length of the line A B. Perhaps the ground might be so situated, that we could not reach the point B, by any route; still, if it could be seen from A and C, it would be all we should want. Thus, in conducting a trigonometrical survey of any country, conspicuous signals are placed on elevated points, and the bearings of these are taken from the extremities of a known line, called the base, and thus the relative situation of various places is accurately determined. Were we to undertake to run an exact north and south line through any country, as New England, we should select, near one extremity, a spot of ground favorable for actual measurement, as a level, unobstructed plain; we should provide a measure whose length in feet and inches was determined with the greatest possible precision, and should apply it with the utmost care. We should thus obtain abase line. From the extremities of this line, we should take (with some appropriate instrument) thebearing of some signal at a greater or less distance, and thus we should obtain one side and two angles of a triangle, from which we could find, by the rules of trigonometry, either of the unknown sides. Taking this as a new base, we might take the bearing of another signal, still further on our way, and thus proceed to run the required north and south line, without actually measuring any thing more than the first, or base line.
Fig. 13.Fig. 13.
Thus, in Fig. 13, we wish to measure the distance between the two points A and O, which are both on the same meridian, as is known by their having the same longitude; but, on account of various obstacles, it would be found very inconvenient to measure this line directly, with a rod or chain, and even if we could do it, we could not by this method obtain nearly so accurate a result, as we could by a series of triangles, where, after the base line was measured, we should have nothing else to measure except angles, which can be determined, by observation, to a greater degree of exactness, than lines. We therefore, in the first place, measure the base line, A B, with the utmost precision. Then, taking the bearing of some signal at C from A and B, we obtain the means of calculating the side B C, as has been already explained. Taking B C as a new base, we proceed, in like manner, to determine successively the sides C D, D E, and E F, and also A C, and C E. Although A C is not in the direction of the meridian, but considerably to the east of it, yet it is easy to find the corresponding distance on the meridian, A M; and in the same manner we can find the portions of the meridian M N and N O, corresponding respectively to C E andE F. Adding these several parts of the meridian together, we obtain the length of the arc from A to O, in miles; and by observations on the north star, at each extremity of the arc, namely, at A and at O, we could determine the difference of latitude between these two points. Suppose, for example, that the distance between A and O is exactly five degrees, and that the length of the intervening line is three hundred and forty-seven miles; then, dividing the latter by the former number, we find the length of a degree to be sixty-nine miles and four tenths. To take, however, a few of the results actually obtained, they are as follows:
This comparison shows, that the length of a degree gradually increases, as we proceed from the equator towards the pole. Combining the results of various estimates, the dimensions of the terrestrial spheroid are found to be as follows:
Equatorial diameter,7925.648 miles.Polar diameter,7899.170 "Average diameter,7912.409 "
The difference between the greatest and the least is about twenty-six and one half miles, which is about one two hundred and ninety-ninth part of the greatest. This fraction is denominated theellipticityof the earth,—being the excess of the equatorial over the polar diameter.
The operations, undertaken for the purpose of determining the figure of the earth, have been conducted with the most refined exactness. At any stage of the process, the length of the last side, as obtained by calculation, may be actually measured in the same manneras the base from which the series of triangles commenced. When thus measured, it is called thebase of verification. In some surveys, the base of verification, when taken at a distance of four hundred miles from the starting point, has not differed more than one foot from the same line, as determined by calculation.
Another method of arriving at the exact figure of the earth is, by observations with thependulum. If a pendulum, like that of a clock, be suspended, and the number of its vibrations per hour be counted, they will be found to be different in different latitudes. A pendulum that vibrates thirty-six hundred times per hour, at the equator, will vibrate thirty-six hundred and five and two thirds times, at London, and a still greater number of times nearer the north pole. Now, the vibrations of the pendulum are produced by the force of gravity. Hence their comparative number at different places is a measure of the relative forces of gravity at those places. But when we know the relative forces of gravity at different places, we know their relative distances from the centre of the earth; because the nearer a place is to the centre of the earth, the greater is the force of gravity. Suppose, for example, we should count the number of vibrations of a pendulum at the equator, and then carry it to the north pole, and count the number of vibrations made there in the same time,—we should be able, from these two observations, to estimate the relative forces of gravity at these two points; and, having the relative forces of gravity, we can thence deduce their relative distances from the centre of the earth, and thus obtain the polar and equatorial diameters. Observations of this kind have been taken with the greatest accuracy, in many places on the surface of the earth, at various distances from each other, and they lead to the same conclusions respecting the figure of the earth, as those derived from measuring arcs of the meridian. It is pleasing thus to see a great truth, and one apparently beyond the pale of human investigation, reached by two routes entirely independent of each other. Nor, indeed, are these the only proofs which have been discovered of the spheroidal figure of the earth. In consequence of the accumulation of matter above the equatorial regions of the earth, a body weighs less there than towards the poles, being further removed from the centre of the earth. The same accumulation of matter, by the force of attraction which it exerts, causes slight inequalities in the motions of the moon; and since the amount of these becomes a measure of the force which produces them, astronomers are able, from these inequalities, to calculate the exact quantity of the matter thus accumulated, and hence to determine the figure of the earth. The result is not essentially different from that obtained by the other methods. Finally, the shape of the earth's shadow is altered, by its spheroidal figure,—a circumstance which affects the time and duration of a lunar eclipse. All these different and independent phenomena afford a pleasing example of the harmony of truth. The known effects of the centrifugal force upon a body revolving on its axis, like the earth, lead us to infer that the earth is of a spheroidal figure; but if this be the fact, the pendulum ought to vibrate faster near the pole than at the equator, because it would there be nearer the centre of the earth. On trial, such is found to be the case. If, again, there be such an accumulation of matter about the equatorial regions, its effects ought to be visible in the motions of the moon, which it would influence by its gravity; and there, also, its effects are traced. At length, we apply our measures to the surface of the earth itself, and find the same fact, which had thus been searched out among the hidden things of Nature, here palpably exhibited before our eyes. Finally, on estimating from these different sources, what the exact amount of the compression at the poles must be, all bring out nearly one and the same result. This truth, so harmonious in itself, takes along with it, and establishes, a thousand other truths on which it rests.