CHAPTER VII.Special Methods of Induction applicable to Quantity.AphorismXLIII.There are special Methods of Induction applicable to Quantity; of which the principal are, theMethod of Curves,theMethod of Means,theMethod of Least Squares,and theMethod of Residues.AphorismXLIV.The Method of Curvesconsists in drawing a curve of which the observed quantities are the Ordinates, the quantity on which the change of these quantities depends being the Abscissa. The efficacy of this Method depends upon the faculty which the eye possesses, of readily detecting regularity and irregularity in forms. The Method may be used to detect the Laws which the observed quantities follow: and also, when the Observations are inexact, it may be used to correct these Observations, so as to obtain data more true than the observed facts themselves.AphorismXLV.The Method of Meansgets rid of irregularities by taking the arithmetical mean of a great number of observed quantities. Its efficacy depends upon this; that in cases in which observed quantities are affected by other inequalities, besides that of which we wish to determine the law, the excessesaboveand defectsbelowthe quantities which the law in question would produce, will, in a collection ofmanyobservations, balanceeach other.203AphorismXLVI.The Method of Least Squaresis a Method of Means, in which the mean is taken according to the condition, that the sum of the squares of the errours of observation shall be the least possible which the law of the facts allows. It appears, by the Doctrine of Chances, that this is themost probablemean.AphorismXLVII.The Method of Residuesconsists in subtracting, from the quantities given by Observation, the quantity given by any Law already discovered; and then examining the remainder, orResidue,in order to discover the leading Law which it follows. When this second Law has been discovered, the quantity given by it may be subtracted from the first Residue; thus giving aSecond Residue,which may be examined in the same manner; and so on. The efficacy of this method depends principally upon the circumstance of the Laws of variation being successively smaller and smaller in amount (or at least in their mean effect); so that the ulterior undiscovered Laws do not prevent the Law in question from beingprominentin the observations.AphorismXLVIII.The Method of Means and the Method of Least Squares cannot be applied without ourknowing the Argumentsof the Inequalities which we seek. The Method of Curves and the Method of Residues, when the Arguments of the principal Inequalities are known, often make it easy to find the others.INcases where the phenomena admit of numerical measurement and expression, certain mathematical methods may be employed to facilitate and give accuracy to the determination of the formula by which the observations are connected into laws. Among the most usual and important of these Methods are the following:—204I. The Method of Curves.II.The Method of Means.III.The Method of Least Squares.IV.The Method of Residues.Sect. I.—The Method of Curves.1.TheMethod of Curves proceeds upon this basis; that when one quantity undergoes a series of changes depending on the progress of another quantity, (as, for instance, the Deviation of the Moon from her equable place depends upon the progress of Time,) this dependence may be expressed by means of acurve. In the language of mathematicians, the variable quantity, whose changes we would consider, is made theordinateof the curve, and the quantity on which the changes depend is made theabscissa. In this manner, the curve will exhibit in its form a series of undulations, rising and falling so as to correspond with the alternate Increase and Diminution of the quantity represented, at intervals of Space which correspond to the intervals of Time, or other quantity by which the changes are regulated. Thus, to take another example, if we set up, at equal intervals, a series of ordinates representing the Height of all the successive High Waters brought by the tides at a given place, for a year, the curve which connects the summits of all these ordinates will exhibit a series of undulations, ascending and descending once in about each Fortnight; since, in that interval, we have, in succession, the high spring tides and the low neap tides. The curve thus drawn offers to the eye a picture of the order and magnitude of the changes to which the quantity under contemplation, (the height of high water,) is subject.2. Now the peculiar facility and efficacy of the Method of Curves depends upon this circumstance;—that order and regularity are more readily and clearly recognized, when thus exhibited to the eye in a picture, than they are when presented to the mind in any other manner. To detect the relations of Number considered directly as Number, is not easy: and we might205contemplate for a long time a Table of recorded Numbers without perceiving the order of their increase and diminution, even if the law were moderately simple; as any one may satisfy himself by looking at a Tide Table. But if these Numbers are expressed by the magnitude ofLines, and if these Lines are arranged in regular order, the eye readily discovers the rule of their changes: it follows the curve which runs along their extremities, and takes note of the order in which its convexities and concavities succeed each other, if any order be readily discoverable. The separate observations are in this manner compared and generalized and reduced to rule by the eye alone. And the eye, so employed, detects relations of order and succession with a peculiar celerity and evidence. If, for example, we thus arrive as ordinates the prices of corn in each year for a series of years, we shall see the order, rapidity, and amount of the increase and decrease of price, far more clearly than in any other manner. And if there were any recurrence of increase and decrease at stated intervals of years, we should in this manner perceive it. The eye, constantly active and busy, and employed in making into shapes the hints and traces of form which it contemplates, runs along the curve thus offered to it; and as it travels backwards and forwards, is ever on the watch to detect some resemblance or contrast between one part and another. And these resemblances and contrasts, when discovered, are the images of Laws of Phenomena; which are made manifest at once by this artifice, although the mind could not easily catch the indications of their existence, if they were not thus reflected to her in the clear mirror of Space.Thus when we have a series of good Observations, and know the argument upon which their change of magnitude depends, the Method of Curves enables us to ascertain, almost at a glance, the law of the change; and by further attention, may be made to give us a formula with great accuracy. The Method enables us to perceive, among our observations, an order, which without the method, is concealed in obscurity and perplexity.2063. But the Method of Curves not only enables us to obtain laws of nature fromgoodObservations, but also, in a great degree, from observations which are veryimperfect. For the imperfection of observations may in part be corrected by this consideration;—that though they may appear irregular, the correct facts which they imperfectly represent, are really regular. And the Method of Curves enables us to remedy this apparent irregularity, at least in part. For when Observations thus imperfect are laid down as Ordinates, and their extremities connected by a line, we obtain, not a smooth and flowing curve, such as we should have if the observations contained only the rigorous results of regular laws; but a broken and irregular line, full of sudden and capricious twistings, and bearing on its face marks of irregularities dependent, not upon law, but upon chance. Yet these irregular and abrupt deviations in the curve are, in most cases, but small in extent, when compared with those bendings which denote the effects of regular law. And this circumstance is one of the great grounds of advantage in the Method of Curves. For when the observations thus laid down present to the eye such a broken and irregular line, we can still see, often with great ease and certainty, what twistings of the line are probably due to the irregular errours of observation; and can at once reject these, by drawing a more regular curve, cutting off all such small and irregular sinuosities, leaving some to the right and some to the left; and then proceeding as if this regular curve, and not the irregular one, expressed the observations. In this manner, we suppose the errours of observation to balance each other; some of our corrected measures being too great and others too small, but with no great preponderance either way. We draw our main regular curve, notthroughthe points given by our observations, butamongthem: drawing it, as has been said by one of the philosophers30who first systematically used this method, ‘with a bold but careful hand.’207The regular curve which we thus obtain, thus freed from the casual errours of observation, is that in which we endeavour to discover the laws of change and succession.30Sir J. Herschel,Ast. Soc. Trans.vol. v. p. 1.4. By this method, thus getting rid at once, in a great measure, of errours of observation, we obtain data which aremore true than theindividualfacts themselves. The philosopher’s business is to compare his hypotheses with facts, as we have often said. But if we make the comparison with separate special facts, we are liable to be perplexed or misled, to an unknown amount, by the errours of observation; which may cause the hypothetical and the observed result to agree, or to disagree, when otherwise they would not do so. If, however, we thus take thewhole mass of the facts, and remove the errours of actual observation31, by making the curve which expresses the supposed observation regular and smooth, we have the separate facts corrected by their general tendency. We are put in possession, as we have said, of something more true than any fact by itself is.31Ib.vol. v. p. 4.One of the most admirable examples of the use of this Method of Curves is found in Sir John Herschel’sInvestigation of the Orbits of Double Stars32. The author there shows how far inferior the direct observations of the angle of position are, to the observations corrected by a curve in the manner above stated. ‘This curve once drawn,’ he says, ‘must represent, it is evident, the law of variation of the angle of position, with the time, not only for instants intermediate between the dates of observations, but even at the moments of observation themselves, much better than the individualrawobservations can possibly (on an average) do. It is only requisite to try a case or two, to be satisfied that by substituting the curve for the points, we have made a nearer approach to nature, and in a great measure eliminated errours of observation.’ ‘In following the graphical process,’ he adds, ‘we have a conviction almost approaching to moral certainty that208we cannot be greatly misled.’ Again, having thus corrected the raw observations, he makes another use of the graphical method, by trying whether an ellipse can be drawn ‘if notthrough, at leastamongthe points, so as to approach tolerably near them all; and thus approaching to the orbit which is the subject of investigation.’32Ib.5. TheObstacleswhich principally impede the application of the Method of Curves are (I.) ourignorance of the argumentsof the changes, and (II.) thecomplication of several lawswith one another.(I.) If we do not know on what quantity those changes depend which we are studying, we may fail entirely in detecting the law of the changes, although we throw the observations into curves. For the trueargumentof the change should, in fact, be made theabscissaof the curve. If we were to express, by a series of ordinates, thehourof high water on successive days, we should not obtain, or should obtain very imperfectly, the law which these times follow; for the real argument of this change is not thesolar hour, but thehourat which themoonpasses the meridian. But if we are supposed to be aware thatthisis theargument, (which theory suggests and trial instantly confirms) we then do immediately obtain the primary Rules of the Time of High Water, by throwing a series of observations into a Curve, with the Hour of the Moon’s Transit for the abscissa.In like manner, when we have obtained the first great or Semi-mensual Inequality of the tides, if we endeavour to discover the laws of other Inequalities by means of curves, we must take from theory the suggestion that the Arguments of such inequalities will probably be theparallaxand thedeclinationof the moon. This suggestion again is confirmed by trial; but if we were supposed to be entirely ignorant of the dependence of the changes of the tide on the Distance and Declination of the moon, the curves would exhibit unintelligible and seemingly capricious changes. For by the effect of the Inequality arising from the Parallax, the convexities of the curves which belong to the209spring tides, are in some years made alternately greater and less all the year through; while in other years they are made all nearly equal. This difference does not betray its origin, till we refer it to the Parallax; and the same difficulty in proceeding would arise if we were ignorant that the moon’s Declination is one of the Arguments of tidal changes.In like manner, if we try to reduce to law any meteorological changes, those of the Height of the Barometer for instance, we find that we can make little progress in the investigation, precisely because we do not know the Argument on which these changes depend. That there is a certain regulardiurnalchange of small amount, we know; but when we have abstracted this Inequality, (of which the Argument is thetime of day,) we find far greater Changes left behind, from day to day and from hour to hour; and we express these in curves, but we cannot reduce them to Rule, because we cannot discover on what numerical quantity they depend. The assiduous study of barometrical observations, thrown into curves, may perhaps hereafter point out to us what are the relations of time and space by which these variations are determined; but in the mean time, this subject exemplifies to us our remark, that the method of curves is of comparatively small use, so long as we are in ignorance of the real Arguments of the Inequalities.6. (II.) In the next place, I remark that a difficulty is thrown in the way of the Method of Curves bythe Combination of several lawsone with another. It will readily be seen that such a cause will produce a complexity in the curves which exhibit the succession of facts. If, for example, we take the case of the Tides, the Height of high water increases and diminishes with the Approach of the sun to, and its Recess from, the syzygies of the moon. Again, this Height increases and diminishes as the moon’s Parallax increases and diminishes; and again, the Height diminishes when the Declination increases, andvice versa; and all these Arguments of change, the Distance from Syzygy, the Parallax, the Declination, complete their circuit and210return into themselves in different periods. Hence the curve which represents the Height of high water has not any periodical interval in which it completes its changes and commences a new cycle. The sinuosity which would arise from each Inequality separately considered, interferes with, disguises, and conceals the others; and when we first cast our eyes on the curve of observation, it is very far from offering any obvious regularity in its form. And it is to be observed that we have not yet enumeratedallthe elements of this complexity: for there are changes of the tide depending upon the Parallax and Declination of the Sun as well as of the Moon. Again; besides these changes, of which the Arguments are obvious, there are others, as those depending upon the Barometer and the Wind, which follow no known regular law, and which constantly affect and disturb the results produced by other laws.In the Tides, and in like manner in the motions of the Moon, we have very eminent examples of the way in which the discovery of laws may be rendered difficult by the number of laws which operate to affect the same quantity. In such cases, the Inequalities are generally picked out in succession, nearly in the order of their magnitudes. In this way there were successively collected, from the study of the Moon’s motions by a series of astronomers, those Inequalities which we term theEquation of the Center, theEvection, theVariation, and theAnnual Equation. These Inequalities were not, in fact, obtained by the application of the Method of Curves; but the Method of Curves might have been applied to such a case with great advantage. The Method has been applied with great industry and with remarkable success to the investigation of the laws of the Tides; and by the use of it, a series of Inequalities both of the Times and of the Heights of high water has been detected, which explain all the main features of the observed facts.211Sect.II.—The Method of Means.7. The Method of Curves, as we have endeavoured to explain above, frees us from the casual and extraneous irregularities which arise from the imperfection of observation; and thus lays bare the results of the laws which really operate, and enables us to proceed in search of those laws. But the Method of Curves is not the only one which effects such a purpose. The errours arising from detached observations may be got rid of, and the additional accuracy which multiplied observations give may be obtained, by operations upon the observed numbers, without expressing them by spaces. The process of curves assumes that the errours of observation balance each other;—that the accidental excesses and defects are nearly equal in amount;—that the true quantities which would have been observed if all accidental causes of irregularity were removed, are obtained, exactly or nearly, by selecting quantities, upon the whole, equally distant from the extremes of great and small, which our imperfect observations offer to us. But when, among a number of unequal quantities, we take a quantity equally distant from the greater and the smaller, this quantity is termed theMeanof the unequal quantities. Hence the correction of our observations by the method of curves consists in taking the Mean of the observations.8. Now without employing curves, we may proceed arithmetically to take the Mean of all the observed numbers of each class. Thus, if we wished to know the Height of the spring tide at a given place, and if we found that four different spring tides were measured as being of the height of ten, thirteen, eleven, and fourteen feet, we should conclude that the true height of the tide was theMeanof these numbers,—namely, twelve feet; and we should suppose that the deviation from this height, in the individual cases, arose from the accidents of weather, the imperfections of observation, or the operation of other laws, besides the alternation of spring and neap tides.212This process of finding the Mean of an assemblage of observed numbers is much practised in discovering, and still more in confirming and correcting, laws of phenomena. We shall notice a few of its peculiarities.9. The Method of Means requires a knowledge of theArgumentof the changes which we would study; for the numbers must be arranged in certain Classes, before we find the Mean of each Class; and the principle on which this arrangement depends is the Argument. This knowledge of the Argument is more indispensably necessary in the Method of Means than in the Method of Curves; for when Curves are drawn, the eye often spontaneously detects the law of recurrence in their sinuosities; but when we have collections of Numbers, we must divide them into classes by a selection of our own. Thus, in order to discover the law which the heights of the tide follow, in the progress from spring to neap, we arrange the observed tides according to theday of the moon’s age; and we then take the mean of all those which thus happen at thesame periodof the Moon’s Revolution. In this manner we obtain the law which we seek; and the process is very nearly the same in all other applications of this Method of Means. In all cases, we begin by assuming the Classes of measures which we wish to compare, the Law which we could confirm or correct, the Formula of which we would determine the coefficients.10. The Argument being thus assumed, the Method of Means is very efficacious in ridding our inquiry of errours and irregularities which would impede and perplex it. Irregularities which are altogether accidental, or at least accidental with reference to some law which we have under consideration, compensate each other in a very remarkable way, when we take the Means ofmanyobservations. If we have before us a collection of observed tides, some of them may be elevated, some depressed by the wind, some noted too high and some too low by the observer, some augmented and some diminished by uncontemplated changes in the moon’s distance or motion: but in the course of a year or two at the longest, all these causes of irregularity balance213each other; and the law of succession, which runs through the observations, comes out as precisely as if those disturbing influences did not exist. In any particular case, there appears to be no possible reason why the deviation should be in one way, or of one moderate amount, rather than another. But taking the mass of observations together, the deviations in opposite ways will be of equal amount, with a degree of exactness very striking. This is found to be the case in all inquiries where we have to deal with observed numbers upon a large scale. In the progress of the population of a country, for instance, what can appear more inconstant, in detail, than the causes which produce births and deaths? yet in each country, and even in each province of a country, the proportions of the whole numbers of births and deaths remain nearly constant. What can be more seemingly beyond the reach of rule than the occasions which produce letters that cannot find their destination? yet it appears that the number of ‘dead letters’ is nearly the same from year to year. And the same is the result when the deviations arise, not from mere accident, but from laws perfectly regular, though not contemplated in our investigation33. Thus the effects of the Moon’s Parallax upon the Tides, sometimes operating one way and sometimes another, according to certain rules, are quite eliminated by taking the Means of a long series of observations; the excesses and defects neutralizing each other, so far as concerns the effect upon any law of the tides which we would investigate.33Provided the argument of the law which we neglect have no coincidence with the argument of the law which we would determine.11. In order to obtain very great accuracy, very large masses of observations are often employed by philosophers, and the accuracy of the result increases with the multitude of observations. The immense collections of astronomical observations which have in this manner been employed in order to form and correct the Tables of the celestial motions are perhaps the most signal instances of the attempts to obtain214accuracy by this accumulation of observations. Delambre’s Tables of the Sun are founded upon nearly 3000 observations; Burg’s Tables of the Moon upon above 4000.But there are other instances hardly less remarkable. Mr. Lubbock’s first investigations of the laws of the tides of London34, included above 13,000 observations, extending through nineteen years; it being considered that this large number was necessary to remove the effects of accidental causes35. And the attempts to discover the laws of change in the barometer have led to the performance of labours of equal amount: Laplace and Bouvard examined this question by means of observations made at the Observatory of Paris, four times every day for eight years.34Phil. Trans.1831.35This period of nineteen years was also selected for a reason which is alluded to in a formernote. It was thought that this period secured the inquirer from the errours which might be produced by the partial coincidence of the Arguments of different irregularities; for example, those due to the moon’s Parallax and to the moon’s Declination. It has since been found (Phil. Tr.1838.On the Determination of the Laws of the Tides from Short Series of Observations), that with regard to Parallax at least, the Means of one year give sufficient accuracy.12. We may remark one striking evidence of the accuracy thus obtained by employing large masses of observations. In this way we may often detect inequalities much smaller than the errours by which they are encumbered and concealed. Thus the Diurnal Oscillations of the Barometer were discovered by the comparison of observations of many days, classified according to the hours of the day; and the result was a clear and incontestable proof of the existence of such oscillations although the differences which these oscillations produce at different hours of the day are far smaller than the casual changes, hitherto reduced to no law, which go on from hour to hour and from day to day. The effect of law, operating incessantly and steadily, makes itself more and more felt as we give it a longer range; while the effect of accident, followed out in the215same manner, is to annihilate itself, and to disappear altogether from the result.Sect.III.—The Method of Least Squares.13. The Method of Least Squares is in fact a method of means, but with some peculiar characters. Its object is to determine thebest Meanof a number of observed quantities; or themost probable Lawderived from a number of observations, of which some, or all, are allowed to be more or less imperfect. And the method proceeds upon this supposition;—that all errours are notequallyprobable, but that small errours are more probable than large ones. By reasoning mathematically upon this ground, we find that the best result is obtained (since we cannot obtain a result in which the errours vanish) by making, not theErroursthemselves, but theSum of their Squares, of thesmallestpossible amount.14. An example may illustrate this. Let a quantity which is known to increase uniformly, (as the distance of a star from the meridian at successive instants,) be measured at equal intervals of time, and be found to be successively 4, 12, 14. It is plain, upon the face of these observations, that they are erroneous; for they ought to form an arithmetical progression, but they deviate widely from such a progression. But the question then occurs, what arithmetical progression do theymost probablyrepresent: for we may assume several arithmetical progressions which more or less approach the observed series; as for instance, these three; 4, 9, 14; 6, 10, 14; 5, 10, 15. Now in order to see the claims of each of these to the truth, we may tabulate them thus.Observation4, 12, 14ErroursSums ofErroursSums of Squaresof ErroursSeries (1)4, 9, 140, 3, 039〃 (2)6, 10, 142, 2, 048〃 (3)5, 10, 151, 2, 146Here, although the first series gives the sum of the216errours less than the others, the third series gives the sum of the squares of the errours least; and is therefore, by the proposition on which this Method depends, themost probableseries of the three.This Method, in more extensive and complex cases, is a great aid to the calculator in his inferences from facts, and removes much that is arbitrary in the Method of Means.Sect.IV.—The Method of Residues.15. By either of the preceding Methods we obtain, from observed facts, such Laws as readily offer themselves; and by the Laws thus discovered, the most prominent changes of the observed quantities are accounted for. But in many cases we have, as we have noticed already,severalLaws of nature operating at the same time, and combining their influences to modify those quantities which are the subjects of observation. In these cases we may, by successive applications of the Methods already pointed out, detect such Laws one after another: but this successive process, though only a repetition of what we have already described, offers some peculiar features which make it convenient to consider it in a separate Section, as the Method of Residues.16. When we have, in a series of changes of a variable quantity, discoveredoneLaw which the changes follow, detected its Argument, and determined its Magnitude, so as to explain most clearly the course of observed facts, we may still find that the observed changes are not fully accounted for. When we compare the results of our Law with the observations, there may be a difference, or as we may term it, aResidue, still unexplained. But this Residue being thus detached from the rest, may be examined and scrutinized in the same manner as the whole observed quantity was treated at first: and we may in this way detect initalso a Law of change. If we can do this, we must accommodate this new found Law as nearly as possible to the Residue to which it belongs; and217this being done, the difference of our Rule and of the Residue itself, forms aSecond Residue. This Second Residue we may again bring under our consideration; and may perhaps initalso discover some Law of change by which its alterations may be in some measure accounted for. If this can be done, so as to account for a large portion of this Residue, the remaining unexplained part forms aThird Residue; and so on.17. This course has really been followed in various inquiries, especially in those of Astronomy and Tidology. TheEquation of the Center, for the Moon, was obtained out of theResidueof the Longitude, which remained when theMean Anomalywas taken away. This Equation being applied and disposed of, theSecond Residuethus obtained, gave to Ptolemy theEvection. TheThird Residue, left by the Equation of the Center and the Evection, supplied to Tycho theVariationand theAnnual Equation. And the Residue, remaining from these, has been exhausted by other Equations, of various arguments, suggested by theory or by observation. In this case, the successive generations of astronomers have gone on, each in its turn executing some step in this Method of Residues. In the examination of the Tides, on the other hand, this method has been applied systematically and at once. The observations readily gave theSemimensual Inequality; theResidueof this supplied the corrections due to the Moon’sParallaxandDeclination; and when these were determined, theremaining Residuewas explored for the law of the Solar Correction.18. In a certain degree, the Method of Residues and the Method of Means areoppositeto each other. For the Method of Residues extricates Laws from their combination,bringing them into view in succession; while the Method of Means discovers each Law, not by bringing the others into view, but bydestroying their effectthrough an accumulation of observations. By the Method of Residues we shouldfirstextract the Law of the Parallax Correction of the Tides, andthen, from the Residue left by this, obtain the Declination Correction. But we might at once employ the Method218of Means, and put together all the cases in which the Declination was the same; not allowing for the Parallax in each case, but taking for granted that the Parallaxes belonging to the same Declination would neutralize each other; as many falling above as below the mean Parallax. In cases like this, where the Method of Means is not impeded by a partial coincidence of the Arguments of different unknown Inequalities, it may be employed with almost as much success as the Method of Residues. But still, when the Arguments of the Laws are clearly known, as in this instance, the Method of Residues is more clear and direct, and is the rather to be recommended.19. If for example, we wish to learn whether the Height of the Barometer exerts any sensible influence on the Height of the Sea’s Surface, it would appear that the most satisfactory mode of proceeding, must be to subtract, in the first place, what we know to be the effects of the Moon’s Age, Parallax and Declination, and other ascertained causes of change; and to search in theunexplained Residuefor the effects of barometrical pressure. The contrary course has, however, been adopted, and the effect of the Barometer on the ocean has been investigated by the direct application of the Method of Means, classing the observed heights of the water according to the corresponding heights of the Barometer without any previous reduction. In this manner, the suspicion that the tide of the sea is affected by the pressure of the atmosphere, has been confirmed. This investigation must be looked upon as a remarkable instance of the efficacy of the Method of Means, since the amount of the barometrical effect is much smaller than the other changes from among which it was by this process extricated. But an application of the Method of Residues would still be desirable on a subject of such extent and difficulty.20. Sir John Herschel, in hisDiscourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy(Articles 158–161), has pointed out the mode of making discoveries by studying Residual Phenomena; and has given several illustrations of the process. In some of these, he has also219considered this method in a wider sense than we have done; treating it as not applicable to quantity only, but to properties and relations of different kinds.We likewise shall proceed to offer a few remarks on Methods of Induction applicable to other relations than those of quantity.
CHAPTER VII.Special Methods of Induction applicable to Quantity.
AphorismXLIII.
There are special Methods of Induction applicable to Quantity; of which the principal are, theMethod of Curves,theMethod of Means,theMethod of Least Squares,and theMethod of Residues.
AphorismXLIV.
The Method of Curvesconsists in drawing a curve of which the observed quantities are the Ordinates, the quantity on which the change of these quantities depends being the Abscissa. The efficacy of this Method depends upon the faculty which the eye possesses, of readily detecting regularity and irregularity in forms. The Method may be used to detect the Laws which the observed quantities follow: and also, when the Observations are inexact, it may be used to correct these Observations, so as to obtain data more true than the observed facts themselves.
AphorismXLV.
The Method of Meansgets rid of irregularities by taking the arithmetical mean of a great number of observed quantities. Its efficacy depends upon this; that in cases in which observed quantities are affected by other inequalities, besides that of which we wish to determine the law, the excessesaboveand defectsbelowthe quantities which the law in question would produce, will, in a collection ofmanyobservations, balanceeach other.203
AphorismXLVI.
The Method of Least Squaresis a Method of Means, in which the mean is taken according to the condition, that the sum of the squares of the errours of observation shall be the least possible which the law of the facts allows. It appears, by the Doctrine of Chances, that this is themost probablemean.
AphorismXLVII.
The Method of Residuesconsists in subtracting, from the quantities given by Observation, the quantity given by any Law already discovered; and then examining the remainder, orResidue,in order to discover the leading Law which it follows. When this second Law has been discovered, the quantity given by it may be subtracted from the first Residue; thus giving aSecond Residue,which may be examined in the same manner; and so on. The efficacy of this method depends principally upon the circumstance of the Laws of variation being successively smaller and smaller in amount (or at least in their mean effect); so that the ulterior undiscovered Laws do not prevent the Law in question from beingprominentin the observations.
AphorismXLVIII.
The Method of Means and the Method of Least Squares cannot be applied without ourknowing the Argumentsof the Inequalities which we seek. The Method of Curves and the Method of Residues, when the Arguments of the principal Inequalities are known, often make it easy to find the others.
INcases where the phenomena admit of numerical measurement and expression, certain mathematical methods may be employed to facilitate and give accuracy to the determination of the formula by which the observations are connected into laws. Among the most usual and important of these Methods are the following:—204I. The Method of Curves.II.The Method of Means.III.The Method of Least Squares.IV.The Method of Residues.
Sect. I.—The Method of Curves.
1.TheMethod of Curves proceeds upon this basis; that when one quantity undergoes a series of changes depending on the progress of another quantity, (as, for instance, the Deviation of the Moon from her equable place depends upon the progress of Time,) this dependence may be expressed by means of acurve. In the language of mathematicians, the variable quantity, whose changes we would consider, is made theordinateof the curve, and the quantity on which the changes depend is made theabscissa. In this manner, the curve will exhibit in its form a series of undulations, rising and falling so as to correspond with the alternate Increase and Diminution of the quantity represented, at intervals of Space which correspond to the intervals of Time, or other quantity by which the changes are regulated. Thus, to take another example, if we set up, at equal intervals, a series of ordinates representing the Height of all the successive High Waters brought by the tides at a given place, for a year, the curve which connects the summits of all these ordinates will exhibit a series of undulations, ascending and descending once in about each Fortnight; since, in that interval, we have, in succession, the high spring tides and the low neap tides. The curve thus drawn offers to the eye a picture of the order and magnitude of the changes to which the quantity under contemplation, (the height of high water,) is subject.
2. Now the peculiar facility and efficacy of the Method of Curves depends upon this circumstance;—that order and regularity are more readily and clearly recognized, when thus exhibited to the eye in a picture, than they are when presented to the mind in any other manner. To detect the relations of Number considered directly as Number, is not easy: and we might205contemplate for a long time a Table of recorded Numbers without perceiving the order of their increase and diminution, even if the law were moderately simple; as any one may satisfy himself by looking at a Tide Table. But if these Numbers are expressed by the magnitude ofLines, and if these Lines are arranged in regular order, the eye readily discovers the rule of their changes: it follows the curve which runs along their extremities, and takes note of the order in which its convexities and concavities succeed each other, if any order be readily discoverable. The separate observations are in this manner compared and generalized and reduced to rule by the eye alone. And the eye, so employed, detects relations of order and succession with a peculiar celerity and evidence. If, for example, we thus arrive as ordinates the prices of corn in each year for a series of years, we shall see the order, rapidity, and amount of the increase and decrease of price, far more clearly than in any other manner. And if there were any recurrence of increase and decrease at stated intervals of years, we should in this manner perceive it. The eye, constantly active and busy, and employed in making into shapes the hints and traces of form which it contemplates, runs along the curve thus offered to it; and as it travels backwards and forwards, is ever on the watch to detect some resemblance or contrast between one part and another. And these resemblances and contrasts, when discovered, are the images of Laws of Phenomena; which are made manifest at once by this artifice, although the mind could not easily catch the indications of their existence, if they were not thus reflected to her in the clear mirror of Space.
Thus when we have a series of good Observations, and know the argument upon which their change of magnitude depends, the Method of Curves enables us to ascertain, almost at a glance, the law of the change; and by further attention, may be made to give us a formula with great accuracy. The Method enables us to perceive, among our observations, an order, which without the method, is concealed in obscurity and perplexity.206
3. But the Method of Curves not only enables us to obtain laws of nature fromgoodObservations, but also, in a great degree, from observations which are veryimperfect. For the imperfection of observations may in part be corrected by this consideration;—that though they may appear irregular, the correct facts which they imperfectly represent, are really regular. And the Method of Curves enables us to remedy this apparent irregularity, at least in part. For when Observations thus imperfect are laid down as Ordinates, and their extremities connected by a line, we obtain, not a smooth and flowing curve, such as we should have if the observations contained only the rigorous results of regular laws; but a broken and irregular line, full of sudden and capricious twistings, and bearing on its face marks of irregularities dependent, not upon law, but upon chance. Yet these irregular and abrupt deviations in the curve are, in most cases, but small in extent, when compared with those bendings which denote the effects of regular law. And this circumstance is one of the great grounds of advantage in the Method of Curves. For when the observations thus laid down present to the eye such a broken and irregular line, we can still see, often with great ease and certainty, what twistings of the line are probably due to the irregular errours of observation; and can at once reject these, by drawing a more regular curve, cutting off all such small and irregular sinuosities, leaving some to the right and some to the left; and then proceeding as if this regular curve, and not the irregular one, expressed the observations. In this manner, we suppose the errours of observation to balance each other; some of our corrected measures being too great and others too small, but with no great preponderance either way. We draw our main regular curve, notthroughthe points given by our observations, butamongthem: drawing it, as has been said by one of the philosophers30who first systematically used this method, ‘with a bold but careful hand.’207The regular curve which we thus obtain, thus freed from the casual errours of observation, is that in which we endeavour to discover the laws of change and succession.
30Sir J. Herschel,Ast. Soc. Trans.vol. v. p. 1.
4. By this method, thus getting rid at once, in a great measure, of errours of observation, we obtain data which aremore true than theindividualfacts themselves. The philosopher’s business is to compare his hypotheses with facts, as we have often said. But if we make the comparison with separate special facts, we are liable to be perplexed or misled, to an unknown amount, by the errours of observation; which may cause the hypothetical and the observed result to agree, or to disagree, when otherwise they would not do so. If, however, we thus take thewhole mass of the facts, and remove the errours of actual observation31, by making the curve which expresses the supposed observation regular and smooth, we have the separate facts corrected by their general tendency. We are put in possession, as we have said, of something more true than any fact by itself is.
31Ib.vol. v. p. 4.
One of the most admirable examples of the use of this Method of Curves is found in Sir John Herschel’sInvestigation of the Orbits of Double Stars32. The author there shows how far inferior the direct observations of the angle of position are, to the observations corrected by a curve in the manner above stated. ‘This curve once drawn,’ he says, ‘must represent, it is evident, the law of variation of the angle of position, with the time, not only for instants intermediate between the dates of observations, but even at the moments of observation themselves, much better than the individualrawobservations can possibly (on an average) do. It is only requisite to try a case or two, to be satisfied that by substituting the curve for the points, we have made a nearer approach to nature, and in a great measure eliminated errours of observation.’ ‘In following the graphical process,’ he adds, ‘we have a conviction almost approaching to moral certainty that208we cannot be greatly misled.’ Again, having thus corrected the raw observations, he makes another use of the graphical method, by trying whether an ellipse can be drawn ‘if notthrough, at leastamongthe points, so as to approach tolerably near them all; and thus approaching to the orbit which is the subject of investigation.’
32Ib.
5. TheObstacleswhich principally impede the application of the Method of Curves are (I.) ourignorance of the argumentsof the changes, and (II.) thecomplication of several lawswith one another.
(I.) If we do not know on what quantity those changes depend which we are studying, we may fail entirely in detecting the law of the changes, although we throw the observations into curves. For the trueargumentof the change should, in fact, be made theabscissaof the curve. If we were to express, by a series of ordinates, thehourof high water on successive days, we should not obtain, or should obtain very imperfectly, the law which these times follow; for the real argument of this change is not thesolar hour, but thehourat which themoonpasses the meridian. But if we are supposed to be aware thatthisis theargument, (which theory suggests and trial instantly confirms) we then do immediately obtain the primary Rules of the Time of High Water, by throwing a series of observations into a Curve, with the Hour of the Moon’s Transit for the abscissa.
In like manner, when we have obtained the first great or Semi-mensual Inequality of the tides, if we endeavour to discover the laws of other Inequalities by means of curves, we must take from theory the suggestion that the Arguments of such inequalities will probably be theparallaxand thedeclinationof the moon. This suggestion again is confirmed by trial; but if we were supposed to be entirely ignorant of the dependence of the changes of the tide on the Distance and Declination of the moon, the curves would exhibit unintelligible and seemingly capricious changes. For by the effect of the Inequality arising from the Parallax, the convexities of the curves which belong to the209spring tides, are in some years made alternately greater and less all the year through; while in other years they are made all nearly equal. This difference does not betray its origin, till we refer it to the Parallax; and the same difficulty in proceeding would arise if we were ignorant that the moon’s Declination is one of the Arguments of tidal changes.
In like manner, if we try to reduce to law any meteorological changes, those of the Height of the Barometer for instance, we find that we can make little progress in the investigation, precisely because we do not know the Argument on which these changes depend. That there is a certain regulardiurnalchange of small amount, we know; but when we have abstracted this Inequality, (of which the Argument is thetime of day,) we find far greater Changes left behind, from day to day and from hour to hour; and we express these in curves, but we cannot reduce them to Rule, because we cannot discover on what numerical quantity they depend. The assiduous study of barometrical observations, thrown into curves, may perhaps hereafter point out to us what are the relations of time and space by which these variations are determined; but in the mean time, this subject exemplifies to us our remark, that the method of curves is of comparatively small use, so long as we are in ignorance of the real Arguments of the Inequalities.
6. (II.) In the next place, I remark that a difficulty is thrown in the way of the Method of Curves bythe Combination of several lawsone with another. It will readily be seen that such a cause will produce a complexity in the curves which exhibit the succession of facts. If, for example, we take the case of the Tides, the Height of high water increases and diminishes with the Approach of the sun to, and its Recess from, the syzygies of the moon. Again, this Height increases and diminishes as the moon’s Parallax increases and diminishes; and again, the Height diminishes when the Declination increases, andvice versa; and all these Arguments of change, the Distance from Syzygy, the Parallax, the Declination, complete their circuit and210return into themselves in different periods. Hence the curve which represents the Height of high water has not any periodical interval in which it completes its changes and commences a new cycle. The sinuosity which would arise from each Inequality separately considered, interferes with, disguises, and conceals the others; and when we first cast our eyes on the curve of observation, it is very far from offering any obvious regularity in its form. And it is to be observed that we have not yet enumeratedallthe elements of this complexity: for there are changes of the tide depending upon the Parallax and Declination of the Sun as well as of the Moon. Again; besides these changes, of which the Arguments are obvious, there are others, as those depending upon the Barometer and the Wind, which follow no known regular law, and which constantly affect and disturb the results produced by other laws.
In the Tides, and in like manner in the motions of the Moon, we have very eminent examples of the way in which the discovery of laws may be rendered difficult by the number of laws which operate to affect the same quantity. In such cases, the Inequalities are generally picked out in succession, nearly in the order of their magnitudes. In this way there were successively collected, from the study of the Moon’s motions by a series of astronomers, those Inequalities which we term theEquation of the Center, theEvection, theVariation, and theAnnual Equation. These Inequalities were not, in fact, obtained by the application of the Method of Curves; but the Method of Curves might have been applied to such a case with great advantage. The Method has been applied with great industry and with remarkable success to the investigation of the laws of the Tides; and by the use of it, a series of Inequalities both of the Times and of the Heights of high water has been detected, which explain all the main features of the observed facts.211
Sect.II.—The Method of Means.
7. The Method of Curves, as we have endeavoured to explain above, frees us from the casual and extraneous irregularities which arise from the imperfection of observation; and thus lays bare the results of the laws which really operate, and enables us to proceed in search of those laws. But the Method of Curves is not the only one which effects such a purpose. The errours arising from detached observations may be got rid of, and the additional accuracy which multiplied observations give may be obtained, by operations upon the observed numbers, without expressing them by spaces. The process of curves assumes that the errours of observation balance each other;—that the accidental excesses and defects are nearly equal in amount;—that the true quantities which would have been observed if all accidental causes of irregularity were removed, are obtained, exactly or nearly, by selecting quantities, upon the whole, equally distant from the extremes of great and small, which our imperfect observations offer to us. But when, among a number of unequal quantities, we take a quantity equally distant from the greater and the smaller, this quantity is termed theMeanof the unequal quantities. Hence the correction of our observations by the method of curves consists in taking the Mean of the observations.
8. Now without employing curves, we may proceed arithmetically to take the Mean of all the observed numbers of each class. Thus, if we wished to know the Height of the spring tide at a given place, and if we found that four different spring tides were measured as being of the height of ten, thirteen, eleven, and fourteen feet, we should conclude that the true height of the tide was theMeanof these numbers,—namely, twelve feet; and we should suppose that the deviation from this height, in the individual cases, arose from the accidents of weather, the imperfections of observation, or the operation of other laws, besides the alternation of spring and neap tides.212
This process of finding the Mean of an assemblage of observed numbers is much practised in discovering, and still more in confirming and correcting, laws of phenomena. We shall notice a few of its peculiarities.
9. The Method of Means requires a knowledge of theArgumentof the changes which we would study; for the numbers must be arranged in certain Classes, before we find the Mean of each Class; and the principle on which this arrangement depends is the Argument. This knowledge of the Argument is more indispensably necessary in the Method of Means than in the Method of Curves; for when Curves are drawn, the eye often spontaneously detects the law of recurrence in their sinuosities; but when we have collections of Numbers, we must divide them into classes by a selection of our own. Thus, in order to discover the law which the heights of the tide follow, in the progress from spring to neap, we arrange the observed tides according to theday of the moon’s age; and we then take the mean of all those which thus happen at thesame periodof the Moon’s Revolution. In this manner we obtain the law which we seek; and the process is very nearly the same in all other applications of this Method of Means. In all cases, we begin by assuming the Classes of measures which we wish to compare, the Law which we could confirm or correct, the Formula of which we would determine the coefficients.
10. The Argument being thus assumed, the Method of Means is very efficacious in ridding our inquiry of errours and irregularities which would impede and perplex it. Irregularities which are altogether accidental, or at least accidental with reference to some law which we have under consideration, compensate each other in a very remarkable way, when we take the Means ofmanyobservations. If we have before us a collection of observed tides, some of them may be elevated, some depressed by the wind, some noted too high and some too low by the observer, some augmented and some diminished by uncontemplated changes in the moon’s distance or motion: but in the course of a year or two at the longest, all these causes of irregularity balance213each other; and the law of succession, which runs through the observations, comes out as precisely as if those disturbing influences did not exist. In any particular case, there appears to be no possible reason why the deviation should be in one way, or of one moderate amount, rather than another. But taking the mass of observations together, the deviations in opposite ways will be of equal amount, with a degree of exactness very striking. This is found to be the case in all inquiries where we have to deal with observed numbers upon a large scale. In the progress of the population of a country, for instance, what can appear more inconstant, in detail, than the causes which produce births and deaths? yet in each country, and even in each province of a country, the proportions of the whole numbers of births and deaths remain nearly constant. What can be more seemingly beyond the reach of rule than the occasions which produce letters that cannot find their destination? yet it appears that the number of ‘dead letters’ is nearly the same from year to year. And the same is the result when the deviations arise, not from mere accident, but from laws perfectly regular, though not contemplated in our investigation33. Thus the effects of the Moon’s Parallax upon the Tides, sometimes operating one way and sometimes another, according to certain rules, are quite eliminated by taking the Means of a long series of observations; the excesses and defects neutralizing each other, so far as concerns the effect upon any law of the tides which we would investigate.
33Provided the argument of the law which we neglect have no coincidence with the argument of the law which we would determine.
11. In order to obtain very great accuracy, very large masses of observations are often employed by philosophers, and the accuracy of the result increases with the multitude of observations. The immense collections of astronomical observations which have in this manner been employed in order to form and correct the Tables of the celestial motions are perhaps the most signal instances of the attempts to obtain214accuracy by this accumulation of observations. Delambre’s Tables of the Sun are founded upon nearly 3000 observations; Burg’s Tables of the Moon upon above 4000.
But there are other instances hardly less remarkable. Mr. Lubbock’s first investigations of the laws of the tides of London34, included above 13,000 observations, extending through nineteen years; it being considered that this large number was necessary to remove the effects of accidental causes35. And the attempts to discover the laws of change in the barometer have led to the performance of labours of equal amount: Laplace and Bouvard examined this question by means of observations made at the Observatory of Paris, four times every day for eight years.
34Phil. Trans.1831.
35This period of nineteen years was also selected for a reason which is alluded to in a formernote. It was thought that this period secured the inquirer from the errours which might be produced by the partial coincidence of the Arguments of different irregularities; for example, those due to the moon’s Parallax and to the moon’s Declination. It has since been found (Phil. Tr.1838.On the Determination of the Laws of the Tides from Short Series of Observations), that with regard to Parallax at least, the Means of one year give sufficient accuracy.
12. We may remark one striking evidence of the accuracy thus obtained by employing large masses of observations. In this way we may often detect inequalities much smaller than the errours by which they are encumbered and concealed. Thus the Diurnal Oscillations of the Barometer were discovered by the comparison of observations of many days, classified according to the hours of the day; and the result was a clear and incontestable proof of the existence of such oscillations although the differences which these oscillations produce at different hours of the day are far smaller than the casual changes, hitherto reduced to no law, which go on from hour to hour and from day to day. The effect of law, operating incessantly and steadily, makes itself more and more felt as we give it a longer range; while the effect of accident, followed out in the215same manner, is to annihilate itself, and to disappear altogether from the result.
Sect.III.—The Method of Least Squares.
13. The Method of Least Squares is in fact a method of means, but with some peculiar characters. Its object is to determine thebest Meanof a number of observed quantities; or themost probable Lawderived from a number of observations, of which some, or all, are allowed to be more or less imperfect. And the method proceeds upon this supposition;—that all errours are notequallyprobable, but that small errours are more probable than large ones. By reasoning mathematically upon this ground, we find that the best result is obtained (since we cannot obtain a result in which the errours vanish) by making, not theErroursthemselves, but theSum of their Squares, of thesmallestpossible amount.
14. An example may illustrate this. Let a quantity which is known to increase uniformly, (as the distance of a star from the meridian at successive instants,) be measured at equal intervals of time, and be found to be successively 4, 12, 14. It is plain, upon the face of these observations, that they are erroneous; for they ought to form an arithmetical progression, but they deviate widely from such a progression. But the question then occurs, what arithmetical progression do theymost probablyrepresent: for we may assume several arithmetical progressions which more or less approach the observed series; as for instance, these three; 4, 9, 14; 6, 10, 14; 5, 10, 15. Now in order to see the claims of each of these to the truth, we may tabulate them thus.
Here, although the first series gives the sum of the216errours less than the others, the third series gives the sum of the squares of the errours least; and is therefore, by the proposition on which this Method depends, themost probableseries of the three.
This Method, in more extensive and complex cases, is a great aid to the calculator in his inferences from facts, and removes much that is arbitrary in the Method of Means.
Sect.IV.—The Method of Residues.
15. By either of the preceding Methods we obtain, from observed facts, such Laws as readily offer themselves; and by the Laws thus discovered, the most prominent changes of the observed quantities are accounted for. But in many cases we have, as we have noticed already,severalLaws of nature operating at the same time, and combining their influences to modify those quantities which are the subjects of observation. In these cases we may, by successive applications of the Methods already pointed out, detect such Laws one after another: but this successive process, though only a repetition of what we have already described, offers some peculiar features which make it convenient to consider it in a separate Section, as the Method of Residues.
16. When we have, in a series of changes of a variable quantity, discoveredoneLaw which the changes follow, detected its Argument, and determined its Magnitude, so as to explain most clearly the course of observed facts, we may still find that the observed changes are not fully accounted for. When we compare the results of our Law with the observations, there may be a difference, or as we may term it, aResidue, still unexplained. But this Residue being thus detached from the rest, may be examined and scrutinized in the same manner as the whole observed quantity was treated at first: and we may in this way detect initalso a Law of change. If we can do this, we must accommodate this new found Law as nearly as possible to the Residue to which it belongs; and217this being done, the difference of our Rule and of the Residue itself, forms aSecond Residue. This Second Residue we may again bring under our consideration; and may perhaps initalso discover some Law of change by which its alterations may be in some measure accounted for. If this can be done, so as to account for a large portion of this Residue, the remaining unexplained part forms aThird Residue; and so on.
17. This course has really been followed in various inquiries, especially in those of Astronomy and Tidology. TheEquation of the Center, for the Moon, was obtained out of theResidueof the Longitude, which remained when theMean Anomalywas taken away. This Equation being applied and disposed of, theSecond Residuethus obtained, gave to Ptolemy theEvection. TheThird Residue, left by the Equation of the Center and the Evection, supplied to Tycho theVariationand theAnnual Equation. And the Residue, remaining from these, has been exhausted by other Equations, of various arguments, suggested by theory or by observation. In this case, the successive generations of astronomers have gone on, each in its turn executing some step in this Method of Residues. In the examination of the Tides, on the other hand, this method has been applied systematically and at once. The observations readily gave theSemimensual Inequality; theResidueof this supplied the corrections due to the Moon’sParallaxandDeclination; and when these were determined, theremaining Residuewas explored for the law of the Solar Correction.
18. In a certain degree, the Method of Residues and the Method of Means areoppositeto each other. For the Method of Residues extricates Laws from their combination,bringing them into view in succession; while the Method of Means discovers each Law, not by bringing the others into view, but bydestroying their effectthrough an accumulation of observations. By the Method of Residues we shouldfirstextract the Law of the Parallax Correction of the Tides, andthen, from the Residue left by this, obtain the Declination Correction. But we might at once employ the Method218of Means, and put together all the cases in which the Declination was the same; not allowing for the Parallax in each case, but taking for granted that the Parallaxes belonging to the same Declination would neutralize each other; as many falling above as below the mean Parallax. In cases like this, where the Method of Means is not impeded by a partial coincidence of the Arguments of different unknown Inequalities, it may be employed with almost as much success as the Method of Residues. But still, when the Arguments of the Laws are clearly known, as in this instance, the Method of Residues is more clear and direct, and is the rather to be recommended.
19. If for example, we wish to learn whether the Height of the Barometer exerts any sensible influence on the Height of the Sea’s Surface, it would appear that the most satisfactory mode of proceeding, must be to subtract, in the first place, what we know to be the effects of the Moon’s Age, Parallax and Declination, and other ascertained causes of change; and to search in theunexplained Residuefor the effects of barometrical pressure. The contrary course has, however, been adopted, and the effect of the Barometer on the ocean has been investigated by the direct application of the Method of Means, classing the observed heights of the water according to the corresponding heights of the Barometer without any previous reduction. In this manner, the suspicion that the tide of the sea is affected by the pressure of the atmosphere, has been confirmed. This investigation must be looked upon as a remarkable instance of the efficacy of the Method of Means, since the amount of the barometrical effect is much smaller than the other changes from among which it was by this process extricated. But an application of the Method of Residues would still be desirable on a subject of such extent and difficulty.
20. Sir John Herschel, in hisDiscourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy(Articles 158–161), has pointed out the mode of making discoveries by studying Residual Phenomena; and has given several illustrations of the process. In some of these, he has also219considered this method in a wider sense than we have done; treating it as not applicable to quantity only, but to properties and relations of different kinds.
We likewise shall proceed to offer a few remarks on Methods of Induction applicable to other relations than those of quantity.