The Philosophy of the Weather Part 15

"It is not a little remarkable that this periodical magnetic variation is found to be identical in period, and in epochs of maxima and minima, with the periodical variation in the frequency and magnitude of the _solar spots_, which M. Schwabe has established by twenty-six years of unremitting labor. From a cosmical connection of this nature, supposing it to be finally established, it would follow that the decennial period, which we measure by our magnetic instrument, is, in fact, a solar period, manifested to us, also, by the alternately increasing and decreasing frequency and magnitude of observations on the surface of the solar disc. May we not have in these phenomena the indication of a cycle, or period of _secular change in the magnetism of the sun_, affecting visibly his gaseous atmosphere or photosphere, and sensibly modifying the magnetic influence which he exercises on the surface of our earth?"--American Journal of Science, new series, vol. xiv. p. 438.

I think it may fairly be inferred, that although these spots do not occasion the "cold spells" and "hot spells," and other transient peculiarities, they do materially affect the _mean_ temperature of the year, and exert an obvious influence when at their maxima; and there is a tendency to an increase of the heat and dryness of summer, and the severity of winter, at the periods named, in our excessive climate, and a well-established connection between the spots and magnetic disturbances and variations.

Popular opinion has ever attributed to the moon a controlling effect upon the changes of the weather. If it be dry, a storm is expected _when the moon changes_; or if it be wet, dry weather. Such popular opinions are usually ent.i.tled to respect, and founded in truth. But every attempt to verify _this opinion_, by careful observation and registration, has failed. Weather-tables and lunar phases, compared for nearly one hundred years, show four hundred and ninety-one new or full moons attended by a change of the weather, and five hundred and nine without. The celebrated Olbers, after _fifty years of careful observation_ and comparison, decided against it. So did the more celebrated Arago, at a more recent date--summing up the result of his observations by saying--"Whatever the progress of the sciences, never will observers, who are trustworthy and careful of their reputation, venture to foretell the state of the weather." Still, the moon may influence the weather, though she may not effect changes at her syzygies or quadratures, and this subject should not be too summarily dismissed. That the moon can not effect changes at the periods named seems philosophically obvious. She changes, for the _whole earth_, within the period of twenty-four hours; yet, how varied the state of things on different portions of its surface. The equatorial belts of trades, and drought, and rains, cover from fifty to sixty degrees of its surface, and know nothing of lunar disturbance. The extra-tropical belt of rains and variable weather moves up in its season, uncovering 10, or more, of lat.i.tude, and admitting the trades and a six months' drought over it, as in California, regardless of the moon. Under the zone of extra-tropical rains, even upon the eastern part of the continent of North America, "dry spells" and "wet spells" exist side by side; the focus of precipitation is now in one parallel, and now in another--_storms_ exist _here_ and _fair weather there_, on the same continent at the same time; and as the moon's rays in her northing pa.s.s round the northern hemisphere during the twenty-four hours, they, doubtless, pa.s.s from ten to thirty or more storms, of all characters and intensities, moving in opposition to her orbit--and as many larger intervening areas of fair weather, not one of which are indebted to her for their existence, or "take thought of her coming."

The storm, which originates in the tropics, pursues its curving way now N.

W., then N. E., and again north, to the Arctic circle, and, perhaps, around the magnetic pole, over gulf, and continent, and ocean, _occupying one third the time of a lunation, and two changes, perhaps, in its progress_, without any perceptible or conceivable influence from her. Yet every inhabitant of mother-earth, influenced by _coincidences remembered_, and uninfluenced by _exceptions forgotten_, looks up within his limited horizon, and devoutly expects from the agency of some phase of the moon, a change for the special benefit of his _dot_ upon the earth's surface. Upon how many of these countless dots is the moon at a particular phase, or relative distance from the sun, to change fair weather to foul, or foul to fair? Upon none. The storms keep on their way;--the wet spells, and the dry spells, the cold and the hot spells alternate in their time, and though the moon turns toward them in pa.s.sing, her dark face, her half face, or her full orb (the gifts of the sun, which confer no power), they do not heed her. They are originated, and are continued, by a more potent agent. They are the work of an atmospheric mechanism, as _ceaseless_ in its operation as _time_, as _regular_ as the _seasons_, _as extensive as the globe_.

Indeed, it seems as if it was expressly designed by the Creator that the moon should not interfere materially with this atmospheric machinery. She is the nearest orb; her influence would be controlling and continuous; would follow her monthly path from south to north, and with changes too violent, and intervals too long; and would interfere with the regular fundamental operation in the trade-wind region, where she is _vertical_.

Aside from the attraction of gravitation, therefore, she seems to have been so created as to be incapable of exerting any influence. She is without an atmosphere; the rays which she reflects are polarized, and without chemical or magnetic power; and, if it be true that Melloni has recently detected heat in them, by the use of a lens three feet in diameter, which could not previously be effected, its quant.i.ty is exceedingly small, and incapable of influence. Doubtless, the attraction of her ma.s.s is felt upon the earth, as the tides attest; and upon the atmosphere as well as the ocean. But the atmosphere is comparatively _attenuated_, and exceedingly so at its upper surface. Her attraction, therefore, although felt, is not influential. She seemed, to Dr. Howard, to produce in her northing and southing, a lateral tide which the barometer disclosed, but owing to the attenuated character of the atmosphere, neither the sun nor moon create an easterly and westerly tide, that is observable, except with the most delicate instruments. Sabine is believed to have detected such a tide by the barometer, at St. Helena, of one four thousandth of an inch. But even this _infinitesimal influence_ may prove an error upon further investigation. There is a diurnal variation of the barometer, but it is not the result of her attraction, for it is not later each day as are the tides, exists in the deepest mines as well as upon the surface, and is demonstrably connected with the _group_ of _diurnal_ changes produced by the action of the sun-light and heat upon the earth's magnetism.

Can the lateral tide, if there be one, affect the weather? for in the present state of science it seems entirely certain that the moon can exert an influence in no other way.

If the received idea of many, perhaps most, meteorologists, on which all wheel barometers are constructed, that a _high barometer_ necessarily produces _fair weather_, and a _low one foul_, were true, she certainly might do so. But that idea can not be sustained, and there is no known certain influence exerted by the moon upon the weather, in relation to which we have any reliable practical data.

Humboldt appears to have adopted the impression of Sir W. Hersch.e.l.l, that the moon aids in the dispersion of the clouds. (Cosmos, vol. iv. p. 502.) But the tendency to such dispersion is always rapid during the latter part of the day and evening, when there is no storm approaching, and the full moon renders their dissolution visible, and attracts attention to them.

The Greenwich observations, also, carefully examined by Professor Loomis, fail to confirm the impression of Hersch.e.l.l and Humboldt, and those eminent philosophers are doubtless in this mistaken.

From this general and somewhat desultory view of the general facts, which bear a.n.a.logically upon the question, no decisive inference can be drawn in relation to the seat of the primary influence which produces the atmospheric changes. The preponderance is in favor of the magnetic, or magneto-electric, action of the earth. We must come back to our own country and grapple with the question at home.

CHAPTER IX.

Before proceeding to do this, however, it may be well to look at some theories which have been advanced, and to a greater or less extent adopted, and at their bearing upon the question.

The calorific theory is at present the prevailing one in Europe and in this country. Meteorologists there and here refer all atmospheric conditions and phenomena to the influence of heat. The princ.i.p.al applications of that theory have been considered. But within the last few years the elasticity and tension of the aqueous vapor of the atmosphere have received much attention, as exerting an auxiliary or modifying influence. Professor Dove, of Berlin, who ranks perhaps as the most distinguished meteorologist of that continent, attributes barometric variations to _lateral overflows_, and, in the upper regions, resulting from the elevation of the atmosphere by expansion; and in this view meteorologists of Europe seem generally to acquiesce. In an article sent to Colonel Sabine, and recently republished in the American Journal of Science, January, 1855, in thus attempting to account for the annual variation of barometric pressure, which occurs in Europe and Asia, and, indeed, over the entire hemisphere. He says:

"From the combined action or the variations of aqueous vapor, and of the dry air, we derive immediately the periodical variations of the whole atmospheric pressure. As the dry air and the aqueous vapor mixed with it, press in common on the barometer, so that the up-borne column of mercury consists of two parts, one borne by the dry air, the other by the aqueous vapor, we may well understand that as with increasing temperature the air expands, and by reason of its augmented volume rises higher, and _its upper portion overflows laterally_," etc.

And in another place he says:

"From the magnitude of the variations in the northern hemisphere, and the extent of the region over which it prevails, we must infer that _at the time of diminished pressure a lateral overflow probably takes place_," etc.

Doubtless, the mean pressure of the atmosphere, in summer, in the northern hemisphere, is less than in winter, in some localities, and greater in others, and it differs in different countries of equal temperature. And this is all very intelligible. The mean of the pressure for the month is made up by _averaging_ all the _elevations_ and _depressions_. During a month, showing a very low mean, the barometer may, at times, attain its _highest alt.i.tude_, if the depressions below the mean are great or more frequent. The barometer is depressed during storms, and ranges high during _set fair_ weather. Ordinarily, therefore, the more stormy the season the more diminished the mean pressure; and it is a mistake to look to an overflow to account for the fact. The changes in the location of the atmospheric machinery, and consequent change in the amount and severity of falling weather, and the periodic frequency and character of storms, and consequent _periodic_ depressions and elevations of the barometer, explain the annual mean variations, as they do the other phenomena. But it is perfectly consistent with the calorific theory to attempt to account for these differences by another of those ever-necessary modifications, viz.: the different tension and elasticity of aqueous vapor in different countries of equal temperature; and then to _suppose_ an expansion of the whole body of the atmosphere and a lateral overflow from the place where the air is expanded, on to some other, where it is not; and thus _suppose_ all necessary currents in the upper regions, setting hither and yon, by the force of gravity alone. And apparently he who is best at supposition becomes the most distinguished meteorologist. Perhaps I have already said all that I ought to be pardoned for saying, in relation to the utter absurdity of attributing all meteorological phenomena to the agency of heat; but when I find such views as those which that article contains, emanating from so distinguished a man, sanctioned by the President of the British a.s.sociation, and copied into the leading journal of science in this country, I can not forbear a further and a somewhat critical examination of them. There is more error of supposition and less truth in it, than in any other article regarding the science, of equal length, which has fallen under my notice.

What is the height of this expansion? The moisture of evaporation ascends, ordinarily, but a few thousand feet. The atmosphere grows regularly cooler, from the earth to the trade, and _the increased warmth that is felt at the surface extends but little way_. Currents of warm air do not ascend. The strata maintain, substantially, their relative positions; and this is a most beneficent provision. In northern lat.i.tudes of the temperate zone, all the warmth derived from a few hours' suns.h.i.+ne is needed at the surface; and, deplorable, indeed, would be our condition, if the atmosphere, as fast as warmed by the rays of the sun, were to hasten up, and the frigid strata descend in its place. The earth would not be habitable. All the warm air on its surface would be rising as soon as it became warmed, and the cold air above be descending, and enveloping us with the chilling strata which are ever floating within two or three miles above us. No. Infinite wisdom has ordered it otherwise. The laws of magnetism and of static-electric induction and attraction keep the strata in their places, and preserve to us the warmth which the solar rays afford or produce. The inhabitant of the valley, in a high northern lat.i.tude, in summer, can plant, and sow, and reap, at the base of the mountain whose summit penetrates the stratum of continual congelation, and up its sides, almost to the line of perpetual snow; and, as he looks upon the fruits of his labor, and up to the snow-clad peak that towers above him, can thank his Maker for placing a warm equatorial current, a perpetual barrier, between the fertility and warmth which surround him, and the cold destructive strata above; and thank Him for not creating such a state of things, as certain meteorologists insist we shall believe He has created.

Again, where are the _upper regions_, from which the lateral overflow takes place? The atmosphere is differently estimated, at from thirty to forty-five miles, or more, in height. Whatever its height may be, it is exceedingly attenuated in its "upper regions."

Gay-Lussac marked the barometer at 12-95/100 inches at the height of 23,040 feet. Two thirds of the atmospheric density, then, is within five miles of the earth. Air, too, is _compressible_. Allowing for the latter and the attenuation, how many miles in vertical depth, of its "_upper regions_," must move from one portion to another, to depress the barometer two inches--its range sometimes in twenty-four hours--or even half an inch? Let the computation be made, and see how startling the proposition, how utterly impossible that the theory can be true.

The distinguished Professor, in the paper referred to, introduces his theory of the formation of hurricanes, and we quote--

"If we suppose the upper portions of the air ascending over Asia and Africa to flow off laterally, and if this takes place suddenly, it will check the course of the upper or counter-current above the trade-wind, and force it to break into the lower current.

"An east wind coming into a S. W. current must necessarily occasion a rotatory movement, turning in the opposite direction to the hands of a watch. A rotatory storm, moving from S. E. to N. W., in the lower current or trade, would, in this view, be the result of the encounter of two ma.s.ses of air, impelled toward each other at many places in succession, the further cause of the rotation (originating primarily in this manner) being that described by me in detail in a memoir 'On the Law of Storms,' translated in the 'Scientific Memoirs,' vol. iii.

art. 7. Thus, it happens that the West India hurricanes, and the Chinese typhoons occur near the lateral confines on either side of the great region of atmospheric expansion, the typhoons being probably occasioned by the direct pressure of the air from the region of the trade-winds over the Pacific, into the more expanded air of the monsoon region, and being distinct from the storms appropriately called by the Portuguese 'temporales,' which accompany the out-burst of the monsoon when the direction of the wind is reversed."

The a.n.a.logy between this, and a theory of Mr. Redfield's, will be noticed further on. But I remark, in pa.s.sing, that there is not a fact or inference in this paragraph which will bear examination.

1. There is no such regular S. W. wind over the surface trade, as he supposes. Doubtless, there are, occasionally, secondary S. W. currents between the counter-trade and the surface one, with partial condensation, for much of both becomes depolarized by their reciprocal action and precipitation, and these induced S. W. currents are sometimes so strong as to usurp the place of the surface-trade, and become very violent in the latter part of hurricanes; but such is not the usual course of the upper currents of the West Indies, as the progress of storms there, and observation, prove.

2. There can not be any _periods_ of extensive and _sudden_ expansion over Africa. If there is any place on the earth which has a more uniformly progressive temperature, either way, and is more free from _sudden_ extremes, or which is more arid and dest.i.tute of aqueous vapor, and sudden aqueous expansions, than another, it is Africa. No such occasional sudden expansions are there possible.

3. Winds do not, and can not, "_encounter_." They stratify upon each other. They are produced by the action of opposite electricity, and are _connected together_ in their origin and action. The atmosphere is never free from the regular and irregular currents, however invisible for the want of condensation. Aeronauts find them in the most serene days. They exist without encounter or tendency to rotation, every where, and at all times; even over the head of the distinguished Professor, whether he sleeps or is awake. We can all see them when there is condensation, and it is rarely the case that there is not some degree of it in some of them.

4. That "Great region of expansion" is a chimera. It does not exist. It is a region of _lower temperature_, and of _condensation_, instead of _expansion_ of _aqueous vapor_. The trade does not rise in it, or the S.

W. wind overflow from it. See the table cited page 165.

5. The hurricanes do not originate _in the surface trades_, as he supposes. They originate in the belt of rains, the supposed "region of expansion," and issue out of it; or in the counter-trade, where volcanic elevations rise far into or above the surface trade.

6. This hypothesis can not be sustained upon his own principles. The distance between Africa and the West India Islands, where most of the hurricanes originate, is from 2,500 to 3,000 miles. These gales are small when they commence, not ordinarily over one or two hundred miles in diameter, and often less. There are trades all the way over from Africa, and S. W. winds also, if they exist, as he supposes, in the West Indies.

How can it happen that this lateral overflow should pa.s.s _without effect_, over 2,500 miles of S. W. wind and trade, and concentrating the overflow of a continent over one small and chosen spot of the West Indies, _pitch down_ there, and there only, and crowd the S. W. wind into the trade below? This is too much for sensible men to believe.

What does Professor Dove mean by the term _impulsion_, as applied to the winds? How are they _impelled_? It is the fundamental idea of his calorific theory, that they are _drawn_ by the _suction_ caused by a _vacuum_, and the vacuum created by expansion and overflow above, in obedience to the law of gravity; that the S. E. trade is drawn to the great region of expansion, and the S. W. runs from it as an overflow. But if the S. W. is driven down into the plane and place of the surface-trades, how does it continue to be impelled, and why is it not then subject to the suction of the vacuum which draws the trade? Does that vacuum _select its air_, and so attract the trade, in preference to the depressed portion of the S. W. current, that the former runs around the latter to get to the vacuum, and the latter around the former to get away from it? And does the trade, when it has got around the S. W. current, instead of going to the vacuum, continue to gyrate, and the S. W. current, instead of pursuing its regular course, gyrate also about the trade, and both move off together, regardless of the vacuum of the great region of expansion, in a new direction to the N. W., in an independent, self-sustaining, cyclonic movement, increasing in power and extent, involving extended and increasing condensation, producing the most violent electrical phenomena, and thus continuing up, even to the Arctic circle?

Yes, says Professor Dove. No, say all fact, all a.n.a.logy, and his own principles.

7. His theory relative to the typhoons is unintelligible. If they originate near the lateral confines of the great region of atmospheric expansion, they originate in the region of the trade-winds, for the two are identical. How the direct pressure of the air from the trade-wind over the Pacific, in the more expanded air of the monsoon region, can occasion a typhoon upon any principles, pa.s.ses my comprehension. If, as Lieutenant Maury supposes, the monsoons are reversed trades, then the trade-wind and monsoon region are identical. If the monsoons are found in the belt of rains, then, the trades, upon Professor Dove's principles, pa.s.s into the monsoon region by attraction or suction, without pressure. Either way the theory is undeserving of consideration.

A new theory has recently been started by Mr. Thomas Dobson, and, although it is (like all other efforts to get the _upper strata down_ to produce condensation, or those below _up_, that they may be condensed), without foundation, his collection of facts is brief and interesting. I copy his article from the London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Phil. Mag., for December, 1853. It adds to the collection of facts in relation to the connection between volcanic action and storms for the seventeenth century, made by Dr. Webster:

The following appear to be the main facts which are available as a basis for a theory which shall comprehend all the meteors in question:

1st. The eruption of a submarine volcano has produced water-spouts.

"During these bursts the most vivid flashes of lightning continually issued from the densest part of the volcano, and the volumes of smoke rolled off in large ma.s.ses of fleecy clouds, gradually expanding themselves before the wind in a direction nearly horizontal, and drawing up _a quant.i.ty of water-spouts_."--(Captain Tilland's description of the upheaval of Sabrina Island in June, 1811, Phil.

Trans.)

With this significant fact may be compared the following a.n.a.logous ones:

"In the Aleutian Archipelago a new island was formed in 1795. It was first observed _after a storm_, at a point in the sea from which a column of smoke had been seen to rise."--(Lyell, Principles of Geology.)

"Among the Aleutian Islands a new volcanic island appeared in the midst of _a storm_, attended with flames and smoke. After the sea was calm, a boat was sent from Unalaska with twenty Russian hunters, who landed on this island on June 1st, 1814."--(Journal of Science, vol.

vii.)

"On July 24th, 1848, a submarine eruption broke out between the mainland of Orkney and the island of Strousa. Amid thunder and lightning, a very dense jet black cloud was seen to rise from the sea, at a distance of five or six miles, which _traveled toward the north-east_. On pa.s.sing over Strousa, the wind from a slight air became _a hurricane_, and a thick, well-defined belt of large hailstones was left on the island. The barometer fell two inches."--(Transactions Royal Society, Edinburg, vol. ix.)

2d. Hurricanes, whirlwinds, and hailstones accompany the paroxysms of volcanos.

"1730. A great volcanic eruption at Lancerote Island, and _a storm_, which was equally new and terrifying to the inhabitants, as they had never known one in the country before."--(Lyell, Principles of Geology, vol. ii.)

"1754. In the Philippine Islands a terrible volcanic eruption destroyed the town of Taal and several villages. Darkness, hurricanes, thunder, lightning, and earthquakes, alternated in frightful succession."--(Edinburgh Philosophical Journal.)

"In 1805, 1811, 1813, and 1830, during eruptions of Etna, caravans in the deserts of Africa perished by violent whirlwinds. In 1807, while Vesuvius was in eruption, a whirlwind destroyed a caravan."--(Rev. W.

B. Clarke in Tasw. Journal.)

"1815, Java. A tremendous eruption of Tombow Mountain. Between nine and ten P.M., ashes began to fall, and soon after _a violent whirlwind_ took up into the air the largest trees, men, horses, cattle, etc."--(Raffles' History of Java.)