A century of science in America : $b with special reference to the American Journal of Science, 1818-1918
History
A century of science in America : $b with special reference to the American Journal of Science, 1818-1918
American journal of science; Science -- United States -- History
a horizontal yielding in one direction would by no means be a general
relief.”
Dutton’s criticisms robbed the current hypothesis of mountain-making of
its conventional basis without providing a new foundation. It was a
quarter of a century in advance of its time, has been seldom cited, and
seems to have had but little direct influence in shaping subsequent
thought. It, however, gave direction to Dutton’s views, and his later
papers were far-reaching in their influence.
If contraction from external cooling is not the cause of the compressive
forces it is necessary to seek another cause. Two years later, in 1876,
Dutton attempted to provide an answer to this open question.[91] A
review of this paper, evidently by J. D. Dana, is given in the Journal.
The following explanations of Dutton’s theory and of Dana’s comments
upon it are contained in a few paragraphs from this review (=12=, 142,
1876).
“Captain Dutton presents in this paper the views brought out in his
article in volume viii of this Journal, with fuller illustrations, and
adds explanations of his theory of the origin of mountains. The
discussion should be read by all desiring to reach right conclusions,
it presenting many arguments from physical considerations against the
contraction-theory, or that of the uplifting and folding of strata
through lateral pressure. There is much to be learned before any
theory of mountain-making shall have a sufficient foundation in
observed facts to demand full confidence, and Captain Dutton merits
the thanks of geologists for the aid he has given them toward reaching
right conclusions. His discussions are not free from misunderstandings
of geological facts, and if they fail to be finally received it will
be for this reason.
We here give in a brief form, and nearly in his own words, the
principal points in his theory of mountain-making as explained in the
later part of his memoir.
Accepting the proposition that there is a plastic condition of rock
beneath the earth’s crust and that metamorphism is a ‘hydrothermal
process,’ and believing that ‘the penetration of water to profound
depths [in the earth’s crust] is a well sustained theory,’ he says
that great pressure and a temperature approaching redness are
essential conditions of metamorphism.... ‘The heaviest portion would
sink into the lighter colloid mass underneath, protruding it laterally
beneath the lighter portions where, by its lighter density, it tends
to accumulate.’ He adds: ‘The resulting movements would be determined,
first, by the amount of difference in the densities of the upper and
lower masses, and, second, by inequalities in the thickness of the
strata: the forces now become adequate to the building of mountains
and the plication of strata, and their modes of operation agree with
the classes of facts already set forth as the concomitants of those
features.’
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account