Appletons' Popular Science Monthly, March 1900: Vol. 56, Nov. 1899 to April, 1900Various
History
Appletons' Popular Science Monthly, March 1900: Vol. 56, Nov. 1899 to April, 1900
Various
Science -- Periodicals; Technology -- Periodicals
The subject is still discussed very earnestly, but with little hope of
definite conclusion. One thing, however, must be remarked. Both parties
assume--the geologist tacitly, the physicist avowedly--the nebular
hypothesis of the origin of the solar system, and therefore the early
incandescent _fluid_ condition of the earth as the basis of all his
reasonings. Now, while this is probably the most reasonable view, it is
not so certain that it can be made the basis of complex mathematical
calculation. There is a possible alternative theory--viz., the meteoric
theory--which is coming more and more into favor. According to this
view, the planets may have been formed by aggregation of meteoric
swarms, and the heat of the earth produced by the collision of the
meteors in the act of aggregation. According to the one view (the
nebular), the heat is all primal, and the earth has been only losing
heat all the time. According to the other, the aggregation and the
heating are both gradual, and may have continued even since the earth
was inhabited. According to the one, the spendthrift earth wasted
nearly all its energy before it became habitable or even a crust was
formed, and therefore the habitable period must be comparatively short.
According to the other, the cooling and the heating, the expenditure
and the income, were going on at the same time, and therefore the
process may have lasted much longer.
The subject is much too complex to be discussed here. Suffice it to
say that on this latter view not only the age of the earth, but many
other fundamental problems of dynamical geology, would have to be
recalculated. The solution of these great questions must also be left
to the next century. In the meantime we simply draw attention to two
very recent papers on the subject--viz., that of Lord Kelvin,[3] and
criticism of the same by Chamberlin.[4]
ANTIQUITY AND ORIGIN OF MAN.
Even after the great antiquity of the earth and its origin and
development by a natural process were generally accepted, still man
was believed, even by the most competent geologists, to have appeared
only a few thousand years ago. The change from this old view took
place in the last half of the present century--viz., about 1859--and,
coming almost simultaneously with the publication of Darwin's Origin of
Species, prepared the scientific mind for entertaining, at least, the
idea of man's origin by a natural process of evolution.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account