Astronomical Myths: Based on Flammarions's "History of the Heavens"Flammarion, Camille
Philosophy
Astronomical Myths: Based on Flammarions's "History of the Heavens"
Flammarion, Camille
Astronomy -- History; Constellations; Cosmology
The question is one that stands on a very different footing from that it
occupied before the days of Galileo and Copernicus. _Then_ the earth was
believed to be the centre of the universe, and all the heavens and stars
created for it. _Then_ the commencement of the world was the
commencement of the universe, its destruction would be the destruction
of all. _Now_, thanks to the revolution in feeling that has been
accomplished by the progress of astronomy, we have learned our own
insignificance, and that amongst the infinite number of stars, each
supporting their own system of inhabited planets, our earth occupies an
infinitesimally small portion, and the destruction of it would make no
difference whatever--still less its becoming uninhabitable. It is an
event which must have happened and be happening to other worlds, without
affecting the infinite life of the universe in any marked degree.
Nevertheless, for ourselves, the question remains as interesting as if
we were the all in all, but must be approached in a different manner.
Numerous hypotheses have been put forth on the question but they may
mostly be dismissed as vain.
Buffon calculated that it had taken 74,832 years for the earth to cool
down to its present temperature, and that it will take 93,291 years
more before it would be too cold for men to live upon it. But Sir
William Thomson has shown that the internal heat of the earth, supposed
to be due to its cooling from fusion, cannot have seriously modified
climate for a long series of years, and that life depends essentially on
the heat of the sun.
Another hypothesis, the most ancient of all, is that which supposes the
earth will be destroyed by fire. It comes down from Zoroaster and the
Jews; and on the improbable supposition of the thin crust of the earth
over a molten mass, this is thought possible. However, as the tendency
in the past has been all the other way, namely, to make the effect of
the inner heat of the earth less marked on the surface, we have no
reason to expect a reversal.
A third theory would make the earth die more gradually and more surely.
It is known that by the wearing down of the surface by the rains and
rivers, there is a tendency to reduce mountains and all high parts of
the earth to a uniform level, a tendency which is only counteracted by
some elevating force within the earth. If these elevating forces be
supposed to be due to the internal heat--a hypothesis which cannot be
proved--then with the cooling of the earth the elevating forces would
cease, and, finally, the whole of the continent would be brought beneath
the sea and terrestrial life perish.
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