"Second, the changing water carried away the heat as fast as it was
produced. While it is true that a cannon ball becomes heated in its
motion through the air, its surface is cooled when it strikes a body of
water, notwithstanding that its great velocity is altogether overcome by
the water. The friction between the water and the iron does not result
in heated iron, but the contrary. The water above the rapids of a river
has practically the temperature of the water below the rapids,
regardless of the friction that ensues between these points. Admit,
however, that heat is liberated as the result of the friction of solids
with water, and still it does not follow that this heat will perceptibly
affect the solid. With a boat each particle of water carries the heat
away, each succeeding portion of water takes up the heat liberated by
that preceding it. Thus the great body of water, over which our boat
sped, in obedience to the ordinary law, became slightly warmed, but its
effect upon the boat was scarcely perceptible. Your comparison of the
motion of a meteor, with that of our boat, was unhappy. We moved
rapidly, it is true, in comparison with the motion of vessels such as
you know, but comparison can not be easily drawn between the velocity of
a boat and that of a meteor. While we moved at the rate of many miles a
minute, a meteor moves many times faster, perhaps as many miles in a
second. Then you must remember that the force of gravitation was so
slight in our position that--"
"Enough," I interrupted. "We will pass the subject. It seems that you
draw upon science for knowledge to support your arguments, however
irrational they may be, and then you sneer at this same method of
argument when I employ it."
He replied to my peevish complaint with the utmost respect by calling to
my attention the fact that my own forced argument had led to the answer,
and that he had simply replied to my attacks. Said he:
"If I am wrong in my philosophy, based on your science thought, I am
right in my facts, and science thought is thus in the wrong, for facts
overbalance theory. I ask you only to give me the attention that my
statements merit. I am sincere, and aim to serve your interests. Should
investigation lead you hereafter to infer that I am in error, at our
final interview you can have my considerate attention. Be more
charitable, please."
Then he added:
"Is there any other subject you wish to argue?"
"Yes," I answered, and again my combativeness arose; "yes. One of the
truly edifying features of your narrative is that of the intelligent
guide," and I emphasized the word intelligent, and curled up my lip in a
sarcastic manner.
"Proceed."
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