Physical science in the time of Nero : $b being a translation of the Quaestiones naturales of SenecaSeneca, Lucius Annaeus
Philosophy
Physical science in the time of Nero : $b being a translation of the Quaestiones naturales of Seneca
Seneca, Lucius Annaeus
Comets; Earthquakes; Meteorology -- Early works to 1800
Wind is the atmosphere in motion. Some have put the definition thus: 1
Wind is the atmosphere in motion in one direction. The latter seems the
more accurate, because the atmosphere is never so still as not to be in
agitation of some kind. In a similar way the sea is called calm when
it is only slightly moved and does not set in a particular direction.
Thus, if you read the verse:
When the winds slumbered and the sea was still,
you must bear in mind that the sea was not actually still, but heaved
gently; and that it is called calm in a comparative sort of way 2
because it receives no distinct impulse to this side or to that. The
same opinion is likewise to be adopted in regard to the atmosphere:
it is never absolutely motionless, even though it be still. This you
may gather from the following observation: When the sun pours into
any circumscribed space, one sees minute particles carried through
the air in different directions, some up, some down, meeting each
other in a great variety of ways. Therefore, if one say: a wave is 3
an agitation of the sea, one will very imperfectly express what is
meant, because even when at rest the sea is agitated. But one will
more than sufficiently safeguard oneself if the definition be: a
wave is an agitation of the sea in one direction. So in the subject
which at the moment forms our special topic, the definition will not
be unduly restricted if one is careful to say: wind is the atmosphere
flowing in one direction; or, wind is atmosphere flowing through some
impulse, or, is the force of the atmosphere going in one direction,
or, is a rush of the atmosphere more forcible than usual in some one
direction. I am aware of a criticism that may be made in regard to
the first definition. What need is there to add that it is in one 4
direction that the atmosphere flows? For surely whatever flows, flows
in one direction. No one says that water flows if there is simply
an internal movement of it, but only if it is borne in a particular
direction. So a substance may be in motion and yet not flow; but, on
the other hand, it cannot flow except in one direction. Well, if, on
the one hand, the shorter definition is free from cavil, let us employ
it; but if, on the other, any one is a stickler, let him not omit the
phrase whose addition will serve to preclude all ambiguity. Now that we
have sufficiently discussed our terms, let us come to grapple with our
problem at closer quarters.
II
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