Abstract
The study of geology has always attracted and profited from the efforts of dedicated amateurs. Even after its emergence at the beginning of the nineteenth century as a fully independent branch of science, the appearance of a growing cadre of professional geologists stimulated rather than inhibited the activity of a still larger band of amateurs. In England especially, geology was the popular science par excellence. Clergymen, professional men, scholars, leisured gentlemen, and scientists from other branches of science were all attracted to its problems. They filled the geological societies and made important contributions to the literature of the maturing science. Kelvin was such an amateur.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Thompson (1910), Kelvin, I: 9–10.
Ibid., I: 185–188. Even the title of this dissertation is in some doubt. Thompson recorded it as “De Caloris distributione per terrae corpus,” while Kelvin referred to it as “De Motu Caloris per Terrae Corpus.” See Kelvin (1882–1911), Mathematical Papers, III: 295.
Kelvin (1852), Dissipation of Mechanical Energy, p. 514.
Waterston (1853), Temperature and Mechanical Force, pp. 11–12.
Joule (1847), Mechanical Equivalent of Heat, pp. 173–176.
Kelvin (1854a), Energies of the Solar System, pp. 1–25.
Kelvin’s arguments here are remarkably similar to those put forward several years earlier by J. R. Mayer. But Mayer’s Beiträge zur Dynamik des Himmels, in popular Darstellung (Heilbronn, 1848) had been privately printed and was almost unknown in England until the early sixties when it played a prominent role in the controversy between Kelvin, P. G. Tait, and John Tyndall over the priority of the discovery of the conservation of energy. It finally appeared in English in April 1863 as “On Celestial Dynamics.” See Mayer, J. R. (1863a).
Kelvin (1854a), Energies of the Solar System, p. 21. Note added in May 1854.
Ibid., pp. 24–25. Note added in August 1854.
Kelvin (1854c), Mechanical Antecedents, pp. 37–38.
Hbid., p. 40.
Kelvin (1859b), Investigations of M. Le Verrier, pp. 134–137.
Kelvin (1860), Variations of the Periodic Times, pp. 138–140.
Thompson (1910), Kelvin, 1:411–414.
King, A. G. (1925), Kelvin the Man, p. 100.
The paper was Kelvin (1816b), Physical Considerations, pp. 141–144.
Kelvin (1862), Age of the Sun’s Heat, pp. 370–375.
Ibid., p. 372. Quoted from Kelvin (1854a) Energies of the Solar System, p. 5. (His italics)
Kelvin (1862), Age of the Sun’s Heat, pp. 373–375. The basic principle outlined here applies equally well to the theory that meteors are constandy replenishing the sun’s heat, and to the theory that they were merely the source of its primordial energy. It was the growing weight of astronomical evidence showing that the supply of meteors available was inadequate for his hypothesis, not the methodological problems involved, that forced Kelvin to abandon his original position.
Helmholtz (1856), Interaction of Natural Forces. The original lecture, “Über die Wechselwirkung der Naturkraft” was delivered on 7 Feb. 1854 in Könisberg, Prussia, Kant’s native city.
Kant’s nebular theory first appeared anonymously in 1755 and Laplace’s version some forty years later. See Kant (1755) Allgemeine Naturgeschichte and Laplace (1796), Système du Monde.
Kelvin (1854c), Mechanical Antecedents, pp. 38–39.
King, A. G. (1925), Kelvin the Man, pp. 100–102. From a letter from Kelvin to his brother-in-law, David King.
Thompson (1910), Kelvin, I: 411–417.
Kelvin (1862), Age of the Sun’s Heat, p. 375.
Ibid., p. 368.
Thompson (1910), Kelvin, I: 539. Letter from Phillips to Kelvin, 12 June 1861.
Between 1850 and 1853 Lyell and Hopkins as successive presidents of the Geological Society of London devoted their presidential addresses to a debate over the relative merits of uniformitarian and catastrophic geology. (See: Lyell (1850a), Presidential Address;
Lyell (1851), Presidential Address;
Hopkins (1853). Presidential Address.
For a discussion of this debate see: Cannon (1960), Uniformitarian-Catastrophist Debate.)
Kelvin (1854a), Energies of the Solar System, pp. 8–9.
Here, as in the case of Lyell’s Principles, it seems unlikely that Kelvin ever systematically read the Origin. Darwin’s calculation of time based on the denudation of the Weald (see chapter 3) was widely criticized in both the popular and scientific press, and thus Kelvin had no trouble in finding the point for attack. Certainly it is significant that he continued to attack Darwin’s calculation long after it had been removed from subsequent editions of the Origin. He was either unaware of or chose to ignore the fact that Darwin had retreated on the question of an exact time scale.
Kelvin (1871c), Presidential Address, pp. 197–205.
Kelvin (1863a), Secular Cooling.
Kelvin’s approach to the problem of the earth’s secutar cooling relied heavily upon the elegant mathematical analysis of heat transfer published by J. B. J. Fourier in 1822 (See Fourier (1822), Thèorie analytique de la chaleur.) and read by Kelvin in 1840. Moreover, Kelvin’s first published paper, prepared before he entered Cambridge in 1841, was a defense of part of Fourier’s theory, while his subsequent work makes it clear that the problems of heat transfer, including their application to the earth itself, occupied a significant part of his attention over the next several decades.
(See Thompson (1910), Kelvin, I: 14–22.)
In 1849, Forbes was engaged in a five-year series of observations of temperature gradients in different minerals and at different depths in several locations around Edinburgh. Kelvin apparently assisted him for a while and made use of the data gathered for many years. (See: Thompson (1910), Kelvin, I: 210
Shairp, Tait, and Adams (1873), Life of Forbes, pp. 463–464.)
Forbes also provided additional data when Kelvin was preparing “On the Secular Cooling of the Earth” in 1861. (See letter from Forbes to J. Phillips in Phillips’ (1869), Vesuvius, pp. 345–347.)
Between those dates, Kelvin published several papers on the problem of underground heat in which many of the elements of his subsequent calculation of time were developed, although the age of the earth itself was not mentioned. (See: Kelvin (1855), Observations of Terrestrial Temperature;
Kelvin (1859a), Variations of Underground Temperature;
Kelvin (1861a), Observations of Underground Temperature.)
See especially: Cordier (1827), Tempèrature de I’interieurde la terre;
Fourier (1827), Tempèrature du globe terrestre.
Descartes (1824–26), Le Monde;
Leibniz (1859), Protogèe;
Buffon (1853–54), Epochs of Nature.
Hopkins (1837–42), Interior of the Earth;
Hopkins (1839), Precession and Nutation.
Kelvin (1863a), Secular Cooling, p. 300.
Ibid., pp. 295–299.
Kelvin (1871a), Geological Time.
According to S. P. Thompson, this address may have been read for Kelvin, since at about this time his wife’s continued ill health carried him to the continent and for many months he read no other papers. (See: Thompson (1910), Kelvin, I: 527.)
Kant (1755), Allgemeine Naturgeschichte;
Mayer (1863a), Celestial Dynamics; pp. 403–409.
Helmholtz (1856), Interaction of Natural Forces, pp. 510–12.
Kelvin (1871a), Geological Time, pp. 17–32, 39–40.
Ibid., p. 36.
Kelvin (1866c), Observations and Calculations, pp. 337–341.
See, e.g.: Kelvin (1872), Rigidity of the Earth;
Kelvin (1874), Geological Changes and the Earth’s Rotation;
Kelvin (1876), Review of the Evidence;
Kelvin (1882), Internal Condition of the Earth. (Also see letter from Kelvin to G. H. Darwin, 28 Dec. 1881 in Thompson (1910), Kelvin, II: 778–779.)
Kelvin’s statements of this belief appear as early as 1854 and continue throughout the century. (See: Kelvin (1854c), Mechanical Antecedents, pp. 36–37;
Kelvin (1871a), Geological Time, pp. 51–52;
Kelvin (1871b), Geological Dynamics, p. 129;
Kelvin (1881), Sources of Energy in Nature, pp. 435–37;
Kelvin (1889), On the Sun’s Heat, pp. 378–379, 391;
Kelvin (1892a), Dissipation of Energy, pp. 473–74.)
Thompson (1910), Kelvin, II: 860.
Kelvin (1889), On the Sun’s Heat.
Ibid., p. 397.
Kelvin (1892a), Dissipation of Energy, p. 474.
The quotation is taken from Kelvin (1852), Dissipation of Mechanical Energy, p. 514. (My italics)
Kelvin (1863a), Secular Cooling, p. 300;
Kelvin (1876), Geological Time, p. 64;
Kelvin (1876), Review of the Evidence, p. 243;
Kelvin (1899), Age of the Earth, pp. 215–216, 226;
Thompson (1910), Kelvin, II: 779.
Kelvin (1895a), Age of the Earth, p. 227. The full importance of the exchange with Perry is discussed in Chapter 5.
Kelvin (1876), Review of the Evidence, pp. 238–43.
Kelvin never published an endorsement of the implications of radioactivity for geological time. On the contrary, as is discussed in Chapter 6, he opposed the idea that radioactive materials could spontaneously emit heat without being supplied by an outside source. Nonetheless, J. J. Thomson reports that in private conversation Kelvin did concede that his theories had been overthrown. (See: Thomson, J. J. (1936), Recollections, p. 420.)
Archibald Geikie attributed to Joseph Larmor the following statement, supposedly uttered at Kelvin’s funeral: “Conceive a perfectly level line drawn from the summit of Newton’s genius across all the intervening generations; probably the only man who reached it in these two centuries has been Kelvin.” Geikie, A. (1924), Autobiography, pp. 350–351.
Such opinions, if not quite so extreme or poetic, were common, ranging from Helmholtz’s opinion of the young Kelvin (Thompson (1910), Kelvin, 1:310, 324–25)
Frank Harris’ observation on the leader of British science (Harris (1963), Life and Loves, p. 389).
Quoted in King, A. G. (1925), Kelvin the Man, p. 96.
A brief but authoritative discussion of this point is given in Thomson, J. J. (1936), Recollections, p. 421.
Perry (1895a), Age of the Earth, p. 224.
Jenkin (1867), Origin of Species.
Thompson (1910), Kelvin, II: 1086–1097;
King, A. G. (1925), Kelvin the Man, pp. 28–31.
This opinion, it should be noted, is directly contrary to that expressed in Eiseley (1961), Darwin’s Century, pp. 234–235.
Kelvin (1871c), Presidential Address– p. 200.
Kelvin (1871a), Geological Time, p. 35.
Darwin, C. (1859), Origin, p. 488,
all subsequent editions. (Also see: Mandelbaum (1958), Darwin’s Religious Views.)
Hutton (1788), Theory of the Earth, p. 304.
For a valuable discussion of Lyell’s views on this point see: Rudwick (1970), Strategy of Lyell’s Principles, especially pp. 7–8.
Kelvin makes this point specifically clear several times, as for example in Kelvin (1863a), Secular Cooling, p. 295
Kelvin (1871b), Geological Dynamics, p. 77.
Copyright information
© 1975 Science History Publications
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Burchfield, J.D. (1975). Kelvin and the Physics of Time. In: Lord Kelvin and the Age of the Earth. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-02565-7_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-02565-7_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-02567-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-02565-7
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)