## 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.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- 1.Thompson (1910),
*Kelvin*, I: 9–10.Google Scholar - 2.
*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.Google Scholar - 3.Kelvin (1852),
*Dissipation of Mechanical Energy*, p. 514.Google Scholar - 4.Waterston (1853),
*Temperature and Mechanical Force*, pp. 11–12.Google Scholar - 5.Joule (1847),
*Mechanical Equivalent of Heat*, pp. 173–176.Google Scholar - 6.Kelvin (1854a),
*Energies of the Solar System*, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar - 7.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).Google Scholar - 8.Kelvin (1854a),
*Energies of the Solar System*, p. 21. Note added in May 1854.Google Scholar - 9.
*Ibid*., pp. 24–25. Note added in August 1854.Google Scholar - 10.Kelvin (1854c),
*Mechanical Antecedents*, pp. 37–38.Google Scholar - 11.
*Hbid*., p. 40.Google Scholar - 12.Kelvin (1859b),
*Investigations of M. Le Verrier*, pp. 134–137.Google Scholar - 13.Kelvin (1860),
*Variations of the Periodic Times*, pp. 138–140.Google Scholar - 14.Thompson (1910),
*Kelvin*, 1:411–414.Google Scholar - King, A. G. (1925),
*Kelvin the Man*, p. 100.Google Scholar - The paper was Kelvin (1816b),
*Physical Considerations*, pp. 141–144.Google Scholar - 15.Kelvin (1862),
*Age of the Sun’s Heat*, pp. 370–375.Google Scholar - 16.
*Ibid*., p. 372. Quoted from Kelvin (1854a)*Energies of the Solar System*, p. 5. (His italics)Google Scholar - 17.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.Google Scholar - 18.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.Google Scholar - 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*.Google Scholar - 19.Kelvin (1854c),
*Mechanical Antecedents*, pp. 38–39.Google Scholar - 20.King, A. G. (1925),
*Kelvin the Man*, pp. 100–102. From a letter from Kelvin to his brother-in-law, David King.Google Scholar - 21.Thompson (1910),
*Kelvin*, I: 411–417.Google Scholar - 22.Kelvin (1862),
*Age of the Sun’s Heat*, p. 375.Google Scholar - 23.
*Ibid*., p. 368.Google Scholar - 24.Thompson (1910),
*Kelvin*, I: 539. Letter from Phillips to Kelvin, 12 June 1861.Google Scholar - 25.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*;Google Scholar - Lyell (1851),
*Presidential Address*;Google Scholar - Hopkins (1853).
*Presidential Address*.Google Scholar - For a discussion of this debate see: Cannon (1960),
*Uniformitarian-Catastrophist Debate*.)Google Scholar - 27.Kelvin (1854a),
*Energies of the Solar System*, pp. 8–9.Google Scholar - 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.Google Scholar - 29.Kelvin (1871c),
*Presidential Address*, pp. 197–205.Google Scholar - 30.Kelvin (1863a),
*Secular Cooling*.Google Scholar - 31.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.Google Scholar - (See Thompson (1910),
*Kelvin*, I: 14–22.)Google Scholar - 32.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: 210Google Scholar - Shairp, Tait, and Adams (1873),
*Life of Forbes*, pp. 463–464.)Google Scholar - 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.)Google Scholar - 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*;Google Scholar - Kelvin (1859a),
*Variations of Underground Temperature*;Google Scholar - Kelvin (1861a),
*Observations of Underground Temperature*.)Google Scholar - 33.See especially: Cordier (1827),
*Tempèrature de I’interieurde la terre*;Google Scholar - Fourier (1827),
*Tempèrature du globe terrestre*.Google Scholar - 34.Descartes (1824–26),
*Le Monde*;Google Scholar - Leibniz (1859),
*Protogèe*;Google Scholar - Buffon (1853–54),
*Epochs of Nature*.Google Scholar - 35.Hopkins (1837–42),
*Interior of the Earth*;Google Scholar - Hopkins (1839),
*Precession and Nutation*.Google Scholar - 36.Kelvin (1863a),
*Secular Cooling*, p. 300.Google Scholar - 37.
*Ibid*., pp. 295–299.Google Scholar - 38.Kelvin (1871a),
*Geological Time*.Google Scholar - 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.)Google Scholar - 39.Kant (1755),
*Allgemeine Naturgeschichte*;Google Scholar - Mayer (1863a),
*Celestial Dynamics*; pp. 403–409.Google Scholar - Helmholtz (1856),
*Interaction of Natural Forces*, pp. 510–12.Google Scholar - 40.Kelvin (1871a),
*Geological Time*, pp. 17–32, 39–40.Google Scholar - 41.
*Ibid*., p. 36.Google Scholar - 42.Kelvin (1866c),
*Observations and Calculations*, pp. 337–341.Google Scholar - 43.See, e.g.: Kelvin (1872),
*Rigidity of the Earth*;Google Scholar - Kelvin (1874),
*Geological Changes and the Earth’s Rotation*;Google Scholar - Kelvin (1876),
*Review of the Evidence*;Google Scholar - 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.)Google Scholar - 44.Kelvin’s statements of this belief appear as early as 1854 and continue throughout the century. (See: Kelvin (1854c),
*Mechanical Antecedents*, pp. 36–37;Google Scholar - Kelvin (1871a),
*Geological Time*, pp. 51–52;Google Scholar - Kelvin (1871b),
*Geological Dynamics*, p. 129;Google Scholar - Kelvin (1881),
*Sources of Energy in Nature*, pp. 435–37;Google Scholar - Kelvin (1889),
*On the Sun’s Heat*, pp. 378–379, 391;Google Scholar - Kelvin (1892a),
*Dissipation of Energy*, pp. 473–74.)Google Scholar - 45.Thompson (1910),
*Kelvin*, II: 860.Google Scholar - 46.Kelvin (1889),
*On the Sun’s Heat*.Google Scholar - 47.
*Ibid*., p. 397.Google Scholar - 48.Kelvin (1892a),
*Dissipation of Energy*, p. 474.Google Scholar - The quotation is taken from Kelvin (1852),
*Dissipation of Mechanical Energy*, p. 514. (My italics)Google Scholar - 49.Kelvin (1863a),
*Secular Cooling*, p. 300;Google Scholar - Kelvin (1876),
*Geological Time*, p. 64;Google Scholar - Kelvin (1876),
*Review of the Evidence*, p. 243;Google Scholar - Kelvin (1899),
*Age of the Earth*, pp. 215–216, 226;Google Scholar - Thompson (1910),
*Kelvin*, II: 779.Google Scholar - 50.Kelvin (1895a),
*Age of the Earth*, p. 227. The full importance of the exchange with Perry is discussed in Chapter 5.Google Scholar - 51.Kelvin (1876),
*Review of the Evidence*, pp. 238–43.Google Scholar - 52.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.)Google Scholar - 53.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.Google Scholar - 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)Google Scholar - Frank Harris’ observation on the leader of British science (Harris (1963),
*Life and Loves*, p. 389).Google Scholar - 54.Quoted in King, A. G. (1925),
*Kelvin the Man*, p. 96.Google Scholar - 55.A brief but authoritative discussion of this point is given in Thomson, J. J. (1936),
*Recollections*, p. 421.Google Scholar - 56.Perry (1895a),
*Age of the Earth*, p. 224.Google Scholar - 57.Jenkin (1867),
*Origin of Species*.Google Scholar - 58.Thompson (1910),
*Kelvin*, II: 1086–1097;Google Scholar - King, A. G. (1925),
*Kelvin the Man*, pp. 28–31.Google Scholar - This opinion, it should be noted, is directly contrary to that expressed in Eiseley (1961),
*Darwin’s Century*, pp. 234–235.Google Scholar - 59.Kelvin (1871c),
*Presidential Address*– p. 200.Google Scholar - 60.Kelvin (1871a),
*Geological Time*, p. 35.Google Scholar - 61.Darwin, C. (1859),
*Origin*, p. 488,Google Scholar - all subsequent editions. (Also see: Mandelbaum (1958),
*Darwin’s Religious Views*.)Google Scholar - 62.Hutton (1788),
*Theory of the Earth*, p. 304.Google Scholar - 63.For a valuable discussion of Lyell’s views on this point see: Rudwick (1970),
*Strategy of Lyell’s Principles*, especially pp. 7–8.Google Scholar - 64.Kelvin makes this point specifically clear several times, as for example in Kelvin (1863a),
*Secular Cooling*, p. 295Google Scholar - Kelvin (1871b),
*Geological Dynamics*, p. 77.Google Scholar