August, 1904.] 



KNOWLEDGE & SCIENTIFIC NEWS. 



181 



cle\elopmcnt of energy. Mass and energy may, alter all, 

 be interchangeable; they are, at any rate, kept less 

 rigidly apart in our nieclitations than used lornierly to 

 be the case. Xor can we assert with any conlklence 

 that partial subsidences into, or emergences Ironi, the 

 surrounding medium is for either a slieer impossibility; 

 the universal framework, on the contrary, presents it- 

 self to us in the guise of an iridescent fountain leaping 

 upward from, and falling back towards, the ethereal 

 reservoir. 



To the very brink of that mysterious ocean the 

 science of the twentieth century has brougiit us; and it 

 is with a thrill of wondering awe that we stand at its 

 verge and survey its illimitaole expanse. The glory of 

 the heavens is transitory, but the impalpable, invisible 

 ether inconceivably remains. Such as it is to-day, it 

 already was when the t lat Lux was spoken; its 

 beginning must liave been coeval with that of time. 

 Nothing or everything according to the manner in 

 wfiich It is accounted of, it is evasive of common 

 notice, while obtrusive to delicate scrutiny. Its nega- 

 tive qualities are numerous and balliing. It has no 

 effect in impeding motion; it docs not perceptibly 

 arrest, absorb, or scatter light; it pervades, yet has 

 (apparently) no share in the displacements of gross 

 matter. Looking, however, below the surface of 

 things, we find the semi-fabulous quintessence to be 

 unobtrusively doing all the world's work. It embodies 

 the energies of motion; is, perhaps, in a very real 

 sense, the true ■prtmum mobile ; the potencies of matter 

 are rooted in it ; the substance of matter is latent in it ; 

 universal intercourse is maintained by means of the 

 ether ; cosmic influences can be exerted only through 

 its aid ; unfelt, it is the source of solidity ; unseen, it is 

 the vehicle of light ; itself non-phenomenal, it is the 

 indispensable originator of phenomena. A contradic- 

 tion in terms, it points the perennial moral that what 

 eludes the senses is likely to be more permanently and 

 intensely actual than what strikes them. 



Pure science has usually, at all times and in all coun- 

 tries, been poorly paid, and we are reminded by an 

 article by Father Tondorf in Popular Aslronomy that the 

 great Repler had to supplement pure astronomy by 

 doubtful astrology. Kepler did not believe in astrology. 

 " Your error," he writes to a friend, '' is one common to 

 the greater part of the school of doctors, who fancy 

 that fortunes drop from the skies. Naught conies thence 

 save light ' — but he had to supply horoscopes in order 

 \.y supplement an insufficient income. Some of those 

 v.ho applied to him for predictions from the stars were 

 half convinced with him tluit Astrology wiis the '" foolish 

 little daughter of Mother .Astronomy," as witness the 

 following letter to Kepler from Zeheutmeyer, secretary 

 of Baron von Heberstein : " You are a man busied in 

 scientific investigation and in reading the future in the 

 stars. Please inform me whether these heavenly bodies 

 indicate anything in particular regarding this section of 

 tiie country. The 15aron, my dear sir, is extremely 

 anxious to give you, a man of such authority, a say in 

 this matter. 1 am far from ignorant of your conviction 

 that nothing can be foretold with certainty ; in fact, 

 that the science of a.strology is a vague and tre^icherous 

 art. However, you know how man hankers after news, 

 and how he would have nature forewarn him of the 

 future. I pray you, then, send me something. Harbour 

 no fear. Wliat you send shall be considered strictly 

 confidential." 



Sunspot VaLriaction in 

 Latitvide. 



I>V W'll.lIAM |. .S. I.IX K^ li.!, M..\. 



.1). 



In the .\slronomiral Xotes m this journal lor July relcr- 

 ence was made to a \cry l)ricf discussion which took 

 place at the Royal .'\slrononiical Society on June 10 on 

 the abo\c suljject. As this note seems to suggest that 



^. 



J\ 



N 





m: 



M\\\ 



. 1870. 



/A 

 _r<:_ A^ I860 



lLL yil 1681. 



iA 



<^^ 



y 



A 



I / 



}^\ 



,1^ I8B3 



1684. 



1865 



188ft 

 1667 



"~^^ 



..^^ 



1688 



1889. 

 1690 



1661 



1865 



1672 



1886 



40 20 - - 10 40 



40 30 20 10- MO 20 30 10 

 S N 



Pijf. I. — The di)tted lines indicate Hijc- 2.— 5nme typical curves, 



the loci of miivenient of the ind.- showinif the distribution of spotted 



V idual maxima of spotted area or area per 3^ /.ones. 



the ■:! ot-activit'j tiiUki, 



tlic results I have puljlished (Roy. Soc. I'roc. vol. 73, 

 p. 142) are entirely in disagreement with (hose set forth 

 by Father Cortic, perhaps I may be permitti^d to make 

 the following remarks : — 



Mention may first be made as to tin- meaning of the 

 term " spot-activity track," which 1 think has been 

 somewhat misunderstood by both I'alluT Cortie and 

 .Mr. .Maunder. The accompanying figure (Fig. i), 

 whi<-h includes a complete sunspot cycle, may, per- 

 haps, help to make this term clearer. ICach jjair of 

 cur\es above each horizontal line represents the varia- 

 tion in latitude of spotted area throughout a year as 

 determined by summing up the spotted area for each 



