THE AUTHOR 's THEORY or THE TIDES 155 



The solar tide being thus found to be 7.8 feet, to find 

 the lunar tide we simply divide this amount by 180, yield- 

 ing only a trifle more than a half inch. These figures, 

 let it be noted, are substantial quantities, derived as they 

 are from well-ascertained relevant data, and may not 

 fairly be compared with Newton's estimates, based as 

 they were on the spurious standard of the thickness of the 

 equatorial ring. If a comparison be desired at all, the 

 fair and logical way is to contrast my results with the 

 1-20 and 1-80 inch tidal measures for the moon and 

 sun respectively, which, by parallel computation, I de- 

 rived in a previous chapter. 



THE CAUSE OF THE EARTH'S DIURNAL 

 ROTATION 



It has been previously demonstrated, not only by the 

 author's original arguments, but by the quoted admis- 

 sions of such orthodox authorities as Sir Robert Ball and 

 Sir John Herschel, that Newton's premises presuppose 

 a miraculous origin of the earth 's axial rotation and, 

 what is more, provide no recuperating source to make 

 good future losses. As if this were not taxing human 

 credulity enough, we have been further taught: first, by 

 Newton and Herschel, that the equatorial ring is being 

 centrifugalized throughout the ages by this mysterious 

 power; second, by Kant, that the rotation is being slowly 

 destroyed by the friction of the tides; thirdly, by Ball 

 and the rest, that all the energy that goes into the lifting 

 of the tides flows from this same store of unearned mo- 

 mentum; and, lastly, that, marvel of marvels, the histori- 

 cal records of some five thousand years of eclipses inform 

 us that, in spite of all these monstrous drains, the earth 's 

 day has not lengthened by so much as a hundredth of 

 a second of time! Truly, celestial mechanics as taught 

 by our " great scientific institutions" is quite as far 

 above the heads of common mortals as Dr. Abbot says. 



Counting myself as one of this plebeian caste, I con- 

 fess, without any sense of shame, my simplicity in sup- 

 posing that the earth's axial rotation had a dynamical 



