426 



SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS 



VOL. 51 



If we compare the numbers in table v with those before given 

 then the departures between the values deduced from observation 

 and those computed by the formulas give a similar picture. But 

 the positive differences in the lower latitudes stand out more 

 prominently in correspondence to the greater surface that the 

 equatorial regions occupy so that the latter receive their proper 

 weight only in this method of collation. 



Similar remarks apply to table vi which now allows us to recog- 

 nize the differences of the temperatures of the two hemispheres in 

 a manner corresponding to the true importance of the individual 

 zones. 



The two tables v and vi show in admirable manner the syste- 

 matic departures from the formula that are caused by the dissimilar 

 distribution of water and land over the two hemispheres. 



The last columns of these tables are also worthy of notice as they 

 also show that there are differences between the values deduced by 

 Spitaler and Batchelder that, so far as concerns magnitude, are of 

 the same order as the differences between the computation and 

 observation of holospheric means. We thus perceive how perfectly 

 the formula is adopted to represent the average distribution of 

 temperature. 



Table VI. Comparison between the hemispheric values deduced from observa- 

 tion and the computed values 



These last columns also show that the departures between the 

 numbers found by the two authors progress quite regularly. From 



