20 



SCIENCE. 



to one class or the other. So far success seems to favor 

 us. Doubt is ihe mainspring of progress, and -this 

 doubting of a fact which has long been maintained to be 

 cf no importance may be the key to open up unknown 

 vistas of research. 



It will, however, be conceded in a matter of no import- 

 portance that this dual classification .may be incorrect. 

 This we believe to be the case, for one very important 

 element — hydrogen — is given in every classification 

 among the non-met?llic elements, while the element 

 itself is admitted to be metallic ; a strange and incom- 

 prehensible misplacement. Whether the others are right 

 or not only extensive experiments will determine. With 

 this rectification, however, they are so far correct that 

 the movements of Nature are opened to us as by a mira- 

 cle. The lock cleared of this obstruction opens readily 

 to the key, and Materialism rules triumphant. We seem 

 premature ; how does the duality of the elements solve 

 all mysteries ? 



The object of this paper was to prove the materialistic 

 origin of the sexes — that sex had its origin in matter. 

 That matter is dual is part confirmation of it, but, like its 

 antitype, we must also prove dual matter to be product- 

 ive. Two females will not produce, neither will two 

 males. If a piodaction can be formed from the non- 

 metallic elements only, or metallic only, then our theory 

 is false ; production should only ensue from the connec- 

 tion or interaction of opposite sexes and elements. 

 Chemical analysis in this particular shows that we are 

 right. No natural production can be found containing 

 the elements of only one class; both metallic and non- 

 metallic are essential to a formation. In simple labora- 

 tory experiments the opposite elements will combine 

 readily with one another, while combination cannot be 

 produced among the elements of either class alone. 

 Even the simplest natural productions, such as air ar.d 

 water, are of dual combinations. Air composed of ox)- 

 gen, nitrogen, carbonic acid gas, hydrogen, etc. Water, 

 composed of oxygen and hydrogen, is the great medium 

 also of life and production. Even the old element, fire 

 or combustion, can only be produced from oxygen and 

 hydrogen, with other opposing dual elements. All rock 

 formations, crystals, stratas, are produced from combina- 

 tions of the dual elements. All plants and vegetation 

 are of dual formation and dual in sex, while all animals 

 are undoubtedly male and female. 



Our premises being thus clear and true regarding the 

 elements of the matter, it follows that — as all plants and 

 animals are composed of the same elements, of oxygen, 

 hydrogen, etc., in different proportions and combinations 

 — the conclusion we have been seeking is inevitable, 

 namely, sex in either animal or vegetable life is derived 

 f rom and had its origin in the duality of matter. 



What causes dual matter to combine and be product- 

 ive would lead us into another inquiry as to the origin of 

 life from matter; but this we reserve for future consider- 

 ation. — Journal of Science, England. 



THE MECHANICS OF BIRD-FLIGHT. 



The mechanics of the flight of birds have been much 

 studied, and considerable space has been recently given 

 to the subject in the columns of the English Mechanic. 

 A new contribution has been recently made to a Silesian 

 Society by MM. Legal and Reichel, whose researches 

 deal with the relations of the size of the muscles of flight, 

 and the size and form of a wing-surface, to the power of 

 Might, and a short account may be of interest. (An ab- 

 stract of the authors' observations appears in a receut 

 number of Na/urforscher.) 



The authors bsgin by considering the question, whether 

 the absolute size of a bird is of importance with regard to 

 its flying power, e., whether two birds, which consid- 

 erably differ in size from each other, but are geometri- 

 cally similar in their whole bodily structure, fly equally 



well. The final answer to this is (as we shall see) a dis- 

 tinct negative. The authors have measured in a great 

 number of birds, the weight of the muscles of flight, 

 especially the most important of these, the great breast 

 muscle, as also its antagonist, the wing raising musculus 

 subclavius, and compared it with the body-weight. The 

 ratio of weight of the right and left large breast-muscle 

 to the body-weight varied in the different bird species 

 that were examined, from i : 3.4 in the pigeon, to 1 : 10.5 

 in the gull. But if the bird- species are arranged accord- 

 ing to the amount of this quotient, neither the equally 

 gcod flyers come together, nor birds of equal absolute 

 size ; e. g., the partridge stands pretty well forward in the 

 series with 1 : 4.8, near and before the hawk 1:5; while 

 the sparrow, stork, and eagle, stand with about 1 : 6 

 near one another. Certainly, with increasing body- 

 weight, the muscular system concerned in fl ght does not 

 become relatively greater. The size of the muscles of 

 flight is only one factor in flying-power. 



A second, and very important factor is the surface pre- 

 sented by the outspread wing (the wing-surface) ; and 

 here, again, it is not immaterial in which direction the 

 surface extends. With equal wing-surface, a long nar- 

 row surface has more effect than a short and broad one, 

 as a long rudder is more powerful than a short one. The 

 authors have therefore given drawings cf the form of the 

 outspread wings fcr 37 different bird species, and indi- 

 cated in figures the surface and length (wing configura- 

 tion). A calculation of the mechanical action showed 

 that where the ratio of the surface and leng:h of the wing 

 to the size of the bird remained the same, the angle of 

 the wing motion and the angular velocity of the wing 

 also remain the same ; also that with the absolute size of 

 the bird the air-resistance against the wings increases in 

 the fourth power, but the body-weight only in the third. 

 In order to compare the significance of wing-configura- 

 tion for flight in large and small birds, one must there- 

 fore introduce into the numbers, expressing wing-config- 

 uration, a correction according to the absolute size of the 

 bird, and the result of this correction the authors name 

 the wing-number. Now, if the various birds be arranged 

 in series according to wing-number, /. e., according to 

 w ing-configuration, with comparative preference of the 

 smaller, the good flyers are found to be at one end of the 

 series, the bad at the other, e.g., partridge 4, wild duck 

 10, jackdaw 20, sparrow hawk 24, sea-swallow 50. If 

 we now multiply this wing-number with the ratio of the 

 weight of the breast-muscle to the body-weight, i. e., 

 combine the consideration of the actual wing-configura- 

 tion with that of the relative size of the muscles of flight, 

 which are related to the effectiveness and velocity of wing- 

 beat, we obtain the flight number as measure of the flying 

 power, and this appears, e.g., as follows : Sparrow 0.43, 

 partridge 0.48, wild duck 0.98, jackdaw, 1 .72, gull 2.15, 

 kibits 2 92, eagle 2.95, stork 2.97, sea-swallow 3.28. 



A comparison of the serii s thus obtained with the 

 actual flying power, shows that the flight-number in gen- 

 eral rises and falls with the flying power and in particu- 

 lar corresponds the better where birds of ecjual body-size 

 are considered ; and less well, the more different the size 

 of the birds compared, so that in larger birds the actual 

 flying power falls behind the comparative flight-number; 

 that even appears, e.g., from a comparison of the par- 

 tridge with the sparrow. Or converselv, when we com- 

 pare birds of equal flying power, but different size, e.g., 

 larger and smaller, but adult examples of a species, or 

 species of a genus, the flight-number increases with the 

 body-size. It is indeed difficult and always somewhat 

 erroneous, to measure the actual flying powers of differ- 

 ent birds together, one bird accomplishes more in dexter- 

 ous and quick movements, another in rapid flight in a 

 short time, a third in duration of flight. Still, the result 

 may in general (says the reporter), be regarded as cor- 

 rect. Now, as the flight-numbers express the combined 

 mechanically measurable factors of flight, it follows tha. 



