112 
BAUER. 
we have been regarding as “abnormal features” — the out- 
standing residuals between observations and the results de- 
rived from the mathematical formula — are in truth not 
“abnormal” from the standpoint of Nature, but are rather 
to be taken as indicative of the “abnormality” or “narrow- 
mindedness,” which means the same thing, of ourselves in 
trying to dictate to Nature the artificial and regular channels 
she should pursue in her operations. 
Louis Agassiz said: 
“The temptation to impose one’s own ideas upon Nature, 
to explain her mysteries by brilliant theories rather than by 
patient study of the facts as we find them, still leads us 
away.” 
The fundamental law of Nature is to invariably follow 
the paths of least resistance, and by examining these lines 
of structural weakness of the opposing systems we may have 
opened to us the very facts which are to be of real value 
and of sure benefit to mankind. The irregularity of the 
banks bordering a natural watercourse serves to differentiate 
the work of Nature from that of the builder of the artificial 
and regular channel. 
No, instead of rejecting, we must learn to retain the out- 
standing residuals and study them most carefully and regard 
them as the true facts of Nature, and not those which we 
so egotistically and presumptuously try to force on her. 
What great discoveries may lie open to us when we once 
have grasped the true significance of the facts we have been 
so fond of measuring by our own standard and have been 
terming as “abnormal” or “irregular” ! 
An interesting example of not wholly successful applica- 
tion of the continuous and ever-recurring functions of spher- 
ical harmonics to a typical geophysical phenomenon — the 
distribution of magnetism over the earth’s surface — has been 
discussed by the speaker elsewhere. Though the number 
of unknowns has been increased in recent computations 
from the original 24 of Gauss to 48, nevertheless the differ- 
ence between theory and observation is of such an order of 
