Selected quad for the lemma: earth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
earth_n	north_n	pole_n	south_n	3,753	5	10.5697	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A69661	Reflections upon The theory of the earth, occasion'd by a late examination of it. In a letter to a friend.	Burnet, Thomas, 1635?-1715.; Beverley, Thomas, attributed name.	1699 (1699)	Wing B5943A; ESTC R4161	38,053	62

the Earth and Sea East and West from North and South The figure of the Earth being a Sphere one way and a Spheroid in the other The Sea also must be of a prodigious depth at the Equator deeper by Seventeen Miles than at or near the Poles I would gladly know what experience there is of this Then in reference to our Rivers How swift and rapid upon this Hypothesis must the Rivers be that rise at or near the Equator or how slow the motion of those that ascend towards it if at all they can be supposed to clime so great an Hill The great River of the Amazons in Southern America is in some parts of it four or five degrees from the Equator others say much more Yet runs up to the Equator with that vast load of water and throws it self there into the Ocean In the Northern America Rio Negro is represented to us as having a longer course against the bent of the Earth and crossing the Equator falls down Southward several Degrees So the Nile in Africa crosses the Line and hath a long course on this side of it Rivers do not rise higher by a natural course than their Fountain's head and Hydrographers usually assign two foot or two foot and an half in a Mile for the descent of Rivers but upon this Hypothesis there will be fourteen or fifteen foot in respect of the center of the Earth for every Mile in Rivers descending from the Equator which is a Precipitation rather than a Navigable Stream Suppose a Canal cut from the Equator to the Pole t' would be a paradox to say the water would not flow in this Chanel nor descend towards the Pole having Fourteen or Fifteen foot descent for every Mile according to your figure of the Earth And also it would be as great or a greater Paradox to suppose that Rivers would rise to the Equator and with the same celerity as we see they do upon an ascent of so many feet And after all to conclude the argument If this difference of Pendulums be found it will still bear a dispute from what Physical Causes that difference Proceeds Thus far we have considered what arguments have been brought for the oblate figure of the Earth from Effects and have noted such observations to be made as we thought might be useful for discovery of Truth on what side soever it may fall We are now to consider an argument taken from the Causes and brought by these Authors to prove the same spheroidical figure of the Globe To this purpose they observe as is obvious and reasonable that in the diurnal motion of the Earth the middle parts about the Equator where the circles are greatest and consequently the motion swiftest would fly off with a greater force and so rise higher than the other parts that were mov'd in lesser circles in the same time and would have less force to remove themselves from the center of their Motion This is agreed on all hands and was own'd by the Theorist in a fluid Globe turn'd about it's Axis in case there was no impediment to hinder the rising or recession of those middle parts But before we speak to that on both sides you see it must be suppos'd and granted That the Globe of the Earth was once Fluid or the exterior Orb of it and we ought to consider when or at what time that was It must have been surely at the first formation of the Earth when it rise from a Chaos and before its parts were Consolidated and grown Hard. Supposing then that the interiour Orb of the Earth was once cover'd over with an Orb of water The question will be How this Orb of water came to be cover'd with dry Land or came to be divided into Land and Water as it is Now. These Questions are no matter of difficulty to the Theorist who supposes the First Earth to have covered the Waters and to have taken their shape whatsoever it was as upon a mould Then upon its Dissolution and Disruption at the Deluge to have faln into that uneven and interrupted Form it hath now But seeing this method does not please the Examiner He must tell us how upon his Hypothesis the Land or solid parts of the Earth could be rais'd above a Spherical Convexity into such a gibbous Figure as he supposes them now to have under the Equator Monsieur Hugens makes this broad Spheroid of the Earth to have been the effect of Gravity in the formation of the Earth the matter whereof being then turned round it would as he thinks be brought to settle in this Oblate Figure Very well but this must be in its very first Concretion from a Chaos before it was fixt and compact as it is now For the rotation of the Earth could have no such effect upon it after it was hard Now if you admit the exteriour Globe of the Earth to have been in such a state betwixt fixtness and fluidity it will lead us directly to the Theorist's Hypothesis which supposes a soft and tender Concretion at first over all the face of the Waters I say over all the face of the Waters for it must be Universal both because there is no reason why these earthy Particles that made the Concretion should not fall upon one part of the Globe as well as upon another and also if they did not fall upon the Equinoctial parts how came there to be Land in that part or that Land rais'd higher than the rest as this Hypothesis will have it In these remarks upon the protuberant Figure of the Earth you see it is allow'd that there would be a greater tendency from the Center in the middle parts of the Globe and the Waters would rise there if there was no impediment But the Theorist did believe that the Vortex or circumfluent Orb was streighter or of a shorter diameter there than thorough the Poles and consequently the Waters having less room to dilate would be press'd and detruded towards the Poles These Authors it may be will allow no Vortices to the Planets but then they must assign some other sufficient cause to carry the Planets in their periodical motions and with the same velocity for innumerable ages about their common Center and the secondary about their primary As also what gives them their diurnal rotation and the different position of their Axes Neither would it be easie to conceive how a great mass of fluid and volatile matter having no current or determination any one way and being often checkt in its progressive motion should not fall into circular motions or into Vortices of one sort or other Especially if you place in this mass some great solid Bodies turned about their Axes These are more general Problems and when they are determin'd with certainty we shall better judge of the particulars that depend upon them But I say still that neither Figure of the Earth Oblong or Oblate can be prov'd from the

not affect Eisensmidius for it proceeds upon a supposition which that Author does not allow namely That the Vertical Lines or the Lines of Gravity are to be drawn directly to the Center of the Earth whereas Eisensmidius supposes they ought to be drawn at right Angles to the Tangent of each respective Horizon and would not in all Figures lead directly to the Center However we do not wonder that he is so rude to strangers seeing he bears so hard in other places upon some of our own learned Country-men We proceed now to the Theorist's Second Observation about Lunar Eclipses and the Shade of the Earth This Shade is generally presumed to be exactly round as the Section of a Cone And yet the best Astronomers have doubted of it and some upon that occasion have doubted of the Figure of the Earth Kepler in an Observation of a Lunar Total Eclipse not finding the Shade of the Earth perfectly round but rather Oblong ut ejus dimetiens à Zonâ Torridâ consurgentis sit minor dimetiente ejus à Polis Terrae surgentis suspects that the Figure of the Earth was so too And that we must conclude it to be so from this Observation if there was not some Obliquity in the rays of the Sun whereof he shews no cause or occasion Si retinenda esset inquit rectitudo radiorum Globus ipse Terrae fiet Ovif●rmis diametro per Polos longiore And a-like Observation to this he cites from Tycho Brahé in a central or next to central Eclipse of the Moon These two great Astronomers it seems did not find the Shade of the Earth to be justly Conical And thereby take away the reason or lessen the doubt which hindred M. Deschales from concluding upon another Observation the Figure of the Earth to be Oval The Third Observation of the Theorist's remains which is about the return of the Sun unto the Polar parts of the Earth whether that be according to the rules of a Spherical Surface The Observations that have been made hitherto in the Northern Climates about the return of the Sun to them make it quicker than will easily consist with a Spherical Figure of the Earth much less are they favourable to a Gibbous Form For that gibbosity under the Equator must needs hinder the appearance and discovery of the Sun in the respective Polar parts more than a Spherical Figure would do Now it hath been observ'd in Nova Zembla That the returning Sun appear'd to them 17. days sooner than they expected according to the rules of Astronomy the Earth being supposed truly Spherical and this may be thought an Argument that the Earth is rather deprest in its middle parts I leave the matter to further examination I know 't is usually imputed to Refractions but that is upon the presumption that the Earth is justly Spherical and a better answer upon that supposition I think cannot be found Tho I think it will not be easie in that way and upon that solution to make all the Phaenomena agree or to shew that the Refractions could make so great a difference However this is no improper Topick to be consider'd in reference to the determination of the Figure of the Earth and for that purpose it was noted by the Theorist We have now done with that side of the Question that respects the Oblong Figure of the Earth and it remains to consider the other part I mean the opinion of those that make the Earth protuberant about the Equator or an oblate Spheroid This the Learned Monsieur Hugens thinks may be prov'd by experiments made about the different Vibrations of Pendulums in different Latitudes of the Earth 'T is found he says by experience that a Pendulum near the Equator makes its Vibrations slower than another of the same length further from the Equator And gives an instance of it from an experiment made at Caiene in America which is 4 or 5 degrees from the Equator compar'd with another made at Paris From this Tryal he concludes first that the gravitation is less under and near the Equator than towards the Poles according to their several degrees of Latitude Then he infers by consequence that the Land and the Sea are higher towards the Equator than towards the Poles And in conclusion That the figure of the Earth is Protuberant and Gibbous in the Middle and more flatted or of a shorter Diameter betwixt Pole and Pole In this conclusion you see there are several things to be considered according to the Premises First matter of Fact concerning the inequality of Vibrations in equal Pendulums according to their different Latitudes then the following inferences made from tha● inequality As to matter of fact Monsieur Hugens seems to be doubtful himself He does not vouch it from his own experience but he takes it from the report of Monsieur Richer whose Person or Character I do not know nor whether his relation be Extant in Print However Monsieur Hugens speaks dubiously of the experiment as such an one whereof we ought to expect further Confirmation For he says we cannot Trust entirely to this first observation whereof we have not any circumstance noted to us and still less to those that are said to be made at Guadaloupe at a greater Latitude where the Pendule is said to be shorter by two lines than that at Paris We must expect to be more justly inform'd of these different lengths of Pendules as well under the Line as in other Climates And he refers us to a further trial by his Clocks rectified for a second voyage whereof I have yet heard no report If matter of Fact be dubious or experiments discordant we cannot be assured of the Conclusion It were to be wish'd That this different gravitation in different Latitudes might be prov'd by other experiments than that of the Pendulum Methinks in ponderous Bodies this difference might become Sensible Not indeed by a Balance or Scales for the supposed decrease of Gravity would have the same effect upon the Counterpoise as upon the Body weighed but by other Powers that do not depend immediately upon Gravity as Springs or any other Engines or by rarefactions or whatsoever hath the force to raise sustain or remove ponderous Bodies For such Powers must have a less effect with us than near the Equator where the gravitation of Bodies that make the counterpoise is supposed to be much lessen'd Neither do I know if they have try'd the Barometer whether that will di●cover any such elevation at or near the Equator the Mercury sinking there much lower than with us or indeed to nothing if the height be comparatively so great as is suppos'd It seems strange that the difference of 17 Miles call it little or call it great compar'd with the semidiameter of the Earth should have a sensible effect upon Pendulums and upon nothing else Methinks that height of the Equator should make a different Horizon as to the Heavens or