Humphry Davy as Geologist, 1805–29

1976 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-227 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Siegfried ◽  
R. H. Dott

When Charles Lyell was writing his Principles of geology early in 1830, he interpolated five chapters between a recently written historical account of the science and the main body of textual material whose structure had long been determined. These added chapters contained not only Lyell's effort ‘to express the consequences of the uniformity of nature in the history of the earth’, but also his general arguments against the catastro-phic-progressionist interpretation, which he felt obliged to refute. In Chapter IX, the final one in the introductory sections, Lyell chose as representative of the progressionist view, Sir Humphry Davy, ‘a late distinguished writer’ who had ‘advanced some of the weightiest of these objections’ to Lyell's own steady-state view of the earth. No other defender of the progressionist history of the earth was named in Lyell's chapter, and we might well ask, why Humphry Davy? Was he merely an easy target for Lyell's refutations, a straw man set up by Lyell for his own rhetorical convenience?

2021 ◽  
pp. 6-33
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Ervin-Blankenheim

This chapter and the next one cover the way in which geology came to be a science in its own right, spanning the early centuries of geology. Lives of crucial individual scientists from the sixteenth century to the beginning of the twentieth century are discussed by relating the stories and discoveries of each, commencing with Leonardo da Vinci and continuing with the European geologists, including Nicholaus Steno, Abraham Werner, James Hutton, Charles Lyell, and early fossilists such as Etheldred Benet. Steno, Werner, Hutton and Lyell, and other early geologists revealed and wrote about the basic principles of geology, painstakingly untangling and piecing together the threads of the Earth’s vast history. They made sense of jumbled sequences of rocks, which had undergone dramatic changes since they were formed, and discerned the significance of fossils, found in environments seemingly incongruous to where the creatures once lived, as ancient forms of life. They set the stage for further research on the nature of the Earth and life on it, providing subsequent generations of geologists and those who study the Earth the basis on which to refine and flesh out the biography of the Earth.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 447-451
Author(s):  
Ulrich Hambach ◽  
Ian Smalley

Abstract The two critical books, launching the study and appreciation of loess, were ‘Charakteristik der Felsarten’ (CdF) by Karl Caesar von Leonhard, published in Heidelberg by Joseph Engelmann, in 1823-4, and ‘Principles of Geology’ (PoG) by Charles Lyell, published in London by John Murray in 1830-3. Each of these books was published in three volumes and in each case the third volume contained a short piece on loess (about 2-4 pages). These two books are essentially the foundations of loess scholarship. In CdF Loess [Loefs] was first properly defined and described; section 89 in vol. 3 provided a short study of the nature and occurrence of loess, with a focus on the Rhine valley. In PoG there was a short section on loess in the Rhine valley; this was in vol.3 and represents the major dissemination of loess awareness around the world. A copy of PoG3 (Principles of Geology vol. 3) reached Charles Darwin on the Beagle in Valparaiso in 1834; worldwide distribution. Lyell and von Leonhard met in Heidelberg in 1832. Von Leonhard and Heinrich Georg Bronn (1800-1862) showed Lyell the local loess. These observations provided the basis for the loess section in PoG3. Lyell acknowledged the influence of his hosts when he added a list of loess scholars to PoG; by the 5th edition in 1837 the list comprised H.G. Bronn, Karl Caesar von Leonhard (1779-1862), Ami Boue (1794-1881), Voltz, Johann Jakob Noeggerath (1788-1877), J. Steininger, P. Merian, Rozet, C.F.H. von Meyer (1801-1869), Samuel Hibbert (1782-1848) and Leonard Horner (1785-1864); a useful list of loess pioneers. The loess is a type of ground that has only recently been established, and it seems, the peculiarity of the Rhine region, and of a very general but inconsistent spread.” H.G. Bronn 1830


2013 ◽  
Vol 465-466 ◽  
pp. 337-344
Author(s):  
Parman Setyamartana ◽  
Radzuan B. Razali ◽  
Azman Zainuddin

Spin-off maneuver of a flexible satellite using constant-amplitude thrusters is studied in this paper. The satellite consists of a rigid main body and two symmetrical solar panels. The panels are having structural flexibility and their motions are discretized following the finite element method. Under constant-amplitude thrusts, steady-state attitude angle oscillations may occur in large amplitude after the maneuvers. Since in operation the satellite should point to certain area on the earth precisely, these oscillations of course are not acceptable. To reduce the oscillations, proportional derivative (PD) based constant-amplitude input shaping logic is proposed to determine time locations of thruster switching. Then, under such inputs, spin-downs of the satellite are simulated numerically. Results of simulations indicate that the precise orientation of the satellite can be achieved.


1976 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul J. McCartney

In the second volume of the Principles of geology Lyell had occasion to speak of G. B. Brocchi, ‘whose untimely death in Egypt’, he said, ‘is deplored by all who have the progress of geology at heart’. Whatever he understood to be the debt of other geologists to that Italian fossil conchologist, Lyell himself owed him much for providing scientific data and interpretations integrated in his own geological synthesis, but especially for furnishing the escutcheon of the third chapter in the review of the history of geology which Lyell appended as a late but enthusiastic embellishment to the Principles of geology. The ‘Discorso sui progressi dello studio della conchiologia fossile in Italia’, an eighty-page essay on the history of his subject, was contained in the first volume of Brocchi's Conchiologia fossile subappennina and afforded Lyell succinct notices on Italian geologists from the sixteenth century to his own time, as well as cues for the introduction of other non-Italian sources.


2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsi Lehto ◽  
Harry J. Lehto ◽  
Ari Brozinski ◽  
Esko Gardner ◽  
Olav Eklund ◽  
...  

AbstractWith the aim to visualize the span of time since the formation of our Universe we have set up a nature and hiking trail called ‘Time Trek’. The 13.7 km length of the trail corresponds to the age of the Universe, and portrays its history including events important for Earth and life. One kilometre corresponds to a billion years, and one metre to a million years of time. The trek combines astronomical, physical, geological and biological time lines, and presents a holistic view of the history of time. It helps people to comprehend the causal and temporal connections of different phenomena. To the trekker, it offers a concrete experience of the lengths and proportions of different time periods, which otherwise are very difficult to understand.


Author(s):  
Jan Zalasiewicz

‘Geology: the early days’ provides a brief history of ideas on the Earth and its processes. Among the earliest recorded scientific speculations on the Earth were those of the ancient Greeks, such as Anaximander of Miletus and Pythagoras. Other cultures that independently developed ideas include the Vedic Period of India (c.1300–300 bc) and the Song Dynasty of China (960–1279 ad). Huge strides were made during the Enlightenment period, and the key contributions of figures such as Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon, James Hutton, Baron Georges Cuvier, Mary Anning, William Buckland, Charles Lyell, Abraham Gottlob Werner, and Adam Sedgwick are discussed, with the creation of the Geological Time Scale.


1919 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 57-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. M. Deeley

Sir Charles Lyell in his Principles of Geology, published in 1834, remarks upon the accumulating proofs that the climate of the earth had undergone great changes in the past, and he endeavoured to show that these changes might have been produced by the varying distribution of sea and land. He says, “But if, instead of vague conjectures as to what might have been the state of the planet at the era of its creation, we fix our thoughts steadily on the connexion at present between climate and the distribution of land and sea; and if we then consider what influence former fluctuations in the physical geography of the earth must have had on superficial temperature, we may perhaps approximate to a true theory.”


1976 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Ruse

Two of the most influential evaluations of Charles Lyell's geological ideas were those of the philosophers of science, John F. W. Herschel and William Whewell. In this paper I shall argue that the great difference between these evaluations—whereas Herschel was fundamentally sympathetic to Lyell's geologizing, Whewell was fundamentally opposed—is a function of the fact that Herschel was an empiricist and Whewell a rationalist. For convenience, I shall structure the discussion around the three key elements in Lyell's approach to geology. First, he was an actualist: he wanted to explain past geological phenomena in terms of causes of the kind that are operating at present. Second, he was a uniformitarian: he wanted to explain only in terms of causes of the degree operating at present; that is, he wanted to avoid ‘catastrophes’. Third, as a geologist he saw the earth as being in a steady-state, in which all periods are essentially similar to one another. Because they will prove important, I draw attention also to two major features of Lyell's programme. First, there is his theory of climate, which suggests, ‘without help from a comet’, that earthly temperature fluctuations are primarily a function of the constantly changing distribution of land and sea. Clearly this theory is actualistic, for it is based on such present phenomena as the Gulf Stream; it is also uniformitarian and supports a steady-state world picture. Second, there is Lyell's denial that the fossil record is progressive, his criticism of Lamarckian evolutionism, ostensibly on the grounds that modern evidence is against it (i.e. it fails actualistically), and his rather veiled claim that the origins of species will nevertheless prove in some way natural, that is, subject to causes falling beneath lawlike regularities in principle discernible by us.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document