of the London Times that projectiles are broadly divided into two groups, those to be used against armor and those that are directed over or against exposed bodies of men. The conditions to be fulfilled are entirely different in the two cases. The former remain intact, in theory, until after they have penetrated armor, whereas the second are broken up automatically by the action of the time fuse or the percussion fuse, at some time subsequent to the discharge. Why the practice does not always conform to the theory puzzles the experts who witness bombardments and volley firing from artillery. The failure of German shells to explode when they should may be due to lack of the essential copper and brass. This explanation does not account for the

"Schrapnel shells, which are not designed for attack against armor-plate but chiefly for service against forts and entrenched troops, contain lead bullets and some highly explosive compound, with a small charge of gun-powder for the purpose of ignition, which charge may be either at the nose or at the rear. A common shrapnel shell includes a powder chamber at the rear by which the shell is discharged from the gun, a powder chamber in front of that by which the bursting of the casing is produced, and the fuse body. The instant of the ex

plosion may be varied from zero when the shell leaves the gun to any distance up to several thousand yards, according to the range. This variation is effected by a graduated time-ring, the details of which and of the fuse involve some beautiful and rather complicated details."

Just what these details may be remains a closely guarded secret. However, our contemporary notes:

"The armor-piercing shell solves the problem of holing and passing through armor and exploding afterwards. The rapid combustion of the bursting charge is not so swift as is the passage of the shell through the armor, and the explosion, therefore, is delayed until the shell has got inside the ship. The common shell occupies a place midway between the shrapnel and the armor-piercing shell."

M

ETEOROLOGY, the science of weather, and climatology, the science of climate, have progressed slowly, according to Doctor Andrew H. Palmer, of the government weather bureau. For that reason, he says, various misconceptions and superstitions concerning weather and climate persist obstinately. No less than twenty-five important misconceptions regarding the weather are accepted in the United States as established verities. The influence of the moon, the planets or the stars affords an instance in point. Textbooks in geography still used in many of our schools frequently combine a brief discussion of astronomy and meteorology in the introductory chapter, thus laying the foundation for some considerable confusion in the popular mind. Meteorologists are, however, unanimously of the opinion that the influence of the moon, the planets and the stars not including the sun-is practically nothing at all when terrestrial weather is considered. Heat is the fundamental force determining the weather the form of energy outweigh ing all others combined. When it is stated that the sum total of all the heat energy received from the heavenly bodies not including the sun is so slight that one of the most delicate of instruments is required for its measurement, it is apparent that their influence upon our weather is negligible. The moon, about which most misconceptions of this nature center, is without doubt the direct cause of ocean and atmospheric tides, and there are places along certain coasts where ocean tides produce periodic breezes of a tidal nature. Aside from these indirect effects astronomical influence upon the weather is practically of no consequence. The The untruth of the proverb which states

that the moon tends to drive away the clouds is explained partly by the fact that a clearing of the sky at night is not ordinarily observed unless the moon is above the horizon, and partly by the fact that after sunset there is a cession of the ascending currents which result in the formation of clouds of the cumulus type, the clouds already formed soon dissipating.

There is no apparent relation, either, between earthquakes and the weather, despite a popular impression to the contrary. In general it may be said that earthquakes are caused by forces at work within the earth, or at least beneath its surface, such as the slipping of a crust along a fault plane or the movement of molten matter or steam beneath the hard crust. On the other hand, weather changes result from the effects of forces at work within the atmosphere itself, primarily as a product of energy coming through space from the sun. Nor is there any marked relation between magnetic phenomena and the weather. Magnetic storms, or disturbances in the magnetic state of the earth, frequently occur without any apparent effect upon the weather. That there is a relation between magnetic phenomena in the earth, auroras, and solar disturbances, particularly sun spots, there can no longer be any doubt. The aurora borealis seen in northern latitudes and the aurora australis seen in southern latitudes are believed to be caused by electrical discharges in the rarified strata of the earth's upper atmosphere. Aside from the visible manifestations of such discharges, observers have sometimes noticed sounds and upon rare occasions odors which were thought to have resulted therefrom. However, the aurora has not yet been satisfactorily explained. With the exsatisfactorily explained. With the exception of the aurora, there is no

"Whatever influence forests have upon meteorological conditions is purely local, and even that influence is not marked. In one case it was found that the mean annual temperature within a forest was

only a few tenths of a degree cooler

than at a point a half mile or a mile outside the forest border, the greatest difference amounting to 2° F. The relative humidity was at times 7 per cent. greater within the forest than in the open country. In the United States the wholesale destruction of forests, which has been going on since colonial times, has not been accompanied by any marked increase hand, the reforestation of large tracts in or decrease in rainfall. On the other

central Europe and in northern Africa during the past century has not resulted in an appreciable effect upon the precipi

tation observed during that period. Forests are the effect rather than the cause, There is still considerable confusion in the public mind concerning rainfall and flow-off, when the supposed influence of

forests is considered. Deforestation has undoubtedly increased the frequency and districts, notably in certain mountain valthe intensity of floods in small constricted leys, but where the removal of the forest cover over large areas has been followed by cultivation of the soil the rate of flowoff has remained unchanged. From hydrographs of the principal rivers of the United States it is apparent that high waters are neither higher nor low waters lower than they were fifty years ago, and they are neither more frequent nor of longer duration then.... While forests are of importhan they were tance to the agriculturist and the engineer, they are of little concern to the student of the weather."

now

The deep-seated notion held by many individuals that the climate is changing is often referred to in expressions like "old-fashioned winter," "the storms we used to have," and the like. These notions are of interest to the psychologist only, since it remains for the meteorologist simply to prove that such ideas have no basis in fact. "When one plots the seasonal or the annual temperatures or snowfalls, or any other elements of climate, using reliable records as far back as they are available, it is apparent that the curves show no appreciable change of climate within. the life of any man now living." Present winters do not seem to be as severe as "old-fashioned winters" because of better housing and heating conditions, more efficient clothing, improved methods of transportation, with multiplied comforts and conveniences. Moreover, a snowfall of three feet looks considerably deeper to a boy four feet tall than it looks to him when he becomes a man six feet in height.

There is no known relation between the weather of one season or year with that of the following season or year. The records of the Weather Bureau do not show that a relatively dry spring is followed by an unusually hot summer, or that an abnormally cool autumn is followed by a severely cold winter. While well-marked cycles are recognized in various solar disturbances, particularly sunspots, there is no similar cycle apparent in the weather of seasons or of years.

"Neither is there any indisputable connection between the weather of one day and that of subsequent weeks or of seasons. Tradition has it that the presence or absence of sunshine on Groundhog Day, February 2, determines whether or not winter conditions shall continue during the following six weeks; that a showery Easter Sunday is followed by seven showery Sundays; and that a rainy St. Swithin's Day, July 15, portends forty consecutive days of

rainfall. No basis can be found for these traditions in available records."

What is popularly known as the equinoctial storm is supposed to occur about the time of the autumnal equinox, September 21st, when the sun crosses the celestial equator to the southern hemisphere. Nevertheless, the so-called equinoctial storm is a fiction, just as Indian Summer is a popular delusion:

"That there is frequently a return of summer-like conditions during the late autumn can not be denied. But to affirm that Indian Summer is a period of several weeks in duration recurring each autumn, and easily recognized by the occurrence of heat, calms and haze, can not be proved by climatological records. It is a peculiar fact that while the recurrence of summer-like conditions in autumn has given

rise to this tradition, and even the name as a season, the similarly frequent recurrence of winter-like conditions in spring

415

Among the many important devices employed by experts in the weather service is the thermograph, an instrument used for automatically recording the fluctuations in the temperature of the air.

has not been popularly recognized. Summer-like periods in autumn and winterlike periods in spring can in every individual case be explained by the weather map in terms of barometric distribution, paths of storms, resulting winds and calms, the height of the sun, the length heat over the continent and the borderof days, and the unequal distribution of ing oceans."

Another false notion, particularly current in rural districts, is the belief that various animals, through some dispensation of nature, have a previous knowledge of coming weather changes. As a result, many proverbs have arisen, based upon observations of the behavior of animals. This foreknowledge of animals is but slight:

"For example, it is sometimes stated that a cold winter is portended when the muskrat or the beaver builds the walls of his home thicker than usual, or when the squirrels or the non-migratory birds hide large quantities of food during the autumn. Again, the remark is often made that a storm is imminent when the chickens go to roost early or when the housecat seeks a warm place beside the fire. Even the human feeling of comfort occasionally gives rise to presentiment. Persons afflicted with recurrent rheumatism claim to feel the approach of a storm long before it appears, and people of nervous temperament often affirm that they have forebodings of coming thunderstorms or of rainy spells through a

temporary disturbance of their neural equilibrium. Physiologically considered, either from the point of view of man or of the lower animals, these fore-warnings, often verified, have some basis for their existence. The secret of the explanation probably lies in the fact that all weather changes occur in cycles-that is, a more or less constant order of events accompanying every change. With the summer of the following: rising temperature and thunderstorm this cycle usually consists humidity, pressure oscillations, decreasing winds, increasing potential of atmospheric electricity, thickening clouds and consequent growing darkness, distant lightning, rumbling thunder, the lightning growing more vivid and the thunder louder and louder as the storm approaches, a squall of wind coming from the direction of the storm itself, accompanied by a marked fall in temperature."

The practice, still followed in some European countries, of bombarding the clouds as a means of preventing hail, is without scientific basis. Equally preposterous is the idea of some association between our own fourth of July and the rainfall. Then, since delusions connected with the weather are so numerous that one can merely mention them in passing, one must notice that the source of the water which

falls in the form of rain or snow in the United States is erroneously stated in several geographical text-books to be the Pacific Ocean.

I

IN THE facts which have been gleaned from the planet Mars chiefly by the able American astronomer, Professor Lowell, we

would seem, in the opinion of Professor J. M. Maxwell, F. R.. A. S., the noted English astronomer and astro-physicist, to have that for which we must at one time have never dared to hope-actual positive evidence of the present existence in another world not of mere life only but of a high state of civilization. In flat contradiction of the conclusions of some astronomers set

forth in London Nature and the Revue Scientifique (Paris), Professor Maxwell says in London Knowledge that the case of Mars has been too lightly dismissed by the astronomers of Europe. He reviews it in the light of the fresh evidence supplied by optics, physiology and photography and his critical study of the facts supports the Lowell hypothesis strongly.

Every reader knows, he reminds us at the outset, what is meant by canals on Mars. These canals are very fine, hairlike markings which intersect the whole surface of the planet. Professor Lowell estimates that they are five or six hundred in number. With one or two exceptions, each runs in the most direct manner possible from one point on the planet's surface to another. They follow the arcs of great circles owing to the curvature of the planet's surface. They thus appear straight when near the center of the disc.

It has been said that canals which are

seen straight when at the center of the disc have continued to look straight and be so drawn when near the edge of the disc. This is in many instances quite true and can be explained.

In the first place, the limb appears so bright by contrast with the surrounding sky that generally no markings can be seen very near the edge of the disc, so that canals are never seen curved to any very marked degree. In the second place, canals are often such delicate objects that slight observational and aerographical errors are bound to occur. In the third place-and this is most important-when a curved line is placed in proximity to a line of greater curvature, it tends to appear straight to most if not all observers. Hence canals close to the limb, tho in reality curved, tend to appear much straighter than they could possibly be. This is a well-known optical illusion. In many cases canals near the limb actually are represented as being curved.

In length the canals run to thousands of miles. Their breadth is immeasurably small and can be ascertained only by comparison with wires of known gauge at known distances.

There can be no doubt that there is an actual appearance of straight lines on Mars. There are some who doubt whether this appearance is given by actual linear markings on the planet's surface or by objects which are resolvable into less regular formations unlikely to be of artificial origin. It can, of course, be shown that irregular objects seen from a distance may appear regular. A line of dots, irregularly disposed between two points, will give, when viewed from a sufficient distance, the appearance of a straight line. Hence an object giving the appearance of a straight line may be composed of a chain of dots. It does not follow that whenever a continuous line is seen it is necessarily composed of a row of dots.

As a matter of fact, if the canals of Mars be composed of broken channels or chains of irregular markings, it can be calculated that the interspaces must be very small, as the canals appear unbroken under high magnification. If both the single and double canals connected in so wonderful a system were, in reality, a series of dots in close apposition, it would, indeed, be a remarkable fact and one strikingly suggestive of an artificial origin. Is it not more comprehensible and credible to regard them as continuous lines? Says Professor Maxwell:

"It has frequently been stated, and possibly believed by the uninitiated, that the canals have actually been resolved into less regular formations by means of apertures larger than those generally employed by Professor Lowell and others who record observations of canals. It is

said that drawings made with larger telescopes, tho revealing objects which Lowell has apparently failed to see, yet do not show any trace of the hard lines which Lowell habitually draws. In their

place appear hazy, uncertain bands, or in some cases nothing at all.

"It is time that these matters were fully explained..

"It may occur to the reader that the whole matter might be cleared up by selecting an arbitrator, who should examine Mars under the best conditions obtainable and declare what he saw.

This would seem to be a reasonable suggestion; but

it is impossible, because there is a disagreement as to what are the best condi

tions under which to view Mars. Under certain conditions no one of any observational ability can fail to see the 'canals.' Under other conditions they cannot be seen."

Only by long practice can fine details be seen at all. A great deal also deThe pends upon climatic conditions. air is not homogeneous in its refractive properties, owing to differences of temperature. On some nights which are quite fine and clear "seeing" is so bad that fine details are entirely obliterated. The larger the telescope, the more susceptible is it to adverse climatic conditions. Telescopes of great aperture can be used with advantage only under practically ideal conditions, which are rarely, if ever, encountered in the localities in which these great instruments are situated.

The observatory which enjoys the finest conditions is that of Professor

Lowell, Mars Hill, Flagstaff, Arizona. This observatory is situated on the Rocky Mountains at an elevation of 7,250 feet. Most of his work on Mars

T

HE ease with which the French prohibition of absinthe was enforced, if we may be guided by the London Times, shows that France is prepared for even more drastic reforms. It seems probable to that daily that if the ban on absinthe were extended for the duration of the war tc spirits generally, very little protest would emanate from Frenchmen. That is not the general impression of Parisian papers, altho they note without objection that General Serrail, commanding the army of the Vosges, has, with the approval of General Joffre, forbidden the sale of alcoholic drinks in the area occupied by his troops. Such a step would not be endured in Great Britain, or at least it would fail, according to some physicians whose opinions are given in the medical press of London. There is much protest by some specialists in The British Medical Journal against a suggestion that the rum ration be abolished in the trenches at the front. As for the idea that the allies should in general go upon what Americans call "the water wagon," it is received inhospitably by an authority so well known as Doctor C. W. Saleeby, among others. We find him saying in the London Westminster Gazette that doing without alcohol is not so easy as it sounds to the accustomed abstainer:

"It is no joke to stop smoking when one has regularly used tobacco. In either

case,

the abstaining novice may suffer such real discomfort and depression that he asks himself whether it is worth while; and very likely he allows himself 'just one' indulgence, not realizing that he will thus annul all he had gained and will have to begin all over again. Meanwhile the selfrighteous or untempted, who know nothing of the problem involved, will sneer or congratulate themselves upon their superior will-power or virtue.

"The first moment of real study corrects all that. I have seen a friend, a world famous poet, die of too sudden deprivation of the morphine to which he had long been a victim, and the experience was unforgettable. What does this puzzle mean that morphine may be killing a man surely, if slowly, and that deprivation of it may kill him in a day or two? The answer was given us by the great German student, Professor Binz, of Bonn, when he traced the vicious circle that explains the whole matter. The soothing, narcotic, comforting morphine is partly oxidized in the body, which always tries to oxidize oxidizable poisons, and the result is a new substance, which irritates, excites, distresses, hampers, and will soon exhaust every vital process. Only one remedy fully avails now-a new dose of morphine, which yields a new dose of the partly oxidized product, and thus the vicious circle continues and spreads. This is not really a 'bad habit,' like biting one's

nails, or always assuming the worst motive for other people's actions. It is a vicious circle in the chemistry of the body. Doctors know that hosts of plants contain

active principles, one derived from the

other, which have exactly opposite actions on our bodies. Morphine and its product, made within ourselves, are in this relation; each is the antidote, or antagonist, of the other. You see how the victim is caught, and what impudence and ignorance it may be for the free to sneer or preach at him.”

For many years Doctor Saleeby has contended that the vicious circle discovered by Binz in the case of morphine is probably true in the case of many other narcotic drugs, of which Lately aldehyde, a product of the paralcohol is by far the most important. tial oxidation or combustion of alcohol, has been found in the nervous system in cases of delirium tremens, thus furnishing the parallel to the case of morphine. The same will probably be found for nicotine. The seriousness of the intoxication in these various cases and scores of others varies within wide limits, but the science of the matter We may be similar in all or many. can understand the extreme and absolute discrepancy of experience between the abstainer and the moderate drinker.

So entirely do they contradict each other that each begins to question the honesty of the other. The drinker suspects the abstainer of tippling in secret, and the abstainer, knowing that he is quite well and happy without alcohol, suspects the drinker of sheer lying or of a depraved nature when he says that he feels vastly better after a dose and is injured by going without it. Yet the drinker is telling the strict truth, and as he knows that each dose he takes is a comforter and soother, relieving irritation and depression, he suspects the abstainer of wanting to hurt him or of being inhuman. The theory of the vicious chemical circle explains the facts:

"Modern inquiry answers most positively that abstinence prolongs life by several years-about five, on the average -as compared with strict moderation; but that is not what I want to argue about now. The present point is that the moderate drinker may, very naturally, say that he does not want to live several years longer if they are all to be as discomfortable as abstinence makes him. The answer is that, once the vicious circle is broken, the sky will clear. When no more alcohol is being ingested, the production of the 'anti-alcohol' in the body must soon cease; and when all that remains of this is excreted or destroyed, the demand for its antidote- -more alcoholwill cease. I do not assert that this is the whole of this intricate and fascinating question, nor that all people are the

same in a respect where personal idiosyncrasy is even more marked than with other narcotic drugs. Space fails at present for positive suggestions, but at least one warning is necessary. In the case of the inebriate, those who try to cure him often use real stimulants, such as strychnine, to help depression due to a sudden deprivation of the drug. Such sudden deprivation, in the case of the heavy drinker, is often the cause of delirium tremens, with its misery and frequently fatal results. (Compare morphinomania.) Many experts who treat inebriety therefore cut off alcohol gradually. However that should be, the moderate drinker has a much simpler problem, tho the same in principle. A simple dose of alcohol produces effects recognizable for at least thirty hours; the moderate drinker is, therefore, of course, drug and its products." continuously under the influence of the

The point at issue seems to involve the difference between natural tolerance and acquired tolerance, thinks the distinguished Doctor Francis Hare, who writes in The British Medical Journal. Natural tolerance is a mere personal idiosyncrasy. It is a physiological condition and has no significance in this connection. Acquired tolerance, on the contrary, is altogether pathological and its significance is great. One who has acquired high tolerance can, without showing any sign of intoxication, ingest and absorb quantities of alcohol which very greatly exceed his original capacity-twenty-six to forty fluid ounces of whiskey or other spirit in a day are by no means rare. But this acquired capacity involves a more or less commensurate incapacity—namely, the incapacity to maintain an ordinary level of health and power to conduct business in the absence of alcohol. Herein acquired tolerance contrasts sharply with natural tolerance, which involves no such incapacity. Those who have acquired tolerance are obviously "normal" (their normal) only when a considerable amount of alcohol is circulating in their brains and nervous systems:

"They are entirely dependent on this artificial condition, which constantly tends to pass off and constantly demands renewal; and any circumstance interfering therewith is liable to precipitate a 'nervous breakdown.' These are not assumptions of mine-neither the acquired capacity nor the acquired incapacity-they are clinical facts, fully realized by nearly all who suffer from high tolerance and easily verifiable by any medical man who has the opportunity of seeing such cases. Of course, the physician seeking such verification will not be assisted in his quest if he starts with what seems a rather common preconviction-namely, that no alcoholist ever speaks the truth. But here I can reassure him: alcoholists do."