METEOROLOGY
350 BC
Translated by E. W.WEBSTER
ARISTOTLE
384 BC - 322 BC
|
WEB-PAGE THREE
BOOK III
Part 1
Let us explain the remaining operations of
this secretion in the same way as we have
treated the rest. When this exhalation is
secreted in small and scattered quantities
and frequently, and is transitory, and its
constitution rare, it gives rise to thunder
and lightning. But if it is secreted in a
body and is denser, that is, less rare, we
get a hurricane. The fact that it issues
in body explains its violence: it is due
to the rapidity of the secretion. Now when
this secretion issues in a great and continuous
current the result corresponds to what we
get when the opposite development takes place
and rain and a quantity of water are produced.
As far as the matter from which they are
developed goes both sets of phenomena are
the same. As soon as a stimulus to the development
of either potentiality appears, that of which
there is the greater quantity present in
the cloud is at once secreted from it, and
there results either rain, or, if the other
exhalation prevails, a hurricane.
Sometimes the exhalation in the cloud, when
it is being secreted, collides with another
under circumstances like those found when
a wind is forced from an open into a narrow
space in a gateway or a road. It often happens
in such cases that the first part of the
moving body is deflected because of the resistance
due either to the narrowness or to a contrary
current, and so the wind forms a circle and
eddy. It is prevented from advancing in a
straight line: at the same time it is pushed
on from behind; so it is compelled to move
sideways in the direction of least resistance.
The same thing happens to the next part,
and the next, and so on, till the series
becomes one, that is, till a circle is formed:
for if a figure is described by a single
motion that figure must itself be one. This
is how eddies are generated on the earth,
and the case is the same in the clouds as
far as the beginning of them goes. Only here
(as in the case of the hurricane which shakes
off the cloud without cessation and becomes
a continuous wind) the cloud follows the
exhalation unbroken, and the exhalation,
failing to break away from the cloud because
of its density, first moves in a circle for
the reason given and then descends, because
clouds are always densest on the side where
the heat escapes. This phenomenon is called
a whirlwind when it is colourless; and it
is a sort of undigested hurricane. There
is never a whirlwind when the weather is
northerly, nor a hurricane when there is
snow. The reason is that all these phenomena
are 'wind', and wind is a dry and warm evaporation.
Now frost and cold prevail over this principle
and quench it at its birth: that they do
prevail is clear or there could be no snow
or northerly rain, since these occur when
the cold does prevail.
So the whirlwind originates in the failure
of an incipient hurricane to escape from
its cloud: it is due to the resistance which
generates the eddy, and it consists in the
spiral which descends to the earth and drags
with it the cloud which it cannot shake off.
It moves things by its wind in the direction
in which it is blowing in a straight line,
and whirls round by its circular motion and
forcibly snatches up whatever it meets.
When the cloud burns as it is drawn downwards,
that is, when the exhalation becomes rarer,
it is called a fire-wind, for its fire colours
the neighbouring air and inflames it.
When there is a great quantity of exhalation
and it is rare and is squeezed out in the
cloud itself we get a thunderbolt. If the
exhalation is exceedingly rare this rareness
prevents the thunderbolt from scorching and
the poets call it 'bright': if the rareness
is less it does scorch and they call it 'smoky'.
The former moves rapidly because of its rareness,
and because of its rapidity passes through
an object before setting fire to it or dwelling
on it so as to blacken it: the slower one
does blacken the object, but passes through
it before it can actually burn it. Further,
resisting substances are affected, unresisting
ones are not. For instance, it has happened
that the bronze of a shield has been melted
while the woodwork remained intact because
its texture was so loose that the exhalation
filtered through without affecting it. So
it has passed through clothes, too, without
burning them, and has merely reduced them
to shreds.
Such evidence is enough by itself to show
that the exhalation is at work in all these
cases, but we sometimes get direct evidence
as well, as in the case of the conflagration
of the temple at Ephesus which we lately
witnessed. There independent sheets of flame
left the main fire and were carried bodily
in many directions. Now that smoke is exhalation
and that smoke burns is certain, and has
been stated in another place before; but
when the flame moves bodily, then we have
ocular proof that smoke is exhalation. On
this occasion what is seen in small fires
appeared on a much larger scale because of
the quantity of matter that was burning.
The beams which were the source of the exhalation
split, and a quantity of it rushed in a body
from the place from which it issued forth
and went up in a blaze: so that the flame
was actually seen moving through the air
away and falling on the houses. For we must
recognize that exhalation accompanies and
precedes thunderbolts though it is colourless
and so invisible. Hence, where the thunderbolt
is going to strike, the object moves before
it is struck, showing that the exhalation
leads the way and falls on the object first.
Thunder, too, splits things not by its noise
but because the exhalation that strikes the
object and that which makes the noise are
ejected simultaneously. This exhalation splits
the thing it strikes but does not scorch
it at all.
We have now explained thunder and lightning
and hurricane, and further firewinds, whirlwinds,
and thunderbolts, and shown that they are
all of them forms of the same thing and wherein
they all differ.
Part 2
Let us now explain the nature and cause of
halo, rainbow, mock suns, and rods, since
the same account applies to them all.
We must first describe the phenomena and
the circumstances in which each of them occurs.
The halo often appears as a complete circle:
it is seen round the sun and the moon and
bright stars, by night as well as by day,
and at midday or in the afternoon, more rarely
about sunrise or sunset.
The rainbow never forms a full circle, nor
any segment greater than a semicircle. At
sunset and sunrise the circle is smallest
and the segment largest: as the sun rises
higher the circle is larger and the segment
smaller. After the autumn equinox in the
shorter days it is seen at every hour of
the day, in the summer not about midday.
There are never more than two rainbows at
one time. Each of them is three-coloured;
the colours are the same in both and their
number is the same, but in the outer rainbow
they are fainter and their position is reversed.
In the inner rainbow the first and largest
band is red; in the outer rainbow the band
that is nearest to this one and smallest
is of the same colour: the other bands correspond
on the same principle. These are almost the
only colours which painters cannot manufacture:
for there are colours which they create by
mixing, but no mixing will give red, green,
or purple. These are the colours of the rainbow,
though between the red and the green an orange
colour is often seen.
Mock suns and rods are always seen by the
side of the sun, not above or below it nor
in the opposite quarter of the sky. They
are not seen at night but always in the neighbourhood
of the sun, either as it is rising or setting
but more commonly towards sunset. They have
scarcely ever appeared when the sun was on
the meridian, though this once happened in
Bosporus where two mock suns rose with the
sun and followed it all through the day till
sunset.
These are the facts about each of these phenomena:
the cause of them all is the same, for they
are all reflections. But they are different
varieties, and are distinguished by the surface
from which and the way in which the reflection
to the sun or some other bright object takes
place.
The rainbow is seen by day, and it was formerly
thought that it never appeared by night as
a moon rainbow. This opinion was due to the
rarity of the occurrence: it was not observed,
for though it does happen it does so rarely.
The reason is that the colours are not so
easy to see in the dark and that many other
conditions must coincide, and all that in
a single day in the month. For if there is
to be one it must be at full moon, and then
as the moon is either rising or setting.
So we have only met with two instances of
a moon rainbow in more than fifty years.
We must accept from the theory of optics
the fact that sight is reflected from air
and any object with a smooth surface just
as it is from water; also that in some mirrors
the forms of things are reflected, in others
only their colours. Of the latter kind are
those mirrors which are so small as to be
indivisible for sense. It is impossible that
the figure of a thing should be reflected
in them, for if it is the mirror will be
sensibly divisible since divisibility is
involved in the notion of figure. But since
something must be reflected in them and figure
cannot be, it remains that colour alone should
be reflected. The colour of a bright object
sometimes appears bright in the reflection,
but it sometimes, either owing to the admixture
of the colour of the mirror or to weakness
of sight, gives rise to the appearance of
another colour.
However, we must accept the account we have
given of these things in the theory of sensation,
and take some things for granted while we
explain others.
Part 3
Let us begin by explaining the shape of the
halo; why it is a circle and why it appears
round the sun or the moon or one of the other
stars: the explanation being in all these
cases the same.
Sight is reflected in this way when air and
vapour are condensed into a cloud and the
condensed matter is uniform and consists
of small parts. Hence in itself it is a sign
of rain, but if it fades away, of fine weather,
if it is broken up, of wind. For if it does
not fade away and is not broken up but is
allowed to attain its normal state, it is
naturally a sign of rain since it shows that
a process of condensation is proceeding which
must, when it is carried to an end, result
in rain. For the same reason these haloes
are the darkest. It is a sign of wind when
it is broken up because its breaking up is
due to a wind which exists there but has
not reached us. This view finds support in
the fact that the wind blows from the quarter
in which the main division appears in the
halo. Its fading away is a sign of fine weather
because if the air is not yet in a state
to get the better of the heat it contains
and proceed to condense into water, this
shows that the moist vapour has not yet separated
from the dry and firelike exhalation: and
this is the cause of fine weather.
So much for the atmospheric conditions under
which the reflection takes place. The reflection
is from the mist that forms round the sun
or the moon, and that is why the halo is
not seen opposite the sun like the rainbow.
Since the reflection takes place in the same
way from every point the result is necessarily
a circle or a segment of a circle: for if
the lines start from the same point and end
at the same point and are equal, the points
where they form an angle will always lie
on a circle.
Let AGB and AZB and ADB be lines each of
which goes from the point A to the point
B and forms an angle. Let the lines AG, AZ,
AD be equal and those at B, GB, ZB, DB equal
too. (See diagram.)
Draw the line AEB. Then the triangles are
equal; for their base Aeb is equal. Draw
perpendiculars to AEB from the angles; GE
from G, Ze from Z, DE from D. Then these
perpendiculars are equal, being in equal
triangles. And they are all in one plane,
being all at right angles to AEB and meeting
at a single point E. So if you draw the line
it will be a circle and E its centre. Now
B is the sun, A the eye, and the circumference
passing through the points GZD the cloud
from which the line of sight is reflected
to the sun.
The mirrors must be thought of as contiguous:
each of them is too small to be visible,
but their contiguity makes the whole made
up of them all to seem one. The bright band
is the sun, which is seen as a circle, appearing
successively in each of the mirrors as a
point indivisible to sense. The band of cloud
next to it is black, its colour being intensified
by contrast with the brightness of the halo.
The halo is formed rather near the earth
because that is calmer: for where there is
wind it is clear that no halo can maintain
its position.
Haloes are commoner round the moon because
the greater heat of the sun dissolves the
condensations of the air more rapidly.
Haloes are formed round stars for the same
reasons, but they are not prognostic in the
same way because the condensation they imply
is so insignificant as to be barren.
Part 4
We have already stated that the rainbow is
a reflection: we have now to explain what
sort of reflection it is, to describe its
various concomitants, and to assign their
causes.
Sight is reflected from all smooth surfaces,
such as are air and water among others. Air
must be condensed if it is to act as a mirror,
though it often gives a reflection even uncondensed
when the sight is weak. Such was the case
of a man whose sight was faint and indistinct.
He always saw an image in front of him and
facing him as he walked. This was because
his sight was reflected back to him. Its
morbid condition made it so weak and delicate
that the air close by acted as a mirror,
just as distant and condensed air normally
does, and his sight could not push it back.
So promontories in the sea 'loom' when there
is a south-east wind, and everything seems
bigger, and in a mist, too, things seem bigger:
so, too, the sun and the stars seem bigger
when rising and setting than on the meridian.
But things are best reflected from water,
and even in process of formation it is a
better mirror than air, for each of the particles,
the union of which constitutes a raindrop,
is necessarily a better mirror than mist.
Now it is obvious and has already been stated
that a mirror of this kind renders the colour
of an object only, but not its shape. Hence
it follows that when it is on the point of
raining and the air in the clouds is in process
of forming into raindrops but the rain is
not yet actually there, if the sun is opposite,
or any other object bright enough to make
the cloud a mirror and cause the sight to
be reflected to the object then the reflection
must render the colour of the object without
its shape. Since each of the mirrors is so
small as to be invisible and what we see
is the continuous magnitude made up of them
all, the reflection necessarily gives us
a continuous magnitude made up of one colour;
each of the mirrors contributing the same
colour to the whole. We may deduce that since
these conditions are realizable there will
be an appearance due to reflection whenever
the sun and the cloud are related in the
way described and we are between them. But
these are just the conditions under which
the rainbow appears. So it is clear that
the rainbow is a reflection of sight to the
sun.
So the rainbow always appears opposite the
sun whereas the halo is round it. They are
both reflections, but the rainbow is distinguished
by the variety of its colours. The reflection
in the one case is from water which is dark
and from a distance; in the other from air
which is nearer and lighter in colour. White
light through a dark medium or on a dark
surface (it makes no difference) looks red.
We know how red the flame of green wood is:
this is because so much smoke is mixed with
the bright white firelight: so, too, the
sun appears red through smoke and mist. That
is why in the rainbow reflection the outer
circumference is red (the reflection being
from small particles of water), but not in
the case of the halo. The other colours shall
be explained later. Again, a condensation
of this kind cannot persist in the neighbourhood
of the sun: it must either turn to rain or
be dissolved, but opposite to the sun there
is an interval during which the water is
formed. If there were not this distinction
haloes would be coloured like the rainbow.
Actually no complete or circular halo presents
this colour, only small and fragmentary appearances
called 'rods'. But if a haze due to water
or any other dark substance formed there
we should have had, as we maintain, a complete
rainbow like that which we do find lamps.
A rainbow appears round these in winter,
generally with southerly winds. Persons whose
eyes are moist see it most clearly because
their sight is weak and easily reflected.
It is due to the moistness of the air and
the soot which the flame gives off and which
mixes with the air and makes it a mirror,
and to the blackness which that mirror derives
from the smoky nature of the soot. The light
of the lamp appears as a circle which is
not white but purple. It shows the colours
of the rainbow; but because the sight that
is reflected is too weak and the mirror too
dark, red is absent. The rainbow that is
seen when oars are raised out of the sea
involves the same relative positions as that
in the sky, but its colour is more like that
round the lamps, being purple rather than
red. The reflection is from very small particles
continuous with one another, and in this
case the particles are fully formed water.
We get a rainbow, too, if a man sprinkles
fine drops in a room turned to the sun so
that the sun is shining in part of the room
and throwing a shadow in the rest. Then if
one man sprinkles in the room, another, standing
outside, sees a rainbow where the sun's rays
cease and make the shadow. Its nature and
colour is like that from the oars and its
cause is the same, for the sprinkling hand
corresponds to the oar.
That the colours of the rainbow are those
we described and how the other colours come
to appear in it will be clear from the following
considerations. We must recognize, as we
have said, and lay down: first, that white
colour on a black surface or seen through
a black medium gives red; second, that sight
when strained to a distance becomes weaker
and less; third, that black is in a sort
the negation of sight: an object is black
because sight fails; so everything at a distance
looks blacker, because sight does not reach
it. The theory of these matters belongs to
the account of the senses, which are the
proper subjects of such an inquiry; we need
only state about them what is necessary for
us. At all events, that is the reason why
distant objects and objects seen in a mirror
look darker and smaller and smoother, why
the reflection of clouds in water is darker
than the clouds themselves. This latter is
clearly the case: the reflection diminishes
the sight that reaches them. It makes no
difference whether the change is in the object
seen or. in the sight, the result being in
either case the same. The following fact
further is worth noticing. When there is
a cloud near the sun and we look at it does
not look coloured at all but white, but when
we look at the same cloud in water it shows
a trace of rainbow colouring. Clearly, then,
when sight is reflected it is weakened and,
as it makes dark look darker, so it makes
white look less white, changing it and bringing
it nearer to black. When the sight is relatively
strong the change is to red; the next stage
is green, and a further degree of weakness
gives violet. No further change is visible,
but three completes the series of colours
(as we find three does in most other things),
and the change into the rest is imperceptible
to sense. Hence also the rainbow appears
with three colours; this is true of each
of the two, but in a contrary way. The outer
band of the primary rainbow is red: for the
largest band reflects most sight to the sun,
and the outer band is largest. The middle
band and the third go on the same principle.
So if the principles we laid down about the
appearance of colours are true the rainbow
necessarily has three colours, and these
three and no others. The appearance of yellow
is due to contrast, for the red is whitened
by its juxtaposition with green. We can see
this from the fact that the rainbow is purest
when the cloud is blackest; and then the
red shows most yellow. (Yellow in the rainbow
comes between red and green.) So the whole
of the red shows white by contrast with the
blackness of the cloud around: for it is
white compared to the cloud and the green.
Again, when the rainbow is fading away and
the red is dissolving, the white cloud is
brought into contact with the green and becomes
yellow. But the moon rainbow affords the
best instance of this colour contrast. It
looks quite white: this is because it appears
on the dark cloud and at night. So, just
as fire is intensified by added fire, black
beside black makes that which is in some
degree white look quite white. Bright dyes
too show the effect of contrast. In woven
and embroidered stuffs the appearance of
colours is profoundly affected by their juxtaposition
with one another (purple, for instance, appears
different on white and on black wool), and
also by differences of illumination. Thus
embroiderers say that they often make mistakes
in their colours when they work by lamplight,
and use the wrong ones.
We have now shown why the rainbow has three
colours and that these are its only colours.
The same cause explains the double rainbow
and the faintness of the colours in the outer
one and their inverted order. When sight
is strained to a great distance the appearance
of the distant object is affected in a certain
way: and the same thing holds good here.
So the reflection from the outer rainbow
is weaker because it takes place from a greater
distance and less of it reaches the sun,
and so the colours seen are fainter. Their
order is reversed because more reflection
reaches the sun from the smaller, inner band.
For that reflection is nearer to our sight
which is reflected from the band which is
nearest to the primary rainbow. Now the smallest
band in the outer rainbow is that which is
nearest, and so it will be red; and the second
and the third will follow the same principle.
Let B be the outer rainbow, A the inner one;
let R stand for the red colour, G for green,
V for violet; yellow appears at the point
Y. Three rainbows or more are not found because
even the second is fainter, so that the third
reflection can have no strength whatever
and cannot reach the sun at all. (See diagram.)
Part 5
The rainbow can never be a circle nor a segment
of a circle greater than a semicircle. The
consideration of the diagram will prove this
and the other properties of the rainbow.
(See diagram.)
Let A be a hemisphere resting on the circle
of the horizon, let its centre be K and let
H be another point appearing on the horizon.
Then, if the lines that fall in a cone from
K have HK as their axis, and, K and M being
joined, the lines KM are reflected from the
hemisphere to H over the greater angle, the
lines from K will fall on the circumference
of a circle. If the reflection takes place
when the luminous body is rising or setting
the segment of the circle above the earth
which is cut off by the horizon will be a
semi-circle; if the luminous body is above
the horizon it will always be less than a
semicircle, and it will be smallest when
the luminous body culminates. First let the
luminous body be appearing on the horizon
at the point H, and let KM be reflected to
H, and let the plane in which A is, determined
by the triangle HKM, be produced. Then the
section of the sphere will be a great circle.
Let it be A (for it makes no difference which
of the planes passing through the line HK
and determined by the triangle KMH is produced).
Now the lines drawn from H and K to a point
on the semicircle A are in a certain ratio
to one another, and no lines drawn from the
same points to another point on that semicircle
can have the same ratio. For since both the
points H and K and the line KH are given,
the line MH will be given too; consequently
the ratio of the line MH to the line MK will
be given too. So M will touch a given circumference.
Let this be NM. Then the intersection of
the circumferences is given, and the same
ratio cannot hold between lines in the same
plane drawn from the same points to any other
circumference but MN.
Draw a line DB outside of the figure and
divide it so that D: B=MH: MK. But MH is
greater than MK since the reflection of the
cone is over the greater angle (for it subtends
the greater angle of the triangle KMH). Therefore
D is greater than B. Then add to B a line
Z such that B+Z: D=D: B. Then make another
line having the same ratio to B as KH has
to Z, and join MI.
Then I is the pole of the circle on which
the lines from K fall. For the ratio of D
to IM is the same as that of Z to KH and
of B to KI. If not, let D be in the same
ratio to a line indifferently lesser or greater
than IM, and let this line be IP. Then HK
and KI and IP will have the same ratios to
one another as Z, B, and D. But the ratios
between Z, B, and D were such that Z+B: D=D:
B. Therefore Ih: IP=IP: IK. Now, if the points
K, H be joined with the point P by the lines
HP, KP, these lines will be to one another
as IH is to IP, for the sides of the triangles
HIP, KPI about the angle I are homologous.
Therefore, HP too will be to KP as HI is
to IP. But this is also the ratio of MH to
MK, for the ratio both of HI to IP and of
Mh to MK is the same as that of D to B. Therefore,
from the points H, K there will have been
drawn lines with the same ratio to one another,
not only to the circumference MN but to another
point as well, which is impossible. Since
then D cannot bear that ratio to any line
either lesser or greater than IM (the proof
being in either case the same), it follows
that it must stand in that ratio to MI itself.
Therefore as MI is to IK so IH will be to
MI and finally MH to Mk.
If, then, a circle be described with I as
pole at the distance MI it will touch all
the angles which the lines from H and K make
by their reflection. If not, it can be shown,
as before, that lines drawn to different
points in the semicircle will have the same
ratio to one another, which was impossible.
If, then, the semicircle A be revolved about
the diameter HKI, the lines reflected from
the points H, K at the point M will have
the same ratio, and will make the angle KMH
equal, in every plane. Further, the angle
which HM and MI make with HI will always
be the same. So there are a number of triangles
on HI and KI equal to the triangles HMI and
KMI. Their perpendiculars will fall on HI
at the same point and will be equal. Let
O be the point on which they fall. Then O
is the centre of the circle, half of which,
MN, is cut off by the horizon. (See diagram.)
Next let the horizon be ABG but let H have
risen above the horizon. Let the axis now
be HI. The proof will be the same for the
rest as before, but the pole I of the circle
will be below the horizon Ag since the point
H has risen above the horizon. But the pole,
and the centre of the circle, and the centre
of that circle (namely HI) which now determines
the position of the sun are on the same line.
But since KH lies above the diameter AG,
the centre will be at O on the line KI below
the plane of the circle AG determined the
position of the sun before. So the segment
YX which is above the horizon will be less
than a semicircle. For YXM was a semicircle
and it has now been cut off by the horizon
AG. So part of it, YM, will be invisible
when the sun has risen above the horizon,
and the segment visible will be smallest
when the sun is on the meridian; for the
higher H is the lower the pole and the centre
of the circle will be.
In the shorter days after the autumn equinox
there may be a rainbow at any time of the
day, but in the longer days from the spring
to the autumn equinox there cannot be a rainbow
about midday. The reason for this is that
when the sun is north of the equator the
visible arcs of its course are all greater
than a semicircle, and go on increasing,
while the invisible arc is small, but when
the sun is south of the equator the visible
arc is small and the invisible arc great,
and the farther the sun moves south of the
equator the greater is the invisible arc.
Consequently, in the days near the summer
solstice, the size of the visible arc is
such that before the point H reaches the
middle of that arc, that is its point of
culmination, the point is well below the
horizon; the reason for this being the great
size of the visible arc, and the consequent
distance of the point of culmination from
the earth. But in the days near the winter
solstice the visible arcs are small, and
the contrary is necessarily the case: for
the sun is on the meridian before the point
H has risen far.
Part 6
Mock suns, and rods too, are due to the causes
we have described. A mock sun is caused by
the reflection of sight to the sun. Rods
are seen when sight reaches the sun under
circumstances like those which we described,
when there are clouds near the sun and sight
is reflected from some liquid surface to
the cloud. Here the clouds themselves are
colourless when you look at them directly,
but in the water they are full of rods. The
only difference is that in this latter case
the colour of the cloud seems to reside in
the water, but in the case of rods on the
cloud itself. Rods appear when the composition
of the cloud is uneven, dense in part and
in part rare, and more and less watery in
different parts. Then the sight is reflected
to the sun: the mirrors are too small for
the shape of the sun to appear, but, the
bright white light of the sun, to which the
sight is reflected, being seen on the uneven
mirror, its colour appears partly red, partly
green or yellow. It makes no difference whether
sight passes through or is reflected from
a medium of that kind; the colour is the
same in both cases; if it is red in the first
case it must be the same in the other.
Rods then are occasioned by the unevenness
of the mirror-as regards colour, not form.
The mock sun, on the contrary, appears when
the air is very uniform, and of the same
density throughout. This is why it is white:
the uniform character of the mirror gives
the reflection in it a single colour, while
the fact that the sight is reflected in a
body and is thrown on the sun all together
by the mist, which is dense and watery though
not yet quite water, causes the sun's true
colour to appear just as it does when the
reflection is from the dense, smooth surface
of copper. So the sun's colour being white,
the mock sun is white too. This, too, is
the reason why the mock sun is a surer sign
of rain than the rods; it indicates, more
than they do, that the air is ripe for the
production of water. Further a mock sun to
the south is a surer sign of rain than one
to the north, for the air in the south is
readier to turn into water than that in the
north.
Mock suns and rods are found, as we stated,
about sunset and sunrise, not above the sun
nor below it, but beside it. They are not
found very close to the sun, nor very far
from it, for the sun dissolves the cloud
if it is near, but if it is far off the reflection
cannot take place, since sight weakens when
it is reflected from a small mirror to a
very distant object. (This is why a halo
is never found opposite to the sun.) If the
cloud is above the sun and close to it the
sun will dissolve it; if it is above the
sun but at a distance the sight is too weak
for the reflection to take place, and so
it will not reach the sun. But at the side
of the sun, it is possible for the mirror
to be at such an interval that the sun does
not dissolve the cloud, and yet sight reaches
it undiminished because it moves close to
the earth and is not dissipated in the immensity
of space. It cannot subsist below the sun
because close to the earth the sun's rays
would dissolve it, but if it were high up
and the sun in the middle of the heavens,
sight would be dissipated. Indeed, even by
the side of the sun, it is not found when
the sun is in the middle of the sky, for
then the line of vision is not close to the
earth, and so but little sight reaches the
mirror and the reflection from it is altogether
feeble.
Some account has now been given of the effects
of the secretion above the surface of the
earth; we must go on to describe its operations
below, when it is shut up in the parts of
the earth.
Just as its twofold nature gives rise to
various effects in the upper region, so here
it causes two varieties of bodies. We maintain
that there are two exhalations, one vaporous
the other smoky, and there correspond two
kinds of bodies that originate in the earth,
'fossiles' and metals. The heat of the dry
exhalation is the cause of all 'fossiles'.
Such are the kinds of stones that cannot
be melted, and realgar, and ochre, and ruddle,
and sulphur, and the other things of that
kind, most 'fossiles' being either coloured
lye or, like cinnabar, a stone compounded
of it. The vaporous exhalation is the cause
of all metals, those bodies which are either
fusible or malleable such as iron, copper,
gold. All these originate from the imprisonment
of the vaporous exhalation in the earth,
and especially in stones. Their dryness compresses
it, and it congeals just as dew or hoar-frost
does when it has been separated off, though
in the present case the metals are generated
before that segregation occurs. Hence, they
are water in a sense, and in a sense not.
Their matter was that which might have become
water, but it can no longer do so: nor are
they, like savours, due to a qualitative
change in actual water. Copper and gold are
not formed like that, but in every case the
evaporation congealed before water was formed.
Hence, they all (except gold) are affected
by fire, and they possess an admixture of
earth; for they still contain the dry exhalation.
This is the general theory of all these bodies,
but we must take up each kind of them and
discuss it separately.
END OF BOOK THREE OF ARISTOTLE
ON METEOROLOGY |