This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Terrestrial Spheroid. By T. y. y. See.
(With a plate and two tables';
LHistorical Statement of the Problem of the Celeste, TomeIII, Liv.VII, Chap. 4 no. 21). This value was
Figure of the Earth. largely used by Lap/act, but in 1815 he adopted the round
The determination of the figure and dimensions of the figure I .: 306, drawn from the combined researches of BUrg, earth is the recognized problem of geodesy, and many ap . Bouvard. and Burckhardl on ·se\~eral. thousand Greenwich rfoximate solutions of it have been effected within the past o?Sen'atlOns of the moon (cf. Mecanique Celeste, Tome V, three centuries. The governments of the leading nations of I Ltv. XI, Chap. I, no. I).
ihe world have long maintained extensive and highly organized Bessel'« profound researches in geodesy (A. N. Ed. 14, !eodetic su rveys for the accurate measurement of arcs 0 f the 1837), with a general met hod for utilizing all observations, ooeridian an d of longitude; a nd so man y arcs have now been 'led him to dOe duce corrections for the calculation of the measured by geodetic operations that the linear dimensions distance .from Barcelona to For~entera (AN 19.116). By of the earth are known to a high degre e of accuracy. com bining all the best arcs known in 184 I he obtained
According to Dr. O. H. Tittmann, who has had over the oblateness I: 2Q9.1528 (AN 438),'which long remained io years experience in geodesy and for about 15 years was classic, and has been but little improved upon to this day, Snperintendent of the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, the [cf Bessel's Abhandlungen, Ed. 3)' Thus in the Encydopedia Jest value of the earth's equatorial radius is Hdmtrt's value Metropolitaua, 1849, Sir GeiJrge Airy carefully discusses the If 1903,  which was communicated to Professor i'veweomb theory of the figure of the earth, first outlined in I83o,and 'or his researches on the motion of the moon ~ namely finally adopts his earlier oblateness of 1 : 2Q9'33, *hich does
\378000 m. This round number is preferred, because there not differ sensiblyfrom Besset's classical value' of r 84 I. .
sill is an uncertainty in the length of the earth's equatorial In Clarkt's spheroid of 1878 (Phil. Mag., 5th Series, ndius of at least 250 metres; yet the accuracy attained in vol. VI, p. 86) .a larger value of the oblateness is found, :he diameter of the earth already approaches I part in 25000, I: 293465; and although it has been 'extensively used in rhich is a notable triumph of the science of geodesy! England and America, it is now abandoned as certainlyless
But the determination of the exact geometrical £gure accurate than Bessefs classic value of 184 I. For during the If the earth is a much more difficult problem than the past 30 years the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey has made' aeasurement of its radius or equatorial diameter. And as extensive series of pendulum observations: and a full idis:he spheroidal figure of the earth gives rise to sensible I cussion of the results by Dr .. Wm. Bowie (Investigations of 1erturbations of the motion of the moon, both in latitude Gravity and Isostacy,U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, Special ~nd in lo.ng.itude, which admit of acc~rate evaluation f~om ! Publicati~n, no. 40, 19I7, p. 134.) leads to the v~lue 1 : 297.~. ~e observations of the moon, the question of the geometrical This value of the flattening of the earth s mean figure 'gure of the earth becomes .also fundame~taJl.y a great. differs 'very little from other values derived from geodetic data ~ob!em of~stro~omy. Thus 10 the det~rmlDatlOn of the in the United States and elsewhere,' For . example. in' 1909 .gtlre and dimensions of the earth the sClenc~s ?f g~odesy Hayford had obtained the value 1 : 197.0: Likewise Professor 'nd astronomy occupy common ground, and It IS difficult Heimerl in 190 I had found the value I : 298.'2 but in 191 S·
"(I h' fh . fh h " ,
separate. t e science 0 t e measurement 0 t e eart increased the oblateness to 1 : 296. ,± 0.4. Dr. BOll!ie,on the
'om the sc!en~e .of the heavens. . . . . other hand, had reached the value 1 ; 2Q8.0 in 19 i: Z, but in
In es!abltshlng the law of universal gravitation, 1687, 1917 adopted I : z9 704 as an improvement 00 his earlier result.
Isaac .L\ewlo1t correctly concluded that the mean figure. . . .' .... . ...
f th h' h t f bl heroid fit' ith The 'recent progress ci Helmerl and of theA merican
e eart .IS tao an 0 ate sp ero! 0 revo u lon, WI . ... . .. . . .. ... '.
I t .sid bl I h (p' ., Lib III investrgators may be tabulated as follows: ,
a eness const era y ess t an 1 : 230, nncipra, 1. '! "
~rop. 19), which corresponds to the hypothesis of homogeneity. .s: . D8a8te 6 = °8b!... . 6 = '6)' Mea.n " :,'. > .
. . .nemer! 1 4 1: 29 ·54 = 0.00'349 5
Already to 17 Sl the measurements of arcs of Iatitude : . 8 _ .). = 0.00335784
Peru and in France led La C(J1ldamin( to an oblateness ' 1901.1.296.2  0 .. 0033J.3~5 = 1 : 297.810 .
. . (' 1915 I: 29.7 = 0.00337041 .... . 'o';._"
IS near the modern value 1: 303.6, cf. Mesure des Hay./ord· '. '.. .~ ._ . ·6  .. ) .•. :.,'  .... : ,".
premiers degres du meridiendans l'hcmisphere austral,' Bowie .... 1909' 1:29~.0= 0.0033704 =0.00336174.
I751, p; 259)' In 1185 Lalande. reached the value" .:9~~. :;:9 _:0.=~:~%33~~70 . 1:297.465':
300, and m 17 89 Lfgmdrt found the most probable ' ...• .' .. 9,7 t . 97 4 .33.47 " '. . ;
ness to be I: 305. '. ,... .' . · ... GIvmgHdme;fs ,value; ~._;",;e:lght of 2, .Hay./~d~and.:;
Itt 1802 Burg discussed the .Iunar perturbations~ ue Bo":,u's val.ue~l\'~lght .,0:' I, In. a~.cor~ance W1 th their g.e~:
the lack of sphericity. of the earth's figure,. and found detic experience, we .. o.?~a~nJor. J~e:W~Ight~dm.e~.~ Qrth~s,e .. :.'.
ients 'leading to the oblateness 1:.305.05, [Mecanique several results; .E" 0.0033 S914 =·1 =.297 .695 . . .. {I) . . .. ' .. '
~ .
  .~.
Abdruck aus den, ASlr. Nachr, Nr, 5 [°3.04 (Band 213 Mai 192 t;.
... :.: .: .
.  . . . : .  ~ .
 ".,., .. '
•• ··LO"
._~~. ,
.':'
_ ". . .. ~ .. ~
: ._,
,
._. :...~
" '
'.j.
, 235" ,
.: : .. .: .
<,
5103,
,': :
~~ :. , .'. . ... • .": ~ .. 'j .'., ,
_  ", The firsto(Helmert's' values of 1884' is based on ' J~st' why no modification of the Newtonian lAw'
, ,~I:_ 297.8, " derived from' the lunar 'perturbations , depending ,be considered so desirable, in  view of the recent ~ on the figure of the earth, and on I: 299:2_6deriv,ed from predi1e~no;;'for E{nstein'stheory; ' whi,ch so unj , pendulum observations. Accordingly it will be seen that there _ alters the form of Newton's law as to violate the nome'llenp;h.
,,' is a very good agreement between the results of Helmert and of the fundamental equation of the potential of a sphere'
those found by the American investigators; yet both results, is not apparent> _ "_  , ' " "
_ except the" value _of Heimert, i 884,', rest mainly on' pend~lum;;:':; What r mean here _is t):lis:f In, the third paper on
obserVations;,, ,'_ ~:,; ,:;~,A<:L"  :,!.::':' ' .,', , new theory, of the nether (A~ 5079). 1. have shown. th&,t.~'ed
, ,,, ',' .' '. , "d' 'Ein;i~in's re'as"oning proceeds' on, Gerber's' formula for,
'there are  several other' methods, however;' of fin mg
the ellipticity of the earth's figure, which have been quite potential,  U= M/r(1  ,l(,dr/dt)2
thoroughly discussed by Helmert, and subsequently by Tisse which violates the ordinary potential of a sphere, just
rand, ::lecaniqu,e Celeste, Tome II, 189 I, pages 3.68 369, we should do in the dimensional equation of the
where we find _the following sagacious summaryr V = LI T, by unwarrantedly introducing_ the factor r~"
) Reflexions generales et conclusions,  L'examen des the divisor thus: "V' ' L/ Tr2   
valeurs obtenues pour I'aplatissernent de 1a Terre par diverses whi~h is not authorized by any recognized canon of physi
methodes et avec des donnees numeriques de sources dif . ""'I ,.miiler,Ol d
 ' , science. , " "
ferentes montre qu'on n'en est pas encore arrive au point Brown's procedure, on the one hand, shows a SOm .. ~lhA.'".'''
de pouvoir affirrner que I'aplatissement r/293·5 de M. Clarke ultra conservative attitude, while the British followers doit etre prefere a l'une des valeurs J 1299. 2 6, 1/2C!7 .. 8 aux Einstein, on' the other, exhibit a course as reckless as it
quelles est pa~venu M. Helmert. On remarquera. d'ail~eurs disrespectful to the traditional veneration naturally attaelljDIZ"~
que les erreurs probables des denominateurs de ces derme_res to jl/ewton's law, It seems to me that neither of these extrem
sont de 1 OU de :2 unites. La theorie de Clairaut neglige courses can be justified.
du reste les quantites du second ordre et ne permet pas de There is of course no objection to modifying
distinguer entre l'ellipticite et I'aplatissement, de sorte qu'on De N ewtonian law, provided any known physical came can
peut pas pretendre a determiner Ie dcnorninateur en question assigned for the change, such as waveaction, thus "r"'~''''I''T'''
a moins d'une unite pres. (I\L O. Callandreau a etendu la this law into Weber's law of 1846, which I have dealt theorie de Clairaut; en tenant compte des terrnes du carre in AN 5048, p. l49) 50. Moreover, ~l1ajorana's experi de l'aplatissement, dans un important memoire : Sur la theorie at Turin, 19 19, lend observational support to this course .• "
de la figure des planetes ',Ann ales de l'Observatoire de Paris', and, the validity of some slight modification cannot well
t. XIX).. denied. Nevertheless, in our researches on the ph~i,calll~~:ufllcv
»11 s'agirait done de savoir si l'aplatissement 1/298 ou universe, it is always desirable to go slow in modi 1/299 doit.des a present, etre remplace par 1/293 ou 1/294. which have proved accurate and historically sel[\'iCellbJI~:I;;;, Nons ne pensons pas que la chose puisse etre regardee comme thus changes should be admitted only in the face demontree. Cela entrainerait, comme on l'a vu, des conse vincing evidence.
quences assez graves, car it y aurait contradiction entre 2. Determination of the Ellipticity of th
I'aplatissernent 1/293 et la valeur numerique de la constante Terrestrial Spheroid by means of the Equation {AC)/A fournie par Ia theorie de la precession. II n'en the Coefficient of the Moon's Inequality in Lat
est plus' ainsi quand on adopte t/2 9 7 ou un aplatissernent t u d e de pen din g on the Figure 0 f th e Earth.
plus petit. M. Rllche, regardant la contradiction comme bien The determination of the exact analytical expreSSJODllr~m
etablie, en avait conclu que l'interieur de la Terre doit etre for the law of universal gravitation leads to a problem solide (Memoire sur l'etat interieur du globe terrestre, Paris, successive approximations. And the search for a soJluuonJ~,.,h 188l). Cette conclusion, qui serait d'une importance capitale might be entirely in vain but for the highly rigorous pour la Geologie, ne peut donc pas encore etre consideree metrical conditions fulfilled by the motions of certain bo,[jjeslh;' comme certaine. N ous reviendrons plus loin sur ce sujet.« of the solar system, and the resulting accuracy with
Accordingly it thus appears, from an extensive survey it is possible to detect a small deviation from the as!;unledlLi~, .. A
of the subject made 30 years ago, that Tisserand reached form of the law of attraction. Among the motions the conclusion that the only values to be seriously considered adapted for disclosing a departure from the law of N(wrlm'l~bl~ltelrle~ ' were Hdmert's values, 1: 299·:2 6 to 1 : 297.8, the latter from we must reckon the nearly fixed elliptical paths d the observations of the moon, and the former from pendulum by the planets about the sun, and the rapidly varying
observations. lerian ellipse described by the moon about the centre
After these able discussions by Helmert and Tisserand, gravity of the earth, ,
it is surprising that Professor E. W. Brown, in his researches The moon's motion, however, is disturbed not only on the lunar theory, should prefer the large value I: 294, 'the action of the sun and planets but also by the action apparently because it gave an outstanding motion of the lunar the oblateness of the figure of the earth; and to throw perigee of only + 3", (cf. AN 5048, p. ISO). He even con light on the observed inequalities in the moon's motion,
siders fa vorabl y the still larger value 1::2 9 3.7, beca use this is necessary to separate these two causes,  the eel would get rid of the outstanding motion of the lunar perigee, from the terrestrial ~ and to evaluate them
without. modifying the Newtonian Law. and with great accuracy. As geometers for oyer two
.",.
._.:
5103
238
237
n the that r the
\2 )
where It is the regression of the moon's node, 9'=_°.00346768 is Hdn/trt's value of the ratio of the centrifugal force to the force of gravity at the  terrestrial equator} a =' earth's mean equatorial radius, 6378000 meters; a == moon's mean distance, .the ' ratio a/a = sine ~ the moon's equatorial horizontal parallax, taken as Prr._ = 57' 2~39, Jog sinP« = (8.2I9884410), and the obliquity of the ecliptic for J900.00, OJ = 23° 27' 8~26 (l\Tewcomb, . Astronomical Constants, 189S, p. 196), and, fo~ the same epoch, the mean motion of the moon
n = I732SS93~8484 ~(6)
turies have given great attention to the motion of the moon, Ir ellipticity of the earth, whose roundness was made known  it happens fortunately that analysis has enabled them to . to the early astronomers by her eclipses«.  >The two determine with great accuracy the effect of the different I preceeding inequalities deserve every attention of observers; forces acting upon the moon. I because they have the advantage over geodetical measures
It is found that just as the action of the oblate figure I in giv"ing the oblateness of the earth, in a manner which is of the earth produces sensible inequalities in the motion of .. less dependent on the irregularities of its figure e •
the moon, both in latitude and in longitude, so also the ob Laplace· did not fully grasp. the fluctuations of the served amounts of these inequalities, when carefully separated moon's motion, since established by NfW(Qfflb and first exfrom, the other perturbations of the moon's motion, become plained byrne in 1916, and thus he somewhat overrated e5tablish~d data which enable us to determine, the exact I the accuracy of the second method, as pointed out below, degree of the oblateness 0 f th e earth's figure. Th e lunar Section 3.
perturbations best suited to this purpose are _the monthly With this explanation of the importance of the lunar inequality in latitude depending on the figure of the earth, methods, we remark that the inequality in latitude depending and the progression of the lunar perigee in longitude, a part on the figure of the earth, has the analytical form [cf Frails
of which also depends on the oblateness of the terrestrial Figure of the Earth, 4'h edition, p. 148) ,
The 18.6 year inequality in longitude, having a dJ.. = na'It·Asin(nt+E) (4)
c.oefficient of 7~1I76, is treated of independently in set = n~Z/2Ita2.(E1/2~)sin20Jsin(nt..f6) (5)
non 3 below.
The observational determination of the exact amount of the earth's oblateness therefore presents a most difficult problem. After reviewing the causes operating to exclude a definite and accurate result, Tisserand remarks [Traite de }1ecanique Celeste, Tome II, p. 366); ;pOn peut voir par ce precede cornbien la determination de la figure de la
terre devient delicate et diffici!e, soit qu'on parte des ope
. geodesiques ou des mesures du pendule, quand on
veut tenir compte des irregularires de la surface et de la croi'iteterrestre ...
It will be the aim of the present paper to determine in a Julian year., _' 
Hansm has carefully determined the coefficient of this the ellipticity _ of the terrestrial : spheroid with the highest
now obtainable. It concludes certain investigations. lunar inequality in latitude from extensive series of observations, and fixed the value at 8~38'2: {Dariegung ,der theo~bich were developed in 1904, but heretofore not published
h retischen Berechnung der in den Mondtafeln angewandten '
:0 detail. The approximate mean, result t en given in Storungen, t. I, p. 4S 747 I and t. II,. p. 27 r3 22). Previously AN 3992 as I : 297.7 is now put in final form and rendered
more exact. to Hansm's researches Burg had fixed the value at 8~, and
in his Cours d'Astronomie, t. II; p. 316, Faye has reached· Tbis celestial method of finding the obJateness of the
the value '8~S9. The mean of Burj's and of FaYf's value is was preferred by Laplact, and is given great" prominence,
his lunar theory, which appeared in the third volume of 8~29S which differs from Hansen's value by 0~087,a com
paratively small quantity. _,
:Uecanique Celeste, 1802. It leads to a mean result free
Tisserand remarks (Mecanique Celeste, t. II, p. 368) the influence of local irregularities of gravity such as
that the difference of O~2 between the values found by Faye from rnountains or irregularities of crust, and thus prove
U""~jl(OUIOJesOlllle in the researches of geodesy. and Hansen shows that the determination of this coefficient from the observations of the moon is a delicate matter. The
By means of a very great number of observations of . . , .
difference is less important, however; since the mean of moon extending oyer a long interval, Burg, a celebrated
of Vienna, at Laplact's  request, carefully deter Burg's value, which Laplace estimated so .highly, and of
m"'~:aIDf'd the coefficient of the lunar inequality in latitude, and Fayt's is within ' 0:"087 of that found by the_ painstaking
labor of Hansen, 8~382. _ . ' _.
the value at 8#; from which LaplaCt deduced an
teness of 11304.6. Accordingly it appears that we may adhere to.[fansm's.
Th I t d th d' b d th' l·t· I . value with great confidence. 'Our formula for the ellipticity
e r~ a e me 0 ase. on e mequa 1 y In ong? t hum .;._ . _ .~ .
extend 109 oyer a revolution of the moon's nodes, 10 of he eart ~h s beco es. .' __ ' _ .. : ..
years, and likewise depending on the ellipticity of the, E=8~382'2h,[nsinfFcsjn2w(206264~8)J+O.Ooq~38.4 b) of the earth,  for which Bilrg found the coefficient where o.ce r j 3384 = rp/2 _ found by Hdmfrf as, Il1dlc:t~e_d .
. be 6~8 from a great number of Maskdynt's observations, above.. r': . ... . . _"'  . :,: : ..... ._':
led Laplact to an oblateness of 'rhos.os.This great ~Veuse the above _valu~s,·andrecall _,that.~h,~Dl~a~ i
'~,~:)lt1llllleter regarded the near coincidence of the .two values regresslO.n of the n.ode h,m unitsof th: .ll"!0on s mean motion
an indication of the' high accuracy of the. two ·astrono in a Juhan year, is found by calculation to be; "
:>·~JIr.l",l methods. < ... ',, . 'h/n = 27.32I66!{36S.2S63S82 '18.59(6) .. ,;':;'
>Thus, the mcon e, says Laplau':_"by the, observation" .• , '<',  =,_ 0~00402 1663 .' . ,',.  ,,(8) .
her motions, . renders sensible to modern .astronomj' the wherefore  . log (h/n) ,=: b .604405710)'. ..',;; (9)
. ,'.' .!. ~
hciuld 19lish' fiably !Deity re 
1St as ocitj;
. .
r" In
,bl
ysical
ewhat rs of it  is
ching treme
, _. : ~
_. ~
:(;
. .I_
"I"·
, "; "
~ ... ~,.~.
.. : ... " ~ .... " .. " "..,
;" ,\;".,2,.'~1 .. lr{;." ,', ,,~ ,.,' ,;"" ~':.3. " ' '. ' '" " '. '
" ' Thustwe find .•.. ", smP«  8.21988441°_:" ; .' ., ,Y"The'oblateness_ of the earth thus obtained by as's ;igrlin~~,Ilil#.rl'
.• :'~£,\,;.: ;:.::'j~:~:i,~;~~,~_i";'_" ':;~ :~ir., ~ !:;1~! ~ ~!~~{:0,?:~,':~' :,1 ":uod:~~~~:i:~;~~~,tih;ll~i :~:~:" ,~(t~n6t~n;:~:,s:t~:!ht:: h
"I'~r":':"""1";("2p, '_ )' 6 8'.' ( ')' Th,e'coinci,dence, of t.h,is value.\1I'it.h,"Hfl.m_fr/.s independe'o"'t'
',' "::">':".. . og S10 (( sm 2~ = '3032,20 10' ~_ 10,
':;,:;, :;A'cC~_~dl~glY,,;,>~,._":'; ,':_' " ' ",:,' resultfound ~r~m gm'lty determinations; lS quite remarkab'le;'
,_, . , _ _ _" " ,,,, ' '. ' " and renders ,le the, more, probable that no considerable
';.<, i~g [(2h/n) (8~ 382/:z062 64~8)1 ,, 3· 5 I 43 5S31~ (Il) error due to accidental or "constant causes can' _exist in tliij'
_ ,', _and:':", "," 3.5 i 43 58 FlO' ~eigh~ed mean _ ellipticity deduced from the lunar inequality'
6.303: 2 08~l'll: In latitude, ',' ,,'  .  ',"" ,,'" ',","'1
10g(E rp/2) = 7.211137 5l0 {I2} Nevertheless, in the abovementioned address on the
, ,E : rp/2 = 0.001 6260634 . moon's motion, Prof; E. W. Brown expresses the view that
Therefore,' ~_ ,E' rp/2 : 0.0016260634 the lunar inequality in latitude is not satisfactory for tbe
+rp/2 = 0.0017338400 determination of the oblateness of the earth, because tbe
coefficient of the inequality is entangled with the Obliquity (13) of the ecliptic. The obliquity, however, is known with great precision for several centuries prior to the present epoch, p. 368}, that and even to the age of the Greeks, with a degree of acthe result of curacy surpassing that derivable from the observations the ancients have transmitted to us. Thus the obliquity has no degree of uncertainty which can sensiblyvitiate the obhitenes~ of the earth deduced from the lunar inequality in latitude: and after an examination of this criticism, we must hold it to be not well founded. It is surprising that Prof. Brou1n was not more careful in pronouncing' against one of the most 8' instead accurate of aU our available methods, which was correctly appraised by Laplace in 1802, and more recently has enabled (14) Hdmtrt t(1 reach a value of the oblateness E = 1/297.8 extremely near the truth.
and with FaYf's coefficient, 8~ 59, we obtain the larger value
i = 0.00340025 = 1/294.103, (15)
.;' . ', .. ~ ,. ." ..
E = 0.0033599034
or E = I/H/7 .63.
. " Tissera~d adds (Me'canique Celeste, t. II, Hdmtrt, stops at 11. value of 1/297'S± 2.2 as
the observations of the moon. '
The oblateness above reached is not far from Helm,r'/'s value, but I would make the probable error smaller than that given by Hdmert, 1fwing to the superior accuracy of Hansen's work, and the greater weight to be attributed to his researches.
If we use Burg's value of the coefficient, of the 8~382 found by Hansen, we obtain '
E = 0.003285So = r/304.34
The mean of these two values, resulting from the coefficients of Burg and Faye,' is found to be:
E = 0.0033430 =1/299.13
." ~
which agrees almost exactly with the oblateness found by Bessel from a discussion of all geodetic measurements in, 1841, (AN 43S), namely:
E = 1/299,1528.
As it seems illogical to wholly igriore the work of Burg and Faye, we combine the three results, with the system of weights assigned below:
Hansen E = 0.0033599. wt, = 10
Burg 0.0032858 5
Fa)'t 0.0034002, 5
weighted mean, t = 0.0033515 = 1/298,37. (IS)
This result utilizes all the results obtained from the moon's inequality in latitude, depending on the figure of the earth. It is remarkable that it agrees almost exactly with Helmeds earlier value (1903) for the oblateness of the earth, obtained from gravity determinations, namely,
E = 1/298.3 ' (19)
to which Prof. E. W. Brown has called attention in his address to the British Association in Australia, 19 J 4, p. 317. It also conforms closely to my value of 1904, namely:
E = 1/297.7
AN 3992, and to the value 1/297 adopted by the Directors of the N autical Almanacs in J 9 I I.
: . .... , .
(16)
Brown contends finally that the observations on the .lunar parallax, between Greenwich, and the Cape of Gobel . Hope, and the observed motion of the moon's node and perigee, are best satisfied by an oblateness of about I: 294. And he holds that this value should have been adopted in the conference of almanac directors. In the COurse of the present paper we shall examine into the validity of this claim: it suffices here to say that it is inadmissible, partly because it assumes that the Newtonian Law should not be modified by a slight' change in the exponent, as shown in AN 5048, p. 148.
3. Discussion of Laplacl's Theoretical Metbo for determining the Ell i p t ic it y of the Terrestria Spheroid by :Meansof the IS.6Year Inequality in Longitude depending on the Regression of th Moon's nodes.
From the observations used for the construction of lunar tables', l 755, Tobias Ma),cr found indications of inequality in longitude in some ,,:ay depending on the volution of the moon's node. In his memoir on the acceleration of the moon, 1 7 7 2, Lagrange was the first to entertain the idea of introducing the oblateness of the into the differential equations of the motion of the but neglected it,  supposing insensible the inequalities contain the factor I, the inclination of the moon's orbit,  and thus he missed the inequality in longitude depen on the oblateness of the earth.
Twenty seven years later, 1799, while calculating terms which escaped the analysis of Lagrange, Laplace covered the physical cause of the inequality pointed out
jEapr, and easily explained the nature of the perturbations and, it is important to ascertain the law which regulates any in longitude. But Laplau discovered also the inequality in such inequality. If we examine the lunar theory, with the latitude di., which Biirg and Burckhardt subsequently con most scrupulous attention, we shall fino, that the action of firmed by the discussion of observations, and which we have the planets produces nothing of this kind.« _ IJready discussed in relation to the ellipticity of the earth. In his commentary to the translation of the Mecanique The principal inequality in longitude depending on the Celeste, from which the above is quoted, Bowditch points out
figure of the earth has the form: that D' Alembft"t proposed to introduce an inequality of long
dL = (I9j,nlh) (£1/2~) Isin2 Pc. sin 2(0 sin n (2I) period, before Laplact discovered the cause of the moon's
=  C sin n  secular acceleration, 1 78 i . And in spi te of this disco very
... here n is the longitude of the moon's node, and the other I the irregularities of the motion in longitude continued to
symbOls are the same as were described before. engage the attention of astronomers like Laplace, Burckhardt,
Using the values previously introduced, namely: Biirg, Plana, and Carlini. Laplact subsequently recurs to the
log sin2p( = 6.439768810 log (nih) = 2.3955943 inequality of long period which appears to exist in the
log sin 2(0 = 9.863452010 log( 19/4) = 0.6766936 moon's motion, in the fifth volume of the Mecanique Celeste, but speaks with less confidence 'of the existence of this ine
we find with I= 5°8'43~35 = 18523735 (22)
quality. And in the last edition of the Systeme du Monde, E = 0.00335233 = I : 298.3
( ) published only R short time before his death, he omits mention
by actual calculation C = 771 176 . 23
of it altogether. This would seem to show that Laplau was Accordingly the theoretical value of this inequality in the
(It least partially a ware of the fluctuations of the moon's
n!? moon's longitude is  motion, afterwards established by l\I(wcomb, 18691909, arid
de: .d L = +771176 sin n . (24) of which the present write~ discovered the physical cause,
In vol ume II of hi s Mecaniq ue Celeste, p. 36 i, Tisserand _ 19 16 [cf Electr. Wa ve Theory of Phys. Forces, vol. I, r 9 17 ).
!taches a value of the coefficient larger than this; for 'in From the above discussion of the inequality in the
rolume Ill, p. 148, he deduces the value: moon's longitude depending on the figure of the earth, it
 oL = r 7 ~6 2 6 sin n (25) follows that to evaluate the coefficient by observation, the
fluctuations must be known accurately for the period of the observations. In the present state of science the laws of the fluctuations have been established indeed, but not yet used in calculation; and thus the corresponding method of finding the ellipticity of the earth is not quite rigorously applied in the deduction of the older coefficients of Biirg and Mason.
I Nevertheless, as the fluctuations change very gradually, the mean values derived by Burg and Mason from observations extending over a long period of years should give coefficients 
which are essentially accurate.' , ,
Accordingly, just asJ.ap/iue believed, the method ultimately is _on~ of great promise; and since he obtained an , ellipticity of 1/304.6, from BIJrg's coefficient, the use of' Mason's v~lue (7':7) properly weighted still further improves the accuracy. '
, 4. The Determination of the Ellipticity of the Strata, under Laplace's Law of Density, 'gives also the Ellipticity of the Earth's Surface; a n d theFluid Theory, postulated by Clairaut, 1743, is confirmed by the Modern Pratf·HdmertHaY/<71"d Theory of Isostacy. UnderLaflads law of density,  which .assumes the 1 law of the compressibility of the earth's mattertd be that the increase of the square Of the density i·s proportional to _ the increase of the pressure, or dU1 = x rr d a ,  we have
th roug hou t the globe: a = (10  sin '1 x./ 'Ix . t 2 7 )
It is shown al~o that the ellipticity of a stratum of uniform density is defined by ,the equation; . ". ,.,. :,'
'.' ~/  ( '( "')J/(   ! ~I ) ()
:,  .. E = :l'P., r"'3zj 'Ia 3:_~cq ~~ Z _",28 '.
wh~re9a_is the part of the radius appropriatetothe stratu'ip, ' in question, i : _I qa/tgqa, and rp = 0.00346768, as before." .. ' It is shown in' AN 399 2, that _ qa,'""72.5:l 896, , __ ~ r 44e 53' 5 5~:l; '. and bence·,we find' for the eUipticityofthe'·'
earth's surface rc". . .  . .' < ,C .... • ,.,'
.  ;~: ~ >": . 
lIe,· hIe .his lity
the hat the the
'eat ch,
acthe
I it
retrograding node n giving this change to a plus sign in the coefficient.
It is pointed out by Laplace (.Mecanique Celeste, Liv.VII, the Cha,P. IV, S 24) that Mason foun d the value 7 ~ 7 for this
coefficient by observation, while Burg subsequently obtained iod the value 6~8. The simple mean of these two values is 7~2 5,
Mar the new theoretical value calculated above. If we give
. s value a weight of J and Biirg's value a weight of 2, the mean will be 7 ~ 10, w hie h is still nearer the above cal, cUlated value, and yields:
E = J: 298.6572 = 0.003348321. (26)
But it should be pointed out that none_' of the older lIIethods for obtaining this coefficient by observation can be rigorously depended on, owing to the fI uctua ti ons esta bl ished by N~wcotJlb in 1909, and theoretically explained by me in accordance with Newton's law, 1916, (cf. AN 5048, 'pp, 1531_60). have shown that there are three terms in the moon's mean with periods of 18.0293, 61.7006, and 277.590 respectively; and as the corresponding coefficients are 1', 3", and 13", there .would result slow changes in the lllOon's mean longitude, which would render the 'older dissomewhat defective, yet  on the average giving a
approximately correct. .
It is noteworthy that in Chap. V, Lib. VII, of the Meque Celeste, 1802, Laplace believed in the existence of
. in the moon's mean motion. He introduces the I !Object by saying: ,We have remarked that the moon's mean' Illotion, deduced from a comparison of the observations of and Bradley, is sensibly greater .than tbn which from the observations of Bradley,compared with those
.'H7SI.!'~IJ'IU'_; moreover , the observationsmadewith in fifteen
twenty years indicate, in this motion, a still greater dimi. n .. This seems to prove, that there is, in the theory of , moon's motion" oneor more inequalitiesof a long period;
md
. .:.. .
 .. :; .
;" ..
~,; .:
==: ...
.. ; 'il
. ~~;
.. ,h f:iI:
' ..  .... :.
$. ,:" log (qa)2 '' 'logs:' :
log ('1a}2/z  (qa )'l/s .
, ,,':, '4.59'8 I 68 .. ~', '. =:'. 0.8°5884°. .. . ' 0.6625849'
 O.l432991
._... • I"
=  1.39°91°4 ~ 4·59~68
:i(qa}2/s' =  5.989°784
+3'
$
38
. Jog 3" ,_":
, log(qa}2
13.794504 '1.1397060 0.8058840
0.3338 HO
 3z/(qaV _ ='c 2.1 5686
1 3z/(qa}2 . ' 1.15686
log [I  34('1«)2]  0.0632809D
log [3 z (qa)2/z]  0·475537 3D
log {[I  34(q~m/[3 z (qa)2/z]) = 9.587743610
. Jog (5/2 9') = 7,937975210
By equation (28) we have log s  7.525718810'
Therefore E = 0.0033552 = 1/298.045. (31)
Accordingly, on Clairaut's fluidtheory, 1743, (cf. Tisserand'» .Mecanique Celeste, Tome II, p. 2 I I_), as now confirmed by modern geodesy, we conclude from the above data, which appear to be the best obtainable, that the ellipticity of the _surface of the terrestrial spheroid is 1; 2'98.045.
Over half a century ago it was shown by Pratt to be highly probable that the density of the matter 'just beneath the surface of the earth is so arranged as to' give 'equal mass in equal cones having their common vertices at the center of the earth,  This doctrine of isostacy applies especially to the inequalities of the earth's surface, and has been recently confirmed by Hay/wd's· investigations of the gravitational and geodetic measurements made by the U. S. Coast Survey.
In his latter years Helmrrt recognized the fact of isostacy in the ,arrangement of the crust of the globe, and thus Clairaut's fluid  theory is fully confirmed by modern geodesy. Accordingly it is made the basis also of my paper on the Physical Cause of the Land and Ocean Hemispheres of the Earth (AN 202 Nr, 48445, May 1916). We have therefore finally confirmed the arrangement of the globe as a heterogeneous mass of fluid in equilibrium, as originally postulated by Clairaut in 1743; and used by Laplace as the basis of his law of density, which made it possible to integrate Clairaut's differential equations for the equilibrium of a fluid mass [cf. Tisserand's Mecanique Celeste, Tome II, Chap. XV, p. 232).
It is shown that
a law
if the earth's internal density follows
'a=$(a} (s2)
;:o!: ••
·'"i'·:'
': ".' .. , .r:_~; .; ..•.. :> .. : :~. ', ... '
, .
where dis' 'the radius of ~~heJI/and' ~.its_ ellipticity,···· law of Laplace; which Ltgendre was' the first to propose"
leads to the equations r. .: v s ", ' •  'j
':,:'.:.;,'::::::,: :!,.,;, '" ~ ····'F~ ",'{;_' ,j'; f:;a/d/,.~_ .' 
:t ":'".: ' .• .; . ~ i~;:.;~.;_._,~:.:. . :<"._,: f.:"'_..;..;; ~
. •  Q.: "_.
.. ',d!rI~a!= (a',,· da/d;! S~~:·da'.~6iat)y·.;_
. 0.'
This equation takes on a simple aspect when we suppose that the law of density will be such tbat ~'e may always w~te, ,%\...,
e
T
, "
a'._M/daIS q~ida+m2 = 0
<>
where m denotes a constant, In ~ 1/6/a:
On clearing of fractions and differentiating
equation', we get; . .
. a2• d'rJ/da2+ z a drr/da+m!f1 a~ = 0
which may be put in the form r
d~Gti/da2+m2 rJ a = 0 .
By integration we obtain; .
a a = Qsinqa+Rcosqa
,.'
0,7
0.6 t5 0)
0·3'
"."
t? >
this last
~~~·i:
~K ( .'if. (:toter
his sh eita .
,' p
table e
'j,;
1:0_ J.
n"
9.9" I 0.8
and as the density should be finite at the centre, where a = 0, we conclude that R = 0, and our general equation for the density reduces to the form (d. A N 167. I 2 2) :
a = Qsinqa/a = rJo: sinqx/qx. (39)
This is Laplaa's celebrated law _of density, and ;hen appJied to the earth the data of the law is illustrated by the following table and curve (cf. AN 3992):
0.1
~::...,. ,
0:0' !~~'
""i' 5 the Ea
of the gratia: the In ippJi~ ;:' II laplact the surJ
Fig. 2. Curves of Pressure and Density witbin the Earth, _according \0 Laplact's Law.
:!I
""'. 
2 '"
\> ........ ~
t ~~
''11!"'''' ~
~
~ .,,~
~~ ..
~ ~',,\
~ ~ i\
~ ,\\
. ..
.~ '\
\~
, '\.1 \
, ~
Radlu.
.1 .2 3 ,4 .:J ,& ,7 .Ii .s to 10
9
which il
.';".'
7
";:, ..
4
:=2
, ;. lit
, °
':'. F.
~uator
:3
~= 2. o
2
t; A el,liptici:
CA
;........_.._ :"'
C
c
The Earth :
Scale of Rigidity I div. = 250000 Atmospheres. 4 divisions = Rigidity of Nickel Steel.
, .. "
~'.
"))":.
245
f1 ti1
Radius" (<:, = 5.50) (Pressure in Atmospheres)
1.0 2.55 I
0·9 3·75 J98760
0.8 4.99 48369 r
0.7 6.21 542921
0.6 7.38 ' I2 60966
0·5 8.461110730
0·4. 9.40 2152114
0.3 10.12 :i521620
0.2 10.7"4 2861507
0.1 11.0i . 3050870
0.0 H.215 3I35P7 .
On calculating the ellipticities of the strata towards the center of the earth, we find them to decrease as Laplace bas shown should be the case [Mecaeique Celeste, Lib. III, Chap. IV, S 30), while the density increases. The following table exhibits the results of our calculations.
r 1J4 in arc 1J4 in radians a E a
1.0 1 44~ 53' 5 5~ 2 2.528960 2.55  1.000 = I : 298.30
0·9 130 24 31.7 2.276064 3·75 0.9487 = r : 314·44
0.8 115 55 8.2 2.023168 4.99 0.9090 = 1;328.16
0·7 101 25 44.7.1.770272 '6.21 0.8778 = I ;339;83
0.6 86 56 21.2 1.517376 7.38 0.8532 = I; 349.62
0·5 72 26 57.7 L264480 8.46 0.8338 = I :357.76
0·4 57 57 34.2 1.0 I 1584 9.40 0.8193 = I: 364.09
0.3 43 28 10.7 0.758688 10. 12 0.8084  I: 369.53
0.2 28 58 47.2 0.505792 10.74 0.8014 = I: 372.22
0.1 I4 29 23·7 0.252896 11.07 '0.7981=1:373.76
0:0 0 0 0.0 0.00000011.215 0.7970 = 1:374.28
5. Determination of the Mean Ellipticity of the Earth's Surface by Means' of the Observed Value of the Precession of the 'Equinoxes, and an Ln t egrati on for the Mechanical Ellipticity of the Earth, the Integrals for (CA}/C being deduced from the
A.pplis:ation of Laplace's Law of Density. .
It is shown in the theory of a 'spheroid, to which laplace's law of density is applicable, that we may represent the surface of the globe by an equation of the form: ..
r = ro [I +E(l/s  cosl1d)]. (40)
Then, we shall have for the larger moment of inertia, is that about the polar axis, and usually denoted by C:
"'~::I: 2::1: , " _
= 2 S J S (J'r! sind dr dd da>·y2 s,in2d  (41)
000 .
, 2 SO [Tf; ra' [1 +E pi;'cos;d)J' sins~ d~a dIi da>.  (42)
000
For the smaller momen t of inertia, about' anaxis in the 'quator of the terre stria I spheroid, we have in like manner:
" ". " ::I: 2::1: .'. . .: " 
,;: 2 S f s (J' '.'0' [I t:E(1/s :c.osZd)l4 X ' _._:
:.' o o 0.'_ .' Xsmd_(I:sln2dsID2,a»droddda>..J43)
{~', Accordingly, th~' triple : integr~lfor the' me~hanical !~Jpticityof the earth .has .the form: .... 
, 'fJ'S:;r~~[I'I~~l/~'~~o~;d)]"X"':', :,',.:' 
.0 0 o_X {(sin!d.cos'(l)_;_JJ/sin!d.} dro dd,da>. '(44)
. ,
last
the .' 'pose,
I:.:
b8}
where ration
(9) ;'h~n ~d ~Y  ,.:j;,'
", .
. .~.
".,.'
... , 
.. 1::'
". _. ,"
"."_ . ,.
, , •. ' ': <: ....
, :.' .
., .......
' 5103
And it is shown that the integral of this becomes:
(CA)/C = lI/[z+(16/q2a!)] '(E_l/~ 9')' (4s)i
where 9' = 0.00346768, and qa = 2.52896, Z  4.598168,
as before. .
This leads to the following value for the mechanical ellipticity of the earth:
(CA)/C = 0.00325766 = 1./306.97 . ' (46)
It may be noticed that this so called mechanical ellipticity of the earth (cf. Ntwcomb, Astronomical Constants, 1895, p. 195) is considerably smaller than the ellipticity of the layer constituting the surface of our globe. The
. physical reason for this is that in the above integral (43) we take account of the product of the mass of each shell into the ellipticity of that stratum of the globe, so that the final result is an average value. And as the ellipticity of the strata decreases towards the center, while the density increases, as shown by the table at. the close of the last section, it follows that the mechanical ellipticity is an average for the entire earth, and thus too small for the surface layer. The integral of the mass of each .stratum, multiplied '. by its appropriate ellipticity, yields a varying product, and when these are summed up, as the integration is extended throughout the mass, the resulting mean value
necessarily is too small. .
. Now the solar annual precession is given by the formula
(Airy, Mathematical Tracts, 41h ed. p, 218):
(Br/Bt}0 = (C A}/C~ 9 (60Fcosw/s66.2 563582. (47) Reducing this to 'numbers with the above value of the mechanical ellipticity, (CAJ/C, we obtain for the an '
Dual solar precession:  
(fJrjo/}0 = 15~86253 . (48)
In 1i.ke manner the lunar ann~al precession is;
(or/olk = (C  A)/ Cx
9(60)2. 366.2563582 cost'.<) {I _;_S/t sin2I}  ,,' (49)
x. ('27.32166)2.81.45 34.4378.
"_.\ ,
"J: .", .
1 '
I '. , _.. ,=..v. : .. '.~ , ._
 ..
Accordingly, for the combined lunisolar precession,
we have the sum of these two values:  .
(Or/otk +(or/~/)0 '34~4378 +1 5~862S = 50~.30~3. (50)
From the discussion of observations of many stars, Newcomb found the val ue of. the actual precession to . be only slightly different from that obtained by Besset in 18 18, ' namely .50~248 (I9oo}.Ntwcomb's value for 1900 is; '. _
. dr/d/.;_siz5, ,  (51)
The difference between the theoretical value '50~30 .as above calculated and the Bust/Newcomb observed precession is therefore only +o~oS, which is so very small as ro be near the limit of uncertainty in' our' valueof the precession
as derived from observations of the fixed stars. .
'It follows therefo~e 'that:i:aplact's l~w of de~sity' Within. ' .
the earth gives a value 'of the' mechanical"_ellipticityw~ich'> ,;represents the precession quite perfectly. /The group ·9L.c~n~~~ i.~':~·,::::, stants could vbe' so' adjusted as toobliterat'e" this. small dif· ')_,:'~:, fereace, but as it is uncertain where "the. changes should be , made, we deem  it best: to allow. the 'above' value _ to·,stand,
without further' change., ;'_,: '"
:
,.' PTa'tt ie:~:rk~ tl1'at the' i\rg~m~~t for'L~;ld;;'~ _law' ~f This' rested6n:' a: ' ~ery complete ~ak~lati()n in "
',:,' ", clensity;deducedfronrthese'calcuI:ationsi is riot very strong. aceo'unt is taken of i term of second order in'sin!(])j where As', the, terr'estrial,'siraia: have. "sri:JaU~elIip~~city.,the ,law of rp is the latitude (nsstrand's, Mecanique Celeste, Tome II , ,density'wDceivlI.bly, might bevvaried from that of Lapldu, p. 366), 'Accordingly;, his more ~ecent calculation of th~) "and,: yet lead ,tci about the same' agreement when "the inte ellipticity, for Prof. Nrwcomb's Lunar Researches, was in fadY :;'"grationf6i (C;;';'A)jC is 'extended to the mass of the whole ,an improvement von the,nlue of _t8S_4, Y:,t it included th~:'
<.: earth._ But' as Laptau'sl law iives a dose agreement for the results of zo years of later measurements of the force or:, elliptidtyor' the~urface, witJt' those found by pendulum, gravity by means of the more refined penduTum observation~:; observations . and by e labora te g~:()detic rrleaslirenlcnis of arcs of recent ti rnes,  , .: ,' ,',; of. the ~eridian" iti~ improbable that t~e law ofdensify I In his address to the British Association in Australia ," should be materially changed, We: must therefore regard 1914, p. 317, Prof. E.W. Broten therefore accepts Hdmlrt'~
Laplau's law as essentially a law of nature. value of 1 : 198.30, from the whole series of pendulum ob
10 AN 3992'4~53, 4104;' we have adduced, strong' servations, as the concluded value by that method; and it, physical arguments to show that' the :increase of density probably will be a long time before any material improve.
towards the centers of the heavenly bodies is due to the ment on this result will be possible. 
enormous pressure to' which their gaseous or semi '501 id m atter Thi 5 Y21 ue of th e elli ptici ty of the earl h has great in
is subjected. It is shown that the enormous  rigidity of the herent proba bility, both because of the refinement of the' '_'U"'~"""
heavenly bodies is d'ue solely to the pressure. measures of gravity, and their wide distribution over the
Professor E. Wiuhtrt and others have' formerly assumed globe, in both latitude and longitude; and also because of the for the e~rth an iron nucleus; covered with a superstructure thoroughness with which Helmert has systematically treated of rock; but of late, the author's argument that the increase all the accumulated observational material 'tinring the past' of density downward is due solely to the enormous increase 50 years. It has in our time the same relative weight with Lode:tlc
of pressure seems to be very generally accepted. Hence the Bessel's classical value E = 1/299.15 (56)
differential equation dUJ' = it Q'dcf, underlying Laplace'S law, may be regarded as verified by an induction based on the study of all the principal solid bodies of the solar system.
It follows therefore that the close agreement of the theoretical with the observed value of the precession points to an ellipticity of the external surface of the globe of 1 : Z9S.3.
6. Determination of the Ellipticity of the Earth's Surface by Means of Pendulum Observations of the Force of Gravity, and of Ciairaut's
Theorem. ..
And I calculated formulae and elaborate tables for the resul
The potential of the earth's mass may, be expressed ting spheroid. On receiving other data, probably from Prof,
in the form: E, W. Brown, I altered the concluded ellipticity a little, and
v= Mlr+(E1/2rp)(.:l1"a2jrS) (1/Scos28). ($2) published merely the approximate result, in AN 167.125,
The second term varies with the polar distance A, which namely: E = 1 I ~CJ7· 7 •
is the complement of the latitude, Accordingly the gravity Accordingly, it appears that my value of the oblateness in any J ad tude was found by Clairaut, in his Theorie de of the earth, 1904, and Helmert's value of I 903, are in exact la Figure de la Terre, 1743, to vary according to the f01; agreement; and although Helmert subsequently increased his lowing law c g = G {I + (5/2  E) sin 2(])} • (53) value to r: zCJ6 _ 7, as shown above in Section I, my definitive This formula for the variation of gravity with the latitude value for the oblateness, 19 Z J, based on all available data
is known as Clairaut's Theorem. _. remains _quite unchanged, namely
By means of pendulum observation s a great many E = 1 : 2 9 S. 3 '
determinations of the relative force of gravity have been 7, Determination of the Eillpticity of the
made in all parts of the world. These give a good deter Terrestrial Spheroid from Geodetic Me a sur e m e nts mination ~f the ellipticity of the earth. The following are of Arc s 0 f the ?l1 eri d ian,
the most Important results: , . . . . h
I. Helmeds determination, 1903, based on all the! I 1 h~s method IS the one originally proposed by t e available measures of gra vity, taking account of the term of A exandnan astronomer Eratosthenes, about 230 B. C, and_~
second order in sin! fIJ, where fIJ is the latitude: in modern times gradually perfected with the development of geodesy, 1t is therefore very old, and was generally considered
E = 1/298.30, (54)
.. . the logical method prior to the discovery of the widely pre·
 ThIS value was furnished to Prof. Newcomb for his Lunar valent minor variations of the force of gravity due to local Researches, vol. II, 19 1~, and was long believed t~ be Hdmerts I distur~ing i~fluen~es, But even ;vith. irregular gra".itationa1 final word on the subject. As ~ar back, however, as 1884, attractions disturbing the local direction of the vertical, rbe Hehnert, from pendulum observations, had reached the value: I method is still very valuable, because it rests on direct
e = 1/(299.26 ± 1.26), (55) measurement of the length of the arc of the meridian.
; 
,.+~ .' .. "
.. , .......
determined from the sagacious discussion of all the geodetic observations of arcs of the meridian availa ble to the investi'" gator in the middle of the 19th century. _
It is somewhat remarkable that as far back as 1904, the present writer reached an ellipticity of the earth, from all the available methods of finding this element, according exactly with, Htlmcrt's value, but without knowledge of his result. The value of 1904 was;
E = 1/(298,30 ± r.co] ..
.. ..
servarior give mir always 1
serious
4
249
250
American geodetic work is combined with the' results of the various series of triangulations in other parts of the world:
E = t/3oo.7. , (64)
.In regard to several other determinations of the ellipticity of the earth, by geodetic methods, it only remains to add that they are of secondary' irn portan ce com pared to the four principal results here cited. For example, in his Figure of the Earth, 4th ed., 187 I, p. 117, Pratt made a determination of the ellipticity of the terrestrial spheroid, taking account of local attractions. From the three long arcs considered Pratt found the ellipticity to be
E = 1/295.2.
If rPl and rP2 be the astronomical latitudes 'Of the terof the arc in question, and (! the radius ofcurvature
the meridian for the mean latitude 1/2{rP1 + (2) and a the axis, we have for the length of the arc the integral:
, ~ ~ : ..
S = S(!dfD = as(Ie2)(1<sin2rP)·/·dW.{59)
~ ~. . '
And if we put for the ratio of the polar to the equatorial bia = (I n)/(I +n), we may write n = (ab)/{a+b) 1/595.6'°, in the case of the earth, and thus
. <1>, . '.
s = b S{ 1 +n){ I n!}( 1 +::n cos 2 fD+n2)'/odW. (60)
4>,. 'Vhen the measurements are extensive, over a long and y homogeneous are, as in a level country, the local dis.""",](, .. s are largely eliminated, as mutually destroying one . Yet there may. be . some disturbing gravitational
introduced, due to systematic local attractions exerting uncompensated influence 0'0 the vertical. Besides, there errors of observation incident to the imperfections of the instruments, and thus also affecting the adjustment
the triangulation of the meridian. And for these and reasons it is possible that the pendulum observations gravity may give a more accurate value of the ellipticity the earth than that of geodetic measurements of arcs of
meridian. .
N everthe less, th e geodetic method has ad va ntages, and following are the chief results:
1. Airy, from an able discussion of the figure of the It onlyremains to point out certain features of the arc'
Encycl. l\Ietr.,ed. 183I, and ed. 1849, method which 'seem worthy of the attention of geodesists .
. E = 1/299.33.' (61) In the U. S. Coast Survey Report, 189899, App. NO.3,
This r~sult wasreached by a judicious s~le'ction of arcs along Frontispiece, we find the accompanying Map of the Geodetic meridian only; those in mountainous.countries also being Operations for the Measurement of the Earth, Fig. I Plate 1. excluded, to avoid undue effects of local gravitational distur The only important extensions of the arcs here laid down, bances, Airy weighedcarefu\ly the relative accuracy, of the in the 2 0 years since this map was published, are in the and later g~odetic measurements, and thus obtained region of South Africa, where Sir David Gill's' arc amounted
ellipticity of great accuracy. . . to n° of latitude, in 1903, and slight arcs of 2~5 'in the
equatorial region of Africa, 1908,. with a simil ar short arc 2. Be ssd'« classical determination of the ellipticity of
figure of the earth, 1841, AN 19 Nr. 438: . in Egypt, Cairo to Assiut (cf. The Observatory, Dec. 1(,120,
. pp. 42 142.2). .
E=1/299.1528. .'.',.'(62) , 
The most striking feature of Figure 1, which is a map.
This celebrated i'e~ult is based upon an elaborate discussion of the world's geodetic surveys, .is the .inequality between the most reliable measurements of arcs of the meridian. the 'operations made in the two terrestrial hemispheres _:
The final spheroid is so adjusted to the entire s'ystemof ob nearly all the measurements being in the northern hemisphere, servations, by a least square solution of the equations, as to where most. of the land lies, and the greater and more enter,
give minimum' errors of observation.Besstl's discussion has . 1
' . prizing nations are deve ope. d. ',.
always been considered a masterpiece, and no criticism of
~rious purport has ever been 'made against it.:" This great deficiency of long arcs in. the southern terrestrial hemisphere is thus a fundamental weakness in the
3." Clarke's spheroid of 1878, . ' .. '.,. geodetic method, but the weakness is largely if not entirely
. E ~ 1/'193.465 .. ' .... (63) compensated for by the following circumstances: ._
This value by Clarke is comparatively recent, but it 'differs r , It is stated by Col. H. G. Lyons, at the London materially from Bessel's, and has not been much used on the discussion iof geophysical subjects, Nov. 5,.1920, (cLThe tontinent of Eur'ope,' where , th~'l~ading,a~thoritie; have' . Observatory, Dec. ~ 19 ~O, p ... 2 2), that Dr. Balm's 'researches, preferred '}3mtfs determination" of :the" ellipticity:'qarke'sin the Beitrage zurGeophysik, show that in the South African ~sult has, however, been considerably used . in England, and Arc_)thecombined errors resulting from jrlangulationrand provisionally by the United States Coast andGeodetic Survey. .base measurement ar'e<onlyabout I' in 90000, or 28 metres'
4.' Tilt~an1J'sCoa~'t 'Sllrveyr~sitlt,190:4';in 'which the'in260okilo~etres. ',The curvatu re, as.a whole, 'agreeswell
. . . . . ,'. ..~., _" ".. .., ~. .. ~.
. ~. .•... ~,  .. ". :' ' ..
•
(65)
Pratt also made certain criticisms of Bessel's formulae, but Colonel Clarke did not consider the criticism justified; and in his Article Earth, Encyc!. Britt., 9th ed., p. 605, Clarke says of Pratt's' attack on Bessel's equations: 'certainly Bessel wasHght, and the objection is groundless s .
It only remains therefore to find the best mean value obtainable from the above four chief results, After careful consideration we adopt the following weights for the different independent determinations, all of which are valuable:·
Name Date Ellipticity weight.
Az'ry 1831. 0.003340794' $
'. Bessel 184l 0.0033,P774 5
Clarke 1878 0.(j0Ho76l'4 3
Tittmann 1904 0.003325573 6
. Weighted Mean E = 0.003347059
, . E = 1/298'767'
(66)'
.......
, ,"_
.. .... ..~<" ...
','
~
r.·.
. .... , ....
. '.~
.. :.:._
~". ~  
i
.;
: :~
..... '
:: ... .'
':';'~'l,.:f?::~'~',:~.?Fr~,':rF;[;";":';'.:~;,:;t:,'~[1:'}j:;\;,~,::,::i~,'.'_ .. , , t',,;::, '  ,:_';;>;': ,~,;'{!:,:,~,:':::" ',,~:  ",: .. . . ; ': 5 I, '~':, {' .' :: t~;.,\:\, •... ; " :':J ' " ,~, ':O~i'; .... ';;~c~'~;'·;:'·f;.i:, ~:;~'C~ /'
. with that' of the Clarko!'~ spheroid' of 1880; but the radius of bi the attraction: of this matter.; Nevertheless the "'Hlln""'.', curvature' ' for the,' so:uihern portion. i( less t hal? ' for the arc o( the 'ear~h;, lS m;tch, grf~a~~ti ,t~_~~ th~, e,lIi?tici ty (l/~ :asa:whole.«';',·1:' ~:",.;,.:< >s.j';', t' r';. ::. " ._:.::.:~"(.,:;", ,; ,to.the' centrifugal forcealone!, and even greater
,,'::" if' thii/,·~~~~lr~i~,~~::·.d~~~~d~b]e~',itme~ns th~t;h~: ~I~: '_ el_1ipticity which would exisrwere the earth composed '
,_ Iipticity of.Jh(s~~~roi~_ inS,6uth_Africa)s !e~sOt.~anthat _in ,sphere touching the sUrface'at theCpoles, and " .'
d icated _ by,' Clark:i's spheroid.. and'jhusmorenearly accord a nt 'concentric .spherical strata of eq ua I density' and of Ii sph ,_ with our V?!uc:,'l',:::;:',_I':,.2g.8.3, whi~h_ is ,a satisfactory' COIl~'  .spheroidal' shell .. having' the' density of ~th_e 'rock's and. fi~inatioii:_or the,: ,riew spheroid derived ,from~: t~e_ latest: thesurface (or_ 1,74:20 nearly);,:', This being the'geodetic surveya":  ': :_;<>~, .:,:,c ,__ . regularity ofth~e_:su'rface i!!,' DO: d0!lpf remarkable;
z •. III the df'rlamical theory' of the land' and water re~u~a'rity is accounted for 'on the hypothesis _ of
hemispheres of our globe, given in A~ 484445. May 1916, ! fluidity.« •. ' . ". .
it is shown that theoretically there ought not to be any sensible f" h )Th~ ~e.ar cotc~dence bet,w~en hthe ,~n~erJ,cal
difference in the figures' of the two terrestrial hemispheres. 0 t I' ellipticity 0 t ~ terrestria sp eroi 0 tatned When Laplac( therefore concluded, in the fifth volume of the pendentl~ from th~ rno~lOn of the moon, from .the pel!ldlllU1:n.IW;
'. ". ' c,' •  ',,' "h ,',  1" • h by the aid of Clalraut s theorem and from direct
Mecanique Celeste.vthat there are slig t rnequantresun t e f' fford ddi I "d 'h '
 ,  f h  .'" det ,'' .." I' . f I d 0 arcs a or s no a mona eVI ence w atever m
monon 0 t I' moon ependmg on certain lOequa HIes 0 an h 'h ' h '  f " 1 fI idi b; di
in the two terrestrial hemispheres, he did_ not take account of te ypot eS1S 0 ongl?a U1 Ity,. :1Og a irect
of isostacy, and' the resulting perfect hydrostatic equilibrium s{ehquence of the law 0lf u~l\.ersadl grhavltat~on, fThes~
f th t h . t, . '.  . ".. t atl every equatorea aX1S' an t e axis 0 rotation ate
o I' wo emrspneres, .' . .. '1 ) Id' r II "
Fr' . AN 8 5 p' 355·· _i have shown that undei the prmcipa axes won ,0 ow as a consequence of the hypo
o III  4 4 ,. , r hesi f " I fl idi 
theory of the isostatic shell, now recognized to exist, there t esis 0 ongma: . UI Ity,., "
are no inequalities of attraction in the rwo terrestrial herni: »The phenomena of .prece~slOn and nutation mtroduce spheres, depending o~ the unequal distribution of the land; ~ ne_w element to our consideration, nan:ely, the momen~ of and thus the motions of ths heavenly bOdies' are not disturbed, merna of the earth about an equatoreal ~XIS, The ob,sen'atlOD as Laplace imagined, by the unsymmetrical equilibrium of the of these phenomena. ena~les .us to determine the numerical va,Jue
solid nucleus in the fluid envelope of our globe. of the, (moment of Inertia] If we sup~ose Ii kno_w? other,wlse,
" Now, independently of any hypothesis as to original fluiditj;
3' These two' results accord well with the views of the
it is probable that the earth consists approximately of spherical
late Professor Sir G, G. Stoku, (Cambridge and Dublin Math. !
strata of equal density, . Any material deviation from this
 Journal, vol. IV, p. ZI0), which in part are as follows: arrangement could hardly fail to produce an irregularity in
»It may be well to consider the degree of evidence the variation of gravity, and consequently in the form o_f_the afforded by the figure of the earth in favour o( the hypo surface, since we know that the surface is one of equilibrium, thesis of the earth's original fluidity,. . Hence we may assume when not directly considering the ,'In the first place it is remarkable that the surface .of ellipticity, that the density is a function of the distance from
the earth is so nearly a surface of equilibrium. The elevation I the centre.« ' _
___ of the land above the level of the sea is extremely trifling ~~ow the preceding results will not be sensibly affected
compared with: the breadth of the continents. The surface by giving to the nearly spherical strata Qf equal density one of the. sea must of course necessarily' be a, surface of equi form or another, but the form of the surface will be materially librium, but still it is remarkable that the' sea is spread so affected. The surface in fact might not be spheroidal at all, uniformly over the surface' of the earth, There is reason to or if spheroidal, the ellipticity might range between tolerably think that the depth of the sea does riot' exceed a very few wide limits, But according to the hypothesis of original fluidity miles on theaverage, V .. 'ere a roundish solid taken 'at random, I the surface ought to be spheroidal, and the ellipticity ought and a quantity of water poured on it,_ and allowed to settle I to have a certain numerical value depending upon the law under the action of the gravitation of the solid, the probability! of density, If then there exists a law of density. not in itself is that the depth of the water would present no sort of improbable a priori, which satisfies the required conditions uniformity, andwouJd be in some places very great. Ne respecting the mean and superficial densities, and which giyes vertheless the circumstance that the surface of the earth is I to the ellipticity and to the annual precession numerical yslues
, so nearly a surface of equilibrium might be attributed to nearly agreeing with their observed values, we mar regard the constant degradation <of the original elevations during this law not only as in all probability representing approximately the lapse of ages, c the distribution of matter within the earth, but also as furnishing,
~ In the second place, it is found that the surface is by its accordance with observation, a certain degree of e\'idence very nearly an oblate spheroid, having for its axis the axis in favour of the hypothesis of original fluidity, The law of of rotation, That the surface should on the whole be pro density usually considered in the theory of the figure of the tuberant about the equator is nothing remarkable, because earth is a law of this kind.«
even were the matter of which the earth is composed arranged This reasoning of Stukes is so well thought out that symmetrically about the centre, a surface of equilibrium would we have quoted it in full. Since the time of St(Jkes' paper, still be protuberant in consequence of the centrifugal force; r 849, very notable progress has been made in our theory and were matter to accumulate at the equator by degradation, of the connection between solid and fluid bodies, In rhe. the ellipticity of the surface of equilibrium would be increased Memoires des Savants Etrangers, Acad, des Scienc. de Paris,
\
(Tomes 18,"zo, 1868,1870) Tresca and St. Venant published 3. The ellipticity found from pendulum observations the. results of their experiments made about half a century of the force of gravity, weighted mean of the results of ago, on the flow of metals and other solid bodies when Helmert, Hayford and Bowie, equation (I) above:
subjected to very great forces. It was found th at under very E = I : Z 9 7 .695 = 0.0033 59 14 wt. 10 .
great forces the division between solid and fluid bodies quite 4. The ellipticity indicated by the geodetic measurement.
disappears, and that solids yield like wa?t and adapt themselves of arcs of the meridian and of longitude, weighted mean of to equilibrium forms. . the results of the geodetic researches of Airy, Bessel, ClarkI',
Lord Kdvin, Sir Grorg« Darwin, and the present writer Tittml(l"fln, equation (66) above:
(cf. A::'; ·399z, 4104, 4152) have' since confirmed the con E = 1: Z98.767 = 0.003347059 wt. 10.
elusion that whatever their constitution the planetary bodies I \Veighted mean of these four independent methods:
behave as fluid un.der. the ~re~en~ous pressures and high, e = I : z98.2 7 5 I = 0.00335z6 10 wt. 30
temperatures operating 10 their mterior. !hu~ the stars, .sun ! ±0.1388 ±0.00000I559.
and planets take ?n. true figu~es of .eqUlhbnum appro?rlate I The probable error of this general mean ellipticity of
to the mutual ~ra~ltahon of their particles and the centrifugal the terrestrial spheroid has been calculated by the well known force of rotation ; and any other figure of the surfaces of formula (cf. Merriman's Textbook of the Method of Least these masses is inconceivable. The doctrine of isostacy, Squares, New York and Loudon.Lr So j , p. 75):
since developed in geodesy, points .in the same direction,
and simplifies very greatly our theory of the earth's attraction 1'0= 0.674 S V {.z pv!f[(n r_) ~ pH (67)
[cf A~ 484445). where p represents the weights assigned the several independent results, and n I = 3, n beiogthe number of in
dependent determinations.  .
It was observed by Laplact, in his celebrated Theorie An alytique des Probs bilites, 1807, that the theory 'of . probability is nothing but common sense reduced to calculation. And Gauss based his development of the method on the axiom established by experience that the most probable value of a quantity which is observed directly several times, with equal care, is the arithmetical mean of the measurements. And if the separate observations have unequal weights, the above formula takes account of the weights assigned by the
best judgement avail~ble.·· . .
N ow in the above determination of the most probable oblateness of the earth we cannot observe this quantity directly, but must deduce it by calculation from independent methods of observation, the calculations themselves being free from error. The theory of probability and the .method of least squares is thus applicable to the determination of the figure of the earth, and gives us a dependable criterion for the degree of precision attained. . .' .'
Finding "the most probable value of an element from
a varied serles of observations is equivalent to determining
the centre of gravity of the given observations, so that the. whole body of phenomena will be best represented. This· condition is fulfilled by the weighted mean,' which makes the sum of the squares of the outstanding residuals a minim urn. In the. present problem the weights have been assigned from
the following consideration}:. . ..
 1. As to the first method, for reasons fully pointed out by Laplatt'in 1802, theellipticity indicated by the lun~r inequality in latitude must be given considerable weight, since
it leads to a mean figure of the earth uninfluenced 'by local peculiarities, such as .!_l1ountains,plateaus and .other .irregu· larities of the earth's crust .. Moreover, the accuracy of the method . depending on the lunar i~eq uaiity 'in latitude 'is:~~n. _ ' firmed ~ytheindepen:dent researches of Burg, Hansir;and. Faye;~' and the' observa."t.loosare not' ni'atedal\y' vitiated by the
fltlct~,ath:~.ris.)n ,'the ~oon:~ .n:e~n. 1,ongitude, ~~i~h. have o.c ;.
casion~d~o· .. much .. inconvenience to recent lnvestlgators.m .
the .lunar theory.·'.: .'0'.'
~ .
5104
2'" ;).)
254
:on· ;ults are
'po
uee lof :ion .lue ise, ity, .cal .his
IQ the tm,
the )m
Accordingly, the favorable circumstances described in the above three arguments, for the perfect figure of equilibrium of the earth, render the geodetic method for finding the oblateness by the measurement of arcs of the meridian one of great accuracy, in spite of the inequality of the geodetic operations hitherto made in the two terrestrial hemispheres. Thus in a definitive determination of the figure of the earth, it is obvious that the method of geodesy should have adequate weight, not inferior to that based on pendulum observations of the relative force; of gravity.
8. Definitive Determination of the Oblateness of the Terrestrial Spheroid Based upon a Weighted Mean of the Results indicated by the Separate ..' Methods for finding the Figure of the Earth.
eo ne
lIy
III, ')y tf ht'
The chief results arrived at in the foregoing investigation are summarized in the following survey of independent weighted means, by the four methods which give a definite . determination of the ellipticity of the terrestrial spheroid.
1. The ellipticity indicated by the lunar inequality in . latitude, weighted mean of the" coefficients found by BOrg, Fay« and H ansen, equation (18) in sectio&" 2 above: .
E = 1: 298.37 = Q.00335I5 wt. 5.
z. The ellipticity derived from two separate sources .shown to be quite independent, yet in ·remarkably good
:w ·If,. )S .
agreement:
(a) 18.6 yearJun ar ineq uali ty in longitude, depending on the revolution of the moon's nodes, weighted mean of .. Bitr"g and MasQ1l's coefficients b~IO),li = I: 298.65P = 0.00334832, equation (26) above.
(b) Laplau's law of density, which rests On Clairasa'»
fluid theory, recently verified by the geodetic fact of isostacy .;,  the constants of Laplads law [cf, AN 39'9z, 1904) having i.been derived fromexperimental determination of the density :~.of the rocks composing theciiist.of the globe (2.55). The ':method thus yields for the surface stratum e = I : 298.045 : = 0.003355zo, equation (31) above, The mean of {a} and
;. (b) therefore gives : . . . . " .
), ,E ~ I ;'Z98'351 '",0.:°'033.5176. wt. 5'.:' >
'. ~
J, .....
\ .'.." . . ',,~ .
.. .. ~
.. "'.. . ...
::.r
. .... ' " ",;/,
.. ,
,.' ....
."j.,;".
··· .. 1.. •.
,.!
.. .;
~. ,
:.,i
,. ~!
i·'··
. ~
,; ;", _'" 2" The, second . method,' .depending, on the' 18.6~yeaT "equilibrium of'such a,het~rogen_e~,)Us fluid ~ass,thu!i ren~'"~ .. ~."
 ',' : ,'lunar:: ineq_u'ality: in', 'longitude, ' :cornbine(_with; the' surface 'es,se'ntiaIIy, l!' Jawt of nature::"';,:'c,,:,:,}.::J;:;;:_' :,~~,,;{?~ '~:, '. _
_ " ellipticity_ resul_dn'g' from Laplads law,under, Clairaul's, fluid ,': " TIie'e,IHptidiy,"(jC: tb~;"ierrestriaf'splieroid now foun"d' '
:'>',_:' 'C' theory:;',i$~ suffici~ntly4 set forth iIi the ~bove "table.' .10 con: , from the discussionof all th~'a,;ailable' methods thus become!",¥
, : fir~ati9~_9,f,its 'validity' we note that Pra_tI',,? t"heory,of isostacy, "with: the hlghest a ccuracy now '?qtainable: :,", , """ ",,:.:\~~:,
' in the 'c:onstitutioriof the crust of the 'earth; has been con ,'.,; ,:,",\_:,i';<:': 6'; ~";I /('~9' g" 3':0' '±' ""0""'3'0) ',,"','~"~',~,:, Y'",',',;', (6'__'8"t~'
, , , "  " """ , "   .. ..,. '~
firmed bY:the' recent researches' of Hdmirt, Hayford "and , " .: Th' ':' .' hi di . ' ' '1 k "i 't' 'r I", ", <h  '.BowitC"and 'toa: ~on~iderable extent by the results rea:ched:, ,'_' h' _e, unbcebrtla~,n~y :11.1 Ihs . l\b'I~,or.lS ',a .ef) , a, a hm ~ O\'eH'~ .. " .. , '''' '1' B'" "" d' > I d' , h'" "hi'   f twice t e pro a e error 10 tea ove summary. so t at It pr~,: by C~l,?ne _ urrar, 10 n ra, near t e mig y nl~g~ 0 bably does not ,," exceed ± 0.'30, Accordingly it' appears th~t:"
the Himalayas, where the contrasts between the elevations b 11"" f h h' d t ined t d _
"" and' depressions of tne'con"tinental crust are the greatest in t e ,e, lPtlC~y bO / e eartrt;s et~rmlDed ~ a" egrefe hOC'"""
the world. Thus it is obvious that the Clairaul· Laplace reclslO~ 0 fa t~U t one r~ I ,," I~, ~ ou~a~h', nt ne~ dO It, e~:
Pratt fluidtheory' of the ~~rlh's constitution is verified .by .mflmenslty °h' h e ./iresna l ~et a~ t e. en,:n~ e fi oca1,;,: the most extensive' geodetic observations and researches of lD. huences w lC VI la1)e, 0tubr. = or SIt 0 e termb me 1 s "drued gure: our time. ,'  '.' Wit great accuracy, 15 resu m us e regar e as a,
"scientific'triumph of no' mean order, It reflects the highest,'
3. The ellipticity found from determinations of the credit on a long series of patient observers, in many lines of  force 'or' gravity, by means of the pendulum observations, as investigation, whose combined researches extend over n'early
used by ddl1lfrf, and subsequently by the U. S. Coast Survey, three centuries. "
obviously must be given great weight. Accordingly, we assign The amount of the compression at either pole of the' the result' of this method a weight equal to that of the two terrestrial globe is approximately 2 I kilometres; and as the foregoing methods combined. ' uncertainty in our  value is estimated at onethousandth  of
4· And on account of the importance of the actual the whole' amount, we see that the outstanding error is 'measurements of arcs of the meridian and of longitude in reduced to a residue of the order of Z l.4 metres, or about ...
geodesy, it will be generally_ felt that equal weight should '65 feet. ., ,_
be given to' the mean ellipticity indicated by geodetic ope· A result so helpful to physical science can  hardly fail rations. Asthe best method of combining the observations, to be gratifying to geometers, since it exhibits the steady on the various arcs of the globe depends on geodetic ex narrowing of the limits of error in the delicate and difficult' perience and sound practical judgement, it seemed best to problem of the measurement of th: exa;t figure of the _eaith. ' use the results of the chief investigators since 1830, without
attempting new reductions of the original data. An attempt at new' reductions would raise many troublesome questions, without yielding any corresponding advantages" where the ground already has, been covered by investigatorsof great
, eminence. This may be easily understood from the discordance of Clarkt's oblateness I: z9 3,4 6 5, 1878,  with those of Airy, 1830, and Bessel, 1841, I: Z99.t5, which Tutman» has brought out by his value I: 300,1, 1904.  an approximate restoration of Bessel's value after a lapse of more
which becomes zero at the free surface, or " . than 60 years I Accordingly, it is best to leave the discussion
of purely geodetic operations to geodesists; and hence the d1i1 = O'j V = u{Xdx+ Ydy+Zdz) = o , bo)
admissibility of the weights assigned to the result reached This equation implies that the resultant of the forces
by Airy, Bessel, Clarlu, Tittmann, probably will be generally is normal to the surface at every point, In a' homogeneous acknowledged, mass the expression (69) is the differential equation for all
Sir _George Darwin's conception of the matter "of the surfaces of equaf"'pre~sure. ,If the mass is heterogeneous, we globe as' plastic and yielding under the tremendous forces have the complete differential :
to which it is subjected by gravity is also confirmed by the I Xdx+ Yd_r+Zds = B Vj'Bx'dx+B Vial' dy+o Vi'(:\;' ds . (7') present author's researches on file physical constitution of When the mass has uniform velocity of rotation, the the earth, sun, and pI an ets, (AN 3992, 4053, 4 I o4l An d effect of the centri fugal force must be introduced, as it acts as these modern inquiries into the internal constitution of on each particle with a force proportional to the distance the globe support the conclusions drawn from, geodetic from the axis of rotation. Thus the corresponding part of
researches on the earth's surface by Hdl1ltrl, HaJford, and Xdx+ Ydy+Zdz = d.Q (72) 
BU1'7'ard, we justly conclude that the fl uid theory of the I'S di a . I f 0  f ( ,_)
h' f 11 ifi d L 1 ' I f densi d th a complete itterentia 0 _  X, 1, " ,
eart 1S u y ven e. aptace s aw 0 ensity, an t e 
hypothesis dm = hada' introduced by this great geometer The equilibrium condition is that
for tile integration of Clairaut's differential equations of the dW' = 0' d_Q
9. Dynamical Theory of the Figure of the.
Earth,
~' .. '
:0. ~.
Let X, Y, Z be the components of the attractive force~f gravity, parallel to the coordinate axes, acting on a fluid particle of the earth's mass; then if 0' be the density and G1 the pressure at the point considered, we have .
dU1 = O'(Xdx+ Ydy+Zdz) " "
= 0' (B vjBx·dx+B Vj'By. d)'+o V/Bz;d~)
i':;~he
: J'::; ~.
~~'of I
~_.~I ••
r inte I~· for
,

'e.
"
I
We
be
On
.~~
the
" <>II!
G.
"'2
w~
:,. pr'
r. "Wt
"
"
~
,"
·i~,
i~ ') That the equatorial radius of the earth should be known to T part in 25000, and thus 25 times more accurately than the oblateness of the geometrical figure, is not remarkable, when "'e consider that one quantity is measured directly, in the observed leng:h of a degree, while
the other is a differential effect w hich must be ca kula ted from small residuals, either terrestria I or celesdal."  ,,,
257
5104
be a complete differential. That is, a must be a function of _ If T be the duration of the earth's axial rotation, and Q or of riJ, and thus also tu a function. of Q. Accordingly, a the density at any point p (x, y, 5), and V the potential
d.Q = 'iJD/'Ox. dx+'OD/'iJydy+'iJ.Qj'iJ5• d5 = 0 (74) of gravity, with the centrifugal force included, we shall have:
is the differential equation .of surfaces of equal pressure and V= JSSf1[(xx')2+ {yyf)Z+(zZ')2]'f. dx'dy'dz'
density.;+'(l1,:2j T2) (x2+ y2).  (80)
Let e denote the eccentricity of the meridian, so that The triple integral is' to be extended to all points of the when I: = J; Z 98.3, e = 0.08 J B r J 3 Z; then if the equation earth's mass, after which the variables x', y', z' of the moveable
for the ellipsoid be point p (x', y', z') disappears; and V becomes a function of
x~/[r (I +e2)J + Y'/[c2 [r +e'}J+z2jc2 = I (,5) x, y, 5, which, equated to a constant, gives the general equa_
has for its tion to the level surfaces.'  , '
If we put (/)' .and ),' for the geocentric latitude and
b6) longitude respectively, we have '
x: = .,.eos (/)' cos I"
y == .,. cos (/)' sin):
z = .,. sin (/)' .
And then our four equations for the component forces basedon the' geographical latitude and longitude, are:
, , H=V
gcos (J) coaI == '0 vjfJx
By integration this yields; g cos rD sin.l. ==  'iJ V/'Oy
(A  w~) (X~+y2) + Cz! = K(79) g sin (/) " = :'0 vjfJz_
where K is th e constant of integration. '. These will become, by substituting polar' coordinates:
H : V = S S S a [,..2_ zr (x' cos rD' cos.l.;~ Y'cos rD'sin}.'+z'sin W')+r2]'" d_"C' dy' dz'+{z7f'/ T2).,.2 cos2QY' .
fJV/Or= ~g[coslDcoslD'cos(J.l')+sinQ)sin(/)'J ..   ... ' ", (83)
III" sec rD' 'iJ vjfJl'=  g COos rD sin (J. l')
Ijr· (\ vj&rD' =  g [~cos rD sin Q)' cost). ~.l.')+sin (J) cos Q)'j
As the geocentric coordinates r, lD', }.', are not determi~ed directly ,by observation,' they must be eliminated, by .
the simplest available process., '.. .
The differences between the geographical and geocentric longitude ). ::).' probably nowhere exceeds a minute of arc, and hence we may put cos (). ).') = I. And in the development of thefirst part of V, under the .above ,triple" integral, it is known that the terms involving ).' have very small coefficients. In these therefore we may 5ubstitutel for ).', and after .l.' is thus made to disappear, we get:
H = V = S S S r1 [r~ 2.,. (x' cos Q)' cosl+ y' c~s Q)' ~n.l.+z' sin rD')+;2]"'o.,( dy'dz,'+(21f2j T2).,.! cos!rD'  .
(j vi'iJ.,. =~gcos( rD (/)') Ij.,.·'iJV/'iJrD' _ ~gsin (Q)~ lD')  ,lj.,.sec(D' a vja).' = 0... ,., ., ' t, (84)
,\Ve may apply Laplace'« method of expanding V in a series of spherical functions. which to ~ yields:
V = M/.,.+ 1'2 /.,.s+ Y$j.,.4 + Y,./.,.5+ (Z1f2j T2) 1'2 cos' rD' = H .
(; ~'C.,. = M/.,.'+3 Yl/.,.' +4 y3/.,.5+5 Yaj.,.8~(4n2/T2) .,.cos' (fl" g cos (rD':: (/)),, . . ., (85)
1/.,.·8V/'iJrD' = l/r'·'iJY2tCrD'+I/.,.5·'iJY8/'iJ([J'+Ij.,.6·'iJYaj'iJrD'::(41f!/T2)r~in_rD'codD' ",:,gsIn(IJ)'rD~~. _
In order to elirninate v and' lDr fromtbese equations; we square bothm'e~bers of "the tir~t ~~d di~ide by' M.· We observe that in this elimination the squ~res and product of Ya and Y, and, their product by (21f!/ T~).,.2 !=os'rD' may
be neglected as insensi ble. Thus we get; .' . ~ . . ~ ' .'
~,.,.! + 2 yt!.,.' + 2 Ys/r5+ 2 Yj,!.,.6+ (21ftj Tt).,. cos2lD'= .,'. _H2jM I/M YZ'/.,.6 (41ftjMT2) Y2 cos' (/)'j.,. kf('IMT').,.4 C05'W',
On subtracting this from the second equation of (85), we find' 
HZ/M+ Y2!.,.'+ 2 ¥Sj.,.5+ 3 'Yi.l.,.6 _, .' .'  _'.'
g cos] rD'  f1.I) + (Srr2j T2).,. cos'@'+ I! M· x/j.,.6+{4rt'!MT2j y; cos~(]'J'!",+(47r4!~lfT!}.,.t cos(rD'.
I,
the attraction upon the particledm = q dx dJ'ds components X = Ax. Y= Ay Z = Cz
A = 2;'f a [( 1+(2) e3 arctge l/eZ]
C.= 4n: Q' [( I +e2) (2  [r +rt) r8 arctg e],
To take account of the centrifugal force due to rotation' we introduce the appropriate components xw~,  yw', 0; and then the condition of the 'fluid equilibrium becomes;
(Aw~)xdx+(Aw2)ydJ;+Czdz = o , (,8)
, ~ .
The last term of the right member is of the orde~ of I 'We. take the earth to be anoblate spheroid of revo
'the square of the compression, and thus very minute, but it lution, and thus the meridian to be an ellipse with polar and_ ought not to be omitted in yery precise determinations, (cf. equatorial iaxes 'in the ratio Of2 9 7.3: 298.3, so that the ,,:c, , G. W. Hill's Collected Mathematical Works, vol, II, p. 305). compression' Or' oblate'ness'f~' 'aridthe eccentricity l ire:''• In thi~ equation' j't' will'be noticed that'~here\'er th"c':::.;;·"_'E ' "I : 298,30""",e' "'·(/6~18~33;'. : "'<:"':,,;._ variables rand rD' occurvthey arejnultiplied 'by quantities:<Then; bythe'meihod ofOessrlandE7Icke,'(d.AN43S:" which are at least of the order of smallness of the com 'and BerlinerTahrbuch ·fori8S.'2',.'orChauvrnif's: Spherical \~ ,pre~sion. Thus it suffices to eliminate them by formulae andPracticaI ASti'onomy,'vor::I, 'pp. 96I9t}, :we fiild"the';,,'
.::. wbich nre .only approximately exact. ~:, ,: . formula required by, astronomers .for _'_thegeocenfric latitude ,
!_: .;.. _ .. .'.~ ,. . "or :' .~ .. <:< .. :.~. ..  ~.. ,j • ..R:.~ .
• .':. . L~
. . . .. ~
;'.i
~ ~
(82)'
"
('86) ...
: . ~
...... ·:,)·ti:'fll;?J[~~i~~~fu~~'t~t'cr~~Jf~J~"~ ..
'and logarithm of the radius of the spheroid,',in thereduction " '",To 'obtain, exact numerical" val~ei:'fci; these radii
<?f, obsem:ltiori~ tel ,Hie,' centre 'pr' the,eart~_:<",',' "':_'~,i;,, • ; ":':' ,cun~ature; at the equator, (])i" "_'oo, 'tatitllcle, (]}J ~ 3 COi fD fD' ' 692:6265 Sill2dJ 1~16;9 sin41'.Di' ,_,,;\:, at. the p01~. fDs, '. , '90°, we, psethe, weJl,knownJormula:
log (,.Ja) . " '9.9992727+0.0007291.COS2,fD; "',_'{8~) ~.,:, :',,',,? ,;'~ .. ;a"ci,~;~JJi~l2'siQ~.q))_s')~"" (951:'
",,;,',": And the ,radiUS'9.(j~~i:~~.:?::/~;~i~~i' i~.·~'ny , : :nd,thus .~~,', find ~:',' . ;63 j 5 30~.00 metr;s:
~.~~~tu9.~'_ ~~.y ~.e· calc_uf,at~~<. fr~m:,th~ ~?rin.~~:~,: :'.':; .. ~~~ . ~;' ':::. : .. ..: ;~,  _ :. (>2~, 6 35 ~:: 46.oor _ : .. '., ... ~~ ,
", '.',:, ,'. " ,e = a{z:~:l2) (I~" sin~ (])) ,r." ,'" ,'." : (89){?s = 6399454.00 )
But for m any purposes; it is better to express these Hence eo = 6367 3 I 5· 3 3 metres
properties of the terrestrial spheroid' by means of genera I A = 3 207 2,.5 metres' B = 66. 17 metres. (97) ,
,formulae which are applicable to all latitudes and equally Therefore the radius of curvature in plane of the meridian
,useful in astronomy' and geodesy.' The theory of the derl 'at'any latitude (/) becomes:, • '''''
vaticn of these formulae must be sought in works OD, the f! = 63673 J 5.33 ~ 3z07 2.50 cos 2(/)+66. f7 COS4(]) m, (98) .. theory of the figure of the earth. The coefficients given
below have been checked by equations of, condition, and "And the derivation' of the other equations ,is similar.
.their rigorous accuracy may be depended; on. Thus for the equation in D, we first compute by means of the .elliptical integral treated below, the length of a degree' of three arcs of the meridian:
10. Derivation' of the 'Ele~ents,'of the Ne:w
T'e rr e st r i a l Spheroid. , ,
The elements of the terrestrial spheroid here adopted , rest on the eq ua torial radi us a = 6378 o 0 0.00 metres, coneluded by Ht/merl from all his researches up to I 903. ~'In the formulae indicated below; e is the radius of curvature of_ the spheroidal surface in the plane .of. the meridian, e' the radius of curvature of the spheroidal surface
, in the plane perpendicular to the meridian, D the length of a' degree in the plane of the meridian, .D' the length of a degree in a plane perpendicular to the meridian. Accordingly, we have the following:
, Cc ncl ud ed Elements of the Terrestrial, Spheroid.
 a = 63780cio±250 metres
b =63S6618.84±250 metres
E = (ab)/a, = I : 298.30 = 0.00335233
~>', , ' '±0.30 ±0.oocio0335
'(I ....:. 636731 5·33 ~ 3207 2.50 cos 2 (/)+66. I 7 cos4([.1 m {?' '_ 6388713.0'!  J 07 27.00.C,O~2 ([.1+ J 4.00 eos4(/) m ' D= 111128.67  559.37 cos 2fD+ 2.7 6 cos 4 ([.I m
.D' = 111410.46 cos (]) 93.48 cos3fD+0.12 cos S(/) m,
(])(]J' = 692~6265sin2(]Jl:J629 sin4fD log (r/a).= 9.9992727 + 0.0007 291 COS2 (/)
, ~o,oooool8 COS4(]J.
Each of the formulae here adopted has been controlled by equations of condition of great accuracy. For example, the equation for the radius of curvature (! in the plane of
the meridian leads to three equations of condition: '
(!l = {In  A cos ~ fDI + B cos 4 fDl
= (loA+B (]Jj. 0"
(12 , (Jo A cos 2, fD2 + B cos 4 (]J2 = eolj,!A~l!,!B f1J2 = 30" (!s = f!oA cos 2(]Js+BcoS4(])g
, = {?o+A+B f1Jg = 90°. . ;
By combining the first and third of these equations, and' then the second and the third, we obtain successively:
(93)
(90)
. '~I +(!s = ieo+ 2B {ll (!~ _:_ ~ 2A
'whence A, _' 1/2 (es {?d, B = I/! ((,11 +es  2{1u) and' ' 2(!O = Z(!t+A+e eo = f!sAB whence flo :,_ I/S(2!?:+{?S)'
at the equator,
fDl = 0° to at Jatiude,
at 'the pole,
And then we
(/)2 = I" (]J2 = 30° fDs = 90"
DI  lioS72.06 metres (99)'
D2 = JI0847·60 •
Ds = IJ169o.80 )
whence
have similar equations of condition:
Dl"='Do~A+B'
'D2 = DO:I/2A~1/2B' Ds = Do+A+B
Do = t; (2D2+Ds) = II J 128.67 m '
A = 559.37 m B....:. 2.76m.
(100)
And therefore
D = III I 28.67, 559.37 COS2(/)+2.76 COS4(]J m. {102) The length of a degree of the elliptic arc of the meridian' ha~ been computed by the formula:
~ ~, '
s = S {? d(]J , as (I _(2) {I'e' sjnt(/))~'!. df1J =
4>, '4>, '
"'.
= b S (I +n) (I ~n2) (r + 2n cos 2(/)+n2)~lrd(]) (103)
,4>, ' .: , _ ",
where alb = (I +n)/(In), so that n = 1 : 595.6.
• This elliptic integral of the second class yields the series:
s/ b = (I +n+ 5/~n2) tl"o  (3n+ 3n~) al + (15/8n2) tl"t. (104)
The functions of n yield the following values: (1 +n+ 5/4112) = 1.001682500
(311+ 3n2) = 0.0050'4540 (I o 5)
(I5/sn~) 8
= 0,00000 J 43.
. For the trigonometric functions {to, at> a2, ([.I = 0',
(]J = I" we have:
tl"o = fD~~f1Jl' log(3600/206264.8) , 8.241877410
tl"l = sin (f1J2  fDr) CoS ((/)2 + (/)1) (106)
tl"t = sin 2 ( fD~ : (])d cos 2 ((/)2 + fD1) • '
And for the three terms of (I 04) we find: 1=+0.01748265
11 _, ~ 0.00008804
III = +0.00000018
~ = +0.01739479,
. sun'e' 'balan;
: very
their
' desira , new ( , pendt
merid seven: "obtair " which 'direct
the w : fuller to the other
s)
:~:
:261
5104
,::, ,:,.
1
 Hence for the length of the meridian arc of to on either side of the equ~tor, we obtain:
4>. 4>. ' 4>~
s = S (! d ([) = as (I  e2) ( I  e! sin 2 t.D )_1/. d (]) = b S ( I + n) (I  n?) ( I + 1 n cos 2 t.D + n ~)'/' d t.D =
 4>, 4>, 4>,
=0(0.01739479)= 11°572.06 metres. (108)
In the calculation of .D2 corresponding to 30°, we have to take t.D between the limits ([)l = 29~S, ([)t = 30~S.; and to get .D3 at the pole ([) = 90°, we take t.D between the limits ([)l = 89~S and ([)t = 90'.'S, with the results indicated in the above equation (99).
In. concluding this paper on the figure of the earth, science by the use of such inadmissible values as t ; 294 by it only remains to point out the circumstances from which Prof. E. W. Brown in his New Lunar Theory and Tables of it arose, and which have delayed its completion and publi the Motion of the Moon, 1920,  it has seemed to me irncation for seventeen years. portant that further delay should Dot occur in publishing the
I. Although the las! 40 years have been productive paper on the concluded definitive figure of the earth.'
of many researches which bear on the figure of the earth, 4. For it should be remembered that the figure of the these researches as a rule have been pursued in isolation, earth enters into a great many sciences,  as Astronomy, and almost wholly without regard to other modes of treatment Mechanics, Dynamics, Physics, Geodesy, Geography  and of the same problem; and when brought to a conclusion therefore the best data of our. age should again be made and prepared for publication, the discussion of the figure of accessible to these varied groups of investigators. This seems the earth usually has proceeded from the point of view of the more important since no all around treatment of the a single method only. Thus the public mind has become subject at all convincing has appeared within the 30 years somewhat bewildered if not confused by the numerpus results since the publication of the second volume of Tissrrand'« obtained from isolated points of view, and apparently lost Mecanique Celeste.
hope of a substantial improvement of our knowledge based 5. Moreover since Tisserand'e learned discussion, though on the utmost use of all available methods taken together. very 'well balanced and comprehensive, left the limits of the Such an integration of all the results of the separate investi oblateness of the earth somewhat wide, as if his data were gations alone can give the definitive determination of the not decisive, whereas they realty were quite conclusive, I figure of the earth which our age demands. . naturally have labored to narrow as much as is allowable
2. Perhaps these remarks on scattered results do Dot the limits of uncertainty by the use of the data of the past apply to the discussions carried out 30 or40 years ago by 30 years. Of all the men recently active in science, Helmerl such eminent investigators asHe/mer! and Tisserand, whose was best qualified to make an authoritative review of the surveys of the available data were comprehensive and well subject,but our hopes along this line are now cut short by balanced by the use of all methods then available; yet the the recent lamented death of this _illustrious geodesist.
very intervals of 30 or 40 rears which have elapsed since 6. Fortunately all the new data point very definitely to _their comprehensive researches render newer determinations the value now adopted, which was in fact also recommended desirable, just as the production in this period also furnished to Newcomb by Helmert in 1903, because of the indications new data for this purpose,  especially along the line of drawn from the great body of the older data. It appears pendulum observations and the measurement of arcs of the likely to be some time before any further sensible refinement meridian. When I began to treat of the figure of the earth, in the oblateness of the earth will be possible; yet the' acseventeen years ago, it was from the immediate necessity of curacy already attained is so great that we may be' less·· obtaining a reliable approximate value I: Z97.7, (AN 399z), concerned for the slight improvements whjch may be made
which accords closely with the value 1 : z9 7 adopted by the by future investigators. 
directors of the nautical almanacs in 19 I I. . The author acknowledges gratefully the aid uniformly
3. Thus with the approximate value attained in 1904, extended in this, as in other investigations, by his associates _ the whole of my .discussion was reserved for a later and Mr. L Tiernan, and J\Ir. W. S. Trankle, and above all by fuller treatment. And as many observations have been added Mrs. See, without which 'it would "not have been possible to to the data of the subject in the last 17 years, while on the I bring these long delayed researches on the figure .of the other hand the confusion continues,  and even injures. earth to a satisfactory conclusion.
Starlight on Loutre, Montgomery City, Mo., 191 I Jan. I4. T. 7 :;. Sa .
.: ';.,
6)
Of nd
an
Ir. of
ee
.. , .~.
'I·,
". ' . ...... ..
" .. , ' ..  .~/ ....
.. "<'
. . .~ .. ~ ~. .
." ..... r . ~~;;~.\; .. ,
~ .. . ".
_":'." ,
:.> :
:.:":"
Asrronom. Nachrichten Bd. 213.
e
It>
.<:
,,_
.~
;:;
....
E
It>
.<:
t:
0
Z
.,
5
c
>.
;;:
.!!
.<:
<.>
e
..
, ~
.<:
~
,;;
c
.~
..
..
"
c,
0
.~
]
0
'"
o

'u
E
<>
5
"0
.§
:ii
u
c:;
.....
..,
5
1:1;
.s
:<
0
.<:
<II
"'"
0::
~
OJ
::
'0
0.
,.
::g
.:
~
;r:: Seha!dl, Irrhaber C..,rg Ohe.im; Kiel.
"..:; 
,
~: .:
. .> .. :"
· .. :i·'·'
.:'.'.:.
. /~ ..
. . ::;::~~.. .
~ :
.,; .
":". ~ .~~~ ..
, t;
".L;
Tafel l.
~
rt:
:i
..,
~
...
0
.....
Z
W
~
IoJ
it"
;:,
II)
0(
W
~
....
i:
&
0
"
lit
Z
0
~
tI::
r
0
(J
j:
IoJ
0
0
w
"
, ~ ". :. ~.. ,.
.'
i
1
,.:.
'j ·r
: .. '
r. t .
'Tables of the Differences of the Astronomical and Geocentric Latitude, dJ.i.'fDi, ,
and of the change of the Logarithm of the Earth's Radius, Log(r/a}, with the Latitude W = Geogra'phical Latitude, W' = G~ocentric Latitude, (ria) = Radius of the Earth in units of the Equat';)ii~i
=_~_J <1>: iii" 1 Diff.jLog (,.fa)1 Diff. <I> , <I>ili' , DilL <I> ,I <1> iii' 1 Di.ff. ILog ("la~1 Diff. <1>, _~<J>
II 19.9999.999 I, 19'999
10 I! 0' 24~091 24~09 i 99i:)7 3 350 ~;Jo' 50~1 I 174° 5236 39 450 0" II' 32~63i 0~02 2746 43
20 48.15: 24.06 i 9983 1410  51:49 1.38 5Ji:)6 40 _10 32.63.0.00 2704 42
3 , 12.15! 24.0019961 22 20 52.85 1.36 5156 40 20 32.61 10.02 2661 43
4 i I 36.07 123.9i i 993'1  3Q ~o '~54.18 i·33 5116 40 30 32.57 I 0.04 2619 42
5 ! I 59.87123.80 I g892 39 40 55·49 1.31 5076 40 40, 32.51 1°.0'6 2576 43
6 I 2 23.53,23.66 9844 48 50 56.78 L29j 5036 40 50 I 32.421 0.09 2534 42
7 2 47.02 23.49l9787 57 36 0 10 58.04 1.26 4996 40 460 II 32.31 0.1 I 249 I 43
8 3 10.30 23.28 97'lI66 10 59.281.24 4956 40 10 32.18) 0.13 2449 42
9 3 33.35 23.05 19647 74 20 II 0.50 1.22 4915 41 20 32.02 0.16 2407 42
3 56.141122.79 i 9565 82 30 1.70 I.20 4875 40 301 3I.8i.o.19 2364 43
4 18.64 22.5019475 90 40 2.88 1.18 4834 41 401 3L61 0.222312 42
i 4 40.851122'21 9377 98 50 4·04 1.16 4794 40 501 3r.37 0.24 2280 42
II 5 _2.70 21.85_ 9270 107 37 0 It 5.18 1.14 4753 4 I 47 0 I I 31.10 0.27 2237 43
5 24.201.21.50 9155 ItS 10' 6.30 I.12 4712 41 10 I 30.81 0.29 2195 42
,. 56 45';51 121.1119033 12220 7.40 1.10 46j2 40 20.1 30.50 0,31 2153 42
5.99'20.68'1890313030 8.471.07 463141 30' 30.17 0·33 21Tl 42
I 6 26.23120.24 8766 137 40 9.51 1.04 4590 41 40 29.82 0·35 2068 43
I 6 46.01 19.78 '%21 145 S0 10.52 1.01 4549 41 50 29·45 0·.37 2026 42
! 7 5.3019.29184691152 3810011111.51 0:99 4508 41 48 0 1129.07 0.38 1984 42
7 24.07 18.77 8310 159 12.48 0·97 4467 41 10 28.661 0.41 1942 42
7 42.30 118.23! 8q4 166 20 13·43 0·95 4426 41 a o I 28'~21 0·44 1900 42
7 59,98; q.68, 7972 q2 30 14.36 0·93 4385 41 30' 27·75 0·47 18S8 42
817.07 17.0917794 178 401T5.27 0.914344 41 401 27.26 0·49 i 1816 42
8 33.56 16.49' 7609 185 SO II 16.161 0.89 4302 42 SO 1 26·751 0.51 i 1774 42
849.44 Is.88 7418191 390 II 17.02io.86 426042. 49100111_26.21jO'54.11732 42
94.67115.237222 196 10, '17.861'0.844::1941 25.650:5611169042
9 I9·24 14.57 I 7020 202 20 I 18.68 0.82 4 I77 42 201 25.06 0·59, 1647 43
933.J4 13.9016813 207 3019:47 0·79 '4135 41 30 24·45 0.61 ! 1605 42
9 40.34113.20 I 6600 213 '40 I ZO·24 , 0·77 4094 42 4023.82 0.63 1563' 42
0' 9 58.83jJ2.4916382 218 5020,990,75 4053 41 50 23·17 0.65 1521 42
10 10 0.841 2.01 6.345 37 40 0)1121.71 0.72 4011 42 SO 0 1122.5010.67 1480 41
20 2.83 1.99· 6308 37 10 22.40 0.69 3969 42 10 21.80 I 0.70 1438 42
304.80 1.97 627236 201 23.08 0.68 3927 42 20 21.08 0·72 1396 42
40 6.7 51.95 6~35 37 .30 I i3·74 0.66 3886 41 30'  20'331 0·75 T354 42
50 8.68 1.93 6198 37 40 I .24·37 0.63 3844 42 40 I 19.56 0·17 1312 42
o 10 10.59 1.91616137 So 24.98 0.61 3802 42 So 18·n  0·79 1270 42
10 1'2.48 1.8916123 38 41 0 1125.57 0·59 3760 42 51 0 I I 17.96 0.81 1229 41
;: :t~~ ::~ I ::::~; ;: :::~; :::: ~~;! :: ;: I: ~;~ :::~ ,: :!~ ::
40 18.02 i:S~ 1601 I 38 30 27·1S0·51 3634 42 30 I' 15.40 I 0.88 1104 42
50 19.831 1.81 59733840 '.27.67 0·49 3592 42 401 14·49 0.91 IP63 41
o 10 il.61 I 1.781' 593637 _ 50 '28.14 0·47 3556 42 50 13.56 i 0·93 1022 41
10 23.381 1.77 5898 38 42 0 1128·59, 0.45 3508 42 52 0 I I .lz.60 I 0.96 _0980' 42
20 25. t 2. 1.74' 5860 38' 10 ~9.02 I 0.43 3466 42 10 11.62; 0.98 0939 41
30 26.841 L72 [5821 39 20 I 29.42 0.4_0 3424' 42 20 10.6211_ 1.00 0898141
40 28.54' J.jo I 5783 38 : 30 29.80 0.38  3382' 42 30 9.60 1.02 0857 41
50 30.221 1.68 574439 40 30.15 0·35 3339 43 40, 8.56• 1.04 0;815 142
0\ 10 3I.88 1.661 5706 38 50 30.48 0:3.3 3297 42 50! 7.50 I 1.06 6774 41
10 . 3.3.521.1.64 i5667 39 43 0 II 30.79 0.31 3255 42 5.3' 0 III  6.41 il.09 0733 4'
20 35.14. I.62l 5628 3Q 10 31.07 0.28 3213 42 , '10 • '5.30 J.IJ '0693 40
36.74 f' 1.60 5589 39 . ,26 3 1·33 0.26; 3170' 43  20 4.1' LI,3 0652 4 I
38.JI' 1.575550 3930"_31.57 .0:24' 3128 42 ~Ol 3,02 LIS 06p' 41
'39.86 1.55 55Ii39' '40"" ji.79 0.22.3086 42 40.j,:84'J.18 057I 40
o 10 41.38 _ 1.5z 5472 39 _50 31.98 0.19 3':>43 43' 50 r r 0.64 1.20 053041_
42.89 'LSI 5433 _ 39 44  0 i I 32.14 6,16 42 54' 0 10 59.4J 1.23 '0489 4 I
 ~4.38 1.49 539340 _ to 32.28. C!.t4 4i . 10·' 58.16 ~~25 0449_ 40
, 30,45.85 1.47 5354 '3Q 20 O.1l 43 20' 56.89 1.27 0409 40
40 '. 47.29'1._~4r 5315: 39 .. _30.0~10' '30 '55.60 J.290368 41
. ,S;,;,~:~'_~~;{';J: :,;::~'~;:j~_ ,,~::~1 }:;i· '~;';,r :~~_
. ~ .. :~~.:~!~~~; ... ~:.:\~~.;,::" ' .<~)6':·l~·2<1_,~>40:
··\k,·~~·}~if~L:;~i{_',~~;'"
to'
. ~~ .
,40 ...... So
.1
20
57,
o 10
10.
::" to
, I
_. 40 :~' 50
59 . 0
10 I
  ,10
, 20
' .. _ 40
50 600 ~o
6{ 94
; 62 .9_3
63" 92
64Q, 658 5 66' ',83
67' '81
68 .. 8
69 .'
71 72
73 .' 74 75" ~:.
76 '{7"
1_8
4
4
Tables of th~ Differences of the Astronomical and' Geocentric Latitude, dJ~(]J'.:"',, "
and of the change of the Logarithm of the Earth's Radius, Log (rIa), with the Latitude: '
@ = Geographical Latitude, (/)' = Geocentric Latitllde, (r/a) = Radius of the Earth in units of the E'quatori<l.f Radiu;;' a·
<1>, 1 <1><1>' I' Diff. ,[LogCr/ail Diff. <I> 4;14;l'! Diff, ILOg\rla~1 Diff. <f> ,4;14;1" I Diff., ,IL?g(r!~)1 Diff,"
.~~ 19.999 I ' 9·999 I ., . ~'19~99 ':j "
35° c'i 10.' 50.:1 I! 1~4o. '5236 39 45° 0.' Iii 32~6JI 0.70.2 2746. 43 55° 0.' 1.0.' 51~591.36 '90.2481,4'0,
10.1 5I.49! 1.38 5196 40. ',10. 32.6310..0.0. 270.4 42 10. 50.·21 1.38/9o.2C8j AC
20.1 52.85 '1.36 5156 40. 20. 32.6110..0.2, 2661 43 20. 48.81 '1'4CI9,~I69i 39,
'30. 54.1811.3351'1640. 30. 32.5710..0..4 26J942 3?I, 47·39 1.4290IZ9'4o.
40. 55.49 I 1.31 50.76 40. 40. 32.510..0.6 2576 43 40.' 45·95 1.44 90.0.891 40.,.
So. 56.781' 1.29 50.36 40. So. 32.42 0.·0.9 2534 42 So. 44·49 1.46, 90C5Cj 39
36 ClIO. 58.0.4 1.26'14996 40. 46 0. 1132.31 0..11 2491 43 56 '0. 10. 43·0.0. I,4919CCIOI,4o.
10. I 59.28 ,1.24 [' 4956 40. 10. 32.18 0..13 2449 42 10. 41.49 1.51 8997 I '39
20. II 0..50.11.22 4915 f4! 2032.0.2 0..16 240.7 4220. 39.90 1.5'389932[39
30. 1.7ci 1.20. 4875 40 30.1 3r.83' 0..19 2364 [43 30. 38.41' 1.5589892140.
540.0.1' 2.88: 1.18 4834 41 ~c 31.61 0..22 2322 42 40. 36.83 1.58 89853,39,
4.0.4 1.16 4794 140. 50. I' 31.37 0..24 228" 42 50., 35.23 1.60. 898141 '39
37 0. II 5.18 1.14 4753 1141 47 6 r r 31.10. 0..2] 2237 43 57 0. 1'033.61 '1.62 89775 39
10.1 6.30. 1.121471Z, 41 r o i 30..81 0..29 2195 42 10. 31.97 1.64 8973639
20. 7.40. LIC 467240. 20.1 30.·50. c.JI 215342 20. 30..31 r.668969'7 39
30. 8.47 1.0.714631 41 3c·j 30..17 0.·33 ZIII 4230. 28.63 '1.68 89659"38
40. 9.5 I 1.0.4 4590. 41 40. I 29.82 0.·35 20.68 43 ,40. 26·93 J.7c 89620_1 39
50. 10..52 1.0.14549 41 So. Z9.45 0.,37 20.26·12 SO 25.20.1.73 895821'38
~8 0. II 11.51 0..99 450.8 41 48 0. 1 I 29.07 0..38 1984 42 58 0 10. 23·45 J·7 5 89543' 39"
10. 12.48 0..97 44671' 41 loz8.66 0.41 1942 42 "10.2 r.68 1.77 89505 :38
10. 13.43 0.·95 4426 41 20. 28.~21' 0.·44 i 190.0. 4220 '1,9.891' r.79 89'467 ,38
30114.36 0..93 4385 41 30. 27.75 0.·47 i 1858 42 30.. 18.0.8 1.81 89429' 38
40.: 15·27 i 0..91 4344 1141 40. 27.26 i 0.·49 I! 18r6 42 40. 16.2$ 1.83 89391 '38
501 16.1610..89 430Z 42 5° I 26·75! 0..51 1774 4~ '50.' 14·40. J.8S 89'353 "38
39 0. II 17.0.2 0..86 4_260 4Z. 49 0. 11 26.21t 0.·54 1732 42 59'0. 10. '12.$2 1.88 8931538
1011 'q.86 0.84 4219 41 10. 25.65°:56 r69c 42 10. 10..63 ,1.8989278:37
20. 18.68 0..82 41]7 42 20. 25.0.61,0..59. 1647 43 20. 8·7 I 1·92 89240. 38
30,19.47 0..794136 41 30. '24.45 0..61 1605' 4~ "30. ,6.771.94 '892°3 :37'
450.0. I" 20..24,0.·77 40.94 42 40 '23.82 0.63 1563 42 '40 4.81 1.9~ 8916637
20..99 0..75 40.53 41 50. 23.17 0..65 1521 42 50. 2.83 ,1.98 8~{i28_ ':38
40. CilI21.71 0..7240.1142 50.10.0.11122.50. 0.671480. 4' 60 0. ~c 0.841,"1'99890.91"'37
10.1 2':1:.40. 0..69 '396942 21.80. 0..70. 143842 61 948.4212.42 888n!:tI9.
20.1 Z3.08 0..68 3927 42 2C! 2'1.0.8 o.p 1396 42 62 9 35.29'3,13 886581214
,30. I' 23·74 0.66 3886 41 30. [ 20.·33 0.·75 1354 42' 63 9 21.4513:84' 88448L2rc
40. 24.3710..63 3844 42 40. 19.56' 0..77 1312 42 64 9 6.92 I4·53 88~4312,05'"
So. I 24.98, 0.61 380.2 142 5C! 18.77 0.·79 I qc 42 65 8 5f.] 3 15.19 8804411'99
4' ,~i" :lg ~;:;;:~ I:: 5' ,~I "; ;;: ~:i ::;::: ::: :::~ : l:l :;~lll::;
201 26.67 0..$4 3676 i 42 20. f 16.28 0..85 1146 4r_ 68 ,8 2·30. q.IC 87482 182
3c! 2].18 0..51 363414~ 30. I 15·40. 0..88 110.4 42 69'  7 44.61 17.69 87 308~74
40 i .27.67 0.,49 3592142 40. '14.49 c.q r 1063 41 7,0 ' 7!6.36) 18.25 87I4c i68
50 II • 28.14 9·47 3550. 42 'So. II 13.56 0·93 1022 41 7 I '7 1;55 18.81 86919 161 '
42 0,1 I 23.59 0..45 350.8142 52: 0. I I 12.60. I 0..96 0.980.' 42]2 6 48.22 i9.33 86823 I 56'.'
10. i Z9.C2 0..43 3466 42 IC! 11.62 0.98 0.939 41 7,3 '6 28·39 19.83 8667'~ 1,4/.:..
, "3200. I 29·42 0.·40. 3424 j 42 20." '10..62 I 1.0.0. 0.898 41 74 6 8.0.8 iO~3I. 815537 139
29.80 '0..38 3382 42 30. 9.60. r.02c8S{ 41 7S 5 47.32, 20.76 86405 13z"
40: 30..15 0.:3.5 3339 i43 4o;~.,561 r.04'i 0.81514276, 5 26.1312,1.19, 8~:1281.tr,~,!<
50. f 30..48 0..33 '3297' 42 5c! 7.50. 1.0.6 o.i74; 41 77 5 4.54.21.59 86164lr17"
43:: I" EH ~:im~:; 53:: j" :;;::; ~m:: iL, :ifiiiH
'~,~ '31.57 0..24, 3128 4~ 30. 3.0.2 ,1.15c6It 41 ~}__+;i 22·9'2 "'j
40. 31.79 0..22 30.86' 42< 40.1 , 841.18 0.57' 40. 8,2f'2j:~'~
,So. 31.98 0.19 3,?43 43 50. I !c.64 1.20. 0.53041, 83 23:'4;1'
44 0. 'II 32.14 0.16 30.0.1 42'· 54 '0. 10 59.41 1.23 0'489 41 84' 2'3:"6,5
' 10. I '32.28 0.',1,4 2959 42 10. I 58.t6 L25 0449 40. 85'.: 2:;'.79
"'2b "32.40. 0..1229,6 43 20' 56.89 1.27. 0.40.9 40.· $6' 2"3:9'
':'/"!~ll ,>, ";~:;; ~:~;;~;!,::~ :;.!~ ,,.:' ;~::~::~~ ~;~~ 41:~:
c:': ... so. . "<32.61 0..0.4.2789 42, ,50 ': .. ,52.95 1.34 0.288
4'50.)1 ,32.630.:C;2', .:.2746. 43·55.·· •• 0.· '2,,51.59 ,1.360.248
.~, . I'·~>I .~:~~~ .. , .. .,:, : > ;::~I~ .... ~r·· .. ···:,: .. ·' .' .. ., .~ .... ":.,. ~;,; .,".  .''::"_":.
':::,](f..~/:~:~T,:~,~;;~ ::,<_:~,S:l:::~;:,::~'/~~~;" ;,: .' ,
. I' . I f 1: .
, DI if. ILog ,'", aj! J)1ff.
. 11 19.999 j
~ I· I
09,24.0.919997 I 3
15' 24.0.61 ()983 14
IS 24.00. 9()61 22
)123.9'2993' 3Q
~7 23.80. 9892 I 39 33 23.661 9844 i 48 )2 23.491 9787 I 57 lC 23.2819721 i 66 ~5 23.051 9647 ! 74
[4 21.791 9565 82
}4 22.50.19475 90.
l5 2Z.21 9377 i 98 10. 2 r.Ss. 9270. 110.7 to. 21.50. 9155 illS )I 21.11 90.331122 19 ~C.68189C3 I t3C 13120..24 8766 ~ '37 )l 19./8 8'621 i 145
10. 19.2918469 1152 )7 18·77 8310. 1159 ;0. IS,231 8144 i 166 )8 17.681' 7972 i Ij2 )7 17·0.9 7794 i 1]8 16 16.491760.9 i 185 14 15·S8 7418]'9! )7 15.231 1221 11196 :4 14.57 70.20. 202 q 13.90. 6813 ,20.7 i4 13.20. 660.0. !213 13 12·4Q 63821218
14 2.0.1 6.345 1 37
13 1.991 63cS I 37
10. 1.97 6~j2 I 36
I 5 r·9 5 I 6:l: 3 5 I 3 7
;8 1.93 6198 37
; 9 1.9 I 1 6 161 37
,8 1.8916123 38
15 1.871 60.86 37
to. 1,85 60.49, 37
)~i 1.82[60.11,' 38
l3: l.SI 5973 38
")1 I 1.7S 5936 37 38; 1.]7 5898 I 38 !~I 1.745860.138
141 1.72l582~139
;4' 1.70. 5783 38
, 1
~ ~ I 1.68 I 5744 I 39 \8 1.66570.6 '38
'21 1.64:.s667 39
;4! 1.621,5628 39
r4: 1.6o.i5589 39
pi 1.571'5550. 39
16' 1.55 ss « 139 ;8! L$2 5472 39
191 LSI 5433 39
IS I L'4Q 5393 40
151 1.47 5354 39
t9, 1.44 531539 11 I 1.42527'5 40. ! I 11.4,0. '$ ~36 '39
:., .
J ..... l.
_.""'0.
~. ; .. _.~; ..
.. ~., ... :.
 32_Cl06·33
;:'1'  3 I 986.96
2 31928.85 3 ".:_ 3183'2.08 4, 3i696.77 5, 315H·93 6': 31 311.23
7.  31061.39
8 ':30773·95
9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17", IS
19 20 21 22 23
_ 24" 25
 , 26
27 28
29' 30 3.1 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45
', 30449.23. _joo87·61 '_:._ 2 96~'9.50
 292 55.41 ,28785:83 :28281.33 27142.52 .27170.01 ' 26564.52
25926.74
';;_ 25257.46
24557·47 _:_ 23827.59  23068.72
22281.74
 2I 467,61
 20627.29
 19761.8 I
188]2.19
~ 17959.51_ . .:_ 17024.85  16069 , 33
15094.13
14100.40
 13°89·34
12062·17
 1 1020.13
9964.48 8896.49 7817.46 6728.70 5631.65 4527.24 3417.21 2302.79 I' 1185.32 I
66.17
)0713.00
10706.49
10687.08
'::"':1 b654·5S. : 106.09.07
 10550.88
:: 10479.80
: 10396.00
~ 10299.59  J ° H}o.68
 10069.3'7
9935.83 9790.23 963~q 5 9463.55 9282•85 gogo.87 8887.85 8673.99 845°.01 8214.93 7970.26 7715.86 1 7452.09 7179.22 6897:61
.6607.09 6309.50 6°°3·7° 569°.57 537°.5° 5043:85 4711.03 4312.43 4028.47 3679.57 3326.15 2968.63 26°7·47 2243.06 r8i 5.87 1506.37 1134·97
762.14 388.32 14.00
 556.61
 556.28
 555.24
 553·57
 551.24
548.25
 544·59
 540•28
 535·]2
 529.72
 523.49
516.61
 5°9.12
 501.02
492.32
483.01
473.13
 462.63
451.66
440•09
427·99
415,37
402.25
 388.65
 374·59
 360.01
 345·°3
329.61
 313.80
297.61
 281.04
264.13
 246.90
'229·35 211.52
193.41
 17 5.07
156.51
137·74
 1 18.81
99.72 80·49 61.16
41.74 22.27 2.76
II J 31 7.10 111300.27 111249.75 111165.59 111047.73 It 0896.3 2
110711.33 110492.86 fI024°·94 1°9953.08 1°9637.°3 1°9285.27 1089°0.33 108482.43 108031.66 107548.21 107032.07 106483.5~ 1°59°2·45 1 ° 5289. 73 104644.84 103968.16 103259.94 102520.33 101749.59 (°°947·9° 100115.54
99252.74 98359.74 Q7436.8t 96484.20 95502.21 94491.10 93451.20 92382.76 91286.1] 90161.81 89°°9.74 8783°.54 86624.52 85392.02 84! 33.36 81848.96 81539'.23 80204.46 78845.10
45~!  66.,,1
46 I 47 48 49 5° 51 5~ 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66
+ 1°53.30
67 68
+ 2._171·73
+ 3287.77
+ 4400.02
+ 55°7.01
_ + 6607.80
+ 7700.62
+ 8784.27
+ 9857.42' +10918.75 + i 1966.97 + 13°00.78 .+14018.92
+15°20.13 +16°°3·17 + 16966.83
+ 17909.93 +18831:l9 +19729·79 +206°4.31 +21453.77
+ 2_2 277.12 +23°73·34 +23841.43 +24580.45 +25289.48 +25967.64 +26614.10 + 27 2 28.03 is +'2]808.68 76 +28355.33 77 +28867.31 78 +29343·97 79 +29784.7° 80 + jo 188.99 81' +30556.29 +3°886·17 +31178.23 +31432.13 +31647.57 +31823.99 + .~1961.SZ + 32059.91 + 321 18·98
72 'i3 i4
82 83 84
~~ Ii
88 89 I
14.00 360.40 7 _H.4 2
+ +
1107.59 + 1479·45 + 1849.57 + HQ·48 + 2582.74 + 2944.89
+ 330$.51 3658.13 + 4008.33
+ 4353.69
+ 4693.79 + 5028.19 + 5356.50
, + 5678.31 + 5993.22 + 6300.84 + 6601.31 + 6892.75 + 7 116.30 +
+
7451.11 I + 7716.84
+ 7973.18
+ 8219.79 + 8455·79 + 8682.65
+ 889~·33 + 91°3.13 + 9296.85 + 9479·2J + 9649.99 + 9808.97 I
+ 9955.971 + 10090.81
+10213.32 +1°_323.33 + 10420.72 + 1°5°5·37
+1°577.18 !
+10635.99
+10681.93
+ 10714.80
+ 1°734.3 I
+J0741.00 I
 :2.76
+ 16.71
+ 36.28
. + 55.76 + 75._19
+ 94·54
, ,+113·77 + 132•86
+151.83
+'170.6 I
. +189.19 + 207.54 + 22 5.65
+ 243.50
+261.°5
+278.28 +295.19 +311.74 +327.91 + 343.69 +359·°5 +374.01 + 388.45 +4°2·45 +415.95 +428.95
+44l·43
+453.36
+464.74
+475·55
+485.77 +495·4°
+ 504.42
+ 5 I 2.82
+ 520.59
+ 527.71 +534.18
+ 540.00
+ 545.16 + 549.63
+ 5 5343
+ 556.54 + 558.97
: t 560.70 j
+56L78
+562.15
78845.10 77461.79 76°54.34 7462:173 73 I7 0.18 71694.1i
. 7°196:15 68676·SZ 67135.76 65574·34 63992.72 62391.42 60770•86 59131.56 57474.03 55798.77 54106.27 52397.10 5°673.00 48930.67 47 I7 4.48 454°3:62 43618'92 41820.61
4°0°9.37 38185.69 3635°.22 345°3.50 :p646.03 3°778.41 28901.36
27015.30 25no.86 23218.58 21309.13 19393.06 1747°.97 15543·44 136 11.09 11674.52
9734.60 7791.08 5845.42 3897.96 1949.27 0000.00
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.