by Bill Bryson
Cavendish is a book in himself. Born into a life of sumptuous privilege—his grandfathers were dukes, respectively, of Devonshire and Kent—he was the most gifted English scientist of his age, but also the strangest. He suffered, in the words of one of his few biographers, from shyness to a “degree bordering on disease.” Any human contact was for him a source of the deepest discomfort.
Once he opened his door to find an Austrian admirer, freshly arrived from Vienna, on the front step. Excitedly, the Austrian began to babble out praise. For a few moments Cavendish received the compliments as if they were blows from a blunt object and then, unable to take any more, fled down the path and out the gate, leaving the front door wide open. It was some hours before he could be coaxed back to the property. Even his housekeeper communicated with him by letter.
Although he did sometimes venture into society—he was particularly devoted to the weekly scientific soirées of the great naturalist Sir Joseph Banks—it was always made clear to the other guests that Cavendish was on no account to be approached or even looked at. Those who sought his views were advised to wander into his vicinity as if by accident and to “talk as it were into vacancy.” If their remarks were scientifically worthy they might receive a mumbled reply, but more often than not they would hear a peeved squeak (his voice appears to have been high-pitched) and turn to find an actual vacancy and the sight of Cavendish fleeing for a more peaceful corner.
Party-goers amuse themselves with electrical experiments of a vague but evidently engrossing nature in an eighteenth-century salon. An urge to understand the world and the forces that govern it became a prevailing preoccupation of the age. (credit 4.15)
His wealth and solitary inclinations allowed him to turn his house in Clapham into a large laboratory where he could range undisturbed through every corner of the physical sciences—electricity, heat, gravity, gases, anything to do with the composition of matter. The second half of the eighteenth century was a time when people of a scientific bent grew intensely interested in the physical properties of fundamental things—gases and electricity in particular—and began seeing what they could do with them, often with more enthusiasm than sense. In America, Benjamin Franklin famously risked his life by flying a kite in an electrical storm. In France, a chemist named Pilatre de Rozier tested the flammability of hydrogen by gulping a mouthful and blowing across an open flame, proving at a stroke that hydrogen is indeed explosively combustible and that eyebrows are not necessarily a permanent feature of one’s face. Cavendish, for his part, conducted experiments in which he subjected himself to graduated jolts of electrical current, diligently noting the increasing levels of agony until he could keep hold of his quill, and sometimes his consciousness, no longer.
In the course of a long life Cavendish made a string of signal discoveries—among much else, he was the first person to isolate hydrogen and the first to combine hydrogen and oxygen to form water—but almost nothing he did was entirely divorced from strangeness. To the continuing exasperation of his fellow scientists, he often alluded in published work to the results of experiments that he had not told anyone about. In his secretiveness he didn’t merely resemble Newton, but actively exceeded him. His experiments with electrical conductivity were a century ahead of their time, but unfortunately remained undiscovered until that century had passed. Indeed, the greater part of what he did wasn’t known until the late nineteenth century, when the Cambridge physicist James Clerk Maxwell took on the task of editing Cavendish’s papers, by which time credit for his discoveries had nearly always been given to others.
Among much else, and without telling anyone, Cavendish discovered or anticipated the law of the conservation of energy, Ohm’s Law, Dalton’s Law of Partial Pressures, Richter’s Law of Reciprocal Proportions, Charles’s Law of Gases, and the principles of electrical conductivity That’s just some of it. According to the science historian J. G. Crowther, he also foreshadowed “the work of Kelvin and G. H. Darwin on the effect of tidal friction on slowing the rotation of the earth, and Larmor’s discovery, published in 1915, on the effect of local atmospheric cooling…the work of Pickering on freezing mixtures, and some of the work of Rooseboom on heterogeneous equilibria.” Finally, he left clues that led directly to the discovery of the group of elements known as the noble gases, some of which are so elusive that the last of them wasn’t found until 1962. But our interest here is in Cavendish’s last known experiment when, in the late summer of 1797, at the age of sixty-seven, he turned his attention to the crates of equipment that had been left to him—evidently out of simple scientific respect—by John Michell.
When assembled, Michell’s apparatus looked like nothing so much as an eighteenth-century version of a Nautilus weight-training machine. It incorporated weights, counterweights, pendulums, shafts and torsion wires. At the heart of the machine were two 350-pound lead balls, which were suspended beside two smaller spheres. The idea was to measure the gravitational deflection of the smaller spheres by the larger ones, which would allow the first measurement of the elusive force known as the gravitational constant, and from which the weight (strictly speaking the mass)5 of the Earth could be deduced.
Illustrations of the equipment used by Henry Cavendish in his 1766 study of “factitious airs” and the specific gravity of different gases. (credit 4.16)
Because gravity holds planets in orbit and makes falling objects land with a bang, we tend to think of it as a powerful force, but it isn’t really. It is only powerful in a kind of collective sense, when one massive object, like the Sun, holds onto another massive object, like the Earth. At an elemental level gravity is extraordinarily unrobust. Each time you pick up a book from a table or a coin from the floor you effortlessly overcome the gravitational exertion of an entire planet. What Cavendish was trying to do was measure gravity at this extremely featherweight level.
Delicacy was the keyword. Not a whisper of disturbance could be allowed into the room containing the apparatus, so Cavendish took up a position in an adjoining room and made his observations with a telescope aimed through a peephole. The work was incredibly exacting, involving seventeen delicate, interconnected measurements, which together took nearly a year to complete. When at last he had finished his calculations, Cavendish announced that the Earth weighed a little over 13,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 pounds, or six billion trillion metric tons, to use the modern measure. (A metric ton, or tonne, is 1,000 kilograms or 2,205 pounds.)
Today, scientists have at their disposal machines so precise they can detect the weight of a single bacterium and so sensitive that readings can be disturbed by someone yawning seventy-five feet away, but they have not significantly improved on Cavendish’s measurements of 1797. The current best estimate for the Earth’s weight is 5.9725 billion trillion tonnes, a difference of only about 1 per cent from Cavendish’s finding. Interestingly all of this merely confirmed estimates made by Newton 110 years before Cavendish without any experimental evidence at all.
At all events, by the late eighteenth century scientists knew very precisely the shape and dimensions of the Earth and its distance from the Sun and planets; and now Cavendish, without even leaving home, had given them its weight. So you might think that determining the age of the Earth would be relatively straightforward. After all, the necessary materials were literally at their feet. But no. Human beings would split the atom and invent television, nylon and instant coffee before they could figure out the age of their own planet.
To understand why, we must travel north to Scotland and begin with a brilliant and genial man, of whom few have ever heard, who had just invented a new science called geology.
1 Triangulation, their chosen method, was a popular technique based on the geometric fact that if you know the length of one side of a triangle and the angles of two corners, you can work out all its other dimensions without leaving your chair. Suppose, by way of example, that you and I decided we wished to know how far it is to the Moon. Using triangulation, the first thing we must do is
put some distance between us, so let’s say for argument that you stay in Paris and I go to Moscow and we both look at the Moon at the same time. Now, if you imagine a line connecting the three principals of this exercise—that is, you and me and the Moon—it forms a triangle. Measure the length of the baseline between you and me and the angles of our two corners and the rest can be simply calculated. (Because the interior angles of a triangle always add up to 180 degrees, if you know the sum of two of the angles you can instantly calculate the third; and knowing the precise shape of a triangle and the length of one side tells you the lengths of the other sides.) This was in fact the method used by a Greek astronomer, Hipparchus of Nicaea, in 150 BC to work out the Moon’s distance from the Earth. At ground level, the principles of triangulation are the same, except that the triangles don’t reach into space but rather are laid side to side on a map. In measuring a degree of meridian, the surveyors would create a sort of chain of triangles marching across the landscape.
2 How fast you are spinning depends on where you are. The speed of the Earth’s spin varies from something over 1,600 kilometres an hour at the equator to zero at the poles. In London the speed is 998 kilometres an hour.
3 The most recent transit was on 8 June 2004, with a second due in 2012. There were none in the twentieth century.
4 In 1781 Herschel became the first person in the modern era to discover a planet. He wanted to call it George, after the British monarch, but was overruled. Instead it became Uranus.
5 To a physicist, mass and weight are two quite different things. Your mass stays the same wherever you go, but your weight varies depending on how far you are from the centre of some other massive object like a planet. Travel to the Moon and you will be much lighter but no less massive. On Earth, for all practical purposes, mass and weight are the same and so the terms can be treated as synonymous, at least outside the classroom.
James Hutton, father of modern geology, as caricatured in 1787. Note the faces profiled in the rock that he has been hammering. (credit 5.1)
THE STONE-BREAKERS
At just the time that Henry Cavendish was completing his experiments in London, four hundred miles away in Edinburgh another kind of concluding moment was about to take place with the death of James Hutton. This was bad news for Hutton, of course, but good news for science as it cleared the way for a man named John Playfair to rewrite Hutton’s work without fear of embarrassment.
Hutton was by all accounts a man of the keenest insights and liveliest conversation, a delight in company, and without rival when it came to understanding the mysterious slow processes that shaped the Earth. Unfortunately, it was beyond him to set down his notions in a form that anyone could begin to understand. He was, as one biographer observed with an all but audible sigh, “almost entirely innocent of rhetorical accomplishments.” Nearly every line he penned was an invitation to slumber. Here he is in his 1795 masterwork, A Theory of the Earth with Proofs and Illustrations, discussing…well, something:
The world which we inhabit is composed of the materials, not of the earth which was the immediate predecessor of the present, but of the earth which, in ascending from the present, we consider as the third, and which had preceded the land that was above the surface of the sea, while our present land was yet beneath the water of the ocean.
Yet almost singlehandedly, and quite brilliantly, he created the science of geology and transformed our understanding of the Earth.
Hutton was born in 1726 into a prosperous Scottish family, and enjoyed the sort of material comfort that allowed him to pass much of his life in a genially expansive round of light work and intellectual betterment. He studied medicine, but found it not to his liking and turned instead to farming, which he followed in a relaxed and scientific way on the family estate in Berwickshire. Tiring of field and flock, in 1768 he moved to Edinburgh, where he founded a successful business producing sal ammoniac from coal soot, and busied himself with various scientific pursuits. Edinburgh at that time was a centre of intellectual vigour and Hutton luxuriated in its enriching possibilities. He became a leading member of a society called the Oyster Club, where he passed his evenings in the company of men such as the economist Adam Smith, the chemist Joseph Black and the philosopher David Hume, as well as such occasional visiting sparks as Benjamin Franklin and James Watt.
In the tradition of the day, Hutton took an interest in nearly everything, from mineralogy to metaphysics. He conducted experiments with chemicals, investigated methods of coal mining and canal building, toured salt mines, speculated on the mechanisms of heredity, collected fossils and propounded theories on rain, the composition of air and the laws of motion, among much else. But his particular interest was geology.
Among the questions that attracted interest in that fanatically inquisitive age was one that had puzzled people for a very long time—namely, why ancient clam shells and other marine fossils were so often found on mountaintops. How on earth did they get there? Those who thought they had a solution fell into two opposing camps. One group, known as the Neptunists, were convinced that everything on the Earth, including sea shells in improbably lofty places, could be explained by rising and falling sea levels. They believed that mountains, hills and other features were as old as the Earth itself, and were changed only when water sloshed over them during periods of global flooding.
Opposing them were the Plutonists, who noted that volcanoes and earthquakes, among other enlivening agents, continually changed the face of the planet but clearly owed nothing to wayward seas. The Plutonists also raised awkward questions about where all the water went when it wasn’t in flood. If there was enough of it at times to cover the Alps, then where, pray, was it during times of tranquillity, such as now? Their belief was that the Earth was subject to profound internal forces as well as surface ones. However, they couldn’t convincingly explain how all those clam shells got up there.
It was while puzzling over these matters that Hutton had a series of exceptional insights. From looking at his own farmland, he could see that soil was created by the erosion of rocks and that particles of this soil were continually washed away and carried off by streams and rivers and redeposited elsewhere. He realized that if such a process were carried to its natural conclusion then the Earth would eventually be worn quite smooth. Yet everywhere around him there were hills. Clearly there had to be some additional process, some form of renewal and uplift, that created new hills and mountains to keep the cycle going. The marine fossils on mountaintops, he decided, had not been deposited during floods, but had risen along with the mountains themselves. He also deduced that it was heat within the Earth that created new rocks and continents and thrust up mountain chains. It is not too much to say that geologists wouldn’t grasp the full implications of this thought until two hundred years later, when finally they adopted the concept of plate tectonics. Above all, what Hutton’s theories suggested was that the processes that shaped the Earth required huge amounts of time, far more than anyone had ever dreamed. There were enough insights here to transform utterly our understanding of the planet.
John Martin’s vision of an apocalyptic flood in the 1834 painting The Deluge, which echoes the Neptunists’ belief in the dramatic rise and fall of sea-levels. (credit 5.2)
In 1785 Hutton worked his ideas up into a long paper, which was read at consecutive meetings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. It attracted almost no notice at all. It’s not hard to see why. Here, in part, is how he presented it to his audience:
In the one case, the forming cause is in the body which is separated; for, after the body has been actuated by heat, it is by the reaction of the proper matter of the body, that the chasm which constitutes the vein is formed. In the other case, again, the cause is extrinsic in relation to the body in which the chasm is formed. There has been the most violent fracture and divulsion; but the cause is still to seek; and it appears not in the vein; for it is not every fracture and dislocation of the solid body of our earth, in which minerals, or the
proper substances of mineral veins, are found.
Needless to say, almost no-one in the audience had the faintest idea what he was talking about. Encouraged by his friends to expand his theory, in the touching hope that he might somehow stumble onto clarity in a more expansive format, Hutton spent the next ten years preparing his magnum opus, which was published in two volumes in 1795.
Together the two books ran to nearly a thousand pages and were, remarkably, worse than even his most pessimistic friends had feared. Apart from anything else, nearly half the completed work now consisted of quotations from French sources, still in the original French. A third volume was so unenticing that it wasn’t published until 1899, more than a century after Hutton’s death, and the fourth and concluding volume was never published at all. Hutton’s Theory of the Earth is a strong candidate for the least read important book in science (or at least, it would be if there weren’t so many others). Even Charles Lyell, the greatest geologist of the following century and a man who read everything, admitted he couldn’t get through it.
Professor John Playfair was one of the few people able to make sense of Hutton’s cluttered prose, and in 1802 produced a simplified version of Hutton’s great but impenetrable opus. (credit 5.3)
Luckily, Hutton had a Boswell in the form of John Playfair, a professor of mathematics at the University of Edinburgh and a close friend, who not only could write silken prose but—thanks to many years at Hutton’s elbow—actually understood what Hutton was trying to say, most of the time. In 1802, five years after Hutton’s death, Playfair produced a simplified exposition of the Huttonian principles, entitled Illustrations of the Huttonian Theory of the Earth. The book was gratefully received by those who took an active interest in geology, which in 1802 was not a large number. That, however, was about to change. And how.