The demonstration of the law of the tide-producing force is of a mathematical character, and I do not intend in these lectures to enter into mathematical calculations. There is, however, a simple line of reasoning which, though it falls far short of actual demonstration, may yet suffice to give a plausible reason for the law.
The tides really owe their origin to the fact that the tide-producing agent operates more powerfully on those parts of the tide-exhibiting body which are near to it, than on the more distant portions of the same. The nearer the two bodies are together, the larger proportionally will be the differences in the distances of its various parts from the tide-producing body; and on this account the leverage, so to speak, of the action by which the tides are produced is increased. For instance, if the two bodies were brought within half their original distance of each other, the relative size of each body, as viewed from the other, will be doubled; and what we have called the leverage of the tide-producing ability will be increased twofold. The gravitation also between the two bodies is increased fourfold when the distance is halved, and consequently, the tide-producing ability is doubled for one reason, and increased fourfold again by another; hence, the tides will be increased eightfold when the distance is reduced to one half. Now, as eight is the cube of two, this illustration may be taken as a verification of the law, that the efficiency of a body as a tide-producer varies inversely as the cube of the distance between it and the body on which the tides are being raised.
For simplicity we may make the assumption that the whole of the earth is buried beneath the ocean, and that the moon is placed in the plane of the equator. We may also entirely neglect for the present the tides produced by the sun, and we shall also make the further assumption that friction is absent. What friction is capable of doing we shall, however, refer to later on. The moon will act on the ocean and deform it, so that there will be high tide along one meridian, and high tide also on the opposite meridian. This is indeed one of the paradoxes by which students are frequently puzzled when they begin to learn about the tides. That the moon should pull the water up in a heap on one side seems plausible enough. High tide will of course be there; and the student might naturally think that the water being drawn in this way into a heap on one side, there will of course be low tide on the opposite side of the earth. A natural assumption, perhaps, but nevertheless a very wrong one. There are at every moment two opposite parts of the earth in a condition of high water; in fact, this will be obvious if we remember that every day, or, to speak a little more accurately, in every twenty-four hours and fifty one minutes, we have on the average two high tides at each locality. Of course this could not be if the moon raised only one heap of high water, because, as the moon only appears to revolve around the earth once a day, or, more accurately, once in that same average period of twenty-four hours and fifty-one minutes, it would be impossible for us to have high tides succeeding each other as they do in periods a little longer than twelve hours, if only one heap were carried round the earth.
The first question then is, as to how these two opposite heaps of water are placed in respect to the position of the moon. The most obvious explanation would seem to be, that the moon should pull the waters up into a heap directly underneath it, and that therefore there should be high water underneath the moon. As to the other side, the presence of a high tide there was, on this theory, to be accounted for by the fact that the moon pulled the earth away from the waters on the more remote side, just as it pulled the waters away from the more remote earth on the side underneath the moon. It is, however, certainly not the case that the high tide is situated in the simple position that this law would indicate, and which we have represented in Fig. 1, where the circular body is the earth, the ocean surrounding which is distorted by the action of the tides.
Fig. 1
We have here taken an oval to represent the shape into which the water is supposed to be forced or drawn by the tidal action of the tide-producing body. This may possibly be a correct representation of what would occur on an ideal globe entirely covered with a frictionless ocean. But as our earth is not covered entirely by water, and as the ocean is very far from being frictionless, the ideal tide is not the tide that we actually know; nor is the ideal tide represented by this oval even an approximation to the actual tides to which our oceans are subject. Indeed, the oval does not represent the facts at all, and of this it is only necessary to adduce a single fact in demonstration. I take the fundamental issue so often debated, as to whether in the ocean vibrating with ideal tides the high water or the low water should be under the moon. Or to put the matter otherwise; when we represent the displaced water by an oval, is the long axis of the oval to be turned to the moon, as generally supposed, or is it to be directed at right angles therefrom? If the ideal tides were in any degree representative of the actual tides, so fundamental a question as this could be at once answered by an appeal to the facts of observation. Even if friction in some degree masked the phenomena, surely one would think that the state of the actual tides should still enable us to answer this question.
But a study of the tides at different ports fails to realize this expectation. At some ports, no doubt, the tide is high when the moon is on the meridian. In that case, of course, the high water is under the moon, as apparently ought to be the case invariably, on a superficial view. But, on the other hand, there are ports where there is often low water when the moon is crossing the meridian. Yet other ports might be cited in which every intermediate phase could be observed. If the theory of the tides was to be the simple one so often described, then at every port noon should be the hour of high water on the day of the new moon or of the full moon, because then both tide-exciting bodies are on the meridian at the same time. Even if the friction retarded the great tidal wave uniformly, the high tide on the days of full or change should always occur at fixed hours; but, unfortunately, there is no such delightful theory of the tides as this would imply. At Greenock no doubt there is high water at or about noon on the day of full or change; and if it could be similarly said that on the day of full or change there was high water everywhere at local noon, then the equilibrium theory of the tides, as it is called, would be beautifully simple. But this is not the case. Even around our own coasts the discrepancies are such as to utterly discredit the theory as offering any practical guide. At Aberdeen the high tide does not appear till an hour later than the doctrine would suggest. It is two hours late at London, three at Tynemouth, four at Tralee, five at Sligo, and six at Hull. This last port would be indeed the haven of refuge for those who believe that the low tide ought to be under the moon. At Hull this is no doubt the case; and if at all other places the water behaved as it does at Hull, why then, of course, it would follow that the law of low water under the moon was generally true. But then this would not tally with the condition of affairs at the other places I have named; and to complete the cycle I shall add a few more. At Bristol the high water does not get up until seven hours after the moon has passed the meridian, at Arklow the delay is eight hours, at Yarmouth it is nine, at the Needles it is ten hours, while lastly, the moon has nearly got back to the meridian again ere it has succeeded in dragging up the tide on which Liverpool's great commerce so largely depends.
Nor does the result of studying the tides along other coasts beside our own decide more conclusively on the mooted point. Even ports in the vast ocean give a very uncertain response. Kerguelen Island and Santa Cruz might seem to prove that the high tide occurs under the moon, but unfortunately both Fiji and Ascension seem to present us with an equally satisfactory demonstration, that beneath the moon is the invariable home of low water.
I do not mean to say that the study of the tides is in other respects such a confused subject as the facts I have stated would seem to indicate. It becomes rather puzzling, no doubt, when we compare the tides at one port with the tides elsewhere. The law and order are, then, by no means conspicuous, they are often hardly discernible. But when we confine our attention to the tides at a single port, the problem becomes at once a very intelligible one. Indeed, the investigation of the tides is an easy subject, if we are contented with a reasonably approximate solution; should, however, it be necessary to discuss fully the tides at any port, the theory of the method necessary for doing so is available, and a most interesting and beautiful theory it certainly is.
Let us then speak for a few moments about the methods by which we can study the tides at a particular port. The principle on which it is