Abstract
I AM glad to read Mr. Cook's reply to my remarks, but believe that my criticism cannot be dismissed as a mere a priori one, and that it goes to the root of the matter. It is true that Mr. Cook illustrated his proposal in a most exhaustive manner, and that he did not suggest that his method might be of service in comparing the rainfalls of places in quite different climatic regions. But the general reasoning in the first paragraph of my former letter cannot be both correct and incorrect. Assuming it to be correct, it follows directly that even if we confine our attention to the records for a single station we might have the same C.G. for two years which differed greatly from one another as regards the monthly distribution of rainfall. In such a case, what possible significance could attach to the position of the C.G.?
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
WATT, A. Centre of Gravity of Annual Rainfall. Nature 83, 249 (1910). https://doi.org/10.1038/083249a0
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/083249a0