Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Centre of Gravity of Annual Rainfall

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

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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

Download citation

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/083249a0

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing