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:

[Letters to Editor]

Abstract

I REGRET that I inadvertently wrote “sub-polar” for “sub-solar” in my remarks on Prof. G. C. Comstock's book on Sumner lines, but this lapse makes no difference really to the statement that the proper description should be zenith point, and not sub-solar point (see p. vi of preface and pp. 2, 3,, etc.). Sub-solar refers to the sun only, and does not necessarily include sub-stellar or sub-lunar, but zenith point is common to all.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

USD 39.95

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

TIZARD, T. [Letters to Editor]. Nature 105, 742 (1920). https://doi.org/10.1038/105742e0

Download citation

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/105742e0

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