Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 6.djvu/560

542

Dr. Robinson here expresses the universally prevalent opinion, and he then assigns the theoretic cause. Fog, he says, "is a mixture of air and globules of water, and, at each of the innumerable surfaces where these two touch, a portion of the vibration is reflected and lost. ... Snow produces a similar effect, and one still more injurious."

Reflection being thus considered to take place at the surfaces of the suspended particles, it followed that the greater the number of particles, or, in other words, the denser the fog, the more injurious would be its action upon sound. Hence optic transparency came to be considered a measure of acoustic transparency. On this point Dr. Robinson, in the letter referred to, expresses himself thus: "At the outset, it is obvious that, to make experiments comparable, we must have some measure of the fog's power of stopping sound, without attending to which the most anomalous results may be expected. It seems probable that this will bear some simple relation to its opacity to light, and that the distance at which a given object, as a flag or pole, disappears, may be taken as the measure.... Still, clear air" was regarded in this letter as the best vehicle of sound, the alleged action of fogs, rain, and snow, being ascribed to their rendering the atmosphere "a discontinuous medium."

Prior to this investigation the views here enunciated were those universally entertained. That sound is unable to penetrate fogs was taken to be "a matter of common observation." The bells and horns of ships were affirmed "not to be heard so far in fogs as in clear weather." In the fogs of London, the noise of the carriage-wheels was reported to be so much diminished that "they seem to be at a distance when really close by." My knowledge does not inform me of the existence of any other source for these opinions regarding the