To the Editor of the "Nomm-Cuixa Dany News"
Sm—t have read with interest and a certain amount of amusement the correspondence in your newspaper between Me. AM. Ware Srevexs, who a highly qualified mathemailcian. on "the. one. side., and" FATHER Guenzt and Da. Fraxk G, Havcnwour fon the other. both authorities on typhoons and. similar phenomena, Where giants do battle it is, perhaps, dangerous for a mere mortal to interfere. but' cannot help feeling that the protagonists in this battle: royal are arguing at cross purposes. and the average reader may find dif-Geulty in understanding what. all about.
The point raised by Mu. Srevens in the first place was. whether or not, in calculations involved in a problem of this nature, that is, the amount in Chinese dollars it would take 10, generale the energy involved in typhoon. can be accurate to the gree indicated by the figures publish-fed_in Farwen Gutenzt's recently issued Feport on "Typhoons in 1939 and 1040." The gute given is CNSI44.- 221.107250.. This isthe answer to problem worked out. by. Farien Guunzr's collaborator, Mu. Joux Sence Groonim, the particular typhoon Question being that of September 13- 16, 1928, By using available data on the duration of the typhoon. the territory it covered and the amount of moisture it precipitated. the amount of energy liberated can be calculated, The coal required to produce this amount of energy can be calculated, as also can the value of that coal in Chinese dollars, which may be called the cost in money of a typhoon, not taking into account the cost of the damage it does. of course.
In collecting such data as the above one naturally gets certain odd Agures. not figures in round numbers, and tone uses those figures. with the Tesult that the answer comes out in odd figures, not in round numbers. And_in a selentife publication, such as Farnen Guenzt's report, there is no reason why the results of an investigation should not be given exactly. On the contrary, "there is every reason why they should. Mu, Srevexs has objected to this. pointing out that such a degree or accuracy in a problem of this nature is impossible. 'This is undoubtedly. true, but the point being missed is that' the lack of such a degree of accuracy does not lie in the caleulations made by Mu, Gnoooix, but in the original The data on the uration. area covered and amount of precipitation of any given typhoon cannot be absolutely exact, obviously. It can only be approximate. that approximation can approximate exactitude as the extent of the data Increases. this extent in regard generally with which it is in communication is very extensive. However, the fact remains that the data not be accurate to the degree indicated by his figures. But, since he exact figures of his answer.
Of course. if Farmen Gurenzr and his collaborators had been writing a popular article, they would no doubt! have given the cost of the typhoon as roughly so many million dollars. for the public is not particular in such matters. A million more or Jess does not concern it, This discussion reminds me of the height of Mount Everest, which is always given by geographers, and appears so in school text-books as 25.001 feet, I'see that the dictionary fives it as 29,002 fect. That final foot. has always intrigued me. At school when a boy T got into serious trouble with my geography. teacher for questioning it. Yet 1 am told that, according to the Geodetic Survey of India, or whatever is the name fof the institution that takes care of such matters, that odd foot or two fare absolutely correct, and they would not lose them for anything in the world. But. if the readings on your measuring instruments and the aleulations based upon them. give you an odd foot like this. you must Feport it and be ready to fight and if necessary die for its preservation.
Anmiun De C. Sowemy, Shanghai, June 10.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.