The Earth's Shifting Crust by Charles Hapgood - wire of information

CAMPBELL'S MECHANISM 377
termined by the balance of gravity and the centrifugal effect
of the rotation that is, the geoid, or the equipotential surfaces
while perfectly valid as an assumption for many calcula-
tions, was irrelevant for our problem. We feel it must be
conceded that if the conformity of the earth's materials in
general to the balance of the two forces of gravity and rotation,
so as to create the oblate shape of the earth the geoid is im-
portant,
the failure of some of the materials to conform to
this shape is also important. By definition, a mass that is not
isostatically compensated fails to conform to this shape. Thus
the real surface of mass differs from the geoid, and cannot
be called an equipotential surface. We feel that the real "sur-
face of mass" of the earth cannot be disregarded.
In this situation equations are of no use. They will not help
us attain clarity. What is needed instead is a re-examination
of the assumptions on which equations have been made. This
is an intellectual problem of the logical development of ideas,
and corresponds to the process advocated by Maxwell as supe-
rior, in some situations, to calculations. Discussing the intri-
cacies of the mechanics of rotation before the Royal Society,
Maxwell remarked:
... If any further progress is to be made in simplifying and
arranging the theory, it must be by the method that Poinsot has repeatedly
pointed out as the only one that can lead to a true knowledge
of the subject that of proceeding from one distinct idea to an-
other, instead of trusting to symbols and equations (296:24811).
Let us remember that the author of this remark was one
of the greatest mathematical physicists of all time. As such,
he understood the limitations of mathematics, of which the
most essential is that all calculations must be based in the
last analysis on assumptions that consist of clear ideas, logically
expressible in words.
I do not wish to have it seem, however, that I am conced-
ing the point that Mr. Campbell and I have not provided
quantitative solutions. On the contrary, I believe that, on the
basis of the assumptions discussed above, Mr. Campbell has
provided sound and adequate (though approximate) quanti-