This study explored the effect of soil water repellency (SWR) on soil hydrophysical properties with depth. Soils were sampled from two distinctly wettable and water repellent soil profiles at depth increments from 0–60 cm. The soils were selected because they appeared to either wet readily (wettable) or remain dry (water repellent) under field conditions. Basic soil properties (MWD, SOM, θ v) were compared to hydrophysical properties (Ks, Sw, Se, Sww, Swh, WDPT, RIc, RIm and WRCT) that characterise or are affected by water repellency. Our results showed both soil and depth affected basic and hydrophysical properties of the soils (p<0.001). Soil organic matter (SOM) was the major property responsible for water repellency at the selected depths (0–60). Water repellency changes affected moisture distribution and resulted in the upper layer (0–40 cm) of the repellent soil to be considerably drier compared to the wettable soil. The water repellent soil also had greater MWDdry and Ks over the entire 0–60 cm depth compared to the wettable soil. Various measures of sorptivity, Sw, Se, Sww, Swh, were greater through the wettable than water repellent soil profile, which was also reflected in field and dry WDPT measurements. However, the wettable soil had subcritical water repellency, so the range of data was used to compare indices of water repellency. WRCT and RIm had less variation compared to WDPT and RIc. Estimating water repellency using WRCT and RIm indicated that these indices can detect the degree of SWR and are able to better classify SWR degree of the subcritical-repellent soil from the wettable soil.
The author notes a lack of response to the work of J. L. Fischer and, using Fischer’s interpretation of Socrates, shows that Fischer deserves critical attention. He first analyses Fischer’s interpretation in terms of content. Fischer’s approach stems from the Scottish school and his analyses can still be productive. However, his idea of a “psychological analysis”, of Socrates proves rather problematic. The author goes on to analyse what Socrates means for Fischer philosophically, noting that fundamental premises of Socrates’ philosophy are exact opposite of the “composable philosophy” Fischer advocates. For Fischer, this means philosophy which can be composed – built up – of discrete observations after the manner of a scientific theory, at least as positivist thinkers conceived of it. Socrates offers a rationalist defence of autocratic rule. T e measure of all things is not the citizen but the expert. On such presuppositions, a general assembly would make no sense. Tus though his study poses as purely historical, Fischer manages to work his way to his central motif, the crisis contemporary democracy challenged by dogma “scientifi c ma¬terialism” which can be neither analysed nor refuted. Socrates is pre¬sented as democracy’s enemy, in wholly contemporary terms. Fischer’s presentation of Socrates, rather like Popper’s reading of Plato, thus re¬flects the experience of the twentieth century.
It is generally known that intensity of the 530.3 nm coronal line depends on tho solar aetivity. The proposed coronal index /Cl/ represents the|530-g nm line irradiance from the whole corona as it seen from the Earth in W8r“^xl0^ . The Cl is derived from daily measured intensities around the disn of the Sun. Maximum
values of the Cl were observed in the second half of the year 1981, just before a deep decrease in the Wolf´s number. Monthly average values of the Cl in the cycle 21 vary from 1,64 to 18,93. The rough comparison of the Cl with similar indices of the UV emissions shows a relative good agreement.
The authors have attempted to elucidate a problem which has widely been discussed in recent years, i. e. the ftuctuation of the solar activity in the past centuries, i. e. from the year 1 000 to the end of the I9th century; for this purpose, they have used a catalogue of auroral observations compiled from all the catalogues (or their corrections) hitherto published, sets of observations and their own supplement of hitherto uncatalogized or unknown observations of the aurorae, extracted from the most various historical sources found in the Czech Lands. The supplement contains 91 aurorae from Bohemia and is presented in Part I. This catalogue gives the ordinal number of the aurora, the date, the description in the original language and the English translation. The world catalogue and its elaboration which regard to long-term variations of aurorae is in Part II, and contains 3 878 northern aurorae from latitudes < 55°N. Part III deals with the relation between the fluctuations of the secular solar activity, in terms of occurrence of aurorae, and the fluctuations of the climate, with particular regard to Central Europe and Bohemia. and Článek převzat z Travaux Géophysiques XXXIII (1985), s. 79-151
The outbursts of cometary brightness háve been attracting the astronomers attention for more than a hundred of years. They play a significant role in the study of physical nature and evolution of comets. An outstanding Soviet astronomer S.K. Vsekhsvyatsky (i)
pointed out the corpuscular fluxes as a plausible factor being responsible for the variation of cometary brightness. He was the
first to suggest that the effect of fragmentation of solar corpuscular fluxes on cometary ices is one of the causes generating the
brightness outbursts.