Cosmos: A Sketch of the Physical Description of the Universe Part 8

[footnote] *Arago, 'Annuaire', 1832, p. 209, 211. The phenomenon of the tail of a comet being visible in bright suns.h.i.+ne, which is recorded of the comet of 1402, occurred again in the case of the large comet of 1843, whose nucleus and tail were seen in North America on the 28th of February (according to the testimony of J. G. Clarke, of Portland, state of Maine), between 1 and 3 o'clock in the afternoon.(a) The distance of the very dense nucleus from the sun's light admitted of being measured with much exactness.

The nucleus and tail appeared like a very pure white cloud, a darker s.p.a.ce intervening between the tail and the nucleus. ('Amer. Journ. of Science', vol. xiv., No. 1, p. 229.)

[footnote] (a) [The translator was at New Bedford, Ma.s.sachusetts, U.S., on the 28th February, 1843, and distinctly saw the comet, between 1 and 2 in the afternoon. The sky at the time was intensely blue, and the sun s.h.i.+ning with a dazzling brightness unknown in European climates.] -- Tr

This latter circ.u.mstance indicates, in particular individuals, a denser ma.s.s, capable of reflecting light with greater intensity. Even in Herschel's large telescope, only two comets, that discovered in Sicily in 1807, and the splendid one of 1811, exhibited well-defined disks;* the one at an angle of 1 second, and the other at 0.77 seconds, whence the true diameters are a.s.sumed to be 536 and 428 miles.

[footnote] *'Phil. Trans.' for 1808, Part ii., p. 155, and for 1812, Part i., p. 118. The diameters found by Herschel for the nuclei were 538 and 428 English miles. For the magnitudes of the comets of 1798 and 1805, see Arago, 'Annuaire', 1832, p. 203.

The diameters of the less well-defined nuclei of the comets of 1798 and 1805 did not appear to exceed 24 or 28 miles.

In several comets that have been investigated with great care, especially in the above-named one of 1811, which continued visible for so long a period, the nucleus and its nebulous envelope were entirely separated from the tail by a darker s.p.a.ce. The intensity of light in the nucleus of comets does not augment toward the center in any uniform degree, brightly s.h.i.+ning zones being in many cases separated by concentric nebulous envelopes. The tails sometimes appear single, sometimes, although more rarely, double; and in the comets of 1807 and 1843 the branches were of different lengths; in one instance (1744) the tail had six branches, the whole forming an angle of 60 degrees. The tails have been sometimes straight, sometimes curved, either toward both sides, or toward the side appearing to us as the exterior (as in 1811), or convex toward the direction in which the comet is moving (as in that of 1618); and sometimes the tail has even appeared like a flame in motion. The tails are always turned away from the sun, so that their line of prolongation pa.s.ses through its center; a fact which, according to Edward Biot, was noticed by the Chinese astronomers as early as 837, but was first generally made known in Europe by Fracastoro and Peter Apian in the sixteenth century. These emanations may be regarded as conoidal envelopes of greater of less thickness, p 102 and, considered in this manner, they furnish a simple explanation of many of the remarkable optical phenomena already spoken of.

Comets are not only characteristically different in form, some being entirely without a visible tail, while others have a tail of immense length (as in the instance of the comet of 1618, whose tail measured 104 degrees), but we also see the same comets undergoing successive and rapidly-changing processes of configuration. These variations of form have been most accurately and admirably described in the comet of 1744, by Hensius, at St.

Petersburg, and in Halley's comet, on its last reappearance in 1835, by Bessel, at Konigsberg. A more or less well-defined tuft of rays emanated from that part of the nucleus which was turned toward the Sun; and the rays being bent backward, formed a part of the tail. The nucleus of Halley's comet; with its emanations, presented the appearance of a burning rocket, the end of which was turned sideways by the force of the wind. The rays issuing from the head were seen by Arago and myself, at the Observatory at Paris, to a.s.sume very different forms on successive nights.*

[footnote] *Arago, 'Des Changements physiques de la Comete de Halley du 15-23 Oct., 1835. 'Annuaire', 1836, p. 218, 221. The ordinary direction of the emanations was noticed even in Nero's time. "Comae radios solis effugiunt." -- Seneca, 'Nat. Quaest.', vii., 20.

The great Konigsberg astronomer concluded from many measurements, and from theoretical considerations, "that the cone of light issuing from the comet deviated considerably both to the right and the left of the true direction of the Sun, but that it always returned to that direction, and pa.s.sed over to the opposite side, so that both the cone of light and the body of the comet from whence it emanated experienced a rotatory, or, rather, a vibratory motion in the plane of the orbit." He finds that "the attractive force exercised by the Sun on heavy bodies is inadequate to explain such vibrations, and is of opinion that they indicate a polar force, which turns one semi-diameter of the comet toward the Sun, and strives to turn the opposite side away from that luminary. The magnetic polarity possessed by the Earth may present some a.n.a.logy to this, and, should the Sun have an opposite polarity, an influence might be manifested, resulting in the precession of the equinoxes." This is not the place to enter more fully upon the grounds on which explanations of this subject have been based; but observations so remarkable,* and views of so exalted p 103 a character, regarding the most wonderful cla.s.s of the cosmical bodies belonging to our solar system, ought not to be entirely pa.s.sed over in this sketch of a general picture of nature.

[footnote] *Bessel, in Schumacher, 'Astr. Nachr.', 1836, No. 300-302, s.

188, 192, 197, 200, 202, und 230. Also in Schumacher, 'Jahrb.', 1837, s.

149, 168. William Herschel, in his observations on the beautiful comet of 1811, believed that he had discovered evidences of the rotation of the nucleus and tail ('Phil. Trans.' for 1812, Part i., p. 140). Dunlop, at Paramatta thought the same with reference to the third comet of 1825.

Although, as a rule, the tails of comets increase in magnitude and brilliancy in the vicinity of the sun, and are directed away from that central body, yet the comet of 1823 offered the remarkable example of two tails, one of which was turned toward the sun, and the other away from it, forming with each other an angle of 160 degrees. Modifications of polarity and the unequal manner of its distribution, and of the direction in which it is conducted, may in this rare instance have occasioned a double, unchecked, continuous emanation of nebulous matter.*

[footnote] *Bessel, in 'Astr. Nachr.', 1836, No. 302, s. 231. Schum, 'Jahrb.', 1837 s. 175. See, also Lehmann, 'Ueber Cometenschweife' (On the Tails of Comets), in Bode, 'Astron. Jahrb. fur' 1826, s. 168.

Aristotle, in his 'Natural Philosophy', makes these emanations the means of bringing the phenomena of comets into a singular connection with the existence of the Milky Way. According to his views, the innumerable quant.i.ty of stars which compose this starry zone give out a self-luminous, incandescent matter. The nebulous belt which separates the different portions of the vault of heaven was therefore regarded by the Stagirite as a large comet, the substance of which was incessantly being renewed.*

[footnote] *Aristot., 'Meteor.', i., 8, 11-14, und 19-21 (ed. Ideler, t.

i., p. 32-34). Biese, 'Phil. des Aristoteles', bd. ii., s. 86. Since Aristotle exercised so great an influence throughout the whole of the Middle Ages, it is very much to be regretted that he was so averse to those grander views of the elder Pythagoreans, which inculcated ideas so nearly approximating to truth respecting the structure of the universe. He a.s.serts that comets are transitory meteors belonging to our atmosphere in the very book in which he cites the opinion of the Pythagorean school, according to which these cosmical bodies are supposed to be planets having long periods of revolution. (Aristot., i., 6, 2.) This Pythagorean doctrine, which, according to the testimony of Apollonius Myndius, was still more ancient, having originated with the Chaldeans, pa.s.sed over to the Romans, who in this instance, as was their usual practice, were merely the copiers of others.

The Myndian philosopher describes the path of comets as directed toward the upper and remote regions of heaven. Hence Seneca says, in his 'Nat.

Quaest.', vii., 17: "Cometes non est species falsa, sed proprium sidus sicut solis et lunae: altiora mundi secat et tunc demum apparet quum in imum cursum sui venit;" and again (at vii., 27), "Cometes aternos esse et sortis ejusdem, cujus caetera (sidera), etiamsi faciem illis non habent similem." Pliny (ii., 25) also refers to Apollonius Myndius, when he says, "Sunt qui et haec sidera perpetua esse credant suoque ambitu ire, sed non nisi relicta a sole cerni."

p 104 The occulation of the fixed stars by the nucleus of a comet, or by its innermost vaporous envelopes, might throw some light on the physical character of these wonderful bodies; but we are unfortunately deficient in observations by which we may be a.s.sured* that the occulation was perfectly central; for, as it has already been observed, the parts of the envelope contiguous to the nucleus are alternately composed of layers of dense or very attenuated vapor.

[footnote] *Olbers, in 'Astr. Nachr.', 1828, s. 157, 184. Arago, 'De la Const.i.tution physique des Cometes; Annuaire de' 1832, p. 203, 208. The ancients were struck by the phenomenon that it was possible to see through comets as through a flame. The earliest evidence to be met with of stars having been seen through comets is that of Democritus (Aristot., 'Meteor.', i., 6, 11), and the statement leads Aristotle to make the not unimportant remark, that he himself had observed the occulation of one of the stars of Gemini by Jupiter. Seneca only speaks decidedly of the transparence of the tail of comets. "We may see," says he, "stars through a comet as through a cloud ('Nat. Quaest.', vii., 18); but we can ony see through the rays of the tail, and not through the body of the comet itself: 'non in ea parte qua sidus ipsum est sp.i.s.si et solidi ignis, sed qua rarus splendor occurrit et in crines dispergitur. Per intervalla ignium, non er ipsos, vides" (vii., 26). The last remark is unnecessary, since, as Galileo observed in the 'Saggiatore (Lettera a Monsignor Cesarini', 1619), we can certainly see through a flame when it is not of too great a thickness'.

On the other hand the carefully conducted measurements of Bessel prove, beyond all doubt, that on the 29th of September, 1835, the light of a star of the tenth magnitude, which was then at a distance of 7".78 from the central point of the head of Halley's comet, pa.s.sed through very dense nebulous matter, without experiencing any deflection during its pa.s.sage.*

[footnote] *Bessel, in the 'Astron. Nachr.', 1836, No. 301, s. 204, 206.

Struve, in 'Recueil des Mem. de l'Acad. de St. Peterab.', 1836, p. 140, 143, and 'Astr. Nachr.', 1836, No. 303, s. 238, writes as follows: "At Dorpat the star was in conjunction only 2".2 from the brightest point of the comet.

The star remained continually visible, and its light was not perceptibly diminished, while the nucleus of the comet seemed to be almost extinguished before the radiance of the small star of the ninth or tenth magnitude."

If such an absence of refracting power must be ascribed to the nucleus of a comet, we can scarcely regard the matter composing comets as a gaseous fluid. The question here arises whether this absence of refracting power may not be owing to the extreme tenuity of the fluid; or does the comet consist of separated particles, const.i.tuting a cosmical stratum of clouds, which, like the clouds of our atmosphere, that exercise no influence on the p 105 zenith distance of the stars, does not affect the ray of light pa.s.sing through it? In the pa.s.sage of a comet over a star, a more or less considerable diminution of light has often been observed; but this has been justly ascribed to the brightness of the ground from which the star seems to stand forth during the pa.s.sage of the comet.

The most important and decisive observations that we possess on the nature and the light of comets are due to Arago's polarization experiments. His polariscope instructs us regarding the physical const.i.tution of the Sun and comets, indicating whether a ray that reaches us from a distance of many millions of miles transmits light directly or by reflection; and if the former, whther the source of light is a solid, a liquid, or a gaseous body.

His apparatus was used at the Paris Observatory in examining the light of Capella and that of the great comet of 1819. The latter showed polarized, and therefore reflected light, while the fixed star, as was to be expected, appeared to be a self-luminous sun.*

[footnote] *On the 3d of July, 1819, Arago made the first attempt to a.n.a.lyze the light of comets by polarization, on the evening of the sudden appearance of the great comet. I was present at the Paris Observatory, and was fully convinced, as were also Matthieu and the late Bouvard of the dissimilarity in the intensity of the light seen in the polariscope, when the instrument received cometary light. When it received light from Capella, which was near the comet, and at an equal alt.i.tude, the images were of equal intensity. On the reappearance of Halley's comet in 1835, the instrument was altered so as to give, according to Arago's chromatic polarization, two images of complementary colors (green and red). ('Annales de Chimie', t. xiii., p. 108; 'Annuaire', 1832, p. 216.) "We must conclude from these observations," says Arago, "that the cometary light was not entirely composed of rays having the properties of direct light, there being light which was reflected specularly or polarized, that is, coming from the sun. It can not be stated with absolute certainty that comets s.h.i.+ne only with borrowed light, for bodies, in becoming self-luminous, do not, on that account, lose the power of reflecting foreign light."

The existance of polarized cometary light announced itself not only by the inequality of the images, but was proved with greater certainty on the reappearance of Halley's comet, in the year 1835, by the more striking contrast of the complementary colors, deduced from the laws of chromatic polarization discovered by Arago in 1811. These beautiful experiments still leave it undecided whether, in addition to this reflected solar light, comets may not have light of their own. Even in the case of the planets, as, for instance, in Venus, an evolution of independent light seems very probable.

The variable intensity of light in comets can not always be p 106 explained by the position of their orbits and their distance from the Sun.

It would seem to indicate, in some individuals, the existence of an inherent process of condensation, and an increased or diminished capacity of reflecting borrowed light. In the comet of 1618, and in that which has a period of three years, it was observed first by Hevelius that the nucleus of the comet diminished at its perihelion and enlarged at its aphelion, a fact which, after remaining long unheeded, was again noticed by the talented astronomer Valz at Nismes. The regularity of the change of volume, according to the different degrees of distance from the Sun, appears very striking. The physical explanation of the phenomenon can not, however, be sought in the condensed layers of cosmical vapor occurring in the vicinity of the Sun, since it is difficult to imagine the nebulous envelope of the nucleus of the comet to be vesicular and impervious to the other.*

[footnote] *Arago, in the 'Annuaire', 1832, p. 217-220. Sir John Herschel, 'Astron.', 488.

The dissimilar eccentricity of the orbits of comets has, in recent times (1819), in the most brilliant manner enriched our knowledge of the solar system. Encke has discovered the existence of a comet of so short a period of revolution that it remains entirely within the limits of our planetary system, attaining its aphelion between the orbits of the smaller planets and that of Jupiter. Its eccentricity must be a.s.sumed at 0.845, that of Juno (which has the greatest eccentricity of any of the planets) being 0.255.

Encke's comet has several times, although with difficulty, been observed by the naked eye, as in Europe in 1819, and according to Rumker, in New Holland in 1822. Its period of revolution is about 3 1/3d years; but, from a careful comparison of the epochs of its return to its perihelion, the remarkable fact has been discovered that these periods have diminished in the most regular manner between the years 1786 and 1838, the diminution amounting, in the course of 52 years, to about 1 3/10th days. The attempt to bring into unison the results of observation and calculation in the investigation of all the planetary disturbances, with the view of explaining this phenomenon, has led to the adoption of the very probable hypothesis that there exists dispersed in s.p.a.ce a vaporous substance capable of acting as a resisting medium. This matter diminished the tangential force, and with it the major axis of the comet's...o...b..t. The value of the constant of the resistance appears to be somewhat different before and after the perihelion; and this may, perhaps, be ascribed p 107 to the altered form of the small nebulous star in the vicinity of the Sun, and to the action of the unequal density of the strata of cosmical ether.*

[footnote] *Encke, in the 'Astronomiche Nachrichten', 1843, No. 489, s.

130-132.

These facts, and the investigations to which they have led, belong to the most interesting results of modern astronomy. Encke's comet has been the means of leading astronomers to a more exact investigation of Jupiter's ma.s.s (a most important point with reference to the calculation of perturbations); and, more recently, the course of this comet has obtained for us the first determination, although only an approximative one, of a smaller ma.s.s for Mercury.

The discovery of Encke's comet, which had a period of only 3 1/3d years, was speedily followed, in 1826, by that of another, Biela's comet, whose period of revolution is 6 3/4th years, and which is likewise planetary, having its aphelion beyond the orbit of Jupiter, but within that of Saturn. It has a fainter light than Encke's comet, and, like the latter, its motion is direct, while Halley's comet moves in a course opposite to that pursued by the planets. Biela's comet presents the first certain example of the orbit of a comet intersecting that of the Earth. This position, with reference to our planet, may therefore be productive of danger, if we can a.s.sociate an idea of danger with so extraordinary a natural phenomenon, whose history presents no parallel, and the results of which we are consequently unable correctly to estimate. Small ma.s.ses endowed with enormous velocity may certainly exercise a considerable power; but Laplace has shown that the ma.s.s of the comet of 1770 is probably not equal to 1/5000th that of the Earth, or about 1/2000th that of the Moon.*

[footnote] *Laplace, 'Expos. du Syst. du Monde', p. 216, 237.

We must not confound the pa.s.sage of Biela's comet through the Earth's...o...b..t with its proximity to, or collision with our globe. When this pa.s.sage took place, on the 29th of October, 1832, it required a full month before the Earth would reach the point of intersection of the two orbits. These two comets of short periods of revolution also intersect each other, and it has been justly observed,* that amid the many perturbations experienced by such small bodies from the largr planets, there is a 'possibility' -- supposing a meeting of these comets to occur in October -- that the inhabitants of the Earth may witness the extraordinary spectacle of an encounter between two cosmical bodies, and possibly of their reciprocal penetration and amalgamation, or of their destruction by means of exhausting emanations.

[footnote] *Littrow, 'Beschreibende Astron.', 1835, s. 274. On the inner comet recently discovered by M. Faye, at the Observatory of Paris, and whose eccentricity is 0.551, its distance at its perihelion 1.690, and its distance at its aphelion 5.832, see Schumacher, 'Astron. Nachr.', 1844, No.

495. Regarding the supposed ident.i.ty of the comet of 1766 with the third comet of 1819, see 'Astr. Nachr.', 1833, No. 239; and on the ident.i.ty of the comet of 1743 and the fourth comet of 1819, see No. 237 or the last mentioned work.