CHAPTER VII.

COMETS.

At the time of Herschel the ancient superstitions in regard to comets

had to a great extent vanished, thanks mainly to the return of Halley’s

comet in 1758. Yet, although comets had ceased to be objects of terror,

no explanation or rational theory of their nature was put forward until

the appearance of the great comet of 1811. This comet was visible from

March 26, 1811, to August 17, 1812, a period of 510 days. It was one of

the most magnificent comets ever seen, its tail being 100 millions of

miles in length and its head 127,000 miles in diameter. This wonderful

phenomenon was the subject of much investigation, particularly by

Olbers, the great German astronomer.

Heinrich Wilhelm Matthias Olbers was born at Arbergen, a village near

Bremen, October 11, 1758. His father was a clergyman who, in addition to

considerable mathematical powers, was an enthusiastic lover of

astronomy. At the age of thirteen young Olbers became deeply interested

in that science. While taking an evening walk in the month of August, he

observed the Pleiades, and determined to find out to which constellation

they belonged. He therefore bought some books on astronomy, along with a

few charts of the sky, and he began to study the science with much

enthusiasm. He read every book he could lay his hands on, and a few

months sufficed to make him acquainted with all the constellations.

In 1777, when in his nineteenth year, Olbers entered the University of

Göttingen to study medicine, and at the same time he learned much

regarding mathematics and astronomy from the mathematician Kaestner.

When twenty-one years of age he observed the stars at Göttingen, and

devised a method of calculating the orbits of comets, the idea coming to

him while he was attending at the bedside of a fellow-student who had

taken ill. “Although not made public until 1797,” writes Miss Clerke,

“‘Olbers’ method’ was then universally adopted, and is still regarded as

the most expeditious and convenient in cases where absolute rigour is

not required. By its introduction, not only many a toilsome and

thankless hour was spared, but workers were multiplied and encouraged in

the pursuit of labours more useful than attractive.”

Towards the end of 1781 he returned to Bremen, settled as a medical

doctor, and continued in practice for about forty-one years. But

although he had adopted perhaps the most toilsome profession, his love

of science prevailed, and night after night he explored the heavens with

untiring zeal. He never slept more than four hours, and the upper part

of his house in the Sandgasse, in Bremen, was fitted up with

astronomical instruments. The largest telescope which he possessed was a

refractor 3¾ inches in aperture. He remained in active practice till

1823, when he retired, and was enabled to devote more attention to his

beloved science. He died on March 2, 1840, at the advanced age of

eighty-one.

Miss Clerke says of Olbers, “Night after night, during half a century

and upwards, he discovered, calculated, or observed the cometary

visitants of northern skies.” He was the discoverer of the comet of

1815, known as Olbers’ comet. It moves round the Sun in a period of over

seventy years, and returned to perihelion in 1887, forty-seven years

after the death of its discoverer. The great comet of 1811 was the

subject of a memoir which Olbers published the following year, and in

which he originated the “electrical repulsion” theory of comets’ tails.

Even after the fulfilment of Halley’s great prediction, comets were

still looked upon with profound awe, and the popular fear regarding them

was still prevalent. Olbers, however, showed that the tails of comets

resulted from purely natural causes. He regarded the Sun as possessed of

a repulsive as well as an attractive force, and considered the tails to

be vapours repelled from the nucleus of the comet by the Sun. He

calculated that in the comet of 1811 the particles of matter expelled

from the head reached the tail in eleven minutes, with a velocity

comparable to that of light. The theory of electrical repulsion, since

elaborated by other observers, is now generally accepted among

astronomers. No other hypothesis represents in such a complete manner

the formation and growth of the luminous appendages of the celestial

bodies so picturesquely called “pale-winged messengers” as that put

forward by the physician of Bremen.

Some years after Olbers’ famous theory was given to the world, a great

advance was made in cometary astronomy by another great German

astronomer, his friend and pupil Encke. The son of a Hamburg clergyman,

Johann Franz Encke was born in that city in 1791, and died in 1865 at

Spandau. After taking part in the war against Napoleon, he was in 1822

appointed director of the Gotha Observatory, being called to Berlin in

1825. In early life he was the pupil of Olbers and Gauss, and his

investigations and discoveries formed an epoch in astronomy. His most

famous discovery related to the little comet which bears his name. The

comet was discovered by _J. L. Pons_ (1761-1831) at Marseilles, although

it had previously been seen by Méchain and Caroline Herschel. In 1819

Encke computed the orbit of the comet, and boldly announced that it

would reappear in 1822, its period being about 3¼ years, or 1208 days.

In 1822 the comet, true to Encke’s prediction, returned to perihelion,

and was observed at Paramatta in Australia, the perihelion passage

taking place within three hours of the time predicted by Encke. As Miss

Clerke remarks, “The importance of this event will be better understood

when it is remembered that it was only the second instance of the

recognised return of a comet; and that it, moreover, established the

existence of a new class of celestial bodies, distinguished as comets of

short period.”

In 1825 the comet was again observed by Valz, passing perihelion on

September 16, and in 1828 it was seen by Struve. Encke now made a very

remarkable discovery. Determining its period with great accuracy, in

1832 he found that his comet returned to perihelion two and a half hours

before the predicted time. As this repeatedly happened, Encke put

forward the theory that the acceleration was due to the existence of a

resisting medium in the neighbourhood of the Sun, too rarefied to retard

the planetary motions, but quite dense enough to make the comet’s path

smaller, and to eventually precipitate it on the Sun. The theory was

widely accepted, but after 1868 the acceleration began to decrease,

diminishing by one-half; besides, no other comet is thus accelerated,

and the hypothesis has accordingly been abandoned.

The second comet recognised as periodic was that discovered on February

27, 1826, by an Austrian officer, _Wilhelm von Biela_ (1782-1856), and

ten days later by the French observer, _Gambart_ (1800-1836), both of

whom, in computing its orbit, noticed a remarkable similarity to the

orbits of comets which appeared in 1772 and 1805. Accordingly, they

concluded it to be periodic, with a period of between six and seven

years. The comet returned in 1832. In 1828 Olbers had published certain

calculations showing that portions of the comet would sweep over the

part of the Earth’s orbit a month later than the Earth itself. This gave

rise to a panic that the comet would destroy the Earth, which did not

subside till it was announced by Arago that the Earth and the comet

would at no time approach to within fifty million miles of each other.

The comet returned again in the end of 1845. It was kept well in view by

astronomers in Europe and America. On December 19, 1846, Hind noticed

that the comet was pear-shaped, and ten days later it had divided in

two. The two comets returned again in 1852 and were well observed; but

they were never seen again, at least as comets. Their subsequent history

belongs to meteoric astronomy.

A comet discovered by Faye at Paris in 1843 was found to have a period

of seven and a half years. It has returned regularly since its

discovery, true to astronomical prediction. Its motion was particularly

investigated for traces of a resisting medium, by _Didrik Magnus Axel

Möller_ (1830-1896), director of the Lund Observatory, who reached a

negative conclusion.

In 1835 Halley’s comet returned to perihelion, and was attentively

studied by the most famous astronomers of the age. It was particularly

studied by Sir John Herschel and by Bessel, who assisted in developing

Olbers’ theory of electrical repulsion. But the most brilliant comet of

the century was that which suddenly appeared on February 28, 1843, in

the vicinity of the Sun. This great comet, whose centre approached the

Sun within 78,000 miles, rushed past its perihelion at the speed of 366

miles a second. The comet’s tail reached the length of 200 millions of

miles. The comet of 1843 was however outshone, not in brilliance but as

a celestial spectacle, by the great comet discovered on June 2, 1858, by

_Giovanni Battista Donati_ (1826-1873) at Florence, and since known by

his name. It became visible to the naked eye on August 19, and was

telescopically observed until March 4, 1859. There was abundance of

time, therefore, to study the comet, which was exhaustively observed by

G. P. Bond at Harvard. His observations convinced him that the light

from Donati’s comet was merely reflected sunshine, and this was

generally accepted. Another great comet appeared in 1861. Like that of

1843, its appearance was sudden, being observed after sunset on June 30,

1861, when, says Miss Clerke, “a golden yellow planetary disc, wrapt in

dense nebulosity, shone out while the June twilight in these latitudes

was still in its first strength.” On the same evening the Earth and the

Moon passed through the tail of the great comet. The vast majority of

people never knew that such a phenomenon had taken place, and even the

astronomers only noticed a singular phosphorescence in the sky—a proof

of the extreme tenuity of comets.

The first application of the spectroscope to the light of comets was

made by Donati in 1864. The spectrum was found to consist of three

bright bands, but Donati was unable to identify them. However, his

observation gave the death-blow to the theory that comets shone by

reflected light alone, for it implied the existence of glowing gas in

them. On the appearance in 1868 of the periodic comet discovered by

_Friedrich August Theodor Winnecke_ (1835-1897), the spectrum was

examined by Huggins, who identified the bright bands with the spectrum

of hydrocarbon. This was confirmed in regard to Coggia’s comet of 1874

by Huggins himself, and also Brédikhine and Vogel. The hydrocarbon

spectrum is characteristic of comets, and has been recognised in all

those spectroscopically studied.

The time had now come for a more complete theory of comets than that of

Olbers. The theory of electrical repulsion was developed in 1871 by

Zöllner, whose principle of investigation is thus described by Miss

Clerke: “The efficacy of solar electrical repulsion relatively to solar

attraction grows as the size of the particle diminishes.” If the

particle is small enough, it will obey the repulsive, and not the

attractive, power of the Sun. Zöllner considered that the smallest

particles of comets obeyed the repulsive power, and thus formed the

tails of comets. The development of a complete cometary theory is due,

however, to the genius of a Russian astronomer. Theodor Alexandrovitch

Brédikhine, born in 1831 at Nicolaieff, was employed at Moscow

Observatory from 1857 to 1890, when he was promoted to the position of

director at Pulkowa. He resigned in 1895, and spent his last years in St

Petersburg, where he died on May 14, 1904. From the beginning of his

astronomical career he was devoted to the study of comets and their

tails, but it was the appearance of Coggia’s comet in 1874 which marked

the commencement of his most important observations. In that year, on

making certain calculations regarding the hypothetical repulsive force

exerted by the Sun on various comets, he reached the conclusion that the

values representing the intensity of the repulsion fell into three

classes. This was the first hint of a classification of cometary tails.

Meanwhile he carefully studied the tails of comets both from direct

observation and from drawings.

In 1877 he wrote: “I suspect that comets are divisible into groups, for

each of which the repulsive force is perhaps the same.” Subsequent

investigations led Brédikhine to divide the tails of comets into three

types. The first type consists of long, straight tails, pointed directly

away from the Sun, represented by the tails of the great comets of 1811,

1843, and 1861. In the second type, represented by Donati’s and Coggia’s

comets, the tails, although pointed away from the Sun, appear

considerably curved. In the third type the tails are, to quote Miss

Clerke, “short, strongly-bent, brushlike emanations, and in bright

comets seem to be only found in combination with tails of the higher

classes.”

In 1879 Brédikhine fully developed his cometary theory. Assuming the

reality of the repulsive force, he concluded that to produce tails of

the first type, the repulsion requires to be twelve times greater than

the solar attraction; the production of tails of the second type

necessitates a repulsive force about equal to gravity; while the force

producing third-type tails has only one-fourth the power of gravitation.

It was concluded that the tails are formed by particles of matter

repelled from the comet by the repulsive force of the Sun, and in tails

of the first type the velocity with which these particles leave the body

of the comet is four or five miles a second. Brédikhine reached the

conclusion that the Sun’s repulsive force is invariable, and that the

different types of tails are formed by the same force acting on

different elements. The numbers 12, 1, and ¼, are inversely proportional

to the atomic weights of hydrogen, hydrocarbon gas, and iron vapour.

Here, then, was the key to the mystery. Brédikhine pointed out that in

all probability the first-type tails are formed of hydrogen, the second

of hydrocarbon, and the third of iron, with a mixture of sodium and

other elements.

Within a few years of the publication of Brédikhine’s theory, five

bright comets made their appearance, and there was abundant chance of

testing the theory spectroscopically. In 1882 Well’s comet was

particularly studied at Greenwich by Maunder, who discerned a

sodium-line in its spectrum. The magnificent comet which appeared in

1882 was spectroscopically studied at Dunecht in Aberdeenshire by _Ralph

Copeland_ (1837-1905), Astronomer-Royal of Scotland, who identified in

its spectrum the prominent iron-lines as well as the sodium-line. These

observations were certainly confirmatory of Brédikhine’s theory. It

should also be stated, however, that several comets have shown, in

addition to the hydrocarbon spectrum, that of reflected sunlight, which

proves that the light we receive from comets is of a compound nature.

The comet which appeared in 1880 was announced by _Benjamin Apthorp

Gould_ (1824-1896) to be a return of the great comet of 1843.

Calculations by Gould, Copeland, and Hind revealed a close similarity

between the elements of the two orbits. Eventually it had to be admitted

that the comets were separate bodies travelling in the same orbit. Then,

two years later, the great September comet of 1882 was found to revolve

in the same orbit as those of 1668, 1843, and 1880. Four years later,

another comet, discovered in 1887, was found to move in the same path.

Closely allied to this subject is the existence of “comet families,”

demonstrated by Hoek of Utrecht in 1865, and mentioned in our chapter on

the Outer Planets. These comets are found to be dependent on the

planets, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, each possessing a

comet-group. Various theories have been advanced to account for the

existence of these groups. One of these theories is that the comets have

been captured by the various planets, who have forced them into their

present orbits. A mathematical study by _Jean Pierre Octave Callandrean_

(1852-1904) shows that the large number of comets possessed by the

various planets may be explained by the disintegration of large comets

into small ones. The capture theory, it must be remembered, is purely

hypothetical, and must not be regarded as anything but a theory. All

that we really know is the existence of comet-families, and of comets

moving in the same orbits.

The first photograph of a comet was that of Donati’s, taken in 1858 by

Bond. In 1881 Tebbutt’s comet was photographed in England by Huggins,

and in America by _Henry Draper_ (1837-1882), while in 1882 Gill secured

excellent photographs of the great September comet. The first

photographic discovery of a comet was made by Barnard in 1892. Since

then photography has been much used in cometary astronomy. No bright

comets have appeared since 1882,—if we except the comet of 1901, only

seen in the southern hemisphere,—although several have been just visible

to the naked eye, among them Swift’s comet of 1892 and Perrine’s in the

autumn of 1902. Telescopic comets, however, are very numerous, and a

year never passes without one or more being discovered. The ordinary

periodic comets, such as Encke’s, Faye’s, and others, are very faint,

and are becoming fainter at each return—a clear proof that comets die,

as Kepler said three centuries ago. This brings us to the subject of the

next chapter, Meteoric Astronomy.

A Century's Progress in Astronomy · 第 7 / 13 章