The next return took place in 1607, when the comet was observed by

Kepler. This astronomer first saw it on the evening of the twenty-sixth

of September, when it had the appearance of a star of the first

magnitude, and, to his vision, was without a tail; but the friends who

accompanied him had better sight, and distinguished the tail. Before

three o'clock the following morning the tail had become clearly visible,

and had acquired great magnitude. Two days afterwards, the comet was

observed by Longomontanus, a distinguished philosopher of the time. He

describes its appearance, to the naked eye, to be like Jupiter, but of a

paler and more obscured light; that its tail was of considerable length,

of a paler light than that of the head, and more dense than the tails of

ordinary comets.

The next appearance, and that which was observed by Halley himself, took

place in 1682, a little before the publication of the '_Principia_.' In

the interval between 1607 and 1682, practical astronomy had made great

advances; instruments of observation had been brought to a state of

comparative perfection; numerous observatories had been established, and

the management of them had been confided to the most eminent men in

Europe. In 1682, the scientific world was therefore prepared to examine

the visitor of our system with a degree of care and accuracy before

unknown.

In the year 1686, about four years afterwards, Newton published his

'_Principia_,' in which he applied to the comet of 1680 the general

principles of physical investigation first promulgated in that work. He

explained the method of determining, by geometrical construction, the

visible portion of the path of a body of this kind, and invited

astronomers to apply these principles to the various recorded

comets,--to discover whether some among them might not have appeared at

different epochs, the future returns of which might consequently be

predicted. Such was the effect of the force of analogy upon the mind of

Newton, that, without awaiting the discovery of a periodic comet, he

boldly assumed these bodies to be analogous to planets in their

revolution round the sun.

Extraordinary as these conjectures must have appeared at the time, they

were soon strictly realized. Halley, who was then a young man, but

possessed one of the best minds in England, undertook the labor of

examining the circumstances attending all the comets previously

recorded, with a view to discover whether any, and which of them,

appeared to follow the same path. Antecedently to the year 1700, four

hundred and twenty-five of these bodies had been recorded in history;

but those which had appeared before the fourteenth century had not been

submitted to any observations by which their paths could be

ascertained,--at least, not with a sufficient degree of precision, to

afford any hope of identifying them with those of other comets.

Subsequently to the year 1300, however, Halley found twenty-four comets

on which observations had been made and recorded, with a degree of

precision sufficient to enable him to calculate the actual paths which

these bodies followed while they were visible. He examined, with the

most elaborate care, the _courses_ of each of these twenty-four bodies;

he found the exact points at which each one of them crossed the

ecliptic, or their _nodes_; also the angle which the direction of their

motion made with that plane,--that is, the _inclination of their

orbits_; he also calculated the nearest distance at which each of them

approached the sun, or their _perihelion distance_; and the exact place

of the body when at that nearest point,--that is, the _longitude of the

perihelion_. These particulars are called the _elements_ of a comet,

because, when ascertained, they afford sufficient data for determining a

comet's path. On comparing these paths, Halley found that one, which had

appeared in 1661, followed nearly the same path as one which had

appeared in 1532. Supposing, then, these to be two successive

appearances of the same comet, it would follow, that its period would be

one hundred and twenty-nine years, reckoning from 1661. Had this

conjecture been well founded, the comet must have appeared about the

year 1790. No comet, however, appeared at or near that time, following a

similar path.

In his second conjecture, Halley was more fortunate, as indeed might be

expected, since it was formed upon more conclusive grounds. He found

that the paths of comets which had appeared in 1531 and 1607 were nearly

identical, and that they were in fact the same as the path followed by

the comet observed by himself in 1682. He suspected, therefore, that the

appearances at these three epochs were produced by three successive

returns of the same comet, and that, consequently, its period in its

orbit must be about seventy-five and a half years. The probability of

this conclusion is strikingly exhibited to the eye, by presenting the

elements in a tabular form, from which it will at once be seen how

nearly they correspond at these regular intervals.

=====================================================================

Time.|Inclination of|Long. of the |Long. Per.|Per. Dist. |Course.

|the orbit. |node. | | |

=====================================================================

1456 | 17°56´ | 48°30´ |301°00´ | 0°58´ |Retrograde.

1531 | 17 56 | 49 25 |301 39 | 0 57 | "

1607 | 17 02 | 50 21 |302 16 | 0 58 | "

1682 | 17 42 | 50 48 |301 36 | 0 58 | "

=====================================================================

So little was the scientific world, at this time, prepared for such an

announcement, that Halley himself only ventured at first to express his

opinion in the form of conjecture; but, after some further investigation

of the circumstances of the recorded comets, he found three which, at

least in point of time, agreed with the period assigned to the comet of

1682. Collecting confidence from these circumstances, he announced his

discovery as the result of observation and calculation combined, and

entitled to as much confidence as any other consequence of an

established physical law.

There were, nevertheless, two circumstances which might be supposed to

offer some difficulty. First, the intervals between the supposed

successive returns were not precisely equal; and, secondly, the

inclination of the comet's path to the plane of the earth's orbit was

not exactly the same in each case. Halley, however, with a degree of

sagacity which, considering the state of knowledge at the time, cannot

fail to excite unqualified admiration, observed, that it was natural to

suppose that the same causes which disturbed the planetary motions must

likewise act upon comets; and that their influence would be so much the

more sensible upon these bodies, because of their great distances from

the sun. Thus, as the attraction of Jupiter for Saturn was known to

affect the velocity of the latter planet, sometimes retarding and

sometimes accelerating it, according to their relative position, so as

to affect its period to the extent of thirteen days, it might well be

supposed, that the comet might suffer by a similar attraction an effect

sufficiently great, to account for the inequality observed in the

interval between its successive returns: and also for the variation to

which the direction of its path upon the plane of the ecliptic was found

to be subject. He observed, in fine, that, as in the interval between

1607 and 1682, the comet passed so near Jupiter that its velocity must

have been augmented, and consequently its period shortened, by the

action of that planet, this period, therefore, having been only

seventy-five years, he inferred that the following period would probably

be seventy-six years, or upwards; and consequently, that the comet ought

not to be expected to appear until the end of 1758, or the beginning of

1759. It is impossible to imagine any quality of mind more enviable than

that which, in the existing state of mathematical physics, could have

led to such a prediction. The imperfect state of mathematical science

rendered it impossible for Halley to offer to the world a demonstration

of the event which he foretold. The theory of gravitation, which was in

its infancy in the time of Halley's investigations, had grown to

comparative maturity before the period at which his prediction could be

fulfilled. The exigencies of that theory gave birth to new and more

powerful instruments of mathematical inquiry: the differential and

integral calculus, or the science of fluxions, as it is sometimes

called,--a branch of the mathematics, expressed by algebraic symbols,

but capable of a much higher reach, as an instrument of investigation,

than either algebra or geometry,--was its first and greatest offspring.

This branch of science was cultivated with an ardor and success by

which it was enabled to answer all the demands of physics, and it

contributed largely to the advancement of mechanical science itself,

building upon the laws of motion a structure which has since been

denominated 'Celestial Mechanics.' Newton's discoveries having obtained

reception throughout the scientific world, his inquiries and his

theories were followed up; and the consequences of the great principle

of universal gravitation were rapidly developed. Since, according to

this doctrine, _every body in nature attracts and is attracted by every

other body_, it follows, that the comet was liable to be acted on by

each of the planets, as well as by the sun,--a circumstance which

rendered its movements much more difficult to follow, than would be the

case were it subject merely to the projectile force and to the solar

attraction. To estimate the time it would take for a ship to cross the

Atlantic would be an easy task, were she subject to only one constant

wind; but to estimate, beforehand, the exact influence which all other

winds and the tides might have upon her passage, some accelerating and

some retarding her course, would present a problem of the greatest

difficulty. Clairaut, however, a celebrated French mathematician,

undertook to estimate the effects that would be produced on Halley's

comet by the attractions of all the planets. His aim was to investigate

_general rules_, by which the computation could be made arithmetically,

and hand them over to the practical calculator, to make the actual

computations. Lalande, a practical astronomer, no less eminent in his

own department, and who indeed first urged Clairaut to this inquiry,

undertook the management of the astronomical and arithmetical part of

the calculation. In this prodigious labor (for it was one of most

appalling magnitude) he was assisted by the wife of an eminent

watchmaker in Paris, named Lepaute, whose exertions on this occasion

have deservedly registered her name in astronomical history.

It is difficult to convey to one who is not conversant with such

investigations, an adequate notion of the labor which such an inquiry

involved. The calculation of the influence of any one _planet_ of the

system upon any other is itself a problem of some complexity and

difficulty; but still, one general computation, depending upon the

calculation of the terms of a certain series, is sufficient for its

solution. This comparative simplicity arises entirely from two

circumstances which characterize the planetary orbits. These are, that,

though they are ellipses, they differ very slightly from circles; and

though the planets do not move in the plane of the ecliptic, yet none of

them deviate considerably from that plane. But these characters do not

belong to the orbits of comets, which, on the contrary, are highly

eccentric, and make all possible angles with the ecliptic. The

consequence of this is, that the calculation of the disturbances

produced in the cometary orbits by the action of the planets must be

conducted not like the planets, in one general calculation applicable to

the whole orbits, but in a vast number of separate calculations; in

which the orbit is considered, as it were, bit by bit, each bit

requiring a calculation similar to the whole orbit of the planet. Now,

when it is considered that the period of Halley's comet is about

seventy-five years, and that every portion of its course, for two

successive periods, was necessary to be calculated separately in this

way, some notion may be formed of the labor encountered by Lalande and

Madame Lepaute. "During six months," says Lalande, "we calculated from

morning till night, sometimes even at meals; the consequence of which

was, that I contracted an illness which changed my constitution for the

remainder of my life. The assistance rendered by Madame Lepaute was

such, that, without her, we never could have dared to undertake this

enormous labor, in which it was necessary to calculate the distance of

each of the two planets, Jupiter and Saturn, from the comet, and their

attraction upon that body, separately, for every successive degree, and

for one hundred and fifty years."

The attraction of a body is proportioned to its quantity of matter.

Therefore, before the attraction exerted upon the comet by the several

planets within whose influence it might fall, could be correctly

estimated, it was necessary to know the mass of each planet; and though

the planets had severally been weighed by methods supplied by Newton's

'Principia,' yet the estimate had not then attained the same measure of

accuracy as it has now reached; nor was it certain that there was not

(as it has since appeared that there actually was) one or more planets

beyond Saturn, whose attractions might likewise influence the motions of

the comet. Clairaut, making the best estimate he was able, under all

these disadvantages, of the disturbing influence of the planets, fixed

the return of the comet to the place of its nearest distance from the

sun on the fourth of April, 1759.

In the successive appearances of the comet, subsequently to 1456, it was

found to have gradually decreased in magnitude and splendor. While in

1456 it reached across one third part of the firmament, and spread

terror over Europe, in 1607, its appearance, when observed by Kepler and

Longomontanus, was that of a star of the first magnitude; and so

trifling was its tail that, Kepler himself, when he first saw it,

doubted whether it had any. In 1682, it excited little attention, except

among astronomers. Supposing this decrease of magnitude and brilliancy

to be progressive, Lalande entertained serious apprehensions that on its

expected return it might be so inconsiderable, as to escape the

observation even of astronomers; and thus, that this splendid example

of the power of science, and unanswerable proof of the principle of

gravitation, would be lost to the world.

It is not uninteresting to observe the misgivings of this distinguished

astronomer with respect to the appearance of the body, mixed up with his

unshaken faith in the result of the astronomical inquiry. "We cannot

doubt," says he, "that it will return; and even if astronomers cannot

see it, they will not therefore be the less convinced of its presence.

They know that the faintness of its light, its great distance, and

perhaps even bad weather, may keep it from our view. But the world will

find it difficult to believe us; they will place this discovery, which

has done so much honor to modern philosophy, among the number of chance

predictions. We shall see discussions spring up again in colleges,

contempt among the ignorant, terror among the people; and seventy-six

years will roll away, before there will be another opportunity of

removing all doubt."

Fortunately for science, the arrival of the expected visitor did not

take place under such untoward circumstances. As the commencement of the

year 1759 approached, "astronomers," says Voltaire, "hardly went to bed

at all." The honor, however, of the first glimpse of the stranger was

not reserved for the possessors of scientific rank, nor for the members

of academies or universities. On the night of Christmas-day, 1758,

George Palitzch, of Politz, near Dresden,--"a peasant," says Sir John

Herchel, "by station, an astronomer by nature," first saw the comet.

An astronomer of Leipzic found it soon after; but, with the mean

jealousy of a miser, he concealed his treasure, while his contemporaries

throughout Europe were vainly directing their anxious search after it to

other quarters of the heavens. At this time, Delisle, a French

astronomer, and his assistant, Messier, who, from his unweared assiduity

in the pursuit of comets, was called the _Comet-Hunter_, had been

constantly engaged, for eighteen months, in watching for the return of

Halley's comet. Messier passed his life in search of comets. It is

related of him, that when he was in expectation of discovering a comet,

his wife was taken ill and died. While attending on her, being withdrawn

from his observatory, another astronomer anticipated him in the

discovery. Messier was in despair. A friend, visiting him, began to

offer some consolation for the recent affliction he had suffered.

Messier, thinking only of the comet, exclaimed, "I had discovered

twelve: alas, that I should be robbed of the thirteenth by

Montague!"--and his eyes filled with tears. Then, remembering that it

was necessary to mourn for his wife, whose remains were still in the

house, he exclaimed, "Ah! this poor woman!" (_ah! cette pauvre femme_,)

and again wept for his comet. We can easily imagine how eagerly such an

enthusiast would watch for Halley's comet; and we could almost wish that

it had been his good fortune to be the first to announce its arrival:

but, being misled by a chart which directed his attention to the wrong

part of the firmament, a whole month elapsed after its discovery by

Palitzch, before he enjoyed the delightful spectacle.

The comet arrived at its perihelion on the thirteenth of March, only

twenty-three days from the time assigned by Clairaut. It appeared very

round, with a brilliant nucleus, well distinguished from the surrounding

nebulosity. It had, however, no appearance of a tail. It became lost in

the sun, as it approached its perihelion, and emerged again, on the

other side of the sun, on the first of April. Its exhibiting an

appearance, so inferior to what it presented on some of its previous

returns, is partly accounted for by its being seen by the European

astronomers under peculiarly disadvantageous circumstances, being almost

always within the twilight, and in the most unfavorable situations. In

the southern hemisphere, however, the circumstances for observing it

were more favorable, and there it exhibited a tail varying from ten to

forty-seven degrees in length.

In my next Letter I will give you some particulars respecting the late

return of Halley's comet.

LETTER XXVI.

COMETS, CONTINUED.

"Incensed with indignation, Satan stood

Unterrified, and like a comet burned,

That fires the length of Ophiucus huge

In the Arctic sky, and from his horrid train

Shakes pestilence and war."--_Milton._

AMONG other great results which have marked the history of Halley's

comet, it has itself been a criterion of the existing state of the

mathematical and astronomical sciences. We have just seen how far the

knowledge of the great laws of physical astronomy, and of the higher

mathematics, enabled the astronomers of 1682 and 1759, respectively, to

deal with this wonderful body; and let us now see what higher advantages

were possessed by the astronomers of 1835. During this last interval of

seventy-six years, the science of mathematics, in its most profound and

refined branches, has made prodigious advances, more especially in its

application to the laws of the celestial motions, as exemplified in the

'Mecanique Celeste' of La Place. The methods of investigation have

acquired greater simplicity, and have likewise become more general and

comprehensive; and mechanical science, in the largest sense of that

term, now embraces in its formularies the most complicated motions, and

the most minute effects of the mutual influences of the various members

of our system. You will probably find it difficult to comprehend, how

such hidden facts can be disclosed by formularies, consisting of _a_'s

and _b_'s, and _x_'s and _y_'s, and other algebraic symbols; nor will it

be easy to give you a clear idea of this subject, without a more

extensive acquaintance than you have formed with algebraic

investigations; but you can easily understand that even an equation

expressed in numbers may be so changed in its form, by adding,

subtracting, multiplying and dividing, as to express some new truth at

every transformation. Some idea of this may be formed by the simplest

example. Take the following: 3+4=7. This equation expresses the fact,

that three added to four is equal to seven. By multiplying all the terms

by 2, we obtain a new equation, in which 6+8=14. This expresses a new

truth; and by varying the form, by similar operations, an indefinite

number of separate truths may be elicited from the simple fundamental

expression. I will add another illustration, which involves a little

more algebra, but not, I think, more than you can understand; or, if it

does, you will please pass over it to the next paragraph. According to a

rule of arithmetical progression, _the sum of all the terms is equal to

half the sum of the extremes multiplied into the number of terms_.

Calling the sum of the terms _s_, the first term _a_, the last _h_, and

the number of terms _n_, and we have _(1/2)n(a+h)=s_; or _n(a+h)=2s_; or

_a+h=2s/n_; or _a=(2s/n)-h_; or _h=(2s/n)-a_. These are only a few of

the changes which may be made in the original expression, still

preserving the equality between the quantities on the left hand and

those on the right; yet each of these transformations expresses a new

truth, indicating distinct and (as might be the case) before unknown

relations between the several quantities of which the whole expression

is composed. The last, for example, shows us that the last term in an

arithmetical series is always equal to twice the sum of the whole series

divided by the number of terms and diminished by the first term. In

analytical formularies, as expressions of this kind are called, the

value of a single unknown quantity is sometimes given in a very

complicated expression, consisting of known quantities; but before we

can ascertain their united value, we must reduce them, by actually

performing all the additions, subtractions, multiplications, divisions,

raising to powers, and extracting roots, which are denoted by the

symbols. This makes the actual calculations derived from such

formularies immensely laborious. We have already had an instance of this

in the calculations made by Lalande and Madame Lepaute, from formularies

furnished by Clairaut.

The analytical formularies, contained in such works as La Place's

'Mecanique Celeste,' exhibit to the eye of the mathematician a record of

all the evolutions of the bodies of the solar system in ages past, and

of all the changes they must undergo in ages to come. Such has been the

result of the combination of transcendent mathematical genius and

unexampled labor and perseverance, for the last century. The learned

societies established in various centres of civilization have more

especially directed their attention to the advancement of physical

astronomy, and have stimulated the spirit of inquiry by a succession of

prizes, offered for the solutions of problems arising out of the

difficulties which were progressively developed by the advancement of

astronomical knowledge. Among these questions, the determination of the

return of comets, and the disturbances which they experience in their

course, by the action of the planets near which they happen to pass,

hold a prominent place. In 1826, the French Institute offered a prize

for the determination of the exact time of the return of Halley's comet

to its perihelion in 1835. M. Pontecoulant aspired to the honor. "After

calculations," says he, "of which those alone who have engaged in such

researches can estimate the extent and appreciate the fastidious

monotony, I arrived at a result which satisfied all the conditions

proposed by the Institute. I determined the perturbations of Halley's

comet, by taking into account the simultaneous actions of Jupiter,

Saturn, Uranus, and the Earth, and I then fixed its return to its

perihelion for the seventh of November." Subsequently to this, however,

M. Pontecoulant made some further researches, which led him to correct

the former result; and he afterwards altered the time to November

fourteenth. It actually came to its perihelion on the sixteenth, within

two days of the time assigned.

Letters on Astronomy in which the Elements of the Science are Familiarly Explained in Connection with Biographical Sketches of the Most Eminent Astronomers · 第 25 / 33 段