I have already spoken of the heat of the sun and its probabl

Produced by Charles Franks, Robert Rowe and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team. HTML version by Al Haines.

SIDE-LIGHTS ON ASTRONOMY

AND KINDRED FIELDS OF POPULAR SCIENCE

ESSAYS AND ADDRESSES

BY

SIMON NEWCOMB

CONTENTS

PREFACE

I. THE UNSOLVED PROBLEMS OF ASTRONOMY

II. THE NEW PROBLEMS OF THE UNIVERSE

III. THE STRUCTURE OF THE UNIVERSE

IV. THE EXTENT OF THE UNIVERSE

V. MAKING AND USING A TELESCOPE

VI. WHAT THE ASTRONOMERS ARE DOING

VII. LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

VIII. HOW THE PLANETS ARE WEIGHED

IX. THE MARINER'S COMPASS

X. THE FAIRYLAND OF GEOMETRY

XI. THE ORGANIZATION OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

XII. CAN WE MAKE IT RAIN?

XIII. THE ASTRONOMICAL EPHEMERIS AND NAUTICAL ALMANAC

XIV. THE WORLD'S DEBT TO ASTRONOMY

XV. AN ASTRONOMICAL FRIENDSHIP

XVI. THE EVOLUTION OF THE SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATOR

XVII. THE EVOLUTION OF ASTRONOMICAL KNOWLEDGE

XVIII. ASPECTS OF AMERICAN ASTRONOMY

XIX. THE UNIVERSE AS AN ORGANISM

XX. THE RELATION OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD TO SOCIAL PROGRESS

XXI. THE OUTLOOK FOR THE FLYING-MACHINE

ILLUSTRATIONS

SIMON NEWCOMB

PHOTOGRAPH OF THE CORONA OF THE SUN, TAKEN IN TRIPOLI DURING TOTAL

ECLIPSE OF AUGUST 30, 1905.

A TYPICAL STAR CLUSTER-CENTAURI

THE GLASS DISK

THE OPTICIAN'S TOOL

THE OPTICIAN'S TOOL

GRINDING A LARGE LENS

IMAGE OF CANDLE-FLAME IN OBJECT-GLASS

TESTING ADJUSTMENT OF OBJECT-GLASS

A VERY PRIMITIVE MOUNTING FOR A TELESCOPE

THE HUYGHENIAN EYE-PIECE

SECTION OF THE PRIMITIVE MOUNTING

SPECTRAL IMAGES OF STARS, THE UPPER LINE SHOWING HOW THEY APPEAR WITH

THE EYE-PIECE PUSHED IN, THE LOWER WITH THE EYE-PIECE DRAWN OUT

THE GREAT REFRACTOR OF THE NATIONAL OBSERVATORY AT WASHINGTON

THE "BROKEN-BACKED COMET-SEEKER"

NEBULA IN ORION

DIP OF THE MAGNETIC NEEDLE IN VARIOUS LATITUDES

STAR SPECTRA

PROFESSOR LANGLEY'S AIR-SHIP

PREFACE

In preparing and issuing this collection of essays and addresses, the

author has yielded to what he could not but regard as the too

flattering judgment of the publishers. Having done this, it became

incumbent to do what he could to justify their good opinion by revising

the material and bringing it up to date. Interest rather than unity of

thought has determined the selection.

A prominent theme in the collection is that of the structure, extent,

and duration of the universe. Here some repetition of ideas was found

unavoidable, in a case where what is substantially a single theme has

been treated in the various forms which it assumed in the light of

constantly growing knowledge. If the critical reader finds this a

defect, the author can plead in extenuation only the difficulty of

avoiding it under the circumstances. Although mainly astronomical, a

number of discussions relating to general scientific subjects have been

included.

Acknowledgment is due to the proprietors of the various periodicals

from the pages of which most of the essays have been taken. Besides

Harper's Magazine and the North American Review, these include

McClure's Magazine, from which were taken the articles "The Unsolved

Problems of Astronomy" and "How the Planets are Weighed." "The

Structure of the Universe" appeared in the International Monthly, now

the International Quarterly; "The Outlook for the Flying-Machine" is

mainly from The New York Independent, but in part from McClure's

Magazine; "The World's Debt to Astronomy" is from The Chautauquan; and

"An Astronomical Friendship" from the Atlantic Monthly.

SIMON NEWCOMB. WASHINGTON, JUNE, 1906.

I

THE UNSOLVED PROBLEMS OF ASTRONOMY

The reader already knows what the solar system is: an immense central

body, the sun, with a number of planets revolving round it at various

distances. On one of these planets we dwell. Vast, indeed, are the

distances of the planets when measured by our terrestrial standards. A

cannon-ball fired from the earth to celebrate the signing of the

Declaration of Independence, and continuing its course ever since with

a velocity of eighteen hundred feet per second, would not yet be

half-way to the orbit of Neptune, the outer planet. And yet the

thousands of stars which stud the heavens are at distances so much

greater than that of Neptune that our solar system is like a little

colony, separated from the rest of the universe by an ocean of void

space almost immeasurable in extent. The orbit of the earth round the

sun is of such size that a railway train running sixty miles an hour,

with never a stop, would take about three hundred and fifty years to

cross it. Represent this orbit by a lady's finger-ring. Then the

nearest fixed star will be about a mile and a half away; the next more

than two miles; a few more from three to twenty miles; the great body

at scores or hundreds of miles. Imagine the stars thus scattered from

the Atlantic to the Mississippi, and keep this little finger-ring in

mind as the orbit of the earth, and one may have some idea of the

extent of the universe.

One of the most beautiful stars in the heavens, and one that can be

seen most of the year, is a Lyrae, or Alpha of the Lyre, known also as

Vega. In a spring evening it may be seen in the northeast, in the later

summer near the zenith, in the autumn in the northwest. On the scale we

have laid down with the earth's orbit as a finger-ring, its distance

would be some eight or ten miles. The small stars around it in the same

constellation are probably ten, twenty, or fifty times as far.

Now, the greatest fact which modern science has brought to light is

that our whole solar system, including the sun, with all its planets,

is on a journey towards the constellation Lyra. During our whole lives,

in all probability during the whole of human history, we have been

flying unceasingly towards this beautiful constellation with a speed to

which no motion on earth can compare. The speed has recently been

determined with a fair degree of certainty, though not with entire

exactness; it is about ten miles a second, and therefore not far from

three hundred millions of miles a year. But whatever it may be, it is

unceasing and unchanging; for us mortals eternal. We are nearer the

constellation by five or six hundred miles every minute we live; we are

nearer to it now than we were ten years ago by thousands of millions of

miles, and every future generation of our race will be nearer than its

predecessor by thousands of millions of miles.

When, where, and how, if ever, did this journey begin--when, where, and

how, if ever, will it end? This is the greatest of the unsolved

problems of astronomy. An astronomer who should watch the heavens for

ten thousand years might gather some faint suggestion of an answer, or

he might not. All we can do is to seek for some hints by study and

comparison with other stars.

The stars are suns. To put it in another way, the sun is one of the

stars, and rather a small one at that. If the sun is moving in the way

I have described, may not the stars also be in motion, each on a

journey of its own through the wilderness of space? To this question

astronomy gives an affirmative answer. Most of the stars nearest to us

are found to be in motion, some faster than the sun, some more slowly,

and the same is doubtless true of all; only the century of accurate

observations at our disposal does not show the motion of the distant

ones. A given motion seems slower the more distant the moving body; we

have to watch a steamship on the horizon some little time to see that

she moves at all. Thus it is that the unsolved problem of the motion of

our sun is only one branch of a yet more stupendous one: What mean the

motions of the stars--how did they begin, and how, if ever, will they

end? So far as we can yet see, each star is going straight ahead on its

own journey, without regard to its neighbors, if other stars can be so

called. Is each describing some vast orbit which, though looking like a

straight line during the short period of our observation, will really

be seen to curve after ten thousand or a hundred thousand years, or

will it go straight on forever? If the laws of motion are true for all

space and all time, as we are forced to believe, then each moving star

will go on in an unbending line forever unless hindered by the

attraction of other stars. If they go on thus, they must, after

countless years, scatter in all directions, so that the inhabitants of

each shall see only a black, starless sky.

Mathematical science can throw only a few glimmers of light on the

questions thus suggested. From what little we know of the masses,

distances, and numbers of the stars we see a possibility that the more

slow-moving ones may, in long ages, be stopped in their onward courses

or brought into orbits of some sort by the attraction of their millions

of fellows. But it is hard to admit even this possibility in the case

of the swift-moving ones. Attraction, varying as the inverse square of

the distance, diminishes so rapidly as the distance increases that, at

the distances which separate the stars, it is small indeed. We could

not, with the most delicate balance that science has yet invented, even

show the attraction of the greatest known star. So far as we know, the

two swiftest-moving stars are, first, Arcturus, and, second, one known

in astronomy as 1830 Groombridge, the latter so called because it was

first observed by the astronomer Groombridge, and is numbered 1830 in

his catalogue of stars. If our determinations of the distances of these

bodies are to be relied on, the velocity of their motion cannot be much

less than two hundred miles a second. They would make the circuit of

the earth every two or three minutes. A body massive enough to control

this motion would throw a large part of the universe into disorder.

Thus the problem where these stars came from and where they are going

is for us insoluble, and is all the more so from the fact that the

swiftly moving stars are moving in different directions and seem to

have no connection with each other or with any known star.

It must not be supposed that these enormous velocities seem so to us.

Not one of them, even the greatest, would be visible to the naked eye

until after years of watching. On our finger-ring scale, 1830

Groombridge would be some ten miles and Arcturus thirty or forty miles

away. Either of them would be moving only two or three feet in a year.

To the oldest Assyrian priests Lyra looked much as it does to us

to-day. Among the bright and well-known stars Arcturus has the most

rapid apparent motion, yet Job himself would not to-day see that its

position had changed, unless he had noted it with more exactness than

any astronomer of his time.

Another unsolved problem among the greatest which present themselves to

the astronomer is that of the size of the universe of stars. We know

that several thousand of these bodies are visible to the naked eye;

moderate telescopes show us millions; our giant telescopes of the

present time, when used as cameras to photograph the heavens, show a

number past count, perhaps one hundred millions. Are all these stars

only those few which happen to be near us in a universe extending out

without end, or do they form a collection of stars outside of which is

empty infinite space? In other words, has the universe a boundary?

Taken in its widest scope this question must always remain unanswered

by us mortals because, even if we should discover a boundary within

which all the stars and clusters we ever can know are contained, and

outside of which is empty space, still we could never prove that this

space is empty out to an infinite distance. Far outside of what we call

the universe might still exist other universes which we can never see.

It is a great encouragement to the astronomer that, although he cannot

yet set any exact boundary to this universe of ours, he is gathering

faint indications that it has a boundary, which his successors not many

generations hence may locate so that the astronomer shall include

creation itself within his mental grasp. It can be shown mathematically

that an infinitely extended system of stars would fill the heavens with

a blaze of light like that of the noonday sun. As no such effect is

produced, it may be concluded that the universe has a boundary. But

this does not enable us to locate the boundary, nor to say how many

stars may lie outside the farthest stretches of telescopic vision. Yet

by patient research we are slowly throwing light on these points and

reaching inferences which, not many years ago, would have seemed

forever beyond our powers.

Every one now knows that the Milky Way, that girdle of light which

spans the evening sky, is formed of clouds of stars too minute to be

seen by the unaided vision. It seems to form the base on which the

universe is built and to bind all the stars into a system. It comprises

by far the larger number of stars that the telescope has shown to

exist. Those we see with the naked eye are almost equally scattered

over the sky. But the number which the telescope shows us become more

and more condensed in the Milky Way as telescope power is increased.

The number of new stars brought out with our greatest power is vastly

greater in the Milky Way than in the rest of the sky, so that the

former contains a great majority of the stars. What is yet more

curious, spectroscopic research has shown that a particular kind of

stars, those formed of heated gas, are yet more condensed in the

central circle of this band; if they were visible to the naked eye, we

should see them encircling the heavens as a narrow girdle forming

perhaps the base of our whole system of stars. This arrangement of the

gaseous or vaporous stars is one of the most singular facts that modern

research has brought to light. It seems to show that these particular

stars form a system of their own; but how such a thing can be we are

still unable to see.

The question of the form and extent of the Milky Way thus becomes the

central one of stellar astronomy. Sir William Herschel began by trying

to sound its depths; at one time he thought he had succeeded; but

before he died he saw that they were unfathomable with his most

powerful telescopes. Even today he would be a bold astronomer who would

profess to say with certainty whether the smallest stars we can

photograph are at the boundary of the system. Before we decide this

point we must have some idea of the form and distance of the cloudlike

masses of stars which form our great celestial girdle. A most curious

fact is that our solar system seems to be in the centre of this

galactic universe, because the Milky Way divides the heavens into two

equal parts, and seems equally broad at all points. Were we looking at

such a girdle as this from one side or the other, this appearance would

not be presented. But let us not be too bold. Perhaps we are the

victims of some fallacy, as Ptolemy was when he proved, by what looked

like sound reasoning, based on undeniable facts, that this earth of

ours stood at rest in the centre of the heavens!

A related problem, and one which may be of supreme importance to the

future of our race, is, What is the source of the heat radiated by the

sun and stars? We know that life on the earth is dependent on the heat

which the sun sends it. If we were deprived of this heat we should in a

few days be enveloped in a frost which would destroy nearly all

vegetation, and in a few months neither man nor animal would be alive,

unless crouching over fires soon to expire for want of fuel. We also

know that, at a time which is geologically recent, the whole of New

England was covered with a sheet of ice, hundreds or even thousands of

feet thick, above which no mountain but Washington raised its head. It

is quite possible that a small diminution in the supply of heat sent us

by the sun would gradually reproduce the great glacier, and once more

make the Eastern States like the pole. But the fact is that

observations of temperature in various countries for the last two or

three hundred years do not show any change in climate which can be

attributed to a variation in the amount of heat received from the sun.

The acceptance of this theory of the heat of those heavenly bodies

which shine by their own light--sun, stars, and nebulae--still leaves

open a problem that looks insoluble with our present knowledge. What

becomes of the great flood of heat and light which the sun and stars

radiate into empty space with a velocity of one hundred and eighty

thousand miles a second? Only a very small fraction of it can be

received by the planets or by other stars, because these are mere

points compared with their distance from us. Taking the teaching of our

science just as it stands, we should say that all this heat continues

to move on through infinite space forever. In a few thousand years it

reaches the probable confines of our great universe. But we know of no

reason why it should stop here. During the hundreds of millions of

years since all our stars began to shine, has the first ray of light

and heat kept on through space at the rate of one hundred and eighty

thousand miles a second, and will it continue to go on for ages to

come? If so, think of its distance now, and think of its still going

on, to be forever wasted! Rather say that the problem, What becomes of

it? is as yet unsolved.

Thus far I have described the greatest of problems; those which we may

suppose to concern the inhabitants of millions of worlds revolving

round the stars as much as they concern us. Let us now come down from

the starry heights to this little colony where we live, the solar

system. Here we have the great advantage of being better able to see

what is going on, owing to the comparative nearness of the planets.

When we learn that these bodies are like our earth in form, size, and

motions, the first question we ask is, Could we fly from planet to

planet and light on the surface of each, what sort of scenery would

meet our eyes? Mountain, forest, and field, a dreary waste, or a

seething caldron larger than our earth? If solid land there is, would

we find on it the homes of intelligent beings, the lairs of wild

beasts, or no living thing at all? Could we breathe the air, would we

choke for breath or be poisoned by the fumes of some noxious gas?

To most of these questions science cannot as yet give a positive

answer, except in the case of the moon. Our satellite is so near us

that we can see it has no atmosphere and no water, and therefore cannot

be the abode of life like ours. The contrast of its eternal deadness

with the active life around us is great indeed. Here we have weather of

so many kinds that we never tire of talking about it. But on the moon

there is no weather at all. On our globe so many things are constantly

happening that our thousands of daily journals cannot begin to record

them. But on the dreary, rocky wastes of the moon nothing ever happens.

So far as we can determine, every stone that lies loose on its surface

has lain there through untold ages, unchanged and unmoved.

We cannot speak so confidently of the planets. The most powerful

telescopes yet made, the most powerful we can ever hope to make, would

scarcely shows us mountains, or lakes, rivers, or fields at a distance

of fifty millions of miles. Much less would they show us any works of

man. Pointed at the two nearest planets, Venus and Mars, they whet our

curiosity more than they gratify it. Especially is this the case with

Venus. Ever since the telescope was invented observers have tried to

find the time of rotation of this planet on its axis. Some have reached

one conclusion, some another, while the wisest have only doubted. The

great Herschel claimed that the planet was so enveloped in vapor or

clouds that no permanent features could be seen on its surface. The

best equipped recent observers think they see faint, shadowy patches,

which remain the same from day to day, and which show that the planet

always presents the same face to the sun, as the moon does to the

earth. Others do not accept this conclusion as proved, believing that

these patches may be nothing more than variations of light, shade, and

color caused by the reflection of the sun's light at various angles

from different parts of the planet.

There is also some mystery about the atmosphere of this planet. When

Venus passes nearly between us and the sun, her dark hemisphere is

turned towards us, her bright one being always towards the sun. But she

is not exactly on a line with the sun except on the very rare occasions

of a transit across the sun's disk. Hence, on ordinary occasions, when

she seems very near on a line with the sun, we see a very small part of

the illuminated hemisphere, which now presents the form of a very thin

crescent like the new moon. And this crescent is supposed to be a

little broader than it would be if only half the planet were

illuminated, and to encircle rather more than half the planet. Now,

this is just the effect that would be produced by an atmosphere

refracting the sun's light around the edge of the illuminated

hemisphere.

The difficulty of observations of this kind is such that the conclusion

may be open to doubt. What is seen during transits of Venus over the

sun's disk leads to more certain, but yet very puzzling, conclusions.

The writer will describe what he saw at the Cape of Good Hope during

the transit of December 5, 1882. As the dark planet impinged on the

bright sun, it of course cut out a round notch from the edge of the

sun. At first, when this notch was small, nothing could be seen of the

outline of that part of the planet which was outside the sun. But when

half the planet was on the sun, the outline of the part still off the

sun was marked by a slender arc of light. A curious fact was that this

arc did not at first span the whole outline of the planet, but only

showed at one or two points. In a few moments another part of the

outline appeared, and then another, until, at last, the arc of light

extended around the complete outline. All this seems to show that while

the planet has an atmosphere, it is not transparent like ours, but is

so filled with mist and clouds that the sun is seen through it only as

if shining in a fog.

Not many years ago the planet Mars, which is the next one outside of

us, was supposed to have a surface like that of our earth. Some parts

were of a dark greenish gray hue; these were supposed to be seas and

oceans. Other parts had a bright, warm tint; these were supposed to be

the continents. During the last twenty years much has been learned as

to how this planet looks, and the details of its surface have been

mapped by several observers, using the best telescopes under the most

favorable conditions of air and climate. And yet it must be confessed

that the result of this labor is not altogether satisfactory. It seems

certain that the so-called seas are really land and not water. When it

comes to comparing Mars with the earth, we cannot be certain of more

than a single point of resemblance. This is that during the Martian

winter a white cap, as of snow, is formed over the pole, which

partially melts away during the summer. The conclusion that there are

oceans whose evaporation forms clouds which give rise to this snow

seems plausible. But the telescope shows no clouds, and nothing to make

it certain that there is an atmosphere to sustain them. There is no

certainty that the white deposit is what we call snow; perhaps it is

not formed of water at all. The most careful studies of the surface of

this planet, under the best conditions, are those made at the Lowell

Observatory at Flagstaff, Arizona. Especially wonderful is the system

of so-called canals, first seen by Schiaparelli, but mapped in great

detail at Flagstaff. But the nature and meaning of these mysterious

lines are still to be discovered. The result is that the question of

the real nature of the surface of Mars and of what we should see around

us could we land upon it and travel over it are still among the

unsolved problems of astronomy.

If this is the case with the nearest planets that we can study, how is

it with more distant ones? Jupiter is the only one of these of the

condition of whose surface we can claim to have definite knowledge. But

even this knowledge is meagre. The substance of what we know is that

its surface is surrounded by layers of what look like dense clouds,

through which nothing can certainly be seen.

I have already spoken of the heat of the sun and its probable origin.

But the question of its heat, though the most important, is not the

only one that the sun offers us. What is the sun? When we say that it

is a very hot globe, more than a million times as large as the earth,

and hotter than any furnace that man can make, so that literally "the

elements melt with fervent heat" even at its surface, while inside they

are all vaporized, we have told the most that we know as to what the

sun really is. Of course we know a great deal about the spots, the

rotation of the sun on its axis, the materials of which it is composed,

and how its surroundings look during a total eclipse. But all this does

not answer our question. There are several mysteries which ingenious

men have tried to explain, but they cannot prove their explanations to

be correct. One is the cause and nature of the spots. Another is that

the shining surface of the sun, the "photosphere," as it is technically

called, seems so calm and quiet while forces are acting within it of a

magnitude quite beyond our conception. Flames in which our earth and

everything on it would be engulfed like a boy's marble in a

blacksmith's forge are continually shooting up to a height of tens of

thousands of miles. One would suppose that internal forces capable of

doing this would break the surface up into billows of fire a thousand

miles high; but we see nothing of the kind. The surface of the sun

seems almost as placid as a lake.

Yet another mystery is the corona of the sun. This is something we

should never have known to exist if the sun were not sometimes totally

eclipsed by the dark body of the moon. On these rare occasions the sun

is seen to be surrounded by a halo of soft, white light, sending out

rays in various directions to great distances. This halo is called the

corona, and has been most industriously studied and photographed during

nearly every total eclipse for thirty years. Thus we have learned much

about how it looks and what its shape is. It has a fibrous, woolly

structure, a little like the loose end of a much-worn hempen rope. A

certain resemblance has been seen between the form of these seeming

fibres and that of the lines in which iron filings arrange themselves

when sprinkled on paper over a magnet. It has hence been inferred that

the sun has magnetic properties, a conclusion which, in a general way,

is supported by many other facts. Yet the corona itself remains no less

an unexplained phenomenon.

[Illustration with caption: PHOTOGRAPH OF THE CORONA OF THE SUN, TAKEN

IN TRIPOLI DURING TOTAL ECLIPSE OF AUGUST 30, 1905]

A phenomenon almost as mysterious as the solar corona is the "zodiacal

light," which any one can see rising from the western horizon just

after the end of twilight on a clear winter or spring evening. The most

plausible explanation is that it is due to a cloud of small meteoric

bodies revolving round the sun. We should hardly doubt this explanation

were it not that this light has a yet more mysterious appendage,

commonly called the Gegenschein, or counter-glow. This is a patch of

light in the sky in a direction exactly opposite that of the sun. It is

so faint that it can be seen only by a practised eye under the most

favorable conditions. But it is always there. The latest suggestion is

that it is a tail of the earth, of the same kind as the tail of a comet!

We know that the motions of the heavenly bodies are predicted with

extraordinary exactness by the theory of gravitation. When one finds

that the exact path of the moon's shadow on the earth during a total

eclipse of the sun can be mapped out many years in advance, and that

the planets follow the predictions of the astronomer so closely that,

if you could see the predicted planet as a separate object, it would

look, even in a good telescope, as if it exactly fitted over the real

planet, one thinks that here at least is a branch of astronomy which is

simply perfect. And yet the worlds themselves show slight deviations in

their movements which the astronomer cannot always explain, and which

may be due to some hidden cause that, when brought to light, shall lead

to conclusions of the greatest importance to our race.

One of these deviations is in the rotation of the earth. Sometimes, for

several years at a time, it seems to revolve a little faster, and then

again a little slower. The changes are very slight; they can be

detected only by the most laborious and refined methods; yet they must

have a cause, and we should like to know what that cause is.

The moon shows a similar irregularity of motion. For half a century,

perhaps through a whole century, she will go around the earth a little

ahead of her regular rate, and then for another half-century or more

she will fall behind. The changes are very small; they would never have

been seen with the unaided eye, yet they exist. What is their cause?

Mathematicians have vainly spent years of study in trying to answer

this question.

The orbit of Mercury is found by observations to have a slight motion

which mathematicians have vainly tried to explain. For some time it was

supposed to be caused by the attraction of an unknown planet between

Mercury and the sun, and some were so sure of the existence of this

planet that they gave it a name, calling it Vulcan. But of late years

it has become reasonably certain that no planet large enough to produce

the effect observed can be there. So thoroughly has every possible

explanation been sifted out and found wanting, that some astronomers

are now inquiring whether the law of gravitation itself may not be a

little different from what has always been supposed. A very slight

deviation, indeed, would account for the facts, but cautious

astronomers want other proofs before regarding the deviation of

gravitation as an established fact.

Intelligent men have sometimes inquired how, after devoting so much

work to the study of the heavens, anything can remain for astronomers

to find out. It is a curious fact that, although they were never

learning so fast as at the present day, yet there seems to be more to

learn now than there ever was before. Great and numerous as are the

unsolved problems of our science, knowledge is now advancing into

regions which, a few years ago, seemed inaccessible. Where it will stop

none can say.

II

THE NEW PROBLEMS OF THE UNIVERSE

The achievements of the nineteenth century are still a theme of

congratulation on the part of all who compare the present state of the

world with that of one hundred years ago. And yet, if we should fancy

the most sagacious prophet, endowed with a brilliant imagination, to

have set forth in the year 1806 the problems that the century might

solve and the things which it might do, we should be surprised to see

how few of his predictions had come to pass. He might have fancied

aerial navigation and a number of other triumphs of the same class, but

he would hardly have had either steam navigation or the telegraph in

his picture. In 1856 an article appeared in Harper's Magazine depicting

some anticipated features of life in A.D. 3000. We have since made

great advances, but they bear little resemblance to what the writer

imagined. He did not dream of the telephone, but did describe much that

has not yet come to pass and probably never will.

The fact is that, much as the nineteenth century has done, its last

work was to amuse itself by setting forth more problems for this

century to solve than it has ever itself succeeded in mastering. We

should not be far wrong in saying that to-day there are more riddles in

the universe than there were before men knew that it contained anything

more than the objects they could see.

So far as mere material progress is concerned, it may be doubtful

whether anything so epoch-making as the steam-engine or the telegraph

is held in store for us by the future. But in the field of purely

scientific discovery we are finding a crowd of things of which our

philosophy did not dream even ten years ago.

The greatest riddles which the nineteenth century has bequeathed to us

relate to subjects so widely separated as the structure of the universe

and the structure of atoms of matter. We see more and more of these

structures, and we see more and more of unity everywhere, and yet new

facts difficult of explanation are being added more rapidly than old

facts are being explained.

We all know that the nineteenth century was marked by a separation of

the sciences into a vast number of specialties, to the subdivisions of

which one could see no end. But the great work of the twentieth century

will be to combine many of these specialties. The physical philosopher

of the present time is directing his thought to the demonstration of

the unity of creation. Astronomical and physical researches are now

being united in a way which is bringing the infinitely great and the

infinitely small into one field of knowledge. Ten years ago the atoms

of matter, of which it takes millions of millions to make a drop of

water, were the minutest objects with which science could imagine

itself to be concerned, Now a body of experimentalists, prominent among

whom stand Professors J. J. Thompson, Becquerel, and Roentgen, have

demonstrated the existence of objects so minute that they find their

way among and between the atoms of matter as rain-drops do among the

buildings of a city. More wonderful yet, it seems likely, although it

has not been demonstrated, that these little things, called

"corpuscles," play an important part in what is going on among the

stars. Whether this be true or not, it is certain that there do exist

in the universe emanations of some sort, producing visible effects, the

investigation of which the nineteenth century has had to bequeath to

the twentieth.

For the purpose of the navigator, the direction of the magnetic needle

is invariable in any one place, for months and even years; but when

exact scientific observations on it are made, it is found subject to

numerous slight changes. The most regular of these consists in a daily

change of its direction. It moves one way from morning until noon, and

then, late in the afternoon and during the night, turns back again to

its original pointing. The laws of this change have been carefully

studied from observations, which show that it is least at the equator

and larger as we go north into middle latitudes; but no explanation of

it resting on an indisputable basis has ever been offered.

Besides these regular changes, there are others of a very irregular

character. Every now and then the changes in the direction of the

magnet are wider and more rapid than those which occur regularly every

day. The needle may move back and forth in a way so fitful as to show

the action of some unusual exciting cause. Such movements of the needle

are commonly seen when there is a brilliant aurora. This connection

shows that a magnetic storm and an aurora must be due to the same or

some connected causes.

Those of us who are acquainted with astronomical matters know that the

number of spots on the sun goes through a regular cycle of change,

having a period of eleven years and one or two months. Now, the curious

fact is, when the number and violence of magnetic storms are recorded

and compared, it is found that they correspond to the spots on the sun,

and go through the same period of eleven years. The conclusion seems

almost inevitable: magnetic storms are due to some emanation sent out

by the sun, which arises from the same cause that produces the spots.

This emanation does not go on incessantly, but only in an occasional

way, as storms follow each other on the earth. What is it? Every

attempt to detect it has been in vain. Professor Hale, at the Yerkes

Observatory, has had in operation from time to time, for several years,

his ingenious spectroheliograph, which photographs the sun by a single

ray of the spectrum. This instrument shows that violent actions are

going on in the sun, which ordinary observation would never lead us to

suspect. But it has failed to show with certainty any peculiar

emanation at the time of a magnetic storm or anything connected with

such a storm.

A mystery which seems yet more impenetrable is associated with the

so-called new stars which blaze forth from time to time. These offer to

our sight the most astounding phenomena ever presented to the physical

philosopher. One hundred years ago such objects offered no mystery.

There was no reason to suppose that the Creator of the universe had

ceased His functions; and, continuing them, it was perfectly natural

that He should be making continual additions to the universe of stars.

But the idea that these objects are really new creations, made out of

nothing, is contrary to all our modern ideas and not in accord with the

observed facts. Granting the possibility of a really new star--if such

an object were created, it would be destined to take its place among

the other stars as a permanent member of the universe. Instead of this,

such objects invariably fade away after a few months, and are changed

into something very like an ordinary nebula. A question of transcendent

interest is that of the cause of these outbursts. It cannot be said

that science has, up to the present time, been able to offer any

suggestion not open to question. The most definite one is the collision

theory, according to which the outburst is due to the clashing together

of two stars, one or both of which might previously have been dark,

like a planet. The stars which may be actually photographed probably

exceed one hundred millions in number, and those which give too little

light to affect the photographic plate may be vastly more numerous than

those which do. Dark stars revolve around bright ones in an infinite

variety of ways, and complex systems of bodies, the members of which

powerfully attract each other, are the rule throughout the universe.

Moreover, we can set no limit to the possible number of dark or

invisible stars that may be flying through the celestial spaces. While,

therefore, we cannot regard the theory of collision as established, it

seems to be the only one yet put forth which can lay any claim to a

scientific basis. What gives most color to it is the extreme suddenness

with which the new stars, so far as has yet been observed, invariably

blaze forth. In almost every case it has been only two or three days

from the time that the existence of such an object became known until

it had attained nearly its full brightness. In fact, it would seem that

in the case of the star in Perseus, as in most other cases, the greater

part of the outburst took place within the space of twenty-four hours.

This suddenness and rapidity is exactly what would be the result of a

collision.

The most inexplicable feature of all is the rapid formation of a nebula

around this star. In the first photographs of the latter, the

appearance presented is simply that of an ordinary star. But, in the

course of three or four months, the delicate photographs taken at the

Lick Observatory showed that a nebulous light surrounded the star, and

was continually growing larger and larger. At first sight, there would

seem to be nothing extraordinary in this fact. Great masses of

intensely hot vapor, shining by their own light, would naturally be

thrown out from the star. Or, if the star had originally been

surrounded by a very rare nebulous fog or vapor, the latter would be

seen by the brilliant light emitted by the star. On this was based an

explanation offered by Kapteyn, which at first seemed very plausible.

It was that the sudden wave of light thrown out by the star when it

burst forth caused the illumination of the surrounding vapor, which,

though really at rest, would seem to expand with the velocity of light,

as the illumination reached more and more distant regions of the

nebula. This result may be made the subject of exact calculation. The

velocity of light is such as would make a circuit of the earth more

than seven times in a second. It would, therefore, go out from the star

at the rate of a million of miles in between five and six seconds. In

the lapse of one of our days, the light would have filled a sphere

around the star having a diameter more than one hundred and fifty times

the distance of the sun from the earth, and more than five times the

dimensions of the whole solar system. Continuing its course and

enlarging its sphere day after day, the sight presented to us would

have been that of a gradually expanding nebulous mass--a globe of faint

light continually increasing in size with the velocity of light.

The first sentiment the reader will feel on this subject is doubtless

one of surprise that the distance of the star should be so great as

this explanation would imply. Six months after the explosion, the globe

of light, as actually photographed, was of a size which would have been

visible to the naked eye only as a very minute object in the sky. Is it

possible that this minute object could have been thousands of times the

dimensions of our solar system?

To see how the question stands from this point of view, we must have

some idea of the possible distance of the new star. To gain this idea,

we must find some way of estimating distances in the universe. For a

reason which will soon be apparent, we begin with the greatest

structure which nature offers to the view of man. We all know that the

Milky Way is formed of countless stars, too minute to be individually

visible to the naked eye. The more powerful the telescope through which

we sweep the heavens, the greater the number of the stars that can be

seen in it. With the powerful instruments which are now in use for

photographing the sky, the number of stars brought to light must rise

into the hundreds of millions, and the greater part of these belong to

the Milky Way. The smaller the stars we count, the greater their

comparative number in the region of the Milky Way. Of the stars visible

through the telescope, more than one-half are found in the Milky Way,

which may be regarded as a girdle spanning the entire visible universe.

Of the diameter of this girdle we can say, almost with certainty, that

it must be more than a thousand times as great as the distance of the

nearest fixed star from us, and is probably two or three times greater.

According to the best judgment we can form, our solar system is situate

near the central region of the girdle, so that the latter must be

distant from us by half its diameter. It follows that if we can imagine

a gigantic pair of compasses, of which the points extend from us to

Alpha Centauri, the nearest star, we should have to measure out at

least five hundred spaces with the compass, and perhaps even one

thousand or more, to reach the region of the Milky Way.

With this we have to connect another curious fact. Of eighteen new

stars which have been observed to blaze forth during the last four

hundred years, all are in the region of the Milky Way. This seems to

show that, as a rule, they belong to the Milky Way. Accepting this very

plausible conclusion, the new star in Perseus must have been more than

five hundred times as far as the nearest fixed star. We know that it

takes light four years to reach us from Alpha Centauri. It follows that

the new star was at a distance through which light would require more

than two thousand years to travel, and quite likely a time two or three

times this. It requires only the most elementary ideas of geometry to

see that if we suppose a ray of light to shoot from a star at such a

distance in a direction perpendicular to the line of sight from us to

the star, we can compute how fast the ray would seem to us to travel.

Granting the distance to be only two thousand light years, the apparent

size of the sphere around the star which the light would fill at the

end of one year after the explosion would be that of a coin seen at a

distance of two thousand times its radius, or one thousand times its

diameter--say, a five-cent piece at the distance of sixty feet. But, as

a matter of fact, the nebulous illumination expanded with a velocity

from ten to twenty times as great as this.

The idea that the nebulosity around the new star was formed by the

illumination caused by the light of the explosion spreading out on all

sides therefore fails to satisfy us, not because the expansion of the

nebula seemed to be so slow, but because it was many times as swift as

the speed of light. Another reason for believing that it was not a mere

wave of light is offered by the fact that it did not take place

regularly in every direction from the star, but seemed to shoot off at

various angles.

Up to the present time, the speed of light has been to science, as well

as to the intelligence of our race, almost a symbol of the greatest of

possible speeds. The more carefully we reflect on the case, the more

clearly we shall see the difficulty in supposing any agency to travel

at the rate of the seeming emanations from the new star in Perseus.

As the emanation is seen spreading day after day, the reader may

inquire whether this is not an appearance due to some other cause than

the mere motion of light. May not an explosion taking place in the

centre of a star produce an effect which shall travel yet faster than

light? We can only reply that no such agency is known to science.

But is there really anything intrinsically improbable in an agency

travelling with a speed many times that of light? In considering that

there is, we may fall into an error very much like that into which our

predecessors fell in thinking it entirely out of the range of

reasonable probability that the stars should be placed at such

distances as we now know them to be.

Accepting it as a fact that agencies do exist which travel from sun to

planet and from star to star with a speed which beggars all our

previous ideas, the first question that arises is that of their nature

and mode of action. This question is, up to the present time, one which

we do not see any way of completely answering. The first difficulty is

that we have no evidence of these agents except that afforded by their

action. We see that the sun goes through a regular course of

pulsations, each requiring eleven years for completion; and we see

that, simultaneously with these, the earth's magnetism goes through a

similar course of pulsations. The connection of the two, therefore,

seems absolutely proven. But when we ask by what agency it is possible

for the sun to affect the magnetism of the earth, and when we trace the

passage of some agent between the two bodies, we find nothing to

explain the action. To all appearance, the space between the earth and

the sun is a perfect void. That electricity cannot of itself pass

through a vacuum seems to be a well-established law of physics. It is

true that electromagnetic waves, which are supposed to be of the same

nature with those of light, and which are used in wireless telegraphy,

do pass through a vacuum and may pass from the sun to the earth. But

there is no way of explaining how such waves would either produce or

affect the magnetism of the earth.

Side-Lights on Astronomy and Kindred Fields of Popular Science · 第 1 / 23 段