The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1879-12-05

AN ASTRONOMICAL wHAT-Is-IT-PA RKHURsr To
PROCTOR.

AN ASTRONOMICAL wHAT-Is-IT- PARKHURsr TO
PROCTOR.
To THE EDITOR OF THE HERALD
On April IL last Mr. II. states that he saw in his
telescope an object resembling planetary nebula.
of which he gives certain rather uncertain posi-
tons covering period of time extending from half
past eight in the evening to about two A. M. Its
motion in right ascension was more than twice as
great as the earth rotation that it
in its motion the phenomenon of the inner moon of
Mars rising in the west and moving toward the
east Its declination at first 81 degrees. and
continued about the same not reaching 3s degrees
at the time when he lost it. His observations in
declination are sufficiently definite but in, right
ascension is so vague that 1t is impossible from his
observations alone to determine anything about its
orbit. s. 49,
few days after Mr. H. had announced his OBJ
servaions in the public print Mr.. D. comes forward
and asserts that he in his telescope similar OBJ
ject. with similar motion He gives three definite
positions. commencing at about eleven p. NJ. and
continuing until nearly three A. NJ. when he also
lost tho comet, will call it for convenience in
consequences OF the rising moon 1t is not early
to say that such object anywhere else in
the world. that its orbit must be determined
solely the observations given us by Mr.. H. and
Mr.. d. The first thing which is obvious from the
observations is that the comet must have been very
much nearer to us than the moon, and consequently
the time of its visibility it must have been revolv
ing around the EARTH Nextwe notice the remarkable
uniformity Of its motion. varying imperceptibly
from uniform motion. proving that the orbit must
moved through fifteen hours Of right ascension, or
through more than half a revolution around the
earh with equal motion, unless its orbit almost
precisely geocentrc. The time Of its complete revou-
ton less than ten hours making it's distance from
the earhs centre about oneseventeenth that Of the
m would m frOm ha
This is sufiiciently remarkable object to deserve
exact study, and II that further study reveals
some curious features it is not my fault. will not
undertake to solve the mystery how such comet
moving through space ut the rate of 68 600 miles
hour and when the comet itself must have been
moving at least as rapidly in such direc-
ton and under such circumstances as to leave a
relative motion Of only ZOO miles hour in di-
rection exactly parallel to the earths surface Nor
will undertake to solve the further mystery in
what way the comet. after having commenced TO
volve in such orbit got spirited away that it
never again seen. come at once to the circum-
stance that Instead Of moving in u circle around the
earth's centre it took fancy to revoIve about a
point some four thousand miles directly above the
North Pole preserve the uniform declination
of thrty-seven degrees. 1t is true that have not
yet taken into account parallax which for
object would be enormous, being about seven-
teen degrees i'll the horizon, but the apparent
path should have crossed the Equator at opposite
points have more than thirty-seven degrees to
account for and further the parallax bringing the
apparent position toward the Equator the more
it only adds to the discrepancy.
There astronomer who was so ambi-
tious of the honor of discovering q comet that he
invented orbit and computed observations from
it, which he published as genuine observations but
unfortunately for his reputation ut his death it
discovered that he had made an in his
pntations, that the positions he gave impos-
sible and could only be accounted for by such
fraudulent procedure. Now know nothing about
Mr.. D.; but when observations, which could SO
easily have been taken from those of Mr. II. by
tinuing the same notion little longer, lead to
inch L Ia To inn
self to and some astronomer who clear up
tho mystery and determine possible orbit to cor
respond with the observations which he represents
that he made. confess that cannot do it. And it
better to raise the question than to leave it
quaintance with Mr.. H. believe that his observa-
tons published In good faith; and although
rejecting the other SERIES his own lead
to similar conclusions. so Tar they lead to any,
assuming their correctness, yet there may be many
ways in which single observer might have been
deceived. or at least have introduced accidental
leading to fatal results. If o single meteor
entering atmosphere. passing our territory
and falling into the sea, deserves to have its orbit
ascertained by elaborate computations. how much
the more object which may yet SO far as appears.
be revolving q satellite around the earth.
SHOWERS or METRoRs.
AT the close OF his first letter, published in the
HERALD Of November 20. Professor Proctor states
that t is most probable that with the telescope the
flight of approaching meteors might be seen end on,
before the shower began" My argument was that
although, he expresses it in the next sentence
''an approaching meteor flight might we'll be seen'
yetit would not be the flight which caused the shower
December 81 he partially admits the correctness Of
this in saying "My suggestion relates to parts near
which the earth never comes" Professor Proctor
says that out of consideration the length Of
the train. This is simply because 1t was an ele-
nent OF my argument. although necessary element
in considering the visibility of an approaching
receding train. which 1 expressly admitted to
be possible. spoke OF the thickness Of
the train for the purpose Of showing at
appear larger than q degree in diameter aud
1 assumed it to be end lin, which case it's
ms ka no n, ifa
size for otherwise the train would have to be still
more distant to DO embraced within the prescribed
limits. Manifestly hight Of meteors could not be
seen as nebulous body in the telescope IL 1t moro
than filed the field of view and shaded oil tho
edge. as it probably would be.
1t is true that if the train more than . million
miles in length the further end OF 1t might be
condensed to be visible. not exactly. but nearly
end on just before the earth reached the orbit; but
in that case, if near enough to n shower ut
al that part the train must be much nearer to us
and too diffuse to be in tho telescopes and
sequen.ly. instead OF the train appearing a crcu
lar object. 1t would have fan-shaped appearance.
the wider portion fading into invisibility. The
correction of the inaccuracy In his first letter with
regard to the apparent position Of the train its not
beng exactly at the radiant or its opposite
pole, hastily assumed by Klinkerfues,
is not sufficient to make it probable that Pogson
Belas comet, not only because ut the time of his OBJ
servations the earth was several million miles from
the orbit, but because however long the train might
have been he could not have described 1t. he did.
appearing circular 1t is for these reasons that
while accept the statement of Professor Proctor,
made at the time OF the first announcement of Pog-
sons observations. "It is easily shown that tie
meteor flight traversing by the earth on November
81. 1872 far too scattered to be visible by
Elected light. cannot accept his view. published
at the time before the observations had been
carefully examined, that ''what Mr. Pogson saw was
a meteoric aggregation travelling the track of the
comet And yet conceive the suggestion Of Pro-
lessor Proctor to be important that in crossing any
known meteor path the telescope should be directed
forward and backward to see whether any cluster of
meteors can be seen. HENRY NJ. PARKHURST.
BROOKLYN. Dec. 3. 1879.