The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1883-02-02
Air and Seas on Venus.

respecting the recent transit have been
some which have little bearing, or none,
on the question of the suns distance, vel
are full of interest to those who wish to
learn something of the real condition Of
other planets than our own. We have
been apt, perhaps. to regard Venus in
transit more as an adjunct to oui
telescope measuring instruments (mi.
crometers, heliometers, and so forth,
forgetting how much interest attaches to
the passage of a world like our own Gin
all probability between US and the
source of our light and heat. But even
the telescope scrutiny of planet so stu
ated is likely to reveal much that is in.
structive, if carefully studied; while with
so wonderful an instrument of research
as the spectroscope we may hope to learn
such things about Venus or Mercury in
transit as men century ago would have
deemed hopelessly beyond our means OF
investigation. Fortunately, these in.
quiries have not wholly been overlooked
during the late transit, though the OBJ.
servations for determining the sums
distance have occupied so large q share
VI ottcutioh, ~ icdSe aiuoHS OIuSioi a.
trOnomers.
The most important of these physical
inquiries are those relating to the atmos.
phere of Venus; and of these the most
promising are those directed to her ap.
pearance during the few minutes when
nearly but not the whole of her disk is
on the face of the sun. If we place
ourselves in imagination at that point
of Venus surface which, as seen
from the earth at such time,
lies farthest from the solar disk, il
will be manifest on little consideration
that from that point no part of the sun
can be visible unless Venus has an at.
mosphere. But if Venus has an atmos-
phere like our own, then from the point
we are considering large part of the
suns disk must be visible, being raised
into view by the retroactive power of that
atmosphere, precisely as our sun when
in . geometrical sense he has set Chat
is, when a straight line from the eye to
him encounters the convexity of the
earth) is brought wholly into view by at
mospheric refraction. Only part (about
four-fifths) of the sun of Venus would
be brought into view in this way, suppos-
ing her air of the same retroactive power
as ours, simply because the sun, as seen
from Venus, looks larger than as seen
from the earth, while the retroactive effect
(on this supposition) would be no greater.
But, still, large portion of the solar disk
would be visible were there no clouds
over that part of Venus. Now, an OBJ
server on earth, directing his sight to
that point of Venus, is Shocking along pre-
cisely the same visual line toward the
sun as our supposed observer on the
planet, only from greater distance.
The terrestrial observer, then, would see
the sun in the direction of his visual line
toward that part of Venus, as certainly
as the observer on Venus would, and,
for the same reason, he would see the
sun through the retroactive action of the
planets atmosphere. 1t follows that,
suppOsing Venus to have an atmosphere
like that of our earth, and still more if,
as other observations have tended to
show, Venus has an even denser atmos-
phere, light-real but refracted sunlight
come to the terrestrial observer
around that part of the convexity of
Venus disk. And it is clear, further,
that the whole of that part of Venus cir
which lies outside the sun
would, on this supposition, be surrounded
by an arc of light; whereas, if Venus
has no atmosphere, or an atmosphere
very much rarer than the earth's no such
arc of light would be seen.
Now, during the transit of 1874, not
only was such an arc of light visible
around the part of Venus which was
outside the suns disk, before the first
internal contact and after the second,
but this arc was photographed. The sig
nificance of this will be seen when we re-
that photographs of the sun must
be taken with very short exposures, other
wise the image is destroyed by excess of
light. Jansen has obtained good pict-
ures of the sun three feet in diameter,
with an exposure of less than the two
thousandth part of a second, and although
in 1874 the exposures were nothing like
50 short as this. they lasted much less
Than a second. If, during this short en-
oosure, the arc of light round Venus left
is Photographic record, we may be sure
t was very much brighter light than that
IF Venus herself as we see her when she
S morning or evening star. It was, in
iact, as certainly sunlight as that which
We receive from the setting sun when the
,ir is at its clearest. Thus we have in
hat Photographic record proof positive
hat Venus has an atmosphere with re-,
:ractive power not falling much short, if
t do not equal or even exceed, that of
DUR own air.
During the recent transit this Observa-
ion was repeated, with results not pre-
,isely the same, yet perfectly accordsnt
with those obtained in 1874, and even to
he thoughtful mind more specially inter-
,sting. The arc of light was not perfect,
put broken near the middle, 50 that only
.wo fine horns of light could be seen,
extending from either cusp of the solar
lisk (that is, from the two corners, SO to
peak, where the outlines of the sun and
Venus intersectedD. These horns of light
we're unequal in length. We learn from
he inequality of these horns that the at
nosphere of Venus is of variable trans
,arency, like that of our earth. Over
hat part of Venus where the longer horn
vas seen, the atmosphere was Cat the
ime) clearer than where the shorter
Irc was seen. But, remembering that
n 1874 the arc of light was complete.
We may 60 further, recognizing that at
lifferent times, as we'll as in different
places, the atmosphere of Venus varies
n condition. And when we consider
what happens in the case of our own
,arth. we need not be surprised to find
hat the arc of sunlight should be COM
,lete, sometimes incomplete, and some
lines altogether absent. We have al
eady put an observer, in imagination,
N the surface of Venus; let US now i'm
gine the earth itself put in Venus
lace at the time of the transit. If the