BY E. WALTER MAUNDER, F.R.A.S. OF THE ROYAL OBSERVATORY, GREENWICH AUTHOR OF "ASTRONOMY WITHOUT A TELESCOPE"
LONDON: T. C. & E. C. JACK
CONTENTS CHAP. I. ASTRONOMY BEFORE HISTORY
THE SCIENCE OF THE STARS
CHAPTER IASTRONOMY BEFORE HISTORYThe plan of the present series requires each volume to be complete in about eighty small pages. But no adequate account of the achievements of astronomy can possibly be given within limits so narrow, for so small a space would not suffice for a mere catalogue of the results which have been obtained; and in most cases the result alone would be almost meaningless unless some explanation were offered of the way in which it had been reached. All, therefore, that can be done in a work of the present size is to take the student to the starting-point of astronomy, show him the various roads of research which have opened out from it, and give a brief indication of the character and general direction of each. That which distinguishes astronomy from all the other sciences is this: it deals with objects that we cannot touch. The heavenly bodies are beyond our reach; we cannot tamper with them, or subject them to any form of experiment; we cannot bring them into our laboratories to analyse or dissect them. We can only watch them and wait for such indications as their own movements may supply. But we are confined to this earth of ours, and they are so remote; we are so short-lived, and they are so long-enduring; that the difficulty of finding out much about them might well seem insuperable. Yet these difficulties have been so far overcome that astronomy is the most advanced of all the sciences, the one in which our knowledge is the most definite and certain. All science rests on sight and thought, on ordered observation and reasoned deduction; but both sight and thought were earlier trained to the service of astronomy than of the other physical sciences. It is here that the highest value of astronomy lies; in the discipline that it has afforded to man's powers of observation and reflection; and the real triumphs which it has achieved are not the bringing to light of the beauties or the sensational dimensions and distances of the heavenly bodies, but the vanquishing of difficulties which might well have seemed superhuman. The true spirit of the science can be far better exemplified by the presentation of some of these difficulties, and of the methods by which they have been overcome, than by many volumes of picturesque description or of eloquent rhapsody. There was a time when men knew nothing of astronomy; like every other science it began from zero. But it is not possible to suppose that such a state of things lasted long, we know that there was a time when men had noticed that there were two great lights in the sky—a greater light that shone by day, a lesser light that shone by night—and there were the stars also. And this, the earliest observation of primitive astronomy, is preserved for us, expressed in the simplest possible language, in the first chapter of the first book of the sacred writings handed down to us by the Hebrews. This observation, that there are bodies above us giving light, and that they are not all equally bright, is so simple, so inevitable, that men must have made it as soon as they possessed any mental power at all. But, once made, a number of questions must have intruded themselves: "What are these lights? Where are they? How far are they off?" Many different answers were early given to these questions. Some were foolish; some, though intelligent, were mistaken; some, though wrong, led eventually to the discovery of the truth. Many myths, many legends, some full of beauty and interest, were invented. But in so small a book as this it is only possible to glance at those lines of thought which eventually led to the true solution. As the greater light, the lesser light, and the stars were carefully watched, it was seen not only that they shone, but that they appeared to move; slowly, steadily, and without ceasing. The stars all moved together like a column of soldiers on the march, not altering their positions relative to each other. The lesser light, the Moon, moved with the stars, and yet at the same time among them. The greater light, the Sun, was not seen with the stars; the brightness of his presence made the day, his absence brought the night, and it was only during his absence that the stars were seen; they faded out of the sky before he came up in the morning, and did not reappear again until after he passed out of sight in the evening. But there came a time when it was realised that there were stars shining in the sky all day long as well as at night, and this discovery was one of the greatest and most important ever made, because it was the earliest discovery of something quite unseen. Men laid hold of this fact, not from the direct and immediate evidence of their senses, but from reflection and reasoning. We do not know who made this discovery, nor how long ago it was made, but from that time onward the eyes with which men looked upon nature were not only the eyes of the body, but also the eyes of the mind. It followed from this that the Sun, like the Moon, not only moved with the general host of the stars, but also among them. If an observer looks out from any fixed station and watches the rising of some bright star, night after night, he will notice that it always appears to rise in the same place; so too with its setting. From any given observing station the direction in which any particular star is observed to rise or set is invariable. Not so with the Sun. We are accustomed to say that the Sun rises in the east and sets in the west. But the direction in which the Sun rises in midwinter lies far to the south of the east point; the direction in which he rises in midsummer lies as far to the north. The Sun is therefore not only moving with the stars, but among them. This gradual change in the position of the Sun in the sky was noticed in many ancient nations at an early time. It is referred to in Job xxxviii. 12: "Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the dayspring to know his place?" And the apparent path of the Sun on one day is always parallel to its path on the days preceding and following. When, therefore, the Sun rises far to the south of east, he sets correspondingly far to the south of west, and at noon he is low down in the south. His course during the day is a short one, and the daylight is much shorter than the night, and the Sun at noon, being low down in the sky, has not his full power. The cold and darkness of winter, therefore, follows directly upon this position of the Sun. These conditions are reversed when the Sun rises in the north-east. The night is short, the daylight prolonged, and the Sun, being high in the heavens at noon, his heat is felt to the full. Thus the movements of the Sun are directly connected with the changes of season upon the Earth. But the stars also are connected with those seasons; for if we look out immediately after it has become dark after sunset, we shall notice that the stars seen in the night of winter are only in part those seen in the nights of summer. In the northern part of the sky there are a number of stars which are always visible whenever we look out, no matter at what time of the night nor what part of the year. If we watch throughout the whole night, we see that the whole heavens appear to be slowly turning—turning, as if all were in a single piece—and the pivot about which it is turning is high up in the northern sky. The stars, therefore, are divided into two classes. Those near this invisible pivot—the "Pole" of the Heavens, as we term it—move round it in complete circles; they never pass out of sight, but even when lowest they clear the horizon. The other stars move round the same pivot in curved paths, which are evidently parts of circles, but circles of which we do not see the whole. These stars rise on the eastern side of the heavens and set on the western, and for a greater or less space of time are lost to sight below the horizon. And some of these stars are visible at one time of the year, others at another; some being seen during the whole of the long nights of winter, others throughout the short nights of summer. This distinction again, and its connection with the change of the seasons on the earth, was observed many ages ago. It is alluded to in Job xxxviii. 32: "Canst thou lead forth the Signs of the Zodiac in their season, or canst thou guide the Bear with her train?" (R.V., Margin). The Signs of the Zodiac are taken as representing the stars which rise and set, and therefore have each their season for being "led forth," while the northern stars, which are always visible, appearing to be "guided" in their continual movement round the Pole of the sky in perfect circles, are represented by "the Bear with her train." The changes in position of the Sun, the greater light, must have attracted attention in the very earliest ages, because these changes are so closely connected with the changes of the seasons upon the Earth, which affect men directly. The Moon, the lesser light, goes through changes of position like the Sun, but these are not of the same direct consequence to men, and probably much less notice was taken of them. But there were changes of the Moon which men could not help noticing—her changes of shape and brightness. One evening she may be seen soon after the Sun has set, as a thin arch of light, low down in the sunset sky. On the following evenings she is seen higher and higher in the sky, and the bow of light increases, until by the fourteenth day it is a perfect round. Then the Moon begins to diminish and to disappear, until, on the twenty-ninth or thirtieth day after the first observation, she is again seen in the west after sunset as a narrow crescent. This succession of changes gave men an important measure of time, and, in an age when artificial means of light were difficult to procure, moonlight was of the greatest value, and the return of the moonlit portion of the month was eagerly looked for. These early astronomical observations were simple and obvious, and of great practical value. The day, month, and year were convenient measures of time, and the power of determining, from the observation of the Sun and of the stars, how far the year had progressed was most important to farmers, as an indication when they should plough and sow their land. Such observations had probably been made independently by many men and in many nations, but in one place a greater advance had been made. The Sun and Moon are both unmistakable, but one star is very like another, and, for the most part, individual stars can only be recognised by their positions relative to others. The stars were therefore grouped together into Constellations and associated with certain fancied designs, and twelve of these designs were arranged in a belt round the sky to mark the apparent path of the Sun in the course of the year, these twelve being known as the "Signs of the Zodiac"—the Ram, Bull, Twins, Crab, Lion, Virgin, Balance, Scorpion, Archer, Goat, Water-pourer, and Fishes. In the rest of the sky some thirty to thirty-six other groups, or constellations, were formed, the Bear being the largest and brightest of the constellations of the northern heavens. But these ancient constellations do not cover the entire heavens; a large area in the south is untouched by them. And this fact affords an indication both of the time when and the place where the old stellar groups were designed, for the region left untouched was the region below the horizon of 40° North latitude, about 4600 years ago. It is probable, therefore, that the ancient astronomers who carried out this great work lived about 2700 B.C., and in North latitude 37° or 38°. The indication is only rough, but the amount of uncertainty is not very large; the constellations must be at least 4000 years old, they cannot be more than 5000. All this was done by prehistoric astronomers; though no record of the actual carrying out of the work and no names of the men who did it have come down to us. But it is clear from the fact that the Signs of the Zodiac are arranged so as to mark out the annual path of the Sun, and that they are twelve in number—there being twelve months in the year—that those who designed the constellations already knew that there are stars shining near the Sun in full daylight, and that they had worked out some means for determining what stars the Sun is near at any given time. Another great discovery of which the date and the maker are equally unknown is referred to in only one of the ancient records available to us. It was seen that all along the eastern horizon, from north to south, stars rise, and all along the western horizon, from north to south, stars set. That is what was seen; it was the fact observed. There is no hindrance anywhere to the movement of the stars—they have a free passage under the Earth; the Earth is unsupported in space. That is what was thought; it was the inference drawn. Or, as it is written in Job xxvi. 7, "He (God) stretcheth out the north over empty space, and hangeth the earth upon nothing." The Earth therefore floats unsupported in the centre of an immense star-spangled sphere. And what is the shape of the Earth? The natural and correct inference is that it is spherical, and we find in some of the early Greek writers the arguments which establish this inference as clearly set forth as they would be to-day. The same inference followed, moreover, from the observation of a simple fact, namely, that the stars as observed from any particular place all make the same angle with the horizon as they rise in the east, and all set at the same angle with it in the west; but if we go northward, we find that angle steadily decreasing; if we go southward, we find it increasing. But if the Earth is round like a globe, then it must have a definite size, and that size can be measured. The discoveries noted above were made by men whose names have been lost, but the name of the first person whom we know to have measured the size of the Earth was ERATOSTHENES. He found that the Sun was directly overhead at noon at midsummer at Syene (the modern Assouan), in Egypt, but was 7° south of the "zenith"—the point overhead—at Alexandria, and from this he computed the Earth to be 250,000 stadia (a stadium = 606 feet) in circumference. Another consequence of the careful watch upon the stars was the discovery that five of them were planets; "wandering" stars; they did not move all in one piece with the rest of the celestial host. In this they resemble the Sun and Moon, and they further resemble the Moon in that, though too small for any change of shape to be detected, they change in brightness from time to time. But their movements are more complicated than those of the other heavenly bodies. The Sun moves a little slower than the stars, and so seems to travel amongst them from west to east; the Moon moves much slower than the stars, so her motion from west to east is more pronounced than that of the Sun. But the five planets sometimes move slower than the stars, sometimes quicker, and sometimes at the same rate. Two of the five, which we now know as Mercury and Venus, never move far from the Sun, sometimes being seen in the east before he rises in the morning, and sometimes in the west after he has set in the evening. Mercury is the closer to the Sun, and moves more quickly; Venus goes through much the greater changes of brightness. Jupiter and Saturn move nearly at the same average rate as the stars, Saturn taking about thirteen days more than a year to come again to the point of the sky opposite to the Sun, and Jupiter about thirty-four days. Mars, the fifth planet, takes two years and fifty days to accomplish the same journey. These planetary movements were not, like those of the Sun and Moon and stars, of great and obvious consequence to men. It was important to men to know when they would have moonlight nights, to know when the successive seasons of the year would return. But it was no help to men to know when Venus was at her brightest more than when she was invisible. She gave them no useful light, and she and her companion planets returned at no definite seasons. Nevertheless, men began to make ordered observations of the planets—observations that required much more patience and perseverance than those of the other celestial lights. And they set themselves with the greatest ingenuity to unravel the secret of their complicated and seemingly capricious movements. This was a yet higher development than anything that had gone before, for men were devoting time, trouble, and patient thought, for long series of years, to an inquiry which did not promise to bring them any profit or advantage. Yet the profit which it actually did bring was of the highest order. It developed men's mental powers; it led to the devising of instruments of precision for the observations; it led to the foundation of mathematics, and thus lay at the root of all our modern mechanical progress. It brought out, in a higher degree, ordered observation and ordered thought.
CHAPTER IIASTRONOMY BEFORE THE TELESCOPEThere was thus a real science of astronomy before we have any history of it. Some important discoveries had been made, and the first step had been taken towards cataloguing the fixed stars. It was certainly known to some of the students of the heavens, though perhaps only to a few, that the Earth was a sphere, freely suspended in space, and surrounded on all sides by the starry heavens, amongst which moved the Sun, Moon, and the five planets. The general character of the Sun's movement was also known; namely, that he not only moved day by day from east to west, as the stars do, but also had a second motion inclined at an angle to the first, and in the opposite direction, which he accomplished in the course of a year. To this sum of knowledge, no doubt, several nations had contributed. We do not know to what race we owe the constellations, but there are evidences of an elementary acquaintance with astronomy on the part of the Chinese, the Babylonians, the Egyptians, and the Jews. But in the second stage of the development of the science the entire credit for the progress made belongs to the Greeks. The Greeks, as a race, appear to have been very little apt at originating ideas, but they possessed, beyond all other races, the power of developing and perfecting crude ideas which they had obtained from other sources, and when once their attention was drawn to the movements of the heavenly bodies, they devoted themselves with striking ingenuity and success to devising theories to account for the appearances presented, to working out methods of computation, and, last, to devising instruments for observing the places of the luminaries in which they were interested. In the brief space available it is only possible to refer to two or three of the men whose commanding intellects did so much to help on the development of the science. EUDOXUS of Knidus, in Asia Minor (408-355 B.C.), was, so far as we know, the first to attempt to represent the movements of the heavenly bodies by a simple mathematical process. His root idea was something like this. The Earth was in the centre of the universe, and it was surrounded, at a great distance from us, by a number of invisible transparent shells, or spheres. Each of these spheres rotated with perfect uniformity, though the speed of rotation differed for different spheres. One sphere carried the stars, and rotated from east to west in about 23 h. 56 m. The Sun was carried by another sphere, which rotated from west to east in a year, but the pivots, or poles, of this sphere were carried by a second, rotating exactly like the sphere of the stars. This explained how it is that the ecliptic—that is to say, the apparent path of the Sun amongst the stars—is inclined 23-½° to the equator of the sky, so that the Sun is 23-½° north of the equator at midsummer and 23-½° south of the equator at midwinter, for the poles of the sphere peculiar to the Sun were supposed to be 23-½° from the poles of the sphere peculiar to the stars. Then the Moon had three spheres; that which actually carried the Moon having its poles 5° from the poles of the sphere peculiar to the Sun. These poles were carried by a sphere placed like the sphere of the Sun, but rotating in 27 days; and this, again, had its poles in the sphere of the stars. The sphere carrying the Moon afforded the explanation of the wavy motion of the Moon to and fro across the ecliptic in the course of a month, for at one time in the month the Moon is 5° north of the ecliptic, at another time 5° south. The motions of the planets were more difficult to represent, because they not only have a general daily motion from east to west, like the stars, and a general motion from west to east along the ecliptic, like the Sun and Moon, but from time to time they turn back on their course in the ecliptic, and "retrograde." But the introduction of a third and fourth sphere enabled the motions of most of the planets to be fairly represented. There were thus twenty-seven spheres in all—four for each of the five planets, three for the Moon, three for the Sun (including one not mentioned in the foregoing summary), and one for the stars. These spheres were not, however, supposed to be solid structures really existing; the theory was simply a means for representing the observed motions of the heavenly bodies by computations based upon a series of uniform movements in concentric circles. But this assumption that each heavenly body moves in its path at a uniform rate was soon seen to be contrary to fact. A reference to the almanac will show at once that the Sun's movement is not uniform. Thus for the year 1910-11 the solstices and equinoxes fell as given on the next page: Epoch Time Interval Winter Solstice 1910 Dec. 22 d. 5 h. 12 m. P.M. 89 d. 0 h. 42 m. Spring Equinox 1911 Mar. 21 " 5 " 54 " P.M. 92 " 19 " 41 " Summer Solstice 191l June 22 " 1 " 35 " P.M. 93 " 14 " 43 " Autumn Equinox 1911 Sept. 24 " 4 " 18 " A.M. 89 " 18 " 36 " Winter Solstice 1911 Dec. 22 " 10 " 54 " P.M. so that the winter half of the year is shorter than the summer half; the Sun moves more quickly over the half of its orbit which is south of the equator than over the half which is north of it. The motion of the Moon is more irregular still, as we can see by taking out from the almanac the times of new and full moon: New Moon Interval to Full Moon Dec. 1910 1 d. 9 h. 10.7 m. P.M. 14 d. 13 h. 54.4 m. " " 31 " 4 " 21.2 " P.M. 14 " 6 " 4.8 " Jan. 1911 30 " 9 " 44.7 " A.M. 14 " 0 " 52.8 " March " 1 " 0 " 31.1 " A.M. 13 " 23 " 27.4 " " " 30 " 0 " 37.8 " P.M. 14 " 1 " 58.8 " April " 28 " 10 " 25.0 " P.M. 14 " 7 " 44.7 " May " 28 " 6 " 24.4 " A.M. 14 " 15 " 26.3 " June " 26 " 1 " 19.7 " P.M. 14 " 23 " 33.7 " July " 25 " 8 " 12.0 " P.M. 15 " 6 " 42.7 " Aug. " 24 " 4 " 14.3 " A.M. 15 " 11 " 42.4 " Sept. " 22 " 2 " 37.4 " P.M. 15 " 13 " 33.7 " Oct. " 22 " 4 " 9.3 " A.M. 15 " 11 " 38.8 " Nov. " 20 " 8 " 49.4 " P.M. 15 " 6 " 2.5 " Dec. " 20 " 3 " 40.3 " P.M. 14 " 21 " 49.4 " Full Moon Interval to New Moon Dec. 1910 16 d 11 h. 5.1 m. A.M. 15 d. 5 h. 16.1 m. Jan. 1911 14 " 10 " 26.0 " P.M. 15 " 11 " 18.7 " Feb. " 13 " 10 " 37.5 " A.M. 15 " 13 " 53.6 " March " 14 " 11 " 58.5 " P.M. 15 " 12 " 39.3 " April " 13 " 2 " 36.6 " P.M. 15 " 7 " 48.4 " May " 13 " 6 " 9.7 " A.M. 15 " 0 " 14.7 " June " 11 " 9 " 50.7 " P.M. 14 " 15 " 29.0 " July " 11 " 0 " 53.4 " P.M. 14 " 7 " 18.6 " Aug. " 10 " 2 " 54.7 " A.M. 14 " 1 " 19.6 " Sept. " 8 " 3 " 56.7 " P.M. 13 " 22 " 40.7 " Oct. " 8 " 4 " 11.1 " A.M. 13 " 23 " 58.2 " Nov. " 6 " 3 " 48.1 " P.M. 14 " 5 " 1.3 " Dec. " 6 " 2 " 51.9 " A.M. 14 " 12 " 48.4 " Jan. 1912 4 " 1 " 99.7 " P.M. 14 " 21 " 40.3 " The astronomer who dealt with this difficulty was HIPPARCHUS (about 190-120 B.C.), who was born at NicÆa, in Bithynia, but made most of his astronomical observations in Rhodes. He attempted to explain these irregularities in the motions of the Sun and Moon by supposing that though they really moved uniformly in their orbits, yet the centre of their orbits was not the centre of the Earth, but was situated a little distance from it. This point was called "the excentric," and the line from the excentric to the Earth was called "the line of apsides." But when he tried to deal with the movements of the planets, he found that there were not enough good observations available for him to build up any satisfactory theory. He therefore devoted himself to the work of making systematic determinations of the places of the planets that he might put his successors in a better position to deal with the problem than he was. His great successor was CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY of Alexandria, who carried the work of astronomical observation from about A.D. 127 to 150. He was, however, much greater as a mathematician than as an observer, and he worked out a very elaborate scheme, by which he was able to represent the motions of the planets with considerable accuracy. The system was an extremely complex one, but its principle may be represented as follows: If we suppose that a planet is moving round the Earth in a circle at a uniform rate, and we tried to compute the place of the planet on this assumption for regular intervals of time, we should find that the planet gradually got further and further away from the predicted place. Then after a certain time the error would reach a maximum, and begin to diminish, until the error vanished and the planet was in the predicted place at the proper time. The error would then begin to fall in the opposite direction, and would increase as before to a maximum, subsequently diminishing again to zero. This state of things might be met by supposing that the planet was not itself carried by the circle round the earth, but by an epicycle—i.e. a circle travelling upon the first circle—and by judiciously choosing the size of the epicycle and the time of revolution the bulk of the errors in the planet's place might be represented. But still there would be smaller errors going through their own period, and these, again, would have to be met by imagining that the first epicycle carried a second, and it might be that the second carried a third, and so on. The Ptolemaic system was more complicated than this brief summary would suggest, but it is not possible here to do more than indicate the general principles upon which it was founded, and the numerous other systems or modifications of them produced in the five centuries from Eudoxus to Ptolemy must be left unnoticed. The point to be borne in mind is that one fundamental assumption underlay them all, an assumption fundamental to all science—the assumption that like causes must always produce like effects. It was apparent to the ancient astronomers that the stars—that is to say, the great majority of the heavenly bodies—do move round the Earth in circles, and with a perfect uniformity of motion, and it seemed inevitable that, if one body moved round another, it should thus move. For if the revolving body came nearer to the centre at one time and receded at another, if it moved faster at one time and slower at another, then, the cause remaining the same, the effect seemed to be different. Any complexity introduced by superposing one epicycle upon another seemed preferable to abandoning this great fundamental principle of the perfect uniformity of the actings of Nature. For more than 1300 years the Ptolemaic system remained without serious challenge, and the next great name that it is necessary to notice is that of COPERNICUS (1473-1543). Copernicus was a canon of Frauenburg, and led the quiet, retired life of a student. The great work which made him immortal, De Revolutionibus, was the result of many years' meditation and work, and was not printed until he was on his deathbed. In this work Copernicus showed that he was one of those great thinkers who are able to look beyond the mere appearance of things and to grasp the reality of the unseen. Copernicus realised that the appearance would be just the same whether the whole starry vault rotated every twenty-four hours round an immovable Earth from east to west or the Earth rotated from west to east in the midst of the starry sphere; and, as the stars are at an immeasurable distance, the latter conception was much the simpler. Extending the idea of the Earth's motion further, the supposition that, instead of the Sun revolving round a fixed Earth in a year, the Earth revolved round a fixed Sun, made at once an immense simplification in the planetary motions. The reason became obvious why Mercury and Venus were seen first on one side of the Sun and then on the other, and why neither of them could move very far from the Sun; their orbits were within the orbit of the Earth. The stationary points and retrogressions of the planets were also explained; for, as the Earth was a planet, and as the planets moved in orbits of different sizes, the outer planets taking a longer time to complete a revolution than the inner, it followed, of necessity, that the Earth in her motion would from time to time be passed by the two inner planets, and would overtake the three outer. The chief of the Ptolemaic epicycles were done away with, and all the planets moved continuously in the same direction round the Sun. But no planet's motion could be represented by uniform motion in a single circle, and Copernicus had still to make use of systems of epicycles to account for the deviations from regularity in the planetary motions round the Sun. The Earth having been abandoned as the centre of the universe, a further sacrifice had to be made: the principle of uniform motion in a circle, which had seemed so necessary and inevitable, had also to be given up. For the time came when the instruments for measuring the positions of the stars and planets had been much improved, largely due to TYCHO BRAHE (1546-1601), a Dane of noble birth, who was the keenest and most careful observer that astronomy had yet produced. His observations enabled his friend and pupil, JOHANN KEPLER, (1571-1630), to subject the planetary movements to a far more searching examination than had yet been attempted, and he discovered that the Sun is in the plane of the orbit of each of the planets, and also in its line of apsides—that is to say, the line joining the two points of the orbit which are respectively nearest and furthest from the Sun. Copernicus had not been aware of either of these two relations, but their discovery greatly strengthened the Copernican theory. Then for many years Kepler tried one expedient after another in order to find a combination of circular motions which would satisfy the problem before him, until at length he was led to discard the circle and try a different curve—the oval or ellipse. Now the property of a circle is that every point of it is situated at the same distance from the centre, but in an ellipse there are two points within it, the "foci," and the sum of the distances of any point on the circumference from these two foci is constant. If the two foci are at a great distance from each other, then the ellipse is very long and narrow; if the foci are close together, the ellipse differs very little from a circle; and if we imagine that the two foci actually coincide, the ellipse becomes a circle. When Kepler tried motion in an ellipse instead of motion in a circle, he found that it represented correctly the motions of all the planets without any need for epicycles, and that in each case the Sun occupied one of the foci. And though the planet did not move at a uniform speed in the ellipse, yet its motion was governed by a uniform law, for the straight line joining the planet to the Sun, the "radius vector," passed over equal areas of space in equal periods of time. These two discoveries are known as Kepler's First and Second Laws. His Third Law connects all the planets together. It was known that the outer planets not only take longer to revolve round the Sun than the inner, but that their actual motion in space is slower, and Kepler found that this actual speed of motion is inversely as the square root of its distance from the Sun; or, if the square of the speed of a planet be multiplied by its distance from the Sun, we get the same result in each case. This is usually expressed by saying that the cube of the distance is proportional to the square of the time of revolution. Thus the varying rate of motion of each planet in its orbit is not only subject to a single law, but the very different speeds of the different planets are also all subject to a law that is the same for all. Thus the whole of the complicated machinery of Ptolemy had been reduced to three simple laws, which at the same time represented the facts of observation much better than any possible development of the Ptolemaic mechanism. On his discovery of his third law Kepler had written: "The book is written to be read either now or by posterity—I care not which; it may well wait a century for a reader, as God has waited 6000 years for an observer." Twelve years after his death, on Christmas Day 1642 (old style), near Grantham, in Lincolnshire, the predestined "reader" was born. The inner meaning of Kepler's three laws was brought to light by ISAAC NEWTON.
CHAPTER IIITHE LAW OF GRAVITATIONThe fundamental thought which, recognised or not, had lain at the root of the Ptolemaic system, as indeed it lies at the root of all science, was that "like causes must always produce like effects." Upon this principle there seemed to the ancient astronomers no escape from the inference that each planet must move at a uniform speed in a circle round its centre of motion. For, if there be any force tending to alter the distance of the planet from that centre, it seemed inevitable that sooner or later it should either reach that centre or be indefinitely removed from it. If there be no such force, then the planet's distance from that centre must remain invariable, and if it move at all, it must move in a circle; move uniformly, because there is no force either to hasten or retard it. Uniform motion in a circle seemed a necessity of nature. But all this system, logical and inevitable as it had once seemed, had gone down before the assault of observed facts. The great example of uniform circular motion had been the daily revolution of the star sphere; but this was now seen to be only apparent, the result of the rotation of the Earth. The planets revolved round the Sun, but the Sun was not in the centre of their motion; they moved, not in circles, but in ellipses; not at a uniform speed, but at a speed which diminished with the increase of their distance from the Sun. There was need, therefore, for an entire revision of the principles upon which motion was supposed to take place. The mistake of the ancients had been that they supposed that continued motion demanded fresh applications of force. They noticed that a ball, set rolling, sooner or later came to a stop; that a pendulum, set swinging, might swing for a good time, but eventually came to rest; and, as the forces that were checking the motion—that is to say, the friction exercised by the ground, the atmosphere, and the like—did not obtrude themselves, they were overlooked. Newton brought out into clear statement the true conditions of motion. A body once moving, if acted upon by no force whatsoever, must continue to move forward in a straight line at exactly the same speed, and that for ever. It does not require any maintaining force to keep it going. If any change in its speed or in its direction takes place, that change must be due to the introduction of some further force. This principle, that, if no force acts on a body in motion, it will continue to move uniformly in a straight line, is Newton's First Law of Motion. His Second lays it down that, if force acts on a body, it produces a change of motion proportionate to the force applied, and in the same direction. And the Third Law states that when one body exerts force upon another, that second body reacts with equal force upon the first. The problem of the motions of the planets was, therefore, not what kept them moving, but what made them deviate from motion in a straight line, and deviate by different amounts. It was quite clear, from the work of Kepler, that the force deflecting the planets from uniform motion in a straight line lay in the Sun. The facts that the Sun lay in the plane of the orbits of all the planets, that the Sun was in one of the foci of each of the planetary ellipses, that the straight line joining the Sun and planet moved for each planet over equal areas in equal periods of time, established this fact clearly. But the amount of deflection was very different for different planets. Thus the orbit of Mercury is much smaller than that of the Earth, and is travelled over in a much shorter time, so that the distance by which Mercury is deflected in a course of an hour from movement in a straight line is much greater than that by which the Earth is deflected in the same time, Mercury falling towards the Sun by about 159 miles, whilst the fall of the Earth is only about 23.9 miles. The force drawing Mercury towards the Sun is therefore 6.66 times that drawing the Earth, but 6.66 is the square of 2.58, and the Earth is 2.58 times as far from the Sun as Mercury. Similarly, the fall in an hour of Jupiter towards the Sun is about 0.88 miles, so that the force drawing the Earth is 27 times that drawing Jupiter towards the Sun. But 27 is the square of 5.2, and Jupiter is 5.2 times as far from the Sun as the Earth. Similarly with the other planets. The force, therefore, which deflects the planets from motion in a straight line, and compels them to move round the Sun, is one which varies inversely as the square of the distance. But the Sun is not the only attracting body of which we know. The old Ptolemaic system was correct to a small extent; the Earth is the centre of motion for the Moon, which revolves round it at a mean distance of 238,800 miles, and in a period of 27 d. 7 h. 43 m. Hence the circumference of her orbit is 1,500,450 miles, and the length of the straight line which she would travel in one second of time, if not deflected by the Earth, is 2828 feet. In this distance the deviation of a circle from a straight line is one inch divided by 18.66. But we know from experiment that a stone let fall from a height of 193 inches above the Earth's surface will reach the ground in exactly one second of time. The force drawing the stone to the Earth, therefore, is 193 x 18.66; i.e. 3601 times as great as that drawing the Moon. But the stone is only 1/330 of a mile from the Earth's surface, while the Moon is 238,800 miles away—more than 78 million times as far. The force, therefore, would seem not to be diminished in the proportion that the distance is increased—much less in the proportion of its square. But Newton proved that a sphere of uniform density, or made up of any number of concentric shells of uniform density, attracted a body outside itself, just as if its entire mass was concentrated at its centre. The distance of the stone from the Earth must therefore be measured, not from the Earth's surface, but from its centre; in other words, we must consider the stone as being distant from the Earth, not some 16 feet, but 3963 miles. This is very nearly one-sixtieth of the Moon's distance, and the square of 60 is 3600. The Earth's pull upon the Moon, therefore, is almost exactly in the inverse square of the distance as compared with its pull on the stone. Kepler's book had found its "reader." His three laws were but three particular aspects of Newton's great discovery that the planets moved under the influence of a force, lodged in the Sun, which varied inversely as the square of their distances from it. But Newton's work went far beyond this, for he showed that the same law governed the motion of the Moon round the Earth and the motions of the satellites revolving round the different planets, and also governed the fall of bodies upon the Earth itself. It was universal throughout the solar system. The law, therefore, is stated as of universal application. "Every particle of matter in the universe attracts every other particle with a force varying inversely as the square of the distance between them, and directly as the product of the masses of the two particles." And Newton further proved that if a body, projected in free space and moving with any velocity, became subject to a central force acting, like gravitation, inversely as the square of the distance, it must revolve in an ellipse, or in a closely allied curve. These curves are what are known as the "conic sections"—that is, they are the curves found when a cone is cut across in different directions. Their relation to each other may be illustrated thus. If we have a very powerful light emerging from a minute hole, then, if we place a screen in the path of the beam of light, and exactly at right angles to its axis, the light falling on the screen will fill an exact circle. If we turn the screen so as to be inclined to the axis of the beam, the circle will lengthen out in one direction, and will become an ellipse. If we turn the screen still further, the ellipse will lengthen and lengthen, until at last, when the screen has become parallel to one of the edges of the beam of light, the ellipse will only have one end; the other will be lost. For it is clear that that edge of the beam of light which is parallel to the screen can never meet it. The curve now shown on the screen is called a parabola, and if the screen is turned further yet, the boundaries of the light falling upon it become divergent, and we have a fourth curve, the hyperbola. Bodies moving under the influence of gravitation can move in any of these curves, but only the circle and ellipse are closed orbits. A particle moving in a parabola or hyperbola can only make one approach to its attracting body; after such approach it continually recedes from it. As the circle and parabola are only the two extreme forms of an ellipse, the two foci being at the same point for the circle and at an infinite distance apart for the parabola, we may regard all orbits under gravitation as being ellipses of one form or another. From his great demonstration of the law of gravitation, Newton went on to apply it in many directions. He showed that the Earth could not be truly spherical in shape, but that there must be a flattening of its poles. He showed also that the Moon, which is exposed to the attractions both of the Earth and of the Sun, and, to a sensible extent, of some of the other planets, must show irregularities in her motion, which at that time had not been noticed. The Moon's orbit is inclined to that of the Earth, cutting its plane in two opposite points, called the "nodes." It had long been observed that the position of the nodes travelled round the ecliptic once in about nineteen years. Newton was able to show that this was a consequence of the Sun's attraction upon the Moon. And he further made a particular application of the principle thus brought out, for, the Earth not being a true sphere, but flattened at the poles and bulging at the equator, the equatorial belt might be regarded as a compact ring of satellites revolving round the Earth's equator. This, therefore, would tend to retrograde precisely as the nodes of a single satellite would, so that the axis of the equatorial belt of the Earth—in other words, the axis of the Earth—must revolve round the pole of the ecliptic. Consequently the pole of the heavens appears to move amongst the stars, and the point where the celestial equator crosses the equator necessarily moves with it. This is what we know as the "Precession of the Equinoxes," and it is from our knowledge of the fact and the amount of precession that we are able to determine roughly the date when the first great work of astronomical observation was accomplished, namely, the grouping of the stars into constellations by the astronomers of the prehistoric age. The publication of Newton's great work, the Principia (The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy), in which he developed the Laws of Motion, the significance of Kepler's Three Planetary Laws, and the Law of Universal Gravitation, took place in 1687, and was due to his friend EDMUND HALLEY, to whom he had confided many of his results. That he was the means of securing the publication of the Principia is Halley's highest claim to the gratitude of posterity, but his own work in the field which Newton had opened was of great importance. Newton had treated comets as moving in parabolic orbits, and Halley, collecting all the observations of comets that were available to him, worked out the particulars of their orbits on this assumption, and found that the elements of three were very closely similar, and that the interval between their appearances was nearly the same, the comets having been seen in 1531, 1607, and 1682. On further consulting old records he found that comets had been observed in 1456, 1378, and 1301. He concluded that these were different appearances of the same object, and predicted that it would be seen again in 1758, or, according to a later and more careful computation, in 1759. As the time for its return drew near, CLAIRAUT computed with the utmost care the retardation which would be caused to the comet by the attractions of Jupiter and Saturn. The comet made its predicted nearest approach to the Sun on March 13, 1759, just one month earlier than Clairaut had computed. But in its next return, in 1835, the computations effected by PONTÉCOULANT were only two days in error, so carefully had the comet been followed during its unseen journey to the confines of the solar system and back again, during a period of seventy-five years. PontÉcoulant's exploit was outdone at the next return by Drs. COWELL and CROMMELIN, of Greenwich Observatory, who not only computed the time of its perihelion passage—that is to say, its nearest approach to the Sun—for April 16, 1910, but followed the comet back in its wanderings during all its returns to the year 240 B.C. Halley's Comet, therefore, was the first comet that was known to travel in a closed orbit and to return to the neighbourhood of the Sun. Not a few small or telescopic comets are now known to be "periodic," but Halley's is the only one which has made a figure to the naked eye. Notices of it occur not a few times in history; it was the comet "like a flaming sword" which Josephus described as having been seen over Jerusalem not very long before the destruction by Titus. It was also the comet seen in the spring of the year when William the Conqueror invaded England, and was skilfully used by that leader as an omen of his coming victory. The law of gravitation had therefore enabled men to recognise in Halley's Comet an addition to the number of the primary bodies in the solar system—the first addition that had been made since prehistoric times. On March 13, 1781, Sir WILLIAM HERSCHEL detected a new object, which he at first supposed to be a comet, but afterwards recognised as a planet far beyond the orbit of Saturn. This planet, to which the name of Uranus was finally given, had a mean distance from the Sun nineteen times that of the Earth, and a diameter four times as great. This was a second addition to the solar system, but it was a discovery by sight, not by deduction. The first day of the nineteenth century, January 1, 1801, was signalised by the discovery of a small planet by PIAZZI. The new object was lost for a time, but it was redetected on December 31 of the same year. This planet lay between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter—a region in which many hundreds of other small bodies have since been found. The first of these "minor planets" was called Ceres; the next three to be discovered are known as Pallas, Juno, and Vesta. Beside these four, two others are of special interest: one, Eros, which comes nearer the Sun than the orbit of Mars—indeed at some oppositions it approaches the Earth within 13,000,000 miles, and is therefore, next to the Moon, our nearest neighbour in space; the other, Achilles, moves at a distance from the Sun equal to that of Jupiter. Ceres is much the largest of all the minor planets; indeed is larger than all the others put together. Yet the Earth exceeds Ceres 4000 times in volume, and 7000 times in mass, and the entire swarm of minor planets, all put together, would not equal in total volume one-fiftieth part of the Moon. The search for these small bodies rendered it necessary that much fuller and more accurate maps of the stars should be made than had hitherto been attempted, and this had an important bearing on the next great event in the development of gravitational astronomy. The movements of Uranus soon gave rise to difficulties. It was found impossible, satisfactorily, to reconcile the earlier and later observations, and in the tables of Uranus, published by BOUVARD in 1821, the earlier observations were rejected. But the discrepancies between the observed and calculated places for the planet soon began to reappear and quickly increase, and the suggestion was made that these discrepancies were due to an attraction exercised by some planet as yet unknown. Thus Mrs. Somerville in a little book on the connection of the physical sciences, published in 1836, wrote, "Possibly it (that is, Uranus) may be subject to disturbances from some unseen planet revolving about the Sun beyond the present boundaries of our system. If, after the lapse of years, the tables formed from a combination of numerous observations should still be inadequate to represent the motions of Uranus, the discrepancies may reveal the existence, nay, even the mass and orbit of a body placed for ever beyond the sphere of vision." In 1843 JOHN C. ADAMS, who had just graduated as Senior Wrangler at Cambridge, proceeded to attack the problem of determining the position, orbit, and mass of the unknown body by which on this assumption Uranus was disturbed, from the irregularities evident in the motion of that planet. The problem was one of extraordinary intricacy, but by September 1845 Adams had obtained a first solution, which, he submitted to AIRY, the Astronomer Royal. As, however, he neglected to reply to some inquiries made by Airy, no search for the new planet was instituted in England until the results of a new and independent worker had been published. The same problem had been attacked by a well-known and very gifted French mathematician, U. J. J. LEVERRIER, and in June 1846 he published his position for the unseen planet, which proved to be in close accord with that which Adams had furnished to Airy nine months before. On this Airy stirred up Challis, the Director of the Cambridge Observatory, which then possessed the most powerful telescope in England, to search for the planet, and Challis commenced to make charts, which included more than 3000 stars, in order to make sure that the stranger should not escape his net. Leverrier, on the other hand, communicated his result to the Berlin Observatory, where they had just received some of the star charts prepared by Dr. Bremiker in connection with the search for minor planets. The Berlin observer, Dr. Galle, had therefore nothing to do but to compare the stars in the field, upon which he turned his telescope, with those shown on the chart; a star not in the chart would probably be the desired stranger. He found it, therefore, on the very first evening, September 23, 1846, within less than four diameters of the Moon of the predicted place. The same object had been observed by Challis at Cambridge on August 4 and 12, but he was deferring the reduction of his observations until he had completed his scrutiny of the zone, and hence had not recognised it as different from an ordinary star. This discovery of the planet now known as Neptune, which had been disturbing the movement of Uranus, has rightly been regarded as the most brilliant triumph of gravitational astronomy. It was the legitimate crown of that long intellectual struggle which had commenced more than 2000 years earlier, when the first Greek astronomers set themselves to unravel the apparently aimless wanderings of the planets in the assured faith that they would find them obedient unto law. But of what use was all this effort? What is the good of astronomy? The question is often asked, but it is the question of ignorance. The use of astronomy is the development which it has given to the intellectual powers of man. Directly the problem of the planetary motions was first attempted, it became necessary to initiate mathematical processes in order to deal with it, and the necessity for the continued development of mathematics has been felt in the same connection right down to the present day. When the Greek astronomers first began their inquiries into the planetary movements they hoped for no material gain, and they received none. They laboured; we have entered into their labours. But the whole of our vast advances in mechanical and engineering science—advances which more than anything else differentiate this our present age from all those which have preceded it—are built upon our command of mathematics and our knowledge of the laws of motion—a command and a knowledge which we owe directly to their persevering attempts to advance the science of astronomy, and to follow after knowledge, not for any material rewards which she had to offer, but for her own sake.
CHAPTER IVASTRONOMICAL MEASUREMENTSThe old proverb has it that "Science is measurement," and of none of the sciences is this so true as of the science of astronomy. Indeed the measurement of time by observation of the movements of the heavenly bodies was the beginning of astronomy. The movement of the Sun gave the day, which was reckoned to begin either at sunrise or at sunset. The changes of the Moon gave the month, and in many languages the root meaning of the word for Moon is "measurer." The apparent movement of the Sun amongst the stars gave a yet longer division of time, the year, which could be determined in a number of different ways, either from the Sun alone, or from the Sun together with the stars. A very simple and ancient form of instrument for measuring this movement of the Sun was the obelisk, a pillar with a pointed top set up on a level pavement. Such obelisks were common in Egypt, and one of the most celebrated, known as Cleopatra's Needle, now stands on the Thames Embankment. As the Sun moved in the sky, the shadow of the pillar moved on the pavement, and midday, or noon, was marked when the shadow was shortest. The length of the shadow at noon varied from day to day; it was shortest at mid-summer, and longest at midwinter, i.e. at the summer and winter solstices. Twice in the year the shadow of the pillar pointed due west at sunrise, and due east at sunset—that is to say, the shadow at the beginning of the day was in the same straight line as at its end. These two days marked the two equinoxes of spring and autumn. The obelisk was a simple means of measuring the height and position of the Sun, but it had its drawbacks. The length of the shadow and its direction did not vary by equal amounts in equal times, and if the pavement upon which the shadow fell was divided by marks corresponding to equal intervals of time for one day of the year, the marks did not serve for all other days. But if for the pillar a triangular wall was substituted—a wall rising from the pavement at the south and sloping up towards the north at such an angle that it seemed to point to the invisible pivot of the heavens, round which all the stars appeared to revolve—then the shadow of the wall moved on the pavement in the same manner every day, and the pavement if marked to show the hours for one day would show them for any day. The sundials still often found in the gardens of country houses or in churchyards are miniatures of such an instrument. But the Greek astronomers devised other and better methods for determining the positions of the heavenly bodies. Obelisks or dials were of use only with the Sun and Moon which cast shadows. To determine the position of a star, "sights" like those of a rifle were employed, and these were fixed to circles which were carefully divided, generally into 360 "degrees." As there are 365 days in a year, and as the Sun makes a complete circuit of the Zodiac in this time, it moves very nearly a degree in a day. The twelve Signs of the Zodiac are therefore each 30° in length, and each takes on the average a double-hour to rise or set. While the Sun and Moon are each about half a degree in diameter, i.e. about one-sixtieth of the length of a Sign, and therefore take a double-minute to rise or set. Each degree of a circle is therefore divided into 60 minutes, and each minute may be divided into 60 seconds. As the Sun or Moon are each about half a degree, or, more exactly, 32 minutes in diameter, it is clear that, so long as astronomical observations were made by the unaided sight, a minute of arc (written 1') was the smallest division of the circle that could be used. A cord or wire can indeed be detected when seen projected against a moderately bright background if its thickness is a second of arc (written 1")—a sixtieth of a minute—but the wire is merely perceived, not properly defined. Tycho Brahe had achieved the utmost that could be done by the naked eye, and it was the certainty that he could not have made a mistake in an observation in the place of the planet Mars amounting to as much as 8 minutes of arc—that is to say, of a quarter the apparent diameter of the Moon—that made Kepler finally give up all attempts to explain the planetary movements on the doctrine of circular orbits and to try movements in an ellipse. But a contemporary of Kepler, as gifted as he was himself, but in a different direction, was the means of increasing the observing power of the astronomer. GALILEO GALILEI (1564-1642), of a noble Florentine family, was appointed Lecturer in Mathematics at the University of Pisa. Here he soon distinguished himself by his originality of thought, and the ingenuity and decisiveness of his experiments. Up to that time it had been taught that of two bodies the heavier would fall to the ground more quickly than the lighter. Galileo let fall a 100-lb. weight and a 1-lb. weight from the top of the Leaning Tower, and both weights reached the pavement together. By this and other ingenious experiments he laid a firm foundation for the science of mechanics, and he discovered the laws of motion which Newton afterwards formulated. He heard that an instrument had been invented in Holland which seemed to bring distant objects nearer, and, having himself a considerable knowledge of optics, it was not long before he made himself a little telescope. He fixed two spectacle glasses, one for long and one for short sight, in a little old organ-pipe, and thus made for himself a telescope which magnified three times. Before long he had made another which magnified thirty times, and, turning it towards the heavenly bodies, he discovered dark moving spots upon the Sun, mountains and valleys on the Moon, and four small satellites revolving round Jupiter. He also perceived that Venus showed "phases"—that is to say, she changed her apparent shape just as the Moon does—and he found the Milky Way to be composed of an immense number of small stars. These discoveries were made in the years 1609-11. A telescope consists in principle of two parts—an object-glass, to form an image of the distant object, and an eye-piece, to magnify it. The rays of light from the heavenly body fall on the object-glass, and are so bent out of their course by it as to be brought together in a point called the focus. The "light-gathering power" of the telescope, therefore, depends upon the size of the object-glass, and is proportional to its area. But the size of the image depends upon the focal length of the telescope, i.e. upon the distance that the focus is from the object-glass. Thus a small disc, an inch in diameter—such as a halfpenny—will exactly cover the full Moon if held up nine feet away from the eye; and necessarily the image of the full Moon made by an object-glass of nine-feet focus will be an inch in diameter. The eye-piece is a magnifying-glass or small microscope applied to this image, and by it the image can be magnified to any desired amount which the quality of the object-glass and the steadiness of the atmosphere may permit. This little image of the Moon, planet, or group of stars lent itself to measurement. A young English gentleman, GASCOIGNE, who afterwards fell at the Battle of Marston Moor, devised the "micrometer" for this purpose. The micrometer usually has two frames, each carrying one or more very thin threads—usually spider's threads—and the frames can be moved by very fine screws, the number of turns or parts of a turn of each screw being read off on suitable scales. By placing one thread on the image of one star, and the other on the image of another, the apparent separation of the two can be readily and precisely measured. Within the last thirty years photography has immensely increased the ease with which astronomical measurements can be made. The sensitive photographic plate is placed in the focus of the telescope, and the light of Sun, Moon, or stars, according to the object to which the telescope is directed, makes a permanent impression on the plate. Thus a picture is obtained, which can be examined and measured in detail at any convenient time afterwards; a portion of the heavens is, as it were, brought actually down to the astronomer's study. It was long before this great advance was effected. The first telescopes were very imperfect, for the rays of different colour proceeding from any planet or star came to different foci, so that the image was coloured, diffused, and ill-defined. The first method by which this difficulty was dealt with was by making telescopes of enormously long focal length; 80, 100, or 150 feet were not uncommon, but these were at once cumbersome and unsteady. Sir Isaac Newton therefore discarded the use of object-glasses, and used curved mirrors in order to form the image in the focus, and succeeded in making two telescopes on this principle of reflection. Others followed in the same direction, and a century later Sir WILLIAM HERSCHEL was most skilful and successful in making "reflectors," his largest being 40 feet in focal length, and thus giving an image of the Moon in its focus of nearly 4-½ inches diameter. But in 1729 CHESTER MOOR HALL found that by combining two suitable lenses together in the object-glass he could get over most of the colour difficulty, and in 1758 the optician DOLLOND began to make object-glasses that were almost free from the colour defect. From that time onward the manufacture of "refractors," as object-glass telescopes are called, has improved; the glass has been made more transparent and more perfect in quality, and larger in size, and the figure of the lens improved. The largest refractor now in use is that of the Yerkes Observatory, Wisconsin, U.S.A., and is 40 inches in aperture, with a focal length of 65 feet, so that the image of the Moon in its focus has a diameter of more than 7 inches. At present this seems to mark the limit of size for refractors, and the difficulty of getting good enough glass for so large a lens is very great indeed. Reflectors have therefore come again into favour, as mirrors can be made larger than any object-glass. Thus Lord Rosse's great telescope was 6 feet in diameter; and the most powerful telescope now in action is the great 5-foot mirror of the Mt. Wilson Observatory, California, with a focal length, as sometimes used, of 150 feet. Thus its light-gathering power is about 60,000 times that of the unaided eye, and the full Moon in its focus is 17 inches in diameter; such is the enormous increase to man's power of sight, and consequently to his power of learning about the heavenly bodies, which the development of the telescope has afforded to him. The measurement of time was the first purpose for which men watched the heavenly bodies; a second purpose was the measurement of the size of the Earth. If at one place a star was observed to pass exactly overhead, and if at another, due south of it, the same star was observed to pass the meridian one degree north of the zenith, then by measuring the distance between the two places the circumference of the whole Earth would be known, for it would be 360 times that amount. In this way the size of the Earth was roughly ascertained 2000 years before the invention of the telescope. But with the telescope measures of much greater precision could be made, and hence far more difficult problems could be attacked. One great practical problem was that of finding out the position of a ship when out of sight of land. The ancient Phoenician and Greek navigators had mostly confined themselves to coasting voyages along the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, and therefore the quick recognition of landmarks was the first requisite for a good sailor. But when, in 1492, Columbus had brought a new continent to light, and long voyages were freely taken across the great oceans, it became an urgent necessity for the navigator to find out his position when he had been out of sight of any landmark for weeks. This necessity was especially felt by the nations of Western Europe, the countries facing the Atlantic with the New World on its far-distant other shore. Spain, France, England, and Holland, all were eager competitors for a grasp on the new lands, and therefore were earnest in seeking a solution of the problem of navigation. The latitude of the ship could be found out by observing the height of the Sun at noon, or of the Pole Star at night, or in several other ways. But the longitude was more difficult. As the Earth turns on its axis, different portions of its surface are brought in succession under the Sun, and if we take the moment when the Sun is on the meridian of any place as its noon, as twelve o'clock for that place, then the difference of longitude between any two places is essentially the difference in their local times. It was possible for the sailor to find out when it was local noon for him, but how could he possibly find out what time it was at that moment at the port from which he had sailed, perhaps several weeks before? The Moon and stars supplied eventually the means for giving this information. For the Moon moves amongst the stars, as the hand of a clock moves amongst the figures of a dial, and it became possible at length to predict for long in advance exactly where amongst the stars the Moon would be, for any given time, of any selected place. When this method was first suggested, however, neither the motion of the Moon nor the places of the principal stars were known with sufficient accuracy, and it was to remedy this defect, and put navigation upon a sound basis, that CHARLES II. founded Greenwich Observatory in the year 1675, and appointed FLAMSTEED the first Astronomer Royal. In the year 1767 MASKELYNE, the fifth Astronomer Royal, brought out the first volume of the Nautical Almanac, in which the positions of the Moon relative to certain stars were given for regular intervals of Greenwich time. Much about the same period the problem was solved in another way by the invention of the chronometer, by JOHN HARRISON, a Yorkshire carpenter. The chronometer was a large watch, so constructed that its rate was not greatly altered by heat or cold, so that the navigator had Greenwich time with him wherever he went. The new method in the hands of CAPTAIN COOK and other great navigators led to a rapid development of navigation and the discovery of Australia and New Zealand, and a number of islands in the Pacific. The building up of the vast oceanic commerce of Great Britain and of her great colonial empire, both in North America and in the Southern Oceans, has arisen out of the work of the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, and has had a real and intimate connection with it. To observe the motions of the Moon, Sun, and planets, and to determine with the greatest possible precision the places of the stars have been the programme of Greenwich Observatory from its foundation to the present time. Other great national observatories have been Copenhagen, founded in 1637; Paris, in 1667; Berlin, in 1700; St. Petersburg, in 1725, superseded by that of Pulkowa, in 1839; and Washington, in 1842; while not a few of the great universities have also efficient observatories connected with them. Of the directly practical results of astronomy, the promotion of navigation stands in the first rank. But the science has never been limited to merely utilitarian inquiries, and the problem of measuring celestial distances has followed on inevitably from the measurement of the Earth. The first distance to be attacked was that of the nearest companion to the Earth, i.e. the Moon. It often happens on our own planet that it is required to find the distance of an object beyond our reach. Thus a general on the march may come to a river and need to know exactly how broad it is, that he may prepare the means for bridging it. Such problems are usually solved on the following principle. Let A be the distant object. Then if the direction of A be observed from each of two stations, B and C, and the distance of B from C be measured, it is possible to calculate the distances of A from B and from C. The application of this principle to the measurement of the Moon's distance was made by the establishment of an observatory at the Cape of Good Hope, to co-operate with that of Greenwich. It is, of course, not possible to see Greenwich Observatory from the Cape, or vice versa, but the stars, being at an almost infinite distance, lie in the same direction from both observatories. What is required then is to measure the apparent distance of the Moon from the same stars as seen from Greenwich and as seen from the Cape, and, the distance apart of the two observatories being known, the distance of the Moon can be calculated. |