Letters on Astronomy: in which the Elements of the Science are Familiarly Explained in Connection with Biographical Sketches of the Most Eminent AstronomersOlmsted, Denison
Science
Letters on Astronomy: in which the Elements of the Science are Familiarly Explained in Connection with Biographical Sketches of the Most Eminent Astronomers
Olmsted, Denison
Astronomy
It is not generally understood in what way greatness of size in a
telescope increases its powers; and it conveys but an imperfect idea of
the excellence of a telescope, to tell how much it magnifies. In the
same instrument, an increase of magnifying power is always attended with
a diminution of the light and of the field of view. Hence, the lower
powers generally afford the most agreeable views, because they give the
clearest light, and take in the largest space. The several circumstances
which influence the qualities of a telescope are, illuminating power,
distinctness, field of view, and magnifying power. Large mirrors and
large object-glasses are superior to smaller ones, because they collect
a larger beam of light, and transmit it to the eye. Stars which are
invisible to the naked eye are rendered visible by the telescope,
because this instrument collects and conveys to the eye a large beam of
the few rays which emanate from the stars; whereas a beam of these rays
of only the diameter of the pupil of the eye, would afford too little
light for distinct vision. In this particular, large telescopes have
great advantages over small ones. The great mirror of Herschel's
forty-feet reflector collects and conveys to the eye a beam more than
four feet in diameter. The Dorpat telescope also transmits to the eye a
beam nine and one half inches in diameter. This seems small, in
comparison with the reflector; but much less of the light is lost on
passing through the glass than is absorbed by the mirror, and the mirror
is very liable to be clouded or tarnished; so that there is not so great
a difference in the two instruments, in regard to illuminating power, as
might be supposed from the difference of size.
_Distinctness of view_ is all-important to the performance of an
instrument. The object may be sufficiently bright, yet, if the image is
distorted, or ill-defined, the illumination is of little consequence.
This property depends mainly on the skill with which all the
imperfections of figure and color in the glass or mirror are corrected,
and can exist in perfection only when the image is rendered completely
achromatic, and when all the rays that proceed from each point in the
object are collected into corresponding points of the image,
unaccompanied by any other rays. Distinctness is very much affected by
the _steadiness_ of the instrument. Every one knows how indistinct a
page becomes, when a book is passed rapidly backwards and forwards
before the eyes, and how difficult it is to read in a carriage in rapid
motion on a rough road.
_Field of view_ is another important consideration. The finest
instruments exhibit the moon, for example, not only bright and distinct,
in all its parts, but they take in the whole disk at once; whereas, the
inferior instruments, when the higher powers, especially, are applied,
permit us to see only a small part of the moon at once.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account