The Chautauquan, Vol. 03, December 1882: A Monthly Magazine Devoted to the Promotion of True Culture.; Organ of the Chautauqua Literary and Scientific CircleChautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle
Religion
The Chautauquan, Vol. 03, December 1882: A Monthly Magazine Devoted to the Promotion of True Culture.; Organ of the Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle
Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle
Chautauqua Institution -- Periodicals; Chautauqua Literary and Scientific Circle -- Periodicals
Dr. Huggins, in a rather disappointing article on comets, recently
communicated to a contemporary, remarks that the nucleus, though an
apparently insignificant speck, “is truly the heart and kernel of the
whole thing—potentially it is the comet.” This has scarcely yet been
proved, though it appears exceedingly probable. It is true, however,
as he adds, that this part only of the comet conforms rigorously to
the laws of gravitation, and moves strictly in its orbit. “If we
could see a great comet,” he proceeds, “during its distant wandering,
when it has put off the gala trappings of perihelion excitement, it
would appear as a very sober object, and consist of little more than
nucleus alone.” This again seems probable, though it has never yet
been proved, and the division of some comets into two or more parts,
each having coma, nucleus, and tail of its own, shows that the nucleus
cannot be, in every case, what Dr. Huggins seems here to suggest.
Dr. Huggins has done well in saying (though scarcely with sufficient
emphasis, considering how often the mistake is repeated) that “though
many telescopic comets are of extremely small mass, nucleus included—so
small, indeed, that they are unable to perturb such small bodies as
Jupiter’s satellites—yet we should mistake greatly if we were to
suppose that all comets are ‘airy nothings.’ In some large comets the
nucleus may be a few hundred miles in diameter, or even very much
larger, and may consist of solid matter. It is not necessary to say
that the collision of a cometary nucleus of this order with the earth
would produce destruction on a wide scale.”
It is even more necessary to correct the widely-spread misapprehension
as to the relations between meteors and comets. We hear it stated that
the nucleus of a comet is made up of meteoric stones (Professor P. G.
Tait says—for unknown reasons—that they resemble “paving stones or even
bricks”) as confidently as though the earth had at some time passed
through the nucleus of a comet, and some of our streets were now paved
with stones which had fallen to earth on such an occasion. As a matter
of fact, all that has yet been proved is that meteoric bodies follow
in the track (which is very different from the tail) of some known
comets, and that probably all comets are followed by trains of meteors.
These may have come out of the head or nucleus in some way as yet
unexplained; but it is by no means certain that they have done so, and
it is by many astronomers regarded as more than doubtful.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account