Now, as to their connection. Of direct evidence we have little. A
few meteors have been observed to come from the known radiants of
shooting-stars. Two instances we have of the fall of meteorites during
star showers. One in 1095, when the Saxon Chronicle tells us stars
fell “so thickly that no man could count them, one of which struck the
ground and when a bystander cast water upon it steam was raised with a
great noise of boiling.” The second case was the fall of a siderite,
eight pounds’ worth of nickel-iron, at Mazapil during the Andromede
shower of 1885, which was by many supposed to be a part of the lost
Biela comet. It contained graphite enough to pencil its own history,
but unfortunately could not write. The direction from which it came was
not recorded, and so the connection between it and the comet not made
out.
[Illustration: THE RADIANT OF A METEORIC SHOWER, SHOWING ALSO THE PATHS
OF THREE METEORS WHICH DO NOT BELONG TO THIS SHOWER—AFTER DENNING.]
If our direct knowledge is thus scanty, reasoning affords surer ground
for belief. For at this point there steps in a bit of news about the
family relations of shooting-stars from a source hardly to have been
anticipated. Indeed, it arose from the thought to examine a qualitative
statement in Young’s “Astronomy” quantitatively. Mathematics is simply
precise reasoning, applied usually to the discovery that a pet theory
will not work. But sometimes it presents one with an unexpected find.
This is what it did here.
It is an interesting fact of observation that more meteors are visible
at six o’clock in the morning than at six o’clock at night in the
proportion of 3 to 1. This seeming preference for early rising is due
to no matutinality on the part of the meteors, but to the matin aspect
then presented by the Earth combined with its orbital motion round the
Sun. For at six in the morning the observer stands on the advancing
side of the Earth, at the bow of the airship; at six at night he is at
the stern. He, therefore, runs into the meteors at sunrise and slips
away from them at sunset. He is pelted in the morning in consequence.
Just as a pedestrian facing a storm gets wetter in front than behind.
[Illustration: METEORS
Diagram explaining their proportionate visibility.
—————— _denotes true paths._
—— - —— ” _apparent paths._
—————— - - - ” _Earth’s path._]
So far the books. Now let us examine this quantitatively according to
the direction in which the meteors themselves may be moving before
the encounter. Suppose, in the first place, that they were travelling
in every possible direction, with the average velocity of the most
erratic members of the family, the great comets. On this supposition
calculation shows that we ought to meet 5.8 times as many at six in the
morning as at six at night. If their orbits were smaller than this,
say, something like those of the asteroids, we should find 7.6 to 1 for
the ratio.
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