The Popular Science Monthly, October, 1900: Vol. 57, May, 1900 to October, 1900Various
History
The Popular Science Monthly, October, 1900: Vol. 57, May, 1900 to October, 1900
Various
Science -- Periodicals; Technology -- Periodicals
With every improvement in their instruments, astronomers sought to
detect the annual swing of the stars. Each time that increased accuracy
in observations failed to show it, the difficulty in the way of the
Copernican system was heightened. How deep the feeling on the subject
is shown by the enthusiastic title, _Copernicus Triumphans_, given by
Horrebow to the paper in which, from observations by Roemer, he claimed
to have detected the swing. But, alas, critical examination showed
that the supposed inequality was produced by the varying effect of the
warmth of the day and the cold of the night upon the rate of the clock
used by the observer, and not by the motion of the earth.
Hooke, a contemporary of Newton, published an attempt to determine the
parallax of the stars, under the title of “An Attempt to Prove the
Motion of the Earth,” but his work was as great a failure as that of
his predecessors. Had it not been that the proofs of the Copernican
system had accumulated until they became irresistible, these repeated
attempts might have led men to think that perhaps, after all, Ptolemy
and the ancients were somehow in the right.
The difficulty was magnified by the philosophic views of the period. It
was supposed that Nature must economize in the use of space as a farmer
would in the use of valuable land. The ancient astronomers correctly
placed the sphere of the stars outside that of the planets, but did not
suppose it far outside. That Nature would squander her resources by
leaving a vacant space hundreds of thousands of times the extent of
the solar system was supposed contrary to all probability. The actual
infinity of space; the consideration that one had only to enlarge his
conceptions a little to see spaces a thousand times the size of the
solar system look as insignificant as the region of a few yards round a
grain of sand, does not seem to have occurred to anyone.
Considerations drawn from photometry were also lost sight of, because
that art was still undeveloped. Kepler saw that the sun might well be
of the nature of a star; in fact, that the stars were probably suns.
Had he and his contemporaries known that the light of the sun was more
than ten thousand million times that of a bright star, they would have
seen that it must be placed at one hundred thousand times its present
distance to shine as a bright star. If, then, the stars are as bright
as the sun, they must be one hundred thousand times as far away, and
their annual parallax would then have been too small for detection with
the instruments of the time. Such considerations as this would have
removed the real difficulty.
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