“When we note that the orbit of the great comet of 1882 almost
grazes the sun’s surface, there is a natural tendency to attribute a
solar origin to it. We know from the phenomena of the solar
prominences that the sun is continually erupting torrents of matter
with very high speeds; a speed of 270 miles per second would suffice
to send the matter round the sun in a circular orbit; if it rose to
382 miles per second the orbit would be parabolic; while for any
intermediate speed it would be elliptic. By combining the observed
speed of ascent of the prominence matter with the speed of approach
or recession that is indicated by the shift of the lines in the
spectrum, we conclude that speeds of this order are quite common, so
that no difficulty arises on that account. I feel rather more
difficulty from the consideration that the meteoric masses that
compose a comet’s head could not exist in the sun in a solid state;
the heat would suffice to vaporize them. The materials would
solidify in the cold of space, but as they would be under no
pressure, I imagine that the resulting solid particles would be
microscopically small, not of the size required to form reservoirs
for a large amount of gas. All objects ejected by the sun would move
in orbits that intersect the sun, except in so far as their orbits
are modified by planetary action. This latter might readily be large
enough to change the orbit to one just outside the sun (like those
of the sun-grazing comets of 1680, 1843, 1882, etc.). However, the
great majority of known comets have orbits whose least distance from
the sun is so large that we cannot imagine an origin for these by
simple solar eruption.
“The question arises, Can the comets have existed for so long a
period in view of the wastage that they undergo? According to the
geologists the date of the approach of another sun to ours (as
suggested in the planetesimal hypothesis) must be put at least a
thousand million years ago; in such an interval, even the comets of
longest period would have returned thousands of times, and I gravely
doubt whether they could continue to be such compact bodies as they
appear to be; I frankly admit that I have no plausible suggestion to
offer for evading the difficulty; it is one of the numerous cases in
astronomy (the status of the spiral nebulæ is another) in which we
must be content for the present to record observed facts and
suggested interpretations, leaving full understanding to come at a
later date, if at all.”
According to the same authority, in connection with his views on the
subject, as expressed after reading the MSS. prepared for this chapter,
he writes, as follows:
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