Page images


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


Masses of Planets that have no Satellites determined from their PerturbaMasses of the others obtained from the Motions of their Satellites - Masses of the Sun, the Earth, of Jupiter and of the Jovial System Mass of the Moon - Real Diameters of Planets, how obtained Size of Sun, Densities of the Heavenly Bodies Formation of Astronomical Tables Requisite Data and Means of obtaining them.

THE masses of such planets as have no satellites are known by comparing the inequalities they produce in the motions of the earth and of each other, determined theoretically, with the same inequalities given by observation; for the disturbing cause must necessarily be proportional to the effect it produces. The masses of the satellites themselves may also be compared with that of the sun by their perturbations. Thus, it is found, from the comparison of a vast number of observations with La Place's theory of Jupiter's satellites, that the mass of the sun is no less than 65,000,000 times greater than the least of these moons. But, as the quantities of matter in any two primary planets are directly as the cubes of the mean distances at which their satellites revolve, and inversely as the squares of their periodic times (N. 135), the mass of the sun and of any planets which have satellites may be compared with the mass of the earth. In this manner it is computed that the mass of the sun is 354,936 times that of the earth; whence the great perturbations of the moon, and the rapid motion of the perigee and nodes of her orbit (N. 136). Even Jupiter, the largest of the planets, has been found by Professor Airy to be 1047-871 times less than the sun; and, indeed, the mass of the whole Jovial system is not more than the 1054 4th part of that of the sun. So that the mass of the satellites bears a very small proportion to that of their primary. The mass of the moon is determined from several sources-from her action on the terrestrial equator, which occasions the nutation in the axis of rotation; from her horizontal parallax; from an inequality she produces in the sun's longitude; and from her action on the tides. The three first quantities, computed from

theory and compared with their observed values, give her mass respectively equal to the,, and ., part of that of the earth, which do not differ much from each other. Dr. Brinkley has found it to be from the constant of lunar nutation: but, from the moon's action in raising the tides, her mass appears to be about the part of that of the earth-a value that cannot differ much from the truth.

The apparent diameters of the sun, moon, and planets are determined by measurement; therefore their real diameters may be compared with that of the earth; for the real diameter of a planet is to the real diameter of the earth, or 7926 miles, as the apparent diameter of the planet to the apparent diameter of the earth as seen from the planet, that is, to twice the parallax of the planet. According to Bessel, the mean apparent diameter of the sun is 1923"-64, and with the solar parallax 8"-5776, it will be found that the diameter of the sun is about 886,877 miles. Therefore, if the centre of the sun were to coincide with the centre of the earth, his volume would not only include the orbit of the moon, but would extend nearly as far again; for the moon's mean distance from the earth is about sixty times the earth's equatorial radius, or 238,793 miles: so that twice the distance of the moon is 477,586 miles, which differs but little from the solar radius; his equatorial radius is probably not much less than the major axis of the lunar orbit. The diameter of the moon is only 2160 miles; and Jupiter's diameter of 88,200 miles is very much less than that of the sun; the diameter of Pallas does not much exceed 79 miles, so that an inhabitant of that planet, in one of our steam carriages, might go round his world in a few hours. The diameters of Lutetia and Atalanta are only 8 and 4 miles respectively; but the whole of the 55 telescopic planets are so small, that their united mass is probably not more than the fifth or sixth part of that of the moon.

The densities of bodies are proportional to their masses, divided by their volumes. Hence, if the sun and planets be assumed to be spheres, their volumes will be as the cubes of their diameters. Now, the apparent diameters of the sun and earth, at their mean distance, are 1923" 6 and 17" 1552, and the mass of the earth is the 354,936th part of that of the sun taken as the unit. It follows, therefore, that the earth is four times as dense as the sun. But the sun is so large that his attractive force would

cause bodies to fall through about 334.65 feet in a second. Consequently, if he were habitable by human beings, they would be unable to move, since their weight would be thirty times as great as it is here. A man of moderate size would weigh about two tons at the surface of the sun; whereas at the surface of some of the new planets he would be so light that it would be impossible to stand steady, since he would only weigh a few pounds. The mean density of the earth has been determined by the following method. Since a comparison of the action of two planets upon a third gives the ratio of the masses of these two planets, it is clear that, if we can compare the effect of the whole earth with the effect of any part of it, a comparison may be instituted between the mass of the whole earth and the mass of that part of it. Now a leaden ball was weighed against the earth by comparing the effects of each upon a pendulum; the nearness of the smaller mass making it produce a sensible effect as compared with that of the larger for by the laws of attraction the whole earth must be considered as collected in its centre. By this method it has been found that the mean density of the earth is 5.660 times greater than that of water at the temperature of 620 of Fahrenheit's thermometer. The late Mr. Baily, whose accuracy as an experimental philosopher is acknowledged, was unremittingly occupied nearly four years in accomplishing this very important object. In order to ascertain the mean density of the earth still more perfectly, Mr. Airy made a series of experiments to compare the simultaneous oscillations of two pendulums, one at the bottom of the Harton coal-pit, 1260 feet deep, in Northumberland, and the other on the surface of the earth immediately above it. The oscillations of the pendulums were compared with an astronomical clock at each station, and the time was instantaneously transmitted from one to the other by a telegraphic wire. The oscillations were observed for more than 100 hours continuously, when it was found that the lower pendulum made 2 oscillations more in 24 hours than the upper The experiment was repeated for the same length of time with the same result; but on this occasion the upper pendulum was taken to the bottom of the mine and the lower brought to the surface. From the difference between the oscillations at the two stations it appears that gravitation at the bottom of the mine exceeds that at the surface by the 1990 part, and that the


mean density of the earth is 6.565, which is greater than that obtained by Mr. Baily by ·89. While employed on the trigonometrical survey of Scotland, Colonel James determined the mean density of the earth to be 5.316, from a deviation of the plumb-line amounting to 2", caused by the attraction of Arthur's Seat and the heights east of Edinburgh: it agrees more nearly with the density found by Mr. Baily than with that deduced from Mr. Airy's experiments. All the planets and satellites appear to be of less density than the earth. The motions of Jupiter's satellites show that his density increases towards his centre. Were his mass homogeneous, his equatorial and polar axes would be in the ratio of 41 to 36, whereas they are observed to be only as 41 to 38. The singular irregularities in the form of Saturn, and the great compression of Mars, prove the internal structure of these two planets to be very far from uniform.

Before entering on the theory of rotation, it may not be foreign to the subject to give some idea of the methods of computing the places of the planets, and of forming astronomical tables. Astronomy is now divided into the three distinct departments of theory, observation, and computation. Since the problem of the three bodies can only be solved by approximation, the analytical astronomer determines the position of a planet in space by a series of corrections. Its place in its circular orbit is first found, then the addition or subtraction of the equation of the centre (N. 48) to or from its mean place gives its position in the ellipse. This again is corrected by the application of the principal periodic inequalities. But, as these are determined for some particular position of the three bodies, they require to be corrected to suit other relative positions. This process is continued till the corrections become less than the errors of observation, when it is obviously unnecessary to carry the approximation further. The true latitude and distance of the planet from the sun are obtained by methods similar to those employed for the longitude.

As the earth revolves equably about its axis in 24 hours, at the rate of 150 in an hour, time becomes a measure of angular motion, and the principal element in astronomy, where the object is to determine the exact state of the heavens and the successive changes it undergoes in all ages, past, present, and to come. Now, the longitude, latitude, and distance of a planet from the

sun are given in terms of the time, by general analytical formulæ. These formula will consequently give the exact place of the body in the heavens, for any time assumed at pleasure, provided they can be reduced to numbers. But before the calculator begins his task the observer must furnish the necessary data, which are, obviously, the forms of the orbits, and their positions with regard to the plane of the ecliptic (N. 57). It is therefore necessary to determine by observation, for each planet, the length of the major axis of its orbit, the excentricity, the inclination of the orbit to the plane of the ecliptic, the longitudes of its perihelion and ascending node at a given time, the periodic time of the planet, and its longitude at any instant arbitrarily assumed, as an origin from whence all its subsequent and antecedent longitudes are estimated. Each of these quantities is determined from that position of the planet on which it has most influence. For example, the sum of the greatest and least distances of the planet from the sun is equal to the major axis of the orbit, and their difference is equal to twice the excentricity. The longitude of the planet, when at its least distance from the sun, is the same with the longitude of the perihelion; the greatest latitude of the planet is equal to the inclination of the orbit: the longitude of the planet, when in the plane of the ecliptic in passing towards the north, is the longitude of the ascending node, and the periodic time is the interval between two consecutive passages of the planet through the same node, a small correction being made for the precession of the node during the revolution of the planet (N. 137). Notwithstanding the excellence of instruments and the accuracy of modern observers, unavoidable errors of observation can only be compensated by finding the value of each element from the mean of a thousand, or even many thousands of observations. For as it is probable that the errors are not all in one direction, but that some are in excess and others in defect, they will compensate each other when combined.

However, the values of the elements determined separately can only be regarded as approximate, because they are so connected that the estimation of any one independently will induce errors in the others. The excentricity depends upon the longitude of the perihelion, the mean motion depends upon the major axis, the longitude of the node upon the inclination of the orbit, and vice versa. Consequently, the place of a planet computed

« PreviousContinue »