Nov 1882
adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1882natur..27..101h&link_type=abstract
Nature, Volume 27, Issue 683, pp. 101 (1882).
Other
Scientific paper
IT would scarcely perhaps be civil to take no notice of Mr. Backhouse's letter in NATURE, vol. xxvii. p.52, the object of which seems to be principally to discredit my account of the disappearance of the comet in a moonlit sky. Still less, however, would it be reasonable to take offence at it-albeit, Mr. Backhouse is wrong. Indeed, a little more reflection might have shown him that ample time having elapsed without any correction from me appearing in your columns, the presumption must have been strong that I had nothing to correct. I have in fact seen the comet frequently since-as well as many times before-and am moreover really experienced enough not to have made quite so gross a blunder; or at least to have found it out, if I did make it, when so many subsequent opportunities permitted. Besides that, I have fortunately the following testimony in corroboration. One of my sisters wrote, ``What you did not see of the comet agrees exactly with F.'s experience. She looked out at Court Lodge: splendid night; many, even small, stars, though moon shining bright; but the comet wasn't to be seen, though she and Miss B. scanned the whole fine expanse of east and southeast sky.'' Another wrote about the same time that though visible two days later, it was so pale that she did not wake a nephew who wished to see it. My drawing of the 23rd October has two stars above the nucleus, with one of which it made the base of an isosceles triangle, the other being at the vertex. These two stars were plainly visible all the morning of the 30th, but not so high above the roof across the way, but what the motion of the comet since I last saw it (23rd) may have lowered it enough to conceal the nucleus. In fact, either I am wholly right as to the disappearance, nucleus and all, under moonlight, or at least the nucleus must have been concealed. There is no other alternative. As to the great sweep of tail-let us be reasonable in our guesses as to the fallibilty of others however improbable their evidence. May not something for instance be ascribed to the London atmosphere as likely to increase the amount of moonlight reflected? It was for this that I wished the observation made public, viz. as a real phenomenon having a real cause; all the more interesting that it was so surprising-nay, as it seems, so incredible. My only regret is that I have been now tempted into so long a reply.
No associations
LandOfFree
The Comet does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with The Comet, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and The Comet will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-1323112