FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58  
59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   >>   >|  
seen in telescope _a_. The two telescopes are now mounted as in Fig. 2, and the plate to be tested placed in front of the two telescopes as at _c_. It is evident, as in the former case, that if the surface is a true plane, the reflected image of the holes or slit thrown upon it by the telescope, _b_, will be seen sharply defined in the telescope, _a_. [Illustration: FIG. 5.] If any error of convexity exists in the plate, the focal plane is disturbed, and the eyepiece must be moved _out_. If the plate is concave, it must be moved _in_ to obtain a sharp image. Irregular errors in the plate or surface will produce a blurred or indistinct image, and, as in the first instance, no amount of focusing will help matters. These methods are both good, but are not satisfactory in the highest degree, and two or three important factors bar the way to the very best results. One is that the aberrations of the telescopes must be perfectly corrected, a very difficult matter of itself, and requiring the highest skill of the optician. Another, the fact that the human eye will accommodate itself to small distances when setting the focus of the observing telescope. I have frequently made experiments to find out how much this accommodation was in my own case, and found it to amount to as much as 1/40 of an inch. This is no doubt partly the fault of the telescopes themselves, but unless the eye is rigorously educated in this work, it is apt to accommodate itself to a small amount, and will invariably do so if there is a preconceived notion or bias _in the direction of the accommodation_. [Illustration: FIG. 6.] Talking with Prof. C.A. Young a few months since on this subject, he remarked that he noticed that the eye grew more exact in its demands as it grew older, in regard to the focal point. A third and very serious objection to the second method is caused by diffraction from the edges of the holes or the slit. Let me explain this briefly. When light falls upon a slit, such as we have here, it is turned out of its course; as the slit has two edges, and the light that falls on either side is deflected both right and left, the rays that cross from the right side of the slit toward the left, and from the left side of the slit toward the right, produce interference of the wave lengths, and when perfect interference occurs, dark lines are seen. You can have a very pretty illustration of this by cutting a fine slit in a card and holding it
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58  
59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

telescopes

 
telescope
 

amount

 
highest
 

produce

 

interference

 
accommodation
 

accommodate

 

surface

 

Illustration


remarked

 
noticed
 

objection

 

method

 

evident

 

demands

 

regard

 
months
 

notion

 

direction


preconceived

 

invariably

 

Talking

 

subject

 

diffraction

 
lengths
 
perfect
 

occurs

 
mounted
 

holding


cutting
 

illustration

 

pretty

 

deflected

 
explain
 

briefly

 

tested

 

turned

 
caused
 

sharply


degree

 
satisfactory
 

methods

 

defined

 

important

 
factors
 

aberrations

 
perfectly
 

results

 

matters