FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253  
254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   >>   >|  
might be expected to understand thoroughly. It is thought daring in the extreme for one outside the circles of official astronomy (as Newton in Flamstead's time, Sir W. Herschel in Maskelyne's, and Sir J. Herschel in the present century), to advance or maintain an opinion adverse to that of some official chief, but for a subordinate (even though no longer so), to be guilty of such rash procedure 'is most tolerable and not to be endured,' as a typical official has said. Accordingly, very little attention was paid by Leverrier to Liais's objections. Yet, in some respects, what M. Liais had to say was very much to the point. At the very time when Lescarbault was watching the black spot on the sun's face, Liais was examining the sun with a telescope of much greater magnifying power, and saw no such spot. His attention was specially directed to the edge of the sun (where Lescarbault saw the spot) because he was engaged in determining the decrease of the sun's brightness near the edge. Moreover, he was examining the very part of the sun's edge where Lescarbault saw the planet enter, at a time when it must have been twelve minutes in time upon the face of the sun, and well within the margin of the solar disc. The negative evidence here is strong; though it must always be remembered that negative evidence requires to be overwhelmingly strong before it can be admitted as effective against positive evidence. It seems at a first view utterly impossible that Liais, examining with a more powerful telescope the region where Lescarbault saw the spot, could have failed to see it had it been there; but experience shows that it is not impossible for an observer engaged in examining phenomena of one class to overlook a phenomenon of another class, even when glaringly obvious. All we can say is that Liais was not likely to have overlooked Lescarbault's planet had it been there; and we must combine this probability against Vulcan's existence with arguments derived from other considerations. There is also the possibility of an error in time. As the writer in the 'North British Review' remarks, 'twelve minutes is so short a time that it is just possible that the planet may not have entered upon the sun during the time that Liais observed it.' The second and third arguments are stronger. In fact, I do not see how they can be resisted. It is, in the first place, clear from Lescarbault's account that Vulcan must have a considerable diam
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253  
254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Lescarbault

 

examining

 

planet

 

official

 

evidence

 

attention

 

telescope

 
minutes
 

Vulcan

 

arguments


impossible
 
twelve
 

negative

 

strong

 
engaged
 

Herschel

 
overlooked
 
combine
 

utterly

 

expected


derived

 

existence

 
probability
 

understand

 

obvious

 

observer

 
phenomena
 

experience

 

extreme

 
daring

thought

 

overlook

 

glaringly

 

powerful

 

region

 
phenomenon
 
failed
 

stronger

 

account

 

considerable


resisted

 

observed

 

writer

 

possibility

 

considerations

 

British

 
entered
 

Review

 

remarks

 
longer