FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163  
164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   >>   >|  
mass of the planet has been cancelled out; the mass of the sun remains, multiplied by the gravitation-constant, and is seen to be proportional to the cube of the distance divided by the square of the periodic time: a ratio, which is therefore the same for all planets controlled by the sun. Hence, knowing _r_ and _T_ for any single planet, the value of _VS_ is known. No. 4. So by knowing the length of year and distance of any planet from the sun, the sun's mass can be calculated, in terms of that of the earth. No. 5. For the satellites, the force acting depends on the mass of _their_ central body, a planet. Hence the mass of any planet possessing a satellite becomes known. The same argument holds for any other system controlled by a central body--for instance, for the satellites of Jupiter; only instead of _S_ it will be natural to write _J_, as meaning the mass of Jupiter. Hence, knowing _r_ and _T_ for any one satellite of Jupiter, the value of _VJ_ is known. Apply the argument also to the case of moon and earth. Knowing the distance and time of revolution of our moon, the value of _VE_ is at once determined; _E_ being the mass of the earth. Hence, _S_ and _J_, and in fact the mass of any central body possessing a visible satellite, are now known in terms of _E_, the mass of the earth (or, what is practically the same thing, in terms of _V_, the gravitation-constant). Observe that so far none of these quantities are known absolutely. Their relative values are known, and are tabulated at the end of the Notes above, but the finding of their absolute values is another matter, which we must defer. But, it may be asked, if Kepler's third law only gives us the mass of a _central_ body, how is the mass of a _satellite_ to be known? Well, it is not easy; the mass of no satellite is known with much accuracy. Their mutual perturbations give us some data in the case of the satellites of Jupiter; but to our own moon this method is of course inapplicable. Our moon perturbs at first sight nothing, and accordingly its mass is not even yet known with exactness. The mass of comets, again, is quite unknown. All that we can be sure of is that they are smaller than a certain limit, else they would perturb the planets they pass near. Nothing of this sort has ever been detected. They are themselves perturbed plentifully, but they perturb nothing; hence we learn that their mass is small. The mass of a comet may, indeed, be a few
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163  
164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
planet
 

satellite

 

Jupiter

 

central

 

knowing

 
distance
 
satellites
 

perturb

 
possessing
 

values


gravitation

 

constant

 
controlled
 

argument

 
planets
 

method

 
Kepler
 
accuracy
 

mutual

 

perturbations


detected

 

Nothing

 

perturbed

 

plentifully

 

perturbs

 

exactness

 

comets

 

smaller

 

matter

 

unknown


inapplicable

 
acting
 

calculated

 

depends

 

instance

 
system
 

length

 
proportional
 

multiplied

 
remains

cancelled
 

divided

 
square
 
single
 

periodic

 

natural

 
Observe
 

quantities

 
absolutely
 

finding