[footnote] *Bessel, in 'Astr. Nachr.', 1836, No. 302, s. 231. Schum, 'Jahrb.', 1837 s. 175. See, also Lehmann, 'Ueber Cometenschweife' (On the Tails of Comets), in Bode, 'Astron. Jahrb. fur' 1826, s. 168.
Aristotle, in his 'Natural Philosophy', makes these emanations the means of bringing the phenomena of comets into a singular connection with the existence of the Milky Way. According to his views, the innumerable quantity of stars which compose this starry zone give out a self-luminous, incandescent matter. The nebulous belt which separates the different portions of the vault of heaven was therefore regarded by the Stagirite as a large comet, the substance of which was incessantly being renewed.*
[footnote] *Aristot., 'Meteor.', i., 8, 11-14, und 19-21 (ed. Ideler, t. i., p. 32-34). Biese, 'Phil. des Aristoteles', bd. ii., s. 86. Since Aristotle exercised so great an influence throughout the whole of the Middle Ages, it is very much to be regretted that he was so averse to those grander views of the elder Pythagoreans, which inculcated ideas so nearly approximating to truth respecting the structure of the universe. He asserts that comets are transitory meteors belonging to our atmosphere in the very book in which he cites the opinion of the Pythagorean school, according to which these cosmical bodies are supposed to be planets having long periods of revolution. (Aristot., i., 6, 2.) This Pythagorean doctrine, which, according to the testimony of Apollonius Myndius, was still more ancient, having originated with the Chaldeans, passed over to the Romans, who in this instance, as was their usual practice, were merely the copiers of others. The Myndian philosopher describes the path of comets as directed toward the upper and remote regions of heaven. Hence Seneca says, in his 'Nat. Quaest.', vii., 17: "Cometes non est species falsa, sed proprium sidus sicut solis et lunae: altiora mundi secat et tunc demum apparet quum in imum cursum sui venit;" and again (at vii., 27), "Cometes aternos esse et sortis ejusdem, cujus caetera (sidera), etiamsi faciem illis non habent similem." Pliny (ii., 25) also refers to Apollonius Myndius, when he says, "Sunt qui et haec sidera perpetua esse credant suoque ambitu ire, sed non nisi relicta a sole cerni."
p 104 The occulation of the fixed stars by the nucleus of a comet, or by its innermost vaporous envelopes, might throw some light on the physical character of these wonderful bodies; but we are unfortunately deficient in observations by which we may be assured* that the occulation was perfectly central; for, as it has already been observed, the parts of the envelope contiguous to the nucleus are alternately composed of layers of dense or very attenuated vapor.
[footnote] *Olbers, in 'Astr. Nachr.', 1828, s. 157, 184. Arago, 'De la Constitution physique des Cometes; Annuaire de' 1832, p. 203, 208. The ancients were struck by the phenomenon that it was possible to see through comets as through a flame. The earliest evidence to be met with of stars having been seen through comets is that of Democritus (Aristot., 'Meteor.', i., 6, 11), and the statement leads Aristotle to make the not unimportant remark, that he himself had observed the occulation of one of the stars of Gemini by Jupiter. Seneca only speaks decidedly of the transparence of the tail of comets. "We may see," says he, "stars through a comet as through a cloud ('Nat. Quaest.', vii., 18); but we can ony see through the rays of the tail, and not through the body of the comet itself: 'non in ea parte qua sidus ipsum est spissi et solidi ignis, sed qua rarus splendor occurrit et in crines dispergitur. Per intervalla ignium, non er ipsos, vides" (vii., 26). The last remark is unnecessary, since, as Galileo observed in the 'Saggiatore (Lettera a Monsignor Cesarini', 1619), we can certainly see through a flame when it is not of too great a thickness'.
On the other hand the carefully conducted measurements of Bessel prove, beyond all doubt, that on the 29th of September, 1835, the light of a star of the tenth magnitude, which was then at a distance of 7".78 from the central point of the head of Halley's comet, passed through very dense nebulous matter, without experiencing any deflection during its passage.*
[footnote] *Bessel, in the 'Astron. Nachr.', 1836, No. 301, s. 204, 206. Struve, in 'Recueil des Mem. de l'Acad. de St. Peterab.', 1836, p. 140, 143, and 'Astr. Nachr.', 1836, No. 303, s. 238, writes as follows: "At Dorpat the star was in conjunction only 2".2 from the brightest point of the comet. The star remained continually visible, and its light was not perceptibly diminished, while the nucleus of the comet seemed to be almost extinguished before the radiance of the small star of the ninth or tenth magnitude."
If such an absence of refracting power must be ascribed to the nucleus of a comet, we can scarcely regard the matter composing comets as a gaseous fluid. The question here arises whether this absence of refracting power may not be owing to the extreme tenuity of the fluid; or does the comet consist of separated particles, constituting a cosmical stratum of clouds, which, like the clouds of our atmosphere, that exercise no influence on the p 105 zenith distance of the stars, does not affect the ray of light passing through it? In the passage of a comet over a star, a more or less considerable diminution of light has often been observed; but this has been justly ascribed to the brightness of the ground from which the star seems to stand forth during the passage of the comet.
The most important and decisive observations that we possess on the nature and the light of comets are due to Arago's polarization experiments. His polariscope instructs us regarding the physical constitution of the Sun and comets, indicating whether a ray that reaches us from a distance of many millions of miles transmits light directly or by reflection; and if the former, whther the source of light is a solid, a liquid, or a gaseous body. His apparatus was used at the Paris Observatory in examining the light of Capella and that of the great comet of 1819. The latter showed polarized, and therefore reflected light, while the fixed star, as was to be expected, appeared to be a self-luminous sun.*
[footnote] *On the 3d of July, 1819, Arago made the first attempt to analyze the light of comets by polarization, on the evening of the sudden appearance of the great comet. I was present at the Paris Observatory, and was fully convinced, as were also Matthieu and the late Bouvard of the dissimilarity in the intensity of the light seen in the polariscope, when the instrument received cometary light. When it received light from Capella, which was near the comet, and at an equal altitude, the images were of equal intensity. On the reappearance of Halley's comet in 1835, the instrument was altered so as to give, according to Arago's chromatic polarization, two images of complementary colors (green and red). ('Annales de Chimie', t. xiii., p. 108; 'Annuaire', 1832, p. 216.) "We must conclude from these observations," says Arago, "that the cometary light was not entirely composed of rays having the properties of direct light, there being light which was reflected specularly or polarized, that is, coming from the sun. It can not be stated with absolute certainty that comets shine only with borrowed light, for bodies, in becoming self-luminous, do not, on that account, lose the power of reflecting foreign light."