We now arrive at the final inquiry, what relations did the body which afforded the meteoric shower sustain to the earth? Was it of the nature of a satellite, or terrestrial comet, that revolves around the earth as its centre of motion? Was it a collection of nebulous, or cometary matter, which the earth encountered in its annual progress? or was it a comet, which chanced at this time to be pursuing its path along with the earth, around their common centre of motion? It could not have been of the nature of a satellite to the earth, (or one of those bodies which are held by some to afford the meteoric stones, which sometimes fall to the earth from huge meteors that traverse the atmosphere,) because it remained so long stationary with respect to the earth. A body so near the earth as meteors of this class are known to be, could not remain apparently stationary among the stars for a moment; whereas the body in question occupied the same position, with hardly any perceptible variation, for at least two hours. Nor can we suppose that the earth, in its annual progress, came into the vicinity of a nebula, which was either stationary, or wandering lawless through space. Such a collection of matter could not remain stationary within the solar system, in an insulated state, for, if not prevented by a motion of its own, or by the attraction of some nearer body, it would have proceeded directly towards the sun; and had it been in motion in any other direction than that in which the earth was moving, it would soon have been separated from the earth; since, during the eight hours, while the meteoric shower was visible, the earth moved in its orbit through the space of nearly five hundred and fifty thousand miles.
The foregoing considerations conduct us to the following train of reasoning. First, if all the meteors which fell on the morning of November 13, 1833, had been collected and restored to their original connexion in space, they would of themselves have constituted a nebulous body of great extent; but we have reason to suppose that they, in fact, composed but a small part of the mass from which they emanated, since, after the loss of so much matter as proceeded from it in the great meteoric shower of 1799, and in the several repetitions of it that preceded the year 1833, it was still capable of affording so copious a shower on that year; and similar showers, more limited in extent, were repeated for at least five years afterwards. We are therefore to regard the part that descended only as the extreme portions of a body or collection of meteors, of unknown extent, existing in the planetary spaces.
Secondly, since the earth fell in with this body in the same part of its orbit, for several years in succession, it must either have remained there while the earth was performing its whole revolution around the sun, or it must itself have had a revolution, as well as the earth. But I have already shown that it could not have remained stationary in that part of space; therefore, it must have had a revolution around the sun.
Thirdly, its period of revolution must have either been greater than the earth's, equal to it, or less. It could not have been greater, for then the two bodies could not have been together again at the end of the year, since the meteoric body would not have completed its revolution in a year. Its period might obviously be the same as the earth's, for then they might easily come together again after one revolution of each; although their orbits might differ so much in shape as to prevent their being together at any intermediate point. But the period of the body might also be less than that of the earth, provided it were some aliquot part of a year, so as to revolve just twice, or three times, for example, while the earth revolves once. Let us suppose that the period is one third of a year. Then, since we have given the periodic times of the two bodies, and the major axis of the orbit of one of them, namely, of the earth, we can, by Kepler's law, find the major axis of the other orbit; for the square of the earth's periodic time 12 is to the square of the body's time (1⁄3)2 as the cube of the major axis of the earth's orbit is to the cube of the major axis of the orbit in question. Now, the three first terms of this proportion are known, and consequently, it is only to solve a case in the simple rule of three, to find the term required. On making the calculation, it is found, that the supposition of a periodic time of only one third of a year gives an orbit of insufficient length; the whole major axis would not reach from the sun to the earth; and consequently, a body revolving in it could never come near to the earth. On making trial of six months, we obtain an orbit which satisfies the conditions, being such as is represented by the diagram on page 362, Fig. 69´, where the outer circle denotes the earth's orbit, the sun being in the centre, and the inner ellipse denotes the path of the meteoric body. The two bodies are together at the top of the figure, being the place of the meteoric body's aphelion on the thirteenth of November, and the figures 10, 20, &c., denote the relative positions of the earth and the body for every ten days, for a period of six months, in which time the body would have returned to its aphelion.
Fig. 69´.
Such would be the relation of the body that affords the meteoric shower of November, provided its revolution is accomplished in six months; but it is still somewhat uncertain whether the period be half a year or a year; it must be one or the other.
If we inquire, now, why the meteors always appear to radiate from a point in the constellation Leo, recollecting that this is the point to which the body is projected among the stars, the answer is, that this is the very point towards which the earth is moving in her orbit at that time; so that if, as we have proved, the earth passed through or near a nebulous body on the thirteenth of November, that body must necessarily have been projected into the constellation Leo, else it could not have lain directly in her path. I consider it therefore as established by satisfactory proof, that the meteors of November thirteenth emanate from a nebulous or cometary body, revolving around the sun, and coming so near the earth at that time that the earth passes through its skirts, or extreme portions, and thus attracts to itself some portions of its matter, giving to the meteors a greater velocity than could be imparted by gravity alone, in consequence of passing rapidly by them.
All these conclusions were made out by a process of reasoning strictly inductive, without supposing that the meteoric body itself had ever been seen. But there are some reasons for believing that we do actually see it, and that it is no other than that mysterious appearance long known under the name of the zodiacal light. This is a faint light, which at certain seasons of the year appears in the west after evening twilight, and at certain other seasons appears in the east before the dawn, following or preceding the track of the sun in a triangular figure, with its broad base next to the sun, and its vertex reaching to a greater or less distance, sometimes more than ninety degrees from that luminary. You may obtain a good view of it in February or March, in the west, or in October, in the morning sky. The various changes which this light undergoes at different seasons of the year are such as to render it probable, to my mind, that this is the very body which affords the meteoric showers; its extremity coming, in November, within the sphere of the earth's attraction. But, as the arguments for the existence of a body in the planetary regions, which affords these showers, were drawn without the least reference to the zodiacal light, and are good, should it finally be proved that this light has no connexion with them, I will not occupy your attention with the discussion of this point, to the exclusion of topics which will probably interest you more.
It is perhaps most probable, that the meteoric showers of August and December emanate from the same body. I know of nothing repugnant to this conclusion, although it has not yet been distinctly made out. Had the periods of the earth and of the meteoric body been so adjusted to each other that the latter was contained an exact even number of times in the former; that is, had it been exactly either a year or half a year; then we might expect a similar recurrence of the meteoric shower every year; but only a slight variation in such a proportion between the two periods would occasion the repetition of the shower for a few years in succession, and then an intermission of them, for an unknown length of time, until the two bodies were brought into the same relative situation as before. Disturbances, also, occasioned by the action of Venus and Mercury, might wholly subvert this numerical relation, and increase or diminish the probability of a repetition of the phenomenon. Accordingly, from the year 1830, when the meteoric shower of November was first observed, until 1833, there was a regular increase of the exhibition; in 1833, it came to its maximum; and after that time it was repeated upon a constantly diminishing scale, until 1838, since which time it has not been observed. Perhaps ages may roll away before the world will be again surprised and delighted with a display of celestial fire-works equal to that of the morning of November 13, 1833.