Of what do Comets consist?
The unsolved problems pertaining to comets are very numerous and exceedingly delicate. Whence come they? Why did they not contract to centres of nebulæ? Are there regions where attractions are balanced, and matter is left to contract on itself, till the movements of suns and planets adds or diminishes attractive force on one side, and so allows them to be drawn slowly toward one planet, and its sun, or another? There is ground for thinking that the comet of 1866 and its train of meteors, visible to us in November, was thus drawn into our system by the planet Uranus. Indeed, Leverrier has conjecturally fixed upon the date of A.D. 128 as the time when it occurred; but another and closer observation of its next return, in 1899, will be needed to give confirmation to the opinion. Our sun's authority extends at least half-way to the nearest fixed star, one hundred thousand times farther than the orbit of the earth. Meteoric and cometary matter lying there, in a spherical shell about the solar system, balanced between the attraction of different suns, finally feels the power that determines its destiny toward our sun. It would take 167,000,000 years to come thence to our system.
The conditions of matter with which we are acquainted do not cover all the ground presented by these mysterious visitors. We know a gas sixteen times as light as air, but hydrogen is vastly too heavy and dense; for we see the faintest star through thousands of miles of cometary matter; we know that water may become cloudy vapor, but a little of it obscures the vision. Into what more ethereal, and we might almost say spiritual, forms matter may be changed we cannot tell. But if we conceive comets to be only gas, it would expand indefinitely in the realms of space, where there is no force of compression but its own. We might say that comets are composed of small separate masses of matter, hundreds of miles apart; and, looking through thousands of miles of them, we see light enough reflected from them all to seem continuous. Doubtless that is sometimes the case. But the spectroscope shows another state of things: it reveals in some of these comets an incandescent gas—usually some of the combinations of carbon. The conclusion, then, naturally is that there are both gas and small masses of matter, each with an orbit of its own nearly parallel to those of all the others, and that they afford some attraction to hold the mass of intermingled and confluent gas together. Our best judgment, then, is that the nucleus is composed of separate bodies, or matter in a liquid condition, capable of being vaporized by the heat of the sun, and driven off, as steam from a locomotive, into a tail. Indications of this are found in the fact that tails grow smaller at successive returns, as the matter capable of such vaporization becomes condensed. In some instances, as in that of the comet of 1843, the head was diminished by the manufacture of a tail. On the other hand, Professor Peirce showed that the nucleus of the comets of 1680, 1843, and 1858 must have had a tenacity equal to steel, to prevent being pulled apart by the tidal forces caused by its terrible perihelion sweep around the sun.
It is likely that there are great varieties of condition in different comets, and in the same comet at times. We see them but a few days out of the possible millions of their periodic time; we see them only close to the sun, under the spur of its tremendous attraction and terrible heat. This gives us ample knowledge of the path of their orbit and time of their revolution, but little ground for judgment of their condition, when they slowly round the uttermost cape of their far-voyaging, in the terrible cold and darkness, to commence their homeward flight. The unsolved problems are not all in the distant sun and more distant stars, but one of them is carried by us, sometimes near, sometimes far off; but our acquaintance with the possible forms and conditions of matter is too limited to enable us to master the difficulties.
Will Comets strike the Earth?
Very likely, since one or two have done so within a recent period. What will be the effect? That depends on circumstances. There is good reason to suppose we passed through the tail of a comet in 1861, and the only observable effect was a peculiar phosphorescent mist. If the comet were composed of small meteoric masses a brilliant shower would be the result. But if we fairly encountered a nucleus of any considerable mass and solidity, the result would be far more serious. The mass of Donati's comet has been estimated by M. Faye to be 1/20000 of that of the earth. If this amount of matter were dense as water, it would make a globe five hundred miles in diameter; and if as dense as Professor Peirce proved the nucleus of this comet to be, its impact with the earth would develop heat enough to melt and vaporize the hardest rocks. Happily there is little fear of this: as Professor Newcomb says, "So small is the earth in comparison with celestial space, that if one were to shut his eyes and fire at random in the air, the chance of bringing down a bird would be better than that of a comet of any kind striking the earth." Besides, we are not living under a government of chance, but under that of an Almighty Father, who upholdeth all things by the word of his power; and no world can come to ruin till he sees that it is best.
VIII.
THE PLANETS AS INDIVIDUALS.
"Through faith we understand that the worlds [plural] were framed by the word of God, so that things which were seen were not made of things which do appear."—Heb. xi. 3.
"O rich and various man! Thou palace of sight and sound, carrying in thy senses the morning, and the night, and the unfathomable galaxy; in thy brain the geometry of the city of God; in thy heart the power of love, and the realms of right and wrong. An individual man is a fruit which it costs all the foregoing ages to form and ripen. He is strong, not to do but to live; not in his arms, but in his heart; not as an agent, but as a fact."—EMERSON.