Stargazing: Past and Present

by Sir Norman Lockyer

We have already seen that the power of substances to refract light differs for different colours, and we have seen the varied refraction of different parts of the spectrum, and the necessity of making lenses achromatic. Now there is one enormous advantage in favour of the reflector. We do not take our light to bits and put it together again as with an achromatic lens. But curiously enough, there is a something else which quite lowers the position of the reflector with regard to the refractor. Although, in the main all the light falling in parallel lines on a concave surface is reflected to a focus, this is only true in a general sense, because, if we consider it, we find an error which increases very rapidly as the diameter of the mirror increases or as the focal length diminishes. For instance, D I, Fig. [58], is the segment of a circle, or the section of a sphere—if we deal with a solid figure. D C, E G and H I, are three lines representing parallel rays falling on different parts of it. According to that law which we have considered, we can find where the ray E G will fall. We draw a line L, G, from the centre to the point of reflection, and make the angle F G L, equal to the angle of incidence E G L; then F will be the focus, so far as this part of the mirror is concerned. Now let us repeat the process for the ray H I, and we shall find that it will be reflected to K, a point nearer the mirror than F, and it will be seen that the further the rays are from the axis D C, the further from the point F is the light reflected; so that if we consider rays falling from all parts of the reflecting surface, a not very large but a distinctly visible surface is covered with light, so that a spherical surface will not bring all the rays exactly to a point, and with a spherical mirror we shall get a blurred image. We can compare this imperfection of the reflector, called spherical aberration, with the chromatic aberration of the object-glass.

Fig. 58.—Diagram Illustrating Spherical Aberration.

Fig. 59.—Diagram Showing the Proper Form of Reflector to be an Ellipse.

Newton early calculated the ratio of imperfection depending upon these properties of light, first of dispersion and then of spherical aberration, and he found that in the refracting telescope the chromatic aberration was more difficult to correct and get rid of than the spherical aberration of the reflector, so that in Newton’s time, before achromatic lenses were constructed, the reflector with its aberration had the advantage. It must now be explained how this difficulty is got over. What is required to produce a mirror capable of being used for astronomical purposes, is to throw back the edges of the mirror to the dotted line A C I, Fig. [58], which will make the margin of the mirror a part of a less concave mirror, and so its focus will be thrown further from itself—to F, instead of to K. Now let us consider what curve this is, that will throw all the rays to one point. It is an ellipse, as will be seen by reference to Fig. [59], in which, instead of having a spherical surface the section of which is a circle, we deal with a surface whose section is an ellipse.

It will be seen in a moment, that by the construction of an ellipse any light coming in any direction from the point A, which represents one of the foci of the curve, must necessarily be reflected back to the other focus, B, of the curve, for it is a well-known property of this curve that the angles made with a tangent C D, by lines from the foci are equal; and the same holds good for the angles made at all other tangents; and it will be seen at once that this is better than a circular curve, because by making the distance between the foci almost infinite we shall have the star or object viewed at one focus and its image at the other; if we use any portion of the reflecting surface we shall still get the rays reflected to one point only. It must also be noticed, that unless we have an ellipse so large that one focus shall represent the sun or a particular star we want to look at, this curve will not help us in bringing the light to one point, but if we use the curve called the parabola, which is practically an ellipse with one focus at an infinite distance, we do get the means of bringing all the rays from a distant object to a point. Hence the reflector, especially when of large diameter, is of no use for astronomical purposes without the parabolic curve.

That it is extremely difficult to give this figure may be gathered from Sir John Herschel’s statement, that in the case of a reflecting telescope, the mirror of which is forty-eight inches in diameter and the focal distance of which is forty feet, the distance between the parabolic and the spherical surface, at the edges of the mirror, will be represented by something less than a twenty-one thousandth part of an inch, or, more accurately, 1
21333 inch. In Fig. [58] the point A represents the extreme edge of the curve of the parabolic mirror, and D that of the circular surface before altered into a parabola.

At the time of Sir William Herschel the practical difficulties in constructing large achromatic lenses led to the adoption by him of reflectors beginning with small apertures of six inches to a foot, and increasing till he obtained one of four feet in diameter and forty-six feet focal length. This has been surpassed by Lord Rosse, whose well-known telescope is six feet diameter, and fifty-three feet focal length. Mr. Lassell, Mr. De La Rue, M. Foucault and Mr. Grubb, have also more recently succeeded in bringing reflectors to great perfection.

How the work has been done will be fully stated in the sequel.