Mr. Hind, the superintendent of the "Nautical Almanac," and as sound and
cautious a student of cometic astronomy as any man living, remarked, so
soon as the resemblance of these comets' paths had been ascertained,
that if it were merely accidental, the case was most unusual; nay, it
might be described as unique. And, be it noticed, he was referring only
to the resemblance between the comets of 1880 and 1843. Had he recalled
at the time the comet of 1668, and its closely similar orbit, he would
have admitted that the double coincidence could not possibly be merely
casual.
But this was by no means the end of the matter. Indeed, thus far,
although the circumstances were striking, there was nothing to prevent
astronomers from interpreting them as other cases of coincident, or
nearly coincident, cometic paths had been interpreted. Hind and others,
myself included, inferred that the comets of 1880, 1843, and 1668 were
simply one and the same comet, whose return in 1880 probably followed
the return in 1843 after a single revolution.
In 1882, however, two years and a half after the appearance of the comet
of 1880, another comet came up from the south, which followed in the
sun's neighborhood almost the same course as the comets of 1668, 1843,
and 1880. The path it followed was not quite so close to those followed
by the other three as these had been to each other, but yet was far too
close to indicate possibly a mere casual resemblance; on the contrary,
the resemblance in regard to shape, slope, and those peculiarities which
render this family of comets unique in the cometary system, was of the
closest and most striking kind.
Pages:
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151