SOUTHERN ASTRONOMERS and
AUSTRALIAN ASTRONOMY
PREPARATIONS NOW BEING MADE IN
SYDNEY OBSERVATORY FOR THE
PHOTOGRAPHIC CHART OF THE HEAVENS
By H. C. RUSSELL, B.A, C.M.G., F.R.S.
[With Plate XI.]
[Read before the Royal Society of New South Wales, July 1,
1891.]
I N T R O D U C T I O N
The following was reproduced from a small
six-page A5-sized pamphlet, whose content was written by the
then New South Wales Government Astronomer, Henry Chamberlain
Russell. Issued by Sydney Observatory, this document discusses the
early photographic experiments by Russell taking pictures of the Moon
and other bright southern deep-sky objects; like the Jewel Box and
the Eta Carinae Nebulae.
At the time this document appeared, time-lapse
photography was a relatively new idea to use on astronomical targets.
Using primitive photographic plates and emulsions, which were not
very sensitive to light, required lengthy exposures over many hours,
if not several nights. These results being produced by imagers in the
19th Century were not very good compared to the standards of today.
However, they did importantly reveal for the first time the intricate
complexities of various kinds of nebulae and much fainter stellar
magnitudes that lay well beyond what could normally be seen to the
naked-eye.
In comparison, Russell’s words here, reflect well on the great
future advancements of astrophotography and for the science of
astronomy. His words also gives us some significant insights into the
difficulties often faced by these 19th Century observers, which
today, we now often take for granted.
Andrew James
21st December 2010
Last year I exhibited various photographs of the stars and nebulae
taken with a portrait camera lens having a focal length of thirty-two
ionches, now I am able to shew you some of the same objects
photographed with the new star camera of one hundred and thirty-five
inches focal length. One could hardly realize the extraordinary
difference between the two without seeing it. I am also able to shew
you the results taking a star cluster with an enlargement lens which
makes the equivalent focal length of the star camera five hundred and
sixty-four inches or forty-seven feet. The success of this additional
star camera is very gratifying, because it shews how much may be
added to our knowledge of star cluster by this method of direct
enlargement. I find it is much better to enlarge the star pictures in
the camera direct than after they are taken, because there are always
blemishes in the surface used for the photograph which get enlarged
with the picture. The first photograph of Kappa Crucis did not cover
a space of one-tenth of a inch square, the star camera makes it
eighteen times larger and the enlarging lens three hundred and
twenty-four time s larger. Where extreme accuracy for measurement is
required, as in these cases, the photograph may again magnified fifty
times under the microscope, and the smaller picture will bear no
greater power, because it is the imperfections in the surface that
carries the image, that limit the magnifying power that can be
used.
The photography obtained with the enlarging lens on the star
camera speaks volumes for the stability and accurate motion of the
telescope, which under such a magnifying power gives perfectly sharp
star discs. The clearness of these star discs, many of them
representing coloured stars, enables us to see distinctly the effect
of different colours on the size of the star discs. There are two
conspicuous stars, a red, and a blue, the red star to the eye is
fully a magnitude brighter than the blue, Herschel called it 9th
magnitude, and the blue one 10th magnitude, the red one in the
photograph appears of the 11th magnitude or two magnitudes less, and
the blue one appears of 9th or one magnitude greater, in other words,
the difference in colour as estimated by the eye and the photograph,
makes a difference of three magnitudes in the stars.
As I have just stated the photographs exhibited here last year
were made with a six inch Dalmeyer Portrait-lens. My object now is to
bring before you the state of preparedness of the Star Camera for the
work of charting the heavens, as well as some examples of the actual
work, plates taken of the dimensions and under the conditions of the
plates which will be used for the chart, and only differing from them
in that the reseau or grating of lines, though ruled and made by the
same machine as those that are to be used, has not been tested in
Europe, as all must be before they are accepted. These are in fact
experimental plates.
The reseau I have, was. courteously sent to me by Admiral Mouchez,
the Director of the Paris Observatory — as an untested sample.
The process of testing those to be used being a tedious one, it will
take some time before the approved ones are available, but for our
present purpose the one I have answers admirably. It consists of a
piece of plate glass with a thick coating of silver from solution on
one side, on this silver, two sets of lines at right angles have been
ruled with a sharp point, which has cut the silver through, the lines
are about two-tenths of an inch apart, which is equal to five
minutes of arc, and each line is numbered.
So far everything is simple and mechanical, but the resolutions of
the Conference require, that one set of plates shall have on them all
stars to the 11th magnitude, and the other set all stars to the 14th
magnitude, and the difficulty in an ever changing atmosphere, and
with plates which differ in sensitiveness is to give the exposure
necessary to secure these results.
The Astronomer Royal of England as Chairman of the Committee
appointed to deal with these and other kindred questions, has been
making experiments on a fairly good night in London. He has come to
the conclusion that two minutes will be enough in such weather for
stars of 11th magnitude, and thirty minutes enough for stars of 14th
magnitude, and that these times must be varied to suit the weather,
that is increased if the weather is bad. I am able to shew you three
plates, one exposed thirty seconds, another two minutes, and the
third thirty minutes, on the well known star cluster Kappa Crucis.
You will see that thirty seconds is enough to get images of stars to
the 9th magnitude, and that two minutes gives images of stars to the
11th magnitude, and takes in also some of 12th and one of 13th
magnitudes.
The plate exposed for thirty minutes is however not so
satisfactory, for it should according to the rule, show with defined
discs stars of the 14th magnitude of Argelander’s scale. In Herschel’s monograph on this cluster he has eleven
stars of 11th and four of 15th magnitude, of Argelander’s scale, of these eight are invisible, six
are visible but not measurable, and only one is “measurable”,
and some stars of even the 12th and 13th magnitudes that are not
measurable. The plates were exposed one after the other, on a night
that seemed to be uniform, and when the two minutes plate was a
success the thirty minutes one ought also to have been. I give the
result of this experiment to shew one serious difficulty that besets
the work; at first sight the foregoing results look like a failure of
the method, but I find that these faint stars in Herschel’s list are either much rainier than he took
them for, or they are coloured stars. This was proved by taking a
photograph of the same object and giving three hours exposure. Even
then most of tile stars referred to above are far too faint to
measure, although they can be seen plainly enough in nearly every
instance, and the photograph, hurriedly examined to see if the faint
stars were on it, is found to contain at least twenty more faint
stars which Herschel did not see. This example will serve to show you
better than any statement, the difficulty to be met in following the
adopted rule, viz., if two minutes exposure records stars of the 11th
magnitude, then thirty to thirty-five minutes should record those of
14th, for here in the case of a well known cluster, with every star
recorded by careful observers, it is found that the rule fails, and
the question arises, did Herschel over-estimate the magnitude of
these stars, or are they coloured. Over nearly the whole surface of
the sky we have no record of stars below the 9th magnitude, and
therefore no means of finding whether the photographs will really
record what is desired, that is stars of 14th magnitude. It is
obvious therefore, that more experiments will have to be made upon
well known clusters to determine the time necessary for the purpose
of making certain of 14th magnitude stars. When this done however, we
shall have (in the photographs) a vast number of stars appearing as
of the 14th magnitude, which the eye cannot see through the
telescope, just as I found in Kappa Crucis. The longer exposure given
in order to secure visible 14th magnitude stars, resulted in
recording a large number of stars photographically of 14th magnitude,
but wholly invisible through the telescope. At the recent meeting of
the Committee, it was decided on the evidence given by Dr. Scheiner,
to extend the time of exposure for 14th magnitude stars to forty
minutes, and it is reasonable to expect, since all are interested and
working at this difficulty, that it will soon be solved, and times of
exposure in different states of the atmosphere agreed upon. At
present there seems to be no possibility of dealing with the colour
difficulty which is a serious one, as I have already pointed out.
Great differences are found also in the sensitive plates, we have
tried Swan’s, Wratten and Wainwright,
Field Dodgson’s star plates, M. A. Seed
plates (American), and Ilford plates; and so far as I have gone, the
Ilford plates are certainly the best for our purpose.
In my photographs of the Great Magellan Cloud taken with the
portrait camera, which I exhibited at the November meeting, the stars
owing to their countless numbers appear as blurred masses, and the
great and remarkable nebula 30 Doradus is only a white spot. With the
Star Camera the picture is enlarged eighteen times, and the stars are
separated and brought out sharply defined, while the nebula 30
Doradus is revealed in its wonderful complexity, and shewn to be much
more extensive than Herschel made it with his great reflector, so
quite a new light is brought out by the Star Camera, and is thrown on
the structure of this object.
There is one thing about this nebula which is very suggestive,
some of its loops are round, and all its features seem to be laid
out, as if in a plane at right angles, or nearly so to the line of
sight; there are no decided elliptical forms, which so commonly
appear in nebulae, owing to their circular forms being oblique to the
line of sight, and therefore projected into ellipses. If we look at
the main features of Nubecula Major we see that the curves are nearly
circles, both those in the main body of it, and in the several star
clusters and nebulae; further if we examine them very closely we find
that they are all slightly elongated in the same way; or in other
words the major axes of these ellipses are parallel or nearly so;
they all in fact stein to lie in a plane nearly at right angles to
the line of sight. Now just as the sun with his attendant planets,
the planets with their moons, and especially Saturn with his rings,
shew us that there has been a tendency, as theory would also lead us
to expect, to arrange the matter, that is revolving about them in a
plane common to all, and as is also evidently the case with spiral
nebulae, the matter is arranged in a plane of which the diameter is
enormously greater than the thickness, so I think we may safely
assume, that the Nubecula Major is a great spiral structure of which
we see the greatest diameter, and that its thickness, measured
through in the line of sight is comparatively small; further in
addition to the central spiral there are two nebulae, and at least
three clusters of stars arranged as spirals, having one character in
common with the main one, that is, they are nearly circular, and
these are all arranged in space, so that they appear to us, in the
same or parallel planes, and near together. It may, I think, be
safely assumed that all these are parts of the grandest spiral
structure that we know, and that they are all in one plane, because
if they are not in the same plane, then, being optically close
together and in parallel planes they must be arranged one after the
other in a long vista which happens to be in our line of sight; that
is, a series of great spirals, one behind the other, at different
distances towards infinity, and all revolving as if on a common or
parallel axes; a conclusion which is highly improbable, and
impossible to receive when the simple and more rational alternative
of their being all in the same plane is available, which also accords
with what we see in other systems. If we assume that all are in tile
same plane, we can imagine what we should see if transported to some
star near the centre. All round us would be an infinity of stars,
which on closer inspection, would seem more crowded in a great plane,
and in the same plane we should see certainly two, and probably many
nebulae, projected into straight lines, because looked at in the
plane in which they revolve; in some directions the stars would
appear thinner than in others, because in those, the photograph shews
us they do not extend so far into space, and in others owing to the
dark spaces in the great spiral, we would see through into the
infinity beyond. If you look at the photograph and assume as I have
done above, that the whole universe of stars is spread out in the
plane of the photograph, you will notice that there would be no
difficulty in finding positions from which the observer would see
through some of the comparatively dark places as well as other
directions in which countless multitudes of stars of all magnitudes
would meet the gaze. In fact, his vision would be much the same as
ours, in one plane in the heavens, that of our universe, we see an
inconceivable wealth of stars, the Milky Way, with here and there
dark spaces, coal sacks — so called — due to the dark
rifts such as those above referred to, and turning our eyes gradually
away from that plane the number of stars decreases, although they are
still abundant.
Now, although even amongst the infinitude of the heavens, we
cannot find two star-clusters, or two nebulae alike, we can still
find classes, which have many points in common, and I think we have
reasonable ground for supposing, that we have presented to us in the
Nubecula Major, a universe similar to that in which we are, and that
instead of seeing it from within, where it is im-possible to make out
its form, we are here — with the aid of telescopes, and the
still more powerful Star Camera — able to see just such a
universe, to trace out a rational explanation of the many puzzling
features of the stars, and Milky Way around us, and to see how such a
universe may be arranged.
In reference to another well-known southern objects,
“…the nebula about Eta
Argus,” it will be remembered that last
session I exhibited a photograph of it with three hours exposure,
stating that it had not been exposed long enough. On April 9th, 1891
I obtained a clear night, and an exposure of eight hours —
again with the short camera — which brings out a host of stars
and shows the Milky Way with a brilliance it has never been seen to
have before, at the same time the nebula, is more distinctly shewn
and larger. After a series of trials, I have succeeded in getting
several fine photographs of this object with the Star Camera, which
make it eighteen times larger than the one I used last year. I have
however been unable to get a continuous exposure of eight hours with
this camera, still in Plate 77, taken March 18th 1891, with five
hours forty-three minutes exposure on a fine clear night, and in
others taken about the same time, we have a marvellous revelation of
the details of light and shade presented to us in this object, which
have never been seen before in any photograph, or by any
telescope.
Something like the appearance would be produced, if one took a
number of tufts of long-fibred wool, and dropped them one after the
other on to a black cloth; as they fell and rolled over one another,
they would arrange themselves in curves and lines, through which as
one looked down at them, the dark cloth would here and there be seen
through tangled wreaths of wool; and in others the cloth would be
wholly hidden by the mass of such lines and curves, which would
nevertheless be sufficiently distinct to shew how the mass of white
was made up; but no description could correctly convey the wonderful
detail which the photograph reveals; the general form of this object
is the same as in drawings, and in the photographs exhibited last
session, but there are certain new features which may be indicated.
In the first place, there is evidence here that the nebula is much
more extended and the spiral structure more decided, and it can be
traced even to the details of the rainier branches. Secondly, the
nebula covers a much larger area than that of Orion. Thirdly it
proves conclusively that a conspicuous part of the nebula which
Herschel drew and described in 1838 has entirely disappeared. I
pointed this out in 1872, but as I then used a telescope inferior in
power to Herschel’s, its invisibility
to me, was not proof that it was gone. Now the Star-Camera is vastly
more powerful than Herschel’s
telescope, how much may be judged from the fact, that in one small
space where he could see only one star, the Camera shows ten, and in
another place examined by Herschel with equal care, and said to
contain four stars, the Camera shews twenty. There can then be no
doubt, that in this case a bright nebulous mass, has entirely
disappeared in thirty-four years, and it is significant that the part
where this nebula was, is now replaced by a dark round spot. I have
photographed the object many times with both Cameras, and the dark
spot is always there, can it be that in the thirty-four years 1838 to
1872 one of the supposed dark clouds of space has drifted in between
us and the nebula. It cannot be a solid body, because the stars are
there, but a slight misty body would hide the nebula and not affect
the stars very much.
It would be tedious to attempt to describe all that the
photo-graph reveals, especially in the central part of the nebula,
but I may say, that while the eye aided by the best telescopes, sees
the nebula of fairly uniform brightness, interrupted by certain
well-known darker spaces, and especially by that which Herschel
called the Lemniscate, this photograph shews a most complex
structure, with a great variety of light and shade; and just as in
the case of the Theta Orionis, the nebula with its vast folds is
shewn to extend farther from the centre, with each increase in the
time of exposure, so I find with that about Eta Argus. The southern
nebula is however very much more difficult to photograph, and I think
it must have some tinge of colour in it, prob-ably yellow, for a
photograph of Orion with one hour’s
exposure is more dense than one of Eta Argus with six hours
exposure.
Taken as a whole, the nebula about Eta Argus covers a much larger
space than that about Orion, even in these photographs in which the
southern nebula, although longer exposed, is comparatively under
exposed; while that of Orion is much over exposed.
I have also brought two photographs of the Moon to show you, they
were taken on 19th and 28th of May last. As you are all aware, it is
extremely rare to get a night in which there is absolutely no motion,
or what is called twinkle in the stars, or in other words, when the
Earth’s atmosphere is not disturbed by
currents of air of unequal temperature. Now until we get such a night
and a suitable Moon, it will be impossible to get a perfect
photograph of the Moon, for any motion in the air, such as that
referred to above, has the effect of enlarging every point of light.
A star image for instance may in this way be made two or three times
its normal size, and if the stars are close together they are run
into one blotch. So on the Moon, all the little details are enlarged
and mixed up, so that they cannot be seen; but these photographs are
very good and show some features of the
Moon’s surface which I have never seen
in any others, for instance the undulations on the surface of the
lunar plains, the equivalent of what on the earth we should call
hills and valleys, as opposed to mountains.

“Henry Chamberlain
Russell’s
Image of the Jewel Box (Figure A) Taken in c.1891.
|
Last Update : 13th August 2012
Southern Astronomical Delights ©
(2012)
For any problems with this Website or Document please e-mail
me.
|