Abstract
CONTRARY to Mr. Hall's experience of astronomical books (see NATURE, vol. viii. p. 7), in neither Herschel's “Outlines of Astronomy,” Humboldt's “Cosmos,” nor Guillemin's “Heavens,” can I find any hint of a permanent difference between the brightness of the zodiacal light east of the sun and west of it, though Arago's “Popular Astronomy” says that according to Cassini, “it is generally less lively and less extended in the morning than in the evening.” But even if Cassini was correct, this is no positive proof of any difference between the two “branches” of the zodiacal light at the same time, seeing that he lived in the temperate zone, and probably did not observe it in both morning and evening at the same time of year. Mr. Hall's situation in Jamaica is favourable for investigating this point, and I should not wonder if he finds the fact different from what he supposes. But even the books that consider the zodiacal light to surround the sun in the shape of a lens, acknowledge that it may extend further one way than another, and further, at one time than another.
Article PDF
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
BACKHOUSE, T. The Zodiacal Light. Nature 8, 181 (1873). https://doi.org/10.1038/008181b0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/008181b0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.