Astronomy: The Science of the Heavenly Bodies
CHAPTER XLIV
THE UNIVERSE OF STARS
Our consideration of the solar system hitherto has kept us quite at home in the universe. The outer known planets, Uranus and Neptune, are indeed far removed from the sun, and a few of the comets that belong to our family travel to even greater distances before they begin to retrace their steps sunward. When we come to consider the vast majority of the glistening points on the celestial sphere--all in fact except the five great planets, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn--we are dealing with bodies that are self-luminous like the sun, but that vary in size quite as the bodies of the solar system do, some stars being smaller than the sun and others many hundred fold larger than he is; some being "giants," and others "dwarfs." But the overwhelming remoteness of all these bodies arrests our attention and even taxes our credulity regarding the methods that astronomers have depended on to ascertain their distances from us.
Their seeming countlessness, too, is as bewildering as are the distances; though, if we make actual counts of those visible to the naked eye within a certain area, in the body of the "Great Bear," for example, the great surprise will be that there are so few. And if the entire dome of the sky is counted, at any one time, a clear, moonless sky would reveal perhaps 2,500, so that in the entire sky, northern and southern, we might expect to find 5,000 to 6,000 lucid stars, or stars visible to the naked eye.
But when the telescope is applied, every accession of power increases the myriads of fainter and fainter stars, until the number within optical reach of present instruments is somewhere between 400 and 500 millions. But if we were to push the 100-inch reflector on Mount Wilson to its limit by photography with plates of the highest sensitiveness, millions upon millions of excessively faint stars would be plainly visible on the plates which the human eye can never hope to see directly with any telescope present or future, and which would doubtless swell the total number of stars to a thousand millions. Recent counts of stars by Chapman and Melotte of Greenwich tend to substantiate this estimate.
What have astronomers done to classify or catalogue this vast array of bodies in the sky? Even before making any attempt to estimate their number, there is a system of classification simply by the amount of light they send us, or by their apparent stellar magnitudes--not their actual magnitudes, for of those we know as yet very little. We speak of stars of the "first magnitude," of which there are about 20, Sirius being the brightest and Regulus the faintest. Then there are about 65 of the second, or next fainter, magnitude, stars like Polaris, for example, which give an amount of light two and a half times less than the average first magnitude star. Stars of the third magnitude are fainter than those of the second in the same ratio, but their number increases to 200; fourth magnitude, 500; fifth magnitude, 1,400; sixth magnitude, 5,000, and these are so faint that they are just visible on the best nights without telescopic aid.
Decimals express all intermediate graduations of magnitude. Astronomers carry the telescopic magnitudes much farther, till a magnitude beyond the twentieth is reached, preserving in every case the ratio of two and one-half for each magnitude in relation to that numerically next to it. Even Jupiter and Venus, and the sun and moon, are sometimes calculated on this scale of stellar magnitude, numerically negative, of course, Venus sometimes being as bright as magnitude -4.3, and the sun -26.7.
Knowing thus the relation of sun, moon, and stars, and the number of the stars of different magnitudes, it is possible to estimate the total light from the stars. This interesting relation comes out this way: that the stars we cannot see with the naked eye give a greater total of light than those we can because of their vastly greater numbers. And if we calculate the total light of all the brighter stars down to magnitude nine and one-half, we find it equal to 1/80th of the light of the average full moon.
Many stars show marked differences in color, and strictly speaking the stars are now classified by their colors. The atmosphere affects star colors very considerably, low altitudes, or greater thickness of air, absorbing the bluish rays more strongly and making the stars appear redder than they really are. Aldebaran, Betelgeuse and Antares are well-known red stars, Capella and Alpha Ceti yellowish, Vega and Sirius blue, and Procyon and Polaris white. Among the telescopic stars are many of a deep blood-red tint, variable stars being numerous among them. Double stars, too, are often complementary in color. There is evidence indicating change of color of a very few stars in long periods of time; Sirius, for example, two thousand years ago was a red star, now it is blue or bluish white. But the meaning of color, or change of color in a star is as yet only incompletely ascertained. It may be connected with the radiative intensity of the star, or its age, or both.
The late Professor Edward C. Pickering was famous for his life-long study and determination of the magnitudes of the stars. Standards of comparison have been many, and have led to much unnecessary work. Pickering chose Polaris as a standard and devised the meridian photometer, an ingenious instrument of high accuracy, in which the light of a star is compared directly with that of the pole star by reflection. All the bright stars of both the northern and the southern skies are worked into a standard system of magnitudes known as HP, or the Harvard Photometry.
Astronomers make use of several different kinds of magnitude for the stars: the apparent magnitude, as the eye sees it, often called the visual magnitude; the photographic magnitude, as the photographic plate records it, and these are now determined with the highest accuracy; the photovisual magnitude, quite the same as the visual, but determined photographically on an isochromatic plate with a yellow screen or filter, so that the intensity is nearly the same as it appears to the eye. The difference between the star's visual or photovisual magnitude and its photographic magnitude is called its color-index, and is often used as a measure of the star's color. Light of the shorter wave lengths, as blue and violet, affects the photographic plate more rapidly than the reds and yellows of longer wave length by which the eye mainly sees; so that red stars will appear much fainter and blue stars much brighter on the ordinary photographic plate than the eye sees them.
So great are the differences of color in the stars that well-known asterisms, with which the eye is perfectly familiar, are sometimes quite unrecognizable on the photographic plate, except by relative positions of the stars composing them. White stars affect the eye and the plate about equally, so that their visual or photovisual and photographic magnitudes are about equal. The studies of the colors of the stars, the different methods of determining them, and the relations of color to constitution have been made the subject of especial investigation by Seares of Mount Wilson and many other astronomers.
Centuries of the work of astronomers have been faithfully devoted to mapping or charting the stars and cataloguing them. Just as we have geographical maps of countries, so the heavens are parceled out in sections, and the stars set down in their true relative positions just as cities are on the map. Recent years have added photographic charts, especially of detailed regions of the sky; but owing to spectral differences of the stars, their photographic magnitudes are often quite different from their visual magnitudes. From these maps and charts the positions of the stars can be found with much precision; but if we want the utmost accuracy, we must go to the star catalogues--huge volumes oftentimes, with stellar positions set down therein with the last degree of precision.
First there will be the star's name, and in the next column its magnitude, and in a third the star's right ascension. This is its angular distance eastward around the celestial sphere starting from the vernal equinox, and it corresponds quite closely to the longitude of a place which we should get from a gazetteer, if we wished to locate it on the earth. Then another column of the catalogue will give the star's declination, north or south of the equator, just as the gazetteer will locate a city by its north or south latitude.