^ j4 account of the meteor seen in connkctiBjtI* 



Calculations At the first Rutland observation the meteor was not seen 



from the pre- at Wenham, since the azimuth at V/enham at that time 

 wIo'ik! ° ^^"^^^ ^^^^ probably less than 84** (as appears by the first four exam- 

 ples of Table I) and the iirst observed azimuth exceeded 

 106"; so that there can be no very accurate estimate of, the 

 situation of the meteor at that time. However, as the 

 altitude of the meteor observed at Wenham, and its calcu- 

 lated altitude above the level of the sea (found in Table II), 

 did not vary much during the time of its appearance at 

 Wenham, it is highly probable that no change was experi- 

 enced from the time of the first Rutland, to the first 

 Wenham, observation. The precedin<j^ method of inter- 

 polation gives for the azimuth 83' 14' 59" at Wenham, a 

 corresponding altitude at that place of 7* 43'*. This alti- 

 tude with the azimuth at Rutland 168* 30', and the corres- 

 ponding altitude 18° 27') give the results in Example 2, 

 Table I ; which, with an increase of 3' 12 " in the longi- 

 tude, are assumed in the right hand columns of that table 

 and in Table II, as the place of the meteor at the first 

 Rutland observation. This addition is made to the longi- 

 tude, because the mean longitudes assumed in Table 11 

 exceed a few miles the results from the corresponding Rut-i 

 land observations in Table I. 



A mistake of 1° in the observed altitudes at Wenhdm 

 ivould produce an errour of about 2^ miles in the calcu- 

 lated height of the meteor ; but the effect of this source of 

 errour cannot be great, since the observed altitude must 

 have fallen between the limits 3*^ 25' and 7° 10', corres- 

 ponding to the heights of the barn and tree ; as was observ- 

 ed above. 



With the altitudes, latitudes, and longitudes of the me- 

 teor given in Table 11, and the latitudes and longitudes of 

 the places of observation, were calculated the distances of 

 the meteor inserted in Table II, to give at one view the 

 results of all the observations. 



• This azimuth and altitude were found in the following mapner. 

 With the azimuth at Wenham, estimated in Example 1, 79° 53' 46", 

 was calculated, by the preceding formula of interijolation, tlie corres- 

 ponding altitude at Wenham. The difference between this and thesup, 

 posed altitude 6° SO' was tailed the errour of this supposition. The 

 operation was repeated with another assumed altitude, as 8% and the er- 

 rour of this supposition found. By these errours a corrected altitude was 

 calculated by the Rule of False; and by repeiting the operation a few 

 times, the above azimuth and altitude were obtained. 



TABLE 



