170 ANNUAL OF SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY. 



contains nickel and cobalt, elements which invariably accompany 

 iron in meteoric masses. The spectra of these metals, like that of 

 iron, are distinguished by the large number of their lines. But the 

 lines of nickel, and still more those of cobalt, are much less bright 

 than the iron lines, and I was therefore unable to observe their posi- 

 tion with the same degree of accuracy with which I determined the 

 position of the iron lines. All the brighter lines of nickel appear to 

 coincide with dark solar lines ; the same was observed with respect 

 to some of the cobalt lines, but was not seen to be the case with other 

 equally bright lines of this metal. From my observations I consider 

 that I am entitled to conclude that nickel is visible in the solar 

 atmosphere ; I do not, however, yet express an opinion as to the 

 presence of cobalt. Barium, copper and zinc apj>ear to be present 

 in the solar atmosphere, but only in small quantities ; the brightest 

 of the lines of these metals correspond to distinct lines in the solar 

 spectrum, but the weaker lines are not noticeable. The remaining 

 metals which I have examined, viz., gold, silver, mercury, aluminum, 

 cadmium, tin, lead, antimony, arsenic, strontium and lithium, are, 

 according to my observations, not visible in the solar atmosphere." 

 Kirckhqff; Researches, etc., p. 21. 



We are now in a position to understand why the discovery of the 

 existence of these metals in the sun is no myth, no vague supposition, 

 or possible contingency. We now see that this conclusion is derived, 

 by a severely correct process of inductive reasoning, from a series of 

 exact and laborious experiments and observations, and that the pres- 

 ence of these metals in the solar atmosphere has been determined 

 with as great a degree of certainty as is attainable in any question 

 of physical science. 



The mode in which new and perhaps startling facts in science, such 

 as those we are now considering, are unwittingly misinterpreted and 

 misapplied by certain minds to suit their own preconceived notions, 

 must be an interesting ' branch of study to the psychologist. The 

 Heidelberg professors received a letter from a worthy farmer in 

 Silesia thanking them for the great discovery they had made ; it had 

 particularly interested him, as it confirmed in a remarkable manner a 

 theory which he had himself long held respecting the nutrition of 

 plants : he believed that all artificial addition of inorganic materials 

 to the plants in the shape of manure was quite unnecessary, as the 

 plants obtained the alkalies, the phosphorus, and the silica, etc., which 

 they require, if a sufficient supply be not present in the soil, from the 

 sunliylit ! "The Heidelberg professors," he continues, " had clearly 

 proved the presence of sodium, potassium, iron, and magnesium (all 

 substances needed by plants) in the sunlight" and he felt sure that 

 his theory of vegetable nutrition now required no further proof, but 

 must at once be adopted by the previously incredulous world. 



As a similar instance of this unconscious perversion of facts, we may 

 mention the case of an English gentleman who believed that by a 

 series of elaborate experiments he had proved the presence of iron in 

 the xuniicjlit ! In spite of the previous caution of an eminent man of 

 science, this gentleman was induced to publish his views, because, as 

 he says, " the whole scope and object of Bunsen's and Kirchhoff's 

 experiments are to prove the possibility of the most minute particles 



