( 40 ) 



Givino- equal weight to tlie throe results, we get : 



Epoch of maximum 2408565 

 Period .... 431.11 days 



and the differences Obs. — -Comp. contained in the last colunier 

 but one. 



This epoch of maximum falls in 4 days before the one according 

 to the results of H. G. v. d. S. Bakhuyzen, whilst the length of 

 the period found by him was first 431.22, later 431.55. Had I 

 combined his mean epoch of maximum with my result then 430.36 

 would have been found for the length of the period. 



This result again agrees well with the supposition that the length 

 of the period has remained unchanged for the last 35 years. In 

 that entire period it cannot have differed much from 431 days and 

 such a great variability as Chandler assumes is now already con- 

 tradicted by the observations. This appears, first in the differences: 

 Obs. — Ch. which I inserted in the last column of the above table. 

 In the second place however the consideration that just in the very 

 last years, according to both suppositions, the epochs must begin to 

 differ widely led me to investigate separately the three last years 

 of Albrecht's summary. I operated only with the x co-ordinates 

 and determined from these the epoch in the same way as before. 

 This result, though necessarily less certain, an error in the assumed 

 yearly motion being now of influence, agrees however almost per- 

 fectly with that of the 7 years together. 



I found : 



Ep. of Max. Obs.— C. Obs.— Ch. 



2413299 — 8 +27 



•) These numbers deviate 3 and 4 days from those in the summary of H. G. v. d. 

 S. Bakhuyzen, as I interpreted the results of Wilterdink somewhat dirt'erently. 



