FAYE S COMET. 



in brightness, and from the 14th to the 16th was not only greatly 

 superior in brightness to the original, but had a sharp and star- 

 like nucleus, compared to a diamond spark. The change of 

 brightness was now reversed, the original comet recovering its 

 superiority, and acquiring on the 18th the same appearance as 

 the companion had from the 14th to the 16th. After this the 

 companion gradually faded away, and disappeared previously to 

 the final disappearance of the original comet on 22nd April. 



It was observed also that a thin luminous line or arc was 

 thrown across the space which separated the centres of the two 

 nuclei, especially when one or the other had attained its greatest 

 brightness, the arc appearing to emanate from that which for the 

 moment was the brighter. 



After the disappearance of the companion, the original comet 

 threw out three faint tails, forming angles of 120 with each 

 other, one of which was directed to the place which had been 

 occupied by the companion. 



It is suspected that the faint comet which was observed by 

 Professor Secchi to precede Biela's comet in 1852, may have been 

 the companion thus separated from it, and if so, the separation 

 must be permanent, the distance between the parts being greater 

 than that which separates the earth from the sun. 



30. On the 22nd November, 1843, M. Faye, of the Paris Obser- 

 vatory, discovered a comet, the path of which soon appeared to be 

 incompatible with the parabolic character. Dr. Goldschmidt 

 showed that it moved in an ellipse of very limited dimensions, 

 with a period of 7| years. It was immediately observed as being 

 extraordinary, that, notwithstanding the frequent returns to peri- 

 helion which such a period would infer, its previous appearances 

 had not been recorded. M. Faye replied by showing that the 

 aphelion of the orbit passed very near to the path of Jupiter, and 

 that it was possible that the violent action of the great mass of 

 that planet, in such close proximity with the comparatively light 

 mass of the comet, might have thrown the latter body into its 

 present orbit, its former path being either a parabola or an ellipse, 

 with such elements as to prevent the comet from coming within 

 visible distance. M. Faye supported these observations by refer- 

 ence to a more ancient comet, which we shall presently notice, to 

 which a like incident is supposed with much probability, if not 

 certainty, to have occurred. 



31. The observations which had been made in 1843, at several 

 observatories, but more especially those made by M. Struve at 

 Pultowa, who continued to observe the comet long after it ceased 

 to be observed elsewhere, supplied to M. Le Yerrier the data neces- 

 sary for the calculation of its motion in the interval between its 



165 



