AsiroiiQiny. i^6T 



in the normal school, founded by the Education Society, in 

 concert with the prefect of the Seine. — Rev. Encyc. 



3. Astronomy. — An AindLteuY of astronomy at Prague, M. 

 de Bieia, an officer of grenadiers, has remarked two impor- 

 tant facts in the last comet, which was discovered by him 

 the 30th of December last year, and observed the next day, 

 the 31st. The first of these facts confirms the opinion pre- 

 viously advanced by him, that the proximity of the comet in- 

 fluences the luminous condition of the sun. In fact, from 

 the 23d and 24th of October, 1822, the period in which a 

 comet was in its perihelion, till the 5th of December, 1823, 

 he remarked no spot on the sun. On the 5th of Decem- 

 ber, he perceived a very considerable spot, which regularly 

 increased upon the surface of the sun till the 13th of Decem- 

 ber. The 21st of the same month, a second large spot was 

 seen, about leaving the surface of the sun, and which had 

 doubtless been produced a short time before. On the 30th 

 of December,the first spot became visible upon the other side, 

 and continued to increase till the 6th of January, 1824, when 

 a cloudy season prevented observation for a long time. It 

 was calculated that the comet passed its perihelion in the 

 nights of the 9th and 10th of December, at a distance from 

 the sun equal to half that of Mercury. On the 7th of Janua- 

 ry, the time in which the first spot would have shown itself 

 for the third time on the sun, it did not appear, and the sun 

 remained free from spots until the 16th of January. If this 

 discovery of the relation between the comets and solar spots 

 should be confirmed, it will be of some importance ; for since 

 the observations of Herschell, many astronomers have re- 

 marked that the spots on the sun had a real influence upon 

 our temperature. 



The second remark of M. de Biela, is, that on the night of 

 the 22d and 23d of January, the comet, besides its tail, 

 which extended from the side opposite to the sun, had a 

 second turned towards that luminary. These two tails were 

 not precisely opposite to each other, but formed an obtuse 

 angle. M. de Biela, who is certain that in this there was no 

 optical illusion, either from the instrument or the eye of the 

 observer,thinks that the most rational explanation of the second 

 tall, is, that the comet, like many other meteors, left behind it 

 a luminous trace over its passage, and that this second tail 

 indicates the path that the comet had just passed over. Thi'-- 



