12 Two Planets beyond Neptune. [January, 
mean period of conjunction of Uranus and the Predicted or 
fictitious; but, as the latter was notlNeptune, it was already 
slightly behind the real planet in 1847, and had been in 
advance in 1800. 
I now refer to quotations 9 and 17. “ From beyond that 
point towards 108776°, ” &c. I seleCt 108776 (s. quot. 14) 
to place it against the year 1800 for A. There was a con- 
junction of A with Uranus in 1778, between the observations 
of 1771 and 1780. I placed slow-moving B in 1825 
at 279*573°, before I saw Le Verrier’s memoirs ; circular 
motion then gives 265*348° in 1800. We had in the “ second 
solution ” 108 0 as beginning of an arc with positive m ' ; we 
have in the first solution 263° 8' as beginning of the second 
arc. Neptune, as before said, was right in the middle of 
the negative m' between an ending and commencing arc with 
positive ni', with A and B between 189° 55' and 263° 8' in 
226" 32'. 
Going back with conjunctions with Uranus before 1670, 
we meet them with B about 1630 ; with Neptune about 1654, 
with A about 1657, in such quick succession that they throw 
their combining shadow before them to 1690. 
Of Prof. Adams’s investigation I know only what Sir G. B. 
Airey wrote in the “ Monthly Notices of the Royal Astro- 
nomical Society ” (1846). His first hypothesis had distance 
38*4 based on the Bode-Titius series, the second “ about 
i-30th less.” He adopted' — if from the commencement or 
not does not appear — the method Le Verrier followed in his 
“ final solution.” His figures were — first and second hypo- 
thesis distance, 38*4, 37*12 ; perihelion, 313 0 57', 299 0 iT ; 
excentricity, 0*16103, 0*120615; mass, 1+6040, 1+6666; 
longitude (OCt. 1st, 1846), 325° 8', 323 0 2'. 
No. 1 placed the aphelion at distance 42*1 ; No. 2 at 
41*59. The mass for No. 2 is 2*904 times that of Neptune ; 
the change of power on Uranus from perihelion to aphelion 
is 2*77 to 1. The loss of power from Neptune distance to 
aphelion distance of the fictitious is 4*26 to 1. We perceive 
here the difference in the treatment of mass by Le Verrier 
and Adams. The masses A to Neptune we had 1*46 to 1 
and 4*26 + 1*46 = 2*91. 
It is easily seen that the first hypothesis — aphelion 42*1, 
the distance of A, giving the mass 3*205 times that of 
Neptune — reproduces the relation of power on Uranus from 
Neptune and from A by the series of fictions invented to find 
one planet instead of two, and that the second hypothesis 
originated from the interfering B, the third planet, to remove 
the error of from 5" to 6" mentioned by Le Verrier. 
