310 
EASTMAN. 
The identity of these bodies is then supposed to be complete 
and the theory established. 
This theory of collisions rests upon a remarkable congeries 
ol experiments, observations, and assumptions. Many of the 
observations and many of the laboratory experiments, which 
were made by the author, as well as much of the data quoted 
throughout his papers are entitled to the highest merit. 
But, considering much of the data and many of the state¬ 
ments in his conclusions, and especially the extraordinary 
assertion that “ comets at aphelion present the telescopic ap¬ 
pearance for the most part of globular nebulae,” it is not re¬ 
markable to find the author’s data, as well as his deductions, 
vigorously attached by able physicists. 
Huggins .— After a careful study of the spectrum of the 
aurora Mr. Huggins 1 remarks: “After consideration, I think 
that I ought to point out that Mr. Lockyer’s recent statement 
that ‘ the characteristic line of the aurora is the remnant of 
the brightest manganese fluting at 558 ’ is clearly inadmis¬ 
sible, considering the evidence we have of -the position of 
this line.” 
After a very thorough study of the spectra of the nebulae, 
Mr. Huggins 2 writes: “ As, therefore, there seems to be little 
doubt that the ‘ remnant of the fluting at 500 ’ is not coin¬ 
cident with the brightest nebular line, and the next most 
characteristic group of this spectrum, the triplet at 3720, 
3724, and 3730, according to Liveing and Deivar, does not 
appear to be present in the photographs, we may conclude 
that the remarkable spectrum of the gaseous nebulae has not 
been produced by burning magnesium.” 
Professor Liveing 3 says in regard to the line denoted by 
Lockyer as 470I have never seen the line at ^ 4703 in the 
spectrum of the magnesium flame. As it is a conspicuous 
line in the arc and spark, we looked for it in the flame, but 
did not find it.” 
1 Proc. Roy. Soc., XLV, 435. 
3 Proc. Roy. Soc., XLVI, 56. 
Proc. Roy. Soc., XLVI, 55. 
