Photographs of Nebulae and Clusters Part 1

Photographs of Nebulae and Cl.u.s.ters.

by James Edward Keeler.

NOTE.

In the original negatives of subjects 10 and 12, there are faint dark rings immediately surrounding some of the stars in the denser parts of the nebulosity. This effect has no doubt been accentuated in the subsequent photographic processes. On the plates of these two subjects in the completed volume, these rings are very distinct and give rise to a suspicion that the effect has been enhanced by the engraver. A critical examination of the prints seems to confirm this view. In the original proofs these rings were inconspicuous and were not noticed. The processes of steel-facing and printing appear to have increased the effect markedly, as it is much stronger on the sheets printed for the edition than in any of the early proofs.

Inasmuch as these effects were not and could not be discovered until the sheets were a.s.sembled in Sacramento for binding, it has not been thought desirable to delay the issue of the volume for several weeks additional in order to have new plates and new prints of these subjects made by the distant engraver.

Lick Observatory, Mount Hamilton, November, 1908.

PREFACE.

When Professor Keeler entered upon the duties of Director of the Lick Observatory, on June 1, 1898, he planned to devote his observing time for several years to photographing the brighter nebulae and star cl.u.s.ters, with the Crossley reflector. The story of his wonderful success with this difficult instrument is familiar to all readers of astronomical literature: this form of telescope was in effect born again; and his contributions to our knowledge of the nebulae were epoch-making.

Professor Keeler's observing programme included one hundred and four subjects. At the time of his lamented death, on August 12, 1900, satisfactory negatives of two-thirds of the selected objects had been secured. The unphotographed objects were mainly those which come into observing position in the unfavorable winter and spring months. The completion of the programme was entrusted to a.s.sistant Astronomer Perrine.

The observers were a.s.sisted chiefly by Mr. H. K. Palmer, and in smaller degree by Messrs. Joel Stebbins, C. G. Dall, R. H. Curtiss and Sebastian Albrecht.

Professor Keeler's photographs enabled him to make two discoveries of prime importance, not to mention several that are scarcely secondary to them.

1st.--"Many thousands of unrecorded nebulae exist in the sky. A conservative estimate places the number within reach of the Crossley reflector at about 120,000. The number of nebulae in our catalogues is but a small fraction of this." [The number already discovered and catalogued did not exceed 13,000. Later observations with the Crossley reflector, with longer exposure-times and more sensitive plates, render it probable that the number of nebulae discoverable with this powerful instrument is of the order of half a million.]

2d.--"Most of these nebulae have a spiral structure."

The photographs of the one hundred and four subjects contain the images of 744 nebulae not previously observed. A catalogue of these is published in the present volume. Their positions, which are thought to be accurate within 1'', were determined by Messrs. Palmer, Curtiss, and Albrecht.

The main purpose of this volume is to reproduce and make available for study, the larger and more interesting nebulae and cl.u.s.ters on the programme, sixty-eight in number. The thirty-six subjects not reproduced are for the most part small or apparently not of special interest. The difficulties attending the reproduction of astronomical photographs by mechanical processes are well-known to all who have made the attempt. It seems necessary to recognize, at least at present, that delicate details of structure will be lost, and that contrasts between very bright and very faint regions will be changed, especially if a good sky background is preserved; in other words, that the best obtainable reproductions fall far short of doing justice to the original photographs. Technical studies should be based upon the original negatives or upon copies on gla.s.s.

After considerable experimental work, involving several methods and several firms, the making of the heliogravure plates and the hand-press prints was entrusted to The Photogravure and Color Company of New York City. To this firm's continued interest and willingness to act on constructive criticism is due much of the excellence of the results.

The expensive reproductions could hardly have been undertaken without the generous a.s.sistance of the donors mentioned on a preceding page.

Professor Keeler's description of the Crossley reflector, of his methods of observing, and of the chief results obtained, was written only a short time before his death. It is here republished. Other results of his work are described in the several papers to which the footnotes refer.

THE CROSSLEY REFLECTOR OF THE LICK OBSERVATORY.[1]

By JAMES E. KEELER.

The Crossley reflector, at present the largest instrument of its cla.s.s in America, was made in 1879 by Dr. A. A. Common, of London, in order to carry out, and test by practical observation, certain ideas of his respecting the design of large reflecting telescopes. For the construction of the instrument embodying these ideas, and for some fine astronomical photographs obtained with it, Dr. Common was awarded the gold medal of the Royal Astronomical Society in 1884.

In 1885, Dr. Common, wishing to make a larger telescope on a somewhat similar plan, sold the instrument to Edward Crossley, Esq., F. R. A. S., of Halifax, England. Mr. Crossley provided the telescope with a dome of the usual form, in place of the sliding roof used by its former owner, and made observations with it for some years; but the climate of Halifax not being suitable for the best use of such a telescope, he consented, at the request of Dr. Holden, then Director of the Lick Observatory, to present it to this inst.i.tution. The funds for transporting the telescope and dome to California, and setting them up on Mount Hamilton, were subscribed by friends of the Lick Observatory, for the most part citizens of California.

The work was completed, and the telescope housed in a suitable observatory building, in 1895.[2]

On taking charge of the Lick Observatory in 1898, I decided to devote my own observing time to the Crossley reflector, although the whole of my previous experience had been with refracting telescopes. I was more particularly desirous of testing the reflector with my own hands, because such preliminary trials of it as had been made had given rise to somewhat conflicting opinions as to its merits.[3] The result of my experience is given in the following article, which is written chiefly with reference to American readers. If I have taken occasion to point out what I regard as defects in the design or construction of the instrument, I have done so, not from any desire to look a gift horse in the mouth, but in the interest of future improvement, and to make intelligible the circ.u.mstances under which the work of the reflector is now being done and will be done hereafter. The most important improvements which have suggested themselves have indeed already been made by Dr. Common himself, in constructing his five-foot telescope. The three-foot reflector is, in spite of numerous idiosyncracies which make its management very different from the comparatively simple manipulation of a refractor, by far the most effective instrument in the Observatory for certain cla.s.ses of astronomical work. Certainly no one has more reason than I to appreciate the great value of Mr. Crossley's generous gift.

[Ill.u.s.tration: DOME OF THE CROSSLEY REFLECTOR.]

The Crossley dome is about 350 yards from the main Observatory, at the end of a long rocky spur which extends from the Observatory summit toward the south, and on which are two of the houses occupied by members of the Observatory staff. It is below the level of the lowest reservoir, "Huyghens," which receives the discharge from the hydraulic machinery of the 36-inch refractor, and therefore the water engine furnished by Mr.

Crossley for turning the dome can not be used, unless a new water system--overflow reservoir, pump and windmill--is provided. In this respect a better site would have been a point on the south slope of "Kepler,"--the middle peak of Mount Hamilton--just above the Huyghens reservoir. No addition to the present water system would then have been needed. The slope of the mountain at this place might cut off the view of the north horizon, but since the telescope can not be turned below the pole, this would be a matter of no consequence. Water-power for the dome is not, however, really necessary.

The cylindrical walls of the dome, 36-1/4 feet inside diameter, are double, and provided with ventilators. Opening into the dome, on the left of the entrance, are three small rooms, one of which has been fitted up as a photographic dark room, and another, containing a sidereal clock and a telephone, which communicates with the main Observatory, as a study, while the third is used for tools and storage. There is also a small room for the water engine, in case it should be used. The dome is at present supplied with water from only the middle reservoir, Kepler, which is reserved for domestic purposes and is not allowed to pa.s.s through the machinery.

The dome itself, 38 feet 9 inches in diameter, is made of sheet-iron plates riveted to iron girders. It also carries the wooden gallery, ladders, and observing platform, which are suspended from it by iron rods.

The apparatus for turning the dome consists of a cast-iron circular rack bolted to the lower side of the sole-plate, and a set of gears terminating in a sprocket-wheel, from which hangs an endless rope. As the dome does not turn easily, it has been necessary to multiply the gearing of the mechanism so that one arm's-length pull on the rope moves the dome only about one inch. In some positions of the telescope the dome can not be moved more than six or eight inches at a time without danger of striking the tube, and this slowness of motion is then not disadvantageous. It is only when the dome has to be moved through a considerable angle, as in turning to a fresh object, or in photographing some object which pa.s.ses nearly through the zenith, that the need for a mechanical means of rotation is felt.

The observing slit, 6 feet wide, extends considerably beyond the zenith.

It is closed by a double shutter, which is operated by an endless rope.

The upper part, within the dome, is also closed by a hood, or shield, which serves to protect the telescope from any water that may find its way through the shutter, and which is rolled back to the north when observations are made near the zenith. I have recently fitted the lower half of the slit with a wind-screen, which has proved to be a most useful addition. It is made of tarpaulin, attached to slats which slide between the two main girders, and is raised or lowered by halliards, which belay to cleats on the north rail of the gallery. A more detailed description of the dome has been given in an article by Mr. Crossley,[4] from which the reduced figure in Fig. 1[5] has been taken.

The mounting of the three-foot reflector has been very completely described and ill.u.s.trated by Dr. Common,[6] so that only a very general description need be given here. The most important feature of the mounting is that the telescope tube, instead of being on one side of the polar axis, as in the usual construction, is central, so that the axis of the mirror and the polar axis are in the same line when the telescope is directed to the pole. The declination axis is short, and is supported by a ma.s.sive goose-neck bolted to the upper end of the polar axis. The mirror is placed just _above_ the declination axis. Its weight, and the weight of the whole tube and eye-end, are counterpoised by slabs of lead, placed in two iron boxes, between which the goose-neck of the polar axis pa.s.ses. The great advantage of this arrangement, and the controlling principle of the design, is that the telescope is perfectly free to pa.s.s the meridian at all zenith distances. No reversal of the instrument is needed, or is indeed possible.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE CROSSLEY REFLECTOR.]

For long-exposure photography, the advantage above referred to is obvious, but it is attended by certain disadvantages. One of these is that a very much larger dome is required than for the usual form of mounting. Another is the great amount of dead weight which the axes must carry; for the mirror, instead of helping to counterpoise the upper end of the tube, must itself be counterpoised. When anything is attached to the eye-end (and in astrophysical work one is always attaching things to the eye-end of a telescope), from ten to twenty times as much weight must be placed in the counterpoise boxes below the declination axis. Where room is to be found for the weights required to counterpoise the Bruce spectrograph, is a problem which I have not yet succeeded in solving.

In his five-foot reflector, Dr. Common has caused the telescope tube to swing between two large ears, which project from the upper end of the boiler-like polar axis, the pivots const.i.tuting the declination axis being near, but above, the lower end of the tube. The mirror, therefore, helps to counterpoise the upper end of the tube. This I regard as a distinct improvement. The danger of large ma.s.ses of metal near the mirror injuring the definition is, in my opinion, imaginary; at least there is no such danger on Mount Hamilton, where the temperature variations are unusually small. Experience with the Crossley reflector, as well as with the other instruments of the Lick Observatory, shows that the definition depends almost entirely on external conditions.

My first trials of the reflector, as first mounted at the Lick Observatory, showed that the center of motion was inconveniently high.

Among other difficulties arising from this circ.u.mstance, the spectroscope projected beyond the top of the dome, so that it had to be removed before the shutter could be closed. In July, 1898, the pier was therefore cut down two feet. This brought the eye-end down nearly to the level of the gallery rail, where it was at a convenient height for the observer when sitting on a camp-stool, and it made all parts of the mounting more accessible. Toward the north and south, the range of the telescope, being limited in these directions by the construction of the mounting, was not affected by the change, but the telescope can not now be used at such low alt.i.tudes as formerly, near the east and west points of the horizon. The only occasion likely to call for the use of the reflector in these positions is the appearance of a large comet near the Sun, and, after some consideration, I decided to sacrifice these chances for the sake of increasing the general usefulness of the instrument. Except in rare cases, all observations are made within three hours of the meridian.

To adapt the mounting to the lat.i.tude of Mount Hamilton, a wedge-shaped casting, shown in the ill.u.s.tration, had been provided, but through some error, arising probably from the fact that the telescope had been used in two different lat.i.tudes in England, the angle of the casting was too great. When the pier was cut down its upper surface was therefore sloped toward the south, in order to compensate the error in the casting. Plate VII shows the instrument very nearly as it is at the present time.

The polar axis of the Crossley reflector is a long, hollow cylinder, separated by a s.p.a.ce of about one-eighth of an inch from its concentric casing. The idea was to fill this s.p.a.ce with mercury, and float the greater part of the thrust of the axis, the function of a small steel pin at the lower end being merely to steady the axis. But this mercury flotation, as applied to the Crossley telescope, is a delusion, as I think Mr. Crossley had already found. The mercury, it is true, relieves the thrust to some extent, but it greatly increases the already enormous side pressure on the steel pin at the bottom, thus creating a much greater evil than the one it is intended to remedy. The workmen who set up the mounting inform me that the small bearing at the lower end of the polar axis is badly worn, as I should expect it to be. Instead of putting mercury into the s.p.a.ce intended for it, I have therefore poured in a pint or so of oil, to keep the lower bearing lubricated. For the reasons indicated above, the force required to move the telescope in right ascension is perhaps five times greater than it should be. The lower end of the polar axis ought to be fitted with ball bearings to take the thrust, and with a pair of friction wheels on top; but it would be difficult to make these changes now. It should be observed that the disadvantages of the mercury flotation are considerably greater at Mount Hamilton than at the lat.i.tude for which the telescope was designed.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE CROSSLEY REFLECTOR.]

As already stated above, the range of the telescope is limited on the south by the construction of the mounting. The greatest southern declination which can be observed is 25. In England this would doubtless mark the limit set by atmospheric conditions, but at Mount Hamilton it would be easy to photograph objects 15 farther south, if the telescope could be pointed to them.

The original driving-clock having proved to be inefficient, at least without an electric control, a new and powerful driving-clock was made by the Observatory instrument maker, from designs by Professor Hussey. In its general plan it is like that of the 36-inch refractor. The winding apparatus, contained in the large casting of the original mounting, has no maintaining power, and can not easily be fitted with one. The clock could in no case be wound during a photographic exposure, on account of the tremors attending the operation, but it would be somewhat more convenient to have the stars remain on the plate during the winding. With a little practice, however, one can wind the clock without actually stopping it, though the object must afterwards be brought back to its place by means of the slow motion in right ascension.

Two finders have recently been fitted to the Crossley reflector. One has an object-gla.s.s of four inches aperture and eight feet six inches focal length, with a field of about 1 2', which is very nearly the photographic field of the main telescope. Its standards are bolted to one of the corner tubes of the reflector. The other finder has a three-inch objective and a large field. It had not been mounted when the photograph for the plate was made.