Letter | Published:

The Motion of the Perihelion of Mercury

Nature volume 101, pages 125126 (18 April 1918) | Download Citation

Subjects

Abstract

I AM obliged to Mr. Harold Jeffreys for his friendly criticism (NATURE, April 11, p. 103), but my suggestion was not one of a resisting medium pure and simple, but of a resistance greater at perihelion than aphelion, and therefore synchronous with the planet's orbital period. Mr. Jeffreys will surely admit that a periodic disturbance of this kind, acting parallel to the minor axis of the orbit, would certainly affect the longitude of perihelion, without affecting the eccentricity; though whether the amount of resistance to be expected, say from matter in the Zodiacal light, is sufficient to make the effect appreciable may well be doubted. Moreover, I had not thought of the resisting medium as revolving in a planetary manner. I am inclined to attribute much more importance to my other suggestion based on the electrical theory of matter (Phil. Mag. for August, 1917). Nevertheless, a periodic resistance hypothesis is peculiarly applicable to Mercury, (a) because of its nearness, (b) because of the eccentricity of its orbit.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

About this article

Publication history

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/101125c0

Authors

  1. Search for OLIVER LODGE in:

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.