 were of materials that drifted to this earth, from an [337/338] eruption somewhere else, passing over a distance that cannot be considered vast, in a few weeks, or a few days --
And that the light of a volcanic eruption somewhere in the sky was seen by people of this earth.
See the Perth Inquirer, Oct. 3 -- a correspondent tells of several observations, early in September, upon a brilliant light that had been seen in the sky, near the sun.(8) There was a beam of light from it, and the observers thought that it was a comet. This appearance is described as conspicuous. If so, it was seen at no Observatory in Australia.
The circumstance that no professional astronomer in Australia saw this brilliant light brings up, in any normally respectful mind, doubt that there was such a light. But this appearance in the sky is the central datum of our expression, and I am going to make acceptable that, even though it was reported only by amateurs, there was at this time a conspicuous new appearance in the heavens. New Zealand -- silence in the Observatories -- but reports from amateurs, upon a "very large" light in the sky. See the New Zealand Times, Sept. 20, 1883.(9) That a yarn in Australia could quickly spread to New Zealand? Ceylon -- an unknown light that was seen in the sky of Ceylon, about a week after the eruption of Krakatoa (Madras Athenæum, Sept. 22).(10) Straits Times, Oct. 13 -- an appearance like a comet, in the sky, at Samarung, where the natives and the Chinese were terrified, and burned incense for protection from it.(11) England -- observation, upon the night of August 28th, by Captain Noble, a well-known amateur astronomer. Whatever the professionals of Australia and New Zealand were doing, the professionals of England were doing likewise, if doing nothing is about the same wherever it's done. In Knowledge, 4-173, Capt. Noble tells of a sight in the heavens [338/339] that he describes as "like a new and most glorious comet."(12) An amateur in Liverpool saw it. Knowledge, 4-207 -- an object that looked like the planet Jupiter, with a beam from it.(13) However, one professional astronomer did report something. Prof. Swift, at Rochester, N.Y., saw, nights of Sept. 11 and 13, and object that was supposed by him to be a comet, but if so, it was not seen again (Observatory, 6-343).(14)
There was a beam of light from this object: so it was thought to be a comet. See coming data upon beams of light that have associated with new stars.
The first observation upon a new light in the sky was two nights after the explosion of Krakatoa. It may have been shining, conspicuous but unseen, at the time of the eruption.
The matter of the supposed velocity of light, or the hustle of visibility, comes up in the mind of a conventionalist. But, if in the past, scientists have determined the velocity of light to be whatever suited their theories, I feel free for any view that I consider suitable. Look it up, and find that once upon a time the alleged velocity of light agreed with supposed distances in this supposed solar system, and that when changed theories required changes in these distances, the velocity of light was cut down to agree with the new supposed distances. In the kindergarten of science, the more or less intellectual infants who have made these experiments have prattled anything that the child-like astronomers have wanted them to prattle. A conventionalist would say that, even if there were a new star, at a time of terrestrial catastrophe, light of it would not have been seen upon this earth, until years later. My expression is that so close to this earth are the stars that when a new star appears, or erupts, effects of it are observable upon this earth, and that, whether because of closeness, or because there is no velocity of [339/340] light, it is seen immediately -- or is seeable immediately -- if amateurs happen to be looking.
Upon the night of August 6th, 1885, while all the professional astronomers of this earth were attending to whatever may be professional astronomical duties, a clergyman made an astronomical disco