![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
(Apologies if this thread goes diverted, this google retriveable
errors driving me up the wall.) Ian Beardsley wrote on my glowing phosphorescence screen: Wouldn't such a radius depend on the direction you go, like towards the center of the galaxy would be brighter than going in the opposite direction, or am I looking at this the wrong way?--Ian Well no because the Milky Way's centre is so far away from the sun, it will be negligible in how bright it looks from going _inwards_ toward it compared to going _outward_ away from it. Besides Ahad's flux constant is a derivative of the milky way + nearby stars. So the radius ought to be fixed, I think. Then suppose saying that, does the sun radiate equally in all directions? If the sun has more power equatorial;ly, (because it is _flat_) then Ahad's _vanity sphere_ may actually be no sphere at all, but a _spereoid_ instead! Who knows... Rob |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sedna, space probes?, colonies? what's next? | TKalbfus | Policy | 265 | July 13th 04 12:00 AM |
Hans Moravec's Original Rotovator Paper | James Bowery | Policy | 0 | July 6th 04 07:45 AM |
SNe Ia DATA ARE COMPATIBLE WITH A STABLE UNIVERSE | Marcel Luttgens | Astronomy Misc | 219 | March 13th 04 02:53 PM |
Electric Gravity&Instantaneous Light | ralph sansbury | Astronomy Misc | 8 | August 31st 03 02:53 AM |
Invention For Revolution In Transport Industry | Abhi | Astronomy Misc | 16 | August 6th 03 02:42 AM |