Dear Neville Jones,
I completely agree with your first question.
I don't understand your second question. Here are three interpretations that
I could think of.
* The three distances are obviously not equivalent inside the Solar System.
* If you mean that E.T.s living on a planet in another star system would not
be able to resolve either of those scales using the same level of technology,
as is at our disposition, then also no. The correct statement would be that
distances smaller than some scale, cannot be resolved. That doesn't make
three different distances, below the resolving power, equivalent.
* With respect to seeing the star from Earth, it also makes a difference.
With a 2 AU baseline you have a chance of measuring a parallax and therefore
the distance to the star - the 2 R_Earth baseline is far too short for that.
Please correct me if none of those cover your second question.
Kind regards,
Regner Trampedach
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Quoting Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Dear Regner,
>
> Thank you for your contribution.
>
> Two straightforward questions:
>
> 1. Do you accept the situation shown in the attached diagram (HC Orbit.gif)
?
>
> 2. Given the enormous distances to the stars, do you accept that, if R is the
> radius of the World, circles of radii
>
> R
> 1AU
> 1AU + R
> are basically equivalent?
>
> Neville
>
www.GeocentricUniverse.com