Yes, Please do it is often very helpful to understand what something is not so as to better understand what it is or could be. "Dr. Neville Jones" <ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Allen, "Normal" parallax is the effect of some stars shifting (let's say to the right as you look at the photographic plate) with respect to (wrt) the majority of stars in the image. Negative parallax is simply that the star has gone to the left wrt the majority. Both are very slight effects. The figure that I produced yesterday does not explain it afterall, but it will serve to do away with the ancient stellatum idea. I will put more explanation in when rewriting the page. Sorry for any inconvenience, but thanks to those that read it and made comments. My original writeup was more sound, but the additional material will be useful I'm sure. Neville. Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: That is very helpful.......... I still have a little difficulty visualizing negative parallax.......I can visualize parallax based on figure1 and Zero would not demonstrate any angle difference but it is negative parallax that is difficult to visualize is it just a measurement of the angle less then the expected mean of zero..in which case the difference in the angle of observation from two sightly different locations actually diverges rather then converges?..The bell curve is very interesting as you point out it is rather symmetrical and structured and makes it difficult to argue that the 46% of the measurements used external of the rest of the measurements is anything other then just an arbitrary dismissmissal of data based on preconceived ideas about the cause of parallax...... As you put it "the number and symmetrical distribution of these values would tend to deny this as being anything other than an exception to the rule." Allen --------------------------------- The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider.