About the distance to the stars

Dear Scsa, you wrote:

“We know how big Uranus is and how far away. We can see that Sirius looks smaller than Uranus (if using a proper optical instrument and not relying on limited naked eye estimations). So Sirius must either be further away than Uranus or smaller than Uranus.”

Surely, you must be joking…: SIrius is the very brightest and largest star in our skies (that EVERYONE will have seen it in their lifetimes). Uranus, on the other hand, is an extremely faint light only barely visible with our naked eyes (that most people will NEVER see during their lifetimes). These are undeniable, HARD FACTS. If Sirius appears smaller in a telescope than Uranus, it does not logically follow that Sirius must either be further away than Uranus or smaller than Uranus.

Dear all,

It is my pleasure to announce today February 5 (the day of my birthday, serendipitously enough!) that the TYCHOS has been cited in an article posted at the Vatican Observatory website. To be sure, this is the very first article mentioning my TYCHOS research to be published on an ‘official’ (for lack of a better term) astronomy website! :slight_smile:

“You Can’t See Atoms, so Why Can You See Stars?” - by Christopher Graney: You Can’t See Atoms, so Why Can You See Stars? - Vatican Observatory

The author of the article is none other than Christopher M. Graney, the public relations officer (and astronomy historian / adjunct scholar) of the Vatican Observatory Foundation - based in Arizona, USA - yet linked to the original Vatican Observatory headquartered at the papal summer residence in Castel Gandolfo (which just happens to be located less than 6 miles from my own house, in the hills overlooking Rome).

“The Vatican Observatory is one of the oldest active astronomical observatories in the world, with its roots going back to 1582 and the Gregorian reform of the calendar.”

As it is, over the years I have read (and thoroughly enjoyed) a great many papers by the prolific astronomy writer / historian Dr. Graney, especially those concerned with Tycho Brahe’s work and achievements - which he has always treated objectively (i.e. with due insight and open-mindedness). You may thus imagine my delight to see my TYCHOS research being cited on the VO website - even though it isn’t exactly supportive of the same. In any event, I remain confident that the TYCHOS model is here to stay - and that it is only a matter of time before it gets seriously assessed, discussed and debated by this world’s scientific community.

1 Like

Here is what you can read on the main page of the site that has just published an article quoting my TYCHOS research:

“The Vatican Observatory is one of the oldest active astronomical observatories in the world, with its roots going back to 1582 and the Gregorian reform of the calendar. Headquartered at the papal summer residence in Castel Gandolfo, outside Rome, this official work of the Vatican City State supports a dozen priests and brothers (Jesuits and diocesan) from four continents who study the universe utilizing modern scientific methods.” https://www.vaticanobservatory.org/

I have to wonder if my fate will be that of Galileo (who was supposedly confined in house arrest for the rest of his life) or that of Giordano Bruno (who was burned at the stake)! :smiley: Only joking, folks…

1 Like

Yes, this is an interesting and most welcome development Simon. Kudos to Mr. Christopher Graney for posting this. But I don’t find his argument very reasonable however. I’m amazed how scholars dismiss valid arguments with others that clearly aren’t. Of course we can see the light from a lamp in the dark from a further distance than we can see the lamp itself in daylight. But I fail to see how this is a relevant argument here or that the light from an atom supposedly is visible with the naked eye.

But unfortunately this is what we see time and time again. The planets move in elliptical orbits at varying speeds and stars have enormous mass because otherwise Newtonian mathematics don’t work. Never mind the postulates of Euclid, sigh.

But I think we are steadily approaching that moment in human history when the Emperor and his court will have to admit that even they are not above grammar, or in this case geometry and reason.


I just read his article and his reasoning isn’t logical. The jist of his response is that its the light from the object that we see not the actual object, ok… What else could we be discussing? The visible “light” is the entire crux of the discussion. Simon has only ever referred to what can be visibly seen. Do we have to now start splitting hairs and say that the object itself is what astronomy has been referring to in the past not the observed light it emits?

No, this is not the argument at all and never was. Astronomy, as Simon noted, attributes the diffraction of light through the atmosphere which affects starlight but apparantly not planetary light or the sun, as being the reason we aren’t supposed to trust our eyes. And was also the same argument, mostly, given by Scsa, that devolved into blatant contradictions of his own argument. I wonder if Scsa is also Graney?

All that being said, I must still wonder why there would not be a reduction factor for our own solar and planetary distances/sizes? How can we be assured of the validity of the 299 200 000 km distance?

Dear Schoeppfer,

That’s an interesting question: you see, I have chosen to ‘go with’ the official estimates of the distances between the bodies of our own solar system because they’ve been calculated (trigonometrically) using the diameter of Earth of 12756 km - which I believe is pretty much correct. Having said that, I do not completely dismiss the idea that those distances may be shorter. Note that if we should find out one day that this is the case, the RELATIVE distances between our solar system’s “family members” will always remain the same, so it wouldn’t change a iota of the TYCHOS paradigm - as implemented in the Tychosium simulator.

Interestingly perhaps, if we apply my “42633 reduction factor” to our own Solar System’s bodies, the Sun would be just about 3509km away (149 600 000km / 42633 = 3509km). Well, 3509km just happens to be exactly 1/4th of 14036km (which is the annual distance covered by the Earth in the TYCHOS model). As it is, the rotational speed of Earth around its axis (≈1600km/h) is just about 1/4th of that of the Sun (≈6400 km/h). Food for thought I guess - but perhaps nothing more than food for thought! :slight_smile:

1 Like