- #1
nightcleaner
Hi
I have been thinking about the transit of Mercury, in which, so I have read, the exact time of crossing of the limb of the sun is difficult to determine due to an apparent tear-drop shape distortion of the orb of the planet. A symetrical distortion of the limb of the sun at the point of transit also occurs. This distortion is an unexplained optical phenomena, not an actual change in the shape of the planet or of the sun.
My question has to do with the angle of resolution of the event. I'm not sure I have the right terminology here. What I mean to inquire about has to do with the magnification of the image. The tangent of the angle would be 1/2 the width of the image divided by the distance to Mercury.
How does this angle compare to the angle used in far-field observations of galaxies at the limits of the observable universe? And of the recent images of large planets orbiting local area stars? My guess is that all of these images are near the limits of current resolution available to our technology. Am I correct? Or is the Mercury image relitively much wider than the others?
Thanks for any information,
nc
I have been thinking about the transit of Mercury, in which, so I have read, the exact time of crossing of the limb of the sun is difficult to determine due to an apparent tear-drop shape distortion of the orb of the planet. A symetrical distortion of the limb of the sun at the point of transit also occurs. This distortion is an unexplained optical phenomena, not an actual change in the shape of the planet or of the sun.
My question has to do with the angle of resolution of the event. I'm not sure I have the right terminology here. What I mean to inquire about has to do with the magnification of the image. The tangent of the angle would be 1/2 the width of the image divided by the distance to Mercury.
How does this angle compare to the angle used in far-field observations of galaxies at the limits of the observable universe? And of the recent images of large planets orbiting local area stars? My guess is that all of these images are near the limits of current resolution available to our technology. Am I correct? Or is the Mercury image relitively much wider than the others?
Thanks for any information,
nc