Definition of Stellar Parallax from Alonso and Finn Volume 1

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the definition of stellar parallax as presented in Alonso and Finn Volume 1. Participants are examining the clarity and interpretation of the definition, particularly regarding the angle described in relation to the Earth's diameter and its orbit.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the definition of stellar parallax, questioning whether there is a typo or misunderstanding regarding the description provided in the text.
  • Another participant asserts that a definition is not derived and suggests that the original poster clarify their concern.
  • A later reply seeks to clarify the meaning of the angle theta in the definition, specifically whether it refers to the angle subtended by the Earth's diameter or the diameter of its orbit.
  • One participant proposes that the definition likely refers to the Earth's orbit's diameter, arguing that the Earth's diameter itself does not make sense in the context of parallax, which is influenced by the Earth's orbit.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the interpretation of the definition. There are competing views regarding whether the angle refers to the Earth's diameter or its orbital diameter.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the specific terms used in the definition and how they relate to the concept of stellar parallax, indicating potential ambiguities in the text.

vibha_ganji
Messages
19
Reaction score
6
Hi! I read this definition of Stellar Parallax "It is expressed quantitatively by one-half the angle subtended by the Earth's diameter E1E2 perpendicular to the line joining the star and the sun (see Fig. 2-10)." (Source Alonso and Finn: Volume 1). But, I was unable to understand how they derived this definition. Is there some typo or am I misuderstanding the description? Here is Figure 2-10. (This is not a homework question but rather a doubt I had when I was reading.)

1629511291211.png
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
A definition is just that. It is not derived. You need to clarify your concern.
 
Sorry about that. What I meant was I do not understand how the definition represents the angle theta. When the text writes, “ It is expressed quantitatively by one-half the angle subtended by the Earth's diameter E1E2 perpendicular to the line joining the star and the sun,” do they mean the angle subtended by the Earth’s orbit’s diameter and the line perpendicular to the line joining the star and the sun or do they mean the Earth’s diameter itself?
 
Pretty sure they mean the Earth's orbit's diameter. Hence why they say E1E2.
The diameter of the Earth doesn't make much sense by being here since the parallax is due almost entirely to Earth's orbit.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
12
Views
28K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
7K
  • · Replies 152 ·
6
Replies
152
Views
11K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K