Earth isn't a star and doesn't (can't) have a parallax, becuse we use Earth's orbit as a baseline to measure parallax.
vega its like a triangle the farther away one part is(arcturis) the narower the triangle is (paralax)
Yes your weight would be greater.
Arcturus is hot. Bear in mind that only a hot star is even going to be seen in the night sky. Any cold star would also be dark.
I assume you mean the parallax. If the parallax is 0.1 arc-seconds, then the distance is 1 / 0.1 = 10 parsecs.I assume you mean the parallax. If the parallax is 0.1 arc-seconds, then the distance is 1 / 0.1 = 10 parsecs.I assume you mean the parallax. If the parallax is 0.1 arc-seconds, then the distance is 1 / 0.1 = 10 parsecs.I assume you mean the parallax. If the parallax is 0.1 arc-seconds, then the distance is 1 / 0.1 = 10 parsecs.
No. We can calculate the distance to an astronomical object that isn't too far away by measuring the parallax, or positional shift compared to the background stars, by observing the star from two opposite sides of the Earth's orbit. This gives us a baseline of about 186 million miles, and we can figure out the sides of the triangle using basic math. But beyond a couple of hundred light years, the angular shift is too small to measure. Perhaps in 30 or 40 years, we'll be able to send space telescopes like the Hubble to orbits out near Neptune or even farther. That will increase our baseline distance 40 times or more, allowing us to use parallax to measure distances out to a thousand light years or more.
vega its like a triangle the farther away one part is(arcturis) the narower the triangle is (paralax)
Parallax would be easier to measure if the Earth were farther from the sun. This way, there will be a wider angle to the stars using the parallax method.
A parallax is hard to measure if it is very small - and this happens when the corresponding object is very far away.
Arcturus and all the other bright stars would have been known to the first astronomers, the Babylonians.
It would be greater.
It would be greater.
It would be greater.
At farther distances, the parallax becomes too small to measure accurately. At a distance of 1 parsec, a star would have a parallax of 1 second (1/3600 of a degree). (The closest star, Toliman, is a little farther than that.) At a distance of 100 parsecs, the parallax is only 1/100 of a second.
Yes your weight would be greater.
Arcturus is a red supergiant with a radius 25 times larger than our Sun. If our Sun was replaced by Arcturus it's outer edges would reach beyond Mars. See related link for a pictorial representation.
You have to ask yourself what is an advantage when parallax measurements are being made? . . parallax happens when you move to a different place and the object you see look a little different, the closest ones appear to have moved more than the ones that are further away. In astronomy parallax is created when the Earth is in opposite points of its orbit. Stars that are close appear to have moved a little, relative to the mass of stars that are a long distance away. Parallax was not observed before the 19th century, and the lack of parallax was always used to 'prove' that the Earth could not possibly be going round the Sun. It was only in the 19th century that parallax was observed, but it was only very tiny movements of the closest stars. It forced people to realise that the stars are incredibly far away and the Earth does go round the Sun after all, so it was extra evidence of the Sun being at the centre of the solar system. A parallax measurement is easier to make if the baseline is longer, so the answer to your question is that Mercury and Venus have no advantage for making parallax measurements.
That is called parallax and it happens when a nearby star appears to move against the background as the Earth moves round the Sun. The baseline is the mean radius of the Earth's orbit (not the diameter) and a star which has a parallax of 1 arc-second would be at a distance of 1 parsec. In practice the nearest stars have a parallax of about 0.7 seconds so are at a distance of 1.4 parsecs or 4 light-years. Parallaxes are always small and require sensitive instruments to measure. The lack of parallax was formerly used as a proof that the Earth must be fixed, and it took until 1838 for Bessel to measure the first stellar parallax. After that people began to realise that the stars are much further away than they had thought.