PROXIMA - our nearmost “star” - agrees with the TYCHOS
Perhaps the 'boldest' contention that I put forth in my book is that the stars are MUCH closer than currently believed. This was, of course, also Tycho Brahe's strongly-asserted (and well-informed!) opinion – and the MAIN reason why he vehemently rejected the Copernican model. In astronomy literature, it is often condescendingly claimed that his rejection was due to him being unable to detect any stellar parallaxes (since this can only be done with modern telescopes). This is not exactly true: he rejected the Copernican model on terms of pure logic: WHY, he asked, would there be such an enormous void
between the furthest planet of our solar system (at the time, Saturn) – and our nearmost star? To be sure, we are told that our nearmost “star” (PROXIMA Centauri), is about 28000 X further away from us than Saturn ! So, between Saturn and PROXIMA, there would only be a handful of other celestial bodies (such as Neptune, Uranus, Pluto and little more!) Now, how bizarre is that
Those who have read my TYCHOS book will be familiar with the simple calculation I made to propound the possibility that the stars are considerably closer than we are told: since Earth - in the TYCHOS - moves (around its PVP orbit) by only 7018 km every six months (as opposed to 299.2 Mkm, or 2AU, as of the Copernican theory), ALL the stellar parallax calculations performed to this day are “inflated” by a factor of (approx) 42633.
299,200,000 / 7018 ≈ 42633 (i.e. the stars are 42633 X closer than currently believed)
I do of course realize that this is a rather “wild contention” of mine – yet if my (and Tycho Brahe's) inklings about stellar distances turn out to be dead wrong, I will have no problem retracting them in the 2nd edition of my book. After all, it isn't the main point of the TYCHOS model – which deals primarily with the geometry of our inner solar system.
In my book, however, I do propose this idea (of the stars being 42633 X closer) - and consequently submit that:
“This means that, in the TYCHOS, the distance unit known as “1 Light Year” corresponds to less than 1.5 AU.”
9,460,730,472,580.8 km (i.e. ONE “light year”) / 42633 = 226,133,053.5 km = 1.48366 AU
So let's see if we can find any clues in support of those “outrageous” contentions of mine (which, predictably, have already been derided and scoffed at by some silly clowns pretending to 'help out' with my TYCHOS research... Seems like history indeed repeats itself!).
We will first have to look at some basic physics pertaining to the empirical domain of visuals / and observed angular diameters :
On Wikipedia's “Angular diameter” entry, we can read:
“In astronomy, the sizes of celestial objects are often given in terms of their angular diameter as seen from Earth, rather than their actual sizes. Since these angular diameters are typically small, it is common to present them in arcseconds. (...)
“An object of diameter 725.27 km at a distance of 1 AU [average Earth > Sun distance] will have an angular diameter of 1 arcsecond”. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_diameter
Now, to follow my reasoning, you will have to know that 1,296,000 arc seconds = 360° (a full circle). Not many people know about "arc seconds".
Well, it so happens that 725.27 km X 1,296,000 = 939,949,920 km, i.e. almost exactly the Sun's orbital circumference – as of the TYCHOS ! (Oh well, in my book I have the Sun's orbital circumference at 939,943,910 km – a mere 0.00063939 % discrepancy, so you may hopefully not hold me up on that ! ).
In other words, if you were looking at a 725.27km-wide sunspot, it would subtend 1 arcsecond in your 360° celestial field of vision (as defined by the Earth-Sun distance of 1 AU - the so-called Astronomical Unit).
So let us now take a close look at our nearmost “stellar” object, namely, PROXIMA Centauri.
According to my TYCHOS model, PROXIMA
(our nearmost “star”) would be 42633 X closer than currently believed.
As of official data, PROXIMA is said to be as far as 4.25 Light Years away: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxima_Centauri
Under the TYCHOS (which propounds that 1 LY = 1,48366 AU) this would translate into : 4.25 X 1.48366 ≈ 6.3 AU
As we saw earlier, 1 arcsecond of an object at 1 AU represents 725.27 km.
Therefore, 1 arcsecond at a distance of 6.3 AU
(my proposed distance for PROXIMA
– as of the TYCHOS reduction factor of 42633) would represent : 725.27 X 6.3 ≈ 4569 km
However, the observed parallax for PROXIMA
is not 1 arc second. It is 0.76813 arc seconds:
“The nearest star to Earth, Proxima Centauri (a member of the triple system of Alpha Centauri), has a parallax of 0.76813″. https://www.britannica.com/place/Proxima-Centauri
Ok, so this means that PROXIMA's
parallax would represent a displacement of :
0.76813 X 4569 km ≈ 3509.5 km
Well, that is most interesting indeed: see, when astronomers go about determining stellar parallaxes, they assume that Earth revolves around the Sun around a 299.2 Mkm-wide (or 2 AU) orbit. Like so:
Now, please note that they determine the parallactic angle considering a baseline of 1 AU (and not of 2 AU). This means that the 0.76813" parallax of PROXIMA (our nearmost "stellar object") was determined using a trigonometric baseline of 1 AU - corresponding to Earth's 'transverse' displacement over HALF of a six month period.
Well, in the TYCHOS, Earth moves by 7018 km in six months. In HALF
that period, it moves by 3509 km.
So, basically, PROXIMA's observed parallax may well be, quite simply, caused by Earth's 1-mph-motion! To be sure, astronomers take into account (and subtract) any given star's assumed proper motion and, of course, the circa 50" (arc seconds) of annual precession. Hence, the little "parallax" value they are left with (the observed transverse / lateral drift of a nearby star in relation to distant stars
) - probably just reflects Earth's 1-mph-motion around its PVP orbit.
If you've followed my logical reasoning this far, I trust that you will now envisage the definite possibility that PROXIMA
, our nearmost "star", is only about 6.3 AU
away from Earth, roughly halfway between Jupiter and Saturn. Yet PROXIMA
is certainly NOT part of our system, since it's location is observed to be at a steep -62°
declination vis-à-vis Earth's equatorial plane (while our own system's bodies' orbits are inclined at about 23.3°with the same). Note that PROXIMA
is also well clear of the Main Asteroid belt (with its millions of small objects ejected by the Sun-Mars binary system, located between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter). Funnily enough, PROXIMA
is known to be an "extremely faint star"
... in spite of being our nearmost
"star"! Its so-called "apparent magnitude"
is a dull 11.3 (invisible to the naked eye), i.e. only slightly brighter than Phobos (Mars's largest moon - a tiny "rock" of circa 25 km in diameter and a dull 11.8 of "apparent magnitude"
). Well, this would certainly appear to suggest that PROXIMA
is a MUCH smaller object than currently believed (my TYCHOS calculations have it at about 32 km of diameter). Here's how I would illustrate PROXIMA's
location within the TYCHOS model, as it slowly revolves around the Alpha Centauri A & B binary system :
I think I'm on to something - regarding stellar distances. Only time will tell though. In the meanwhile, let the naysayers sneer and scorn to their heart's content.