Our Sun Is A Star ! |
Our Sun Is A Star ! |
Guest_PhilCo126_* |
Feb 21 2006, 03:51 PM
Post
#1
|
Guests |
A very simple topic title because everybody knows that our Sun is a Star ( lectured to 8 year olds all over the world ... )
But which scientist/Astronomer actually found out this 'simple' fact ? ( 17th Century CHristiaan HUYGENS studied the Sun, 19th Century Angelo SECHI even studied Sunspots ) I do know that 20th Century Fred HOYLE did a lot of calculations on the destiny of Stars but we might go back way earlier to know who found out that our Sun is a Star |
|
|
Feb 21 2006, 04:49 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 23 Joined: 30-June 05 Member No.: 422 |
But which scientist/Astronomer actually found out this 'simple' fact ? ( 17th Century CHristiaan HUYGENS studied the Sun, 19th Century Angelo SECHI even studied Sunspots ) Huygens used the comparative brightness of the Sun and Sirus (using a pinhole to reduce the former and his memory of the latter) and calcualted that Sirus is 27,000AU away (off by a factor of 20, but when you consider that Sirus is 8x brighter than the Sun -which Huygens couldn't have known- he was only off by a factor of 2.5; pretty damn impressive). Thus clearly it was known that the Sun is a star prior to the end of the 17th century. Indeed, the lack of apparent parallax indicated that the stars were very far -and thus Sun-like in their brightness- well prior to Copernicus. But agreed, it is an interesting question as to who made the first compelling argument that the Sun is a star. -Kevin |
|
|
Guest_Richard Trigaux_* |
Feb 21 2006, 05:52 PM
Post
#3
|
Guests |
For us it is easy, but back in the past, it was not obvious, as the Sun and stars look very different. Only when thinkers became aware of the huge distances of the stars it was possible to infer their enormous luminosity. Well though at that time.
It would be even more impressive if some antic thinker had such an idea, but I never heard of that. Another difficulty is that, until recently, everybody was thinking at stars as being fixed on a sphere, all at the same distance, thus explaining that they don't have a parralax even if they were not much further than the planets. So the idea that stars were not all at the same distance and not all the same size had to be discovered before. Anyway the fist physical evidence was only very recent, the end of the 19th century, with the discovery of spectroscopy, which allowed to really see that the sun has the same composition and temperatures than stars. And nailing down whose scientist I don't remember his name, who stated just a year before that "we shall never know what are the stars"... |
|
|
Feb 21 2006, 06:29 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2492 Joined: 15-January 05 From: center Italy Member No.: 150 |
PhilCo, I think you are talking of Father Angelo SECCHI...
-------------------- I always think before posting! - Marco -
|
|
|
Feb 21 2006, 08:48 PM
Post
#5
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2454 Joined: 8-July 05 From: NGC 5907 Member No.: 430 |
Aristarchus of Samos was one of the first in history to theorize that
the stars are similar to Sol, only very far away. You will recall he was also among the first to claim that Earth orbited Sol and not the other way around, like most others thought. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristarchus_of_Samos http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~h...ristarchus.html Among the many advanced ideas of Democritus was that the band of the Milky Way consisted of many stars which were faint because they were so far away. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democritus -------------------- "After having some business dealings with men, I am occasionally chagrined,
and feel as if I had done some wrong, and it is hard to forget the ugly circumstance. I see that such intercourse long continued would make one thoroughly prosaic, hard, and coarse. But the longest intercourse with Nature, though in her rudest moods, does not thus harden and make coarse. A hard, sensible man whom we liken to a rock is indeed much harder than a rock. From hard, coarse, insensible men with whom I have no sympathy, I go to commune with the rocks, whose hearts are comparatively soft." - Henry David Thoreau, November 15, 1853 |
|
|
Feb 21 2006, 09:42 PM
Post
#6
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14434 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
I've often wondered what constellation we might be in as viewed from say, Sirius or Alpha Centuri.
Doug |
|
|
Guest_Myran_* |
Feb 21 2006, 09:50 PM
Post
#7
|
Guests |
Sol would be in Cassiopeia as seen from Alpha Centauri.
|
|
|
Feb 21 2006, 10:42 PM
Post
#8
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2454 Joined: 8-July 05 From: NGC 5907 Member No.: 430 |
Sol would be in Cassiopeia as seen from Alpha Centauri. Here is where Sol would be from the vicinity of Sirius: http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/newsdesk/...2005/36/image/c -------------------- "After having some business dealings with men, I am occasionally chagrined,
and feel as if I had done some wrong, and it is hard to forget the ugly circumstance. I see that such intercourse long continued would make one thoroughly prosaic, hard, and coarse. But the longest intercourse with Nature, though in her rudest moods, does not thus harden and make coarse. A hard, sensible man whom we liken to a rock is indeed much harder than a rock. From hard, coarse, insensible men with whom I have no sympathy, I go to commune with the rocks, whose hearts are comparatively soft." - Henry David Thoreau, November 15, 1853 |
|
|
Feb 21 2006, 11:03 PM
Post
#9
|
|
Senior Member Group: Moderator Posts: 2262 Joined: 9-February 04 From: Melbourne - Oz Member No.: 16 |
I've often wondered what constellation we might be in as viewed from say, Sirius or Alpha Centuri. Doug Always worth putting a link to Celestia up every now and again. A fantastic bit of software, especially with all the Add ons (be prepared to loose many hours!). See the night sky from 100,000 stars! James -------------------- |
|
|
Guest_Richard Trigaux_* |
Feb 22 2006, 09:04 AM
Post
#10
|
Guests |
Aristarchus of Samos was one of the first in history to theorize that the stars are similar to Sol, only very far away. You will recall he was also among the first to claim that Earth orbited Sol and not the other way around, like most others thought. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristarchus_of_Samos http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~h...ristarchus.html Among the many advanced ideas of Democritus was that the band of the Milky Way consisted of many stars which were faint because they were so far away. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democritus WOWWW! That antic thinkers were so close of the marvelous astronomy truth makes me glad for them, but also sad, because there was such a long time of oblivion and ignorance after!! |
|
|
Guest_PhilCo126_* |
Feb 22 2006, 09:43 AM
Post
#11
|
Guests |
dilo that's correct, Vatican head-Astronomer Angelo SECHI ... I believe he might found it out !
|
|
|
Guest_Richard Trigaux_* |
Feb 22 2006, 09:52 AM
Post
#12
|
Guests |
Among the many advanced ideas of Democritus was that the band of the Milky Way consisted of many stars which were faint because they were so far away. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democritus DOUBLE WOW the intuitions of Democritus were incredible, he not only though of the atom, but also for their arrangement into molecules, explainig the variety of differnt matters, solidity, taste, etc... he even went so far as considering the atoms as being "void" as in the quantum concept... or was he in contact with Buddhist thinkers? There was actual contacts from Buddhism toward Greece, but later, when the India emperor Ashoka sent an ambassy toward Greece (a little known fact, but important for the appearance of certain ideas into Antiquity) Democritus was also the first to explain that there could be many inhabited worlds.. I noted an article in a french popular science review (sorry don't recall the reference and title) that the 5th century BC was a king of special, witth he appearance of many "modern" great thinkers, including Zoroastre, Pythagore, Buddha, etc. We should add Democritus to the list. So these scientists were asking the question: what happened so special into this century? Why so much intuitions and thinking system appeared at that time, and not further? For about a millenia, Antiquity lived onto these intuitions, without adding really new things, until catholic fanaticism put an end to it in the 5th century, bringing the heaviest setback of human evolution. Why so much progress in this 5th century BC, and not a linear following after the 1000 years it was still possible? |
|
|
Feb 22 2006, 10:03 AM
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 249 Joined: 11-June 05 From: Finland (62°14′N 25°44′E) Member No.: 408 |
Here is where Sol would be from the vicinity of Sirius: http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/newsdesk/...2005/36/image/c Only because of the selected viewpoint... ------ Democritus had some clever ideas, but so had for example Aristotle. The only difference is that Democritus was right and Aristotle much more popular. There was no any mean to prove who was right; so although Democritus' ideas sound awesome, they weren't that useful or popular in ancient times. Just some ideas among others. It was known fact that Earth was round even in the Middle Ages, but some(?) Chinese believed that Earth was also located in vacuum and it orbited the Sun! -------------------- The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.
|
|
|
Guest_Richard Trigaux_* |
Feb 22 2006, 11:50 AM
Post
#14
|
Guests |
Democritus had some clever ideas, but so had for example Aristotle. The only difference is that Democritus was right and Aristotle much more popular. There was no any mean to prove who was right; so although Democritus' ideas sound awesome, they weren't that useful or popular in ancient times. Just some ideas among others. Yes there was no mean to prove who was right, from for instance heliocentrism and geocentrism. But if knowledge had evolved regularly, such means would have appeared soon after, say 2 to 1st century BC. In place of this, Antiquity did not made real great moves and stagnated into dogmatism, before it was put an end to it in the 5th century AC. This is also true in many other domains, and the cause is perhaps dogmatiscism and lack of real reasoning capacity: in Antiquity everybody was trusting their masters, not their reasonings. This is perhaps why the Antiquity was not able of a real evolution like today science. Perhaps only the appearance of mathematics, logic and reasoning allowed science to take off in hte time of Galileo. What is curious anyway is this fascinating 5th century BC where so much great ideas and thinking systems appeared all over the world, and only at that time. It was known fact that Earth was round even in the Middle Ages, This seemed not a problem, as it is not contradictory with heliocentrism. but some(?) Chinese believed that Earth was also located in vacuum and it orbited the Sun! At what epoch? The Chinese had to bear an evolution similar tou our Antiquity, but on several millenia rather than one: great ideas, but too many dogmaticism (especially in confucianism) and social conformism to be able to really question the "teachings of the ancestors". It was even said recently that the Chinese were able to tour the world some tens of years before Magellan. But when they were back to their country, the new emperor had ordered to forbid further travels, dismantle the ships and scrap all their science results... and they all did, from obedience. |
|
|
Guest_Myran_* |
Feb 22 2006, 12:05 PM
Post
#15
|
Guests |
QUOTE Jyril said: There was no any mean to prove who was right Yes in many cases they lacked the tools to check and test their ideas, one of the few they could test was if the Earth were round looking down wells in Greece and Egypt and so were able to calculate the diameter with one amazingly good result, only slightly off. What they did have was scientific discourse, even though the term wasnt invented back then (they most likely had another word for it though). Regardless many of these amazing ideas these philosophers presented had been discussed at length with their students and fellows, very littl of that is preserved, so we really dont know how they actually reached the conclusions. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th September 2024 - 07:10 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |