| |
Main
Date: 19 Oct 2006 14:58:12
From: nuckdaily@gmail.com
Subject: back in time
|
if vega is 26 light years from our sun how many hours are we looking
back in time when we view vaga
thanks bill
nuckdaily@gmail.com
|
|
| |
Date: 19 Oct 2006 20:30:20
From: AustinMN
Subject: Re: back in time
|
nuckdaily@gmail.com wrote:
> if vega is 26 light years from our sun how many hours are we looking
> back in time when we view vaga
> thanks bill
> nuckdaily@gmail.com
A little less than 228,000 hours.
Austin
|
| |
Date: 19 Oct 2006 22:29:04
From: darkfield
Subject: Re: back in time
|
<nuckdaily@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1161295091.968308.325240@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> if vega is 26 light years from our sun how many hours are we looking
> back in time when we view vaga
> thanks bill
> nuckdaily@gmail.com
>
it's actually 25.27 light years away.
so 25.27*24*365
|
| | |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 01:43:40
From: Educate
Subject: Re: back in time
|
darkfield wrote:
> <nuckdaily@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1161295091.968308.325240@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > if vega is 26 light years from our sun how many hours are we looking
> > back in time when we view vaga
> > thanks bill
> > nuckdaily@gmail.com
> >
>
> it's actually 25.27 light years away.
>
> so 25.27*24*365
I met Actually once. He disappeared immediately.
|
| |
Date: 19 Oct 2006 22:01:08
From: Algomeysa2
Subject: Re: back in time
|
<nuckdaily@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1161295091.968308.325240@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> if vega is 26 light years from our sun how many hours are we looking
> back in time when we view vaga
> thanks bill
26 times the number of hours in a year...
|
| |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 13:28:45
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: back in time
|
nuckdaily@gmail.com wrote:
> if vega is 26 light years from our sun how many hours are we looking
> back in time when we view vaga
> thanks bill
> nuckdaily@gmail.com
>
See: http://www.google.com/search?q=25.27+light+years+%2F+c+in+hours
|
| | |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 09:17:46
From: canopus56
Subject: Re: back in time
|
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com > wrote in message
news:ha4_g.246050$1i1.39764@attbi_s72...
> See: http://www.google.com/search?q=25.27+light+years+%2F+c+in+hours
That's a pretty cool calculator feature in Google. It even properly decoded:
http://www.google.com/search?q=7.75+parsecs+%2F+c+in+hours
and
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=1.0+astronomical+units+in+kilometers&btnG=Search
But this one incorrectly returned 499 seconds:
http://www.google.com/search?q=1.0+astronomical+units+%2F+c+in+seconds
|
| | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 16:12:38
From: Paul Schlyter
Subject: Re: back in time
|
In article <4538e89c$0$11709$3a2ecee9@news.csolutions.net >,
canopus56 <canopus56@NOyahooSPAM.com > wrote:
>But this one incorrectly returned 499 seconds:
>
>http://www.google.com/search?q=1.0+astronomical+units+%2F+c+in+seconds
...and what would you want instead? The light-time of one AU happens
to be very close to 499 seconds.....
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/
|
| | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 15:26:53
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: back in time
|
canopus56 wrote:
> "Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
> news:ha4_g.246050$1i1.39764@attbi_s72...
>> See: http://www.google.com/search?q=25.27+light+years+%2F+c+in+hours
>
> That's a pretty cool calculator feature in Google. It even properly decoded:
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=7.75+parsecs+%2F+c+in+hours
>
> and
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=1.0+astronomical+units+in+kilometers&btnG=Search
>
> But this one incorrectly returned 499 seconds:
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=1.0+astronomical+units+%2F+c+in+seconds
>
>
>
>
Looks accurate to me...
http://www.google.com/search?q=1+AU+%2F+c
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=1+AU+%2F+c+in+seconds
|
| | | | |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 16:12:38
From: Paul Schlyter
Subject: Re: back in time
|
In article <1V5_g.202348$FQ1.142843@attbi_s71 >,
Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com > wrote:
>canopus56 wrote:
>> "Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
>> news:ha4_g.246050$1i1.39764@attbi_s72...
>>> See: http://www.google.com/search?q=25.27+light+years+%2F+c+in+hours
>>
>> That's a pretty cool calculator feature in Google. It even properly decoded:
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?q=7.75+parsecs+%2F+c+in+hours
>>
>> and
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=1.0+astronomical+units+in+kilometers&btnG=Search
>>
>> But this one incorrectly returned 499 seconds:
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?q=1.0+astronomical+units+%2F+c+in+seconds
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Looks accurate to me...
> http://www.google.com/search?q=1+AU+%2F+c
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=1+AU+%2F+c+in+seconds
One thing I'm missing in this nice "Google calculator" is trig functions
whoch work in degrees. Almost all trig equipped pocket calculators have
that, so why not also Google? Or perhaps it's there but I just don't know
the name of the trig functions in degrees? Oh, I just found it! One simply
writes e.g.:
sin(30 degrees)
:-)
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/
|
| |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 11:48:52
From: canopus56
Subject: Re: back in time
|
Paul Schlyter wrote:
> ...and what would you want instead? The light-time of one AU happens
> to be very close to 499 seconds.....
My error - I wasn't thinking in minutes. Yes, it is right. - C
|
|
