posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 03:03 PM
The recent meeting in China drew to a close last month with the collective agreement that the definition of the Astronomical Unit (distance between
the earth and the sun) should be simplified and fixed as one number.
One of the stalwart units of astronomy just got a makeover. The International Astronomical Union, the authority on astronomical constants, has
voted unanimously to redefine the astronomical unit, the conventional unit of length based on the distance between the Earth and the sun.
This fixing of the variable seems like a move to undermine all future space travel. Since we can no longer accurately calculate stellar distances
within our own solar system. The rationale:
The revision also makes the unit easier for engineers, software designers and students to understand, Klioner and his colleague Nicole Capitaine,
of Paris Observatory, noted.
Since the entire community has agreed upon this less accurate method for calculating true distances it raises an interesting question about the
accuracy of all the terms used to define distance. We are simplifying and fixing these numbers with a knowledge that on this planet those
discrepencies don't add up to much, but when traveling to the moon or mars, a few feet does matter. It could be life and death.
Ask yourself how any measurement is made without reducing the many variables down to some fixed constants to make it easier to calculate. Every tool
man has created for making such measurements incorporate some assumptions and minor falsehoods. So any solution is bound to carry with it one of
those +/- means, or degrees of accuracy.
I'm only raising this odd point because I've always believed that if there is any falsehood in my solutions then the entire outcome is false. I've
never found what I'm seeking 100% of the time, maybe its not possible?