Re: Nearby stars-why do they start at 4LY?
- From: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Richard Tobin)
- Date: 20 Jul 2008 21:34:55 GMT
In article <5b9784dng0s0hkgu94con8409ur7kiatqg@xxxxxxx>,
John C. Polasek <jpolasek@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The distances for the first few are
.. .. .. 4.3 6.0 7.7 8.4 8.6 9.4 10.4 LY
1.7 1.7 .7 .2 1.2 1 the differences
Why are there no stars from 0 to 4.3 LY? From the difference list
there should be at least 2 closer than 4.3.
There's no "should" about it. You can't deduce anything from such a
small set of data.
But even supposing they were uniformly distributed, the volume with 10
LY of earth is 8 times the volume within 5. The differences in
distances would be expected to tend to zero.
-- Richard
--
Please remember to mention me / in tapes you leave behind.
.
- References:
- Nearby stars-why do they start at 4LY?
- From: John C . Polasek
- Nearby stars-why do they start at 4LY?
- Prev by Date: Re: Lin Liangtai - why not peer reviewed publication
- Next by Date: Re: Nearby stars-why do they start at 4LY?
- Previous by thread: Nearby stars-why do they start at 4LY?
- Next by thread: Re: Nearby stars-why do they start at 4LY?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
