• NJSpradlin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I am not a scientist, or mathematician, or STEM in any way, but if we assume that mercury has a circular orbit, and the sun has a stationary position within everyone’s orbit… and that every planet has a circular orbit, instead of elliptical, then we can assume… that the sun and mercury (edit: or ANY planet) are equal, since mercury is half of the time further and half of the time closer.

    I hope that helps. I know the first rule of the internet is that stating something wrong will immediately result in being corrected by a SME, so either way my comment will get you* the correct answer.

    Edit: this reasoning would only apply to planets that have circular orbits and are on the same plane.

    • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Thanks for the attempt but your calculation is wrong, as it considers distance only on a one axis and not a two axis plane. With your circle assumption, mercury would be further than the sun on average.

      I wonder if anyone has the data without the circle assumption, and also correcting for the various other complexities.

      • NJSpradlin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Thanks, you fell into the trap. But, how would Mercury be further on average if we assumed circular orbits and the planets were on the same plane?