We believe the correct parsec is 3.085122.... times 10^16 m. This should be the most accurate value of the parsec, it is not a function of Pi but a function of the golden ratio and a new cosmological parameter!
In August 2015, the International Astronomical Union (IAU) passed Resolution B2 which, as part of the definition of a standardized absolute and apparent bolometric magnitude scale, mentioned an existing explicit definition of the parsec as exactly 648000/π au, or approximately 30856775814913673 metres, given the IAU 2012 exact definition of the astronomical unit in metres. This corresponds to the small-angle definition of the parsec found in many astronomical references.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsec for details
Gerd Pommerenke,
This definition is not necessarily related to fundamental physical constants. According to my unified model of physics, where all constants are closely related, there are two equations for the Hubble constant: one directly gives the Hubble constant in megaparsecs, and the other equation for H0 directly gives the value of H0 in km/sec. The quotient of the two equations will give the equation and the value of the parsec, which is 3.085122... times 10^16 m. These equations will soon be published on my RG pages.
Gerd Pommerenke,
This definition of "the parsec as being exactly 648000/π au, or about 30856775814913673 meters, given the IAU 2012" is better than nothing, that's all.
That's correct. The parsec (symbol pc) is a non-SI unit of length. It is not accepted for use with the SI. Thus it's not related to fundamental physical constants. Your definition of parsec was not introduced in 2012, but in 2015. In 2012 it was the AU. The German Wikipedia is a little more precise there.
Gerd Pommerenke,
The astronomical unit of 149,587,870,700 m is almost exact; here it is within a few centimeters of the absolute value. On the other hand, the parsec of 3,085,677,581,491,3673 meters is incorrect. My theory allows me to obtain the absolute astronomical unit. Its equation is a function of the golden ratio and a new cosmological parameter. This information will soon be published on my RG pages. The theoretical equation of Planck's constant will also be presented in the context of an exotic theory for physics where the Lambda parameter is omnipresent especially with regard to the new quotient of h to reduced h.
You should know that according to my theory the absolute value of the astronomical unit is a ratio of two whole numbers of 38 digits each.
Any attempt to use the AU „unit“ for any distance measurement is doomed by design of the (historical, weak digit precision) way parallax distance measurement can be done up to its possible theoretical maximum.
And such maximum is way below precision of current quantum or even time based measurements by about 14-15 (!) orders of magnitude (time is in range of 10^-18 already assumming c is exact and constant, whatever the unit system).
So any referring to AU “relations“ is just that that your (@Jamil Kooli) whole “theory“ is actually based on - numerology (and let me say we have had enough of such in the last century, it simply does not ever work that way).
In contract iSpace theory on exact value and integer geometry on constants of nature is not so, as was shown all constsnts can be derived from 4 simple assumed - if not proven - 1:1 physical base quanta in the 4 physical ever required base units 6 (iSpace)Volt, GoldenRatio (iSpace)Ampere, 1/6961 (iSpace)Second - the quantum of time (!) and GoldenRatio (iSpace)Meter, the quantum of distance (not length).
Hi i am really interested towards read about astronomy from my childhood , this discussion section was really useful. ❤️😌
As my little knowledge i dont believe.
M.J Damsara,
The current parsec is not a fundamental physical constant, that's why I wrote a new equation for the parsec as a fundamental constant of physics. In fact, there must be two equations for the parameter HA and their ratio must give the value of the new parsec. Concerning HA, the formula that gives HA directly in parsec is not yet known in physics, but my theory speaks about it. For the second equation of HA, it actually comes from the ratio c/HA or (c=HA.RA), so here too we must have an absolute equation for c and an absolute equation for RA, and their quotient gives the equation of HA. In the end, we must have two equations for HA, and their ratio gives the absolute parsec, which this time must be a fundamental constant that you can, at most, even link to LAMBDA.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Phytochemistry
- Extracts