An Astrophotography Question regarding use of Paralax?

Question

Just wondering if this has ever been tried. We know we can figure the distance to stars within our galaxy by using the paralax method...by comparing observations of the same stars made six months apart, where earth is diametrically opposed to itself in its own orbit around the sun. BUT...can you actually take two separate photographs using the same principle, and in the process create one of those Magic Eye 3D images??...where you can actually see the stars in 3 dimensions??

Answer 1

It's not practical. The parallaxes are so small -- less than 1 arcsecond -- that you can't see them directly in photographs. That's why it took until 1838 to determine the first stellar parallax.

However, there are *simulations* of what the stars would look like if the parallax was many times larger.

Answer 2

parallax is very limited for that use. The nearest star system, 4.4 ly away, generates a parallax of only 0.72 microradians. The Hubble telescope's diffraction limited performance is only about 0.5 microradians:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_telescope#Proposals_and_precursors
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_centauri

Answer 3

a million. I planned out my tale, allowing what got here approximately to happen. Then, I retroactively gave my characters particular personalities in accordance with their movements, and then rethought out the tale with the only spectacular personalities. So certainly, the 1st section become only recommendations, and the 2d section become shaping those recommendations into personalities. My characters developed, and slowly began to attain the valuables of existence in my concepts. i do no longer love my characters, plenty as i'm attracted to them. they are no longer meant to be enjoyed, or hated, or overanalyzed-- they are who they are. 2. My characters are no longer plot units, yet no longer particularly complete human beings. i'm confident that the extra I artwork with them, the extra they're going to appear as if residing, respiration human beings in my eyes. this is all approximately evolution for me. 3. I certainly have in no way completed so, besides the reality that a number of my characters are nonhuman and emotionally diverse. i do no longer think of i ought to effectively write what you're speaking approximately. 4. My characters are not very resembling me or my acquaintances. One portion of myself become given to a character (she just about makes relaxing of her very own tale, and likes to giggle and shaggy dog tale). although, she is a complicated character who has many factors that i do no longer (gentle xenophobia, optimism, a particular faith, and all the sentiments that come from her function, one so divorced from my existence that I have not got any theory what i might do in her footwear). different than for that, they incorporate few or no factors of me and acquaintances. One character began as a Sue that I projected myself onto, yet via the top of the tale he had a character, that's now could be his character on the instant from the commencing up (besides the reality that he's ordinary a dynamic character). 5. My characters continuously went OOC in my first theory-with reference to the tale. Like I mentioned, their personalities have been desperate in the top, and those are actually their personalities for the whole tale, that's now consistent. as quickly as I be conscious an inconsistency now, I the two restoration it or discover the thank you to describe it (that may upload extra sides to a character). Sorry for no moar paragraphs. kthxbai :)