Stellar relative velocities are only tens of km/s which are << c. Most naked eye stars are only within a few thousand light years.
If you corrected to "now" I think the sky would look pretty much the same. Einstein might take an issue with defining "now" being particularly useful - Karl On 05/03/2013, at 4:17 PM, Ashish Mahabal <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > The proper motions of most stars are too small to matter. More importantly, > we do not know what the values are for most stars. That incidentally is > likely to change soon as Gaia gets launched later this year and will measure > positions of a billion stars much more precisely than ever before over a five > year period through multiple observations. > http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Gaia_overview > > There are lists of what are called High proper Motion (HPM) stars available > [see the two stars in the box here, for instance: > http://nesssi.cacr.caltech.edu/catalina/20130302/1303021210274114807.html - > one of them is/has HPM]. > Information is also available about some "streams" within our Galaxy. > > > Cheers, > ashish > > On Mar 4, 2013, at 8:45 PM, MARK BAKER wrote: > >> >> The light that we see from the stars in the sky is not there real position >> I was wondering has any one done any work to calculate there >> true positions in our time and put it into some kind of graph ... >> >> >> -Mark >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Perldl mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl > > Ashish Mahabal > http://www.astro.caltech.edu/~aam > > > > _______________________________________________ > Perldl mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
_______________________________________________ Perldl mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
