# Green the Outer World *The Urth list — 2 messages, 2 voices, 26 Mar 2002* > Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright > in each message remains with the person who wrote it. > Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original > archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than > retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact. --- ### Michael Andre-Driussi *26 Mar 2002, 00:39* Duh! In my previous figurings, I put Green as a Venus stand-in. Those jungles, doncha know. But hey, if Green is a full disk in the sky (iirc it is always a disk, never crescent--another big tip if that is correct, since outer worlds are always seen as disks), then it must be located further from the Breenstar: an outer world dipping in, rather than an inner world reaching out to Blue. This could help a lot with the whole six-year problem. It probably plays havoc with the estimated "habitable zone" around Sol-type stars, but maybe not. Let's see . . . put Blue at 0.95 AU (Fogg's Moist Greenhouse outer edge), put Green at 1.83 AU (Fogg's outer edge of Juvenile Mars, just this side of Runaway Icehouse) . . . hmmm. Sure, that's right: Green at 1.83 AU would have an orbit of around 2.5 years. And Blue would have an orbit of 0.93 years. Now we can have the case where Green slowly gets into position at periastron and Blue comes racing up and past. But how often would the closest encounters be? Back to Roy's Blue Moon: it is the sense that Green has been =steadily= shrinking in size, right? That's what makes it seem like Green is a moon. If it were the planet I'm talking about, it would be growing and shrinking every year, but its maximum size every year would be increasing up to closest encounter and then shrinking every year after that until the third year when it would start growing again (while still growing/shrinking every year). A series of oscilations (planet) rather than a stately progression through the night sky (moon). (Oo, that's another thing--first glimpse of Green from Blue, at the end of EXODUS, was near sunset, no? Datapoint. Is it ever seen during the day?) =mantis= SIRIUS FICTION booklets on Gene Wolfe, John Crowley 42 Lexicons left until OP! http://www.siriusfiction.com/ --- ### Jerry Friedman *26 Mar 2002, 17:31 · follows Michael Andre-Driussi* > --- Michael Andre-Driussi wrote: > Duh! > > In my previous figurings, I put Green as a Venus stand-in. Those > jungles, > doncha know. > > But hey, if Green is a full disk in the sky (iirc it is always a disk, > never crescent--another big tip if that is correct, since outer worlds > are > always seen as disks), Not quite. It should never be an exact disk except when it's in opposition (and when it's in conjunction on the *other* side of the short sun), and if its orbit is only a little bigger than Blue's, it should be noticeably gibbous at some points. > then it must be located further from the Breenstar: > an outer world dipping in, rather than an inner world reaching out to > Blue. You're presenting strong arguments for this. The strongest argument against it is that the narrator consistently uses "conjunction" rather than "opposition" for the time of closest approach. According to , the astronomical meaning is "3 a : the apparent meeting or passing of two or more celestial bodies in the same degree of the zodiac b : a configuration in which two celestial bodies have their least apparent separation". Thus if Green is an inner planet, it approaches closest when it's in "inferior conjunction" with the short sun. (Note, by the way, that from the point of view of Bluvians, Blue is not a "celestial body".) On the other hand, if it's an outer planet, it approaches closest when it's in opposition, "1 : a configuration in which one celestial body is opposite another in the sky or in which the elongation is near or equal to 180 degrees". > This could help a lot with the whole six-year problem. ... Could you possibly remind me of the source of "six years"? Somewhere near the beginning of OBW, the narrator warns the Gaonese that the conjunction will happen again "next year" or so it seems. I'll try to find a reference for that. Jerry Friedman ---