{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/663",
    "note": "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.",
    "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'"
  },
  "archive": "urth",
  "thread": {
    "id": 663,
    "subject": "5HC constellations",
    "messages": 1,
    "voices": 1,
    "first": "1998-05-26T05:14:00+00:00",
    "last": "1998-05-26T05:14:00+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0011-0102@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "m.driussi",
        "address": "m.driussi at genie.com"
      },
      "date": "1998-05-26T05:14:00+00:00",
      "subject": "(urth) 5HC constellations",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Tania Ruiz,\n\nThanks for your comments on my notes re the constellations of THE\nFIFTH HEAD OF CERBERUS.\n\nRe: the pinkness of light from the star.  Right, there is no such\nthing (in orthodox astronomy) as a \"pink star.\"  (This pink detail\nis from an observer upon the planetary surface, a world with a\nbreathable atmosphere--he may be comparing the star to Sol rather\nthan an absolute scale.)\n\n\"What sets the color of the sky is another thing you can't find\neasily in textbooks.  The blue of the cloudless sky results from\nscattering by the very molecules in the air.  Long wavelengths (red)\nare scattered much less easily, but short-wavelength blue is\nscattered all over the sky.  Obviously, then, the sky color depends\non the available wavelengths--that is, on the color of the star.  If\nthe star is, say, red, the sky will look reddish, as there's no blue\nto scatter.  With an orangish sun, the sky may look more greenish\nthan blue.  This effect will only appear under extreme cases,\nhowever, as even most `red' stars look white to the eye\"\n(Gillett, WORLD-BUILDING, 1996, p. 88).\n\n\"A typical `red' dwarf, for example . . . The star's light won't look\nred at all, and the eye is sufficiently adaptable that scenes will\nlook normal . . . Quite a few science fiction stories have spoken of\nthe lurid light of a red sun . . . But this `local color' is just not\ntrue!\" (ibid, p. 129).\n\nHOWEVER--not to get into a \"what did Wolfe know and when did he know\nit,\" nor examine the possible \"bad science\" of this fiction, rather\nI'm just pointing at one of these scant clues in the text and wondering\nif it points toward a non-G type star.\n\nRe: Shadow Child as the Rift, with two bright eyes as Albireo.\nInteresting point, and I like the use of the Rift, but is Albireo a\n\"naked eye\" binary?  Peterson Field Guide STARS AND PLANETS notes:\n\"Albireo--Beta Cygni . . . is one of the prettiest doubles.\nBinoculars split it into orange and blue components.\"\n\nRe: \"Dead Man\" (planet) as Mars.  I agree, but I didn't mention that\n(or did I?) because the parallels between the alien star and Sol\nsystems begin to get, well, rather twinning.  St. Anne/St. Croix is\nobviously rather close to Terra/Luna.  A planet called \"Swift\" seems\nlikely in the orbital position of Mercury; \"the Dead Man\" echoes Mars,\nthe ancient names of which point to \"the flayed god\"; then there is\n\"the Snow Woman\" which sounds enough like Venus (whose brightness and\ngender could lead to renaming as \"Snow Woman\").\n\nIf it weren't for a character from \"Earth\" visiting St. A/St. C, I'd\nbe willing to bet that this system was Sol System.  Because Wolfe is\nso fond of tricks like that.\n\nRe: the other star names.  Wolfe sometimes just translates star names\n(Greek/Arabic/Latin) into English: Fomalhaut becomes \"the Fish's\nMouth\" (in TBOTNS) for example.  So I keep meaning to run through\nsome of the famous star names looking for possible leads.\n\nMore bits from PLANETS FOR MAN:\n\n\"_Twin planets,_ revolving about a common center of mass, would have\ntheir rotation stopped with respect to each other.  It would be\ninteresting to speculate on the intellectual development of a life\nform on one planet of such a pair.  With another planet, close and\nlarge, with clouds, oceans, and continents clear to the naked eye,\ncould any egocentric philosophy of the Universe develop?  Would the\nurge to reach the companion hasten technological progress?  We can\nask but can offer no answer.\" (Dole, PLANETS FOR MAN [1964], p. 204).\n\n\"If the satellite is comparable in mass to the planet itself, there\nis the possibility that it, too, will be habitable.  We will then\nhave twin habitable planets.  The dimensions of Roche's limit rise\nsomewhat as the satellite increases in mass, and so does the maximum\ndistance allowed for a month of 96 hours or less.\n\n[mantis note: because the twins are locked face-to-face, it is their\nrotation around their common center that causes local \"days\"; and as\nDole had determined a 96 hour day as the maximum limit on habitability,\nthis period now transfers to the \"month.\"]\n\n\"Such twin habitable planets would have to be separated by a distance\nof not less than 18,000 miles and not more than 100,000 miles\"\n(ibid, p. 130-131).\n\n=mantis="
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}