Obligatory warning: Don't look directly at sun, kids. It's really, really bad for your eyes.
In years past this event held considerable interest for
astronomers because Edmund Halley (the one for which the comet is named) produced
a paper demonstrating that the transit was a particularly useful
event
because it could be used to determine the precise distance between the earth
and the sun. By measuring the times that this event occurred at two
distantly placed points on the earth, the distance to the sun could be
calculated
geometrically using a process of triangulation. Students of Australian
history will no doubt recall (unless they were home sick that day) that
observing the transit of Venus from Tahiti was James
Cook's primary
mission for his voyage across the Pacific (his secondary and
top-secret mission
was to chart the hitherto unknown east coast of the Australian
mainland).
Why was important? It was needed in order to calibrate Kepler's Third
Law, i.e. the period of a planet's orbit is equal to the
cube of its radius from the sun (actually this was its average radius because Kepler also knew that planetary orbits are
elliptical rather than purely circular). By knowing, as we now do, that the average radius of the earth's
orbit is about 150 million kilometres and that its period is 365.25
days, we can easily calculate the size of the solar system
and the distances between all of
the planets solely from the periods of their orbits.
Unfortunately for Cook and others, the exact timing of the start and end
of the transits was obscured by an optical effect know as the black-drop
effect
caused by refraction in our atmosphere. This experimental uncertainty
greatly reduced the usefulness of the transit of Venus and the correct
distance was eventually found by a different route, by calculating the
speed
of the planet earth in its orbit from an anomaly known as the aberration of
starlight.
More recently this figure has been refined to a very accurate degree through the use of radar.
Well the pinhole approach was a complete failure in Melbourne's feeble
winter sunlight but Peter did a remarkably good job with a pair of
binoculars (following the method outlined here). This image was taken from
Melbourne at 6:40 am UTC
while this quite similar picture wasn't taken until 9:16 am UTC at the Nehru Planetarium in Mumbai.
The
time difference required in order to take these two quite similar
images is a function of the solar parallax. I'll leave it as an
exercise for the reader
to use this to calculate the size of the solar system.