Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.

NavList:

A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding

Compose Your Message

Message:αβγ
Message:abc
Add Images & Files
    or...
       
    Reply
    Re: 18 june 2013 lunar distance
    From: Paul Hirose
    Date: 2013 Jul 02, 16:46 -0700

    Dave Walden wrote:
    > The additional places are essentially 'free' in modern computers, and are correct, so why not?
    >
    > They amuse some of us!
    
    When people explore the limits of their software and compare results,
    there can be benefits beyond amusement. In December 2010 we had a long
    discussion in the HASTRO-L group about whether or not a lunar
    occultation of Spica was visible from Alexandria in November 283 BC. One
    person using the Swiss Ephemeris software had a .0005° discrepancy in
    Spica's position. It was due to a previously undetected bug in the
    processing of star catalog data. Right ascension proper motion in the
    Hipparcos catalog is expressed in great circle units, but the Swiss
    Ephemeris was coded as if they were coordinate units. That was quickly
    fixed.
    
     > Using USNO NOVA's, DE405, SIMBAD data for Altair, and Paul's "Delta T
    = 32.184 + 35 - 0.0661627", I get:
     >
     > true xld= in deg
     > + 106 deg 34' 28.466124"   OR  106 deg 34.474435'   OR 106.574574deg
    
    Note that each angle above has 60 times less precision that the one to
    its left. A good rule of thumb is to use the same total number of
    digits. For instance, DDDMMSS.s and DDD.ddddd have the same number of
    digits and about the same precision.
    
    In this case, Lunar3 says 106°34′28.453″. That's 13 mas different from
    Dave. (2013-06-18 0330 UT1, 67.1178 delta T, DE406 ephemeris, Hipparcos
    second reduction)
    
    I think 1 mas is close enough, but 13 is too much. My use of DE406
    should not matter. It's the same integration as DE405 but stored in a
    more compact format, "only" accurate to 1 meter for the Moon. (That's
    how well DE406 duplicates the original integration, not its accuracy
    with respect to the true position of the body.)
    
    What about SIMBAD vs. Lunar3's internal star catalog? With the SIMBAD data
    http://simbad.u-strasbg.fr/simbad/sim-id?Ident=Altair
    
    I get 106°34′28.454″, only 1 mas more.
    
    Is the discrepancy in the Moon position, or Altair? I would like to
    compare the geocentric apparent places of both bodies. And to eliminate
    any question about the precession / nutation model, I wonder if Dave can
    put the coordinates in the GCRS. From Lunar3 I get Moon coordinates
    
    -2.44969548e-003 -5.24187596e-004 -3.58294080e-004 au, or
    192° 04′ 40.973″  -08° 08′ 21.886″
    
    and Altair coordinates
    4.59325899e-001 -8.74784757e-001 1.54179599e-001 au, or
    297° 42′ 09.913″  +08° 52′ 09.188″
    
    --
    I filter out messages with attachments or HTML.
    

       
    Reply
    Browse Files

    Drop Files

    NavList

    What is NavList?

    Join NavList

    Name:
    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    Email:
    Do you want to receive all group messages by email?
    Yes No

    You can also join by posting. Your first on-topic post automatically makes you a member.

    Posting Code

    Enter the email address associated with your NavList messages. Your posting code will be emailed to you immediately.
    Email:

    Email Settings

    Posting Code:

    Custom Index

    Subject:
    Author:
    Start date: (yyyymm dd)
    End date: (yyyymm dd)

    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site