NavList:

   

Reply

George Huxtable wrote:
> In Navlist 3926, under threadname "Ted Gerrard's book", Mike Daly wrore-
>
> "Halley's method can only be as accurate as his lunar position knowledge.
>   No one published tables at that time (as Maskelyne did after 1767).
> There was the raw data that was coming out of Flamsteed's observations
> and other observers that may have been accumulating data.  Newton and
> Halley published Flamsteed's data without his permission in 1712 but
> what Halley used in the 1699 timeframe I don't know offhand."
>
[...]
> Anyway, the question arises; how did Halley predict Moon positions? There
> were indeed tables published of the Moon, contrary to Mike Daly's claim
> above, but these were nothing like as precise and detailed as Maskelyne
> derived from Mayer in 1767. They dated back to Ptolemy! Intended for
> astrologers, rather than astronomers.

Exactly how is what I wrote contrary to what you write?  There was no
Nautical Almanac of reduced lunar data but there was raw data on lunar
position.  That's what I wrote and that's what you wrote.

I don't know why you persist in misquoting or convoluting the meaning of
my statements.  I wish you would stop, as it contributes nothing to the
discussions.

> Phil. Trans.vol. 12, no. 141 (1678), 1032-4
http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/content/056171286722j535/fulltext.pdf

Mike




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to NavList@fer3.com
To , send email to NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply