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
    Name or NavList Code:
    Email:
       
    Reply
    Re: Star to star angular measurement, beginner
    From: Frank Reed CT
    Date: 2005 Mar 11, 23:16 EST
    Bill you wrote:
    "My next query, will there be horizontal refraction as well?"
     
    Luckily no. Consider: which way would it go? North, South? By the symmetry of the atmosphere alone, there shouldn't be any "sideways" refraction, it has to be all in the vertical direction (except under "weird" atmospheric conditions which would probably guarantee cloudy weather, too). Refraction lifts all stars. It compresses the constellations towards the zenith.
    And you wrote:
    "In Meeus's chapter on refraction he gives an example of the reduction of
    the Sun's vertical observed measurement when near the horizon due to
    refraction.  He then states, "...the horizontal diameter of the solar disk
    is very slightly contracted by reason of the refraction.  This is due to the
    fact that the extremities of this diameter are raised along vertical circles
    that meet at the zenith."  He goes on to mention Danjon, "...writes the
    apparent contraction of horizontal diameter of the Sun is practically
    constant and independent of altitude, and  that this contraction is
    approximately 0".6."
     
    He's talking here about a small effect that arises from ordinary (vertical) refraction. Imagine modelling the Sun as a diamond of four stars. One at the top of the Sun, one at the bottom, and one each on the horizontal limbs of the Sun's disk. In the absence of refraction, this is a perfectly symmetrical diamond -- if the distance from top to bottom is 30 arc minutes, then te distance from side to side is also 30 arc minutes. OK, now throw in refraction. All four stars are pushed towards the zenith though by varying amounts depending on their distance from the horizon. The stars on the sides of the diamond are both raised by the same amount, but they're being pushed towards the zenith from slightly different azimuths. The horizontal distance across the diamond is decreased very slightly. Meeus quotes an amount, but you can confirm it yourself using your star-star calculation and this "diamond" of stars that I'm describing.
     
    By the way, parallax, for the Moon, Sun etc. is also an entirely vertical correction so you can go immediately to the case of lunar distance calculations from you star-star calculations, if you want. There's one small issue: the Earth's oblateness yields a slightly non-vertical component to parallax but that can be dealt with separately.
     
    -FER
    42.0N 87.7W, or 41.4N 72.1W.
    www.HistoricalAtlas.com/lunars
       
    Reply
    Browse Files

    Drop Files

    NavList

    What is NavList?

    Get a NavList ID Code

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

    A NavList ID Code guarantees your identity in NavList posts and allows faster posting of messages.

    Retrieve a NavList ID Code

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

    Email Settings

    NavList ID 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