Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #40 on: July 20, 2017, 12:53:18 AM »
This is incorrect. The Circular Restricted 3 Body Problem assumes that one of the bodies has negligible mass and that the two massive bodies make circular orbits about its center mass of the system. Neither attributes apply to the earth-moon-sun system.

both apply to the e-m-s system.  the moon is ~1% the mass of the earth and has a circular orbit around the earth-moon barycenter.  the earth is like negative infinity times less massive than the sun and has a circular orbit around the earth-sun barycenter.  both conditions are fulfilled.

Quote from: getzwiller
The motion of the Moon has a significant overlap with the much smaller class of the restricted three-body problem, where two large masses move around each other on a fixed circular orbit, whereas the third mass is assumed to be so small that it does not interfere with the motion of the two large masses (Contopoulos 1966; Szebehely, 1967). Asteroids, space travel between Earth and Moon, and satellites of binary stars belong in this class. The problem is usually treated in two dimensions, so that Hill’s motion of the lunar perigee becomes a special limiting case.


The Saros Cycle has been updates since the time of the Babylonians to include data from world wide observation of the eclipses. This is described on NASA's Eclipse Website. No solving of the three body problem was necessary, since the Saros Cycle is purely a pattern based method based on past observations.

this, again, is just plain false.  the source you cite is from the five millennium canon of solar eclipses.  notice that it says: "Modern digital computers using high precision solar and lunar ephemerides can directly predict the dates and circumstances of eclipses. Nevertheless, the Saros and Inex cycles remain useful tools in understanding the periodicity and frequency of eclipses."

saros cycles are useful, but that's not where the predictions come from.  the canon of eclipses predictions rely on tables of lunar and solar positions called ephemerides.

Quote from: https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEpubs/5MCSE.html (under the heading "predictions")
The coordinates of the Sun used in these predictions are based on the VSOP87 theory [Bretagnon and Francou, 1988]. The Moon's coordinates are based on the ELP-2000/82 theory [Chapront-Touze and Chapront, 1983]. For more information, see: Solar and Lunar Ephemerides.

these ephemerides come from numerical integration of the kinds of equations of motion you'll find in getzwiller.

For the final (integration) phase of the ephemeris creation process, there are three main ingredients, each of which constitutes a major phase itself:
• the equations of motion describing the gravitational physics which govern the dynamical motions of the bodies,
• a method for integrating the equations of motion , and
• the initial conditions and dynamical constants; i.e., the starting positions and velocities of the bodies at some initial epoch along with the values for various constants which affect the motion (e.g., planetary masses).
[...]
Numerical integration of the equations of motion is the only known method capable of computing fundamental ephemerides at an accuracy which is comparable to that of the modern-day observations; analytical theories have not been able to attain such high accuracy. The computer program which was used to integrate the equations of motion for DE405/LE405 has been demonstrated to be sufficiently accurate (Newhall et al., 1983).

Quote from: getzwiller
With the arrival of computing machinery in the 1930s the processing of data and the preparation of ephemerides could be accomplished without the incredible drudg- ery of earlier times. Celestial mechanics received an enormous impulse in the late 1950s from the sudden push for a large program of space exploration. Lunar theory in particular profited from President Kennedy’s decision to have humans visit the Moon by the end of the 1960s. Indeed, there followed a prolific outpouring of interesting work, which will be reviewed somewhat summarily in this Section.

At the end of the 1990s it has to be admitted, however, that Tisserand’s diagnosis is still valid. The main problem of lunar theory has been completely solved for all practical purposes, but there have been no major dis- coveries in getting a more direct analytical approach, and we are still wrestling with uncertainties in the comparison with the observations of almost 1 arcsecond [of lat/long].

that's a very small error.  far from being embarrassed, classical mechanics is almost literally just showing off at this point.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2017, 12:55:37 AM by garygreen »
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10633
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #41 on: July 20, 2017, 09:06:47 AM »
This is incorrect. The Circular Restricted 3 Body Problem assumes that one of the bodies has negligible mass and that the two massive bodies make circular orbits about its center mass of the system. Neither attributes apply to the earth-moon-sun system.

both apply to the e-m-s system.  the moon is ~1% the mass of the earth and has a circular orbit around the earth-moon barycenter.  the earth is like negative infinity times less massive than the sun and has a circular orbit around the earth-sun barycenter.  both conditions are fulfilled.

The paths of both massive objects do not make simple circular orbits. The earth  does not make a circular orbit around the sun, it makes an elliptical one.

And the mass of the moon is hardly negligable. The examples in the circular restricted problem pdf have the earth-moon system as the two large masses the spaceshop interacts with.

I will respond the the rest of it later. The things you mention are not applicable and not in line with the actual methods involved. You are so dishonest.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2017, 09:13:06 AM by Tom Bishop »

Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #42 on: July 20, 2017, 01:06:09 PM »
The paths of both massive objects do not make simple circular orbits. The earth  does not make a circular orbit around the sun, it makes an elliptical one.

no orbit is perfectly circular.  the eccentricity of earth's orbit is 0.0167.  that's very circular. 

And the mass of the moon is hardly negligable. The examples in the circular restricted problem pdf have the earth-moon system as the two large masses the spaceshop interacts with.

earth-moon-spaceship is also a cr3bp, yes.  your source uses that as an example, but it doesn't say that e-m-s cannot be understood as a cr3bp.  my sources are explicit that it can be.

also your own source explicitly describes the equations of motion for these systems, contra your claim that they don't exist because saros cycles or whatever.

You are so dishonest.

oh yeah well your ugly.

srsly tho your own sources explicitly agree with me.  and none of them say what you claim they do, that saros cycles are the only way to predict eclipses.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

Hmmm

Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #43 on: July 23, 2017, 12:43:41 AM »
chipsullivan, i support the hypotheses about sun being a technological object/system(a dimmable lantern) and about multiple suns deployed in different regions of Earth. Look at the stars, for anologous example. When you zoom in at stars using a powerful smartphone/tablet with good camera, you see something odd familiar to holograms. You can see the fluid-like movements of the stars even with bare eyes!
This could a subliminal message of sun's underlying mechanism model, type 'hidden in plain sight': Parker Solar probe.
There is a conspiracy theorist, who claims a poem Stolen Sun by russian author Korney Ivanovich Chukovsky is a metaphore, alluding to real events with, possibly, reptilian/draconian(crocodile in the poem) involvement; I.e there was a single giant natural sun, like the official science endoctrinates us with, somewhere in the middle of the Earth, and then the malevolent(wow: male+violent!...) actions of highly-intelligent reptiles(and maybe of insectoid  aliens too) have led to literal extinguishing or capturing for latter exploitation of the sun. For now nobody knows where exactly is the genuine big sun. That's a hypothesis though.


I recommend using advanced search operators combined with your fantasy/imagination, intuition to all of the FE society.
Not only it will help you find valueable information fast, but it will give you more indepth understanding on different topics.
You can also search randomly(and for me it actually works!), until you hit something interesting.
Be very-very-very-very open-minded and listen to all kinds of information. You can search tor/freenet/i2p sites in combination, but be very careful: they are not as private, as they are advertising themselves; you should only be browsing! And also there are archiving sites, in case the page you're looking for haven't been found: archive.org, archive.is, webcitation.org

Good luck in finding the truth (though it's still an illusion; a part of egregore system made by our collective/individual Absolute mind) in our liesworld.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2017, 09:50:30 PM by Hmmm »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10633
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #44 on: July 23, 2017, 02:23:23 AM »
The paths of both massive objects do not make simple circular orbits. The earth  does not make a circular orbit around the sun, it makes an elliptical one.

no orbit is perfectly circular.  the eccentricity of earth's orbit is 0.0167.  that's very circular. 

And the mass of the moon is hardly negligable. The examples in the circular restricted problem pdf have the earth-moon system as the two large masses the spaceshop interacts with.

earth-moon-spaceship is also a cr3bp, yes.  your source uses that as an example, but it doesn't say that e-m-s cannot be understood as a cr3bp.  my sources are explicit that it can be.

also your own source explicitly describes the equations of motion for these systems, contra your claim that they don't exist because saros cycles or whatever.

You are so dishonest.

oh yeah well your ugly.

srsly tho your own sources explicitly agree with me.  and none of them say what you claim they do, that saros cycles are the only way to predict eclipses.

Gary, if you believe that the three body problem has been solved and is able to predict the lunar eclipse, please post the method.

The words "George William Hill"+"lunar eclipse" turn up zero relevant results on Google. If this is the man who made the method for predicting the lunar eclipse with his three body problem solution, why doesn't anything show up? "George Hill"+"lunar eclipse" is also void. Surely, if this is the man who solved the eclipse problem this should be easily searchable.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2017, 02:49:54 AM by Tom Bishop »

Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #45 on: July 23, 2017, 04:19:37 PM »
Gary, if you believe that the three body problem has been solved and is able to predict the lunar eclipse, please post the method.

nasa's eclipse tables come from a work called the "five millennium canon of solar eclipses."  this work relied on a table of lunar positions (ephemeris) called epl-2000: https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEpath/ve82-predictions.html

this is the 1982 paper published with that ephemeris: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983A%26A...124...50C

here's a program in c that constructs a lunar ephemeris using the epl-2000 method: https://github.com/variar/elp2000-82b

here's a python program that uses ephemerides to do all kinds of stuff, including eclipse prediction.  the documentation describes functions that output the angular separation between two astronomical objects and can be minimized to find eclipse times/locations/whatever: http://rhodesmill.org/pyephem/index.html


The words "George William Hill"+"lunar eclipse" turn up zero relevant results on Google. If this is the man who made the method for predicting the lunar eclipse with his three body problem solution, why doesn't anything show up? "George Hill"+"lunar eclipse" is also void. Surely, if this is the man who solved the eclipse problem this should be easily searchable.

you made two claims: 1) nasa uses saros cycles to predict future eclipses, because 2) the 3-body problem has no general analytic solution.

hill's lunar theory addresses the latter point.  it's true, but some special cases are tractable and equations of motion can be derived.  the e-m-s system is close enough that semi-analytic solutions can be found and used to construct a table of positions for the moon over some period of time.

also you'll have better luck searching "hill-brown lunar theory."
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

Hmmm

Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #46 on: July 23, 2017, 05:10:03 PM »
garygreen, Tom Bishop,
let's give a little less attention to the moon, since this thread is not about who's right and who's not, it's about the sun and what it is.

Have anyone of FES had weird thoughts, drawings in their childhood related to sun?

Bring these drawings up and analyze them for something weird and astonishing - there could be lots of clues and hints "your younger version put for their older version".
Why is it important? Because, as i believe, children have increased mental sensitivity to information field(s) of the earth and the universe, which, if triggered to get access to, from time to time gives them capabilities to know "everything about everything". But as children grow in the conditions of our mind-prisonworld, they become spiritually/mentally/psychically insensitive to info field(s).  And don't say it's ridiculous!
« Last Edit: September 29, 2017, 04:54:12 AM by Hmmm »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10633
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #47 on: July 23, 2017, 05:15:48 PM »
Gary, the lunar ephemeris is a complicated equation only useful for telling us the coordinates of the moon. It does not tell us when the next lunar eclipse will occur.

https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEpubs/5MCSE.html

Quote
The coordinates of the Sun used in these predictions are based on the VSOP87 theory [Bretagnon and Francou, 1988]. The Moon's coordinates are based on the ELP-2000/82 theory [Chapront-Touze and Chapront, 1983].

You are also WRONG that the "Five Millennium Cannon of Solar Eclipses" makes its solar eclipse predictions bases on a table of ephemeris predictions or any three-body problem solution. Here is an excerpt from a PDF which explains how the Five Millennium Cannon of Solar Eclipses was made:

https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCSE/5MCSE-Text11.pdf

From Section 1: Maps and Predictions, Page 2:

Quote
1.2.2 Saros Series Number

Each eclipse belongs to a Saros series (Sect. 4.2) using a numbering system first introduced by van den Bergh (1955). This system has been expanded to include negative values from the past, as well as additional series in the future. The eclipses with an odd Saros number take place at the ascending node of the Moon’s orbit; those with an even Saros number take place at the descending node.

The Saros is a period of 223 synodic months, or approximately 18 years, 11 days, and 8 hours. Eclipses separated by this period belong to the same Saros series and share very similar geometry and characteristics.

It says, quite clearly, that the eclipse predictions are based on the Saros Cycle. The Saros Cycle is a method of pattern matching of past eclipses to predict when the next one will occur in the future. It has nothing to do with any geometric model of the earth.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2017, 06:23:14 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10633
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #48 on: July 23, 2017, 05:51:29 PM »
hill's lunar theory addresses the latter point.  it's true, but some special cases are tractable and equations of motion can be derived.  the e-m-s system is close enough that semi-analytic solutions can be found and used to construct a table of positions for the moon over some period of time.

Show us an example where this or any other similar geometric theory has predicted the eclipse, because the "Five Millennium Cannon of Solar Eclipses" you had mentioned is based on a method created by an ancient society who believed that the earth was flat.

Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #49 on: July 23, 2017, 06:40:59 PM »
Gary, the lunar ephemeris only tells us the coordinates of the moon. It does not tell us when the next lunar eclipse will occur.

https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEpubs/5MCSE.html

Quote
The coordinates of the Sun used in these predictions are based on the VSOP87 theory [Bretagnon and Francou, 1988]. The Moon's coordinates are based on the ELP-2000/82 theory [Chapront-Touze and Chapront, 1983].

so, just to be clear, you're acknowledging that these predictions are based on tables of coordinates of the sun and moon as described by these two ephemerides, yes?  doesn't that kind of undercut your argument that they're based on saros cycles?

knowing the positions of the moon and sun is exactly how you predict future eclipses.  if you know where the moon and sun are located at any given time, then you can work out if an eclipse is happening at any given time.  more accurately, you can work out the "besselian" elements:



if you're a computer-nerd with a bunch of computer-nerd friends, then you can work out these elements for any given time over the next 1,000 years and put it in a big catalog with fancy maps and shit.  and you'd call it the five millennium canon of solar eclipses.

You are also WRONG that the "Five Millennium Cannon of Solar Eclipses" makes its solar eclipse predictions bases on a table of ephemeris predictions or any three-body problem solution. Here is an excerpt from a PDF which explains how the Five Millennium Cannon of Solar Eclipses was made:

it explicitly says that they do.  you have yet to produce a single source that says otherwise.

here are more excerpts:

Quote
Without exception, all solar eclipse canons produced during the latter half of the 20th century were based on Newcomb’s tables of the Sun (1895) and Brown’s lunar theory (1905), subject to later modifications in the Improved Lunar Ephemeris (1954). These were the best ephemerides of their day but they have now been superseded.

The present book contains detailed, accurate maps (found in the Appendix at the back of the book) for 5,000 years of solar eclipses, from –1999 to +3000 (2000 BCE to 3000 CE). The following points highlight the features and characteristics of this work.

*Based on modern theories of the Sun and the Moon constructed at the Bureau des Longitudes of Paris rather than the older Newcomb and Brown ephemerides.

Quote
Any two eclipses separated by one Saros cycle share similar characteristics. They occur at the same node with the Moon at nearly the same distance from Earth and at the same time of year. Because the Saros period is not equal to a whole number of days, its biggest drawback as an eclipse predictor is that subsequent eclipses are visible from different parts of the globe.

you obviously just did a search for the word saros, found it, and moved on.  you keep making the same mistake of taking "here is some information about saros cycles" to mean "saros cycles are the only way to predict when and where an eclipse will occur."  the section you quote absolutely does not say that saros cycles "explain how the Five Millennium Cannon of Solar Eclipses was made."  literally none of the sources you or i have provided have said anything like that. 

Show us an example where this or any other similar geometric theory has predicted the eclipse

the five millennium canon is exactly that.  check my last post.  i even pointed you to an open source python program that does this.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10633
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #50 on: July 23, 2017, 07:10:32 PM »
Quote
so, just to be clear, you're acknowledging that these predictions are based on tables of coordinates of the sun and moon as described by these two ephemerides, yes?  doesn't that kind of undercut your argument that they're based on saros cycles?

The Saros cycle just gives a time when to expect the next lunar eclipse to appear on the face of the moon. You will also need to know if you will be able to see the moon from your particular location. This is where the equations to find the coordinates of the moon come in.

The Lunar Eclipse is visible for anyone who can see the moon, and you will need to know whether the moon will be over your area at that time, not merely the time of the lunar eclipse.

The Solar Eclipse is visible for only a narrow path beneath the moon, and knowing the coordinates of the sun is necessary for knowing whether a solar eclipse will be visible in your area, not merely the time it will occur.

The coordinates of the sun and moon over the earth have nothing to do with computing the time of the lunar eclipse. It does not say that in the Five Millennium Canon of Solar Eclipses PDF. The only points it brings up is a direct statement that the eclipses are predicted based on the Saros cycle in section 1.2.2 "Saros Series Number"

    "Each eclipse belongs to a Saros series (Sect. 4.2) using a numbering system first introduced by van den Bergh (1955)."

In 4.4 "Saros Series Statistics" we read:

    "Eclipses belonging to 204 different Saros series fall within the five millennium span of the Canon."


The document also states the coordinates for the sun and moon are used in section 1.3 "Solar and Lunar Coordinates":

    "The coordinates of the Sun used in these eclipse predictions have been calculated on the basis of the VSOP87 theory
    constructed by Bretagnon and Francou (1988) at the Bureau des Longitudes, Paris."

    "For the Moon, use has been made of the theory ELP-2000/82 of Chapront-Touzé and Chapront (1983), again of the
    Bureau des Longitudes."

The section says nothing about the coordinates of the sun or moon being used to predict when the eclipse will occur. The coordinates of the sun is used in the eclipse predictions, but the knowledge of coordinates is only useful because it will help create a map showing where the eclipses will be visible from, which is what the map sections of the document is about.

You seem to be saying that there is some special math not mentioned in the document where the time of the eclipse can be predicted without the use of the Saros cycle, despite the document stating that each eclipse is based on a Saros cycle series.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2017, 08:23:25 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10633
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #51 on: July 23, 2017, 07:57:22 PM »
Quote
the five millennium canon is exactly that.  check my last post.  i even pointed you to an open source python program that does this.

The Five Millennium Catalog PDF mentions Saros cycle all over the place. The word Saros appears 128 times in that document, and the document is very specific on how the Saros Cycle is used to make predictions, yet you are expecting us to believe that it does not use the Saros cycle and that, while Saros prediction method is explicitly described, it was done do for no reason, and that some other method which is not explicitly described is used instead to make the predictions. Ridiculous.

You have not shown us where an eclipse has been predicted with the "open source python program" that you had mentioned. Without experimental data why should we assume that it has ever predicted an eclipse?

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10633
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #52 on: July 23, 2017, 08:02:50 PM »
you obviously just did a search for the word saros, found it, and moved on.  you keep making the same mistake of taking "here is some information about saros cycles" to mean "saros cycles are the only way to predict when and where an eclipse will occur."  the section you quote absolutely does not say that saros cycles "explain how the Five Millennium Cannon of Solar Eclipses was made."  literally none of the sources you or i have provided have said anything like that. 

Read section 4. It is very specific about how the Saros Cycle is used to make predictions. The Saros is talked about again and again over many pages in the entire book and you are telling us that the Saros had nothing to do with how the predictions were made and that the author is only bringing the Saros up for educational purposes.  ::)

The "modern digital computers" quote you had mentioned appears at the very end of the book:

Quote
"Modern digital computers using high precision solar and lunar ephemerides can directly predict the dates and circumstances of eclipses. Nevertheless, the Saros and Inex cycles are still of great value in understanding the periodicity and frequency of eclipses."

So if the 5 Millennium Catalog is based on these ephemerides, why is this whole book about the Saros Cycle method and not about this other method? Clearly, this ephemerides method was not the method used to create the catalog if it is only mentioning the possibility in the closing sentences of the book.

You should probably try to find information about this other prediction method mentioned, along with some observations that the predictions match reality, because that is not the standard method astronomers are using to predict the eclipse.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2017, 10:02:18 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10633
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #53 on: July 23, 2017, 08:43:00 PM »
I have my doubts that the Hill-Brown Theory that was brought up earlier is even valid as a theory that accurately reflects the Round Earth model. According to this section in "Mask of the Sun: The Science, History and Forgotten Lore of Eclipses" we read that Hill started with the three body problem and had to make nearly 3000 adjustments to be able to predict anything.

    "Let it be said that all previous workers had started with what is known in Newtonian theory as the two-body problem (the Earth-Moon system), and then determined what slight adjustments were needed by considering the gravitational attraction  of the Sun, other planets, and the lunar tides. Hill started with the much more complicated three-body problem (the Earth-Moon-Sun system) then added adjustments. In total, he incorporated in his calculations nearly 3,000 such adjustments. And those calculation involved manipulating numbers to fifteen decimal places."

And here is a study done which claims that the using the Saros Cycle is "far better" than using the Hill-Brown Theory.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2017, 09:40:25 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #54 on: July 23, 2017, 09:49:18 PM »
"The coordinates of the Sun used in these eclipse predictions have been calculated on the basis of the VSOP87 theory constructed by Bretagnon and Francou (1988) at the Bureau des Longitudes, Paris."

"For the Moon, use has been made of the theory ELP-2000/82 of Chapront-Touzé and Chapront (1983), again of the Bureau des Longitudes."

The section says nothing about the coordinates of the sun or moon being used to predict when the eclipse will occur.

lol that's literally exactly what it says.  like, almost word-for-word.  you keep quoting this bit, but you don't seem to understand that it supports my argument.  elp-2000 is an ephemeris.  this literally says "we used two ephemerides to predict eclipses: vsop87 and elp-2000."  not "we used saros cycles to predict these eclipses."

here is the paper for how elp-2000 was created.  notice that there's nothing about saros cycles: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983A%26A...124...50C

more excerpts:

Quote
Without exception, all solar eclipse canons produced during the latter half of the 20th century were based on Newcomb’s tables of the Sun (1895) and Brown’s lunar theory (1905), subject to later modifications in the Improved Lunar Ephemeris (1954)...The following points highlight the features and characteristics of this work:
• Based on modern theories of the Sun and the Moon constructed at the Bureau des Longitudes of Paris rather than the older Newcomb and Brown ephemerides.

Quote
The coordinates of the Sun used in these eclipse predictions have been calculated on the basis of the VSOP87 theory constructed by Bretagnon and Francou (1988) at the Bureau des Longitudes, Paris. This theory gives the ecliptic longitude and latitude of the planets, and their radius vector, as sums of periodic terms. In our calculations, we used the complete set of periodic terms of version D of VSOP87 (this version provides the positions referred to the mean equinox of the date).

For the Moon, use has been made of the theory ELP-2000/82 of Chapront-Touzé and Chapront (1983), again of the Bureau des Longitudes. This theory contains a total of 37,862 periodic terms, namely 20,560 for the Moon’s longitude, 7,684 for the latitude, and 9,618 for the distance to Earth. But many of these terms are very small: some have an amplitude of only 0.00001 arcsec for the longitude or the latitude, and of 2 cm for the distance. In our computer program, we neglected all periodic terms with coefficients smaller than 0.0005 arcsec in longitude and latitude, and smaller than 1 m in distance. Because of neglecting the very small periodic terms, the Moon’s positions calculated in our program have a mean error (as compared to the full ELP theory) of about 0.0006 s of time in right ascension, and about 0.006 arcsec in declination.

Quote
The accuracy of the eclipse maps depends principally on two factors. The first is the rigorousness of the solar and lunar ephemerides used in the calculations (Sect. 1.3). The Moon’s close proximity to Earth coupled with its relatively low mass, results in orbital perturbations that make the Moon’s position far more difficult to predict compared to the Sun’s position.

and indeed that paper has a lot to say about saros cycles.  in the section on saros cycles.  under the heading "periodicity."  that paper is interested in all kinds of periods and distributions, like:

  • 3.2 Distribution of Eclipse Types by Century
  • 3.3 Distribution of Eclipse Types by Month
  • 3.4 Eclipse Frequency and the Calendar Year
  • 3.17 Eclipses on February 29
  • 4.3 Gamma and Saros Series
  • 4.4 Saros Series Statistics

nowhere does the author indicate that the table was constructed from saros cycles.  the author explicitly says he used position tables.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10633
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #55 on: July 23, 2017, 10:24:15 PM »
"The coordinates of the Sun used in these eclipse predictions have been calculated on the basis of the VSOP87 theory constructed by Bretagnon and Francou (1988) at the Bureau des Longitudes, Paris."

"For the Moon, use has been made of the theory ELP-2000/82 of Chapront-Touzé and Chapront (1983), again of the Bureau des Longitudes."

The section says nothing about the coordinates of the sun or moon being used to predict when the eclipse will occur.

lol that's literally exactly what it says.  like, almost word-for-word.  you keep quoting this bit, but you don't seem to understand that it supports my argument.  elp-2000 is an ephemeris.  this literally says "we used two ephemerides to predict eclipses: vsop87 and elp-2000."  not "we used saros cycles to predict these eclipses."

No. It LITERALLY says that "the coordinates of the Sun used in these eclipse predictions have been calculated on the basis of the VSOP87." It does not say that the eclipse predictions are based on VSOP87. It merely says that they are used in the eclipse predictions.

The coordinates of the sun are important because it tells us where we will be able to see the solar eclipse from. They are used in the map described further into the book.

Look at the quote you brought up:

Quote
The accuracy of the eclipse maps depends principally on two factors. The first is the rigorousness of the solar and lunar ephemerides used in the calculations (Sect. 1.3). The Moon’s close proximity to Earth coupled with its relatively low mass, results in orbital perturbations that make the Moon’s position far more difficult to predict compared to the Sun’s position.

See that? It says that accuracy of the eclipse maps are dependent of the accuracy of the solar and lunar ephemerides that tell us the coordinates of the sun and moon. That clearly suggests that the coordinates are used in the maps portion, which are used to tell us where we will be able to see the eclipses from.

The actual method of finding when the eclipse will occur is explained at length in the book as being the Saros cycle. The Saros cycle method is not being described across over half the pages of the book for mere educational or superfluous purposes. Why dedicate so much space to a method that is not being used?
« Last Edit: July 23, 2017, 11:39:50 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline ErnestV1

  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • After digging into FE WIKI, still a RE believer
    • View Profile
Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #56 on: July 25, 2017, 08:05:44 AM »
So... what is the sun again? Why can we not determine it's composition from its spectrum analysis when we can determine any plasma composition in a lab using a spectrum analysis?

What happened to the original topic on this thread?
I love how the sun shines on the bottom of the clouds and sunrise and sunset!

We may disagree on many things, but I will always try to respect everyone and thereby reflect the love of Christ.

Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #57 on: July 25, 2017, 03:53:11 PM »
No. It LITERALLY says that "the coordinates of the Sun used in these eclipse predictions have been calculated on the basis of the VSOP87." It does not say that the eclipse predictions are based on VSOP87. It merely says that they are used in the eclipse predictions.

"the coordinates used in these eclipse predictions" sounds to me like they used coordinates to make eclipse predictions.

here are more excerpts:
  • Without exception, all solar eclipse canons produced during the latter half of the 20th century were based on Newcomb’s tables of the Sun (1895) and Brown’s lunar theory (1905).
  • To make [Oppolzer's] remarkable achievement possible, a number of approximations were used in the calculations and maps. For instance, the central line path of each solar eclipse was computed for only three positions: sunrise, mid-point, and sunset. A circular arc was fit through the points to depict the eclipse path. Consequently, the central lines often differ by hundreds of miles compared to rigorous predictions generated with modern ephemerides. Furthermore, the 1887 Canon took no account of the shifts imparted to ancient eclipse paths as a consequence of Earth’s variable rotation rate and the secular acceleration of the Moon.
  • [This work is] based on modern theories of the Sun and the Moon constructed at the Bureau des Longitudes of Paris rather than the older Newcomb and Brown ephemerides.
  • The center of figure of the Moon does not coincide exactly with its center of mass. To compensate for this property in their eclipse predictions, many of the national institutes employ an empirical correction to the center of mass position of the Moon...We choose to ignore this convention and have performed all calculations using the Moon’s center of mass position.
  • A fundamental parameter used in eclipse predictions is the Moon’s radius, k, expressed in units of Earth’s equatorial radius.  The Moon’s actual radius varies as a function of position angle and libration because of irregularity in the limb profile.
  • The orbital positions of the Sun and Moon required by eclipse predictions, are calculated using TD because it is a uniform time scale. World time zones and daily life, however, are based on UTa. In order to convert eclipse predictions from TD to UT, the difference between these two time scales must be known.
  • Modern digital computers using high precision solar and lunar ephemerides can directly predict the dates and circumstances of eclipses. Nevertheless, the Saros and Inex cycles are still of great value in understanding the periodicity and frequency of eclipses.

that last sentence is why he talks about saros cycles.  it's an interesting periodicity.

See that? It says that accuracy of the eclipse maps are dependent of the accuracy of the solar and lunar ephemerides that tell us the coordinates of the sun and moon. That clearly suggests that the coordinates are used in the maps portion, which are used to tell us where we will be able to see the eclipses from.

so just to be clear, you now agree that ephemerides are used to predict the location/duration/type/etc of an eclipse...but not the timing.  ok. 

The actual method of finding when the eclipse will occur is explained at length in the book as being the Saros cycle. The Saros cycle method is not being described across over half the pages of the book for mere educational or superfluous purposes. Why dedicate so much space to a method that is not being used?

because saros cycles are an interesting periodicity.  he also cataloged feb 29th eclipses, but that doesn't mean feb 29th has anything to do with predicting eclipses.

instead of reading tea leaves, we can just consult the text where he says a bunch of times in a bunch of different places very explicitly that these eclipse tables were calculated directly from ephemerides.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

Offline 3DGeek

  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Path of photon from sun location to eye at sunset?
    • View Profile
    • What path do the photons take from the physical location of the sun to my eye at sunset
Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #58 on: July 25, 2017, 08:13:41 PM »

Gary, if you believe that the three body problem has been solved and is able to predict the lunar eclipse, please post the method.


Tom: Your usual blindness to modern knowledge defeats you here.

1) It can be proven for 100% sure that the 3 body problem cannot ever be solved ANALYTICALLY.   That means that we can't write an equation that you can plug the positions and velocities of the three bodies into - along with some amount of time into the future - and get back the position at some other date/time.   This is true - there is not and cannot EVER be a mathematical equation that does that.  Nobody who understands the problem would claim otherwise.

2) BUT: It *CAN* be proven for 100% sure that for a 3 body problem where the masses are highly unequal that there is an approximate solution - and, furthermore we can prove that the true future positions will lie within some predictable range.   For the Earth/Moon/Sun problem, neglecting the mass of the moon produces an error that is VERY tiny - of the order of a meter or so over a year or two.   That's because (in RET) the moon is insanely tiny compared to the Sun and fairly small compared to the Earth.  Because the moon's gravitational effect on the sun is COMPLETELY negligible - we can simplify this from a 3 body problem to a couple of two-body problems and those we can solve very easily.   Yes, there is an error - no it doesn't matter - and we can PROVE that.

3) Although there cannot be a precise equation - there are other ways to solve the problem.  Numerical integration is a good one.   Using numerical integration you calculate the approximate motion of each body over a particular (short) time-step using three 2 body approximations.   You then apply this math over and over again to predict a future positions of the three bodies.  THEN, you pick a smaller time step (thereby getting more accurate results) and do it all over again.   The difference between the answer you got the first time and the answer you have now gives you a confidence interval that tells you how close you are to a solution with "good enough" precision.  Now that we have computers and can automate this, we can make calculations using (say) a microsecond as the time interval and obtain the position of moon, earth and sun to within a tiny fraction of a millimeter.  Plenty good enough to predict sunrises, sunsets, moonrises, moonsets, phases of the moon and both lunar and solar eclipses thousands of year into the future.

So your complaints are frankly ridiculous.   You know JUST enough to think you can jump into a problem like this ("The thee body problem cannot be solved") and blow that up into "We can't predict these things"...but you don't know anywhere near enough to understand WHY IT CAN BE DONE.

Sadly, you've now met someone who can see through these claims of yours and explain clearly and comprehensively why you're wrong.   I intend to keep doing that...so don't expect these kinds of incorrect claims to slip past a gullible audience anymore.

Mathematicians are a LOT smarter than you seem to think.
Hey Tom:  What path do the photons take from the physical location of the sun to my eye at sunset?

Hmmm

Re: What is the Sun?
« Reply #59 on: July 30, 2017, 08:36:40 AM »
3DGeek, garygreen, Tom Bishop, why are you talking about eclipses, when the topic is about the nature and structure of sun?

Holy shit, that's what i have found on the russian site dedicated for women:
original site

"I fell asleep in the day after the sunset that I was thinking about before, and I dreamed that I was gazing happily at the sun and I thought how soon it would come, and then I watched the swift sunset and it suddenly fell to the ground not far from me, and it became Some metal and it did not shine anymore, and of course it was not hot, just a ball-shaped large piece of metal, and then it rolled in my direction, and I was frightened, she thought as a bomb could explode and began to run away from him ... what could this dream mean ???? Please tell me exactly !!!"

And here is the video:
could this be the sun's CORE????????????????

If that's true, it is just madness!! How the...?! What keeps these objects in the sky?