*

Offline Bobby Shafto

  • *
  • Posts: 1390
  • https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdv72TaxoaafQr8WD
    • View Profile
    • Bobby Shafto YouTube Channel
Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« on: November 19, 2018, 11:29:32 PM »
https://wiki.tfes.org/Astronomical_Prediction_Based_on_Patterns

Predicting solar eclipses "with at least an approximation to the truth" is a low bar. 

How are types of solar eclipses, duration of the eclipse and locations from whence solar eclipses will be visible predictable if it's but pattern-based?

Surely, to make accurate predictions of solar eclipses, and not merely approximations to the truth, requires much more understanding than "patterns."

There is quite a bit of detail in this description of the next solar eclipse. That's not merely "pattern based." It requires an understanding of the motions of the earth and moon, relative to the sun in order to develop sufficiently accurate ephemerides to predict not just when a solar eclipse will happen but when it will begin, end, where it will be visible, partial or total (or annular).

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10662
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2018, 12:37:41 AM »
Go to NASA Eclispe Web Site -> Resources -> Eclipses and the Soros

Quote from: NASA
The periodicity and recurrence of eclipses is governed by the Saros cycle, a period of approximately 6,585.3 days (18 years 11 days 8 hours). It was known to the Chaldeans as a period when lunar eclipses seem to repeat themselves, but the cycle is applicable to solar eclipses as well.

NASA is describing that they are predicting the eclipses based on the ancient Saros Cycle as used by the Ancient Babylonians. They are not describing that they are using a Three Body Problem model of the Sun-Earth-Moon system.

Why would NASA be using ancient methods that are thousands of years old, created by a society of people who believed that the earth was flat, if there are modern methods that can predict the location of the earth, moon and sun based on Newtonian or Einsteinian laws? We should be reading about how they are solving the Three Body Problem, not about ancient methods. The word Saros and Saros Cycle appears all throughout that website, many times, and not one word about the Three Body Problem.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10662
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #2 on: November 20, 2018, 12:46:41 AM »
Everything in astronomy is predicted on basis of patterns. Samuel Birley Rowbotham describes this in Earth Not a Globe. At the end of Chapter 11 Rowbotham provides a complex set of equations to find the time, magnitude, and duration of a Lunar Eclipse and explains that these equations add nothing to our knowledge of the eclipses, but is merely a mathematical instrument based on repeating occurrences to predict a future event.

Quote from: Samuel Birley Rowbotham
Those who are unacquainted with the methods of calculating eclipses and other phenomena, are prone to look upon the correctness of such calculations as powerful arguments in favour of the doctrine of the earth's rotundity and the Newtonian philosophy, generally. One of the most pitiful manifestations of ignorance of the true nature of theoretical astronomy is the ardent inquiry so often made, "How is it possible for that system to be false, which enables its professors to calculate to a second of time both solar and lunar eclipses for hundreds of years to come?" The supposition that such calculations are an essential part of the Newtonian or any other theory is entirely gratuitous, and exceedingly fallacious and misleading. Whatever theory is adopted, or if all theories are discarded, the same calculations can be made. The tables of the moon's relative positions for any fraction of time are purely practical--the result of long-continued observations, and may or may not be connected with hypothesis. The necessary data being tabulated, may be mixed up with any, even the most opposite doctrines, or kept distinct from every theory or system, just as the operator may determine.

...The simplest method of ascertaining any future eclipse is to take the tables which have been formed during hundreds of years of careful observation; or each observer may form his own tables by collecting a number of old almanacks one for each of the last forty years: separate the times of the eclipses in each year, and arrange them in a tabular form. On looking over the various items he will soon discover parallel cases, or "cycles" of eclipses; that is, taking the eclipses in the first year of his table, and examining those of each succeeding year, he will notice peculiarities in each year's phenomena; but on arriving to the items of the nineteenth and twentieth years, he will perceive that some of the eclipses in the earlier part of the table will have been now repeated--that is to say, the times and characters will be alike. If the time which has elapsed between these two parallel or similar eclipses be carefully noted, and called a "cycle," it will then be a very simple and easy matter to predict any future similar eclipse, because, at the end of the "cycle," such similar eclipse will be certain to occur; or, at least, because such repetitions of similar phenomena have occurred in every cycle of between eighteen and nineteen years during the last several thousand years, it may be reasonably expected that if the natural world continues to have the same general structure and character, such repetitions may be predicted for all future time. The whole process is neither more nor less--except a little more complicated--than that because an express train had been observed for many years to pass a given point at a given second--say of every eighteenth day, so at a similar moment of every cycle or eighteenth day, for a hundred or more years to. come, the same might be predicted and expected. To tell the actual day and second, it is only necessary to ascertain on what day of the week the eighteenth or "cycle day" falls.

Tables of the places of the sun and moon, of eclipses, and of kindred phenomena, have existed for thousands of years, and were formed independently of each other, by the Chaldean, Babylonian, Egyptian, Hindoo, Chinese, and other ancient astronomers. Modern science has had nothing to do with these; farther than rendering them a little more exact, by averaging and reducing the fractional errors which a longer period of observation has detected.

As an instance of the complicated process into which modern theorists have allowed themselves to "drift," the following formula is here introduced:--

<equations to find the time, magnitude, and duration of a lunar eclipse>

The formulæ above quoted are entirely superfluous, because they add nothing to our knowledge of the causes of eclipses, and would not enable us to predict anything which has not hundreds of times already occurred. Hence all the labour of calculation is truly effort thrown away, and may be altogether dispensed with by adopting the simple process referred to at page 153, and calling that which eclipses the moon the "lunar eclipsor," or the moon's satellite, instead of the "earth's shadow," just as the moon is the sun's eclipsor.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2018, 12:27:50 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Bobby Shafto

  • *
  • Posts: 1390
  • https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdv72TaxoaafQr8WD
    • View Profile
    • Bobby Shafto YouTube Channel
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2018, 01:12:15 AM »
Cyclic patterns of periodicity tell you when, not where.

So, how can you predict where the moon's shadow (or, if not the moon, then some other celestial body's shadow) will be cast on the face of the earth based on past patterns? 

As far as I can tell, the "ancients" never had enough data to predict where a solar eclipse would be seen. Even today, that wouldn't be possible based simply on patterns of the timing of past eclipses, including the Saros cycle. That's could only be possible by understanding the motion of the bodies; and not to the precision necessary to solve an n-body problem. But pattern periodicity is not sufficient nor accurate to anymore more than prediction windows. Now, it's much more precise than that because we understand the motion of the bodies much more than did "the ancients."

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10662
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #4 on: November 20, 2018, 01:25:32 AM »
How do they predict the Solar Eclipse? Lets go to their Solar Eclipse website:

Quote
1.4 Saros
The Saros arises from a harmonic between three of the Moon's orbital cycles. All three periods are subject to slow variations over long time scales, but their current values (2000 CE) are:

       Synodic Month (New Moon to New Moon)    = 29.530589 days   = 29d 12h 44m 03s
       Anomalistic Month (perigee to perigee)  = 27.554550 days   = 27d 13h 18m 33s
       Draconic Month (node to node)           = 27.212221 days   = 27d 05h 05m 36s

One Saros is equal to 223 synodic months, however, 239 anomalistic months and 242 draconic months are also equal (within a few hours) to this same period:

              223 Synodic Months        = 6585.3223 days   = 6585d 07h 43m
              239 Anomalistic Months    = 6585.5375 days   = 6585d 12h 54m
              242 Draconic Months       = 6585.3575 days   = 6585d 08h 35m

With a period of approximately 6,585.32 days (~18 years 11 days 8 hours), the Saros is valuable tool in investigating the periodicity and recurrence of eclipses. It was first known to the Chaldeans as an interval when lunar eclipses repeat, but the Saros is applicable to solar eclipses as well.



Figure 1 Eclipses from Saros 136: 1901 to 2045
(click for larger figure)

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. The extra 1/3 day displacement means that Earth must rotate an additional ~8 hours or ~120° with each cycle. For solar eclipses, this results in a shift of each succeeding eclipse path by ~120° west. Thus, a Saros series returns to approximately the same geographic region every three Saros periods (~54 years and 34 days). This triple Saros cycle is known as the Exeligmos. Figure 1 shows the path of totality for nine eclipses belonging to Saros 136. This series is of particular interest because it is currently producing the longest total eclipses of the 20th and 21st centuries. The westward migration of each eclipse path from 1901 through 2045 illustrates the consequences of the extra 1/3 day in the Saros period. The northward shift of each path is due to the progressive increase in gamma from -0.3626 (in 1901) to 0.2116 (in 2045). The color figure Recent Eclipses of Saros 136 shows nine eclipse paths from the series (1937 through 2081).

Saros series do not last indefinitely because the synodic, draconic, and anomalistic months are not perfectly commensurate with one another. In particular, the Moon's node shifts eastward by about 0.48° with each eclipse in a series. The following narrative describes the life cycle of a typical Saros series at the Moon's descending node. The series begins when the New Moon occurs ~17° east of the node. The Moon's umbral/antumbral shadow passes about 3500 km south of Earth and a small partial eclipse will be visible from high southern latitudes. One Saros period later, the umbra/antumbra passes ~250 km closer to Earth's geocenter (gamma increases) and a partial eclipse of slightly larger magnitude will result. After about 10 Saros cycles (~200 years), the first umbral/antumbral eclipse occurs near the South Pole of Earth. Over the course of the next 7 to 10 centuries, a central eclipse occurs every 18.031 years (= Saros), but will be displaced northward by about 250 km with respect to Earth's center. Halfway through this period, eclipses of long duration occur near the equator (mid-series eclipses may be of short duration if hybrid or nearly so). The last central eclipse of the series takes place at high northern latitudes. Approximately 10 more eclipses will be partial with successively smaller magnitudes. Finally, the Saros series ends 12 to 15 centuries after it began at the opposite pole.


Figure 2 Eclipses from Saros 136: 2117 to 2261
(click for larger figure)

Based on the above description, the path of each umbral/antumbral eclipse should shift uniformly north in latitude after every Saros period. As Fig. 2 shows, this is not always the case. Nine members from Saros 136 are plotted for the years 2117 through 2261. Although the paths of previous eclipses in this series were shifting progressively northward (Figure 1), the trend here is reversed and the paths shift south. This temporary effect is due to the tilt of Earth's axis combined with the passage of Saros 136 eclipses from the Northern Hemisphere's autumnal equinox through winter solstice. Note that the season for this group of eclipses runs from September through December. With each successive eclipse, Earth's Northern Hemisphere tips further and further away from the Sun. This motion shifts geographic features and circles of latitude northward with respect to the Sun-Earth line at a rate that is faster than the change in gamma. Consequently, the eclipse paths appear to shift south in latitude until the winter solstice when they again resume a northward trend.

The scenario for a Saros series at the ascending node is similar except that gamma decreases as each successive eclipse shifts south of the previous one. The southern latitude trend in eclipse paths reverses to the north near the Northern Hemisphere summer solstice.

Because of the ellipticity of the orbits of Earth and the Moon, the exact duration and number of eclipses in a complete Saros series is not constant. A series may last 1,226 to 1,551 years and is composed of 69 to 87 eclipses, of which 39 to 59 are umbral/antumbral (i.e., annular, total, or hybrid). At present (2008), there are 39 active Saros series numbered 117 to 155. The number of eclipses in each of these series ranges from 70 to 82, however, the majority of the series (84.6%) are composed of 70 to 73 eclipses.

Historically speaking, the word Saros derives from the Babylonian term "sar" which is an interval of 3600 years. It was never used as an eclipse period until English astronomer Edmund Halley adopted it in 1691. According to R. H. van Gent, Halley "...extracted it from the lexicon of the 11th-century Byzantine scholar Suidas who in turn erroneously linked it to an (unnamed) 223-month Babylonian eclipse period mentioned by Pliny the Elder (Naturalis Historia II.10[56])."

The page talks egregiously about the Saros Cycle, which is the ancient method of predicting the eclipses.

The Solar Eclipse appears as a little line on the earth, since it is only seen on a narrow path between the sun and moon, and not to everyone. There is also a dynamic component. It moves over time, and can be computed based on the Saros Cycle: "Based on the above description, the path of each umbral/antumbral eclipse should shift uniformly north in latitude after every Saros period." Comments are made of 'because of the tilt of the earth', but the Flat Earth model has an analogue to that as well. We can see that the entirety of this is based on pattern of occurrences, movement, etc. It is not a dynamic Sun-Earth-Moon Round Earth system.

The ancients may not have had enough data to predict world-wide occurrences, but as Rowbotham says, "modern astronomers" have merely improved on the ancient pattern-finding methods.

Surely, if there were a modern way of predicting the eclipse through the computation of a heliocentric or round earth system, it would be used. The fact that we are reading about the ancient flat earth Saros Cycle on NASA's own website, speaks volumes. It vindicates Rowbotham and entirely discredits modern astronomy.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2018, 01:38:32 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2615
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2018, 01:42:05 AM »
http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-11172009000100003

Maybe someone better do a little more homework before making statements.  There are folks that can use Newtonian mechanics to predict what the tables do.  Again, you could go back to Rowbotham and try to apply his statement at the end of Chapter 11.  However I feel that something has been learned this time.  Equations are just nothing more than relationships between things.   With modern computers you could use the Newtonian equations to describe the relationships between all the bodies.  If these equations accurately predict some observable event then it will give some credence to the relationships described in the equations.  Is there anyone who wants to bet that NASA already has either this set of equations or more likely something that they have independently developed themselves? It is never wise for an amateur to bet against a professional.
You can lead flat earthers to the curve but you can't make them think!

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10662
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #6 on: November 20, 2018, 02:15:42 AM »
http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-11172009000100003

Maybe someone better do a little more homework before making statements.  There are folks that can use Newtonian mechanics to predict what the tables do.  Again, you could go back to Rowbotham and try to apply his statement at the end of Chapter 11.  However I feel that something has been learned this time.  Equations are just nothing more than relationships between things.   With modern computers you could use the Newtonian equations to describe the relationships between all the bodies.  If these equations accurately predict some observable event then it will give some credence to the relationships described in the equations.  Is there anyone who wants to bet that NASA already has either this set of equations or more likely something that they have independently developed themselves? It is never wise for an amateur to bet against a professional.

Please find anything like those equations in NASA's very detailed descriptions on how they compute the eclipses. Newton's equations are not used. Newton's equations are just a cartoon, and cannot simulate the Sun-Earth-Moon system. It falls apart very quickly.

The author of that paper appears to be reverse engineering an example of the Saros Cycle with a load of his own personal math designed to declare that he solved it and came up with a value that was close. At the end he admits to using something similar to dimensional analysis to find his desired result; it is not a dynamical result. Its utility is likely nill.

He even claims in his introduction that he is the first ever to use Newton's equations for the eclipse! Wow. Show where this work has been used in any application. You have presented me a paper with equations, by someone claiming to have found a match to a number in the Saros Cycle. I have presented an organization that is actually predicting the eclipses. Nothing like those equations are used.

If anyone really has solved the Three Body Problem, it is a guaranteed Nobel Prize. The Three Body Problem and the failure to simulate even the simplest heliocentric system with Newton's laws has eluded the greatest minds for hundreds of years.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2018, 11:18:39 PM by Tom Bishop »

Curiosity File

Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #7 on: November 20, 2018, 02:19:14 AM »
http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-11172009000100003

Maybe someone better do a little more homework before making statements.  There are folks that can use Newtonian mechanics to predict what the tables do.  Again, you could go back to Rowbotham and try to apply his statement at the end of Chapter 11.  However I feel that something has been learned this time.  Equations are just nothing more than relationships between things.   With modern computers you could use the Newtonian equations to describe the relationships between all the bodies.  If these equations accurately predict some observable event then it will give some credence to the relationships described in the equations.  Is there anyone who wants to bet that NASA already has either this set of equations or more likely something that they have independently developed themselves? It is never wise for an amateur to bet against a professional.

Please find anything like those equations in NASA's very detailed descriptions on how they compute the eclipses. Newton's equations are not used. Newton's equations are just a cartoon, and cannot simulate the Sun-Earth-Moon system. It falls apart very quickly.

The author of that paper appears to be reverse engineering an example of the Saros Cycle with a load of his own pointless math designed to declare that he solved it and came up with a value that was close. If it wasn't close, he just added more equations where it became close to a desired value. That's how it works in that world. Its utility is likely nill.

He even claims in his introduction that he is the first ever to use Newton's equations for the eclipse! Wow. Show where this work has been used in any application.

If anyone really has solved the Three Body Problem, it is a guaranteed Nobel Prize. The Three Body Problem and the failure to simulate even the simplest heliocentric system with Newton's laws has eluded the greatest minds for hundreds of years.

You have presented me a paper with equations, by someone claiming to have found a match to a number in the Saros Cycle. I have presented an organization that is actually predicting the eclipses. Nothing like those equations are used.


Physicists Discover a Whopping 13 New Solutions to Three-Body Problem

By Jon CartwrightMar. 8, 2013 , 4:30 PM
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2013/03/physicists-discover-whopping-13-new-solutions-three-body-problem

Home News Physics Space
76
Daily news
20 September 2017
Infamous three-body problem has over a thousand new solutions
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2148074-infamous-three-body-problem-has-over-a-thousand-new-solutions/
I'd also like to point out that your dates and comment about Babylon and the Saros familyof Cycles is inaccurate.
History books claim that Babylon threw out FET in favor of RET before they could apply the Saros Cycles to anything accurate.   

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10662
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #8 on: November 20, 2018, 02:24:43 AM »
Here are some selected quoted from that New Scientist article you posted: "Infamous three-body problem has over a thousand new solutions"

Quote
The new solutions were found when researchers at Shanghai Jiaotong University in China tested 16 million different orbits using a supercomputer.

...

Perhaps the most important application of the three-body problem is in astronomy, for helping researchers figure out how three stars, a star with a planet that has a moon, or any other set of three celestial objects can maintain a stable orbit.

But these new orbits rely on conditions that are somewhere between unlikely and impossible for a real system to satisfy. In all of them, for example, two of the three bodies have exactly the same mass and they all remain in the same plane.

Knot-like paths

In addition, the researchers did not test the orbits’ stability. It’s possible that the tiniest disturbance in space or rounding error in the equations could rip the objects away from one another.

These orbits have nothing to do with astronomy, but you’re solving these equations and you’re getting something beautiful,” says Vanderbei.

...

Aside from giving us a thousand pretty pictures of knot-like orbital paths, the new three-body solutions also mark a starting point for finding even more possible orbits, and eventually figuring out the whole range of winding paths that three objects can follow around one another.

...

This is kind of the zeroth step. Then the question becomes, how is the space of all possible positions and velocities filled up by solutions?” says Richard Montgomery at the University of California, Santa Cruz. “These simple orbits are kind of like a skeleton to build the whole system up from.”

As plainly stated, the stable orbits that can be found have nothing that looks like heliocentric astronomy. The system, at its very basic level, is unable to be created.

The "thousands of stable solutions" are scenarios where the bodies have the same mass or where one of the bodies is mass-less. All of these scenarios are incredibly sensitive, and none represent anything that looks like a heliocentric system. They are crazy loopy orbits, based on situations that would not happen in nature, and which fall apart with the slightest touch.

As admitted, astronomy is still in the stone age. They are on the zeroth step.

Do you want to know why they are on the zeroth step? It is simply because the heliocentric system and the laws of newton do not actually work. Would New Scientist be trumpeting a triumphant victory of coming up with crazy three-body orbits that would not exist in nature if this science were truly mature? The triumphant victory is that they were able to come up with these unrealistic orbits. This research will be used  to search for hints for getting the basic system of Copernicus and Newton working at all...

The state of modern astronomy is actually quite sad.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2018, 02:52:00 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2615
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #9 on: November 20, 2018, 02:34:11 AM »
Well, again, it looks like you are consulting with people who don't know how to solve a problem.  It's time you look at the people who actually can.  My link was to a person who had all the equations that described the motions of the Sun, Moon, and Earth.  These equations are able to predict when an eclipse will occur.  That should be a pretty good confirmation that everything is correct.  Of course everything is based upon the Earth orbiting the Sun and the Moon orbiting the Earth.  That totally anathema to the beliefs on this site.  There's really nothing I can do about that.  The best you can do is show that the results are invalid or the math is incorrect. Denial really isn't a river in Egypt.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2018, 02:36:24 AM by RonJ »
You can lead flat earthers to the curve but you can't make them think!

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10662
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #10 on: November 20, 2018, 02:50:42 AM »
Read above Ron, an astronomer just admitted that the state of astronomy is in the stone age. The belief that modern astronomy is sophisticated or advanced in any manner is false. It is a farce.

Poliastro, an astrodynamics software developer, shared an image of the most state of the art methods in the field of Celestial Mechanics for simulating the Sun-Earth-Moon System on basis of the restricted three body problem (where one of the bodies is massless).



Quote from: poliastro
Look at this beautiful plot of several numerical methods for the restricted three body problem taken from Harier et al. "Solving Ordinary Differential Equations I". The use of high order Runge-Kutta methods is pervasive in Celestial Mechanics. Happy Monday!


Does this look like the heliocentric system you were taught in school?

Do you think that, if there were a "real" way to run this model, that this image would even exist and we would be simulating such things?

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2615
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #11 on: November 20, 2018, 02:50:57 AM »
The diagram was probably one of the unsuccessful attempts of an astronomer made to describe a 3 body problem. Maybe he had better luck after a few more adjustments to the parameters.  It's a similar argument you made last week with an amateur radio operator not being able to bounce a signal off the moon.  Of course others can and do on a regular basis.  There are mathematicians who have solved the 3 body problem 100 years ago and I gave links to those names.  Just about all of them are known to me and I studied their works years ago in my engineering math classes.  I would like to give some of them a 'swift kick' because their equations are hard to understand, but when they are, they work as advertised.  It has been said that everyone is useful for something.  Some are useful as a bad example.  It's always best to pay attention to the ones who are good examples.
You can lead flat earthers to the curve but you can't make them think!

Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #12 on: November 20, 2018, 02:53:29 AM »
I will never understand (unless it's a willful attempt to deceive) why Tom always wants to start at the Saros cycles. The page you guys want is this one: https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEcat5/SEcatalog.html

The information you want is located under the header 'predictions' which is thus:

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]. For more information, see: Solar and Lunar Ephemerides. The revised value used for the Moon's secular acceleration is n-dot = -25.858 arc-sec/cy*cy, as deduced from the Apollo lunar laser ranging experiment (Chapront, Chapront-Touze, and Francou, 2002).

The largest uncertainty in the eclipse predictions is caused by fluctuations in Earth's rotation due primarily to tidal friction of the Moon. The resultant drift in apparent clock time is expressed as ΔT and is determined as follows:

pre-1950's: ΔT calculated from empirical fits to historical records derived by Morrison and Stephenson (2004)
1955-present: ΔT obtained from published observations
future: ΔT is extrapolated from current values weighted by the long term trend from tidal effects
A series of polynomial expressions have been derived to simplify the evaluation of ΔT for any time from -1999 to +3000. The uncertainty in ΔT over this period can be estimated from scatter in the measurements.

I've never been able to locate the source(s) reference by that work and others, but I've also never dug particularly hard into it. Feel free, maybe you'll dig up more.

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2615
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #13 on: November 20, 2018, 03:08:04 AM »
I took a quick look at the link you gave.  It's interesting to note some of the sources for the data used in the equations.  One was the laser reflector placed upon the moon.  Of course this device is used by the astronomers use precisely measure this distance between the Moon and Earth.  This distance, of course, changes just a bit all the time because the Earth-Moon system is not static, it's dynamic with all the small changes that happen continuously with the Moon and Earth.  Of course with the equipment used the distance to the moon is known to the centimeter.  Again this is totally anathema to the premises of this site, but I am not responsible for the information.  It's just the best information available.  Probably everything is reduced to a computer program where all the numbers are 'crunched' on a continuous basis as new data comes in.   

As the saying goes:  "Never start a knife-fight with a man holding a gun"
« Last Edit: November 20, 2018, 03:11:34 AM by RonJ »
You can lead flat earthers to the curve but you can't make them think!

*

Offline Bobby Shafto

  • *
  • Posts: 1390
  • https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdv72TaxoaafQr8WD
    • View Profile
    • Bobby Shafto YouTube Channel
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #14 on: November 20, 2018, 03:10:06 AM »
How do they predict the Solar Eclipse? Lets go to their Solar Eclipse website
...

You linked to a page about periodicity of solar eclipses. Even so, that page concedes that the Saros cycle is but a useful tool and "modern digital computers using high precision solar and lunar ephemerides can directly predict the dates and circumstances of eclipses." (emphasis mine).

The predictive methods including location, duration, type and not just when is here.

(Curious Squirrel beat me to it.)

Excerpt:


What's the analog in a flat earth model for sun and moon coordinates?


Curiosity File

Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #15 on: November 20, 2018, 03:21:38 AM »
Here are some selected quoted from that New Scientist article you posted: "Infamous three-body problem has over a thousand new solutions"

Quote
The new solutions were found when researchers at Shanghai Jiaotong University in China tested 16 million different orbits using a supercomputer.

...

Perhaps the most important application of the three-body problem is in astronomy, for helping researchers figure out how three stars, a star with a planet that has a moon, or any other set of three celestial objects can maintain a stable orbit.

But these new orbits rely on conditions that are somewhere between unlikely and impossible for a real system to satisfy. In all of them, for example, two of the three bodies have exactly the same mass and they all remain in the same plane.

Knot-like paths

In addition, the researchers did not test the orbits’ stability. It’s possible that the tiniest disturbance in space or rounding error in the equations could rip the objects away from one another.

These orbits have nothing to do with astronomy, but you’re solving these equations and you’re getting something beautiful,” says Vanderbei.

...

Aside from giving us a thousand pretty pictures of knot-like orbital paths, the new three-body solutions also mark a starting point for finding even more possible orbits, and eventually figuring out the whole range of winding paths that three objects can follow around one another.

...

This is kind of the zeroth step. Then the question becomes, how is the space of all possible positions and velocities filled up by solutions?” says Richard Montgomery at the University of California, Santa Cruz. “These simple orbits are kind of like a skeleton to build the whole system up from.”

As plainly stated, the stable orbits that can be found have nothing that looks like heliocentric astronomy. The system, at its very basic level, is unable to be created.

The "thousands of stable solutions" are scenarios where the bodies have the same mass or where one of the bodies is mass-less. All of these scenarios are incredibly sensitive, and none represent anything that looks like a heliocentric system. They are crazy loopy orbits, based on situations that would not happen in nature, and which fall apart with the slightest touch.

As admitted, astronomy is still in the stone age. They are on the zeroth step.

Do you want to know why they are on the zeroth step? It is simply because the heliocentric system and the laws of newton do not actually work. Would New Scientist be trumpeting a triumphant victory of coming up with crazy three-body orbits that would not exist in nature if this science were truly mature? The triumphant victory is that they were able to come up with these unrealistic orbits. This research will be used  to search for hints for getting the basic system of Copernicus and Newton working at all...

The state of modern astronomy is actually quite sad.
I reread those articles and couldn't find anything in them that remotely matched your interpretation of them
It appears you cherry pick sentences and take the entirety of the articles out of context, add your own assumptions to in an attempt to discredit them or make them fit your own views.

   

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10662
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #16 on: November 20, 2018, 03:34:36 AM »
I will never understand (unless it's a willful attempt to deceive) why Tom always wants to start at the Saros cycles. The page you guys want is this one: https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEcat5/SEcatalog.html

The information you want is located under the header 'predictions' which is thus:

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]. For more information, see: Solar and Lunar Ephemerides. The revised value used for the Moon's secular acceleration is n-dot = -25.858 arc-sec/cy*cy, as deduced from the Apollo lunar laser ranging experiment (Chapront, Chapront-Touze, and Francou, 2002).

The largest uncertainty in the eclipse predictions is caused by fluctuations in Earth's rotation due primarily to tidal friction of the Moon. The resultant drift in apparent clock time is expressed as ΔT and is determined as follows:

pre-1950's: ΔT calculated from empirical fits to historical records derived by Morrison and Stephenson (2004)
1955-present: ΔT obtained from published observations
future: ΔT is extrapolated from current values weighted by the long term trend from tidal effects
A series of polynomial expressions have been derived to simplify the evaluation of ΔT for any time from -1999 to +3000. The uncertainty in ΔT over this period can be estimated from scatter in the measurements.

I've never been able to locate the source(s) reference by that work and others, but I've also never dug particularly hard into it. Feel free, maybe you'll dig up more.

What are you pointing me to look at? It says that the coordinates from the sun and the moon come from other models. Are you just posting the names of models and blindly expecting us to assume that it is all based on a Round Earth Heliocentric System? That certainly appears to be your tactic. Deceptive.

It absolutely is not based on a Round Earth model or a Heliocentric System.

The first model for the sun comes from VSOP, which is addressed in our wiki link Bobby provided in the OP:

Quote
VSOP

VSOP (French: Variations Séculaires des Orbites Planétaires) is a popular software package used to generate planetary ephemeris, the position of astronomical objects in the sky. It is used in astronomy software such as Stellarium and Celestia. It has been alleged that VSOP uses a geometric RET model to make its predictions, and so VSOP and the astronomy software which use it is therefore validation of the theory. We find, however, that VSOP is based on the ancient pattern methods of epicycles and perturbations:

Comparing VSOP to the Ptolemaic System

The following is left by an editor on VSOP's Wikipedia Talk Page (Archive):

  “ Modelling VSOP on a ubiquitous PC computer program, starting with only one element for each of the three parameters (L, B R) and then slowly incrementing the number of elements, gives a sense of irony that it is in fact nothing more than a more complex development of the ancient deferent / epicycle system used by Ptolemy. A system that despite being totally dismissed out of hand for being intellectually "wrong", was able to provide a prediction service accurate enough to match the observational resolution available (naked eye, with no reliable mechanical timekeeping). A system that, astoundingly to this author, was able to detect and measure, accurately, the lunar evection, one of the still-used perturbations of the Earth-Moon system. Summing powers of sines and cosines is certainly tantamount to circles upon (or perhaps within) circles; recursing, or perhaps simply nesting, almost endlessly. Whilst of course this is totally irrelevant to the mathematics, it perhaps behooves Wikipedia's wider terms of reference to include this as a philosophical point. ”

Comments from Celstia Developers
Celestia Developers comment on the large number of planet-specific terms used in computing positions:

https://celestia.space/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8285 (Archive)

  “ VSOP87 is a set of polynomials describing the orbits of the major planets. There are over 1000 terms in each series. ”

https://celestia.space/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2592 (Archive)

  “ I could add more terms to the VSOP-87 series, but there are already over 1000 per major planet ”

The model is bases on the ancient system of epicycles, not the Heliocentric or Round Earth system. The system of the perturbations and the epicycles are mathematical tools to find patterns. See: https://wiki.tfes.org/Astronomical_Prediction_Based_on_Patterns#Perturbations

The only person here being deceptive here is you, by blindly quoting the names of models without showing us that it is based on a Heliocentric or Round Earth model.

In the Wiki we also look at the NOAA Solar Calculator, which is again, another pattern based sun model.

It is your responsibility to demonstrate your nonsensical assumptions for these models.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2018, 03:38:02 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline RonJ

  • *
  • Posts: 2615
  • ACTA NON VERBA
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #17 on: November 20, 2018, 04:21:54 AM »
All of the arguments above seem to be a divergence from the original answer I gave about the equation to predict eclipses.  I have to admit that I was somewhat complicit myself when answering some of the posts.  In an scientific investigation it's best to focus very tightly on a single issue at a time and either solve it, try something else, or abandon the attempt altogether and go back to 'square one'.  The original proposition, I believe, was that there wasn't any equation that could just apply Newtonian mechanics to predict an eclipse.  I supplied such information, and I believe that there is more out there.  If the equations don't actually work then it will be easy to show that the eclipse doesn't happen as calculated.  If the equations do work then you will have to examine the implications of what the equations say.  It looks like the discussion has diverged to answering the general case of the 3 body problem and all the examples that don't work.  Is it possible to get back to answering the question about the eclipse prediction equations that do seem to work? 
« Last Edit: November 20, 2018, 04:30:06 AM by RonJ »
You can lead flat earthers to the curve but you can't make them think!

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 7849
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #18 on: November 20, 2018, 04:49:57 AM »
Go to NASA Eclispe Web Site -> Resources -> Eclipses and the Soros

Quote from: NASA
The periodicity and recurrence of eclipses is governed by the Saros cycle, a period of approximately 6,585.3 days (18 years 11 days 8 hours). It was known to the Chaldeans as a period when lunar eclipses seem to repeat themselves, but the cycle is applicable to solar eclipses as well.

NASA is describing that they are predicting the eclipses based on the ancient Saros Cycle as used by the Ancient Babylonians.
Tom, what evidence do you have that the Ancient Babylonians used the Saros Cycle to predict solar eclipses?  The relatively large size of the earth's shadow on the moon makes observing and predicting lunar eclipses fairly easy.  However, the relatively tiny size of the moon's shadow on the earth makes solar eclipses much, much harder to observe, let alone predict.

For example:
From the 'Canon of Eclipses' from 1207 BC to 1600 AD, you can follow a series of total solar eclipses that were visible over Egypt between 1157 and 115 BC spanning over 1000 years of potential observations. There is no simple, or discernible, pattern. Sometimes 8 months separates two total solar eclipses, sometimes as many as 400 months separate the two! This means that, knowing that an eclipse happened during a particular month and year, there is no simple additive period that lets you anticipate when the next total solar eclipse will happen, even in the same geographical location. This doesn't even allow for the possibility of bad weather which would further reduce the number of observable eclipses.
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

Curiosity File

Re: Astronomical Prediction Based on Patterns
« Reply #19 on: November 20, 2018, 05:05:53 AM »
Go to NASA Eclispe Web Site -> Resources -> Eclipses and the Soros

Quote from: NASA
The periodicity and recurrence of eclipses is governed by the Saros cycle, a period of approximately 6,585.3 days (18 years 11 days 8 hours). It was known to the Chaldeans as a period when lunar eclipses seem to repeat themselves, but the cycle is applicable to solar eclipses as well.

NASA is describing that they are predicting the eclipses based on the ancient Saros Cycle as used by the Ancient Babylonians.
Tom, what evidence do you have that the Ancient Babylonians used the Saros Cycle to predict solar eclipses?  The relatively large size of the earth's shadow on the moon makes observing and predicting lunar eclipses fairly easy.  However, the relatively tiny size of the moon's shadow on the earth makes solar eclipses much, much harder to observe, let alone predict.

For example:
From the 'Canon of Eclipses' from 1207 BC to 1600 AD, you can follow a series of total solar eclipses that were visible over Egypt between 1157 and 115 BC spanning over 1000 years of potential observations. There is no simple, or discernible, pattern. Sometimes 8 months separates two total solar eclipses, sometimes as many as 400 months separate the two! This means that, knowing that an eclipse happened during a particular month and year, there is no simple additive period that lets you anticipate when the next total solar eclipse will happen, even in the same geographical location. This doesn't even allow for the possibility of bad weather which would further reduce the number of observable eclipses.
The Babylonians started using the Saros Cycles about 3rd or 4th century BC but I believe it was named 2 or 3 different names. The term Saros came into use several centuries later. But it was the same process. Again I'd like to point out that the Babylonians dropped the FE belief in favor of RE belief several centuries prior them using the Saros Cycles. Tom also claimed  claimed that the Saros Cycles are primarily a FET concept in his comment or question as to why would NASA use a primarily FE concept to predict eclipses.

History. The earliest discovered historical record of what is known as the saros is by Chaldean (neo-Babylonian) astronomers in the last several centuries BC. ... The name "saros" (Greek: σάρος) was applied to the eclipse cycle by Edmond Halley in 1691, who took it from the Suda, a Byzantine lexicon of the 11th century.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saros_(astronomy)