NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Navigation without Leap Seconds
From: Fred Hebard
Date: 2008 Apr 15, 08:38 -0400
From: Fred Hebard
Date: 2008 Apr 15, 08:38 -0400
Completely unrelated, but stemming from the same article. The author states that height can only be known to some few cm or whatever because of variations in gravity, if I remember correctly. It would seem that this is due to our tradition of assuming we are on the surface of a spheroid or ellipsoid when doing navigation. Confining ourselves to a surface makes the trig easier, but couldn't one position oneself with greater accuracy (with feet firmly planted on earth, not on a boat) using only stars or stars plus the sun, ignoring the earth's horizon, by measuring star-star distances? Make it a true 3-D problem. Or would uncertainties in the positions of stars still hamper ones efforts, especially uncertainty in their distance from us? Fred Hebard On Apr 14, 2008, at 9:50 PM, frankreed@HistoricalAtlas.net wrote: > > The fascinating article which Fred Hebard linked: > http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-59/iss-3/p10.html > includes a detailed discussion about the problems of gravitational > time > dilation and extremely accurate clocks. That's the main topic, and > it's > great stuff. > > The article also mentions leap seconds and navigation: > "Celestial navigators --that vanishing breed-- also like leap > seconds. The > Global Positioning System, however, cannot tolerate time jumps and > employs a > time scale that avoids leap seconds." > > So here's my question: what's the best way of doing celestial > navigation if > leap seconds are dropped from official time-keeping? I don't think > it should > be all that difficult to work around, but I'm not sure what the best > approach would be. Assume we get to a point where the cumulative time > difference is, let's say, 60 seconds (that shouldn't happen for > decades, so > this is just for the sake of argument). Should we treat the > difference as a > 60 second clock correction before working the sights? Or should it > be a 15 > minute of arc longitude correction after working the sights? Or > something > else entirely?? > > -FER > Celestial Navigation Weekend, June 6-8, 2008 at Mystic Seaport Museum: > www.fer3.com/Mystic2008 > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Navigation List archive: www.fer3.com/arc To post, email NavList@fer3.com To , email NavList-@fer3.com -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---