NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Celestial navigation: easier basic principle?
From: Bruce Cutting
Date: 2020 Jan 26, 20:23 -0700
From: Bruce Cutting
Date: 2020 Jan 26, 20:23 -0700
I probably am using zenith incorrectly - essentially, what I was think about was MAX altitude which os clearly not the same. Sorry Quoting Peter Monta: > Hi Bruce, > > Why is it unlikely that any bright star will be within an arc minute >> of zenith? >> >> > Now I'm thinking that you and/or the original poster may be using "zenith" > in the archaic sense of "at culmination". > > But if we're all talking about the zenith as "up", or "opposite the gravity > vector", then at any given place and time the bright stars, of which there > are only a few dozen or hundred, will be unlikely to find themselves that > close to the zenith. It's just statistics. There are about 70 million > square arcminutes in the hemisphere, if my arithmetic is right, so for one > of the 100 bright stars to be in the magic square at the zenith, it's like > winning the lottery. > > Cheers, > Peter > > > : > http://fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx/Celestial-navigation-easier-basic-principle-PeterMonta-jan-2020-g46920