Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.

NavList:

A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding

Compose Your Message

Message:αβγ
Message:abc
Add Images & Files
    Name or NavList Code:
    Email:
       
    Reply
    Re: Navigation without Leap Seconds
    From: Gary LaPook
    Date: 2008 Apr 15, 13:00 -0700
    Gary LaPook wrote:

    If I remember correctly, the Apollo spacecraft had a sextant on board used to mesure angles of celestial bodies in order to compute their position in space on the way to the moon, (maybe only as a backup.)


    gl
    Fred Hebard wrote:
    So it would have to be sun/moon/planet-star distances.  I suppose
    those are limited by the low degree of parallax of the planets and
    sun, not to mention one has to know where one is on earth to
    determine the "position" of other bodies in the solar system, which I
    guess would be a circular argument.
    
    On Apr 15, 2008, at 12:54 PM, Lu Abel wrote:
      
    Fred:
    
    You're right about traditional surveying.   But your proposal is to
    use
    star-to-star distances to locate one (if I understand correctly) in
    3-D
    space relative to some very distant stars.   Imagine a couple of stars
    several hundreds of light-years away (that's on the order of 10^20
    cm).   Suppose I move a few cm closer to them.   By how much would the
    angle between them change?   Not by much at all.
    
    Lu
    
    Fred Hebard wrote:
        
    Lu,
    
    Why billionths of an arcsecond?  One arcsecond gets one to 1/60th of
    100 feet in traditional surveying, or about 50 cm.  One-thousandth of
    an arcsecond would drop one to 5 mm.  I wonder if refraction is a
    problem here.
    
    Fred
    
    On Apr 15, 2008, at 12:33 PM, Lu Abel wrote:
    
          
    Fred:
    
    In theory, yes; in practice, no.
    
    To position oneself using star-star distances would require require
    measuring angles to billionths of an arc-second.   Maybe
    something an
    astronomer could do, but not something you or I are going to do
    with our
    sextants!
    
    BTW, I remember a conversation with a radio-astronomer about 20
    years
    ago where he said that his team had measured the distance between
    two
    radiotelescopes on opposite sides of the US to within a cm or so
    using a
    technique called long-baseline interferometry.   But the whole
    experiment took them a year or so...
    
    Lu Abel
    
    Fred Hebard wrote:
    
            
    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
    -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

       
    Reply
    Browse Files

    Drop Files

    NavList

    What is NavList?

    Get a NavList ID Code

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

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

    Retrieve a NavList ID Code

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

    Email Settings

    NavList ID Code:

    Custom Index

    Subject:
    Author:
    Start date: (yyyymm dd)
    End date: (yyyymm dd)

    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site