NavList:

   

Reply

George asked:
>
>  ..But is this true
>  zenith distance, or is it apparent zenith distance, after the light has been
>  refracted?

It's ZD at the observer (apparent)

>  And whichever it is, if the plots were made instead in terms of the other
>  one, and the ratios were computed for constant values of that other angle
>  intead, would they look any different?

If I understand you here correctly: I always had only one parameter
changed from the reference case (=100%).

>  ... It's going to be hard to explain the
>  very different amount of refraction change in response to a 10% increase in
>  absolute temperature, and to a 10% reduction in pressure, either of which

Yes, I didn't have at that time an idea on how to proceed best in
order to make the cause visible.

>  should have exactly the same effect on air density.

That's what I also expected from "textbooks".

>  So the question needs to be asked- why the hell not? That may
>  point to whatever's going wrong.

It doesn't necessarily have to be wrong; it also could be a difficulty
to imagine the effects of the relevant physical relationships in the
context of setting up the layers of the atmospheric model. I know I do
have to get back to this one day ...

Marcel

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Navigation List archive: www.fer3.com/arc
To post, email NavList@fer3.com
To , email NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply