NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: accuracy of Cook's lunars
From: Tom Sult
Date: 2012 Dec 31, 15:09 -0600
From: Tom Sult
Date: 2012 Dec 31, 15:09 -0600
My comment was really more facetious than real. Should have used an emoticon ; ) Tom Sult Sent from my iPhone On Dec 31, 2012, at 14:06, eremenko@math.purdue.edu wrote: > > Tom, > 1. We are talking of Lunars. Nobody on Navlist will think of an > error 30 sec in longitude from a Lunar as an "upper edge". > > 2. My own comparison of Cook's Lunars with his true position, > when it is known, gives much smaller errors than mentioned in this movie. > > In fact, Cook's accuracy (at the place I checked) is of the SAME order > of magnitude as most of the recent Lunar observations, that I know, > including this list members observations. > > So I believe that there was no substantial > progress in lunar obsevrations since Cook (of course we have a more > accurate almanac, but I am only discussing observations now). > > So the statement in the movie is surprising to me, and I want to see > the data that confirm it. > > Alex. > >> The interesting thing about this (besides the multiple ocular injuries) is >> that Cook was happy with his estimate of 30 min of error. Here on nav list >> one would think an error of 30 sec is at the upper edge. >> >> Very nice video. I recommend an A. >> >> Tom Sult >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >> NavList message boards and member settings: www.fer3.com/NavList >> Members may optionally receive posts by email. >> To cancel email delivery, send a message to NoMail[at]fer3.com >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> >> : http://fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx?i=121650 > > > >
