Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Equation of time
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Secular change === The difference between the MICA and {{math|Ξ''t''}} results was checked every 5 years over the range from 1960 to 2040. In every instance the maximum absolute error was less than 3 s; the largest difference, 2.91 s, occurred on 22 May 1965 (day 141). However, in order to achieve this level of accuracy over this range of years it is necessary to account for the secular change in the orbital parameters with time. The equations that describe this variation are:{{r|Duffett-Smith|p=86}}{{r|Hughes+|p=1531,1535}} :<math>\begin{align} e &= 1.6709 \times 10^{-2} - 4.193 \times 10^{-5}\left(\frac{D}{36\,525}\right) - 1.26\times 10^{-7}\left(\frac{D}{36525}\right)^2 \\ \varepsilon &= 23.4393-0.013\left(\frac{D}{36\,525}\right) - 2\times 10^{-7}\left(\frac{D}{36\,525}\right)^2 + 5\times 10^{-7}\left(\frac{D}{36\,525}\right)^3\mbox{ degrees} \\ \lambda_\mathrm{p} &= 282.938\,07 + 1.7195\left(\frac{D}{36\,525}\right) + 3.025\times 10^{-4}\left(\frac{D}{36\,525}\right)^2\mbox{ degrees} \end{align}</math> According to these relations, in 100 years ({{math|''D''}} = {{val|36525}}), {{math|''Ξ»''<sub>p</sub>}} increases by about 0.5% (1.7Β°), {{math|''e''}} decreases by about 0.25%, and {{math|''Ξ΅''}} decreases by about 0.05%. As a result, the number of calculations required for any of the higher-order approximations of the equation of time requires a computer to complete them, if one wants to achieve their inherent accuracy over a wide range of time. In this event it is no more difficult to evaluate {{math|Ξ''t''}} using a computer than any of its approximations. In all this note that {{math|Ξ''t<sub>ey</sub>''}} as written above is easy to evaluate, even with a calculator, is accurate enough (better than 1 minute over the 80-year range) for correcting sundials, and has the nice physical explanation as the sum of two terms, one due to obliquity and the other to eccentricity that was used previously in the article. This is not true either for {{math|Ξ''t''}} considered as a function of {{math|''M''}} or for any of its higher-order approximations.
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)