<HTML>RAW wrote:
>
> Sorry, Dave.
>
> My mistake. I did a brainfart too. (my dumb finger went one
> column over too far in my notes into the autumnal-eqx and the
> wrong year - ahh, it feels great to be wrong sometimes). Here
> are the correct locations for the veqx's in their relevant
> epochs (e = east):
>
> 10.5kBCE : e-Leo
> 4000BCE : e-Taurus
> 2001CE (present) : w-Pisces
>
> And the Gregorian calendar dates for when the sun sits on
> this spot:
>
> 10.5kBCE : June 6
> 4000BCE : April 22-23
> 2001CE (present) : March 20
>
> So I have to backtrack here.
>
> In 4000BCE you used March 21 as the beginning date, and again
> this date after navigating 25,770 yrs. Ok. What you saw was a
> different position for the sun, and weren't so concerned with
> v-eqx position in testing the accuracy of the program.
>
> So what I'm getting at is....to find the real accuracy, don't
> use a calendrical date - use the position of the v-eqx (you
> could even use the a-eqx or eith of the solstices). So after
> c.26,000 years, the marker should near it's original position.
>
> Now, when you used dates, not only is there a shift in the
> time of year for the markers, but there are 11 days lost
> during Oct of 1582. So stick to the marker positions.
>
> The results of SNP:
>
> From Apr 22/4000BCE (v-eqx) to Feb 20/21,776CE (v-eqx) =
> 21,776yrs
>
> Location of v-eqx in both : e-Taurus
>
> J2000 v-eqx position : 4000bce ; RA 5h 28m 45s / Dec 24 01' 25"
> J2000 v-eqx position : 21,776 ; RA 5h 22m 50s / Dec 22 03' 34"
>
> Therefore an angular offset of about 2deg, and with the sun
> being c.31' (half deg) in angular size, the postions of the
> v-eqx's can be positively identified with the modern
> precessional cycle defined as c.25,776 years. Also, any
> congruent offset in the precessional match is further
> exemplified becuase of centre locking features which can
> vary. (I was set to 25 44' 10" angular view, where a Telrad
> would make the RA/DEC's more acute).
>
> Therefore, SNP refelects the accuracy of current astronomical
> data.
>
> __________
>
> Since I provided you with incorrect figures (an error in
> locating the data - 'duh' for me) you will have to re-do the
> sim to check the accuracy of SkyMap. All apologies.
>
> Avry
Nice one. Looks like SNP is reasonably accurate. I will check on Skymap, although I doubt I will get it done tonight, as it's now 12.25 AM! But I'll report back as soon as possible.
Best Regards,
Dave</HTML>
