Well, sort of. Despite the heroic efforts of the two
astronomers/surveyors, Pierre Mechain and Jean-Baptiste Delambrein
determining the circumference of the earth the standard metre finished
up as a platinum bar which had been prepared in Paris in advance of
their return.
Frank
On 19/03/2012
Alex caught a typo in my procedure ... the sine of gamma, the arc
distance should read:
sgm = sqrt (sDsC*sDsC + sDcC*sDcC)
Bob ... Thanks Alex !!
---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
: sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de [mailto:sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de] On
Behalf Of Robert Kellogg
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 7:48 PM
To: sundial@uni-koeln.de
Subject: RE: Eratosthenes (Robert Kellogg)
---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo
low. What am I missing?
Tom Laidlaw
*From:* sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de
[mailto:sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de] *On Behalf Of *Robert Kellogg
*Sent:* Monday, March 19, 2012 7:48 PM
*To:* sundial@uni-koeln.de
*Subject:* RE
almost, but not quite, the same!
Dave
_
From: sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de [mailto:sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de] On
Behalf Of Tom Laidlaw
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 8:48 PM
To: 'Robert Kellogg'; sundial@uni-koeln.de
Subject: RE: Eratosthenes (Robert Kellogg)
Hello the list,
So
So, co-latitude. As you say, the closeness makes my assumption seem
plausible.
Tom
_
From: Dave Bell [mailto:db...@thebells.net]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 10:13 PM
To: 'Tom Laidlaw'; 'Robert Kellogg'; sundial@uni-koeln.de
Subject: RE: Eratosthenes (Robert Kellogg)
Thats an easy
Hello Axel,
I think you have made a mistake with the number 40231.264 (miles?).
If you take the formula for size of a latitude degree, as you stated:
dx/d theta = 111.133+0.559*cos(2*theta) km per degree latitude
if we integrate this formula with respect to theta from 0 to 360
X =
Sorry
40.231.264 Kilometers
best regards Hank
Axel
From: h.de...@bom.gov.au
To: atg...@hotmail.com; sundial@uni-koeln.de
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:52:18 +1100
Subject: RE: Eratosthenes [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Hello Axel,
I think you have made a mistake with the number 40231.264 (miles
I believe the original definition of a kilometer was based on 1/1 of
the distance from a pole to the equator.
metre was On 2012-03-18 21:52, Hank de Wit wrote:
Hello Axel,
I think you have made a mistake with the number 40231.264 (miles?).
If you take the formula for size of a latitude
Axel,
This is a far cry from Eratosthenes measuring distance by the time of a
Camel caravan, but it should help do distance problems: If we consider
the earth a sphere, then the distance between two points on the earth
and azimuth from one to another is as follows:
Let site1 have lat1 and
Dear all,
It is possible (and easy) to get ecliptic obliquity computing half of tropic
distance that is the difference of sun merdian elevation in soltsices,
just using a trivial gnomon.
In the famous florentine church S. Maria Novella, there are some
astronomical instruments. Among them an
11 matches
Mail list logo
