Thanks everyone for the responses. For some reason the coding I was
doing was working fine but my 'common sense' brain was parked outside :)
Of course it makes sense that the angles are 180 degrees apart, provided
the stars are relatively close (which they are in this case).
Sander
marceau.guihard wrote:
>
>
> To Sander
>
> A->B = B->A +/- 180° works better
>
> Marceau
>
> --- In [email protected]
> <mailto:skychart-discussion%40yahoogroups.com>, Sander Pool <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I noticed that when I have two stars, A and B and let CdC calculate the
> > distance and Position Angle (PA) between them the order in which I
> > select them matters. I would expect the PA from A to be plus the PA
> from
> > B to A to be 360 but it's not. One particular example is this one:
> >
> > From "GSC 4048-102" to "BSC HR860"
> > Separation: +00°30'51.0" PA:297°
> > Offset: -0h03m50.4s +00°13'55"
> >
> > and
> >
> > From "BSC HR860" to "GSC 4048-102"
> > Separation: +00°30'51.0" PA:116°
> > Offset: 0h03m50.4s -00°13'55"
> >
> > The distance is the same (thankfully :) but together the PAs don't make
> > 360. I'm probably not understanding PA properly. Can someone explain it
> > please or send me a link to an article that I should read? I've googled
> > the subject a bit and I'm not finding fault with my reasoning yet.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Sander
> >
>
>
