Hi John,

The difference is there is no difference.

January 1st -4712 is the same as January 1st 4713 BC
( I think the 4173 in your message is a typo error)

Atronomers count including the year 0 so the year before 1 is 0 and the year
before that is -1.

Historians count without the year 0 so the year before 1 is 1 BC and the
year before that is -2 BC.

Therefore we get two starting points for the Julian day:
-4712
4713 BC

Jean Meeus uses the astronomical way because it's easier to calculate the JD
for the Julian calendar.

Best wishes, Fer.

Fer J. de Vries

De Zonnewijzerkring
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.de-zonnewijzerkring.nl

Home
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.iae.nl/users/ferdv/index-fer.htm
Eindhoven, Netherlands
lat.  51:30 N      long.  5:30 E

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2003 9:39 AM
Subject: Julian Date and UbiSol


> Anselmo I have a couple of questions about your UbiSol Julian Date
> (Julian Day). The result for 2003/04/26 seems to be at odds with other
> calculators.
>
> UbiSol = JD 21478.5
> Meeus and others = JD 2452755.5
>
> You and other respected references state this date is calculated from
> January the 1st 4173 BC. Meeus in his first edition of Astronomical
> Algorithms on page 59 states this is calculated from '....... the
> beginning of the year -4712'
>
> Can somebody please help me with an explanation ?
>
> Confused of Tasmania
> 41.5 South   147.1 East
>
> -
>


-

Reply via email to