In the last post, we explored various lunar cycles from astronomers predating Ptolemy in which the moon reset its ecliptic longitude and anomalistic motion to define a full lunar period. These ancient astronomers did this by studying pairs of lunar eclipses1but Ptolemy notes that this method
is not simple or easy to carry out, but demands a great deal of extraordinary care
The reason for this difficulty is that, without careful consideration there can essentially be false positives of eclipses separated equally in time, but do not in fact, result in the moon returning to the same ecliptic longitude or same speed.
One of the reasons is that the conditions necessary to produce a lunar eclipse are also dependent on the sun, which has anomalistic motion. As such, it could be entirely possible that the moon could not have yet returned to the same ecliptic longitude as a previous eclipse, but the sun’s anomaly could cause an eclipse anyway. Thus, a pair of eclipses may be equally separated in time, but
this is no use to us unless the sun too exhibits no effect due to anomaly, or exhibits the same [anomaly] over both intervals: for if this is not the case, but instead, as I have said, the equation of anomaly has some effect, the sun will not have travelled equal distances over [the two] equal time intervals, nor, obviously, will the moon.
To illustrate this, Ptolemy starts with an example. Continue reading “Almagest Book IV: The Solar Anomaly and Lunar Periods”