Tag: syzygy

Posted on

Almagest Book VI: Predicting Solar Eclipses

Now that we understand how to predict lunar eclipses, we’ll turn our attention towards solar eclipses. However, Ptolemy warns us that these will be

more complicated to predict because of lunar parallax1.

Toomer again provides an example that we can follow along with2. This will be Example $12$ from Appendix A. Surprisingly, nowhere in the Almagest does Ptolemy describe the details of a solar eclipse. As such, Toomer has selected his own example. In this case, we are to determine the details of the solar eclipse of June $16$, $364$ CE (Nabonassar $1112$ in the month of Thoth), which was observed by Theon of Alexandria3. Upon observing the eclipse, Theon then followed Ptolemy’s methods in the Almagest and Handy Tables to compare the predictions against observations and his calculation are what Toomer follows as an example using Ptolemy’s methods4. Continue reading “Almagest Book VI: Predicting Solar Eclipses”

Posted on

Almagest Book VI: Predicting Lunar Eclipses

Having set out the above as a preliminary, we can predict lunar eclipses in the following manner.

As Ptolemy states in opening this chapter, we’re finally done with the preliminary work and we’re ready to start diving into how to actually use everything we’ve done to predict eclipses. As usual, Ptolemy walks us through the steps, but does not provide an example, so I will follow my usual procedure of using example $11$ in Appendix A of Toomer’s translation5.In that example, Toomer invites us to examine lunar eclipses around Nabonassar 28, in the month of Thoth (the first month of the Egyptian year). Continue reading “Almagest Book VI: Predicting Lunar Eclipses”

Posted on

Almagest Book VI: Solar Eclipses Separated by One Month

We have finally reached the final in this run of eclipse timing feasibility checks. In it Ptolemy wants to demonstrate that it is impossible to have two eclipses separated by one month

even if one assumes a combination of conditions which could not in fact all hold true at the same time, but which may be lumped together in a vain attempt to provide a possibility of the event in question happening.

In short, we’re going to assume an overly ambitious “best case” scenario which can’t actually happen because some of these best case conditions contradict one another. Continue reading “Almagest Book VI: Solar Eclipses Separated by One Month”

Posted on

Almagest Book VI: Solar Eclipses Separated by Seven Months

Having established that two solar eclipses separated by the five months from the same location are just barely possible, Ptolemy then works on whether it will be possible for the same to occur over a period of seven months concluding that it is possible, provided it happen in the “shortest $7$-month interval”6. Continue reading “Almagest Book VI: Solar Eclipses Separated by Seven Months”

Posted on

Almagest Book VI: Lunar Eclipses Separated by Seven Months

So far in this chapter, we’ve demonstrated that it’s quite possible that, if either a solar or lunar eclipse occurs, there will be another one six months later. Then, in the last post we showed that, if a lunar eclipse happens, it’s possible (although unlikely) that there can be another one five months later. In this post, we’ll explore whether or not, for lunar eclipses, you can have two separated by seven months.

The procedure will be the same as in the last post. First we’ll determine the motion of the luminaries, taking into account the discrepancies due to the anomalies, as well as the differences between mean and true syzygy, and then compare those to the eclipse windows which we’ll again recalculate for this situation. Continue reading “Almagest Book VI: Lunar Eclipses Separated by Seven Months”

Posted on

Almagest Book VI: Lunar Eclipses Separated by Five Months

In the previous post, we showed that , if a solar or lunar eclipse occurs, it is possible that another may occur six months later. Now, we’ll turn to ask whether or not another lunar eclipse can happen five months after a previous one. To answer this question, we’ll first work out how much the moon would have moved in that time period and then compare that to the eclipse window.. Continue reading “Almagest Book VI: Lunar Eclipses Separated by Five Months”

Posted on

Almagest Book VI: Solar and Lunar Eclipses Separated by Six Months

Continuing in the theme of checking as few as possible syzygies for eclipses, Ptolemy now turns his attention towards

the problem of intervals at which, in general, it is possible for ecliptic syzygies to occur, so that, once we have determined a single example of of an ecliptic syzygy, we need not apply our examination to the [ecliptic] limits to every succeeding syzygy in turn, but only to those which are separated [from the first] by an interval of months at which it is possible for an eclipse to recur.

Continue reading “Almagest Book VI: Solar and Lunar Eclipses Separated by Six Months”

Posted on

Almagest Book VI: Eclipse Limits for Solar Eclipses – Solar & Lunar Anomalies

So far, when considering the distance the sun/moon can be from one of the nodes, we’ve worked out how much the longitudinal and latitudinal parallax impact things and all that’s left now is the fact that the sun and moon aren’t always at their mean position. They both have anomalies which we’ll need to consider. This is because the big goal of this book, so far, is to reduce the amount of math we have to do when checking for an eclipse. While we could go through all the effort of calculating the true position, that’s extra steps. Wouldn’t it be nicer if we could just stop at the mean position if it’s not in the window in which an eclipse can occur?

To that end, our final step in this series of posts exploring the limits for solar eclipses is to translate the true positions to the mean positions.

Continue reading “Almagest Book VI: Eclipse Limits for Solar Eclipses – Solar & Lunar Anomalies”

Posted on

Almagest Book VI: How to Determine the Mean and True Syzygies

Now that we’ve created our table of conjunctions and oppositions, how do we go about using it? As usual, Ptolemy walks through the process in a vacuum, so to help, I’ll follow along with the example Neugebauer does in History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy on pages $123-124$, although somewhat slimmed down. In particular, I’ll walk through finding the true opposition from the year $718$ in the epoch for the first opposition in the year. Continue reading “Almagest Book VI: How to Determine the Mean and True Syzygies”