sidereal right ascensions, 7 . corr.

[Guest guest]

>Since the conventional, approximate " ayanamsa method " of precession in

>longitude does not take this into account, it contains *at all times* an

>error in the positions varying from 0 to about 18 arcseconds.

 

Actually, I am not sure about this, and would aprreciate a clarification.

 

Juan

[Guest guest]

> >Since the conventional, approximate " ayanamsa method " of precession in

> >longitude does not take this into account, it contains *at all times* an

> >error in the positions varying from 0 to about 18 arcseconds.

>

>Actually, I am not sure about this, and would aprreciate a clarification.

 

Since there is no input, I will make an empirical test. To test if sidereal

longitudes calculated in the usual way contain the nutation or not, I will

compare one " standard " position with one calculated without the nutation

for the same moment of time:

 

Sun, 1-1-1976, 0h U.T.:

 

Michelsen = 15 Sag, 16' 55 "

Riyal = 15 Sag, 16' 57 "

Swewin32 = 15 Sag 16' 56.3166 "

 

The nutation at that time was:

 

Swewin32 = 13.7633 "

Riyal = 13.8 "

 

I modify Riyal and compute the position removing the nutation:

 

Sun = 15 Sag 16' 57 "

 

Same result. This means that conventional method is effectively removing

the nutation, and therefore correct. My statement was wrong and the

paragraph from " sidereal right ascensions, 7 " quoted above must be removed.

 

The rest of what I wrote is not affected by this.

 

Juan