Lunar Orbit Issues & Lunar Clocks

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jaziel
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the accuracy of a lunar clock purchased for a young astronomy enthusiast. Participants explore the discrepancies between the clock's lunar phase indications and actual lunar phases, questioning whether these differences arise from the clock's mechanism or the inherent differences between the sidereal and synodic months.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • The clock is reported to be slow by 56 hours when measuring lunar phases from New Moon to New Moon.
  • Participants question whether the 56-hour discrepancy is due to the difference between the sidereal month (27.2 days) and the synodic month (29.5 days), or if it indicates a fault in the clock's movement.
  • One participant notes that adding 56 hours to the sidereal month results in a value that approximately equals the synodic month, raising further questions about the clock's accuracy.
  • Another participant expresses a personal suspicion that the clock's mechanism may be flawed but admits to a lack of technical understanding regarding the Moon's orbital movements.
  • A later post reveals that the supplier confirmed the clock is faulty and offered a refund.
  • One participant suggests that the clock designer may have used the sidereal month in their calculations rather than the synodic month, providing specific values for both months and their relationship.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the cause of the discrepancies, with some suspecting a fault in the clock and others suggesting a design choice based on the sidereal month. There is no consensus on the exact reason for the inaccuracies.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexities involved in lunar timing and the potential for design flaws in timekeeping devices related to astronomical phenomena. The relationship between sidereal and synodic months is noted but not fully resolved in the context of the clock's performance.

Jaziel
Messages
17
Reaction score
6
TL;DR
Conflict between the sidereal and synodic months regarding a particular lunar clock.
I recently purchased a lunar clock intended as a Christmas present for a young family friend who has become interested in astronomy. The clock face shows twelve images of the Moon in all its main phases, with the Full Moon depicted at the "twelve o'clock" position. Now I purchased this clock especially early to allow time to check on its accuracy. After waiting for a full lunar orbit to occur, I have since discovered that the clock time when measured relative to its lunar images (that's to say from New Moon back to New Moon) is slow by a factor of 56 hours.

What is confusing the issue is whether this shortfall of 56 hours is due to the difference in time between the sidereal month (27.2 days) and the synodic month (29.5 days) - or whether there really is a fault with the clock's movement. All I can be certain of is that by adding the 56 hours to the sidereal month produces the following result: 56+652.8 = 708.8 hrs = 29.53 days. This then (approximately) equals the synodic month, yes? If so, why doesn't this result tally with the lunar phases depicted on the clock face. The reason I'm asking this question is because the most recent Last Quarter occurred at 20:51 UTC on the 11/12/25 (World dating format) wasn't actually achieved by the clock until noon the following day (12/12/25) - here a discrepancy of some 14 hours!

It's this issue that bugs me most of all - the marked difference between what is shown on the clock face and the actual lunar phases flagged up by reputable astro websites like Time & Date. This leaves me wondering what would happen if I simply let matters ride? What will these discrepancies add up to in another six months, for example? The mind boggles.
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Jaziel said:
TL;DR: Conflict between the sidereal and synodic months regarding a particular lunar clock.

I recently purchased a lunar clock intended as a Christmas present for a young family friend who has become interested in astronomy. The clock face shows twelve images of the Moon in all its main phases, with the Full Moon depicted at the "twelve o'clock" position. Now I purchased this clock especially early to allow time to check on its accuracy. After waiting for a full lunar orbit to occur, I have since discovered that the clock time when measured relative to its lunar images (that's to say from New Moon back to New Moon) is slow by a factor of 56 hours.

What is confusing the issue is whether this shortfall of 56 hours is due to the difference in time between the sidereal month (27.2 days) and the synodic month (29.5 days) - or whether there really is a fault with the clock's movement. All I can be certain of is that by adding the 56 hours to the sidereal month produces the following result: 56+652.8 = 708.8 hrs = 29.53 days. This then (approximately) equals the synodic month, yes? If so, why doesn't this result tally with the lunar phases depicted on the clock face. The reason I'm asking this question is because the most recent Last Quarter occurred at 20:51 UTC on the 11/12/25 (World dating format) wasn't actually achieved by the clock until noon the following day (12/12/25) - here a discrepancy of some 14 hours!

It's this issue that bugs me most of all - the marked difference between what is shown on the clock face and the actual lunar phases flagged up by reputable astro websites like Time & Date. This leaves me wondering what would happen if I simply let matters ride? What will these discrepancies add up to in another six months, for example? The mind boggles.
Can you boost the clock's voltage by (27.2/29.5)%? :oldbiggrin:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jaziel
Unfortunately, no. This battery powered clock (which wasn't cheap) does include a knurled knob at the back, enabling the 'hand' or pointer to be adjusted, but that's it, I'm afraid.

Personally I strongly suspect the clock's mechanism to be flawed in some way, but don't have anything like enough technical understanding of the Moon's orbital movements as these apply to the clock's own motions to defend this position. I'm sorry if this comes across as confusing, but this is because I'm right out of my depth here. :oops:
 
PS. Good news! I've just contacted the supplier and they confirm that the clock is definitely at fault and that they're perfectly happy to give me a refund upon returning it to them, which is a mighty relief, I must say. But thanks for your input, DaveC426913!
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: DaveC426913 and berkeman
The clock designer appears to have used the sidereal month, not the synodic month, in their design calculations.
Sidereal month = 27.32166 days.
Sidereal year = 365.25636 days.
Synodic month = 29.53059 days. (Phase of the Moon).
The periods are related by: 1 / 27.32166 - 1 / 365.256 = 1 / 29.53059
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
10K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 287 ·
10
Replies
287
Views
27K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
Replies
28
Views
8K