Doubt About Hour Angle: How Can It Change So Little?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Frank Einstein
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Angle Doubt
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the hour angle of the sun and its unexpected variation over a short period. The user notes that while they expected a change of about 92 minutes over 23 days, the actual change was only seven minutes. This discrepancy arises from the difference between the sidereal day and the apparent solar day, which is influenced by Earth's axial tilt and orbital eccentricity. The apparent solar day varies in length, leading to the observed differences in hour angle. Understanding these concepts clarifies why the hour angle does not change as expected over the specified timeframe.
Frank Einstein
Messages
166
Reaction score
1
Hi everybody, I was messing arround with the program stellarium; I decided to check the hour angle of the sun at 10 am on August 12; it was 19h 53 min; then I did the same for september 4th and it was 20h 0 min.
As far as I know it takes 23h 56 minutes to the sun to cross the same point in the sky, so the hour angle varies in about 4 minutes each day; but the hour angle only changes in seven minutes in twenty three days; can someone please tell me why that angle has variated only in seven minutes and not the 92 (23*4) it should have?

Thanks for your anwsers.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Frank Einstein said:
As far as I know it takes 23h 56 minutes to the sun to cross the same point in the sky
Let's start here. The time you specified is for the sidereal day - the time needed for the Sun to get back to the same point in the sky with respect to the so-called fixed stars.
It is NOT the time needed for the Sun to get back to the same 'point' (hour angle) in the sky w/r to the Earth (e.g. cross the meridian). This time is the apparent solar day.
The apparent solar day is not constant in length, due to the Earth's axial tilt and orbital eccentricity. The two effects combine to net a variation that looks like this:
310px-Equation_of_time.svg.png

and it's what Stellarium is showing you.
If you take the mean of the apparent solar day, you'll get the mean solar day which is the 24 hours the length of day is defined as.

The 4 minute (-ish) difference between the sidereal day and the mean solar day that you were thinking about adds up to 1 day of difference over a year in very much the same way as the long hand of a clock meets the short hand only 11 times over a 12 hour period, or the protagonists of 'Around the world in 80 days' manage to 'save' a day. This is the effect that makes the Sun pass the signs of Zodiac over the year.
This has no bearing on how long it takes for the sun to get back to where it was on the sky, though.

See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_time
for more on the graph you see above.

This wiki entry might be handy as well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_time
 
Last edited:
Then, does the seven minutes difference in the hour anglecomes from the differencie between the mean solar day and the actual one?
 
Yes.
 
Thank you very much for your help. Very apreciated.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top