Playing with Coordinate Systems (Spherical Geometry)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on simulating the azimuth and altitude of events observed by two Earth stations using spherical geometry. The author is transitioning from latitude and longitude coordinates to an xyz coordinate system, utilizing 3x3 matrices for rotations. They are attempting to draw a circle around a specified point on Earth but are encountering inaccuracies in their calculations, suggesting a potential flaw in their approach. The author suspects that switching to spherical coordinates, which would eliminate the need for rotation matrices, may yield better results. They seek feedback on this method and emphasize the importance of centering calculations around the circle's center.
solarblast
Messages
146
Reaction score
2
I'm working on a problem that involves two Earth stations that scan the skies. I'm writing a simulation program (no physics involved) that simply finds the az/alt of an event observed simultaneously by each station. At this point, I'm warming up to the mathematics, spherical geo, etc. to pull this off. It's been awhile since I've dealt with this sort of thing. A long while. My approach was to start with lat, long coordinates and then move things to an xyz coordinate system, and do x,y, or z rotations as required. I'm using 3x3 matrices for those, and generally vectors.

Here's a simple example I'm working on. x is pointing south, y east and z through the north pole. I want to pick an arbitrary point and draw a circle of a radius in degrees around it on the earth.

Suppose I'm content with one point on the circle to make this easy, and let's take the set up along 0 longitude.

Center of circle: (0.0, 20.0) (long,lat)
Point on circle: (0.0, 30.0)
I want the point on the circle to be 90 deg ccw to the west.

I then do a few rotational transforms to work around the (0,0) lat/long point, and look at the results for where the point on the circle is located.

Seemingly, that should be at (-10,20) in the original xyz. But I get
(19.68,-10.63).

Since I'm drawing a circle (one point here) and it is not (after the "circle" position rotation) on a great circle, the results seem close enough. However, this inaccuracy suggests I'm going about this incorrectly. In fact, I'm pretty sure of it.

My suspicion is that I've got to ditch xyz, and work maybe entirely in spherical coordinates, and associated vectors, probably vectors something like (alpha, beta, r),where r is a radius, and the others are angles. In the above example, I decided to center everything around (0,0) long and lat. It probably should have been to center around the circle's center. Something like topocentric, but my skimpy knowledge of them suggests that's not such a good idea. Probably in spherical coords, I wouldn't really need rotations matrices.

Comments?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I'm pretty sure that spherical coordinates would be the best way to deal with this. However, it has been a long time since I wrote something like that either. From what I remember, you will need one set of equations to display things and another set to select something that is being displayed. Once you know the positions of the stations, the rest should fall into place.
 
I think this is what I needed for finishing off matters <http://www.erikdeman.de/html/sail042e.htm>.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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