Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-21T10:16:35.827Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Observations of Luni-Solar Precession

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 March 2016

D.D. McCarthy  and
B.J. Luzum
D.D. McCarthy
Affiliation:
U.S. Naval Observatory Washington, DC 20392U.S.A.
B.J. Luzum
Affiliation:
U.S. Naval Observatory Washington, DC 20392U.S.A.

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The observations of dψ and dε used in this analysis were taken from the combination solution of the IERS Sub-Bureau for Rapid Service and Precition (McCarthy and Luzum 1991a). Besides corrections to the coefficients determined from VLBI, additional estimates can be derived from lunar laser ranging (LLR) observations (Williams et al. 1991; Whipple 1993). Table ?? shows a comparison of the estimates of the change in longitude and obliquity derived in this analysis with corresponding terms from analyses by other authors using different observations. The theoretical value of obliquity by Williams (1994) is also included for comparison. There are significant unexplained discrepancies among the rate estimates. Difference in the methods of the analyses such as the procesure for the estimation of the nutation coefficients and correlations within the solutions probably account for the greater part of these discrepancies. In considering the adoption of changes in the IAU model for nutation, it is important to recall that changes must also be made in the precession constant. Introduction of changes in nutation without corresponding changes in precession will not improve the agreement between observations and theory.

Type
II. Joint Discussions
Information
Highlights of Astronomy , Volume 10: Highlights of Astronomy. As presented at the XXIInd General Assembly of the IAU, 1994 , 1995 , pp. 198
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer 1995

References

Chariot, P., Sovers, O.J., Williams, J.G., Newhall, X X, 1991, in Proc. IAU Coll. 127, 228.Google Scholar
Herring, T.A., 1994 private communication.Google Scholar
McCarthy, D.D. and Luzum, B.J., 1991a, Bull. Geod., 65, 22.Google Scholar
McCarthy, D.D. and Luzum, B.J., 1991b, A.J., 102, 1889.Google Scholar
Souchay, J., Feissel, M., Bizouard, N., Capitaine, N., Bougeard, M., 1994, submitted to A&A.Google Scholar
Steppe, J.A., Oliveau, S.H., and Sovers, O.J., 1994, NEOS Annual Report for 1993, 28.Google Scholar
Walter, H.G. and Ma, C., 1994, A&A, 284, 1000.Google Scholar
Whipple, A., 1993, private communication.Google Scholar
Williams, J.G., Newhall, X X, and Dickey, J.O., 1991, A&A, 241, L9.Google Scholar
Williams, J.G., Newhall, X X, and Dickey, J.O., 1993, in Contributions of Space Geodesy to Geodynamics: Earth Dynamics, Geophs. Monog. AGU, 24, Smith, D.E. and Turcotte, D.L. (eds), 83.Google Scholar
Williams, J.G., 1994, A. J., 108, 711.Google Scholar