How to calculate rate of axial precession?What if an Earth-like planet had no axial tilt? (climate and technology)How does one calculate the tidal heating of a satellite?axial tilts of 16, 28, and 75 on habitable planetsMaking a slow orbit around a large gas giantHow extreme can I make an altered solar cycle without destroying an inhabited world?How to calculate the solar day from sidereal day and sidereal orbital period?Spotlight distribution in a hollow earth?Effects of Rings - Debris?Ringed Planet: The shadow's effect on faunaFeasible star + planet + moon combo? Did I miss anything that makes this system wildly unstable or otherwise impossible?

What are the advantages of luxury car brands like Acura/Lexus over their sibling non-luxury brands Honda/Toyota?

What does "negligible mass" mean in the formulation of geodesics equation?

What's the 2-minute timer on mobile Deutsche Bahn tickets?

Where are the "shires" in the UK?

What do you call a painting on a wall?

All superlinear runtime algorithms are asymptotically equivalent to convex function?

Would a "Permanence" spell in 5e be overpowered?

Sparring against two opponents test

Where to draw the line between quantum mechanics theory and its interpretation(s)?

My large rocket is still flipping over

Is throwing dice a stochastic or a deterministic process?

weird pluperfect subjunctive in Eutropius

What was the first story to feature the plot "the monsters were human all along"?

Why did WWI include Japan?

Motion-trail-like lines

no sense/need/point

Is there a proof that the set of real numbers can exactly represent distances?

Install Firefox without updates

Sheared off exhasut pipe: How to fix without a welder?

Why does sound not move through a wall?

Dangerous workplace travelling

Why would a military not separate its forces into different branches?

The Adventures of a Chocolate Cookie

Has the Hulk always been able to talk?



How to calculate rate of axial precession?


What if an Earth-like planet had no axial tilt? (climate and technology)How does one calculate the tidal heating of a satellite?axial tilts of 16, 28, and 75 on habitable planetsMaking a slow orbit around a large gas giantHow extreme can I make an altered solar cycle without destroying an inhabited world?How to calculate the solar day from sidereal day and sidereal orbital period?Spotlight distribution in a hollow earth?Effects of Rings - Debris?Ringed Planet: The shadow's effect on faunaFeasible star + planet + moon combo? Did I miss anything that makes this system wildly unstable or otherwise impossible?













4












$begingroup$


I want to start with the fact that I am by no means an astronomer, or even a hobbyist in the field. I am attempting to build a fantasy world which still reflects accepted physical laws.



My problem comes from the fact that I have no idea how to go about figuring out the period of axial precession for a fantasy earth-like planet. For the Earth, I believe the period is roughly ~26,000 years. I've spent a few days trying to find resources, but in all honesty I can't wrap my head around half of the equations I've seen presented.



How would I go about doing this calculation for a given planet, and which of its properties would I have to specify in order to do this calculation? I've got 2 moons around my earth like planet, one of which is large enough to hold a stable atmosphere and be inhabited (which may make it more of a binary planet system than a planet-moon relationship).



I've asked this same question in the astronomy stack exchange, but it seems that the commentators over there believe you folks' may be able to help also...










share|improve this question









New contributor




Tristan Schott is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Hi, welcome to worldbuilding. Whilst our users here may be able to help you, i don’t think your question is about worldbuilding as defined in the help center. Unfortunately this may be closed here. However, as i stated, we do have users here who will hopefully be able to answer your question.
    $endgroup$
    – Liam Morris
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Depends very very very much on the exact specific planet in question. If the planet is perfectly spherical and has a perfectly uniform mass distribution then it won't precess. For a general object with no symmetry, such as a planet, you must do a numerical simulation. So you need to give the exact physical characteristics of the planet, down to actual shape (planets are not perfect spheres or ellipsoids) and the actual mass distribution. Then hope that somebody knows enough physics, has access to the right computer programs, and has the time to work the numerical simulation for you.
    $endgroup$
    – AlexP
    3 hours ago







  • 3




    $begingroup$
    ... On the other hand, just pick a number and be done with it. Any period of precession between 5,000 to 50,000 years is perfectly believable.
    $endgroup$
    – AlexP
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession#Equations
    $endgroup$
    – Ville Niemi
    2 hours ago















4












$begingroup$


I want to start with the fact that I am by no means an astronomer, or even a hobbyist in the field. I am attempting to build a fantasy world which still reflects accepted physical laws.



My problem comes from the fact that I have no idea how to go about figuring out the period of axial precession for a fantasy earth-like planet. For the Earth, I believe the period is roughly ~26,000 years. I've spent a few days trying to find resources, but in all honesty I can't wrap my head around half of the equations I've seen presented.



How would I go about doing this calculation for a given planet, and which of its properties would I have to specify in order to do this calculation? I've got 2 moons around my earth like planet, one of which is large enough to hold a stable atmosphere and be inhabited (which may make it more of a binary planet system than a planet-moon relationship).



I've asked this same question in the astronomy stack exchange, but it seems that the commentators over there believe you folks' may be able to help also...










share|improve this question









New contributor




Tristan Schott is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Hi, welcome to worldbuilding. Whilst our users here may be able to help you, i don’t think your question is about worldbuilding as defined in the help center. Unfortunately this may be closed here. However, as i stated, we do have users here who will hopefully be able to answer your question.
    $endgroup$
    – Liam Morris
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Depends very very very much on the exact specific planet in question. If the planet is perfectly spherical and has a perfectly uniform mass distribution then it won't precess. For a general object with no symmetry, such as a planet, you must do a numerical simulation. So you need to give the exact physical characteristics of the planet, down to actual shape (planets are not perfect spheres or ellipsoids) and the actual mass distribution. Then hope that somebody knows enough physics, has access to the right computer programs, and has the time to work the numerical simulation for you.
    $endgroup$
    – AlexP
    3 hours ago







  • 3




    $begingroup$
    ... On the other hand, just pick a number and be done with it. Any period of precession between 5,000 to 50,000 years is perfectly believable.
    $endgroup$
    – AlexP
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession#Equations
    $endgroup$
    – Ville Niemi
    2 hours ago













4












4








4





$begingroup$


I want to start with the fact that I am by no means an astronomer, or even a hobbyist in the field. I am attempting to build a fantasy world which still reflects accepted physical laws.



My problem comes from the fact that I have no idea how to go about figuring out the period of axial precession for a fantasy earth-like planet. For the Earth, I believe the period is roughly ~26,000 years. I've spent a few days trying to find resources, but in all honesty I can't wrap my head around half of the equations I've seen presented.



How would I go about doing this calculation for a given planet, and which of its properties would I have to specify in order to do this calculation? I've got 2 moons around my earth like planet, one of which is large enough to hold a stable atmosphere and be inhabited (which may make it more of a binary planet system than a planet-moon relationship).



I've asked this same question in the astronomy stack exchange, but it seems that the commentators over there believe you folks' may be able to help also...










share|improve this question









New contributor




Tristan Schott is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




I want to start with the fact that I am by no means an astronomer, or even a hobbyist in the field. I am attempting to build a fantasy world which still reflects accepted physical laws.



My problem comes from the fact that I have no idea how to go about figuring out the period of axial precession for a fantasy earth-like planet. For the Earth, I believe the period is roughly ~26,000 years. I've spent a few days trying to find resources, but in all honesty I can't wrap my head around half of the equations I've seen presented.



How would I go about doing this calculation for a given planet, and which of its properties would I have to specify in order to do this calculation? I've got 2 moons around my earth like planet, one of which is large enough to hold a stable atmosphere and be inhabited (which may make it more of a binary planet system than a planet-moon relationship).



I've asked this same question in the astronomy stack exchange, but it seems that the commentators over there believe you folks' may be able to help also...







science-based planets






share|improve this question









New contributor




Tristan Schott is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Tristan Schott is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 3 hours ago







Tristan Schott













New contributor




Tristan Schott is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 4 hours ago









Tristan SchottTristan Schott

214




214




New contributor




Tristan Schott is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Tristan Schott is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Tristan Schott is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











  • $begingroup$
    Hi, welcome to worldbuilding. Whilst our users here may be able to help you, i don’t think your question is about worldbuilding as defined in the help center. Unfortunately this may be closed here. However, as i stated, we do have users here who will hopefully be able to answer your question.
    $endgroup$
    – Liam Morris
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Depends very very very much on the exact specific planet in question. If the planet is perfectly spherical and has a perfectly uniform mass distribution then it won't precess. For a general object with no symmetry, such as a planet, you must do a numerical simulation. So you need to give the exact physical characteristics of the planet, down to actual shape (planets are not perfect spheres or ellipsoids) and the actual mass distribution. Then hope that somebody knows enough physics, has access to the right computer programs, and has the time to work the numerical simulation for you.
    $endgroup$
    – AlexP
    3 hours ago







  • 3




    $begingroup$
    ... On the other hand, just pick a number and be done with it. Any period of precession between 5,000 to 50,000 years is perfectly believable.
    $endgroup$
    – AlexP
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession#Equations
    $endgroup$
    – Ville Niemi
    2 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    Hi, welcome to worldbuilding. Whilst our users here may be able to help you, i don’t think your question is about worldbuilding as defined in the help center. Unfortunately this may be closed here. However, as i stated, we do have users here who will hopefully be able to answer your question.
    $endgroup$
    – Liam Morris
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Depends very very very much on the exact specific planet in question. If the planet is perfectly spherical and has a perfectly uniform mass distribution then it won't precess. For a general object with no symmetry, such as a planet, you must do a numerical simulation. So you need to give the exact physical characteristics of the planet, down to actual shape (planets are not perfect spheres or ellipsoids) and the actual mass distribution. Then hope that somebody knows enough physics, has access to the right computer programs, and has the time to work the numerical simulation for you.
    $endgroup$
    – AlexP
    3 hours ago







  • 3




    $begingroup$
    ... On the other hand, just pick a number and be done with it. Any period of precession between 5,000 to 50,000 years is perfectly believable.
    $endgroup$
    – AlexP
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession#Equations
    $endgroup$
    – Ville Niemi
    2 hours ago















$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to worldbuilding. Whilst our users here may be able to help you, i don’t think your question is about worldbuilding as defined in the help center. Unfortunately this may be closed here. However, as i stated, we do have users here who will hopefully be able to answer your question.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to worldbuilding. Whilst our users here may be able to help you, i don’t think your question is about worldbuilding as defined in the help center. Unfortunately this may be closed here. However, as i stated, we do have users here who will hopefully be able to answer your question.
$endgroup$
– Liam Morris
4 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
Depends very very very much on the exact specific planet in question. If the planet is perfectly spherical and has a perfectly uniform mass distribution then it won't precess. For a general object with no symmetry, such as a planet, you must do a numerical simulation. So you need to give the exact physical characteristics of the planet, down to actual shape (planets are not perfect spheres or ellipsoids) and the actual mass distribution. Then hope that somebody knows enough physics, has access to the right computer programs, and has the time to work the numerical simulation for you.
$endgroup$
– AlexP
3 hours ago





$begingroup$
Depends very very very much on the exact specific planet in question. If the planet is perfectly spherical and has a perfectly uniform mass distribution then it won't precess. For a general object with no symmetry, such as a planet, you must do a numerical simulation. So you need to give the exact physical characteristics of the planet, down to actual shape (planets are not perfect spheres or ellipsoids) and the actual mass distribution. Then hope that somebody knows enough physics, has access to the right computer programs, and has the time to work the numerical simulation for you.
$endgroup$
– AlexP
3 hours ago





3




3




$begingroup$
... On the other hand, just pick a number and be done with it. Any period of precession between 5,000 to 50,000 years is perfectly believable.
$endgroup$
– AlexP
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
... On the other hand, just pick a number and be done with it. Any period of precession between 5,000 to 50,000 years is perfectly believable.
$endgroup$
– AlexP
3 hours ago












$begingroup$
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession#Equations
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession#Equations
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
2 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

First, find tonight's pole star. As the planet spins on its axis, over the course a day/night, all the stars in the sky will move in a circular path, with the exception of the pole star. You can use a fixed sight-line (e.g. the ends of two sticks stuck in the ground) to determine if a star has moved after just a few minutes. You should then be able to narrow down the pole star within an hour. Keep in mind- most worlds do not have an "exact" pole star, even our Polaris moves in a tiny circle.



Now that you have a pole star (or pole star circular-path), you can set up some much more permanent apparatus to fix its position for a long time. If the planet has an axial procession, then the pole star will eventually move out of this "permanently-fixed" position. The RATE at which it moves out of this position would determine the rate of axial precession. The time it takes for the star to return to its original position would define a full precession cycle. It maximum displacement during this period would define the precessions angular maximum.



I suspect, with some of that crazy math you mentioned, they can figure out how long a full cycle will be, and the angular maximums of the precession, before a full cycle has completed; but I'm not really sure how.



Edit: just to clarify- these stars are NOT moving, rather your planet is spinning, and precessing, which makes the stars appear to move. In fact, the above is based on the assumption that they do NOT move.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$




















    2












    $begingroup$

    Wikipedia's page on Axial Precession has a good deal of mathematics on it and, unless you have absolutely got to have precise numbers for some obscure story reason (which is probably what I'd call the tail wagging the dog - change the story to avoid that problem) then making up the numbers or just forgetting all about Axial Precession is the way to go. The periods involved will be very long by the standards of any story you're likely to write, so why burden yourself with something you probably don;t need.



    The maths that follows only gives a rough approximation anyway, and you don't want to even contemplate the kind of things you need to do to get a better one : it's not worth it.



    That said let's have a look at the very basic theory result that Wikipedia gives :



    There are two component to axial precession that matter (for Earth) : the one due to the Moon and the one due to the Sun. The Moon's effect is actually larger, but these numbers are very sensitive to the values you use.



    The Solar Contribution



    $$fracdpsidt=left[ frac GM_sa_s^3left(1-e_s^2right)^frac 3 2 right] left[ frac C-AC frac cosepsilonomega right]$$



    Lots of symbols so what do they mean ?




    • $G$ - the Universal Gravitational Constant also famous from $F = frac GM_1M_2 r^2$ Newtons law for gravitation.


    • $M_s$ - The Sun's mass - in your case you need the mass of your planet's star, of course.


    • $a_s$ - The semi-major axis of the orbit of the planet around it's star


    • $e_s$ - The eccentricity of the planet's orbit around it's star.

    Now that second term in square bracket, which is also in the expression for the Lunar contribution. This one is trickier.




    • $C$ - moment of inertia (of Earth) around the axis of rotation


    • $A$ - moment of inertia around the equator


    • $epsilon$ - the angle between the equatorial plane and the ecliptic plane (see below)


    • $omega$ - Earth's angular velocity (due to it's rotation, not it's orbit)

    Now this expression is really poorly dealt with in Wikipedia because of two problems.



    $epsilon$ in Wikipedia is assumed to be the same for both the Solar and Lunar contributions. This is not (AFAIK) correct. The angle should be the angle between axis of rotation of the body and the plane of the orbit of the other body (which means it's different for the Sun and Moon).



    The $C-A$ and $A$ terms are really hard to deal with for mere mortals (and frankly just messy for anyone else). For your purposes I would propose the following compromise term instead. It's based on modeling the planetary bulge as an ellipsoid of constant density compared with the $A$ value for an ideal sphere - both objects have the same mass and density, which I'm taking as constant . I'll spare you the derivation :



    $$frac C-A C approx 1 - fracR^2 a^2$$



    where in this case $R$ is the average radius of the planet and $a$ is the equatorial radius of the planet.



    The Lunar Contribution



    $$fracdpsidt=left[ frac GM_la_l^3left(1-e_l^2right)^frac 3 2 left(1-frac 3 2 sin^2iright) right] left[ frac C-AC frac cosepsilonomega right]$$



    Not much change here expect that the masses and so on refer to the Moon and not the Sun (hence the different subscripts). There is one additional term which is the factor :



    $$left(1-frac 3 2 sin^2iright)$$



    This corrects for the effect that the angle of inclination of Moon's orbit to the ecliptic is not zero. The ecliptic being the plane with the Sun and the Earth's orbit in it.



    You have to decide these numbers for yourself.



    The total effect :



    The total effect is simply the sum of the two other effects so :



    $$frac dpsidt = frac dpsi_ldt + frac dpsi_sdt$$



    If you had multiple moons you would need multiple lunar correction terms.



    Just for clarification that $frac dpsidt$ means the rate of change of the angle $psi$ with respect to time $t$. To get how big an angle you'd move through in a century you do this :



    $$Delta psi approx frac dpsidt Delta t$$






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "579"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );






      Tristan Schott is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f146349%2fhow-to-calculate-rate-of-axial-precession%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      3












      $begingroup$

      First, find tonight's pole star. As the planet spins on its axis, over the course a day/night, all the stars in the sky will move in a circular path, with the exception of the pole star. You can use a fixed sight-line (e.g. the ends of two sticks stuck in the ground) to determine if a star has moved after just a few minutes. You should then be able to narrow down the pole star within an hour. Keep in mind- most worlds do not have an "exact" pole star, even our Polaris moves in a tiny circle.



      Now that you have a pole star (or pole star circular-path), you can set up some much more permanent apparatus to fix its position for a long time. If the planet has an axial procession, then the pole star will eventually move out of this "permanently-fixed" position. The RATE at which it moves out of this position would determine the rate of axial precession. The time it takes for the star to return to its original position would define a full precession cycle. It maximum displacement during this period would define the precessions angular maximum.



      I suspect, with some of that crazy math you mentioned, they can figure out how long a full cycle will be, and the angular maximums of the precession, before a full cycle has completed; but I'm not really sure how.



      Edit: just to clarify- these stars are NOT moving, rather your planet is spinning, and precessing, which makes the stars appear to move. In fact, the above is based on the assumption that they do NOT move.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$

















        3












        $begingroup$

        First, find tonight's pole star. As the planet spins on its axis, over the course a day/night, all the stars in the sky will move in a circular path, with the exception of the pole star. You can use a fixed sight-line (e.g. the ends of two sticks stuck in the ground) to determine if a star has moved after just a few minutes. You should then be able to narrow down the pole star within an hour. Keep in mind- most worlds do not have an "exact" pole star, even our Polaris moves in a tiny circle.



        Now that you have a pole star (or pole star circular-path), you can set up some much more permanent apparatus to fix its position for a long time. If the planet has an axial procession, then the pole star will eventually move out of this "permanently-fixed" position. The RATE at which it moves out of this position would determine the rate of axial precession. The time it takes for the star to return to its original position would define a full precession cycle. It maximum displacement during this period would define the precessions angular maximum.



        I suspect, with some of that crazy math you mentioned, they can figure out how long a full cycle will be, and the angular maximums of the precession, before a full cycle has completed; but I'm not really sure how.



        Edit: just to clarify- these stars are NOT moving, rather your planet is spinning, and precessing, which makes the stars appear to move. In fact, the above is based on the assumption that they do NOT move.






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$















          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          First, find tonight's pole star. As the planet spins on its axis, over the course a day/night, all the stars in the sky will move in a circular path, with the exception of the pole star. You can use a fixed sight-line (e.g. the ends of two sticks stuck in the ground) to determine if a star has moved after just a few minutes. You should then be able to narrow down the pole star within an hour. Keep in mind- most worlds do not have an "exact" pole star, even our Polaris moves in a tiny circle.



          Now that you have a pole star (or pole star circular-path), you can set up some much more permanent apparatus to fix its position for a long time. If the planet has an axial procession, then the pole star will eventually move out of this "permanently-fixed" position. The RATE at which it moves out of this position would determine the rate of axial precession. The time it takes for the star to return to its original position would define a full precession cycle. It maximum displacement during this period would define the precessions angular maximum.



          I suspect, with some of that crazy math you mentioned, they can figure out how long a full cycle will be, and the angular maximums of the precession, before a full cycle has completed; but I'm not really sure how.



          Edit: just to clarify- these stars are NOT moving, rather your planet is spinning, and precessing, which makes the stars appear to move. In fact, the above is based on the assumption that they do NOT move.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          First, find tonight's pole star. As the planet spins on its axis, over the course a day/night, all the stars in the sky will move in a circular path, with the exception of the pole star. You can use a fixed sight-line (e.g. the ends of two sticks stuck in the ground) to determine if a star has moved after just a few minutes. You should then be able to narrow down the pole star within an hour. Keep in mind- most worlds do not have an "exact" pole star, even our Polaris moves in a tiny circle.



          Now that you have a pole star (or pole star circular-path), you can set up some much more permanent apparatus to fix its position for a long time. If the planet has an axial procession, then the pole star will eventually move out of this "permanently-fixed" position. The RATE at which it moves out of this position would determine the rate of axial precession. The time it takes for the star to return to its original position would define a full precession cycle. It maximum displacement during this period would define the precessions angular maximum.



          I suspect, with some of that crazy math you mentioned, they can figure out how long a full cycle will be, and the angular maximums of the precession, before a full cycle has completed; but I'm not really sure how.



          Edit: just to clarify- these stars are NOT moving, rather your planet is spinning, and precessing, which makes the stars appear to move. In fact, the above is based on the assumption that they do NOT move.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 3 hours ago

























          answered 3 hours ago









          GlurthGlurth

          39919




          39919





















              2












              $begingroup$

              Wikipedia's page on Axial Precession has a good deal of mathematics on it and, unless you have absolutely got to have precise numbers for some obscure story reason (which is probably what I'd call the tail wagging the dog - change the story to avoid that problem) then making up the numbers or just forgetting all about Axial Precession is the way to go. The periods involved will be very long by the standards of any story you're likely to write, so why burden yourself with something you probably don;t need.



              The maths that follows only gives a rough approximation anyway, and you don't want to even contemplate the kind of things you need to do to get a better one : it's not worth it.



              That said let's have a look at the very basic theory result that Wikipedia gives :



              There are two component to axial precession that matter (for Earth) : the one due to the Moon and the one due to the Sun. The Moon's effect is actually larger, but these numbers are very sensitive to the values you use.



              The Solar Contribution



              $$fracdpsidt=left[ frac GM_sa_s^3left(1-e_s^2right)^frac 3 2 right] left[ frac C-AC frac cosepsilonomega right]$$



              Lots of symbols so what do they mean ?




              • $G$ - the Universal Gravitational Constant also famous from $F = frac GM_1M_2 r^2$ Newtons law for gravitation.


              • $M_s$ - The Sun's mass - in your case you need the mass of your planet's star, of course.


              • $a_s$ - The semi-major axis of the orbit of the planet around it's star


              • $e_s$ - The eccentricity of the planet's orbit around it's star.

              Now that second term in square bracket, which is also in the expression for the Lunar contribution. This one is trickier.




              • $C$ - moment of inertia (of Earth) around the axis of rotation


              • $A$ - moment of inertia around the equator


              • $epsilon$ - the angle between the equatorial plane and the ecliptic plane (see below)


              • $omega$ - Earth's angular velocity (due to it's rotation, not it's orbit)

              Now this expression is really poorly dealt with in Wikipedia because of two problems.



              $epsilon$ in Wikipedia is assumed to be the same for both the Solar and Lunar contributions. This is not (AFAIK) correct. The angle should be the angle between axis of rotation of the body and the plane of the orbit of the other body (which means it's different for the Sun and Moon).



              The $C-A$ and $A$ terms are really hard to deal with for mere mortals (and frankly just messy for anyone else). For your purposes I would propose the following compromise term instead. It's based on modeling the planetary bulge as an ellipsoid of constant density compared with the $A$ value for an ideal sphere - both objects have the same mass and density, which I'm taking as constant . I'll spare you the derivation :



              $$frac C-A C approx 1 - fracR^2 a^2$$



              where in this case $R$ is the average radius of the planet and $a$ is the equatorial radius of the planet.



              The Lunar Contribution



              $$fracdpsidt=left[ frac GM_la_l^3left(1-e_l^2right)^frac 3 2 left(1-frac 3 2 sin^2iright) right] left[ frac C-AC frac cosepsilonomega right]$$



              Not much change here expect that the masses and so on refer to the Moon and not the Sun (hence the different subscripts). There is one additional term which is the factor :



              $$left(1-frac 3 2 sin^2iright)$$



              This corrects for the effect that the angle of inclination of Moon's orbit to the ecliptic is not zero. The ecliptic being the plane with the Sun and the Earth's orbit in it.



              You have to decide these numbers for yourself.



              The total effect :



              The total effect is simply the sum of the two other effects so :



              $$frac dpsidt = frac dpsi_ldt + frac dpsi_sdt$$



              If you had multiple moons you would need multiple lunar correction terms.



              Just for clarification that $frac dpsidt$ means the rate of change of the angle $psi$ with respect to time $t$. To get how big an angle you'd move through in a century you do this :



              $$Delta psi approx frac dpsidt Delta t$$






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$

















                2












                $begingroup$

                Wikipedia's page on Axial Precession has a good deal of mathematics on it and, unless you have absolutely got to have precise numbers for some obscure story reason (which is probably what I'd call the tail wagging the dog - change the story to avoid that problem) then making up the numbers or just forgetting all about Axial Precession is the way to go. The periods involved will be very long by the standards of any story you're likely to write, so why burden yourself with something you probably don;t need.



                The maths that follows only gives a rough approximation anyway, and you don't want to even contemplate the kind of things you need to do to get a better one : it's not worth it.



                That said let's have a look at the very basic theory result that Wikipedia gives :



                There are two component to axial precession that matter (for Earth) : the one due to the Moon and the one due to the Sun. The Moon's effect is actually larger, but these numbers are very sensitive to the values you use.



                The Solar Contribution



                $$fracdpsidt=left[ frac GM_sa_s^3left(1-e_s^2right)^frac 3 2 right] left[ frac C-AC frac cosepsilonomega right]$$



                Lots of symbols so what do they mean ?




                • $G$ - the Universal Gravitational Constant also famous from $F = frac GM_1M_2 r^2$ Newtons law for gravitation.


                • $M_s$ - The Sun's mass - in your case you need the mass of your planet's star, of course.


                • $a_s$ - The semi-major axis of the orbit of the planet around it's star


                • $e_s$ - The eccentricity of the planet's orbit around it's star.

                Now that second term in square bracket, which is also in the expression for the Lunar contribution. This one is trickier.




                • $C$ - moment of inertia (of Earth) around the axis of rotation


                • $A$ - moment of inertia around the equator


                • $epsilon$ - the angle between the equatorial plane and the ecliptic plane (see below)


                • $omega$ - Earth's angular velocity (due to it's rotation, not it's orbit)

                Now this expression is really poorly dealt with in Wikipedia because of two problems.



                $epsilon$ in Wikipedia is assumed to be the same for both the Solar and Lunar contributions. This is not (AFAIK) correct. The angle should be the angle between axis of rotation of the body and the plane of the orbit of the other body (which means it's different for the Sun and Moon).



                The $C-A$ and $A$ terms are really hard to deal with for mere mortals (and frankly just messy for anyone else). For your purposes I would propose the following compromise term instead. It's based on modeling the planetary bulge as an ellipsoid of constant density compared with the $A$ value for an ideal sphere - both objects have the same mass and density, which I'm taking as constant . I'll spare you the derivation :



                $$frac C-A C approx 1 - fracR^2 a^2$$



                where in this case $R$ is the average radius of the planet and $a$ is the equatorial radius of the planet.



                The Lunar Contribution



                $$fracdpsidt=left[ frac GM_la_l^3left(1-e_l^2right)^frac 3 2 left(1-frac 3 2 sin^2iright) right] left[ frac C-AC frac cosepsilonomega right]$$



                Not much change here expect that the masses and so on refer to the Moon and not the Sun (hence the different subscripts). There is one additional term which is the factor :



                $$left(1-frac 3 2 sin^2iright)$$



                This corrects for the effect that the angle of inclination of Moon's orbit to the ecliptic is not zero. The ecliptic being the plane with the Sun and the Earth's orbit in it.



                You have to decide these numbers for yourself.



                The total effect :



                The total effect is simply the sum of the two other effects so :



                $$frac dpsidt = frac dpsi_ldt + frac dpsi_sdt$$



                If you had multiple moons you would need multiple lunar correction terms.



                Just for clarification that $frac dpsidt$ means the rate of change of the angle $psi$ with respect to time $t$. To get how big an angle you'd move through in a century you do this :



                $$Delta psi approx frac dpsidt Delta t$$






                share|improve this answer









                $endgroup$















                  2












                  2








                  2





                  $begingroup$

                  Wikipedia's page on Axial Precession has a good deal of mathematics on it and, unless you have absolutely got to have precise numbers for some obscure story reason (which is probably what I'd call the tail wagging the dog - change the story to avoid that problem) then making up the numbers or just forgetting all about Axial Precession is the way to go. The periods involved will be very long by the standards of any story you're likely to write, so why burden yourself with something you probably don;t need.



                  The maths that follows only gives a rough approximation anyway, and you don't want to even contemplate the kind of things you need to do to get a better one : it's not worth it.



                  That said let's have a look at the very basic theory result that Wikipedia gives :



                  There are two component to axial precession that matter (for Earth) : the one due to the Moon and the one due to the Sun. The Moon's effect is actually larger, but these numbers are very sensitive to the values you use.



                  The Solar Contribution



                  $$fracdpsidt=left[ frac GM_sa_s^3left(1-e_s^2right)^frac 3 2 right] left[ frac C-AC frac cosepsilonomega right]$$



                  Lots of symbols so what do they mean ?




                  • $G$ - the Universal Gravitational Constant also famous from $F = frac GM_1M_2 r^2$ Newtons law for gravitation.


                  • $M_s$ - The Sun's mass - in your case you need the mass of your planet's star, of course.


                  • $a_s$ - The semi-major axis of the orbit of the planet around it's star


                  • $e_s$ - The eccentricity of the planet's orbit around it's star.

                  Now that second term in square bracket, which is also in the expression for the Lunar contribution. This one is trickier.




                  • $C$ - moment of inertia (of Earth) around the axis of rotation


                  • $A$ - moment of inertia around the equator


                  • $epsilon$ - the angle between the equatorial plane and the ecliptic plane (see below)


                  • $omega$ - Earth's angular velocity (due to it's rotation, not it's orbit)

                  Now this expression is really poorly dealt with in Wikipedia because of two problems.



                  $epsilon$ in Wikipedia is assumed to be the same for both the Solar and Lunar contributions. This is not (AFAIK) correct. The angle should be the angle between axis of rotation of the body and the plane of the orbit of the other body (which means it's different for the Sun and Moon).



                  The $C-A$ and $A$ terms are really hard to deal with for mere mortals (and frankly just messy for anyone else). For your purposes I would propose the following compromise term instead. It's based on modeling the planetary bulge as an ellipsoid of constant density compared with the $A$ value for an ideal sphere - both objects have the same mass and density, which I'm taking as constant . I'll spare you the derivation :



                  $$frac C-A C approx 1 - fracR^2 a^2$$



                  where in this case $R$ is the average radius of the planet and $a$ is the equatorial radius of the planet.



                  The Lunar Contribution



                  $$fracdpsidt=left[ frac GM_la_l^3left(1-e_l^2right)^frac 3 2 left(1-frac 3 2 sin^2iright) right] left[ frac C-AC frac cosepsilonomega right]$$



                  Not much change here expect that the masses and so on refer to the Moon and not the Sun (hence the different subscripts). There is one additional term which is the factor :



                  $$left(1-frac 3 2 sin^2iright)$$



                  This corrects for the effect that the angle of inclination of Moon's orbit to the ecliptic is not zero. The ecliptic being the plane with the Sun and the Earth's orbit in it.



                  You have to decide these numbers for yourself.



                  The total effect :



                  The total effect is simply the sum of the two other effects so :



                  $$frac dpsidt = frac dpsi_ldt + frac dpsi_sdt$$



                  If you had multiple moons you would need multiple lunar correction terms.



                  Just for clarification that $frac dpsidt$ means the rate of change of the angle $psi$ with respect to time $t$. To get how big an angle you'd move through in a century you do this :



                  $$Delta psi approx frac dpsidt Delta t$$






                  share|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  Wikipedia's page on Axial Precession has a good deal of mathematics on it and, unless you have absolutely got to have precise numbers for some obscure story reason (which is probably what I'd call the tail wagging the dog - change the story to avoid that problem) then making up the numbers or just forgetting all about Axial Precession is the way to go. The periods involved will be very long by the standards of any story you're likely to write, so why burden yourself with something you probably don;t need.



                  The maths that follows only gives a rough approximation anyway, and you don't want to even contemplate the kind of things you need to do to get a better one : it's not worth it.



                  That said let's have a look at the very basic theory result that Wikipedia gives :



                  There are two component to axial precession that matter (for Earth) : the one due to the Moon and the one due to the Sun. The Moon's effect is actually larger, but these numbers are very sensitive to the values you use.



                  The Solar Contribution



                  $$fracdpsidt=left[ frac GM_sa_s^3left(1-e_s^2right)^frac 3 2 right] left[ frac C-AC frac cosepsilonomega right]$$



                  Lots of symbols so what do they mean ?




                  • $G$ - the Universal Gravitational Constant also famous from $F = frac GM_1M_2 r^2$ Newtons law for gravitation.


                  • $M_s$ - The Sun's mass - in your case you need the mass of your planet's star, of course.


                  • $a_s$ - The semi-major axis of the orbit of the planet around it's star


                  • $e_s$ - The eccentricity of the planet's orbit around it's star.

                  Now that second term in square bracket, which is also in the expression for the Lunar contribution. This one is trickier.




                  • $C$ - moment of inertia (of Earth) around the axis of rotation


                  • $A$ - moment of inertia around the equator


                  • $epsilon$ - the angle between the equatorial plane and the ecliptic plane (see below)


                  • $omega$ - Earth's angular velocity (due to it's rotation, not it's orbit)

                  Now this expression is really poorly dealt with in Wikipedia because of two problems.



                  $epsilon$ in Wikipedia is assumed to be the same for both the Solar and Lunar contributions. This is not (AFAIK) correct. The angle should be the angle between axis of rotation of the body and the plane of the orbit of the other body (which means it's different for the Sun and Moon).



                  The $C-A$ and $A$ terms are really hard to deal with for mere mortals (and frankly just messy for anyone else). For your purposes I would propose the following compromise term instead. It's based on modeling the planetary bulge as an ellipsoid of constant density compared with the $A$ value for an ideal sphere - both objects have the same mass and density, which I'm taking as constant . I'll spare you the derivation :



                  $$frac C-A C approx 1 - fracR^2 a^2$$



                  where in this case $R$ is the average radius of the planet and $a$ is the equatorial radius of the planet.



                  The Lunar Contribution



                  $$fracdpsidt=left[ frac GM_la_l^3left(1-e_l^2right)^frac 3 2 left(1-frac 3 2 sin^2iright) right] left[ frac C-AC frac cosepsilonomega right]$$



                  Not much change here expect that the masses and so on refer to the Moon and not the Sun (hence the different subscripts). There is one additional term which is the factor :



                  $$left(1-frac 3 2 sin^2iright)$$



                  This corrects for the effect that the angle of inclination of Moon's orbit to the ecliptic is not zero. The ecliptic being the plane with the Sun and the Earth's orbit in it.



                  You have to decide these numbers for yourself.



                  The total effect :



                  The total effect is simply the sum of the two other effects so :



                  $$frac dpsidt = frac dpsi_ldt + frac dpsi_sdt$$



                  If you had multiple moons you would need multiple lunar correction terms.



                  Just for clarification that $frac dpsidt$ means the rate of change of the angle $psi$ with respect to time $t$. To get how big an angle you'd move through in a century you do this :



                  $$Delta psi approx frac dpsidt Delta t$$







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 1 hour ago









                  StephenGStephenG

                  15k72154




                  15k72154




















                      Tristan Schott is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









                      draft saved

                      draft discarded


















                      Tristan Schott is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                      Tristan Schott is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











                      Tristan Schott is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f146349%2fhow-to-calculate-rate-of-axial-precession%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

                      Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

                      François Viète Contents Biography Work and thought Bibliography See also Notes Further reading External links Navigation menup. 21Google Bookspp. 75–77Google BooksDe thou (from University of Saint Andrews)ArchivedGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle booksGoogle Bookscc-parthenay.frL'histoire universelle (fr)Universal History (en)ArchivedAdsabs.harvard.eduPagesperso-orange.frArchive.orgChikara Sasaki. Descartes' mathematical thought p.259Google BooksGoogle BooksGoogle Bookspp. 152 and onwardGoogle BooksGoogle BooksScribd.comGoogle Books1257-7979Google BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGallica.bnf.frGoogle BooksGoogle Books"François Viète"Francois Viète: Father of Modern Algebraic NotationThe Lawyer and the GamblerAbout TarporleySite de Jean-Paul GuichardL'algèbre nouvelle"About the Harmonicon"cb120511976(data)1188044800000 0001 0913 5903n82164680ola2013766880073431702w6vt1sb70287374827140948071409480