| |
Main
Date: 30 Jul 2006 03:30:20
From: MThomas
Subject: Peterson Field Guide
|
I have a Stars and Planets guide updated to 1995. Is is
still accurate enough in '06?
|
|
| |
Date: 30 Jul 2006 04:21:58
From: John Taylor
Subject: Re: Peterson Field Guide
|
Yes these are printed in "epochs" of 50 years the last was 1950 and the next
will be 2050. The charts change very slowly due to precession - the 26,000
year wobble of earth's axis.
"MThomas" <mikeman_80@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:gJVyg.134925$A8.43966@clgrps12...
>I have a Stars and Planets guide updated to 1995. Is is
> still accurate enough in '06?
>
|
| | |
Date: 30 Jul 2006 11:24:39
From: MThomas
Subject: Re: Peterson Field Guide
|
"John Taylor" <taylor.john.r@verizon.net > wrote in message
news:GtWyg.2462$zV6.594@trnddc03...
> Yes these are printed in "epochs" of 50 years the last was 1950 and the
> next will be 2050. The charts change very slowly due to precession - the
> 26,000 year wobble of earth's axis.
>
> "MThomas" <mikeman_80@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:gJVyg.134925$A8.43966@clgrps12...
>>I have a Stars and Planets guide updated to 1995. Is is
>> still accurate enough in '06?
Then why do they bother saying things like "up to 1995" and not 2050?
Why do they even bother with "epochs".?
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2006 08:47:05
From: William Hamblen
Subject: Re: Peterson Field Guide
|
On 2006-07-30, MThomas <mikeman_80@hotmail.com > wrote:
> Then why do they bother saying things like "up to 1995" and not 2050?
> Why do they even bother with "epochs".?
If you had ever seen a Peterson Field Guide to the Stars and
Planets you would know that it includes an almanac. The current
edition has tables up to 2014.
Bud
|
| | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2006 18:12:31
From: MThomas
Subject: Re: Peterson Field Guide
|
"William Hamblen" <wrhamblen@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:sNSdnT61yerEJVHZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> On 2006-07-30, MThomas <mikeman_80@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Then why do they bother saying things like "up to 1995" and not 2050?
>> Why do they even bother with "epochs".?
>
> If you had ever seen a Peterson Field Guide to the Stars and
> Planets you would know that it includes an almanac. The current
> edition has tables up to 2014.
>
> Bud
Great. Four different answers of which yours is most useful. Thanks.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 31 Jul 2006 09:09:15
From: Chris McMahan
Subject: Re: Peterson Field Guide
|
And each of which was completely voluntary and offered free of charge.
I second the Dale Carnegie suggestion.
- Chris
"MThomas" <mikeman_80@hotmail.com > writes:
> "William Hamblen" <wrhamblen@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:sNSdnT61yerEJVHZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> On 2006-07-30, MThomas <mikeman_80@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Then why do they bother saying things like "up to 1995" and not 2050?
>>> Why do they even bother with "epochs".?
>>
>> If you had ever seen a Peterson Field Guide to the Stars and
>> Planets you would know that it includes an almanac. The current
>> edition has tables up to 2014.
>>
>> Bud
>
> Great. Four different answers of which yours is most useful. Thanks.
>
>
--
(. .)
=ooO=(_)=Ooo=====================================
Chris McMahan
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2006 12:37:03
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: Peterson Field Guide
|
MThomas wrote:
>
> Then why do they bother saying things like "up to 1995" and not 2050?
> Why do they even bother with "epochs".?
>
>
It's not that hard to comprehend--The planetary data is updated
in each new edition of Peterson's Field Guide to the Stars and
Planets. Much of the material is updated in each new edition.
|
| | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2006 18:09:13
From: MThomas
Subject: Re: Peterson Field Guide
|
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com > wrote in message
news:PJ1zg.108423$1i1.92131@attbi_s72...
> MThomas wrote:
>
>>
>> Then why do they bother saying things like "up to 1995" and not 2050?
>> Why do they even bother with "epochs".?
>
>
> It's not that hard to comprehend--The planetary data is updated
> in each new edition of Peterson's Field Guide to the Stars and
> Planets. Much of the material is updated in each new edition.
If it's not hard to comprehend then why didn't you answer my querstion?
|
| | | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2006 20:20:55
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: Peterson Field Guide
|
MThomas wrote:
> "Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
> news:PJ1zg.108423$1i1.92131@attbi_s72...
>
>>MThomas wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Then why do they bother saying things like "up to 1995" and not 2050?
>>>Why do they even bother with "epochs".?
>>
>>
>> It's not that hard to comprehend--The planetary data is updated
>> in each new edition of Peterson's Field Guide to the Stars and
>> Planets. Much of the material is updated in each new edition.
>
>
> If it's not hard to comprehend then why didn't you answer my querstion?
>
You might want to consider reading books by Dale Carnegie,
Debbie Mandel or Robert Fulghum.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2006 20:00:46
From: Marty
Subject: Re: Peterson Field Guide
|
Sam was saying
>You might want to consider reading
> books by Dale Carnegie, =A0 Debbie
> Mandel or Robert Fulghum.
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=3D42867&d=3D1154285=
181
Marty
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 31 Jul 2006 11:33:42
From: Chuck Taylor
Subject: Re: Peterson Field Guide
|
>> If it's not hard to comprehend then why didn't you answer my querstion?
>
> You might want to consider reading books by Dale Carnegie,
> Debbie Mandel or Robert Fulghum.
ROFL!
Clear Skies
Chuck Taylor
Do you observe the moon? If so, try
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/
If you enjoy optics, try
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ATM_Optics_Software/
*********************************************
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2006 00:04:03
From:
Subject: Re: Peterson Field Guide
|
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 03:30:20 GMT, "MThomas" <mikeman_80@hotmail.com >
wrote:
>I have a Stars and Planets guide updated to 1995. Is is
>still accurate enough in '06?
From the exchanges so far, I am going to guess that you are a
beginner, and are asking about using the guide for looking at the
night sky with just your naked eyes or binoculars.
If that is true, then the star maps will work just fine. The stars
change position so slowly that you would have no trouble using the
book 100 years from now.
The moon and the planets change position much more rapidly, and you
will need to have tables for the current month. Rather than buying a
new book just for that, use Google to find an online almanac.
|
|
