HackerPapers

arXiv:astro-ph/0303376astro-ph

The IAU 2000 resolutions for astrometry, celestial mechanics and metrology in the relativistic framework: explanatory supplement

M. Soffel, S. A. Klioner, G. Petit, P. Wolf, S. M. Kopeikin, P. Bretagnon, V. A. Brumberg, N. Capitaine, T. Damour, T. Fukushima, B. Guinot, T. Huang, L. Lindegren, C. Ma, K. Nordtvedt, J. Ries, P. K. Seidelmann, D. Vokrouhlicky, C. Will, Ch. Xu

Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.

Abstract

This paper discusses the IAU Resolutions B1.3, B1.4, B1.5 and B1.9 (2000) that were adopted during the 24th General Assembly in Manchester, 2000 and provides details and explanations for these Resolutions. It is explained why they present significant progress over the corresponding IAU 1991 Resolutions and why they are necessary in the light of present accuracies in astrometry, celestial mechanics and metrology. In fact most of these Resolutions are consistent with astronomical models and software already in use. The metric tensors and gravitational potentials of both the Barycentric Celestial Reference System and Geocentric Celestial Reference System are defined and discussed. The necessity and relevance of the two celestial reference systems are explained. The transformations of coordinates and gravitational potentials are discussed. Potential coefficients parameterizing the post-Newtonian gravitational potentials are expounded. Simplified versions of the time transformations suitable for modern clock accuracies are elucidated. Various approximations used in the Resolutions are explicated and justified. Some models (e.g. for higher spin moments) that serve the purpose for estimating orders of magnitude have actually never been published before.

arXiv comments
45 pages, 1 figure, submitted to Astronomical Journal
Journal reference
Astron.J.126:2687-2706,2003
DOI
doi:10.1086/378162
Subjects
astro-phAstrophysics

On Hacker News

Linked by 1 identifiable commenter in 1 comment across 1 thread, from Nov 2018 to Nov 2018.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments1 thread

    • > It will go upwards, yes, but only because of an upwards velocity. In this picture, what imparted the upwards velocity to it, given its starting point on the ground? >> a falling ball [...] in reverse > it will still be accelerating downward. It seems strange to ask this of…

      raattgiftView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.