Earlier, I mentioned my attempt to have Celestia simulate Earth's geologic history in real time.
However, I looked at the source code, and the code used for the rotation, precession, and orbit models, because I want to use SSC for when the clock goes beyond the builtin clamps. Example: I defined a test object using all the Earth's orbital parameters, and meticulously calculated a mostly correct period (1.0000174209555099247091033538672 years), and when went beyond the 4000 BCE/CE clamps for vsop87earth, Earth drifted away from the test object, and after 500 years, it was on the opposite side of the sun as the test object. Naturally, being an extremely finicky perfectionist, I got quite angry, especially since it pretty much threw the calendar and daily clock off.
So, how do I make sense of the numbers that are used in the code for the vsop87 orbits and iau rotations, so I can have a smoother transition when Celestia crosses the 4000 BC clamp?
And please, no lectures on how accuracy decreases beyond certain points in time. Please. Don't.
Question about the builtin Orbit and Rotation Models

Topic authorPlutonianEmpire
 Posts: 1359
 Joined: 09.09.2004
 Age: 35
 With us: 15 years 5 months
 Location: MinneSNOWta
Question about the builtin Orbit and Rotation Models
Terraformed Pluto: Now with New Horizons maps! :D
 John Van Vliet
 Posts: 2718
 Joined: 28.08.2002
 With us: 17 years 6 months
Re: Question about the builtin Orbit and Rotation Models
 edit 
Last edited by John Van Vliet on 19.10.2013, 03:59, edited 1 time in total.

Topic authorPlutonianEmpire
 Posts: 1359
 Joined: 09.09.2004
 Age: 35
 With us: 15 years 5 months
 Location: MinneSNOWta
Re: Question about the builtin Orbit and Rotation Models
I'm aware of the date overflow in previous versions of celestia, but in 1.6.0 and 1.6.1, I can go 2 billion years into past and future before hitting the builtin clamps for those dates with little trouble. The only bad "mix" I see is having to hav the timerate at 100x or 1000x. Were you referring to that?john Van Vliet wrote:you could set a timeline and use JPLHORIZONS with a date set to the min. "BC 3000Feb23 "
but for 4000+ BCE ???????
that will get you "close" to the orbit
for rotational ???
and for Geological time scales
deep time and celestia do not mix well
Either way, what I'm looking for is what the "current" orbital and rotational parameters were at the points where the vsop87 and iau models cut off, so I don't have entire planets warp hundreds of thousands of kilometers to new positions when transitioning from the vsop87/iau models to the basic ssc parameters.
Terraformed Pluto: Now with New Horizons maps! :D
 t00fri
 Developer
 Posts: 8772
 Joined: 29.03.2002
 Age: 17
 With us: 17 years 11 months
 Location: Hamburg, Germany
Re: Question about the builtin Orbit and Rotation Models
PlutonianEmpire wrote:...
I got quite angry, especially since it pretty much threw the calendar and daily clock off.
So, how do I make sense of the numbers that are used in the code for the vsop87 orbits and iau rotations, so I can have a smoother transition when Celestia crosses the 4000 BC clamp?
And please, no lectures on how accuracy decreases beyond certain points in time. Please. Don't.
The phenomenon of rapid orbit failure that you are observing near the limit of validity of the vsop87 approximation is unfortunately a generic behaviour that can hardly be improved.
Anyone with a solid math background about the behaviour of highorder numerical approximations will understand it right away:
vsop87 is not a basic physical theory but rather a numerical approximation of the cumulative effect of gravity (due to other bodies) on a given orbit, involving a huge number (about 400!) of polynomial terms per orbit in order to achieve the best possible accuracy around our present epoch.
Unfortunately, it is a mathematical fact that approximations in terms of highorder polynomials start to deviate more rapidly outside the proper domain of validity the higher the used polynomial degree!
Once you have understood and accepted this purely mathematical fact, there will also be no reason left for you to become angry
If one wanted to have a slower transition to nonsensical results, the only alternative would be to restrict the orbit approximations to much lower polynomial degrees. This in turn would imply a much worse ephemeridal accuracy in our epoch, which is certainly NOT what most of us want. The vsop87 approximation has been polished and finetuned by highly specialized experts over years, and the vsop87 code in Celestia has been copied straight from their publication site. Hence none of the devs is advised to put their hands on any of the terms in vsop87.
Fridger