>(For the same
>reason, the term "solstice" isn't technically applicable in
>Glorantha -- anyone care for maxiyelm and miniyelm? ;-) )
Not I
> This makes the winter season longer than the summer season
>If you mean here the Dara Happan Winter then it doesn't, as Sacred Time
>isn't part of their "year", much less part of "winter". If we're
>discussing hypothetical intra-solstice seasons, then true.
Let me clarify -- The distance between Spring and Autumnal Equinoxes is 135 days on the summer "side" and 159 days on the winter "side". Spring and Autumn would likely be the same length of time. Summer would be shorter than winter.
>> which makes sense given the tilt of the Dome.
>Not sure I follow. You've just proposed that Summer and Spring
>are each almost two weeks shorter than Autumn and Winter; this
>doesn't tally at all with the 1.6 degree difference between northward
>and southward tilt you propose later. A proportionate difference
>would be a couple a days, if the equinoxes corresponded with Yelm
>at the zenith. (Not that I think they do.)
I proposed nothing about Spring -- I proposed something about Summer. And how can the appropriate difference be a couple of days? 10.6 / 9 = 1 1/6, so the difference in lengths between equinoxes should be the same, a ratio of 10.6 to 9 for the distance between them on each of the two "sides". That's how I figured the dates, anyways, if my math is faulty please let a mathemetician or astronomer let me know.
>> For various reasons, I have determined that the Sky
>> Dome tilts 9 degrees to the north in summer [...]
>To the north of the _zenith_? This contradicts not just Elder Secrets,
>but also GRoY, which both have the Dome "untilted" at the summer
>solstice, with Pole Star then at the zenith. (Though re-reading GRoY,
>it also seems to contradict, or at least greatly obfuscate, itself in
>places, so I'm not betting huge sums of cash either way.)
Elder Secrets, Secrets Book, pg. 42: "In summer it tilts north, exposing stars in the south which are invisible in winter and sending the sun's path to the north of the center of the sky. In winter the dome rocks back, exposing northern stars and concealing the southern, and making the sun's path cross the sky to the south of center."
Clearly, the Dome rocks north of center, then back, then south, then back. GRoY's information was based on an attempt by Nick Brooke to justify certain inconsistencies of the Elder Secrets information.
>Isn't it the case that the Dome _only_ tilts to the south, which is the
>reason for the skewed "seasons", above? Though the connection is
>somewhat hypothetical, as it's far from clear what the relationship
>between the angle of the midday sun, and the length of the day should
>be. (Earthly correspondances need not apply.)
No, the Dome rocks both north and south, though Nick's Starmaps program has it go to center at midsummer. This was an attempt, if I remember correctly, to justify having both summer and winter stars, impossible given the Elder Secrets model. Nick's solution only gave us one or the other. I suggested a different solution, which allows us to keep both at the expense of adding a second major dome, one which tilts but does not rotate. With this Dome in place, the dome again tilts both north and south of the center.
As for the relationship between the position of the Sunpath and the length of day, as I said in my post there is none directly, since the distance the Sun travels is identical regardless of how far north or south the Sunpath is. After all, the Sun starts at Theya's Gate, ends at Rausa's Gate, and travels on a circle of the same Dome. But, for esthetic reasons, days should be longer in summer and shorter in winter, and having them correspond to the amount of tilt gives what I feel to be acceptable durations.
Unpublished Material
Peter Metcalfe <P.Metcalfe_at_student.canterbury.ac.nz> many topics
Me>>BTW, can we stop referring to anything which people have gotten from
Greg
>>over the years as coming from Greg's Trashcan or Wastebasket?
Peter>No. I find it very useful to describe the nature of the sources
>in question. If they haven't been published, then they should
>not be treated as Holy Writ from Upon High that should be adhered
>to on pain of Defenestration. (The collary BTW does not apply).
Um, did you miss something? I asked that we refer to the source differently, I never said we should not cite our sources. Since I try very hard to cite my sources, and also try to mention when they are unpublished, I feel confident in asking this. Contrary to what Alex Ferguson said, most of the references have seemed to me to be derogatory, not in the spirit of fun. And not all of them were aimed at me, either. But again, I think many people on the Digest are too offensive, and many of them on purpose.
Stephen Martin
ilium_at_juno.com
- -----------------------------------------------The Book of Drastic Resolutions
Powered by hypermail