S282 11B TMA 02 Question 1 Observational activity write-up

Jens Jensen Bilgrav PI: B498008X

The sidereal and solar day

Abstract
Two values for the difference in duration between the sidereal day and the mean solar day were obtained from measurements of the setting time of Rigel ( Orionis) and Cursa ( Eridani) behind a vertical reference edge during the period 5 March till 15 March 2011. The value obtained for the Rigel dataset was (2384) s, and the value obtained for the Cursa dataset, which spanned a shorter time period, was (2397) s, both values consistent with the theoretical value of 236 s (three significant figures), which is calculated for reference. Changes to the observational procedure in order to minimise uncertainties are suggested. (103 words)

Introduction
The aim of this activity was to determine the difference in duration between the sidereal and the mean solar day. The sidereal day is the time it takes for the Earth to complete a full rotation around its axis with respect to the stars, while the mean solar day is the average time it takes for one rotation with respect to the Sun. The lengths of these two days are not identical, because the Earth is orbiting the Sun, and consequently, the Sun appears to move against the stellar backdrop. As the Earth moves around the Sun in a year, it must complete one more sidereal rotation period (sidereal day) than the number of solar rotation periods (mean solar days), and this allows us to calculate the length of the sidereal day:

where period. known:

is the sidereal rotation period, can be expressed in terms of

is the mean solar rotation period, and is the orbital , given that the number of solar days in a year is well-

Inserting the expression from Equation 1.2 in Equation 1.1,

can be obtained:

Page 1 of 9

S282 11B TMA 02 Question 1 Observational activity write-up

Jens Jensen Bilgrav PI: B498008X

Inserting the known value of

in Equation 1.3, this equates to:

The difference in duration,

, between

and

can now be calculated:

Our timekeeping is based on the length of the mean solar day, so accurate measurements of the times at which a given star appears in the same direction in the sky on two or more nights can be used to determine the difference in duration of the sidereal and mean solar days. (187 words)

Observational procedure
A fixed observing position was chosen with a view of a vertical edge (the corner of a four-storey building) in a SSE direction at a distance of approximately 16 m as illustrated in Figure 1 below. The distance was measured using the ruler tool in the Google Earth application. The southerly direction of the edge was chosen because the stars apparent angular speed with respect to the observer would thus be maximised. The edge should preferably have been farther away from the observing position, but the absence of tall buildings in the neighbourhood combined with the need to observe the stars when they had a good deal of angular separation from the horizon precluded this. Direct light emanating from the windows in the building was blocked by keeping a notepad between the windows and the observing eye.

Page 2 of 9

S282 11B TMA 02 Question 1 Observational activity write-up

Jens Jensen Bilgrav PI: B498008X

Figure 1 - Site of observation. The northernmost point represents the fixed observing point, and the southernmost point represents the vertical edge against which setting of the two stars was observed.

Page 3 of 9

S282 11B TMA 02 Question 1 Observational activity write-up

Jens Jensen Bilgrav PI: B498008X

The fixed observing point was a pole against an embankment. The observers head was leaned against the pole and the embankment at the same time so as to remain in a fixed position, with the left mastoid process touching the pole. The left eye was used for observations, the right eye remaining shut. Time was measured with a network-synchronised cell phone with a dimly backlit screen. The times of setting behind the reference edge were measured for two stars, Cursa ( Eridani) and Rigel ( Orionis) on 6 evenings between March 5 and March 15, 2011. No bobbing in and out of view of the stars was noted, so the times recorded were those of complete obscuration. A reference time at 19:20:00 CET was adopted, and the setting times relative to this reference time were calculated. Additionally, the first observation date (March 5, 2011) was chosen as the reference date and relative dates were calculated. The relative setting times were plotted as a function of the relative dates of measurement for each of the two stars, and the slope of the best-fit lines for both datasets were calculated as described in the Results section. These slopes represent the difference in duration between the sidereal and the mean solar day. In the following, the word setting will be used to signify setting behind the reference edge. (362 words)

Results
The observed setting times for the two stars are given in Table 1 below. Date of measurement Absolute / yyyy-mm-dd 2011-03-05 2011-03-06 2011-03-07 2011-03-08 2011-03-11 2011-03-15 Relative / days 0 1 2 3 6 10 Time of setting behind vertical edge Cursa ( Eridani) Rigel ( Orionis) Absolute / Relative / s Absolute / Relative / s hh:mm:ss CET hh:mm:ss CET 19:51:50 1910 20:01:22 2482 19:47:41 1661 19:57:24 2244 19:43:45 1425 19:53:27 2007 19:39:46 1186 19:49:31 1771 19:27:53 473 19:37:33 1053 Not observable Not observable 19:21:48 108

Table 1 - Measurements of absolute setting times and the derived relative setting times.

There was no uncertainty in the dates. Any uncertainty in the time measurements can be due to several factors: Uncertainty in the observing position. This was estimated at 0.5 cm, which corresponds to an angular uncertainty of 0.018 at a distance of 16 m ( ). The horizontal component of the angular separation of the two stars was estimated at around 1.5 , and this angular distance was traversed in a little less than 600 s, so the stars horizontal motion must have

Page 4 of 9

S282 11B TMA 02 Question 1 Observational activity write-up been close to 0.15 min-1 (

Jens Jensen Bilgrav PI: B498008X ), or 0.0025 s-1. This means that the uncertainty ).

induced in the time measurement is around 7 s (

Uncertainty in the position of the reference edge. The edge was composed of bricks with layers of interposed mortar, which meant that the position could vary by about 0.5 cm. Following the above reasoning, this also adds a time measurement uncertainty of around 7 s. Uncertainty in the setting of the time-keeping device (estimated at 1 s). Uncertainty in the time reading. Once the star had been obscured by the edge, the observer had to look at the time-keeping device and obtain the time, which adds an uncertainty of around 2 s.

So, the combined uncertainty in the time measurements - the sum of the above uncertainties - would appear to be around 20 s. This uncertainty was taken to be the same for all measurements. The relative times of setting for each of the two stars was plotted against the relative dates of observation in Figure 2 using Microsoft Excel 2007. Best-fit lines for the two datasets were calculated and plotted by the software. The algorithm for calculating the slope of best-fit straight lines is given here for reference:

where is the slope, is the number of data points, and and are the x- and y-coordinates of the individual data points. The calculation of the y-axis intercept point is of less consequence, so it will not be detailed here.

Page 5 of 9

S282 11B TMA 02 Question 1 Observational activity write-up Relative time of observation / s 2500

Jens Jensen Bilgrav PI: B498008X

2000

1500

Relative time of setting behind vertical edge Cursa ( Eridani) Relative time of setting behind vertical edge Rigel ( Orionis) y = -237.54x + 2481.8

1000

Linear (Relative time of setting behind vertical edge Cursa ( Eridani))

Linear (Relative time of setting behind vertical edge Rigel ( Orionis))

500

y = -238.92x + 1904.4

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Relative date of observation / days 9 10

Figure 2 Relative setting times for Cursa and Rigel plotted as a function of the relative date of observation.

Page 6 of 9

S282 11B TMA 02 Question 1 Observational activity write-up

Jens Jensen Bilgrav PI: B498008X

The equations of these best-fit lines can be seen next to the lines, and they are repeated here: For the Rigel dataset: For the Cursa dataset: The slopes of these lines correspond to the change in setting time per day the same as the difference between the length of the sidereal and the mean solar day. The fact that the slopes are negative means that the stars were obscured earlier for each subsequent evening the sidereal day is shorter than the mean solar day. The uncertainty of each data point was so small compared to the absolute values measured, that the vertical error bars are almost invisible, and it was impossible to draw maximum and minimum slope lines for the two datasets. However, the minimum and maximum slopes of each line were estimated as follows, using the two extreme data points for each of the datasets:

where is the maximum slope, rightmost data points, respectively, and measurements. And:

and are the coordinates of the leftmost and the is the numerical value of the mean uncertainty in the time

where

is the minimum slope.

The slope uncertainty can now be calculated:

where

is the numerical slope uncertainty.

Page 7 of 9

S282 11B TMA 02 Question 1 Observational activity write-up Inserting the expressions for get: and

Jens Jensen Bilgrav PI: B498008X from Equations 1.7 and 1.8 in Equation 1.9 and simplifying, we

So, in the case of the Rigel dataset, we obtain a value for the numerical difference in length between the sidereal and the mean solar day of, , of:

And, similarly, for Cursa:

The analysis of one dataset (Rigel) has thus determined that the sidereal day is shorter than the solar day by (2384) s, and analysis of another dataset (Cursa) has led to a value of (2397) s. Both of these values fit in well with the theoretical value of close to 236 s. (484 words, not counting descriptions of equations)

Page 8 of 9

S282 11B TMA 02 Question 1 Observational activity write-up

Jens Jensen Bilgrav PI: B498008X

Conclusions
Both values for the difference between the duration of the sidereal day and the solar day were surprisingly close to the theoretical value, so the uncertainty in the setting times may well have been overestimated by a factor of 2 or so. It should, however, be possible to obtain even more precise values by adhering to the following advice: The distance between the fixed observing point and the vertical reference edge should be maximised in order to reduce the angular uncertainty (this might mean having to observe stars closer to the horizon). The reference edge should preferably be completely smooth (again, in order to reduce the angular uncertainty). A fixed digital camera taking pictures at a rate of around 10 per second could be used instead of the human eye for the observation. The camera should timestamp the photos with high precision. The date range of observations should be maximised this will reduce the uncertainty in the final result.

(166 words)

Page 9 of 9