A quirk of celestial mechanics.
As the last blood-red , blue-moon, super-moon was 31 March 1866 we'll
have to wait 55458 days for the next coincidence of the tides in the
channel , presumably.
I wonder what conjuction of tidal harmonics gives a 55,458 day repeat.
The high tides in ports of a large part of the English channel today are
all the same time. I originally thought there was a problem with big-data http://www.ntslf.org/storm-surges/latest-surge-forecast?port=Dover http://www.ntslf.org/storm-surges/latest-surge-forecast?port=Newhaven http://www.ntslf.org/storm-surges/latest-surge-forecast?port=Portsmouth
And from the UK Hydrographic office, high tide times today
Portsmouth,10:53, 23:24
Newhaven, 10:43 , 23:17
Dover, 10:44, 23:09
A quirk of celestial mechanics.
As the last blood-red , blue-moon, super-moon was 31 March 1866 we'll
have to wait 55458 days for the next coincidence of the tides in the
channel , presumably.
I wonder what conjuction of tidal harmonics gives a 55,458 day repeat.
The high tides in ports of a large part of the English channel today are
all the same time. I originally thought there was a problem with big-data http://www.ntslf.org/storm-surges/latest-surge-forecast?port=Dover http://www.ntslf.org/storm-surges/latest-surge-forecast?port=Newhaven http://www.ntslf.org/storm-surges/latest-surge-forecast?port=Portsmouth
And from the UK Hydrographic office, high tide times today Portsmouth,10:53,   23:24
Newhaven, 10:43   ,   23:17
Dover, 10:44,   23:09
On 31/01/2018 14:16, N_Cook wrote:
A quirk of celestial mechanics.
As the last blood-red , blue-moon, super-moon was 31 March 1866 we'll
have to wait 55458 days for the next coincidence of the tides in the
channel , presumably.
I wonder what conjuction of tidal harmonics gives a 55,458 day repeat.
It is double the named "Short Callipic Cycle" 2I+S = 75.9y 27729.22d
27729.22 x 2 = 55458.44 but according to the catalogue is unnamed.
I = Inex ~29y and S = Saros ~18y
They are the fundamental periodicities that allow you to catalogue
eclipse cycles. It will be interesting to see if the strong tides this
year drive any climatic effects from deep ocean mixing.
http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/eclipse/eclipsecycles.htm
Inex gives you an eclipse about the same longitude but opposite latitude
and 3x Saros gives you about the same eclipse conditions in about the
same place on the Earth. Or for an overviews and better explanation
https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsaros/SEperiodicity.html
The high tides in ports of a large part of the English channel today
are all the same time. I originally thought there was a problem with
big-data
http://www.ntslf.org/storm-surges/latest-surge-forecast?port=Dover
http://www.ntslf.org/storm-surges/latest-surge-forecast?port=Newhaven
http://www.ntslf.org/storm-surges/latest-surge-forecast?port=Portsmouth
And from the UK Hydrographic office, high tide times today
Portsmouth,10:53, 23:24
Newhaven, 10:43 , 23:17
Dover, 10:44, 23:09
On 31/01/2018 16:17, Martin Brown wrote:
On 31/01/2018 14:16, N_Cook wrote:
A quirk of celestial mechanics.
As the last blood-red , blue-moon, super-moon was 31 March 1866 we'll
have to wait 55458 days for the next coincidence of the tides in the
channel , presumably.
I wonder what conjuction of tidal harmonics gives a 55,458 day repeat.
It is double the named "Short Callipic Cycle" 2I+S = 75.9y 27729.22d
27729.22 x 2 = 55458.44 but according to the catalogue is unnamed.
I = Inex ~29y and S = Saros ~18y
They are the fundamental periodicities that allow you to catalogue
eclipse cycles. It will be interesting to see if the strong tides this
year drive any climatic effects from deep ocean mixing.
http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/eclipse/eclipsecycles.htm
Inex gives you an eclipse about the same longitude but opposite latitude
and 3x Saros gives you about the same eclipse conditions in about the
same place on the Earth. Or for an overviews and better explanation
https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsaros/SEperiodicity.html
Ta for that, I'll let the local NOC academic oceanographers know, to
avoid too much head-scratching.
 Next stop Milankovitch cycles
On 31/01/2018 18:03, N_Cook wrote:
On 31/01/2018 16:17, Martin Brown wrote:
On 31/01/2018 14:16, N_Cook wrote:
A quirk of celestial mechanics.
As the last blood-red , blue-moon, super-moon was 31 March 1866 we'll
have to wait 55458 days for the next coincidence of the tides in the
channel , presumably.
I wonder what conjuction of tidal harmonics gives a 55,458 day repeat.
It is double the named "Short Callipic Cycle" 2I+S = 75.9y 27729.22d
27729.22 x 2 = 55458.44 but according to the catalogue is unnamed.
I = Inex ~29y and S = Saros ~18y
They are the fundamental periodicities that allow you to catalogue
eclipse cycles. It will be interesting to see if the strong tides this
year drive any climatic effects from deep ocean mixing.
http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/eclipse/eclipsecycles.htm
Inex gives you an eclipse about the same longitude but opposite latitude >>> and 3x Saros gives you about the same eclipse conditions in about the
same place on the Earth. Or for an overviews and better explanation
https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsaros/SEperiodicity.html
Ta for that, I'll let the local NOC academic oceanographers know, to
avoid too much head-scratching.
Next stop Milankovitch cycles
Checking there was also a nice juicy total lunar eclipse in 1942 Mar 3
which is midway between the one you quoted and now (ie every 2I+S).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1942_lunar_eclipse
Any interesting tides observed back then?
The one later in the year promises to have better UK visibility but we
still won't see totality well - moon will rise in eclipse for the UK:
https://www.space.com/33786-lunar-eclipse-guide.html
Some of these empirical eclipse rules have been known since Babylonian
times! Predicting solar eclipses was a blood sport in the early days of colonising China when Ferdinand Verbiest nearly got killed before
inflicting that fate on the indigenous lazy court "astronomers".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Verbiest#Astronomy_contests
Enjoy! Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.
On 31/01/2018 20:29, Martin Brown wrote:
On 31/01/2018 18:03, N_Cook wrote:
On 31/01/2018 16:17, Martin Brown wrote:
On 31/01/2018 14:16, N_Cook wrote:
A quirk of celestial mechanics.It is double the named "Short Callipic Cycle" 2I+S = 75.9y 27729.22d
As the last blood-red , blue-moon, super-moon was 31 March 1866 we'll >>>>> have to wait 55458 days for the next coincidence of the tides in the >>>>> channel , presumably.
I wonder what conjuction of tidal harmonics gives a 55,458 day repeat. >>>>
27729.22 x 2 = 55458.44 but according to the catalogue is unnamed.
I = Inex ~29y and S = Saros ~18y
They are the fundamental periodicities that allow you to catalogue
eclipse cycles. It will be interesting to see if the strong tides this >>>> year drive any climatic effects from deep ocean mixing.
http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/eclipse/eclipsecycles.htm
Inex gives you an eclipse about the same longitude but opposite
latitude
and 3x Saros gives you about the same eclipse conditions in about the
same place on the Earth. Or for an overviews and better explanation
https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsaros/SEperiodicity.html
Ta for that, I'll let the local NOC academic oceanographers know, to
avoid too much head-scratching.
Next stop Milankovitch cycles
Checking there was also a nice juicy total lunar eclipse in 1942 Mar 3
which is midway between the one you quoted and now (ie every 2I+S).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1942_lunar_eclipse
Any interesting tides observed back then?
The one later in the year promises to have better UK visibility but we
still won't see totality well - moon will rise in eclipse for the UK:
https://www.space.com/33786-lunar-eclipse-guide.html
Some of these empirical eclipse rules have been known since Babylonian
times! Predicting solar eclipses was a blood sport in the early days of
colonising China when Ferdinand Verbiest nearly got killed before
inflicting that fate on the indigenous lazy court "astronomers".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Verbiest#Astronomy_contests
Enjoy! Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.
I doubt anything noticed 1942, any more than generally this week.
Its only the heights that are generally noticed and they are perfectly
normal spring tides this week and this year.
As part of local marine flooding potential, I daily look at NTSLF surge
plots for Pompey, Newlyn and Dover.
Superimposed on the plots is the high tide times ,only, not low tides, graphically. So it was obvious to the resolution of the plots the times
were the same, highly odd and seemingly in error, Newhaven showed the
same times.
Normally, springs and neaps, the tide pulse goes west to east about 6
hours Newlyn too Pompey and 6 hours Pompey to Dover, where it just about coincides with the tide pulse down the east coast.
On 01/02/2018 08:45, N_Cook wrote:
On 31/01/2018 20:29, Martin Brown wrote:
On 31/01/2018 18:03, N_Cook wrote:
On 31/01/2018 16:17, Martin Brown wrote:
I = Inex ~29y and S = Saros ~18y
They are the fundamental periodicities that allow you to catalogue
eclipse cycles. It will be interesting to see if the strong tides this >>>>> year drive any climatic effects from deep ocean mixing.
http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/eclipse/eclipsecycles.htm
Inex gives you an eclipse about the same longitude but opposite
latitude
and 3x Saros gives you about the same eclipse conditions in about the >>>>> same place on the Earth. Or for an overviews and better explanation
https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsaros/SEperiodicity.html
Ta for that, I'll let the local NOC academic oceanographers know, to
avoid too much head-scratching.
 Next stop Milankovitch cycles
Checking there was also a nice juicy total lunar eclipse in 1942 Mar 3
which is midway between the one you quoted and now (ie every 2I+S).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1942_lunar_eclipse
Any interesting tides observed back then?
From one of the NOC experts on deep-sea oceanography
"I would be very surprised if the tides have any significant effect on
deep ocean mixing."
"tides" in this context referring the recent anomolous tides as
exemplified at Dover last week
A quirk of celestial mechanics.[...]
The high tides [...].
On 31/01/18 14:16, N_Cook wrote:
A quirk of celestial mechanics.[...]
The high tides [...].
Nothing directly to do with this [interesting] discussion,
but the BBC's programme on the supermoon was trying to explain what
was meant by full/new/quarter Moon, why some were "super", etc.,
the usual stuff. In the middle of which they told us that when the
Moon was new, its pull reinforced that of the Sun, and we had higher
tides than usual. Nothing said directly, but any normal listener
would have inferred that when it was full, and its pull was opposed
to that of the Sun, tides would be lower. I've heard physicists,
who really should know better, say exactly that on TV.
In trying to explain this to people, they can usually accept
that we get "spring" tides when the Moon-tide and the Sun-tide are reinforcing each other, and "neap" tides when they oppose. The hard
part is explaining why the Moon-tide bulges both towards and away
from the Moon. You can explain till you're blue in the face that the
Moon's gravity pull is stronger on the side of Earth facing the Moon
and weaker on the side facing away, so the water piles up [a little!]
on both sides, but somehow that gets confused with ellipses with the
Earth at one focus, and/or with the phase of the Moon.
I had one former colleague, a highly intelligent and competent
pure mathematician, who came to me regularly to explain this. "We
did this last year!" "Yes, but I've forgotten, and the children have
asked again, and anyway [famous name] was on TV and his explanation
was different. Surely we get lower high tides at full Moon?" "No,
because [blah]." "No, you've lost me. Are you saying that [name]
was wrong?" "Yes. Let's try again ...."
On 04/02/2018 09:50, N_Cook wrote:
On 01/02/2018 08:45, N_Cook wrote:
On 31/01/2018 20:29, Martin Brown wrote:
On 31/01/2018 18:03, N_Cook wrote:
On 31/01/2018 16:17, Martin Brown wrote:
I = Inex ~29y and S = Saros ~18y
They are the fundamental periodicities that allow you to catalogue >>>>>> eclipse cycles. It will be interesting to see if the strong tides
this
year drive any climatic effects from deep ocean mixing.
http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/eclipse/eclipsecycles.htm >>>>>>
Inex gives you an eclipse about the same longitude but opposite
latitude
and 3x Saros gives you about the same eclipse conditions in about the >>>>>> same place on the Earth. Or for an overviews and better explanation >>>>>>
https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsaros/SEperiodicity.html
Ta for that, I'll let the local NOC academic oceanographers know, to >>>>> avoid too much head-scratching.
Next stop Milankovitch cycles
Checking there was also a nice juicy total lunar eclipse in 1942 Mar 3 >>>> which is midway between the one you quoted and now (ie every 2I+S).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1942_lunar_eclipse
Any interesting tides observed back then?
[snip]
From one of the NOC experts on deep-sea oceanography
"I would be very surprised if the tides have any significant effect on
deep ocean mixing."
"tides" in this context referring the recent anomolous tides as
exemplified at Dover last week
I know it is out of fashion at the moment but I think the Keeling tides
paper PNAS 1997 August, 94 (16) 8321-8328 was actually onto something (although some of the analysis is flawed and the MEM spectrum (fig 4) is
over fitted causing peak splitting of the 18y Saros peak to 15y & 21y.
They see a strong peak at 58y (2x Inex but fail to comment on it).
http://www.pnas.org/content/94/16/8321
My contention is that there is evidence in their analysis despite them
having removed a fair amount of the longer periodicities for tidal
forcing at 2xInex = 58 years. HADCRUT also shows periodic positive
excursions around 2000, 1940 and 1880 separated by about the Inex
period. You would also expect something at ~54 years which is a period
for about the same eclipse at about the same longitude and especially
when the eclipse is at or near perigee.
My email address is valid so if you would be kind enough to your NOC
expert to get in touch I would be interested to discuss with them why
they would dismiss the possibility of tidal forcing out of hand.
No mention of any odd tidal or moon effects in the national Times
newspaper of 03 Mar 1866 or 05 Mar 1866 , nor a local Southampton weekly newspaper but 1/3 of it was near enough illegible.
The weekly Hampshire Chronicle i'll look in , sometime.
Brian Cox did an excellent visual-aided correct explanation of why
springs occur at new and full moons, and tidal "bulge" on opposite
sides of the Earth at any one time. A few months back on BBC
something, perhaps on Utube if not replayer.
Something to do with momentum/centrepetal forces I seem to remember
On 31/01/18 14:16, N_Cook wrote:
A quirk of celestial mechanics.[...]
The high tides [...].
Nothing directly to do with this [interesting] discussion,
but the BBC's programme on the supermoon was trying to explain what
was meant by full/new/quarter Moon, why some were "super", etc.,
the usual stuff. In the middle of which they told us that when the
Moon was new, its pull reinforced that of the Sun, and we had higher
tides than usual. Nothing said directly, but any normal listener
would have inferred that when it was full, and its pull was opposed
to that of the Sun, tides would be lower. I've heard physicists,
who really should know better, say exactly that on TV.
In trying to explain this to people, they can usually accept
that we get "spring" tides when the Moon-tide and the Sun-tide are reinforcing each other, and "neap" tides when they oppose. The hard
part is explaining why the Moon-tide bulges both towards and away
from the Moon. You can explain till you're blue in the face that the
Moon's gravity pull is stronger on the side of Earth facing the Moon
and weaker on the side facing away, so the water piles up [a little!]
on both sides, but somehow that gets confused with ellipses with the
Earth at one focus, and/or with the phase of the Moon.
I had one former colleague, a highly intelligent and competent
pure mathematician, who came to me regularly to explain this. "We
did this last year!" "Yes, but I've forgotten, and the children have
asked again, and anyway [famous name] was on TV and his explanation
was different. Surely we get lower high tides at full Moon?" "No,
because [blah]." "No, you've lost me. Are you saying that [name]
was wrong?" "Yes. Let's try again ...."
On 05/02/2018 09:01, Martin Brown wrote:remove both " ?
My email address is valid so if you would be kind enough to your NOC
expert to get in touch I would be interested to discuss with them why
they would dismiss the possibility of tidal forcing out of hand.
I'll tell him of your recent post and "newspam"@... em address,
My interest is a bit more parochial.
I wonder if the "sotonisation" of the pompey tides
and multiple high-waters for Soton also since the end of 2015, (correspondence with Southampton Hydrographic office confirming thisphenomenom but no insight as to cause, from them)
change in Lymington tide times, growth of a spit at Pagham Harbourare all connected.
Perhaps connected to whatever tidal harmonic constituents are closeto syncing together for 2 or more years , along with the
Myself and 3 proper NOC oceanographers are intrigued about this localeffect, so far tentatively "blamed" on dredging for aggregates in the
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 286 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 82:01:47 |
Calls: | 6,495 |
Calls today: | 6 |
Files: | 12,096 |
Messages: | 5,276,771 |