DOCSLIB.ORG

GEODYN Systems Description Volume 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

GEODYN Systems Description Volume 1 updated by: Jennifer W. Beall Prepared By: John J. McCarthy, Shelley Rowton, Denise Moore, Despina E. Pavlis, Scott B. Luthcke, Lucia S. Tsaoussi Prepared For: Space Geodesy Branch, Code 926 NASA GSFC, Greenbelt, MD February 23, 2015 from the original December 13, 1993 document 1 Contents 1 THE GEODYN II PROGRAM 6 2 THE ORBIT AND GEODETIC PARAMETER ESTIMATION PROB- LEM 6 2.1 THEORBITPREDICTIONPROBLEM . 7 2.2 THE PARAMETER ESTIMATION PROBLEM . 8 3 THE MOTION OF THE EARTH AND RELATED COORDINATE SYS- TEMS 11 3.1 THE TRUE OF DATE COORDINATE SYSTEM . 12 3.2 THE INERTIAL COORDINATE SYSTEM . 12 3.3 THE EARTH-FIXED COORDINATE SYSTEM . 13 3.4 TRANSFORMATION BETWEEN EARTH-FIXED AND TRUE OF DATE COORDINATES................................. 13 3.5 COMPUTATION OF THE GREENWICH HOUR ANGLE . 14 3.6 PRECESSION AND NUTATION . 15 3.6.1 Precession . 17 3.6.2 Nutation . 19 3.7 THE TRANSFORMATION TO THE EARTH CENTERED FIXED ADOPTED POLE COORDINATE SYSTEM . 20 4 LUNI-SOLAR-PLANETARY EPHEMERIS 22 4.1 EPHEMERIS USED IN GEODYN VERSIONS 7612.0 AND LATER . 22 4.1.1 Chebyshev Interpolation . 23 4.1.2 Coordinate Transformation . 24 5 THE OBSERVER 27 5.1 GEODETICCOORDINATES ......................... 27 5.1.1 Station Constraints . 33 5.1.2 Baseline Sigmas . 38 5.1.3 Station Velocities . 39 5.2 TOPOCENTRIC COORDINATE SYSTEMS . 39 5.3 TIME REFERENCE SYSTEMS . 40 5.3.1 Partial Derivatives . 41 5.4 POLAR MOTION . 43 5.4.1 E↵ect on the Position of a Station . 43 5.4.2 Partial Derivatives . 44 5.5 SOLID EARTH TIDES . 49 5.5.1 Station Displacement Due to Luni-Solar Attraction . 49 2 5.5.2 Station Displacement Due to Pole Tide . 50 5.5.3 Partial Derivatives for h2 and l2 . 51 5.6 THE UPLIFT DUE TO OCEAN TIDES . 53 5.6.1 The Hendershott Tidal Model . 53 5.6.2 The NOAA Tide Model . 55 5.7 TECTONIC PLATE MOTION . 57 5.8 OCEAN LOADING . 58 6 MEASUREMENT MODELING AND RELATED DERIVATIVES 59 6.1 THE GEOMETRIC RELATIONSHIPS . 62 6.2 THE GEOMETRIC PARTIAL DERIVATIVES . 73 6.3 THE TIME DERIVATIVES . 76 6.4 MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR SST MEASUREMENTS . 80 6.4.1 Definition of SST Terms . 80 6.4.2 SST Range Measurements and Partials . 81 6.4.3 SST Range Rate Measurements . 82 6.4.4 Range Rate Partials . 89 6.5 PCE MEASUREMENT TYPES . 90 6.6 AVERAGE RANGE RATE MEASUREMENT TYPES . 91 6.7 THE 8906 OCEAN TIDE ALTIMETRIC MEASUREMENT CORRECTION 94 6.8 PLANETARY EPHEMERIS CORRECTION . 95 6.9 TABLE COMPRESSION VIA 2D FOURIER TRANSFORMS . 99 6.9.1 Introduction . 99 6.9.2 Theoretical Basis . 99 6.9.3 Application of tile Range Correction Algorithms . 100 7 DATA PREPROCESSING 104 7.1 TIMEPREPROCESSING............................ 104 7.2 REFERENCE SYSTEM CONVERSION TO TRUE OF DATE . 105 7.3 TRANSPONDER DELAY AND GATING EFFECTS . 105 7.4 ABERRATION . 105 7.5 REFRACTIONCORRECTIONS. 106 7.6 TRANET DOPPLER OBSERVATIONS . 113 7.7 SATELLITE-SATELLITE TRACKING DATA PREPROCESSING . 113 7.8 CORRECTIONS TO TIME MEASUREMENTS DUE TO THE EFFECTS OF GENERAL RELATIVITY . 114 7.9 SCALING TO A NEW VALUE OF SPEED OF LIGHT . 115 7.10 RELATIVISTIC SPACECRAFT CLOCK DRIFT CORRECTIONS . 116 8 FORCE MODEL AND VARIATIONAL EQUATIONS 119 8.1 EQUATIONS OF MOTION . 119 3 8.2 THE VARIATIONAL EQUATIONS . 120 8.3 THE EARTH’S POTENTIAL . 123 8.3.1 Spherical Harmonic Expansion . 123 8.3.2 Temporal Variations . 132 8.4 SOLAR, LUNAR, AND PLANETARY GRAVITATIONAL PERTURBA- TIONS....................................... 132 8.5 SOLAR RADIATION PRESSURE . 133 8.5.1 Radiation Pressure Models for GPS Satellites . 134 8.6 ATMOSPHERIC DRAG . 136 8.7 ATMOSPHERIC DENSITY . 138 8.7.1 Jacchia 1971 Density Model . 138 8.7.2 Thermospheric Drag Model (DTM) . 153 8.8 TIDAL POTENTIALS . 158 8.8.1 The Love Model . 158 8.8.2 The Expanded Tide Model . 159 8.8.3 The 8906 Tide Model . 160 8.9 GENERAL ACCELERATIONS . 163 8.10 DYNAMIC POLAR MOTION . 165 8.11 EARTH RADIATION . 166 8.12 THERMAL DRAG EFFECT ON LAGEOS . 168 8.13 RELATIVISTIC CORIOLIS FORCE . 169 8.14 LENSE-THIRRlNG . 170 8.15 PLANETARY MOON POINT MASS PERTURBATION . 171 8.16 ORIENTATION INITIAL CONDITIONS - VARIATIONAL EQUATIONS: T. Sabaka . 172 8.16.1 Introduction . 172 8.16.2 Application to computing angular velocity and reference frame through time.................................... 173 8.16.3 Application to computing partials of angular velocity and reference frame with respect to initial conditions through time . 175 8.16.4 Application to IAU reference frames . 182 8.16.5 Application to computing partials of angular velocity and reference frame with respect to moments of inertia through time . 188 9 INTEGRATION AND INTERPOLATION 192 9.1 INTEGRATION . 192 9.2 THE INTEGRATOR STARTING SCHEME . 194 9.3 INTERPOLATION . 195 10 THE STATISTICAL ESTIMATION SCHEME 195 10.1 BAYESIAN LEAST SQUARES ESTIMATION . 195 4 10.2 THE PARTITIONED SOLUTION . 199 10.3 DATA EDITING . 204 10.4 ELECTRONIC BIAS . 205 10.5 CONDITION NUMBERS . 207 11 GENERAL INPUT I OUTPUT DISCUSSION 207 11.1 INPUT . 207 11.2 OUTPUT . 209 11.3 COMPUTATIONS FOR RESIDUAL SUMMARY . 213 11.4 KEPLER ELEMENTS AND NON-SINGULAR KEPLER ELEMENTS . 215 11.4.1 Partial Derivatives of the Elements . 221 11.4.2 Node Rate and Perigee Rate . 226 11.4.3 Period Decrement and Drag Rate . 227 12 REFERENCES 229 5 1THEGEODYNIIPROGRAM The GEODYN II program, which evolved from GEODYN, is a totally redesigned software system. It has been written for the NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center by EG&G Wash- ington Analytical Services Center, Inc., and has been operational since November 1985. The main user group is NASA/GSFC, where GEODYN II first operated on an IBM 3081 Computer and on a CDC Cyber 205 vector processing computer. The highly efficient op- timized operation on the Cyber has been the main reason GEODYN has been redesigned. These computers are not available any more at GSFC, and GEODYN now operates on a Cray Y-MP. In the mid-1990.s, GEODYN was optimized to take advantage of the Cray parallel processors. With the evolution of small workstations, GEODYN II has mainly been used on HP 900 series computers and during the last few years on SUN workstations. Now in the year 2002, the maintenance of the GEODYN code and executables is done entirely on a SUN workstation. Currently, the maintenance and development of GEODYN II is performed by RAYTHEON ITSS under contract. Like GEODYN, GEODYN II is used extensively for satellite orbit determination, geodetic parameter estimation, tracking instrument calibration, satellite orbit prediction, as well as for many other items relating to applied research in satellite geodesy using virtually all types of satellite tracking data. The GEODYN II documentation is web-based and features an Operations Manual, a File Description chapter, and maintenance history. 2 THE ORBIT AND GEODETIC PARAMETER ESTIMA- TION PROBLEM The purpose of this section is to provide an understanding of the relationship between the various elements in the solution of the orbit and geodetic parameter estimation problem. As such, it is a general statement of the problem and serves to coordinate the detailed solutions to each element in the problem presented in the sections that follow. The problem is divided into two parts: the orbit prediction problem, and • the parameter estimation problem. • 6 The solution to the first of these problems corresponds to GEODYN’s orbit generation mode. The solution to the latter corresponds to GEODYN’s data reduction mode and of course is based on the solution to the former. The reader should note that there are two key choices that dramatically a↵ect the GEO- DYN solution structure: Cowell’s method of integrating the orbit, and • a Bayesian least squares statistical estimation procedure for the parameter estimation • problem. 2.1 THE ORBIT PREDICTION PROBLEM There are a number of approaches to orbit prediction. The GEODYN approach is to use Cowell’s method, which is the direct numerical integration of the satellite equations of motion in rectangular coordinates. The initial conditions for these di↵erential equations are the epoch position and velocity; the accelerations of the satellite must be evaluated. The acceleration-producing forces that are currently modeled in GEODYN are the e↵ects of: the geopotential, • the luni-solar potentials, • planetary potentials, • radiation pressure, • solid Earth and ocean tidal potential, • atmospheric drag, and • general acceleration. • Perhaps the most outstanding common feature of these forces is that they are functions of the position of the satellite relative to the Earth, Sun, Moon, or Planets and of the Sun and Moon relative to the Earth. Only atmospheric drag is a function of an ad- ditional quantity,[1] specifically, the relative velocity of the satellite with respect to the atmosphere. The accurate evaluation of the acceleration of a satellite therefore involves the solution in two concomitant problems: The accurate modeling of each force on the satellite - Earth - Sun - Moon - Planet • relationship, and 7 The precise modeling of the motions of the Earth, Sun, Moon, and Planets. • The specific details for each model in these solutions are given elsewhere in Sections 3, 4, and 8. The question of how these models fit together is, in e↵ect, the question of appropriate coordinate systems. The key factor in the selection of coordinate systems for the satellite orbit prediction problem is the motion of the Earth. For the purposes of GEODYN, this motion consists of: 1. precession and nutation, and 2. rotation. We are considering here the motion of the solid body of the Earth, as versus the slippage in the Earth’s crust (polar motion) which just a↵ects the position of the observer.
Recommended publications
  • Geodetic Surveying, Earth Modeling, and the New Geodetic Datum of 2022

    Geodetic Surveying, Earth Modeling, and the New Geodetic Datum of 2022

    Geodetic Surveying, Earth Modeling, and the New Geodetic Datum of 2022 PDH330 3 Hours PDH Academy PO Box 449 Pewaukee, WI 53072 (888) 564-9098 www.pdhacademy.com [email protected] Geodetic Surveying Final Exam 1. Who established the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey? A) Thomas Jefferson B) Benjamin Franklin C) George Washington D) Abraham Lincoln 2. Flattening is calculated from what? A) Equipotential surface B) Geoid C) Earth’s circumference D) The semi major and Semi minor axis 3. A Reference Frame is based off how many dimensions? A) two B) one C) four D) three 4. Who published “A Treatise on Fluxions”? A) Einstein B) MacLaurin C) Newton D) DaVinci 5. The interior angles of an equilateral planar triangle adds up to how many degrees? A) 360 B) 270 C) 180 D) 90 6. What group started xDeflec? A) NGS B) CGS C) DoD D) ITRF 7. When will NSRS adopt the new time-based system? A) 2022 B) 2020 C) Unknown due to delays D) 2021 8. Did the State Plane Coordinate System of 1927 have more zones than the State Plane Coordinate System of 1983? A) No B) Yes C) They had the same D) The State Plane Coordinate System of 1927 did not have zones 9. A new element to the State Plane Coordinate System of 2022 is: A) The addition of Low Distortion Projections B) Adjoining tectonic plates C) Airborne gravity collection D) None of the above 10. The model GRAV-D (Gravity for Redefinition of the American Vertical Datum) created will replace _____________ and constitute the new vertical height system of the United States A) Decimal degrees B) Minutes C) NAVD 88 D) All of the above Introduction to Geodetic Surveying The early curiosity of man has driven itself to learn more about the vastness of our planet and the universe.
  • Geodesy in the 21St Century

    Geodesy in the 21St Century

    Eos, Vol. 90, No. 18, 5 May 2009 VOLUME 90 NUMBER 18 5 MAY 2009 EOS, TRANSACTIONS, AMERICAN GEOPHYSICAL UNION PAGES 153–164 geophysical discoveries, the basic under- Geodesy in the 21st Century standing of earthquake mechanics known as the “elastic rebound theory” [Reid, 1910], PAGES 153–155 Geodesy and the Space Era was established by analyzing geodetic mea- surements before and after the 1906 San From flat Earth, to round Earth, to a rough Geodesy, like many scientific fields, is Francisco earthquakes. and oblate Earth, people’s understanding of technology driven. Over the centuries, it In 1957, the Soviet Union launched the the shape of our planet and its landscapes has developed as an engineering discipline artificial satellite Sputnik, ushering the world has changed dramatically over the course because of its practical applications. By the into the space era. During the first 5 decades of history. These advances in geodesy— early 1900s, scientists and cartographers of the space era, space geodetic technolo- the study of Earth’s size, shape, orientation, began to use triangulation and leveling mea- gies developed rapidly. The idea behind and gravitational field, and the variations surements to record surface deformation space geodetic measurements is simple: Dis- of these quantities over time—developed associated with earthquakes and volcanoes. tance or phase measurements conducted because of humans’ curiosity about the For example, one of the most important between Earth’s surface and objects in Earth and because of geodesy’s application to navigation, surveying, and mapping, all of which were very practical areas that ben- efited society.
  • NASA Space Geodesy Program: Catalogue of Site Information

    NASA Space Geodesy Program: Catalogue of Site Information

    NASA Technical Memorandum 4482 NASA Space Geodesy Program: Catalogue of Site Information M. A. Bryant and C. E. Noll March 1993 N93-2137_ (NASA-TM-4482) NASA SPACE GEODESY PROGRAM: CATALOGUE OF SITE INFORMATION (NASA) 688 p Unclas Hl146 0154175 v ,,_r NASA Technical Memorandum 4482 NASA Space Geodesy Program: Catalogue of Site Information M. A. Bryant McDonnell Douglas A erospace Seabro'ok, Maryland C. E. Noll NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland 20771 1993 . _= _qum_ Table of Contents Introduction .......................................... ..... ix Map of Geodetic Sites - Global ................................... xi Map of Geodetic Sites - Europe .................................. xii Map of Geodetic Sites - Japan .................................. xiii Map of Geodetic Sites - North America ............................. xiv Map of Geodetic Sites - Western United States ......................... xv Table of Sites Listed by Monument Number .......................... xvi Acronyms ............................................... xxvi Subscription Application ..................................... xxxii Site Information ............................................. Site Name Site Number Page # ALGONQUIN 67 ............................ 1 AMERICAN SAMOA 91 ............................ 5 ANKARA 678 ............................ 9 AREQUIPA 98 ............................ 10 ASKITES 674 ........................... , 15 AUSTIN 400 ...........................
  • Vectors, Matrices and Coordinate Transformations

    Vectors, Matrices and Coordinate Transformations

    S. Widnall 16.07 Dynamics Fall 2009 Lecture notes based on J. Peraire Version 2.0 Lecture L3 - Vectors, Matrices and Coordinate Transformations By using vectors and defining appropriate operations between them, physical laws can often be written in a simple form. Since we will making extensive use of vectors in Dynamics, we will summarize some of their important properties. Vectors For our purposes we will think of a vector as a mathematical representation of a physical entity which has both magnitude and direction in a 3D space. Examples of physical vectors are forces, moments, and velocities. Geometrically, a vector can be represented as arrows. The length of the arrow represents its magnitude. Unless indicated otherwise, we shall assume that parallel translation does not change a vector, and we shall call the vectors satisfying this property, free vectors. Thus, two vectors are equal if and only if they are parallel, point in the same direction, and have equal length. Vectors are usually typed in boldface and scalar quantities appear in lightface italic type, e.g. the vector quantity A has magnitude, or modulus, A = |A|. In handwritten text, vectors are often expressed using the −→ arrow, or underbar notation, e.g. A , A. Vector Algebra Here, we introduce a few useful operations which are defined for free vectors. Multiplication by a scalar If we multiply a vector A by a scalar α, the result is a vector B = αA, which has magnitude B = |α|A. The vector B, is parallel to A and points in the same direction if α > 0.
  • Transit Timing Analysis of the Hot Jupiters WASP-43B and WASP-46B and the Super Earth Gj1214b

    Transit Timing Analysis of the Hot Jupiters WASP-43B and WASP-46B and the Super Earth Gj1214b

    Transit timing analysis of the hot Jupiters WASP-43b and WASP-46b and the super Earth GJ1214b Mathias Polfliet Promotors: Michaël Gillon, Maarten Baes 1 Abstract Transit timing analysis is proving to be a promising method to detect new planetary partners in systems which already have known transiting planets, particularly in the orbital resonances of the system. In these resonances we might be able to detect Earth-mass objects well below the current detection and even theoretical (due to stellar variability) thresholds of the radial velocity method. We present four new transits for WASP-46b, four new transits for WASP-43b and eight new transits for GJ1214b observed with the robotic telescope TRAPPIST located at ESO La Silla Observatory, Chile. Modelling the data was done using several Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) simulations of the new transits with old data and a collection of transit timings for GJ1214b from published papers. For the hot Jupiters this lead to a general increase in accuracy for the physical parameters of the system (for the mass and period we found: 2.034±0.052 MJup and 0.81347460±0.00000048 days and 2.03±0.13 MJup and 1.4303723±0.0000011 days for WASP-43b and WASP-46b respectively). For GJ1214b this was not the case given the limited photometric precision of TRAPPIST. The additional timings however allowed us to constrain the period to 1.580404695±0.000000084 days and the RMS of the TTVs to 16 seconds. We investigated given systems for Transit Timing Variations (TTVs) and variations in the other transit parameters and found no significant (3sv) deviations.
  • Geodesy Methods Over Time

    Geodesy Methods Over Time

    Geodesy methods over time GISC3325 - Lecture 4 Astronomic Latitude/Longitude • Given knowledge of the positions of an astronomic body e.g. Sun or Polaris and our time we can determine our location in terms of astronomic latitude and longitude. US Meridian Triangulation This map shows the first project undertaken by the founding Superintendent of the Survey of the Coast Ferdinand Hassler. Triangulation • Method of indirect measurement. • Angles measured at all nodes. • Scaled provided by one or more precisely measured base lines. • First attributed to Gemma Frisius in the 16th century in the Netherlands. Early surveying instruments Left is a Quadrant for angle measurements, below is how baseline lengths were measured. A non-spherical Earth • Willebrod Snell van Royen (Snellius) did the first triangulation project for the purpose of determining the radius of the earth from measurement of a meridian arc. • Snellius was also credited with the law of refraction and incidence in optics. • He also devised the solution of the resection problem. At point P observations are made to known points A, B and C. We solve for P. Jean Picard’s Meridian Arc • Measured meridian arc through Paris between Malvoisine and Amiens using triangulation network. • First to use a telescope with cross hairs as part of the quadrant. • Value obtained used by Newton to verify his law of gravitation. Ellipsoid Earth Model • On an expedition J.D. Cassini discovered that a one-second pendulum regulated at Paris needed to be shortened to regain a one-second oscillation. • Pendulum measurements are effected by gravity! Newton • Newton used measurements of Picard and Halley and the laws of gravitation to postulate a rotational ellipsoid as the equilibrium figure for a homogeneous, fluid, rotating Earth.
  • Space Geodesy and Satellite Laser Ranging

    Space Geodesy and Satellite Laser Ranging

    Space Geodesy and Satellite Laser Ranging Michael Pearlman* Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Cambridge, MA USA *with a very extensive use of charts and inputs provided by many other people Causes for Crustal Motions and Variations in Earth Orientation Dynamics of crust and mantle Ocean Loading Volcanoes Post Glacial Rebound Plate Tectonics Atmospheric Loading Mantle Convection Core/Mantle Dynamics Mass transport phenomena in the upper layers of the Earth Temporal and spatial resolution of mass transport phenomena secular / decadal post -glacial glaciers polar ice post-glacial reboundrebound ocean mass flux interanaual atmosphere seasonal timetime scale scale sub --seasonal hydrology: surface and ground water, snow, ice diurnal semidiurnal coastal tides solid earth and ocean tides 1km 10km 100km 1000km 10000km resolution Temporal and spatial resolution of oceanographic features 10000J10000 y bathymetric global 1000J1000 y structures warming 100100J y basin scale variability 1010J y El Nino Rossby- 11J y waves seasonal cycle eddies timetime scale scale 11M m mesoscale and and shorter scale fronts physical- barotropic 11W w biological variability interaction Coastal upwelling 11T d surface tides internal waves internal tides and inertial motions 11h h 10m 100m 1km 10km 100km 1000km 10000km 100000km resolution Continental hydrology Ice mass balance and sea level Satellite gravity and altimeter mission products help determine mass transport and mass distribution in a multi-disciplinary environment Gravity field missions Oceanic
  • Chapter 5 ANGULAR MOMENTUM and ROTATIONS

    Chapter 5 ANGULAR MOMENTUM and ROTATIONS

    Chapter 5 ANGULAR MOMENTUM AND ROTATIONS In classical mechanics the total angular momentum L~ of an isolated system about any …xed point is conserved. The existence of a conserved vector L~ associated with such a system is itself a consequence of the fact that the associated Hamiltonian (or Lagrangian) is invariant under rotations, i.e., if the coordinates and momenta of the entire system are rotated “rigidly” about some point, the energy of the system is unchanged and, more importantly, is the same function of the dynamical variables as it was before the rotation. Such a circumstance would not apply, e.g., to a system lying in an externally imposed gravitational …eld pointing in some speci…c direction. Thus, the invariance of an isolated system under rotations ultimately arises from the fact that, in the absence of external …elds of this sort, space is isotropic; it behaves the same way in all directions. Not surprisingly, therefore, in quantum mechanics the individual Cartesian com- ponents Li of the total angular momentum operator L~ of an isolated system are also constants of the motion. The di¤erent components of L~ are not, however, compatible quantum observables. Indeed, as we will see the operators representing the components of angular momentum along di¤erent directions do not generally commute with one an- other. Thus, the vector operator L~ is not, strictly speaking, an observable, since it does not have a complete basis of eigenstates (which would have to be simultaneous eigenstates of all of its non-commuting components). This lack of commutivity often seems, at …rst encounter, as somewhat of a nuisance but, in fact, it intimately re‡ects the underlying structure of the three dimensional space in which we are immersed, and has its source in the fact that rotations in three dimensions about di¤erent axes do not commute with one another.
  • Solving the Geodesic Equation

    Solving the Geodesic Equation

    Solving the Geodesic Equation Jeremy Atkins December 12, 2018 Abstract We find the general form of the geodesic equation and discuss the closed form relation to find Christoffel symbols. We then show how to use metric independence to find Killing vector fields, which allow us to solve the geodesic equation when there are helpful symmetries. We also discuss a more general way to find Killing vector fields, and some of their properties as a Lie algebra. 1 The Variational Method We will exploit the following variational principle to characterize motion in general relativity: The world line of a free test particle between two timelike separated points extremizes the proper time between them. where a test particle is one that is not a significant source of spacetime cur- vature, and a free particles is one that is only under the influence of curved spacetime. Similarly to classical Lagrangian mechanics, we can use this to de- duce the equations of motion for a metric. The proper time along a timeline worldline between point A and point B for the metric gµν is given by Z B Z B µ ν 1=2 τAB = dτ = (−gµν (x)dx dx ) (1) A A using the Einstein summation notation, and µ, ν = 0; 1; 2; 3. We can parame- terize the four coordinates with the parameter σ where σ = 0 at A and σ = 1 at B. This gives us the following equation for the proper time: Z 1 dxµ dxν 1=2 τAB = dσ −gµν (x) (2) 0 dσ dσ We can treat the integrand as a Lagrangian, dxµ dxν 1=2 L = −gµν (x) (3) dσ dσ and it's clear that the world lines extremizing proper time are those that satisfy the Euler-Lagrange equation: @L d @L − = 0 (4) @xµ dσ @(dxµ/dσ) 1 These four equations together give the equation for the worldline extremizing the proper time.
  • Geodetic Position Computations

    Geodetic Position Computations

    GEODETIC POSITION COMPUTATIONS E. J. KRAKIWSKY D. B. THOMSON February 1974 TECHNICALLECTURE NOTES REPORT NO.NO. 21739 PREFACE In order to make our extensive series of lecture notes more readily available, we have scanned the old master copies and produced electronic versions in Portable Document Format. The quality of the images varies depending on the quality of the originals. The images have not been converted to searchable text. GEODETIC POSITION COMPUTATIONS E.J. Krakiwsky D.B. Thomson Department of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering University of New Brunswick P.O. Box 4400 Fredericton. N .B. Canada E3B5A3 February 197 4 Latest Reprinting December 1995 PREFACE The purpose of these notes is to give the theory and use of some methods of computing the geodetic positions of points on a reference ellipsoid and on the terrain. Justification for the first three sections o{ these lecture notes, which are concerned with the classical problem of "cCDputation of geodetic positions on the surface of an ellipsoid" is not easy to come by. It can onl.y be stated that the attempt has been to produce a self contained package , cont8.i.ning the complete development of same representative methods that exist in the literature. The last section is an introduction to three dimensional computation methods , and is offered as an alternative to the classical approach. Several problems, and their respective solutions, are presented. The approach t~en herein is to perform complete derivations, thus stqing awrq f'rcm the practice of giving a list of for11111lae to use in the solution of' a problem.
  • Abstracts of the 50Th DDA Meeting (Boulder, CO)

    Abstracts of the 50Th DDA Meeting (Boulder, CO)

    Abstracts of the 50th DDA Meeting (Boulder, CO) American Astronomical Society June, 2019 100 — Dynamics on Asteroids break-up event around a Lagrange point. 100.01 — Simulations of a Synthetic Eurybates 100.02 — High-Fidelity Testing of Binary Asteroid Collisional Family Formation with Applications to 1999 KW4 Timothy Holt1; David Nesvorny2; Jonathan Horner1; Alex B. Davis1; Daniel Scheeres1 Rachel King1; Brad Carter1; Leigh Brookshaw1 1 Aerospace Engineering Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder 1 Centre for Astrophysics, University of Southern Queensland (Boulder, Colorado, United States) (Longmont, Colorado, United States) 2 Southwest Research Institute (Boulder, Connecticut, United The commonly accepted formation process for asym- States) metric binary asteroids is the spin up and eventual fission of rubble pile asteroids as proposed by Walsh, Of the six recognized collisional families in the Jo- Richardson and Michel (Walsh et al., Nature 2008) vian Trojan swarms, the Eurybates family is the and Scheeres (Scheeres, Icarus 2007). In this theory largest, with over 200 recognized members. Located a rubble pile asteroid is spun up by YORP until it around the Jovian L4 Lagrange point, librations of reaches a critical spin rate and experiences a mass the members make this family an interesting study shedding event forming a close, low-eccentricity in orbital dynamics. The Jovian Trojans are thought satellite. Further work by Jacobson and Scheeres to have been captured during an early period of in- used a planar, two-ellipsoid model to analyze the stability in the Solar system. The parent body of the evolutionary pathways of such a formation event family, 3548 Eurybates is one of the targets for the from the moment the bodies initially fission (Jacob- LUCY spacecraft, and our work will provide a dy- son and Scheeres, Icarus 2011).
  • Models for Earth and Maps

    Models for Earth and Maps

    Earth Models and Maps James R. Clynch, Naval Postgraduate School, 2002 I. Earth Models Maps are just a model of the world, or a small part of it. This is true if the model is a globe of the entire world, a paper chart of a harbor or a digital database of streets in San Francisco. A model of the earth is needed to convert measurements made on the curved earth to maps or databases. Each model has advantages and disadvantages. Each is usually in error at some level of accuracy. Some of these error are due to the nature of the model, not the measurements used to make the model. Three are three common models of the earth, the spherical (or globe) model, the ellipsoidal model, and the real earth model. The spherical model is the form encountered in elementary discussions. It is quite good for some approximations. The world is approximately a sphere. The sphere is the shape that minimizes the potential energy of the gravitational attraction of all the little mass elements for each other. The direction of gravity is toward the center of the earth. This is how we define down. It is the direction that a string takes when a weight is at one end - that is a plumb bob. A spirit level will define the horizontal which is perpendicular to up-down. The ellipsoidal model is a better representation of the earth because the earth rotates. This generates other forces on the mass elements and distorts the shape. The minimum energy form is now an ellipse rotated about the polar axis.