Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-12T18:53:18.170Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Latest Best Estimates of Astronomical Constants

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 August 2015

D.D. McCarthy
D.D. McCarthy*
Affiliation:
U.S. Naval Observatory 3450 Massachusetts Ave. NW Washington, DC 20392-5420, USA

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Systematic errors caused by the use of inconsistent models and constants currently limit the accuracy of the most precise astro-geodetic observations. It is important, therefore, to provide conventional estimates of astronomical constants for general use in astronomy and geodesy. Establishment of such a set raises issues involving the accuracy of the constants, their internal consistency, and the reference system in which they are expressed. Future sets of constants will be updated at regular intervals to provide the most accurate values at that instant. Careful consideration must be given to their internal consistency. It is likely that they will be provided only in electronic format with references to their determination and to procedures for their use.

Type
II. Joint Discussions
Information
Highlights of Astronomy , Volume 11 , Issue 1: Highlights of Astronomy. As presented at the XXIIIrd General Assembly of the IAU (Part A), 1997 , 1998 , pp. 187 - 190
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer 1998

References

Astronomical Almanac for the Year 1984 (1984) U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Google Scholar
[1] Burša, M. (1995) Report of the I.A.G. Special Commission SC3, Fundamental Constants, XXI, I.A.G. General Assembly.Google Scholar
[2] Cohen, E.R. and Taylor, B.N. (1973) J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, 2, p. 663.Google Scholar
[3] Cohen, E.R. and Taylor, B.N. (1986) The 1986 Adjustment of the Fundamental Physical Constants. CODATA Bulletin, Bureau International des Poids et Mesures.Google Scholar
[4] Fukushima, T. (1994) Time Ephemeris. Astron. Astrophys., 294, pp. 895–906.Google Scholar
[5] Herring, T. (1996) KSV.1996-3 Precession/Nutation, personal communication.Google Scholar
Le Système International d’Unités (SI) (1991) Bureau International des Poids et Mesures, Sèvres, France.Google Scholar
McCarthy, D.D. (ed.) (1989) IERS Standards, IERS Technical Note, 3, Observatoire de Paris, Paris.Google Scholar
McCarthy, D.D. (ed.) (1992) IERS Standards, IERS Technical Note, 13, Observatoire de Paris, Paris.Google Scholar
McCarthy, D.D. (ed.) 1996, IERS Conventions, IERS Technical Note, 21, Observatoire de Paris, Paris.Google Scholar
Melbourne, W., Anderte, R., Feissel, M., King, R., McCarthy, D., Smith, D., Tapley, B. and Vicente, R. (1983) Project MERIT Standards, U.S. Naval Observatory Circular 167.Google Scholar
Seidelmann, P.K. and Fukushima, T. (1992) Why New Time Scales? Astron. Astrophys., 265, pp. 833–838.Google Scholar
[6] Standish, E.M. (1994) Report of the IATJ WGAS Sub-group on Numerical Standards.Google Scholar
[7] Standish, E.M., Newhall, X.X., Williams, J.G. and Folkner, W.F. (1995) JPL Planetary and Lunar Ephemerides, DE403/LE403. JPL IOM 314.10-127, Astron. Astrophys., to be submitted.Google Scholar