An Analysis of Lunar Occultations in Years 1955 - 1980 Using The New Lunar Ephemeris ELP2000

AN A N A L Y S I S OF L U N A R O C C U L T A T I O N S IN THE Y E A R S 1955-1980 U S I N G THE N E W
LUNAR EPHEMERIS ELP2000
M I T S U R U SOMA
Tokyo Astronomical Observatory, U n i v e r s i t y of Tokyo, Mitaka,
Tokyo 181, J a p a n
(Received S e p t e m b e r , 1984; a c c e p t e d 29 O c t o b e r , 1984)
ABSTRACT. A b o u t 6 0 , 0 0 0 o b s e r v a t i o n s of lunar o c c u l t a t i o n s m a d e d u r i n g
1955-1980 are a n a l y s e d u s i n g r e c e n t l y - d e v e l o p e d s e m i - a n a l y t i c a l
solution ELP2000-82 for the M o o n ' s p o s i t i o n in o r d e r to d e t e r m i n e the
constants in the lunar t h e o r y and to i n v e s t i g a t e the tidal t e r m in the
M o o n ' s m e a n l o n g i t u d e and the m o t i o n s of the p e r i g e e and node of the
lunar orbit. The e q u i n o x c o r r e c t i o n and s y s t e m a t i c c o r r e c t i o n to the
f u n d a m e n t a l star c a t a l o g u e and the c o r r e c t i o n to the d a t u m of the
l u n a r - p r o f i l e in Watts' charts are also i n v e s t i g a t e d . It is c o n ( i r m e d
that the o c c u l t a t i o n o b s e r v a t i o n s do not have inconsistent tidal term
w i t h the m o d e r n o b s e r v a t i o n s and the o b s e r v e d m e a n m o t i o n s of the
p e r i g e e and n o d e c o i n c i d e w i t h the t h e o r e t i c a l ones w i t h i n the e r r o r of
observations. Some of the v a l u e s of the c o n s t a n t s in the lunar t h e o r y
and the e q u i n o x c o r r e c t i o n to the f u n d a m e n t a l c a t a l o g u e FK5 o b t a i n e d in
this p a p e r are s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m the v a l u e s o b t a i n e d u s i n g
the B r o w n ' s theory. The r e a s o n of the d i f f e r e n c e is a l m o s t a t t r i b u t e d
to the d e f i c i e n c i e s in the B r o w n ' s theory. The o b t a i n e d c o r r e c t i o n to
the d a t u m of the l u n a r - p r o f i l e in Watts' charts is a l m o s t c o n s i s t e n t
w i t h the r e s u l t s by e a r l i e r i n v e s t i g a t o r s .
I. I N T R O D U C T I O N
For m a n y y e a r s o b s e r v a t i o n s of lunar o c c u l t a t i o n s and m e r i d i a n - c i r c l e

o b s e r v a t i o n s of the p o s i t i o n s of the Moon h a v e b e e n a n a l y s e d u s i n g the lunar
e p h e m e r i s b a s e d on B r o w n ' s (1899a, b, 1904, 1908, 1910) theory. F r o m ana-
lyses of o c c u l t a t i o n s M o r r i s o n (1979) p o i n t e d out that some of the p l a n e t a r y
t e r m s in the lunar t h e o r y w e r e wrong. Also V a n F l a n d e r n (1970a, 1975) and
Morrison (1973, 1979) d e r i v e d the tidal t e r m - 2 1 " t 2 to - 3 2 " . 5 t 2 (t is the
time in centuries) in the M o o n ' s m e a n l o n g i t u d e u s i n g a t o m i c t i m e - s c a l e as
the time argument. T h e s e v a l u e s are i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h - 1 1 " - 2 2 t 2 d e r i v e d from
an a n a l y s i s of the p o s i t i o n s of the M o o n and the inner p l a n e t s b a s e d on the
w o r k of S p e n c e r J o n e s (1939; Clemence, 1948), and (-13"• 2 derived from
an a n a l y s i s of o c c u l t a t i o n s and t r a n s i t s of M e r c u r y (Morrison and Ward,
1975). Van F l a n d e r n (1975) has i n t e r p r e t e d this i n c o n s i s t e n c y as e v i d e n c e
for the v a r i a b i l i t y of the g r a v i t a t i o n a l constant, while Morrison (1979) has
s u g g e s t e d that the d e r i v e d tidal t e r m is p o s s i b l y d i s t o r t e d by the d e f i c i e n -
CelestialMechanics35 (I985) 45-88. 0008-8714/85.15.

9 1985 by D. ReidelPublishingCompany.
46 MITSURU SOMA
cies of small l o n g - p e r i o d terms in the p l a n e t a r y p e r t u r b a t i o n s in B r o w n ' s

lunar theory. In a d d i t i o n , it has b e e n p o i n t e d out that the m o t i o n s of the
p e r i g e e and n o d e of the lunar o r b i t d e r i v e d f r o m o b s e r v a t i o n s are i n c o n s i s -
tent w i t h the v a l u e s d e d u c e d f r o m the t h e o r y (Eckert, 1965).
In r e c e n t y e a r s two a c c u r a t e e p h e m e r i d e s of the M o o n h a v e b e e n d e v e -
loped. One is the n u m e r i c a l i n t e g r a t i o n n a m e d L E 2 0 0 (Williams, 1981), w h i c h
is c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the p l a n e t a r y e p h e m e r i s D E 2 0 0 (Standish, ~981a) developed
by the Jet P r o p u l s i o n L a b o r a t o r y (JPL), and the o t h e r is the e p h e m e r i s n a m e d
E L P 2 0 0 0 , w h i c h is c a l c u l a t e d f r o m the s e m i - a n a l y t i c a l s o l u t i o n E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2
( C h a p r o n t - T o u z @ and C h a p r o n t , 1982) and the c o n s t a n t s $200. The D E 2 0 0 / L E 2 0 0
has b e e n i n t r o d u c e d in the A s t r o n o m i c a l A l m a n a c from 1984 o n w a r d s and the
E L P 2 0 0 0 has b e e n i n t r o d u c e d in the F r e n c h e p h e m e r i d e s C o n n a i s s a n c e des Temps
f r o m 1984 onwards. F r o m a c o m p a r i s o n of t h e s e e p h e m e r i d e s o v e r one century,
C h a p r o n t - T o u z 6 and C h a p r o n t (1983) h a v e f o u n d t h a t the i n t e r n a l a c c u r a c y of
the E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 is b e t t e r t h a n 0".01 w h i c h is m o r e a c c u r a t e t h a n o p t i c a l
observations.
The LE200 is the e p h e m e r i s f i t t e d to the lunar laser r a n g i n g d a t a
obtained since 1969 and the c o n s t a n t s $200 of the E L P 2 0 0 0 w e r e d e t e r m i n e d
f r o m f i t t i n g the s o l u t i o n E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 to the e p h e m e r i s LE200. Therefore, both
e p h e m e r i d e s LE200 and E L P 2 0 0 0 are b a s e d on the r a n g i n g o b s e r v a t i o n s and it
is i m p o r t a n t to c o m p a r e t h e m w i t h a n g u l a r o b s e r v a t i o n s such as o c c u l t a t i o n s
or m e r i d i a n - c i r c l e o b s e r v a t i o n s in o r d e r to i n v e s t i g a t e the c o n s i s t e n c y of
t h o s e o b s e r v a t i o n s and to e x a m i n e the r e f e r e n c e frame d e f i n e d by the fun-
d a m e n t a l c a t a l o g u e and the a d o p t e d p r e c e s s i o n constant.
In this paper, a b o u t 60,000 o b s e r v a t i o n s of lunar o c c u l t a t i o n s m a d e
during 1955-1980 are a n a l y s e d u s i n g the n e w s o l u t i o n E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 in o r d e r to
d e t e r m i n e the c o n s t a n t s in the E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 and to i n v e s t i g a t e the t i d a l t e r m
in the Moon's m e a n l o n g i t u d e and the m o t i o n s of the p e r i g e e and node of the
lunar orbit. In addition, the s y s t e m a t i c c o r r e c t i o n s to the f u n d a m e n t a l
c a t a l o g u e and to the d a t u m of the l u n a r - p r o f i l e in Watts' {1963) c h a r t s are
investigated.
The m e t h o d of the a n a l y s i s is g i v e n in S e c t i o n 4 in some d e t a i l , the
s o l u t i o n is in S e c t i o n 5 and d i s c u s s i o n s on the r e s u l t s and on the r e l a t i o n
b e t w e e n the E p h e m e r i s Time and the D y n a m i c a l Time are in S e c t i o n 6.
2. O B S E R V A T I O N S
O b s e r v a t i o n s of lunar o c c u l t a t i o n s m a d e in the w o r l d d u r i n g the years 1943-

1980 w e r e c o l l e c t e d at the Royal G r e e n w i c h O b s e r v a t o r y (RGO) and t h o s e s a v e d
on a m a g n e t i c tape w e r e k i n d l y s u p p l i e d to the H y d r o g r a p h i c D e p a r t m e n t of
Japan (JHD). T h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s are i n c l u d e d in the c a t a l o g u e s of lunar
o c c u l t a t i o n s p u b l i s h e d by M o r r i s o n (1978) and A p p l e b y et al. (1984). A m o n g
these o b s e r v a t i o n s those m a d e a f t e r 1955.5 are a n a l y s e d in this paper, for
the c o n v e r s i o n of o b s e r v e d U n i v e r s a l T i m e to A t o m i c Time is p o s s i b l e o n l y in
this period. A l s o o b s e r v a t i o n s u s e d in this a n a l y s i s are l i m i t e d to those of
AN ANALYSIS OF LUNAR OCCULTATIONS IN THE YEARS 1955-1980 47
stars in the c a t a l o g u e by R o b e r t s o n (1940; hereinafter referred to as the

ZC), for it is i m p o r t a n t to use as h o m o g e n e o u s a s y s t e m of star p l a c e s as
possible. Observations not h a v i n g Watts' (1963) limb c o r r e c t i o n s and o b s e r -
vations of the c o m p o n e n t of double stars not h a v i n g separate positions in
the ZC are also rejected.
Total number of thus selected observations is 59,765. About 96% of them
w e r e made v i s u a l l y and the rest were made by p h o t o e l e c t r i c equipment.
3. R E D U C T I O N
3.1. A c c u r a c y
The accuracy of o b s e r v a t i o n s estimated by o b s e r v e r s on d e s c r i p t i v e phrases

was t r a n s l a t e d into n u m e r i c a l estimates of u n c e r t a i n t y as shown in Table I.
TABLE I: A c c u r a c y of visual observations.
Description Accuracy
Excellent, very good •

Good, certain •
Fair, satisfactory •
Poor, uncertain •
Very poor, very d o u b t f u l •
No d e s c r i p t i o n given • -4
For o b s e r v a t i o n s w i t h no d e s c r i p t i o n given, the u n c e r t a i n t y of • was

adopted and for p h o t o e l e c t r i c observations, • was adopted. These
accuracies were u s e d to d e t e r m i n e the w e i g h t of each o b s e r v a t i o n explained
in S e c t i o n 4.
3.2. Personal Equation
For v i s u a l observations the o b s e r v e r ' s reaction time, or p e r s o n a l equation,

m u s t be taken into account. In this paper p e r s o n a l equation is taken to be
positive when recorded time is after actual o c c u l t a t i o n time.
Sinzi and Suzuki (1967) and Mori (1975) analysed visual observations
with key-tapping m e t h o d made simultaneously with photoelectric observations
and found that the p e r s o n a l equations of v i s u a l observations had good
correlation with brightness of the o c c u l t e d stars and the a c c u r a c y assigned
by the observers. They also found that there was no s i g n i f i c a n t difference
between personal equations of d i s a p p e a r a n c e and r e a p p e a r a n c e . F r o m their
analyses the values of the p e r s o n a l equations shown in Table II for visual
observations made with c h r o n o g r a p h , stopwatch, or tape r e c o r d e r are a d o p t e d
48 MITSURU SOMA
TABLE II: A d o p t e d values of p e r s o n a l equations.
Accuracy Mag. p.e.
-6.0 0~40
• 6.1-8.0 0.45
8.1- 0.50
-6.0 0545
• 6.1-8.0 0.50
8.1- 0.55
• -6.0 0550
and 6.1-8.0 0.58
• 8.1- 0.60
-6.0 0~60
• 6.1-8.0 0.70
8.1- 0.80
-6.0 0570
• 6.1-8.0 0.90
8.1- 1.10
TABLE III: D i s t r i b u t i o n of p e r s o n a l equations a p p l i e d by the observers.
p.e.
050 0Sl 0"s2 0s3 0s4 0s5 0-s6 0s7 - unk. I non. 2 e.e. 3 ph.e. ~ Total
yr.
1955-60 0 12 95 209 27 37 5 9 128 4206 1581 243 6552

61-65 0 26 169 705 203 36 20 9 471 5202 1227 198 8266
66-70 39 229 893 1735 596 240 59 138 1561 6529 1744 480 14243
71-75 59 209 1421 3441 1456 519 321 239 860 5440 1381 1025 16371
76-80 60 268 1255 3361 1698 852 306 411 859 3757 813 693 14333
Total 158 744 3833 9451 3980 1684 711 806 3879 25134 6746 2639 59765
Observations w i t h u n k n o w n values for personal equation a p p l i e d by

observers.
2 Observations w i t h no values for p e r s o n a l equation a p p l i e d by observers.
3 Observations made w i t h e y e - a n d - e a r method.
4 Photoelectric observations.
w h e n no estimate of personal equations was given by the observers. Personal

equations for about 25,000 observations were e s t i m a t e d by the o b s e r v e r s as
shown in Table III. Since. these values are small c o m p a r e d w i t h the values in
Table II by about 052 ~ 0 ~ 3 , the m e a n c o r r e c t i o n to the p e r s o n a l equations
a p p l i e d by the o b s e r v e r s will be a n a l y s e d later.
An e x p e r i m e n t which simulates the e y e - a n d - e a r m e t h o d of timing occul-
t a t i o n s shows that the p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n of the o b s e r v a t i o n s m a d e w i t h the

e y e - a n d - e a r m e t h o d is a r o u n d 090 (Hammerton and Stretch, 1981). H e n c e
p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n of 0~0 for o b s e r v a t i o n s m a d e w i t h e y e - a n d - e a r m e t h o d is
adopted.
3.3. P o s i t i o n s of O b s e r v e r s
N e a r l y all the p o s i t i o n s of o b s e r v e r s are g i v e n in g e o d e t i c c o o r d i n a t e s

r e f e r r e d to s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t n a t i o n a l d a t u m s w h i c h use v a r i o u s r e f e r e n c e
e l l i p s o i d s . For the c o n v e r s i o n of these c o o r d i n a t e s to one s t a n d a r d
e l l i p s o i d w h o s e c e n t e r is the c e n t e r of the earth, d a t a s u p p l i e d by the
U.S. N a v a l O b s e r v a t o r y to JHD w e r e used. Most of these d a t a are r e f e r r e d to
WGS-72. The g e o d e t i c c o o r d i n a t e s w e r e c o n v e r t e d to the c o o r d i n a t e s r e f e r r e d
to the r e f e r e n c e e l l i p s o i d h a v i n g an e q u a t o r i a l radius of 6 3 7 8 . 1 4 0 k m and a
f l a t t e n i n g of 1/298.257, w h i c h are the v a l u e s in the IAU 1976 s y s t e m of
astronomical constants.
For o b s e r v a t i o n s for w h i c h o n l y the a s t r o n o m i c a l c o o r d i n a t e s are given,
t h e i r c o o r d i n a t e s w e r e u s e d as the g e o d e t i c c o o r d i n a t e s r e f e r r e d to the
n a t i o n a l r e f e r e n c e e l l i p s o i d since the d i s p l a c e m e n t s of their c o o r d i n a t e s
f r o m the n a t i o n a l d a t u m c o o r d i n a t e s s h o u l d be m o r e or less r a n d o m and s h o u l d
not lead any s i g n i f i c a n t s y s t e m a t i c e f f e c t s in the residuals.
3.4. C o n v e r s i o n of T i m e - s c a l e s
O b s e r v a t i o n s w e r e u s u a l l y t i m e d u s i n g the t i m e - s i g n a l b r o a d c a s t s of v a r i o u s
n a t i o n a l and i n t e r n a t i o n a l time services. To c a l c u l a t e p o s i t i o n s of o b s e r -
v e r s in space it is n e c e s s a r y to r e d u c e all the o c c u l t a t i o n t i m i n g s to the
UTI scale.
In the p e r i o d 1 9 5 5 . 5 - 1 9 6 1 . 0 m o s t of the t i m e - s i g n a l s w e r e d e r i v e d from
an a t o m i c t i m e - s c a l e by m a k i n g step a d j u s t m e n t s in e p o c h and f r e q u e n c y in
o r d e r to m a i n t a i n the t i m e - s i g n a l s w i t h i n 0~I of UT2. Since the step a d j u s t -
ments in this p e r i o d w e r e not in g e n e r a l s y n c h r o n i z e d a m o n g the n a t i o n a l
time-keeping agencies, the t i m e s of o c c u l t a t i o n s are r e g a r d e d as UT2 and
t h e y are c o n v e r t e d to UTI by s u b t r a c t i n g the d i f f e r e n c e s UT2-UTI g i v e n in
the B u l l e t i n H o r a i r e p u b l i s h e d by the B u r e a u I n t e r n a t i o n a l de l ' H e u r e (BIH)
(1961):
UT2-UTI = +0~022 sin(2~tl) -01017 cos(2~tl) -

-0~007 s i n ( 4 ~ t I) +0~006 cos(4ztl) , (3.1)
w h e r e t I d e n o t e s the time f r o m the b e g i n n i n g of the year in years.

From 1961.0 o n w a r d s some of the t i m e - s i g n a l s w e r e c o o r d i n a t e d to UTC
time-scale. Therefore, in this p e r i o d the o c c u l t a t i o n times are c o n v e r t e d to
UTI by a p p l y i n g the d i f f e r e n c e UTI-UTC. The v a l u e of U T I - U T C for the y e a r
50 MITSURU SOMA
1961 is o b t a i n e d by adding the v a l u e of U T I - U T 2 , UT2-TAI (BIH, 1965) a n d the

value of T A I - U T C (BIH, 1981, p. B - 2 1 ) . The value of U T I - U T C for t h e y e a r s
1962.0-1981.0 are g i v e n in the A n n u a l Report for 1968 o n w a r d s published by
the B I H (1969-1981). Note that the v a l u e s for the y e a r s 1962.0 to 1968.0 are
given in t h e A n n u a l Report for 1970 (BIH, 1971).
The argument of time in l u n a r a n d p l a n e t a r y ephemerides is T D B (Bary-
centric Dynamical Time) which was defined b y t h e IAU (1980) . S i n c e the
difference between TDB and TDT (Terrestrial Dynamical Time) is less t h a n
0~002, the d i f f e r e n c e between them can be neglected in t h i s analysis and
t h e y are d e n o t e d b y TD. T D is g i v e n by
TD = TAI + 32~184, (3.2)
where TAI is the International Atomic Time which was derived f r o m the
formula
TAI : UT2 - (UT2-TAI) (3.3)
for the y e a r s 1955.5 to 1961.0 and
TAI : UTC + (TAI-UTC) (3.4)
for t h e y e a r s after 1961.0. The values of UT2-TAI for the y e a r s 1955.5 to

1961.0 are g i v e n in the B u l l e t i n Horaire (BIH, 1965) and t h e v a l u e TAI-UTC
for the y e a r s after 1961.0 are g i v e n in t h e A n n u a l Report for 1980 (BIH,
1981, p. B-21) .
In t h i s p a p e r t denotes the time from J2000.0 (2000 Jan. 1.5 TD) in
Julian centuries.
3.5. Lunar and Planetary Ephemerides
Theory of t h e m o t i o n of t h e M o o n u s e d in t h i s analysls is the r e c e n t l y -

developed semi-analytical solution ELP2000-82 (Chapront-Touz6 and Chapront,
1982). Planetary ephemeris used to d e t e r m i n e the p o s i t i o n s of the E a r t h and
Moon referred to t h e b a r y c e n t e r of t h e solar system is V S O P 8 0 (Bretagnon,
1980).
3.6. Star Positions
Although the FK5 h a s not yet been completed, positions and proper motions of
the stars at B 1 9 5 0 . 0 in the FK4 system can be converted to positions and
proper motions at J 2 0 0 0 . 0 referred to the FK5 e q u i n o x and equator because
the new precession constant {IAU, 1977) a n d the l o c a t i o n of the FK5 equinox
and equator (Fricke, 1982) have been determined.
First the star places and proper motions for the e p o c h B1950.0 in t h e
ZC w e r e systematically adjusted to t h e FK4 (Fricke and Kopff, 1963} by
adding the following corrections (Kubo, 1971):
A~ = + 090017 - 090016 sin e + 0~0012 cos ~ -

0~0019 sin 2~ - 0~0012 cos 2e, (3.5)
s = + 07006 - 0?024 sin ~ - 0~021 cos ~ +
+ 0?028 sin 2e - 0 ~ 0 5 0 cos 2e, (3.6)
A~ = + 0 5 0 0 4 2 + 050017 sin ~ + 090017 cos ~ -

- 050110 sin 2~ - 0~0021 cos 2~, (3.7)
s = - 0]028 + 0[033 sin ~ + 0]018 cos ~ +

+ 0]072 sin 2~ - 01108 cos 2~, (3.8)
where ~ and 6 denote the right ascension and declination respectively, and
u and ~' d e n o t e the centennial proper motions in r i g h t ascension and decli-
nation respectively.
Thus obtained places and proper motions were converted to the J2000.0
places and proper motions by the procedure given by Aoki et al. (1983).
It should be noted that since corrections for the zonal or regional
systematic di[ferences between FK4 and FK5 are not included in t h i s con-
version procedure, the system of star places used in t h i s analysis is t h e
FK4 system while the equinox adopted for star places is t h e FK5 equinox.
3.7. Limb-profile Corrections
The irregularity of the lunar profile was removed by applying limb-profile

corrections taken from a computerized version (Morrison and Martin, 1971) of
the charts by Watts (1963). The position angle Q from the axis of the Moon
and the topocentric librations (IM, b M) needed for entry to W a t t s ' charts
were calculated from the solution 500 of the lunar libration by Eckhardt
(1981). Since the value for the inclination of the mean equator of the Moon
to the ecliptic inherant in t h e Eckhardt's theory is d i f f e r e n t from the
value used by Watts, it w a s changed to the Watts' (1955) value of I7564.
The constant term in T i n t h e Eckhardt's theory was also changed to 0~0
because this term was not known at t h e time of constructing the charts.
Morrison (1970) found from an a n a l y s i s of 38 g r a z i n g occultations that
the tabular position angles of the charts should be amended systematically
by - 0 ~ 2 5 • 0701. The value obtained by Van Flandern (1970b) for it from
grazing and total occultations is - 0 ~ 2 2 • 0~02. Recently, Appleby and
Morrison (1983) obtained the correction of -0~237 • 07010 from 289 grazing
occultations. Hence the correction of -0124 to the position angle of t h e
charts was adopted.
The limb-profile correction was obtained by interpolating the correc-
tions read from the two charts adjacent to t h e position angle. The un-
certainty 071 of the correction was usually assigned, but when the extra-
polation was needed, either 0~2 or 0~4 was assigned depending on the amount
52 MITSURU SOMA
of extrapolation of the contours that was required. Observations not having

Watts' limb-profile corrections and observations of w h i c h the assigned un-
certainty of the charts were 074 were rejected because these can introduce
systematic effects with libration which may influence some of the solutions
for the lunar arguments. This comment was given by Morrison (1984, private
communication).
3.8. Method of R e d u c t i o n
The J2000.0 ecliptic rectangular coordinates of the observer and the

direction of the star at the time of occultation t and the J2000.0 ecliptic
rectangular coordinates of the Moon at the time t - s were used to c a l c u l a t e
the distance between the Moon's center and the limb of the Moon which
occulted the star as seen from the observer. That calculated distance is
denoted by R c and the observed one by R 0. R c was calculated from the formula
RC : IrM(t - At) - r0(t) [{rM(t - At) r0(t) } 9 r ~ ] r ~ l , (3.9)
where r E is t h e direction of the star corrected for the deflection of the

star's light due to solar gravity, r0(t) is the position vector of the ob-
server at t h e time t and rM(t - At) is t h e position vector of the center of
the Moon at t h e time t - At. The vectors are referred to the barycenter of
the solar system. The light time At from the Moon to the observer was
calculated iteratively from the formula
s : Ir0(t) - rM(t - At) I/c, (3.10)
where c is t h e light velocity. The direction of the star r[ corrected for

light deflection was calculated from the formula,
r~ = r* + (1.9741 x I0-8/r) [(rE - (r* 9 r E ) r * ) / ( 1 + r* - r E ) ] , (3.11)
where r* is t h e undeflected unit vector toward the star, rE is t h e unit

vector toward the Earth from the Sun and r is the distance of the Earth from
the Sun in a s t r o n o m i c a l units. The observed distance R 0 is t h e sum of the
adopted radius of the Moon R A = 1738.0 km and the limb-profile correction
6R L = 1 . 8 6 3 6 h W k m w h e r e hW in seconds of arc is t h e value taken from the
Watts' charts. The residual of the observational equation is given by
R0-R c 9
The formulae of the precession by Bretagnon and Chapront (198]) and
the formulae of the nutation adopted by the IAU 1980 (Seidelmann, ]982) were
used to o b t a i n the coordinates of the observer referred to the mean equinox
and ecliptic of J2000.0. The formulae of the precession were also used to
obtain the coordinates of the Moon. The formulae of the precession by
Bretagnon and Chapront are slightly different from those by Lieske et al.
(1977) which was adopted by the IAU (1977), but because the lunar theory
ELP2000-82 is b a s e d on the formulae by Bretagnon and Chapront, they were
AN ANALYSIS OF LUNAR OCCULTATIONS IN THE yEARS 1955-1980 53
used in t h i s analysis. The sidereal time was calculated from the formula by
Aoki et al. (1982).
The refraction height h r which should be added to the observer's height
to compensate for the change due to r e f r a c t i o n was calculated from the
formula by Uniwa in M o r i et al. (1978) when the star altitude was greater
than 5~
h r = 2.3 + 2.20 cot 2 a - 0.0045 cot 4 a (m), (3.12)
where a is t h e altitude of the star. When the star altitude was less than
5 ~ , the values in t h e Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Ephemeris
and the American Ephemeris and Nautical Almanac (1961, p. 55) were used.
4. A N A L Y S I S
4.1. Selection and Weighting of Observations
To solve the equations of condition it w a s decided to u s e observations

having the residuals R0-R c between -1.85 km and +1.85 km. After obtaining
the solution, the equations of condition were again solved using the new
residuals. The iteration was needed several times until the solution con-
verged. In o r d e r to a v o i d the dependence of the selection of the obser-
vations on the initial values of the unknowns, the selection was made in
each iteration.
The weight W assigned to each observation was calculated from the
following formula:
~RcI2 ~Rc]2 $Rc'2 2 ,

(4.1)
where o T is t h e accuracy of the observation adopted in Section 3.1, o and

~ are mean errors of the star places at the time t of o c c u l t a t i o n obser-
vation and o W is t h e error of the limb-profile height explained in S e c t i o n
3.7. The values of o and ~6 w e r e calculated from
c a2 = o~0
2 + o H2 ( t - t0)2 (4.2)
and
2 2 2 2
o 6 = 060 + o ,(t - t o ) , (4.3)
where o 0 , 060 , oH, and oH, are mean errors (converted from the probable
errors given in t h e ZC) at the observation epoch t O of the position of the
star. The derivative of R c w i t h respect to U n i v e r s a l Time T was calculated
by numerical differenciation and the derivatives with respect to r i g h t
ascension ~ and declination 6 of the star were from
8R C
- d o cos 6 sin P (4.4)
54 MITSURU SOMA
and
~R C
- d o cos P, (4.5)
where d O is t h e distance between the observer and the Moon and P is t h e

position angle of the occultation measured from the projection of the pole
of the Earth's equator.
For the observations of stars in t h e Pleiades the weight W was multi-
plied by 0.083 in o r d e r to h a v e an even distribution of stars around the
lunar orbit, as w a s explained by Morrison (1979).
4.2. Unknowns to b e Determined in t h i s Analysis
The lunar theory ELP2000-82 includes the following 8 fundamental constants:
sidereal mean motion of the Moon at J 2 0 0 0 . 0 ,

E half coefficient of sin s in longitude,
F half coefficient of sin F in latitude,
e' solar eccentricity at J2000.0,
n' sidereal mean motion of the Sun at J 2 0 0 0 . 0 ,
~ mass ratio (Moon)/(Earth + Moon),
c2 mass ratio (Earth + Moon)/(Sun + Earth + Moon),
G' product of the constant of gravitation and the mass of the
Earth.
Among these constants, the values of al, ~ and G' w e r e fixed to t h e values
based on the IAU 1976 system of a s t r o n o m i c a l constants because these cannot
be improved using occultation data. The value n' w a s fixed to t h e value in
S200 of E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 (Chapront-Touz6 and Chapront, 1983), which is t h e
constant fitted to t h e JPL ephemeris LE200 because n' is h i g h l y correlated
with the unknown 6s 6 a n d its accurate value cannot be o b t a i n e d in t h i s
analysis.
In a d d i t i o n to t h e values of the fundamental constants v, E, F, a n d e',
the following values were analysed in t h i s paper:
(o)
wI constant term of the Moon's mean longitude,
DO constant term of e l o n g a t i o n of the Moon from the Sun,
s constant term of m e a n anomaly of the Sun
~0 constant term of m e a n anomaly of the Moon,
F0 constant term of m e a n argument of latitude of the Moon,
s0 constant term of o b l i q u i t y ,
6~ 0 constant correction to t h e equinox of F K 5 ,
6~ systematic correction in r i g h t ascension of FK4 varying as
s
sin ~,
6~ c systematic correction in r i g h t ascension of FK4 varying as
COS ~,
R0 Moon's radius,
6Ric latitude component of s h i f t of c e n t e r of W a t t s ' datum,
6R2s longitude component of c o r r e c t i o n to e l l i p t i c i t y of Watts'

datum,
@R2c latitude component of c o r r e c t i o n to e l l i p t i c i t y of W a t t s '

datum,
mean correction to p e r s o n a l equations applied by o b s e r v e r s
3
(~ = I: p e r s o n a l equations reported ~.
2 personal equations not reported]
Because of the strong correlation with the c o n s t a n t correction t o the

Moon's mean longitude, the longitude component of s h i f t of the c e n t e r of
Watts' datum was not included. Therefore, w@0)" is the c o n s t a n t t e r m of the
longitude of the c e n t e r of the reference datum in W a t t s ' charts. Corrections
to the linear terms of e q u i n o x correction and obliquity were not included,
either, because the t i m e s p a n of o c c u l t a t i o n observations used in t h i s
analysis is o n l y 25 y e a r s a n d the c o r r e l a t i o n between these and the constant
terms are high.
4.3. Equation of C o n d i t i o n
The equation of c o n d i t i o n t o o k the following form:
3R C 3R C 3R C 3R C ~R C
-- 61 + 65 + 6d + 6a + 6~- 3Rc 6T - 6R : R 0 - R c , (4 .6)
31 35 3d 3s 3a ~T
where
9 31
61 = 6w~ 0) + 6~- t + ~ -- 6~ i, (4.7)
i=I 3~ i
9 3B
65 : Z (4.8)
-- 6~i,
i=I 3~ i
9 3d
6d = [ (4.9)
6~ i ,
i=I ~Pi
6s = 6s0, (4.10)
6~ : 6~ 0 + 6~ s sin ~ + 6~ c COS ~, (4.11)
6R = 6R 0 + 6R1c cos Q + 6R2s s i n 2Q + 6R2c cos 2Q, (4.12)
!
and ~i (i : I, ..., 9) r e p r e s e n t s the c o n s t a n t s ~, E, V, e', L0, DO, s Z0'
a n d F 0. The p a r t i a l derivatives of g e o c e n t r i c longitude i, g e o c e n t r i c
latitude B and geocentric distance d with respect to the 4 f u n d a m e n t a l
constants ~, E, [, a n d e' are given in E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 . Note t h a t the theoretical
values of the d e r i v a t i v e s of the m e a n m o t i o n w~I)- of the p e r i g e e a n d the
mean motion w~~ I) of the n o d e of the lunar orbit with respect to t h e c o n -
56 MITSURU SOMA
stants 9, E, F, a n d e' are included in t h e d e r i v a t i v e s of l, S, a n d d

through the d e r i v a t i v e s of s (mean a n o m a l y o f t h e Moon) and F (mean a r g u m e n t
of latitude of t h e M o o n ) :
3s
- - - t, (4.13)
3~ 3~
3F
- ~ t, (4.14)
3~
3s 3w~ 1 )
- - t (i = 2, 3, 4) , (4.15)
~F 3w~ 1)
- - t (i = 2, 3, 4). (4.16)
3Rc/31 , 3Rc/36, 3Rc/3d, and 3Rc/3T w e r e obtained by numerical differentiation

and 3Rc/3S and 3Rc/3d were f r o m the formulae
3R C
d0(cos I sin B sin N - s i n I cos N), (4.17)
3~
3R C
d o cos 6 sin P, (4.18)
3e
where d O is t h e d i s t a n c e between the o b s e r v e r a n d the M o o n , P a n d N are the

position angle of the occultation measured f r o m the p r o j e c t i o n of t h e p o l e
o f the E a r t h ' s equator and ecliptic, respectively, ~ and 6 are the right
ascension and declination, respectively, o f the o c c u l t e d star, and I and B
a r e the e c l i p t i c longitude and latitude, respectively, of the M o o n . Note
that the formulae
3R C
-d O cos 8 s i n N, (4.19)
31
3R C
-d O cos N, (4.20)
35
3R C
-d O sin p (p: M o o n ' s apparent semi-diameter), (4.21)
3d
which are e q u i v a l e n t t o the following derivatives of t h e a n g u l a r separation

between the s t a r a n d the l i m b of t h e M o o n :
3~
- -cos 6 s i n N, (4.22)
31
3a
- - c o s N, (4.23)
36
.... 0.2725 (~: M o o n ' s horizontal parallax), (4.24)
used by earlier investigators are the derivatives with respect to the topo-
centric coordinates. Since the values we need are the derivatives with
respect to the geocentric coordinates, they were obtained by numerical dif-
ferenciation.
In t h i s equation of condition 6w~0)- is the correction to the mean
longitude referred to the dynamical equinox (the actual intersection of the
equator and the ecliptic). On the other hand, when the equinox correction
@~0 is inserted into the correction 6B' to the topocentric latitude of the
Moon in t h e form
6S' : cos ~' sin e 6~0, (4.25)
which is t h e formula used by Morrison (1979), the obtained correction 6w~ 0)

i
becomes the correction to the mean longitude referred to t h e catalogue

equinox. This fact can be shown from the approximate formula
~Rc (0) ~Rc ~Rc ,o (0)

6Wl + -- 6~ 0 - 10w I - cos e 6~ 0) +
~R C
+ (COS I' s i n e @s0) , (4.26)
aB'
which is e q u i v a l e n t to the formula
cos 6' sin P : cos ~' c o s ~ sin N - cos I' sin s cos N, (4.27)
where I', B', and 6' a r e the topocentric longitude, latitude and declination
of the Moon respectively, 6w~0)" is t h e correction to the mean longitude
referred to t h e dynamical equinox and ~w I
(o) - c o s s 6~ 0 is the correction
referred to the catalogue equinox. Equation (4.27) is t h e approximate
formula of the exact formula
cos 6' sin P = cos B' c o s c sin N - cos I' sin s cos N -
- sin s sin B' sin I' s i n N, (4.28)
which is o b t a i n e d from the relations
cos 6' sin (N - P) : sin g cos I', (4.29)
cos 6' cos (N - P) = cos s cos B' - sin s sin B' sin I'. (4.30)
5. SOLUTION
The number of e q u a t i o n s of condition is 5],376 and the root mean square

(RMS) of the residuals is 0 . 7 5 km which corresponds to 0~40 in M o o ~ ' s
position. The mean epoch of the observations is 1969.6.
58 MITSURU SOMA
The derived expressions for the mean longitude of the Moon are as
follows (t is t h e time in J u l i a n centuries from J2000.0) :
referred to the mean equinox of J2000.0:
w I = 785 940':53 + I 732 559 344115t - 5 1 9 0 t 2, (5.1)

i 0~02 • 0103
referred to the mean equinox of date i.e. including precession:
Wl + P A : 785 940~53 + 1 732 564 373~25t - 4 1 7 9 t 2, (5.2)

• 0102 • 0103
where P A = 5029':I0t + I T 1 1 • 2 is t h e general precession in longitude. These

are referred to the dynamical equinox obtained in t h i s analysis in t h e
inertial sense. When one wants to refer them to the dynamical equinox in
the rotating sense, add -01094 cos s :-0109 to each longitude. When one
wants to r e f e r them to the FK5 equinox, the value -01177 cos s = -0116 should
be used instead of -0109. The difference of the equinoxes in t h e inertial
sense, equinox in t h e rotating sense and the FK5 equinox will be given in
Section 6.5.
The derived expressions for the primary arguments are as follows:
mean elongation of the Moon from the Sun:
D = 1 072 260191 + 1 602 961 601188t - 5 ~ 8 8 t 2, (5.3)

• 0~07
mean anomaly of the Sun:
i' = 1 287 104116 + 129 596 581105t - 0156t 2 (5.4)

• 1113
mean anomaly of the Moon:
= 485 868131 + I 717 915 923138t + 32138t 2 r (5.5)

• 0?06
mean argument of latitude of the Moon:
F = 335 779169 + 1 739 527 263167t - 1 2 1 2 6 t 2. (5.6)

• 0105
In t h e s e expressions the quadratic terms are all theoretical and -11195t 2

is adopted for the tidal term in t h e mean longitude of the Moon. The
sidereal mean motions of the perigee and node of the lunar orbit are theo-
retical values fitted to t h e values of the constants v, E, F, a n d e' derived
in t h i s analysis:
w~ I) = 14 643 420177 / Julian century, (5.7)
w : -6 967 919~52 / Julian century. (5.8)

The sidereal mean motion of the Sun is t h e value in $200 of E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 :
n' = 129 597 742~28 / Julian century, (5.9)
which is t h e constant fitted to the JPL ephemeris LE200. The mean motion of
the perigee of the Sun is t h e value in V S O P 8 2 (Bretagnon, 1982).
It is n o t e d that, while the expression for w I given above is for the
center of the reference datum in W a t t s ' charts, the expressions for the
primary arguments are for the center of m a s s of the Moon because they are
derived ~rom dynamical considerations.
The expressions for the fundamental arguments w2 (mean longitude of
the perigee of the Moon), w3 (mean longitude of the node of t h e Moon), L'
(mean longitude of the Sun), and ~' (mean longitude of the perigee of the
Sun) can be obtained from the relations
D : w I - L', (5.10)
s = L' - ~' (5 11)
s : w I - w2, (5.12)
F = w I - w 3. (5.13)
Note that if t h e center of the reference datum in W a t t s ' charts leads the
center of m a s s by s w in longitude, the fundamental arguments Wl, w2, w3,
L', and ~' obtained from the above formulae should be subtracted by s
while the primary arguments D, s s and F should remain unchanged.
The values of o t h e r constants obtained in this analysis are as follows:
V - (I 732 559 344715 • 0~03) / Julian century, (5.14)
E : 11 3197798 • 01002, (5.15)
F 9 230?628 • 0?002, (5.16)
e' = 0.016 709 10 • 0 . 0 0 0 000 08
3446750 • 0?02, (5.17)
sO = 84 3817432 • 0?004, (5.18)
6e 0 = +07177 • 07012, (5.19)
6~ = -0~026 • 0~004, (5.20)

s
6~ = +0?023 • 0?004, (5.21)

c
R0 (1738.107 • 0.004) km, (5.22)
6RIc (-0.446 • 0.007) km, (5.23)
6R2s = (+0.238 • 0.005) km, (5.24)

60 MITSURU SOMA
6R2c : (-0.001 • 0.006) km, (5.25)
6T 1 : +0~21 • 0~01, (5.26)
6T 2 : +0!31 • 0!02. (5.27)
Chapront-Tous6 and Chapront (1983) obtained the set $200 of the values
of the constants by fitting the solution ELP2000-82 to t h e JPL numerical
integration LE200. The differences of the above values from the values in
S200 (this paper minus $200) for the mean observation epoch 1969.6 are as
follows:
s I - +0145 • 0~02, (5.28)
AD - +0?04 • 0707, (5 29)
s : -0~63 f I713, (5 3O)
s : +0?06 • 0?06, (5 31)
&F : -0~04 • 0~05, (5 32)
s : (+0~41 • 0~03)/cy (cy : c e n t u r y ) , (5 33)
AE : +0~005 • 0~002, (5 34)
s = +0~009 • 0~002, (5 35)
s = +0710 • 0~02, (5.36)
s 0 = +0?023 • 0~004. (5.37)
The reason for these differences will be discussed in S e c t i o n 6.
6. DISCUSSION
6.1. Mean Longitude of the Moon
6.1.1. Tidal term. Various values for the tidal term in t h e Moon's mean
longitude have been obtained from observations so far. The tidal term
adopted in t h e national ephemerides up to 1983 is - 1 1 7 2 2 t 2, w h i c h was
derived from a comparison between the positions of t h e Moon and the inner
planets by Spencer Jones (1939). Mort• and Ward (1975) obtained
(-13" • 1 " ) t 2 f o r it from an analysis of oecultations and the transits of
Mercury. But from analyses of occultations timed since 1955.5 on the atomic
time-scale, Van Flandern (1970a), Mort• (1973) and Van Flandern (1975)
found the tidal term to be (-26" • 8 " ) t 2 (-21" + 3 " ) t 2, and (-32~5 + 9 " ) t 2
respectively. Recently, from analyses of laser ranging measurements of the
M o o n o b t a i n e d since 1969, v a l u e s near -12"t 2 h a v e b e e n o b t a i n e d (Calame and

Mulholland, 1978; W i l l i a m s et al., 1978; F e r r a r i et al., 1980; D i c k e y et al.,
1982). Therefore, the r e a s o n w h y the n e g a t i v e l y l a r g e r v a l u e s for the tidal
a c c e l e r a t i o n w e r e o b t a i n e d f r o m o c c u l t a t i o n s t i m e d on the a t o m i c t i m e - s c a l e
has to be i n v e s t i g a t e d .
The s o l u t i o n g i v e n in S e c t i o n 5 was o b t a i n e d f i x i n g the t i d a l t e r m
- 1 1 7 9 5 t 2 a d o p t e d in E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 , w h i c h was d e r i v e d f r o m the m o d e l by W i l l i a m s
et al. (1978) u s i n g the v a l u e s for Love n u m b e r of k 2 = 0.30 and for p h a s e of
= 0.0407. In o r d e r to i n v e s t i g a t e the t i d a l t e r m o b t a i n e d f r o m o b s e r v a t i o n s
of o c c u l t a t i o n s , the e q u a t i o n s of c o n d i t i o n h a v i n g the u n k n o w n for the tidal
t e r m were also solved. The s o l u t i o n for the t i d a l t e r m b e c o m e s (-813 • 015)t 2,
but as shown in T a b l e IV, the c o r r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n the u n k n o w n s for the
T A B L E IV: E f f e c t of the t i d a l t e r m on the RMS.
Tidal term f i x e d to unknown f i x e d to

-11~95t 2 (-8~3 • O~5)t 2 -24~0t 2
No. of eq. 51376 51388 51298

RMS (km) 0.7536 0.7538 0.7565
C o r r e l a t i o n : w~ 0) and w# I) 0.96.
w~ 0) and w 1 2 ) 0 . 9 4 .
w~ I) and w~ 2) 0.99.
The h i g h n e s s of c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s is p a r t l y due to
the fact that the u n k n o w n s g i v e n above are for the e p o c h
J 2 0 0 0 . 0 w h i c h are d i s t a n t f r o m the m e a n e p o c h of o b s e r v a t i o n s .
constant, l i n e a r and q u a d r a t i c terms are so h i g h that the RMS of the p o s t -

fit r e s i d u a l s s c a r c e l y c h a n g e s f r o m the one in the s o l u t i o n g i v e n in
S e c t i o n 5. In a d d i t i o n , the p e r i o d o g r a m s of the r e s i d u a l s o b t a i n e d from the
two s o l u t i o n s are a l m o s t the same. On the o t h e r hand, if the tidal t e r m is
f i x e d to - 2 4 ~ 0 t 2, the RMS of the r e s i d u a l c h a n g e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y and there
a p p e a r s a s i g n i f i c a n t peak at p e r i o d of about 25 y e a r s (i.e. f r e q u e n c y of
a b o u t 0.04 c y c l e s / y e a r ) in the p e r i o d o g r a m of the r e s i d u a l s (Figure I).
Since this p e r i o d is v e r y close to the p e r i o d of o b s e r v a t i o n s u s e d in this
a n a l y s i s and since the p h a s e and a m p l i t u d e of the t e r m are c o n s i s t e n t w i t h
the q u a d r a t i c t e r m in the m e a n longitude, we see that the peak c o m e s from
the i n c o r r e c t q u a d r a t i c t e r m in the m e a n longitude. There are two o t h e r
p e a k s n e a r the p e r i o d of 29.5 days (frequency of 12.4 c y c l e s / y e a r ) , but
t h e s e are the g h o s t s of the 25 y e a r - p e r i o d p e a k due to the d i s t r i b u t i o n of
the d a t a w h i c h has the p e r i o d of s y n o d i c m o n t h as shown in F i g u r e 2. T h e r e -
fore, it is c o n c l u d e d that the o c c u l t a t i o n o b s e r v a t i o n s o b s e r v e d on the
a t o m i c t i m e - s c a l e do not h a v e i n c o n s i s t e n t t i d a l t e r m w i t h the l a s e r r a n g i n g
observations.
62 MITSURU SOMA
0'.'10 0'.'10
0.00 i i , ] , , i i i I i E , e i i i I i I 0.00
I 2 I] 12 13
Freauency (cycles/year)
o:1o o'~io
I
0.00 o oo
0 ] 2 Ii 12 13
Frequency (cycles/year)
Fig. I. Periodogram of the residuals for frequencies 0-2 cycles/year

and 11-13 cycles/year.
(a) Tidal term fixed to - 1 1 7 9 5 t 2. (b) Tidal term fixed to
-2470t 2 .
2.00
t. 75
1.50
1.25
~ t.oo
0.75
0.50
0.25
I
0.00
5 tO 15 20 25 30 35 q0 q5 50 55
Fig. 2. Periodogram of t h e observation times.
The difference of the longitudes between the ephemeris j : 2 (IAU, 1968),

which is b a s e d on the Brown's theory, and the ELP2000-82, in w h i c h the con-
stants are fitted to the values in Section 5, for the period between 1940
AN ANALYSIS OF LUNAR OCCULTATIONS IN T H E Y E A R S ~955-1980 63
O0
O0
. . . .
__, ;~ .:;::~__
C)
F~ o
C7)
T
o
Z
r'
C3
CO I
0
0
o
D~
~ . LI ~ , , , - ~ , ~ i-
---_-~ • .... ~ - ~ -
4J
r~
4J
0
0
LID
C7)
4J
4.4
tlq
C3
C)D
~5 6 6 o ~5 c5 o o o 6 ~ o
I i i I
64 MITSURU SOMA
and 1980 is shown in F i g u r e 3. The correction 0?54 + I 7 2 3 t was added to t h e

difference in o r d e r to r e f e r the longitudes to the same equinox, as w i l l be
explained later in Section 6.1.4 (Table VI) . T h e quadratic trend in t h e
differences around 1970 is e v i d e n t . The differences (j = 2 m i n u s ELP2000-82)
in the period 1955.0-1975.0 at intervals of I day were analysed to e x p r e s s
them by quadratic expression. The solution is
61 = +I~66 +9736t • z (6.1)

• • •
while the quadratic term in the difference of the mean longitudes between
j = 2 and ELP2000-82 is o n l y 0 7 7 3 t 2. From the fact that the quadratic term
1317t 2 appeared in 61, we conclude that the negatively larger values for
the tidal term obtained by Van Flandern (1970a) and Morrison (1973) are
largely due to d e f i c i e n c i e s in t h e planetary terms in t h e Brown's lunar
theory, as w a s suggested by Morrison (1979).
Van Flandern (1975) obtained the negatively larger values for the tidal
term using a numerical integration. The reason for this is still unknown.
The longer period difference between j = 2 and ELP2000-82 will be
discussed in Section 6.1.4.
6.1.2. Mean motion. The value of the mean motion derived in t h i s paper is
different from the value in t h e set of constants $200 by the amount of
(+0741 i 0 ? 0 3 ) / c y (Equation (5.33)). Before considering the reason for this
difference, let us enquire whether the standard error • reflects the
true uncertainty of the result, for the correlation of the unknowns between
the mean motion and the constant term is a l i t t l e high.
The residuals R 0 - R C reduced by the solution in Section 5 were resolved
for corrections to the ecliptic longitude 61 a n d latitude 6B in e a c h
lunation by the following weighted observational equation of condition:
~R C ~R C
6~ + - - 6B : R 0 - R C. (6.2)
The solutions for the 312 lunations (Brown's lunation numbers 403-714) are
plotted in F m g u r e 4, w h e r e the half-bar length is o n e standard error. Thus
obtained values of 61 w e r e solved by the linear expression
61 = a + b t ' , (6.3)
where t' is t h e time from 1968.0 in J u l i a n centuries. The solution is g i v e n

in T a b l e V. Since the variance of 61 b e f o r e 1960.0 shown in F i g u r e 4 is
large, the solutions using only the data in t h e period of 1958.0-1980.0 and
1960.0-1980.0 were also made and the results are given in T a b l e V. From the
variability of the value b shown in T a b l e V, we see that the true uncertain-
ty of the value v is a b o u t four times the formal standard error. Still, the
value of v obtained here differs significantly from the value in $200.
4.)
~J
O
u~
o9
i
.S
J
i
.2
g
m
~ r
9
.ssss~ .,-t
r~
66 MITSURU SOMA
TABLE V: Solution for 61.
Period 1955.5-1980.0 1958.0-1980.0 1960.0-1980.0
No. of eq. 312 281 257

RMS 01089 01088 01084
Correlation -0.30 -0.44 -0.52
Solution 0100 -0~00t' 0101 - 0 1 1 1 t ' 0100 + 0103t'
• • 0.07 • • 0.09 • • 0.09
Two reasons for the discrepancy Am : +0141 can be considered: (i) the
value m obtained here is incorrect due to adopting the inappropriate
reference frame, (ii) the value m is incorrect due to e r r o r s presumably
s200
contained in L E 2 0 0 .
The LE200 is t h e ephemeris fitted to the lunar laser ranging data
obtained since 1969. From the ranging data we can determine the mean motion
with respect to the inertial space accurately (Standish, 1982). In t h e
analysis of this paper we assume that the reference frame defined by the
FK5 and by the precession constant in t h e IAU 1976 system is t h e inertial
frame. Therefore, if the FK5 has equinox motion E and the adopted speed of
the general precession in longitude has an error s the obtained mean
motion has an e r r o r Am w h i c h is g i v e n by
Am : Ap - E c o s c, (6.4)
where ~ is t h e obliquity. If w e assume that the mean motion in t h e LE200 is

correct with respect to t h e inertial frame, we obtain
Ap - E c o s c = 0141/cy. (6.5)
The other possibility is t h a t the mean motion in t h e LE200 is i n -

correct. From the Kepler's third law, the error of A~ = 0 1 4 1 / c y in m e a n
motion corresponds to t h e error of Aa in d i s t a n c e :
2a
Aa = - -- Am = -6cm. (6.6)
3n
Since the RMS of the post-fit residuals of the lunar laser ranging data is
about 40 c m and the observations were made only at the time when the Moon
was near the meridian, it is p o s s i b l e that the coordinates of the obser-
vatory of the lunar ranging (McDonald Observatory) referred to the center
of m a s s of the Earth have constant bias of the order of 6 cm. The difference
in m e a n motion can also be explained by the error in t h e value of GE + G M
adopted in t h e LE200, where G is t h e constant of gravitation and E and M
are the masses of the Earth and the Moon respectively, because the relation
between the errors of them are given from the Kepler's third law by the
formula:
2ma3Am + 3m2a2Aa = A(GE + GM). (6.7)

AN ANALYSIS OF LUNAR OCCULTATIONS IN THE yEARS 1955-]980 67
The definitive interpretation of s is b e y o n d the scope of this paper.

Only the possible reasons have been mentioned.
6.1.3. Constant term. The difference of the longitude of the Moon between
the value derived in t h i s paper and in t h e set of constants $200 is
Aw I = 0 1 5 7 + 0~41t. (6.8)
The values in $200 are referred to t h e center of m a s s of the Moon because

the coordinates of the four retroreflectors on the Moon referred to the
center of m a s s were solved from the laser ranging data. If w e assume that
the longitude given by the LE200 is c o r r e c t with respect to t h e dynamical
equinox at t h e time of mean epoch of lunar laser ranging (around 1975), the
difference
A w I = 0':47 (at 1975) (6.9)
becomes the longitude component of the difference between the center of the
reference datum in the Watts' charts and the center of mass in the sense
that the center in t h e Watts' charts leads the center of m a s s in the lunar
orbit. This is c o m p a r a b l e with the results obtained using laser altimetry
data from Apollo missions and orbital or Earth-based photogrammetry. The
value obtained by Sjogren and Wollenhaupt (1976) is a b o u t I km (i.e. 075),
regardless of whether the reference points are taken on the maria or the
highlands, and the value by Bills and Ferrari (1977) is 0 . 4 4 km (i.e. 0724) .
All the results considered here are in a g r e e m e n t that the center of figure
leads the center of m a s s in t h e direction of o r b i t a l motion. The difference
of their sizes is p r e s u m a b l y due to t h e difference of the reference point
for the center of figure.
6.1.4. Relation between ET and TD. After recognizing that the Universal Time
(UT) was not a uniform time-scale, Ephemeris Time (ET) was introduced t o be
used as a uniform time-scale in a s t r o n o m y . It is d e f i n e d by the mean
longitude of the Sun given by Newcomb (1895b), but it is p r a c t i c a l l y deter-
mined from the observations of the position of the Moon, because the Moon's
geocentric motion is m u c h greater than those of the Sun and the planets. In
order to r e d u c e the Brown's (1919) expression of the mean longitude to an
expression in a p u r e l y gravitational theory in w h i c h the measure of time is
the same as d e f i n e d by the Sun's longitude, a correction based on the work
of Spencer Jones (1939) and proposed by Clemence (1948) was applied to the
mean longitude. The correction applied after the removal of the Brown's
empirical term is g i v e n by
~L = -8~72 - 26~75(t + I) - 11~22(t + I) 2 , (6.10)
which was adopted by the IAU (1949). Note that the numerical coefficients
for this expression given in t h e Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical
Ephemeris and the American Ephemeris and Nautical Almanac (1961, p. 106)
68 MITSURU SOMA
differ slightly, but those given above have actually been used. Improved
Lunar Ephemeris 1952-1959 (1954, hereinafter referred to as ILE) and the
lunar ephemeris in t h e n a t i o n a l ephemerides for 1960-1971 are based on the
above expression a n d t h e y are d e s i g n a t e d j = 0. T h e lunar ephemeris was
later revised by introducing the IAU 1964 system of a s t r o n o m i c a l constants
(IAU, ]966) and incorporating the full precision of B r o w n ' s solution for
the solar terms evaluated by Eckert e t al. (1966). The revised ephemeris is
designated j = 2 and is g i v e n in t h e n a t i o n a l ephemerides for 1972-1983.
Spencer Jones' analysis includes observations of the Sun, Moon, and
inner planets observed since 17th c e n t u r y a n d the c o r r e c t i o n proposed by
Clemence is b a s e d o n the a b s o l u t e (i.e. d e c l i n a t i o n ) observations of t h e
Sun and the observations of lunar occultations. Therefore, ET determined
from the lunar observations using the lunar ephemeris j = 2 is in a c c o r d
with the Newcomb's mean longitude of t h e Sun which is m e a s u r e d f r o m the
dynamical equinox.
According to A o k i (1960) , S p e n c e r Jones used the zodiacal catalogue
compiled by Hendrick (1905) in the r e d u c t i o n of o c c u l t a t i o n s . Therefore,
when the ZC b y R o b e r t s o n (1940) is u s e d in t h e r e d u c t i o n of o c c u l t a t i o n s ,
as is u s u a l l y the c a s e at p r e s e n t , some correction must be a p p l i e d t o the
obtained ET. The correction proposed by Aoki (1960) is I734, to w h i c h the
equinox difference Hed-ZC of 0 ~ 0 5 4 correspond. Aoki (1961) rediscussed the
effect of the e q u i n o x difference and obtained the c o r r e c t i o n as t h e function
of time, but the constant value I~34 h a s actually been used.
Since the t i m e u n i t of the International Atomic Time (TAI) was
determined in s u c h a w a y t h a t it is e q u a l to t h e t i m e u n i t of E T (Markowitz
e t al., 1958), the d i f f e r e n c e ET -TAI is a l m o s t constant for a long period
of time. The observed value for E T - T A I using the catalogue ZC a n d the
ephemeris j = 2 is a b o u t 3098. This value is b a s e d on the o b s e r v a t i o n s of
the M o o n m a d e at a r o u n d 1970. After adding I~34 to it, the v a l u e 32~184 is
chosen to d e f i n e the Dynamical Time (TD) :
TD : TAI + 32~184, (6.11)
for t h i s v a l u e needs only four figures when expressed in d a y s . TD is t h e

time argument used in t h i s p a p e r for e n t r y to the lunar ephemeris.
If the t i d a l term in j = 2 is i n c o r r e c t , ET deduced from j = 2 diverges
with time f r o m the v a l u e defined b y the Sun's longitude. We d i s t i n g u i s h
these two ET's by denoting E T ( j = 2) a n d E T ( S u n ) . ET(j = 2) is t h e t i m e
deduced using the catalogue ZC and t h e e p h e m e r i s j = 2 plus I734 and ET(Sun)
is the t i m e d e f i n e d b y the Sun's longitude.
Assuming that the t i d a l t e r m in l o n g i t u d e adopted in E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2
( - 1 1 ~ 9 5 t 2) is c o r r e c t with respect to TD, we can deduce the relation
ET(j : 2) a n d TD.
The mean longitude of t h e M o o n in t h e lunar ephemeris j = 2 referred to
the mean equinox of d a t e is
w1( j : 2) : 785 938~93 + 1 732 564 371~17t - 4 ~ 0 6 t 2, (6.12)

in w h i c h partial correction for aberration (-0?70) is e l i m i n a t e d and the

small cubic term is ignored. Since this ephemeris is r e f e r r e d to t h e
Hedrick's equinox, we obtain the longitude referred to t h e dynamical equinox
by applying the value shown in T a b l e VI:
w1( j = 2, Dyn) = 785 939?47 + I 732 564 372740t - 4 7 0 6 t 2. (6.13)
TABLE VI: Equinox difference.
Dyn-FK5 0~0118 (this paper)

FKS-FK4 0.0775 + 07085t (Fricke, 1982)
FK4-ZC 0.0038 + 0.0042t (Kubo, 197])
ZC - H e d -0.054 (Robertson, 1940)
Dyn-Hed 090391 + 070892t
.'. (Dyn-Hed) cos ~ = +0~54 + 1723t
The linear term in ZC-Hed is i g n o r e d in o r d e r to

accord with the value proposed by Aoki (1960).
Therefore, the difference between the mean longitude in j : 2 and the one in
ELP2000-82 obtained in t h i s paper (j = 2 m i n u s ELP2000-82) is
s I = -I706 - 0~85t + 0 7 7 3 t 2. (6.14)
The difference of the apparent longitudes between j = 2 and the

ELP2000-82 for the period 1940-1980 is shown in F i g u r e 3 and for the period
]720-2000 in F i g u r e 5. The correction given in T a b l e VI w a s also applied to
the longitude of j = 2 in t h i s case in o r d e r to r e f e r the both longitudes to
the same equinox. The value of the difference at a r o u n d 1970 is about 070
because TD is d e f i n e d in such a way that its value is e q u a l to E T d e d u c e d
from the observations of the Moon at a r o u n d 1970. The mean rate of the
difference in t h e period 1955-1958 should be 0 for the rate of TD (i.e. the
rate of TAI) was determined from ET deduced from the observations of the
Moon in this period (Markowitz et al., 1988), but because the dispersion of
the difference is l a r g e , it c a n n o t be seen clearly.
The smooth line in F i g u r e 5 shows the difference of the mean longitudes
given in E q u a t i o n (6.14). The shift of the difference of the apparent
longitude from the smooth line is d u e to t h e deficiencies of long period
terms of the longitude in t h e Brown's theory. The long period terms of the
longitude whose coefficient is g r e a t e r than 0?05 are listed in T a b l e VII.
Since most of these terms in j = 2 are additive terms to t h e mean elements,
errors of the coefficients would produce errors of short periods and hence
the solutions for the constants would be affected by the errors when using
Brown's theory.
By p i c k i n g up the long period terms in j = 2 and in E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 whose
coefficient differs by more than 071 from each other, we obtain the
70 MITSURU SOMA
CD
CD
C~
CD
CD
-- C[D 9
c)
Od o
c~
i
t--
o
q~
o~
ii
-n
qg
r~
c~ ~
CD i
o
0)
SC CD
CD
4J
-g
O
,-t
~
,1=
4~
o3
L~
t~
tM
-~ -2" ~
t;
-,-t
I I
Od CO
I I I
TABLE VII: Long period terms in longitude whose period is greater than
10 y e a r s and whose coefficient is g r e a t e r than 0~05.
Period Argument I ELP2000-82 j = 2
(yr) Coeff. Phase Coeff. Phase
1912 10V-3T - i 0~563 333~306 -0~31 3317

1783 4T - 8 M + 3J 0.901 285.987 0.84 284.8
883 2J - 5 S 0.164 347.767
273 18V-16T- ~ 14.249 26.543 14.27 30.4
273 18V - 1 6 T - s 0.254t 114.565 0 25t 120.4
239 8V-13T 0.227 235.750 0 237 226. I
127 26V-29T - s 0.105 75.001 0 108 68.0
104 2M + D- F 0.064 163.722 0 017 165.
95.8 3V- 4T + D - s 0.104 270.343 0 011 267.0
49.8 5V- 6T + 2D - 2F 0.053 272.296 0 054 270.
47.9 6V- 8T + 2 D - 2s 0.059 167.127 0 062 162.6
37.1 2T - 3J + 2 D - 2s 0.283 10.038 0 284 7.5
34 8 20V- 21T- 2D + s 0.107 271.802 0.126 267.0
186 Wl + P A - F 7.063 0.001 7.072 0.0
18 6 T + D- F 0.289 95.001 0.282 92.8
174 2T- 2J + 2D - 2Z 0.245 0.086 0.240 0.1
156 T- 2M 0.325 318.138 0.327 315.6
11 9 J 0.086 286.696 0.087 289.9
i
All terms are sine terms. The characters in t h e arguments have the
following meanings in w h i c h longitudes are referred to t h e fixed
equinox of 2000 (for E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 ) and 1850 (for j = 2):
V: Mean longitude of the Venus.
T: Mean longitude of the Earth.
M: Mean longitude of the Mars.
J: Mean longitude of the Jupiter.
S: Mean longitude of the Saturn.
w1: Mean longitude of the Moon.
D: Mean elongation of the Moon from the Sun.
s Mean anomaly of the Sun.
s Mean anomaly of the Moon.
F: Mean argument of latitude of the Moon.
PA: general precession in longitude.
expression for the long period difference between j = 2 and ELP2000-82

j = 2 minus ELP2000-82) :
Allong = -0187 sin ( 1 0 V - 3T - Z + 333 ~ ) 0~16 sin (2J - 5S + 348 ~ )
+0'283 - 0':08t - 0 ] 0 4 t 2, (6.15)
in w h i c h the difference is e x p a n d e d to t h e polynomial in t c e n t e r e d at

72 MITSURU SOMA
J2000.0. By taking into account this long period difference, we obtain the
expression for the difference of the longitudes between j = 2 and ELP2000-82
(j = 2 m i n u s ELP2000-82) :
s : ~w I + Allong
= -0123 - 0~93t + 0 1 6 9 t 2. (6.16)
This difference comes from the fact that the time arguments of j = 2 and
ELP2000-82 are ET(j = 2) and TD respectively. Dividing s by the mean motion
of the Moon 0~5490/sec, we obtain
TD - ET(j = 2) : - 0~42 - I~69t + I ~ 2 6 t 2. (6.17)
If the time argument used in celestial mechanics has no acceleration

with respect to TAI, there should be no quadratic term in TD -ET(Sun). Let
us assume that ET(j : 2) and ET(Sun) have equal value and equal rate at the
mean epoch of observations used by Spencer Jones, for the coefficients in
j = 2 are based on the work of Spencer Jones. The mean epoch of the
observations is around 1800. Since
TD - ET(j = 2) : + 8~00 (6.18)
and
d
-- [TD - ET(j = 2)] : - 6773/cy (6.19)
dt
at 1800, we obtain
TD - ET(Sun) = + 8~00 - 6773(t + 2.0)
= - 5~46 - 6?73t. (6.201
It should be noted that the expression obtained here depends greatly

on the adopted tidal term. For example, if the tidal term is - 1 3 ~ 0 t 2, the
difference of the longitudes would become
s = - 0~23 - 0~93t + 0169t 2 + I~05(t + 0.304) 2 , (6.21)
from which we deduce
TD - ET(Sun) = - 12~9 - 1372t. (6.22)
Equation (6.20) or (6.22) shows that, although the value and rate of
TD was chosen to be equal to those of ET(j : 2), TD (= T A I + 3 2 ~ 1 8 4 ) and
ET(Sun) diverges with time.
6.1.5. Mean motion of the Sun. The sidereal mean motion n' of the Sun in
$200 which is the value fitted to the JPL's LE200 is given by
n' = 129 597 742~276 / Julian century. (6.23)

Bretagnon (1982) compared the solution VSOP82 of the motion of the planets
with the JPL's DE200 and obtained almost the same value for n' w i t h the
above one. By adding the speed of g e n e r a l precession in longitude at J 2 0 0 0 . 0
in t h e IAU 1976 system of constants:
p = 5029~097 / Julian century, (6.24)
we obtain the mean motion referred to t h e mean equinox of d a t e :
n' + p = 129 602 771~37 / Julian century. (6.25)
Newcomb's expression for the Sun's mean longitude gives the following value
at J 2 0 0 0 . 0 :
n' + p = 129 602 770~31 / Julian century. (6.26)
Therefore, the difference of the Sun's mean motion between LE200 and Newcomb
(LE200 minus Newcomb) is
5n' = I~06 / cy. (6.27)
Lieske and Standish (1981) state that this discrepancy comes from the fact
that the Newcomb's solar ephemeris is w i t h respect to 'Newcomb's dynamical
equinox', but this explanation is n o t acceptable for the following reason:
The time argument of the longitude in t h e LE200 is t h e Dynamical Time, while
that of the longitude given by Newcomb is t h e Ephemeris Time in t h e present
interpretation. The relation between the Sun's longitude and the Ephemeris
Time is b a s e d on the work of Spencer Jones and he used the absolute
observation of the Sun in d e r i v i n g the Sun's longitude, as w a s already
discussed in Section 6.1.4. Therefore, the solar ephemeris calculated from
the Newcomb's expression is n o t concerned with the equinox used by Newcomb.
The following reasons for the discrepancy can be considered:
(i) the time unit of ET and that of T D are different,

(ii) the adopted precession p has an e r r o r .
The mean motion in D E 2 0 0 / L E 2 0 0 is w i t h respect to TD, whereas the mean

motion in N e w c o m b ' s expression is w i t h respect to E T ( S u n ) . If w e accept the
relation (6.20) derived from the tidal term - 1 1 7 9 5 t 2 in t h e Moon's mean
longitude, we can deduce
n'(TD) - n' (ET) : 0~28 / cy. (6.28)
This value depends greatly on the adopted tidal term of t h e Moon. If w e

assume that the tidal term is - 1 3 ] 0 t 2, i.e. the formula (6.22) is c o r r e c t ,
we obtain
n' (TD) - n' (ET) : 0~54 / cy. (6.29)
The JPL ephemeris DE200/LE200 is m a i n l y based on t h e spacecraft and

the radar ranging data for the 4 inner planets. From the ranging data, the
74 MITSURU SOMA
m e a n m o t i o n s w i t h r e s p e c t to the i n e r t i a l frame can be a c c u r a t e l y determined,

as was a l r e a d y s t a t e d c o n c e r n i n g the M o o n ' s m e a n motion. Therefore, if the
p r e c e s s i o n p g i v e n by (6.24) has an e r r o r of s the r e s u l t i n g m e a n m o t i o n
(6.25) also has an e r r o r of s The v a l u e of p in the IAU 1976 s y s t e m of
constants is b a s e d on the F r i c k e ' s (1967, 197]] a n a l y s i s of the stars'
p r o p e r m o t i o n s and it m i g h t have an e r r o r of O]i/cy or 0~3/cy.
The a b o v e r e a s o n s are not e n o u g h to e x p l a i n the d i s c r e p a n c y . For
o b t a i n i n g the d e f i n i t e r e a s o n s of the d i s c r e p a n c y , a n a l y s e s of r e c e n t
o p t i c a l o b s e r v a t i o n s of the Sun and p l a n e t s are needed.
6.2. V_alues of the P r i m a r y A r g u m e n t s
As s h o w n in the E q u a t i o n s (5.29)-(5.32), the v a l u e s for the p r i m a r y a r g u -

m e n t s D, i', Z, F o b t a i n e d in this a n a l y s i s are c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the J P L ' s
L E 2 0 0 w i t h i n the e r r o r of o b s e r v a t i o n s .
6.3. M o t i o n of the P e r i g e e and N o d e
To d e t e r m i n e the v a l u e s of the c o n s t a n t s in his lunar theory, B r o w n a n a l y s e d

the m e r i d i a n o b s e r v a t i o n s of the M o o n and in o r d e r to r e c o n c i l e the
t h e o r e t i c a l v a l u e s of the m o t i o n s of the p e r i g e e and n o d e w i t h the o b s e r v e d
values, he a d o p t e d the v a l u e of 1/294 for the e a r t h ' s f l a t t e n i n g f a c t o r
(Brown, 1914b), w h e r e a s the H a y f o r d ' s (1909) v a l u e was 1/297.0. Eckert
(1965) r e - e x a m i n e d the m o t i o n s of t h e m b a s e d on the n e w s o l u t i o n of the m a i n
p r o b l e m of the l u n a r t h e o r y by E c k e r t and S m i t h (1966) and s t a t e d that the
o b s e r v e d m o t i o n of the node i n d i c a t e d the large c o n c e n t r a t i o n of d e n s i t y
n e a r the s u r f a c e of the Moon. This d i s c o r d s w i t h the r e c e n t k n o w l e d g e of the
d e n s i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n of the Moon.
In the f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n s , in o r d e r to i n v e s t i g a t e the m o t i o n s of
the p e r i g e e and node, the v a l u e s of the m e a n l o n g i t u d e of t h e m for the e p o c h
1850 d e r i v e d by S p e n c e r J o n e s (1932) w i l l be used.
B r o w n o b t a i n e d the v a l u e s of the m e a n l o n g i t u d e s of the p e r i g e e and
node from the a n a l y s e s of the G r e e n w i c h m e r i d i a n o b s e r v a t i o n s f r o m 1750 to
1901 (Brown, 1914a, 1915b) and f r o m 1847 to 1901 (Brown, 1914b, 1915a, b),
respectively. ILE and n a t i o n a l e p h e m e r i d e s up to 1983 a d o p t e d t h e s e
expressions. Spencer Jones (1932) a n a l y s e d the o c c u l t a t i o n s o b s e r v e d f r o m
1672 to 1908 and o b t a i n e d the c o r r e c t i o n s to the B r o w n ' s values. In the
f i r s t and s e c o n d lines of T a b l e V I I I are the v a l u e s for the e p o c h J 1 8 5 0 . 0
o b t a i n e d by them. N o t e that in B r o w n ' s and S p e n c e r Jones' p a p e r s the y e a r
1850.0 m e a n s 1850 Jan. 0.5 UT w h i c h is 0.5 day after J1850.0. The m e a n
l o n g i t u d e of the p e r i g e e in the B r o w n ' s t h e o r y i n c l u d e s the p a r t i a l
c o r r e c t i o n for a b e r r a t i o n (Clemence et al., 1952). The v a l u e of the t h i r d
line of T a b l e V I I I is for r e m o v i n g this aberration. The a n a l y s e s by B r o w n
and S p e n c e r J o n e s w e r e r e f e r r e d to the N e w c o m b ' s equinox. The d i f f e r e n c e
TABLE VIII: Mean longitude of the p e r i g e e and node for t h e

epoch J1850.0.
w2 w3
Brown 359 315~85 526 517~27

Spencer Jones -1.61 • 0 ~ 5 3 - 1 . 7 8 • I~19
Removing aberration +0.35 0.00
Equinox difference -1.21 -1.21
359 3 1 3 ~ 3 8 • 0153 526 5 1 4 1 2 8 • I~19
The quoted uncertainties a r e the standard errors.
TABLE IX: Equinox difference.
Dyn-FK5 (this p a p e r ) +0~177

FK5-FK4 (Fricke, 1982) -01750 at J 1 8 5 0 . 0
FK4-N I (Fricke and Kopff, 1963) -01750
Dyn-N I -I]323 at J 1 8 5 0 . 0
between the d y n a m i c a l equinox (Dyn) derived in t h i s paper and the Newcomb's

equinox (N]) is - I ~ 3 2 3 as s h o w n in T a b l e IX. Therefore, in o r d e r to r e f e r
the B r o w n ' s and Spencer Jones' values to t h e d y n a m i c a l equinox, the value
-I~323 cos ~ must be a d d e d . The value of the fourth line in T a b l e V I I I is
this correction.
The v a l u e s o f the m e a n longitudes of t h e p e r i g e e and node referred to
the m e a n equinox of date for t h e m e a n epoch J1969.6 derived in t h i s paper
a r e the following:
w 2 : 1 030 940]02 • 0]06, (6.30)
w 3 : I 270 880'~22 • 0~05. (6.31)
Combining these values with the values in T a b l e VIII using the theoretical
values of the secular accelerations of the perigee and node in E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 ,
we deduce the following mean motions of t h e m for the e p o c h J 2 0 0 0 . 0 :
w = (14 648 450~21 • 0~45) / Julian century, 16.32)
w~ 1) = (-6 962 891~25 • 1~00) / Julian century. 16.33)
Accordingly the d i f f e r e n c e between the observed and theoretical values of

them are
6w~ I) = (+0~34 • 0~45) / cy, (6.34)
6w~ I) : (-0~83 • I~00) / cy. (6.35)

76 MITSURU SOMA
Thus we c o n c l u d e that the o b s e r v e d v a l u e s of the m e a n m o t i o n s of the p e r i g e e

and node c o i n c i d e w i t h the t h e o r e t i c a l v a l u e s w i t h i n the e r r o r of
observations. This r e s u l t is c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the r e s u l t by C h a p r o n t and
Chapront-Tous@ (1981), who use the s o l u t i o n E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 1 and the o b s e r v e d
v a l u e s by M a r t i n and Van F l a n d e r n (1970).
W h e n one uses the IAU ~976 s y s t e m of c o n s t a n t s to c a l c u l a t e the
p e r t u r b a t i o n by the f i g u r e of the Moon, the t h e o r e t i c a l v a l u e of the
s i d e r e a l m o t i o n of the p e r i g e e by E c k e r t (1965) becomes 14 643 53518 (per
J u l i a n century) for the e p o c h 1850, w h i c h c o i n c i d e s w i t h the E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2
v a l u e of 14 643 535161. B u t the t h e o r e t i c a l v a l u e of the s i d e r e a l m o t i o n of
the node by E c k e r t is -6 967 932~7, w h i c h d i f f e r s f r o m the E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 v a l u e
of -6 967 938~60 by the a m o u n t of 519. As s h o w n in T a b l e X this d i f f e r e n c e
is m a i n l y due to the i n a c c u r a t e v a l u e for the p l a n e t a r y p e r t u r b a t i o n by
B r o w n w h i c h was u s e d by Eckert.
T A B L E X: M o t i o n of the node for the e p o c h 1850.
ELP2000-82 Eckert
Main problem -6 967 187~37 -6 967 186~6

E a r t h figure -592.25 -592.1
Planetary perturbation -144.08 -137.0
Tidal effect 0.14 0.
Lunar figure -16.94 -17.0
Relativity 1.90 0.
-6 967 938160 -6 967 93217
The o b s e r v e d v a l u e s of the m o t i o n of the node o b t a i n e d by B r o w n and

S p e n c e r J o n e s still d i f f e r from the t h e o r e t i c a l v a l u e by a b o u t +5". The
r e a s o n for this d i f f e r e n c e is not known.
6.4. The V a l u e s for E, F, and e'
The v a l u e s of the c o n s t a n t s E, F, and e' o b t a i n e d in this p a p e r are s h o w n

in E q u a t i o n s (5.15)-(5.17) and the d i f f e r e n c e s of t h e m f r o m the v a l u e s in
$200 are g i v e n in E q u a t i o n s (5.34)-(5.36).
The v a l u e s of 2E and 2P are o b t a i n e d m a i n l y f r o m O - C ' s of the c o e f f i -
c i e n t s of sin i in l o n g i t u d e and sin F in l a t i t u d e r e s p e c t i v e l y . The
l i b r a t i o n in l o n g i t u d e and l a t i t u d e are a l m o s t r e p r e s e n t e d by 8 ~ sin Z and
-7 ~ sin F, r e s p e c t i v e l y . Therefore, if the c e n t e r of the r e f e r e n c e d a t u m in
Watts' charts varies with libration (s bM) such as
Ax = a I " ZM, (6.36)
Ay = a 2 9 bM, (6.37)
AN ANALYSIS OF LUNAR OCCULTATIONS IN THE yEARS 1955-1980 77
where Ax is m e a s u r e d in the direction of the west on the celestial sphere

and Ay is m e a s u r e d in the direction of the north, the obtained values of E
and F have errors of -ai/2 and -a2/2, respectively. If t h e differences
(5.34) and (5.35) come from the errors s and Ay in W a t t s ' charts, the
values of a I and a 2 would be
a I = -07010/8 ~ , (6.38)
a 2 = -07018/7 ~ . (6.39)
As for the solar elements, Newcomb applied the corrections +0?054 and
+I~4, respectively, to the values of the eccentricity and the longitude of
perigee of the solar orbit in o r d e r to e l i m i n a t e those terms in the
perturbations in t h e longitude which depend only upon the mean anomaly of
the Sun (Newcomb, 1895a, p. 180). Therefore the value for e' consistent
with the Newcomb's definition is found to De
e N' = 3 4 4 6 ? 5 5 _+ 0?02. (6.40)
Morrison (1979) obtained the correction -0717 • 0~02 to the Newcomb's value
for e' using the ephemeris j = 2. Since the Newcomb's value for e' at J2000.0
is 3446150, the value obtained by Morrison for J2000.0 is
e N' = 3 4 4 6 ? 3 3 _+ 0 ? 0 2 (Morrison) . (6.41)
The difference 0':22 b e t w e e n the above two values may be attributed to the
error in the Brown's theory. The value e' is m a i n l y determined from the
coefficient of the term sin s in longitude. As shown in T a b l e XI, the
TABLE XI: Terms in longitude having frequency between 0.98 y r -I and

-I
1.02 yr and whose coefficients is g r e a t e r than 0?005.
Freq. Argument l ELP2000-82 j : 2
(yr-1) Coeff. Phase Coeff. 2 Phase
0.9989 T + 2J- 5S 07017 65165 - -

0.9994 5T - 8 M + 3S 0.011 187.28 07010 18472
1.0000 s -666.442 0.00 -666.454 0.0
1.0000 s 1.677t 0.00 1.667t 0.0
1.0000 Z' - - -0.035 0.0
1.0000 ~' 0.007 155.77 - -
1.0000 T 0.017 95.38 - -
1.0005 3T- 8 M + 3J 0.017 29.80 0.010 30.1
I All terms are sine terms. The characters in the arguments have the
same meanings as in T a b l e VII.
2 The values are changed so as to correspond to the ELP2000-82 initial
value e' = 0 . 0 1 6 709 24 w h i c h corresponds to the Newcomb's definition of
e ~ = 0 . 0 1 6 709 50.
78 MITSURU SOMA
difference (ELP2000-82 minus j = 2) o f t h e t e r m s w h o s e frequency is c l o s e to

the frequency of Z' is g i v e n b y
0~012 sin Z' + 0 7 0 1 7 sin (T + 95~4) +

+ 07017 sin (T + 2J - 5S + 6516) +
+ 07007 sin (Z' + 15518) + 07035 sin i'
+ 07041 sin Z' + 0 ~ 0 0 3 cos i' (6.42)
The difference of 0~041 in the c o e f f i c i e n t of sin i' c o r r e s p o n d s to the

difference of 0 ~ 2 2 in t h e v a l u e of e'. This explains fully the d i f f e r e n c e
between the v a l u e for e' o b t a i n e d by Morrison a n d the v a l u e obtained in t h i s
analysis. Anyway, the value for e' o b t a i n e d from occultations differs from
the value in $ 2 0 0 b y 0710, the r e a s o n of w h i c h is n o t k n o w n .
6.5. Equinox Correction and Obliquity
The correction to b e a p p l i e d to t h e r i g h t ascension of t h e stars in t h e F K 5

in o r d e r that they should be r e f e r r e d to t h e d y n a m i c a l equinox is f o u n d
to be
~ : + 0~177 • 07012. (6.43)
Since the ELP2000-82 is c o n s t r u c t e d with respect to the e c l i p t i c in the

inertial sense, the value given above is r e f e r r e d to the e q u i n o x in t h e
inertial sense. The ecliptic in t h e i n e r t i a l sense is the same ecliptic as
defined b y Le V e r r i e r (1858), w h i l e the ecliptic in t h e r o t a t i n g sense is
the same ecliptic as d e f i n e d by Newcomb (1895b). The correction to be
applied to the FK5 in o r d e r to r e f e r them to the e q u i n o x in the r o t a t i n g
sense is
6~ = + 07083 • 0~012, (6.44)
because the equinox in t h e r o t a t i n g sense is l o c a t e d at 0 7 0 9 4 e a s t o f the

equinox in t h e inertial sense (Standish, 1981b; Kinoshita and Aoki, 1983).
The equinox correction to the FK4 o b t a i n e d by Morrison (1979) using the
ephemeris j = 2 is + 0 1 8 2 • 0702 for t h e e p o c h 1959.0. Since the equinox
correction to the FK4 adopted in the F K 5 is + 0764 at 1959.0, the v a l u e
obtained by Morrison corresponds to the equinox correction to t h e FK5 o f
+ 0 7 1 8 • 0702. This value s h o u l d be r e g a r d e d as the v a l u e referred to t h e
equinox in t h e r o t a t i n g sense, because the t h e o r y by Brown was based o n the
ecliptic by Newcomb. Therefore, the location of t h e e q u i n o x obtained in t h i s
analysis is d i f f e r e n t from that obtained by Morrison significantly.
The equinox correction 6~ 0 is o b t a i n e d mainly from O-C's in t h e
residuals of the Moon's latitude which has the p e r i o d of t r o p i c a l month
(i.e. the frequency of 13.369 cycles/year):
6~ ~ cos ~ sin e 6~ 0. (6.45)

o'~ 20 -
r%
O. lO - /k fl / ~
<
I3 13.5
Fig. 6. Periodogram of the difference in latitude between ELP2000-82 and

j = 2 for frequencies 13-14 cycles/year.
Therefore, if the theory has errors in the terms of latitude whose

frequencies are close to 13.369 cycles/year, it will produce an error in
the obtained equinox correction. The periodogram of the difference in
latitude between ELP2000-82 and j = 2 is shown in Figure 6 for frequencies
between 13 and 14 cycles/year and the terms are shown in Table XII.
-I
TABLE XII: Terms in latitude having frequency between 13 yr and
-I
14 yr and whose difference of the coefficients between ELP2000-82
and j = 2 is greater than 0]01.
Freq. Argument I ELP2000-82 j = 2
(yr-1) Coeff. Phase Coeff. Phase
1 3 . 143 Wl + P A - 2Z 0]017 0~00 0~007 0~

1 3 . 200 T - 2J + D 0.050 100.51 -0.018 24
1 3 . 241 5V -9T -D 0 000 324.28 -0.030 305
13 301 T - 2S + D 0 016 113.92 - -
13 367 T + 2J- 5S + D 0 014 239.06 - -
13 369 T + D 0 141 291.98 0.166 289
13 369 w I + PA 8 045 180.00 8.076 180
13 373 8V- 12T + D 0 011 153.48 - -
13 402 T + S + D 0 013 154.19 - -
13 422 10V- 3T - i + F 0 025 333.23 -0.014 331
13 423 10V-3T - s F 0 025 333.19 -0.014 331
13 432 2M + D 0 039 163.75 0.011 165
13 453 T + J + D 0 035 75.51 -0.007 34
13 4 9 6 5V - 7T + D 0 037 169.28 0.007 247
13 537 T + 2J + D 0 000 81.75 0.035 348
All terms are sine terms. The characters in the arguments have the
same meanings as in Table VII.
80 MITSURU SOMA
These differences should be compared with the expression:
6B = 0?037 sin (l + 9 5 7 1 2 ) , (6.46)
which represents the latitude referred to t h e ecliptic in t h e rotating sense

minus the latitude referred to t h e ecliptic in t h e inertial sense. The
difference of the terms whose frequencies between 13.367 and 13.373
cycles/year would greatly affect the solution for the equinox correction.
This is p r o b a b l y the main cause of the difference between the result by
Morrison and the result derived in t h i s analysis. But it is d i f f i c u l t to
explain the difference from the coefficients of the terms because the terms
having the frequencies such as 13.301 or 13.402 cycles/year would also
affect the solution and their influence depends on t h e time distribution of
the observations.
The difference of the applied systematic corrections to the declination
of the stars would also affect the solution for the equinox slightly. A
second-order harmonic expression was applied in t h i s paper, while cor-
rections read from his table were applied in M o r r i s o n ' s analysis.
The value of the difference of the obliquity derived in t h i s analysis
from the value of the IAU 1976 system of a s t r o n o m i c a l constants is
I
E - eIA U = - 07016 • 0?004, (6.47)
I
where ~ is t h e obliquity of the ecliptic in t h e inertial sense on the mean
equator. Since we have
R I
e - ~ : + 0?003 (6.48)
(Standish, 1981b; Kinoshita and Aoki, 1983), where s is t h e obliquity of

the ecliptic in t h e rotating sense on the mean equator, we obtain
R
s - eIA U : - 0~013 • 0?004. (6.49)
The difference from the value in $ 2 0 0 is
I I
s ~$200 = + 0?023 • 0?003. (6.50)
The equinox correction 6e 0 to t h e catalogue and the correction 6~ 0 to

the adopted value of the obliquity are mainly determined from O-C's in t h e
latitude 6B:
6B # s i n i 6s 0 + sin s cos I 6~ 0. (6.51)
The solution for 6a 0 a n d 6e 0 a r e affected by the systematic error in

declination of the catalogue because if t h e declination of the stars has an
error such as
66 : S s i n ~ + c cos ~, (6.52)
where ~ is t h e right ascension of t h e star, the O-C in t h e latitude has an

error in t h e form
68 = s c o s e sin ~ + c cos I. (6.53)
If the value given in E q u a t i o n (6.50) is d u e to t h e error of the stars'

declinations, we find the value
s = 0~025. (6.54)
The solution for the equinox correction given in E q u a t i o n s (6.43) and (6.44)
is a l s o affected by the term c cos e in t h e error of t h e star's declination:
6~ + c/sin ~ = + 0~177 • 0':012, (6.55)
6~ + c/sin e = + 0~083 • 0~012. (6.56)
6.6. S_~stematic Correction to t h e Right Ascension
The systematic correction to t h e right ascension of the FK4 is found t o be
6~ = (- 0 ~ 0 2 6 • 0~004) sin ~ + (0~023 • 0~004) cos ~ =
= ( - 0~0023 • 0~0004) sin (~ - 2~8 i 0~6). (6.57)
Note that this correction is o n l y applicable to stars near the ecliptic.
6.7. Watts' Charts Datum
The mean radius of W a t t s ' charts is found to be
R0 = (1738.107 • 0.004) km, (6.58)
which corresponds to the following radius at t h e mean distance of 384 400 km:
00 = 932~652 • 0~002. (6.59)
The mean radius is c o r r e l a t e d with the personal equation. From the com-
parison with the solution (Table XIII) using only photoelectric observations
TABLE XIII: Solution using only photoelectric observations.
Unknown Solution ~
~ 0 000 • 0 011
6R 0 (-0.013 • 0.018) km
No. of eq. 2461

RMS 0.726 km
Correlation -0.55
i The values shown in t h i s column are corrections to t h e values

in Section 5. O t h e r unknowns are fixed to the values in Section 5.
82 MITSURU SOMA
which are free from the personal equation, the true uncertainty of the
result would be about four times of the standard error.
The latitude component of the center of the reference datum in W a t t s '
charts referred to the center of m a s s is found to be
~R I = (- 0 . 4 4 6 • 0.007) km, (6.60)
which corresponds to the following value at t h e mean distance:
~Pl = - 0~239 • 0[004. (6.61)
The value is c o m p a r a b l e with the value - 0 1 1 9 • 0]01 obtained by M o r r i s o n .

The difference is p a r t l y due to the different adoption of the reference
datum of the Earth. For example, when z-coordinates of observers are
systematically shifted, the solution for ~R I i n c r e a s e s by a l m o s t the same
amount while the solution for the other unknowns scarcely changes. Constant
errors in x - and y-coordinates of observers shculd not produce significant
errors on the solution. Note that if an e r r o r in t h e equator point of the
FK4 exists, the error is incorporated in the solution for ~R I .
The correction for the ellipticity of W a t t s ' datum is
@R 2 : [(+ 0.238 • 0.005) sin 2Q +
+ (- 0.00] • 0.006) cos 2Q] km, (6.62)
which corresponds to the following value at t h e mean distance:
6p2 = (- 0 ~ 1 2 8 • 0~003) cos 2(Q - 135~I • 0?7). (6.63)
The value applied by Watts for correcting the ellipticity which was
determined from the comparison between his preliminary datum and artificial
moon images is
@Pwatts = + 0715 cos 2(Q - 153~ (6.64)
From the comparison of E q u a t i o n s (6.63) and (6.64), it w o u l d appear that

Watts overestimated the correction required to remove the ellipticity. This
result is c o n s i s t e n t with the results by Van Flandern (1970b) and Morrison
(1979).
The correction to the mean radius may vary with libration as w e l l as
position angle. Morrison and Appleby (]981b) discussed such corrections and
their result would be u s e f u l when one use Watts' charts.
6.8. Personal Equation
The visual observations were divided into the following four classes
according to t h e method of timing and application of personal equation:
(i) chronograph, stop watch or tape recorder with no personal equation
applied by the observer,
(ii) c h r o n o g r a p h , stop w a t c h or tape r e c o r d e r w i t h e s t i m a t e of the

p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n r e p o r t e d by the o b s e r v e r ,
(iii) chronograph, stop w a t c h or tape r e c o r d e r w i t h e s t i m a t e of p e r s o n a l
e q u a t i o n a p p l i e d by the o b s e r v e r but the v a l u e not reported,
(iv) e y e - a n d - e a r .
For class (i) the v a l u e s in T a b l e II w e r e a d o p t e d and for c l a s s (iv) 0~0 was
adopted. O n l y the m e a n c o r r e c t i o n s to the p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n s for (ii) and
(iii) w e r e s o l v e d in this analysis. The s o l u t i o n gives
(ii) 6T 1 = + 0~21 • 0~01, (6.65)
(iii) 6% 2 : + 0731 • 0702, (6.66)
w h i c h c o n f i r m the e s t i m a t e in S e c t i o n 3.2. The v a l u e 6~ 2 is g r e a t e r than

the v a l u e ST I by 0~I. This is p r o b a b l y b e c a u s e p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n s w e r e not
a p p l i e d by the o b s e r v e r s to some of the o b s e r v a t i o n s i n c l u d e d in class
(iii).
The o b s e r v a t i o n s w e r e d i v i d e d into 20 ~ r a n g e s of e l o n g a t i o n of the
M o o n f r o m the Sun. The m e a n v a l u e of the p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n a d o p t e d in this
analysis in class (i) and (ii) for e a c h 20 ~ r a n g e of e l o n g a t i o n are shown
in F i g u r e 7. M o r r i s o n and A p p l e b y (1981a) have found that the v a l u e of a
p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n v a r i e s w i t h the p h a s e of the M o o n and it is i n c r e a s e d
just a f t e r full Moon. F i g u r e 7 shows that the a d o p t e d p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n s in
this a n a l y s i s just a f t e r full M o o n is i n c r e a s e d for class (ii) , but the
a m o u n t is small c o m p a r e d w i t h the r e s u l t by M o r r i s o n and A p p l e b y .
I n c o r r e c t v a l u e s of p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n s m i g h t p r o d u c e i n c o r r e c t
s o l u t i o n s for the u n k n o w n s w h i c h are m a i n l y d e t e r m i n e d f r o m the p e r i o d i c
t e r m s h a v i n g a p e r i o d of s y n o d i c month. The p r i n c i p a l t e r m a m o n g t h e m is
the p a r a l l a c t i c i n e q u a l i t y in l o n g i t u d e : -124~988 sin D. The c o e f f i c i e n t of
this t e r m m a i n l y d e p e n d s on the v a l u e s of ~I and ~2 and t h e s e v a l u e s are
f i x e d to the IAU 1976 v a l u e s in this analysis. T h e r e f o r e , e v e n if the
incorrect personal equations i n c r e a s e the r e s i d u a l s and a f f e c t the s o l u t i o n
for the radius of the Moon, the e f f e c t of the i n c o r r e c t n e s s on the s o l u t i o n s
for the f u n d a m e n t a l c o n s t a n t s in the lunar t h e o r y m u s t be i n s i g n i f i c a n t .
In o r d e r to c h e c k the c o r r e c t n e s s of the m e a n v a l u e of the p e r s o n a l
equations, the s o l u t i o n for only the c o n s t a n t c o r r e c t i o n to the m e a n
longitude 6w~ 0) and the c o r r e c t i o n to the r a d i u s ~R 0 of the Moon, w h i c h are
c o r r e l a t e d w i t h the p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n s , are o b t a i n e d u s i n g o n l y the p h o t o -
electric observations. The r e s u l t is shown in T a b l e XIII. The small v a l u e
of the c o r r e c t i o n to the m e a n l o n g i t u d e c o n f i r m s the c o r r e c t n e s s of the
m e a n v a l u e of the a d o p t e d p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n s .
F r o m the a s s u m p t i o n that the g r a v i t a t i o n a l m a s s e s of Solar S y s t e m
b o d i e s are not e q u a l to t h e i r i n e r t i a l m a s s e s , Nordtvedt (1970) predicts
t h a t the l o n g i t u d e of the M o o n has the t e r m w h o s e a m p l i t u d e is 0]02 and
w h o s e p e r i o d is s y n o d i c month. Such a t e r m is i n c o r p o r a t e d into the p e r s o n a l
e q u a t i o n s and it c a n n o t be d e t e c t e d in this analysis.
84 MITSORU SOMA
O.s7
+ + + + + +
+ +
+ +
+ 4- + + +
~ o. 5
1.4
134
@.4
@.3 I t t I
0~ 90 ~ 180 ~ 270 ~ 380 ~
Elongation
Fig. 7. Mean values of the adopted personal equations for each 20 ~ r a n g e

of e l o n g a t i o n , o No personal equation applied by observers.
+ Estimate of p e r s o n a l equation reported by observers.
0"i0 -
O. O0 l t I I I I I l r I I I l l l l l l l l I t t l l I t { I l l I l l I l l I l l I l l t; j I l l I I I I / I I
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 $5 40 45 50 55
Fig. 8. Periodogram of the residuals.

6.9. Periodogram Analysis
The r e s i d u a l s r e d u c e d by the s o l u t i o n g i v e n in S e c t i o n 5 w e r e s u b j e c t e d to
p e r i o d o g r a m a n a l y s i s and the r e s u l t i n g p e r i o d o g m a m is shown in F i g u r e 8.
The figure is t e r m i n a t e d at a f r e q u e n c y of 55 c y c l e s / y e a r as t h e r e are no
s i g n i f i c a n t p e a k s b e y o n d this point.
The peaks f o u n d by M o r r i s o n (7979) u s i n g the B r o w n ' s t h e o r y do not
e x i s t in this p e r i o d o g r a m . But there is a s i g n i f i c a n t p e a k at a f r e q u e n c y
of 27.73 c y c l e s / y e a r . This f r e q u e n c y c o r r e s p o n d s to the p e r i o d of 13.17
days. The peaks at f r e q u e n c i e s of 40.10 and 52.47 c y c l e s / y e a r m u s t be the
g h o s t of the f o r m e r peak, b e c a u s e the d i f f e r e n c e of t h e i r f r e q u e n c y is
12.37 cycles~year w h i c h c o r r e s p o n d s to the p e r i o d of s y n o d i c month. Since
no such d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t s b e t w e e n the s o l u t i o n of E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 and n u m e r i c a l
integrations ( C h a p r o n t - T o u s ~ and Chapront, 1983), these peaks are p r o b a b l y
due to u n k n o w n s y s t e m a t i c e r r o r s in the o b s e r v a t i o n s . A n y w a y , it is
c o n f i r m e d by o b s e r v a t i o n s that the s o l u t i o n E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 has no e r r o r w h o s e
c o e f f i c i e n t is g r e a t e r than 0105.
7. C O N C L U S I O N
The o b s e r v a t i o n s of lunar o c c u l t a t i o n s w e r e a n a l y s e d u s i n g the n e w s o l u t i o n

ELP2000-82 for the M o o n ' s m o t i o n , and as a r e s u l t the c o n s t a n t s in the lunar
t h e o r y and the s y s t e m a t i c c o r r e c t i o n s to the r i g h t a s c e n s i o n of the
f u n d a m e n t a l c a t a l o g u e and to the d a t u m of the Watts' charts w e r e determined.
It was found that the n e g a t i v e l y larger v a l u e s for the tidal t e r m h a v i n g b e e n
o b t a i n e d by e a r l i e r i n v e s t i g a t o r s u s i n g the B r o w n ' s t h e o r y w e r e due to the
deficiencies in the B r o w n ' s t h e o r y and that the m o t i o n s of the p e r i g e e and
node of the lunar o r b i t o b t a i n e d f r o m o b s e r v a t i o n s w e r e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the
m o t i o n s d e r i v e d f r o m the theory. It was a l s o found that the d i f f e r e n c e s of
the v a l u e s of the c o n s t a n t s o b t a i n e d in this a n a l y s i s f r o m the v a l u e s
o b t a i n e d u s i n g the B r o w n ' s t h e o r y w e r e a l m o s t a t t r i b u t e d to the d e f i c i e n c i e s
in the B r o w n ' s theory.
The v a l u e s of the c o n s t a n t t e r m of the m e a n longitude, m e a n m o t i o n of
the Moon, the i n c l i n a t i o n of the lunar o r b i t and the o b l i q u i t y of the
e c l i p t i c o b t a i n e d in this a n a l y s i s are s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m the
v a l u e s d e t e r m i n e d u s i n g the lunar laser r a n g i n g data. M o s t of t h e s e
d i f f e r e n c e s are p r o b a b l y a t t r i b u t e d to the s y s t e m a t i c e r r o r s in the Watts'
c h a r t s and in the f u n d a m e n t a l c a t a l o g u e of stars.
It is i m p o r t a n t to c o n s t r u c t n e w c h a r t s for the m a r g i n a l zone of the
M o o n u s i n g a l t i m e t r y d a t a o b t a i n e d by s p a c e c r a f t s . The d a t a o b t a i n e d by
A p o l l o m i s s i o n s are not e n o u g h to c o n s t r u c t them. It is a d v i s a b l e to o b t a i n
t o p o g r a p h y data of the m a r g i n a l zone in f u t u r e m i s s i o n s to the Moon.
In o r d e r to i n q u i r e w h e t h e r the d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the D y n a m i c a l Time
u s e d as a time a r g u m e n t in c e l e s t i a l m e c h a n i c s and the I n t e r n a t i o n a l A t o m i c
Time is c o n s t a n t , and to d e t e r m i n e the c o r r e c t i o n s to the f u n d a m e n t a l
86 MITSURU SOMA
catalogue such as e q u i n o x m o t i o n and p r e c e s s i o n constant, it is i m p o r t a n t

to c o n t i n u e observing occultations. Observations of g r a z i n g o c c u l t a t i o n s are
also important especially determining the latitude of the Moon.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Dr H. K i n o s h i t a of the Tokyo A s t r o n o m i c a l Observatory (TAO) gave me

instruction in d y n a m i c a l theory and v a l u a b l e discussions. Prof. Y. Kozai of
TAO gave me many useful comments about errors of the result. Prof. S. Aoki
and Dr K. N a k a j i m a of TAO were always e n c o u r a g i n g me in my analysis.
Dr L. V. M o r r i s o n of RGO gave me m a n y v a l u a b l e comments to the draft of the
present paper. Dr L. V. M o r r i s o n of RGO and Dr Y. Kubo of JHD p r o v i d e d
occultation data. I would like to express my g r a t i t u d e to all of them.
This paper is b a s e d on the author's dissertation submitted to the
University of Tokyo, in partial fulfillment of the r e q u i r e m e n t s for the
doctorate.
REFERENCES
Aoki, S.: 1960, Publ. Astron. Soc. Japan 12, 106.

Aoki, S.: 1961, Astron. J. 66, I.
Aoki, S., Guinot, B., Kaplan, G. H., K i n o s h i t a , H., McCarthy, D. D., and
Seidelmann, P. K.: 1982, Astron. Astrophys. 105, 359.
Aoki, S., S6ma, M., Kinoshita, H., and Inoue, K.: 1983, Astron. Astrophys.
128, 263.
Appleby, G. M. and Morrison, L. V.: 1983, M o n t h l y Notices Roy. Astron. Soc.
205, 57.
Appleby, G. M., Morrison, L. V., and White, M. T.: 1984, Roy. Greenwich Obs.
Bull., No. 192.
BIH: 1961, Bulletin Horaire, S~rie 5, p. 336, Paris.
BIH: 1965, B u l l e t i n Horaire, S~rie J, No. 7, p. 3, Paris.
BIH: 1969-1981, Annual Report, Paris.
Bills, B. G. and Ferrari, A. J. : 1977, Icarus 31, 244.
Bretagnon, P.: 1980, VSOP80, Magnetic Tape.
Bretagnon, P. : 1982, Astron. Astrophys. 114, 278.
Bretagnon, P. and Chapront, J.: 1981, Astron. Astrophys. 103, 103.
Brown E.W.: 1899a: Mem. Roy. Astron. Soc. 53, 39.
Brown E. W.: 1899b, Mem. Roy. Astron. Soc. 5_3, 163.
Brown E. W.: 1904, Mem. Roy. A$tron. Soc. 54, I.
Brown E. W.: 1908, Mem. Roy. Astro~o~n.Soc. 57, 51.
Brown E.W.: 1910, Mem. Roy. Astron. Soc. 59, I.
Brown E. W.: 1914a, M o n t h l y Notices Roy. Astron. Soc. 74, 396.
Brown E.W.: 1914b, M o n t h l y Notices Roy. Astron. Soc. 7=44, 552.
Brown E.W.: 1915a, M o n t h l y Notices Roy. Astron. Soc. 7_5, 506.
Brown, E. W.: 1915b, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc. 75, 508.
Brown, E. W.: 1919, Tables of the M o t i o n of the Moon, Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press,
New Haven.
Calame, O. and M u l h o l l a n d , J. D.: 1978, Science 199, 977.
Chapront, J. and C h a p r o n t - T o u z 6 , M.: 1981, Astron. Astrophys. 103, 298.
Chapront-Touz6, M. and Chapront, J.: 1982, E L P 2 0 0 0 - 8 2 , Magnetic Tape.
Chapront-Touz@, M. and Chapront, J. : 1983, Astren. Astrophys. 124. 50.
Clemence, G. M.: 1948, Astron. J. 53, 169.
Clemence, G. M., Porter, J. G., and Sadler, D. H.: 1952, Astron. J. 57, 46.
Dickey, J. 0., W i l l i a m s , J. G., and Yoder, C. F.: 1982, in O. C a l a m e (ed.),
'High-Precision Earth Rotation and E a r t h - M o o n Dynamics: Lunar Distances
and R e l a t e d Observations', IAU Colloq. 6__3, 209.
Eckert, W. J.: 1965, Astron. J. 70, 787.
Eckert, W. J. and Smith, H. F., Jr.: 1966, Astron. Papers Am. Ephemeris
19, Pt. II, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Eckert, W. J., Walker, M. J., and Eckert, D.: 1966, Astron. J. 71, 314.
Eckhardt, D. H. : 1981, The Moon and the P l a n e t s 2__5, 3.
Explanatory Supplement to the A s t r o n o m i c a l Ephemeris and the A m e r i c a n
Ephemeris and N a u t i c a l Almanac: 1961, Her M a j e s t y ' s Stationery Office,
London.
Ferrari, A. J., Sinclair, W. S., Sjogren, W. L., Williams, J. G., and
Yoder, C. F.: 1980, J. Geophys. Res. 85, 3939.
Fricke, W.: 1967, Astron. J. 72, 1368.
Fricke, W.: 1971, Astron. Astrophys. 13, 298.
Fricke, W.: 1982, Astron. Astrophys. 107, L13.
Fricke, W. and Kopff, A. : 1963, Fourth F u n d a m e n t a l Catalogue (FK4) ,
Ver@ffentlichungen des A s t r o n o m i s c h e n Rechen-Instituts Heidelberg,
Nr. 10.
Hammerton, M. and Stretch, D. D.: 1981, J. Br. Astron. Ass. 91, 245.
Hayford, J. F.: 1909, 'The Figure of the E a r t h and Isostasy from M e a s u r e -
ments in the U n i t e d States', U.S. Coast and G e o d e t i c Survey Publ.,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Hedrick, H. B.: 1905, Astron. Papers Am. E p h e m e r i s ~, Pt. III, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
IAU: 1949, Bulletin Astronomique I__5, 289.
IAU: 1966, Trans. IAU 12B, 593.
IAU: 1968, Trans. IAU 13B, 48.
Improved Lunar E p h e m e r i s 1952-1959: 1954, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C.
Kinoshita, H. and Aoki, S.: 1983, Celes. Mech. 31, 329.
Kubo, Y. : 1971, Report of H y d r o g r a p h i c Researches, No. 6, p. 85, M a r i t i m e
Safety Agency, Tokyo.
Le Verrier, U. J.: 1858, Annales de l ' O b s e r v a t o i r e Imp@rial de Paris 4, 13.
Lieske, J. H., Lederle, T., Fricke, W., and Morando, B.: 1977, Astron.
Astrophys. 58, I.
88 MITSURU SOMA
Lieske, J. H. and Standish, E. M., Jr.: 1981, in E. M. G a p o s h k i n and

B. Kolaczec (eds.), 'Reference Coordinate Systems for Earth Dynamics',
IAU Colloq. 56, 295.
Markowitz, W., Glenn Hall, R., Essen, L., and Parry, J. V. L.: 1958, Phys.
Rev. Letters I, 105.
Martin, C. F. and Van Flandern, T. C.: 1970, Science 168, 246.
Mori, T. : 1975, Data Report of Hydrographic Observations, Series of
Astronomy and Geodesy, No. 9, p. 40, Maritime Safety Agency, Tokyo.
Mori, T., Harada, Y., and Kawada, M.: 1978, Data Report of Hydrographic
Observations, Series of A s t r o n o m y and Geodesy, No. 12, p. I, Maritime
Safety Agency, Tokyo.
Morrison, L. V.: 1970, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc. 149, 81.
Morrison, L. V.: 1973, Nature 241, 519.
Morrison, L. V. : 1978, Roy. Greenwich Obs. Bull., No. 183.
Morrison, L. V.: 1979, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc. 187, 41.
Morrison, L. V. and Appleby, G. M.: 1981a, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron.
Soc. 196, 1005.
Morrison, L. V. and Appleby, G. M.: 1981b, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron.
Soc. 196, 1013.
Morrison, L. V. and Martin, R. J.: 1971, The Moon 2, 463.
Morrison, L. V. and Ward, C. G.: 1975, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc. 173, 183.
Newcomb, S.: 1895a, The Elements of the Four Inner Planets and the
Fundamental Constants of Astronomy, Supplement to the American
Ephemeris and Nautical Almanac for 1897, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C.
Newcomb, S.: 1895b, Astron. Papers Am. Ephemeris ~, Pt. I, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Nordtvedt, K., Jr.: 1970, Icarus 12, 91.
Robertson, J. : 1940, Astron. Papers Am. Ephemeris I_0, Pt. II, U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Seidelmann, P. K.: 1982, Celes. Mech. 27, 79.
Sinzi, A. M. and Suzuki, H.: 1967, Report of Hydrographic Researches, No. 2,
p. 75, Maritime Safety Agency, Tokyo.
Sjogren, W. L. and Wollenhaupt, W. R.: 1976, The Moon 15, 143.
Spencer Jones, H.: 1932, Ann. Cape Obs. 13, Pt. 3.
Spencer Jones, H.: 1939, Monthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc. 9___9, 541.
Standish, E. M., Jr.: 1981a, Numerical Integration DE200, Magnetic Tape.
Standish, E. M., Jr.: 1981b, Astron. Astrophys. 101, L17.
Standish, E. M., Jr.: 1982, Celes. Mech. 26, 181.
Van Flandern, T. C.: 1970a, Astron. J. 75, 657.
Van Flandern, T. C.: 1970b, Astron. J. 75, 744.
Van Flandern, T. C.: 1975, M__onthly Notices Roy. Astron. Soc. 170, 333.
Watts, C. B.: 1955, Astron. J. 60, 443.
Watts, C. B.: 1963, Astron. Papers Am. Ephemeris 17, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Williams, J. G.: 1981, Numerical Integration LE200, Magnetic Tape.
Williams, J. G., Sinclair, W. S., and Yoder, C. F.: 1978, Geophys. Res.
Letters 5, 943.

An Analysis of Lunar Occultations in Years 1955 - 1980 Using The New Lunar Ephemeris ELP2000

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Analysis of Lunar Occultations in Years 1955 - 1980 Using The New Lunar Ephemeris ELP2000

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AN A N A L Y S I S OF L U N A R O C C U L T A T I O N S IN THE Y E A R S 1955-1980 U S I N G THE N E W

LUNAR EPHEMERIS ELP2000

(Received S e p t e m b e r , 1984; a c c e p t e d 29 O c t o b e r , 1984)

For m a n y y e a r s o b s e r v a t i o n s of lunar o c c u l t a t i o n s and m e r i d i a n - c i r c l e

CelestialMechanics35 (I985) 45-88. 0008-8714/85.15.

cies of small l o n g - p e r i o d terms in the p l a n e t a r y p e r t u r b a t i o n s in B r o w n ' s

O b s e r v a t i o n s of lunar o c c u l t a t i o n s m a d e in the w o r l d d u r i n g the years 1943-

stars in the c a t a l o g u e by R o b e r t s o n (1940; hereinafter referred to as the

The accuracy of o b s e r v a t i o n s estimated by o b s e r v e r s on d e s c r i p t i v e phrases

TABLE I: A c c u r a c y of visual observations.

Excellent, very good •

For o b s e r v a t i o n s w i t h no d e s c r i p t i o n given, the u n c e r t a i n t y of • was

3.2. Personal Equation

For v i s u a l observations the o b s e r v e r ' s reaction time, or p e r s o n a l equation,

TABLE II: A d o p t e d values of p e r s o n a l equations.

Accuracy Mag. p.e.

TABLE III: D i s t r i b u t i o n of p e r s o n a l equations a p p l i e d by the observers.

1955-60 0 12 95 209 27 37 5 9 128 4206 1581 243 6552

Observations w i t h u n k n o w n values for personal equation a p p l i e d by

w h e n no estimate of personal equations was given by the observers. Personal

t a t i o n s shows that the p e r s o n a l e q u a t i o n of the o b s e r v a t i o n s m a d e w i t h the

N e a r l y all the p o s i t i o n s of o b s e r v e r s are g i v e n in g e o d e t i c c o o r d i n a t e s

UT2-UTI = +0~022 sin(2~tl) -01017 cos(2~tl) -

w h e r e t I d e n o t e s the time f r o m the b e g i n n i n g of the year in years.

1961 is o b t a i n e d by adding the v a l u e of U T I - U T 2 , UT2-TAI (BIH, 1965) a n d the

TD = TAI + 32~184, (3.2)

TAI : UT2 - (UT2-TAI) (3.3)

for the y e a r s 1955.5 to 1961.0 and

TAI : UTC + (TAI-UTC) (3.4)

for t h e y e a r s after 1961.0. The values of UT2-TAI for the y e a r s 1955.5 to

3.5. Lunar and Planetary Ephemerides

Theory of t h e m o t i o n of t h e M o o n u s e d in t h i s analysls is the r e c e n t l y -

3.6. Star Positions

adding the following corrections (Kubo, 1971):

A~ = + 090017 - 090016 sin e + 0~0012 cos ~ -

A~ = + 0 5 0 0 4 2 + 050017 sin ~ + 090017 cos ~ -

s = - 0]028 + 0[033 sin ~ + 0]018 cos ~ +

3.7. Limb-profile Corrections

The irregularity of the lunar profile was removed by applying limb-profile

of extrapolation of the contours that was required. Observations not having

The J2000.0 ecliptic rectangular coordinates of the observer and the

RC : IrM(t - At) - r0(t) [{rM(t - At) r0(t) } 9 r ~ ] r ~ l , (3.9)

where r E is t h e direction of the star corrected for the deflection of the

s : Ir0(t) - rM(t - At) I/c, (3.10)

where c is t h e light velocity. The direction of the star r[ corrected for

r~ = r* + (1.9741 x I0-8/r) [(rE - (r* 9 r E ) r * ) / ( 1 + r* - r E ) ] , (3.11)

where r* is t h e undeflected unit vector toward the star, rE is t h e unit

h r = 2.3 + 2.20 cot 2 a - 0.0045 cot 4 a (m), (3.12)

4.1. Selection and Weighting of Observations

To solve the equations of condition it w a s decided to u s e observations

~RcI2 ~Rc]2 $Rc'2 2 ,

where o T is t h e accuracy of the observation adopted in Section 3.1, o and

where d O is t h e distance between the observer and the Moon and P is t h e

4.2. Unknowns to b e Determined in t h i s Analysis

The lunar theory ELP2000-82 includes the following 8 fundamental constants:

sidereal mean motion of the Moon at J 2 0 0 0 . 0 ,

6Ric latitude component of s h i f t of c e n t e r of W a t t s ' datum,

6R2s longitude component of c o r r e c t i o n to e l l i p t i c i t y of Watts'

@R2c latitude component of c o r r e c t i o n to e l l i p t i c i t y of W a t t s '

Because of the strong correlation with the c o n s t a n t correction t o the

The equation of c o n d i t i o n t o o k the following form:

6~ : 6~ 0 + 6~ s sin ~ + 6~ c COS ~, (4.11)

6R = 6R 0 + 6R1c cos Q + 6R2s s i n 2Q + 6R2c cos 2Q, (4.12)