Va41 4 543

Vistas in Asrronomy Vol. 41, No. 4, pp.
543-571, 1998
@ 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd
Printed in Great Britain.Allrights reserved
Pergamon
0083-6656/97
$15.00+ 0.00
PI
I: SOOS3-6656(98)00004-X
THE CYCLES OF SELENE

B.A. STEVES
Department of Mathematics, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, G4 OBA, UK
Abstract-
The discovery and use of the Saros, a h&r cycle of 18 years and
10 or 11 days, is reviewed from its earliest origins two millennia ago to the
present day, when it is known with precision and enables the accurate prediction of both time and type of solar and lunar eclipses. The theoretical basis
for the Saros is discussed, along with other historically known lunar cycles.
The geometry of the Sun-Moon-Earth system is found to repeat itself after
one Saros, not only at eclipses but also at any phase of the cycle, indicating that the Moon moves in a nearly periodic orbit. The search for periodic
orbits using the Saros has led to the discovery of a set of eight periodic orbits of period equal to one Saros whose time evolutions closely resemble that
of the real Moon. Finally, the potential of the Saros in studying the dynamics and stability of the Earth-Moon system is examined and the existence of
other Saros-like cycles of longer periods in the present, past arid future of
the Earth-Moon-Sun system is explored. @ 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All
rights reserved.
1. PROLOGUE
The old seer carefully moved his aching legs up the time-worn stairs of the stone watch-tower
as he had done countless nights for so many years. The sky was lit up with the cold brilliance of
thousands of stars, awesome in their beauty. He caught his breath. Its icy tendrils swirled into
the night. The beauty - the immensity of the sky. It cut him like a knife. It neverfailed to. It was
so huge. He was nothing. How dare he follow the gods, like a thie$ through the mighty skies.
But like familiar fiends, they appeared out of the vastness. There was Ishtal; star of both
evening and morning, enticing in herfluctuating brightness. She was the goddess of youth, beauty
and love, but she could also be a fierce
Lady in battle riding astride a great lion. Ma&k, the
king of gods, was also visible with a strong steadfast glow. He could bring cataclysm and storms,
but at a whim he couldalso reveal a regal graciousness to his subjects. The malevolent red gleam
of Nergal, god of war; shone down on the seer: Nergal could herald death and destruction. And
there was the faint light of Ninurta, the god of time. He moved so slowly he was still in the same
constellation after many years, while Nebu, the messenger, raced off through the skies to play his
tricks.
Their movements ofen puzzled the seer: Sometimes the gods would stride ahead purposely,
then stop in the vicinity of a constellation only to reverse and move backwards for a while. They
544
B.A. Steves
were the bibbus, the wild goats, but they heM human destiny in their hands and as such the seer
and many before him hadfaithfully recorded their movements throughout the years.
He fondly watched them as they marched across the sky. He was excited. Would it happen?
Would the gods show theiFfaVOUF to him? While studying the clay tablets that recorded the details
of one hundred years of the travels of Selene, the Moon, he had discovered that she appeared to
pass through the same pattern of eclipses every 18 years and 10 days. If he was right, she would
meet with an eclipse tonight.
And it came to pass. With intense excitement he watched the crescent of darkness hide more
and more of the golden face of Selene until like a phantom barely seen, her face shone faintly,
glowing like the last embers of afire. He continued to watch until she reappeared in herfill glory
once more.
What power his discovery gave him! He was now able to predict the actions of the gods. The
priests would be able to use his knowledge to increase their hold over the people and the King!
The seer shivered. He was old. He was tired. Let younger men do what they would. There was
power here, but also what beautiful symmetry the gods had shown him.
2. THE DISCOVERY OF THE SAROS
It is not known who the Chaldean genius was who first discovered the Saros, the most famous
cycle of Selene, the Moon. A period of 6585.32 days (i.e. approximately 18 years and 10 or 11
days depending on the number of leap years in the interval), it is the time that elapses between
successive repetitions of a particular sequence or family of solar and lunar eclipses. Saros,
in fact is the Greek word for repetition. After one Saros period, a sequence of eclipses will
recur with approximately the same order of type of eclipses, the same duration of the eclipses
and the same time intervals between the eclipses, as the previous sequence of eclipses. In other
words, after one Saros period a large partial lunar eclipse will be followed by a large partial lunar
eclipse; a total solar eclipse of short duration will be followed by a total solar eclipse of short
duration; an annular solar eclipse will be followed by an annular solar eclipse and so on. Thus,
the solar and lunar eclipse pattern which occurred in the previous Saros period can be used to
predict the solar and lunar eclipses in the next Saros period.
The Saros cycle was most probably first discovered by the Babylonians from their records of
eclipses extending back over many centuries. In his book, A History of Astronomy, A. Pannekoek
[ 171 gives an excellent, well documented history of the development of Babylonian astronomy.
In summary, the Babylonians lived on the plains between the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers
from some time before 3000 BC. The whole of Mesopotamia was first united as early as 2500
BC. Babylon became the capital and grew into a great commercial and cultural centre circa 2OOfl
BC under the reign of Hammurabi.
The Babylonians began making regular observations of the Moon in order to be able to predict
when the different seasons were approaching and therefore to know when to start planting and
harvesting crops. This led to a belief that the heavenly bodies were related to the Gods and
Goddesses, and that the movements of these bodies held great significance to changes in the
lives of people on Earth.
The Assyrians, a military people living on the northern part of the Tigris river, rose to become the most powerful state in near-Asia around 800 BC, and eventually destroyed Babylon in
689 BC. Although the Assyrians conquered the Babylonians, they adopted much of their culture
and it became very important for the Assyrians to know what was happening in the sky in order
to interpret its meaning and relate it to the success of any large-scale military enterprise or the
The cycles of Selene
545
well-being of the king and country.

Eclipses were, in particular, very significant omens. The exact month, day, time of day, and
place in the sky for every eclipse observed was recorded. A different interpretation of the eclipse
was made, depending on the exact time it occurred. Thus, for example, we find recorded such
predictions as this (see Ref. [ 171,but originally published in R.C. Thompsons book The Reports
of the Magicians and Astrologers of Ninevah and Babylon, 1900, page 27 1):
An eclipse in the morning-watch means disease.. . The morning-watch is Elam, the 14th
day is Elam, Simannu is Amurru, the second side is Akkad.. . When an eclipse happens in the
morning-watch and it completes the watch, a north wind blowing, the sick in Akkad will recover:
When an eclipse begins on thefirst side and stands on the second side, there will be slaughter of
Elam; Guti will not approach Akkad.. . When an eclipse happens and stands on the second side,
the gods will have mercy on the land. When the Moon is dark in Simannu, after a year Ramanu
[the storm-god] will inundate. When the Moon is eclipsed in Simannu, there will beflood and the
produce of the waters of the land will be abundant.. .
From these accurate observations of eclipses, the Babylonian-Assyrians were able to identify
regular patterns. Their reports then began to show that they expected eclipses to occur, by announcing the consequences of such events before they occurred. For example, Thompson (1900,
pages 273-274) also records the following prophecies made by court astrologers:
On the 14th an eclipse will take place; it is evil for Elam and Amurru, luckyfor the king, my
lord; let the king, my lord, rest happy. It will be seen without Venus. To the king, my lord, I say;
there will be an eclipse. From Irasshi-ilu, the kings servant.
To the king of countries, my lord thy servant Bil-usur May Bel, Nebo and Shamash be gracious to the king, my lord. An eclipse has happened but it was not visible in the capital. As that
eclipse approached, at the capital where the king dwells, behold, the clouds were everywhere,
and whether the eclipse took place or did not take place we dont know. Let the lord of kings send
to Ashul; to all cities, to Babylon, Nippul; Uruk and Borsippa; whatever has been seen in those
cities the king will hear for certain. . . The great gods who dwell in the city of the king, my lord,
overcast the sky and did not permit to see the eclipse. So let the king know that this eclipse is not
directed against the king, my lord, nor his land. Let the king rejoice. . .
At this point in time, they were probably using the simple regularity (see Section 3) that once
an eclipse series began, there would be five or six lunar eclipses each separated by approximately
six months. Thus, when a new series of eclipses began one or two years later, they could predict
eclipses again.
The Assyrian empire, weakened by wars against barbarian tribes from Europe, eventually
crumbled under the combined attack of the Babylonians and the Medes. In 606 BC, Nineveh, the
Assyrian capital, was ruined and Babylon became the capital once again. The new Babylonian
empire was extended by Nebuchadnezar (604-561 BC) to include all of near-Asia. During his
time, the Babylonian priesthood held great power arising from its ability to predict the fortunes of
people and countries by reading the signs laid out in the sky. In 539 BC, the Persians conquered
Babylon and eventually Babylon was reduced to the status of other Persian capitals.
The Persian kings had no use for omens of good luck or evil from foreign gods; nevertheless,
the priests maintained their power by changing their role from that of court astrologer to that of
the elite group of people who knew the ways of the gods by knowing their movements in the
heavens. In order to prove this knowledge, their observations of the sky became more accurate
and detailed. It was probably during this interval that they discovered the Saros period.
The well-known Saros-Canon tablet studied by J.N. Strassmaier and J. Epping is a fragment
of a list of eclipse months which extend from 373 to 277 BC. Because each column consists
of 38 lines spanning 223 months, and each eclipse series is clearly demarcated by horizontal
B.A. Steves
546
Sun
:
Distant
Stars
:-
completed
here
Fig. 1. Solar and lunareclipsescan only occur when the Earth,Moon and Sun are collinear, i.e. when the Moon is
new or full.
lines and a total eclipse month is located in the centre of each series, it is believed that this list of
eclipse months was used as a means of predicting future eclipse months by applying the repetitive
properties of the Saros cycle. Certainly, the Babylonians knew of and used the Saros period in
later centuries because Babylonian Auxiliary Tables have been discovered where it is obvious
that eclipse times have been calculated from data taken 18 years earlier.
3. ECLIPSE PREDICTION USING THE SAROS

A solar or lunar eclipse occurs whenever the Earth, the Moon and the Sun lie in approximately
a straight line. If the Moons orbital plane were exactly the same as the ecliptic plane, a solar
eclipse would occur at every new moon when the Moon is at conjunction, and a lunar eclipse
would occur at every full moon when the Moon is at opposition. See Fig. 1. However, since
the two planes are inclined at an angle of about 5 to each other, eclipses can only be possible
when the Sun is also near a node and is therefore located in approximately the same plane as the
Barth-Moon system. It is obvious that (Fig. 2), if the Moon is near the same node as the Sun, a
solar eclipse will occur, while, if the Moon is near the opposite node, a lunar eclipse will occur.
The ecliptic limit, i.e. the maximum angular distance that the new or full moon can be from
the nodes in order for an eclipse to occur, is about 10 to 12 for a partial eclipse and 5 to 6 for
a total eclipse, the particular value depending on the exact geometry.
Consecutive lunar eclipses occur approximately six months apart, when the Sun returns to a
position near one of the Moons nodes. After six synodic months (i.e. 177.18 days), the Sun
and hence the positions of the full or new moon have moved, on average, by about (177.18
days/36524 days) x 360 = 174.64 in longitude. However, in this time, because the nodes of

_
Q_.u,r
547
orbital plane
Ecliptic plane
Y
Sun
Line of nodes 1997
Line of nodes 1999
Fig. 2. Solar and lunar eclipses can only occur when the Moon is located near the intersection of the lunar orbital
plane and the ecliptic plane, i.e. when the Moon lies near its line of nodes.
No eclipse
Partial
Total?
TOtal
Total
Partial
Partial?
No eclipse
13.67
9.65
5.62
I .59 *
-2.43
-6.45
- 10.48
-14.50
Fig. 3. A possible series of eclipses which occur approximately every six months. The large and small circles denote
the Earths and Moons shadows respectively. The scale indicates the angular separation (in degrees) between the
Moons position and the Moons orbital nodes. Diagram and data derived from Ref. [ 171.
lunar orbit are moving at a rate of -O.O52954/day, the nodes have receded by about 177.18
days x(-O.O52954/day) = 9.38. The opposite node is located at a longitude of 180-9.38 =
170.62. Therefore, the full moon has moved relative to the node by about 174.64 - 170.62 =
4.02 [ 171.
An eclipse will thus occur as long as the Moon is located within approximately f 12 of a
node. If the Moon progresses about 4 relative to the node every time it comes back to a position
where both it and the Sun are near a node, then approximately five or six consecutive lunar
eclipses separated by about six months are possible before the Moon moves beyond the ecliptic
limits. Fig. 3 portrays a possible series of eclipses. Note that the type of eclipse depends on the
angular distance from the Moon to its node.
A new series of eclipses then begins when the positions of the Sun, the full moon and the
nodes coincide again. This occurs about 47 months after the first series began. The new series,
t.be
548
B.A. Steves
like the old, contains five or six lunar eclipses each approximately six months apart; however, the
characteristics of the new series, namely the eclipse type and duration, are not the same as that
of the old series.
The type of eclipse which occurs depends not only on the angular separation between the
Moon and its node, but also on the distance between the Earth and the Moon, and on the position
of the Earth observer. Although the Moon is almost four hundred times smaller than the Sun, it
is also approximately four hundred times closer to the Earth than the Sun. Thus, having almost
the same apparent angular size as the Sun, the Moon can totally obscure the Sun. If the Moon is
far enough away, it appears smaller than the Sun. In this case, a ring of light encircles the Moon
as the Moon eclipses the Sun. This type of eclipse is called an annular eclipse.
If the Moon is close enough to the Earth, the Moons apparent diameter is greater than that
of the Sun and the umbra or dark cone-shaped inner region of the Moons shadow just barely
reaches the Earths surface. Any observer on Earth positioned along the path taken by the umbra
will experience a total solar eclipse. Any Earth observer located in the outer lighter region or
penumbra of the Moons shadow will see a partial solar eclipse. The extent of the penumbra and
umbra shadow regions, and therefore likewise the types of both lunar and solar eclipses observed
depend on the distance between the Moon and the Earth at that time.
The Earth-Moon separation also affects the duration of an eclipse. The length of time that the
Moon and the Sun remain in an eclipse configuration is governed by the Moons velocity, which
varies according to its position in its elliptical orbit, and hence varies according to the distance
between the Earth and the Moon.
Therefore, because the eclipse characteristics such as duration and type depend on the EarthMoon distance, the first repetition of an eclipse series where the eclipse characteristics are also
repeated, occurs when not only the position of the Sun, the new or full moon and the nodes lie
in approximately a straight line again, but when this event also coincides with the Moon and the
Sun lying in the same positions relative to their pericentres. This occurs approximately after one
Saros period or about five series of eclipses.
4. THR REPETITION OF THE RELATIVE GEOMETRY OF THR

EARTH-MOONSUN
SYSTEM OVER ONE SAROS
The ease with which people can use records of eclipses that occurred in the previous Saros
period to predict future solar and lunar eclipses suggests how closely the geometry of the EarthMoon-Sun system must be repeated every Saros period. Table 1, for example, shows the values
of the semi-diameters of the Moon and the Sun during four eclipses, which occurred at approximately Saros intervals in the years 1898,1916,1934,1952 and 1970. The data is taken from the
relevant Astronomical Ephemerides [22,25,19].
Even without allowing for the fact that over a span of seventy-two years, methods for calculating the ephemerides have changed (i.e. orbital constants of the Earth, Moon and Sun have been
improved, and more accurate and constant time reference frames have been implemented), the
semi-diameters of the Moon and the Sun vary only slightly from eclipse to eclipse over a single
Saros period. Because the Saros cycle is not exactly periodic, in other words the relative geometry of the Earth-Moon-Sun system is not repeated exactly over one Saros period, a comparison
of the relative geometry over many Saros periods will start to show discrepancies. However, a
comparison over even four Saros periods still shows a close agreement between the lunar and the
solar semi-diameters at the beginning and the end of the four Saros periods.
This is particularly remarkable, given that the total range within which the semi-diameters of
549
Table 1
Semi-diameters (in arc-minutes) for the Sun and Moon during eclipses which occurred at Saros intervals. The data
below are taken from the appropriate Nautical Alamanacs and Astronomical Ephemerides [22]
Year
Eclipse type
1898
1916
1934
1952
1970
A=Partial
Lunar eclipse
Moon
Sun
Jan. 7
Jan. 19
Jan. 30
Feb. 10-l 1
Feb. 21
14.867
16.265
14.830
16.255
14.808
16.235
14.788
16.207
14.780
16.172
B = Total
Solar eclipse
Moon
Sun
Jan. 21
Feb. 3
Feb. 13-14
Feb. 25
Mar. 7
16.405
16.247
16.423
16.225
16.455
16.193
16.487
16.157
16.527
16.113
C = Partial
Lunar eclipse
Moon
Sun
Jul. 3
Jul. 14
Jul. 26
Aug. 5
Aug. 17
16.722
15.731
16.715
15.735
16.718
15.748
16.720
15.770
16.732
15.798
D = Annular
Solar eclipse
Moon
Sun
Jul. 18
Jul. 29
Aug. 10
Aug. 20
Aug. 3 1Sep. 1
14.765
15.739
14.733
15.755
14.720
15.780
14.708
15.810
14.710
15.847
Table 2
Comparison of the differences in the lunar and solar semi-diameters (in arc minutes) over 1 and 4 Saros periods for
the eclipses in Table 1
Eclipse type
Average absolute differences in

semi-diameter (in arc-minutes)
% differences in semi-diameters
relative to total possible differences
Over 1 Saros
Over 4 Saros
Over 1 Saros
Over 4 Saros
Moon
Sun
0.022
0.023
0.087
0.093
1.08%
4.18
16.91
Moon
Sun
0.03 1
0.034
0.122
0.134
1.53
6.18
6.01
24.36
Moon
Sun
0.006
0.017
0.010
0.067
0.30
3.09
0.49
12.18
Moon
Sun
0.015
0.027
0.055
0.108
0.74
4.91
2.71
19.64
4.29%
the Sun and the Moon can vary over time is considerably larger than the small differences in their
semi-diameters over one Saros period. For example, Table 2 compares the sizes of the average
absolute differences in semi-diameters for the Sun and the Moon over one Saros period with the
total possible range in semi-diameters for the Sun and the Moon. The lunar differences over one
Saros period are about 1% of the total differences possible, while the solar differences are about
3-696 of the total,
The solar semi-diameter and hence the Suns geocentric distance will not be as closely repeated
as the lunar semi-diameter because, after one Saros period, the Sun has not returned to exactly
the same position relative to its apse line. Instead of revolving through 18 complete cycles of its
orbit, the Sun has gone through 18.03 cycles. Of course, the apse line of the Sun has also moved
B.A. Steves
550
Table 3
Comparison of the relative position and velocity coordinates for the Moon and the Sun during a partial lunar eclipse
which occurred on Feb. 11.1952 and then recurred one Saros period later on Feb. 21,197O [22]
Eclipse date
Feb. lO-11,1952
Feb. 21,197O
Positional coordinates
179.91Y
179.912
Eclipse date
Feb. lO-11,1952
Feb. 21.1970
-0.8473
-0.8615
16.207
16.172
14.788
14.780
Velocity coordinates
- 10.944lday
-10.915
65.348lday
65.305
-0.18lday
-0.22
3.84lday
3.49
in those 18 years and 10 or 11 days. However, since these changes in the Suns orbital geometry
are small over one Saros period, the Suns semi-diameters are still very closely repeated.
A repetition of the configuration and characteristics of an eclipse must include a repetition
of the relative velocity vectors, as well as the relative radius vectors of the Moon and the Sun.
In other words, the complete relative dynamical geometry of the Earth-Moon-Sun system must
be repeated. If we now look at the full set of relative position and velocity coordinates for the
Earth-Moon-Sun system at a particular eclipse epoch and compare these quantities with the
same eclipse event one Saros period later, we find that, in general, all of them are very closely
repeated.
In Table 3 the semi-diameters of the Sun and the Moon, os and a,,,, the differences between the
Sun and the Moons geocentric ecliptic longitudes )cs - &, and latitudes Bs - /I,,,, and the daily
rates of change of these coordinates, are seen to return to much the same values after one Saros
period. The data in Table 3 describe a partial eclipse of the Moon which occurred on February
10-l 1, 1952 and recurred one Saros period later on February 21, 1970 [22,25,19].
Therefore at the end of a Saros period, the Earth, the Sun, the Moon, the nodes of the Moons
orbit and the pericentre and apocentre of the Moons orbit have all returned to approximately the
same relative positions that they held at the beginning of the Saros period.
5. EXPLANATION OF THE NEAR REPETITION

PERIOD
OF ECLIPSES EVERY SAROS
The near repetition of eclipses is a consequence of the set of high-integer near commensurabilities which exist between the Moons synodic period, its anomalistic period and its nodical
period. The lunar synodic period is the time taken for the Earth-Moon-Sun system to move from
one conjunction to the next, i.e. for the Moon to pass from full moon to full moon (Fig. 1). The
lunar anomalistic period is the time taken for the Moon to move through one complete cycle of
its orbit relative to its line of apses. Finally, the lunar draconic or nodical period is the time taken
for the Moon to move through one complete cycle of its orbit relative to its line of nodes.
The mean values of these periods are listed in the 1988 Nautical Almanac as

Synodic period
Anomalistic period
Nodicai period
551
Ts = 29.530589 days,
TA = 27.554550 days,
TN = 27.212221 days.
Although the actual values of these different lunar months can vary quite extensively from one
revolution of the Moon to another because of the solar perturbations in the Moons orbit, these
mean values remain constant to within one second over many centuries.
The commensurable set of integers which makes up the Saros period is then
223Ts = 6585.3213 days,
239TA = 6585.5375 days,
242T~ = 6585.3575 days.
In order for an eclipse to occur, the Earth, the Sun and the Moon must lie in approximately a
straight line. This configuration can occur only when the Moon is at conjunction or opposition,
and the Moon and the Sun are located near the Moons orbital nodes. At this point, a series of
five or six lunar eclipses will occur about every six months before the required configuration is
disrupted once again. A conjunction of the Moon and Sun occurs every lunar synodic period,
while the Moon passes its ascending node every lunar nodical month. Therefore, conditions for
the occurrence of an eclipse series must result whenever an integer multiple of the synodic month
is approximately equal to an integer multiple of the nodical month. The lowest integer multiple
set which meets these requirements is
47Ts = 1387.937683 days,
5lT~ = 1387.823271 days.
In this, we have the reason why a new eclipse series was observed to begin approximately every
47 lunar months.
To obtain a repetition of the characteristics of the eclipse series as well, the Earth-Moon and
the Earth-Sun distances should also be repeated. A repetition of the Earth-Moon distance occurs
once every lunar anomalistic month. A repetition of eclipse series characteristics would therefore
occur over a period which equaled integer multiples of the synodic, nodical and the anomalistic
months. The first set of integers to meet these requirements approximately, is the set which makes
up the Saros period.
It might be thought that a repetition of the characteristics of an eclipse series would also require a commensurability with the Suns anomalistic period. This does not occur within the Saros
cycle. However, because the Saros period is only N 10 days longer than 18 solar years and because the Suns orbit is almost circular with an eccentricity of only 0.017, the Suns geocentric
radius vector is still repeated approximately over one Saros period, despite its lack of commensurability with the solar anomalistic period. After one Saros period, the Suns geocentric radius
vector is only about (10 days/365 days) x 360 w 10 from its former position. Using familiar
elementary properties of elliptical orbital motion [22], a displacement of 10 in the true anomaly
changes the Suns radius vector, velocity vector and the angle between them by at most 0.3%. A
commensurability with the Suns anomalistic period does not therefore seem to be so crucial for
a close repetition of the relative geometry of the Earth-Moon-Sun system.
The near commensurabilities between Ts, TA and TN,suffice to ensure that the mean relative
geometry of the Earth-MoonSun system at the beginning of a Saros cycle is almost exactly
repeated at the end of a Saros cycle. The whole system is simply rotated about 10 from its
previous position.
B.A. Steves
552
6. OTHER CYCLES OF SELENE
Greek study of the heavens was possibly partially motivated by a need to improve the navigation of their ships and to enable accurate calendar timekeeping. Thales of Miletus (624-547 BC)
was accorded by Herodotus with having predicted a solar eclipse. However, Herodotus only
states that Thales foretold that an eclipse would occur within the year. Because of the vagueness
of Thales prediction, Pannekoek [ 171 surmises that Thales was probably unaware of the use of
the Saros cycle as a means of predicting eclipses.
Another Greek, Meton (c. 433 BC) discovered the 19 year Metonic cycle within which an
integer multiple of lunar months approximately equals an integer multiple of solar tropical years.
A tropical year is the time interval between two successive passages of the Sun through the vernal
equinox, in other words, the solar nodical period. Since the seasons recur every tropical year, the
tropical year is the ideal average length for the calendar year.
Given that the mean solar tropical year is TY = 365.24220 days, the metonic cycle consists of
235Ts = 6939.69 days,
19T, = 6939.60days
and allows time-keeping by the lunar month to be incorporated into a solar calendar which keeps
a measure of the changing seasons. In other words, for twelve calendar years out of the nineteen,
the year would consist of twelve lunar months, while for seven calendar years a thirteenth month
would be intercalated to make up for the fact that twelve lunar months are only 354.37 days and
not the 365.24 days of the solar year. The Babylonians also knew of this cycle and it is not known
whether Meton discovered it independently or borrowed it from them.
Hipparchus made careful observations of eclipses between 146 and 135 BC and compared
these results with earlier Babylonian eclipse records, not to predict future eclipses, but in order to
get more accurate values of the mean synodic and nodical lunar months. According to Deslambre
[4, p. 1441, Hipparchus not only used the Saros cycle, but he also used a 345 year cycle of
4267Ts
4573T~
4612Tsi
3451;
=
=
=
=
126007.02
126006.96
126007.51
126008.56
days,
days,
days,
days,
where Tsi = 27.321662 days is the mean lunar sidereal period. The lunar sidereal period is the
time taken for the Moon to move through one complete cycle of its orbit relative to the distant
stars (see Fig. 2). When the above cycle period is doubled, a commensurability with TN results:
8534Ts
9261TN
9146TA
9224Tsi
69OT,
=
=
=
=
=
252014.05
252012.38
252013.91
252015.01
252017.12
days,
days,
days,
days,
days.
In addition, Hipparchus used a cycle of about 441 years and 103 days
5458Ts = 161177.95 days,
5923TN = 161177.99 days
and a cycle of 20 years and approximately 107 days given by
553
Table 4
Summary of historically known lunar cycles. E = lunar and solar eclipses; m = apparentsernidiameter of the moon;
S = apparent semi-diameter of the sun; C = calendar date; L = location on earth for viewing solar eclipse
Repeatability of
Commensurability in
Cycle
Name
Duration T,
Ts
TN
TA
saros
18.030 y
6585.321 d
223
241.999
238.992
- 400 BC
Meton
c. 433 BC
19.000
6939.69
235
Hipparchus
146135 BC
1. Short
20 294
7412.178
251
2. Medium
441291
161177.95
5458
5 922 999
3.1 Long
3449%
126007.02
4267
4. Long
689 992
252014.05
8534
Exelignos
Triple Saros
54090
19 755.964
Perchot
1894
Tsi
EmSCL
YYY--
-y__-
-.
4573 002
4611982
9261061
9146005
9223965
669
725 996
716976
YYY--
168011
61364,564
2078
2255.037
2227.021
2246004
Stockwell
1901
28.945
10571.951
358
388.500
Crommelin
1910
1. Megalosaros
1805.023
659270.399
22325
24 226.997
2. 18xStockwell
521.011
190 295.116
6444
6993.002
269 000
Y-Y-YYY--
23 926.009
Y-Y--
25lTs = 7412.1778 days,

2693~ = 7412.1740 days.
These lunar cycles and others are summarised in Table 4.

Edmond Halley was the first astronomer in recent history to use the Saros to predict eclipses,
being generally credited by his contemporaries with having discovered it [14]. Halley, in fact,
gave the Saros its name. He also seems to be the first astronomer to realise that detailed predictions of the Moons circumstances during an eclipse and not just general predictions of when an
eclipse might occur could be made using the Saros [I]. In 173 1, Halley proposed a new method
of determining the longitude of the Moon at any given time using the Saros cycle to improve the
predictive accuracy of Newtons Lunar Theory of 1702 [8].
He hoped to predict the lunar longitude with enough accuracy that comparison with the moons
current position would give a universal time, which could then be compared with the local time
to give the longitude of the observer. The problem of how to determine ones longitude at sea
was of great importance to the powerful naval nations of the time and a prize of 20 000 pounds
(equivalent to 2 million pounds today) was offered in 1714 by the British parliament for the first
person to solve it.
By comparing his observations with those of the first Astronomer Royal, John FQunsteed made
B.A. Steves
554
18 and 36 years before, Halley established that the errors between the observed lunar longitudes
and those predicted by Newtons procedure were repeated after 1 Saros period [8]. Halley made
over 2200 observations of the lunar longitude positions during one Saros period from 1722 to
1740. This enabled him to empirically predict corrections to Newtons Lunar Theory, which
could then be included to improve the lunar theory. Kollerstrom [ 1l] evaluated Halleys method
by repeating Halleys calculations over three successive Saros cycles for the years 1690, 1708
and 1726, confirming that Halley was able to predict the lunar longitude to within approximately
2 arcminutes.
Unfortunately, Halley never published his data during his lifetime and so none of his contemporaries were able to check his new method. When his data was finally published in 1749 [9],
his method was already becoming redundant with the development of new lunar theories based
on the theory of gravity and calculus. Little attention, thereafter, was paid to his use of the Saros
to predict the lunar longitude.
More recently, various commentators on the Saros cycle have taken it to refer principally to
the commensurability existing between the lunar synodic period and the lunar nodical period
because a good commensurability between these two values is the minimum requirement for
eclipse prediction. Consequently, they have often ignored the fact that the Saros cycle also contains a commensurability with the lunar anomalistic period and have searched, instead, for more
accurate metonic-like cycles (i.e. cycles produced by commensurabilities between only two periods) which consist of integer multiples of the synodic period approximately equalling integer
multiples of the nodical period.
The use of one such period of 29 years minus 20 days where
358Ts = 10571.95 1 days,
388.5T~ = 10571.948 days,
but 383.673T~ = 10571.95 days
was advocated by Stockwell [31]. He felt that the 29 year cycle was a vast improvement on the
Saros cycle traditionally used for eclipse prediction because it was more accurate, and therefore
slower to change from cycle to cycle. It was also longer than the Saros cycle and therefore
contained a larger series of eclipses for prediction. At the same time, it was not too long that use
of it for eclipse predictions became cumbersome.
Crommelin [2] and Newcomb [ 151point out that cycles like Stockwells cycle, while they may
have very close commensurabilities between the synodic and nodical periods, and therefore can
be used to predict with great accuracy when eclipses will occur, are of no use for predicting the
type of successive eclipses or the location of these eclipses. Without the added commensurability
with the anomalistic period which the Saros cycle contains, the characteristics of an eclipse
cannot be repeated every cycle because the Moons true anomaly has not returned to its original
value at the beginning of the cycle. In addition, the Saros cycle brings the Suns position back to
within 10 of its former true anomaly. This means that, unlike the other cycles so far described,
the Saros cycle enables the circumstances of an eclipse at its beginning to be almost totally
duplicated at its end or in other words, the relative geometry of the Earth-Moon-Sun system to
be almost exactly repeated.
Crommelin [2] mentions a few other cycles of interest which do maintain some of the important characteristics of the Saros cycle. He describes the triple Saros of 54 years and 33 days:
3 x 223Ts = 19755.964 days,
3 x 239T~ = 19756.612 days,
3 x 242T~ = 19756.072days,
555
which was known to the Creeks as the Exelignos cycle. It has the advantage of having a period
almost equal to a whole number of days. Ihis means that after one Exelignos cycle, the Earth
has rotated back to its original position and that therefore the eclipse track on the Earth will also
be found in almost the same position. This is helpful for predicting the locations on Earth where
the solar eclipses can be seen. However after one Exelignos cycle, the Sun has moved about 30
from its former position and the Suns geocentric distance is not quite repeated.
He also studied a cycle of about 1805 years minus 6 days tlrst discovered by hf. Oppert, which
Crommelin calls the Megalosaros:
22325Ts = 659270.40 days,
23926TA = 659270.16 days,
24227T~ = 659270.48 days.
The Megalosaros is just slightly greater than 100 times the Saros cycle. The commensurabilities over one Megalosaros cycle are closer to being exact than the commensurabilities for the
Saros cycle are over the same time span. However, the relative geometry of the Earth-Moon-Sun
system is still repeated more accurately over one Saros period than over one Megalosaros period.
Finally, Crommelin mentions a 521 year cycle which is 18 Stockwell cycles:
18 x (358)Ts = 6444Ts
18 x (388.5)T~ = 6993TN
6906TA
521T,
=
=
=
=
190295.12days,
190295.06&ys,
190291.72 days,
190292.19 days.
Again it is not as accurate as the Saros cycle.

All of these cycles show close commensurabilities between Ts, TN and TA, but because their
large sixes make them a bit unmanageable for eclipse prediction and because they are less accurate, the use of the Saros cycle has remained the most popular method of predicting eclipses.
7. A MODERN USE OF THE SAROS AS AN INDICATION OF THE

NEAR-PRRIODICITY OF THE EARTH-MOONSUN DYNAMICAL SYSTEM
So far, well-known ground has been covered in the present paper with respect to cycles involving the Sun, Moon and Earth used for calendar and eclipse predictions. Modem predictions
of eclipses use sophisticated computer programs and complex lunar theories. It might be thought
that such metonic and Saros type cycles are therefore of purely historical interest and of no
importance to modem celestial mechanics research into the dynamics of the Earth-Moon system. Recent research by Perozxi, Roy, Steves and Valsecchi [29,19,25,32,33,30,34] has, however,
made use of the existence of the Saros to investigate the dynamics of the Earth-Moon system.
Their interest began with the property that the Saros has, of almost repeating exactly the relative
geometry of the Earth-Moon-Sun system.
Crommelin [2] states that it is well-known that the Saros cycle reproduces the distances,
diameters and rates of motion of Sun and Moon with very considerable accuracy. Yet no one
previously seems to have considered that the existence of the Saros cycle for at least 2300 years,
i.e. more than 130 Saros cycles, implies that the Earth-Moon system perturbedby the Sun is
moving in a nearly periodic orbit of one Saros period.
So far, by focusing on the mean motions of the Moon and the Sun through the use of the mean
periods Ts, TN and TA, we have been studying a fictitious dynamical system. Yet, despite the
556
B.A. Steves
fact that the Saros cycle is a relationship involving these mean motions, the closeness with which
eclipses can be predicted in the real Earth-Moon-Sun system suggests that not only is the mean
relative geometry repeated over one Saros period, but so is the real relative geometry.
This result is surprising, given that the eccentricities of the solar and lunar orbits may cause the
Sun and the Moon to be up to f2 or f5 respectively from their mean positions. Their relative
positions can, as a result, vary by as much as 7 from their mean relative positions at any time.
Newcomb [ 151 mentions that such a large variation could change the eclipse time by half a day,
and the distance of the Sun and the Moon from the nodes by about 2. The combination of the
above two effects could cause a recurring eclipse to be almost a day late or early. The character
of the eclipse could change from a total to a partial eclipse, or a partial eclipse to one that fails
to occur at all, or the reverse. Because none of these possible scenarios actually occur, the real
relative geometry of the Earth-Moon-Sun system, as well as the mean relative geometry, must
be nearly repeated every Saros period.
More importantly, this repetition of the relative geometry over one Saros period does not just
occur at eclipse times, but at any time. After all, there is nothing unique about the geometry of an
eclipse except that its occurrence is visible from the Earth. If the relative geometry of an eclipse
is nearly repeated every Saros period, then so must the relative geometry of the Earth-Moon-Sun
system in general also be repeated.
In order to test this hypothesis Perozzi, Roy, Steves and Valsecchi [29,19,25] adopted the
following procedure. An epoch tl was chosen at random, but avoiding the time of a solar or
lunar eclipse. Then, using the JPL high-precision numerically integrated planetary and lunar
ephemerides [28], the relative position and velocity coordinates of the Moon and the Sun were
found at this epoch tl. Similarly to the case described in Table 3 where the epoch is taken to
be the time of an eclipse, they found the geocentric distance of the Moon r,,,, the differences
between the Sun and the Moons geocentric ecliptic longitudes (& - hm) and latitudes (/ls - #Im)
and the daily rates of change of these coordinates im, (i, - i&, (& - bm>.The Suns geocentric
distance and rate of change were not considered as they would introduce a long-term libration
with a period of the order 18 x 360/10 = 650 years (see Section 5).
Taking the value of the Saros period to be approximately T = 6585.3 days, the ephemeris
was then searched for the time t2 near tl + T which minimized Q, the sum of the squares of the
normalised differences between the relative position and velocity coordinates of the two epochs
tl and t2. Perozzi et al. [19] describe the derivation of the expression for Q in more detail. T* =
t2 - tl was then defined as the osculating value of the Saros period for that particular epoch tt .
The procedure was repeated for 100 values of t1 spanning two Saros periods from 1952 to 1988.
The latter rows of Table 5 show a comparison of the relative positional and velocity coordinates
for the two epochs tl and t2 for a sample set of 5 values of tl . The results confirm that as expected,
regardless of the initial time chosen, the relative positions and velocities of the Moon and Sun
are best repeated after an interval of time close to the classical Saros period, i.e. T* w Tsaros =
223Ts. The last two columns of Table 5 indicate the accuracy of the repetition, with Q being the
minimum sum of the differences and P being the percentage relative discrepancy obtained by
dividing Q by the total number of coordinates taken into consideration. From the sample of 100
epochs, the average difference P of a relative coordinate of the Earth-Moon-Sun system over
T* x one Saros period is 0.5%. The average period T* for the sample was 6585.320 days, with
a standard deviation of 0.03 days.
Traditionally the Saros period is taken to be 6585.321 days, which involves only the synodic
month. By adopting the idea of minimizing the expression Q to find numerically the Saros period,
Perozzi et al. [19] changed its definition; however, the average Saros period found in this manner
is remarkably close to the traditional result, suggesting that the synodic month plays the dominant
1 Be
cycles oj Selene
557
Table 5
Comparison of the relative position and velocity coordinates for the Moon and the Sun over one Saros period
beginningat epochs chosen far from eclipses. For comparison, the first row corresponds to the partial lunar eclipse
which occurred on Feb. 11.1954 [ 191
Saros period Beginning
End
%)
---_----
(days)
year
ls-&
rm
(km/day) ()
is-i,
(/day)
Bs-&
()
js-A
(/day)
mth day
179.925 -10.942
179.924 -10.916
-0.848
-0.864
1.091 0.015 0.19

1.087
20.89109 392136.2
31.21860 391372.4
4829.7 2S4.564 -11.633

4877.1 254.561 -11.677
-4.980
-4.990
0.401
0.397
0.023 0.29
7
7
15.63149 390917.8
26.91061 389942.7
5398.4 279.984 -11.755

5522.6 279.978 -11.817
-5.163
-5.184
0.227
0.210
0.032 0.40
1974
1992
2
2
4.86549 359560.4 -2023.8

16.23050 359473.7 -2206.4
209.769 -13.991
209.769 -14.001
1.620
1.611
1.281 0.004 0.05

1.282
6585.36290
1979
1997
10
11
31.60589 364882.5 -1481.2

10.96879 364603.2 -1727.4
229.510 -13.543
229.510 -13.559
1.011
0.992
1.272
1.276
6585.32358
1988
2006
6
6
6585.32696
(eclipse)
1952
1970
2
2
6585.32751
1958
1976
10
10
6585.27911
1964
1982
6585.36501
11.02729 403657.9 -1749.7

21.35425 404162.9 -1591.9
7.71649 370856.4
19.04007 370542.8
1595.6
1308.2
84.094 -13.086
84.093 -13.112
-0.380
-0.305
-1.234
-1.237
0.009 0.11
0.014 0.17
role in driving the system towards the repetition of any particular configuration.
It should also be noted that this confirmation of the value for the Saros period to this accuracy
is obtained using only the criterion that the relative geometry of the Earth-Moon-Sun system
is repeated after one Saros period. The Saros period is therefore evident in the JPL Ephemeris
despite the fact that the JPL Ephemeris, in its calculations of the positions of the Earth, Moon
and the Sun at any time, incorporates not only the effects of the gravitational interaction between
the three bodies, but also the effects of the figures of the Earth and the Moon, the effects of the
tides raised on the Earth by the Moon, and the effects of the point mass gravitational interactions
of the other planets and the five largest asteroids. This underlines the fact that at any given time,
these other perturbations on the Moons orbit are very small, being several orders of magnitude
smaller than the gravitational perturbations of the Sun.
It was therefore likely that the main characteristics of the Saros cycle could also be investigated in the much simplified model of the elliptic restricted three-body problem of the EarthMoon system disturbed only by the Sun. Perozzi et al. [ 191then numerically integrated a system
consisting of the Sun, the Earth moving in a fixed Keplerian ellipse with its mass augmented by
that of the real Moon, and a massless Moon perturbed by the Earth and Sun. The initial positions and velocities of the Earth and Moon were taken from the JPL Ephemeris DE-l 18 at JD
2434000.5. The equations of motion were integrated in Cartesian coordinates using the RADAU
integrator [5] to 15th order to give the time evolutions of the Moons semimajor axis, eccentricity, inclination, argument of perigee and longitude of the nodes over two Saros periods. Here
the Saros period was taken to be 223 synodic months, where the synodic month had to be calculated using Delaunays formulae [3] for the rates of change in the longitude of the nodes and
pericentre as functions of v = nl /n, e, and i, because the initial osculating semimajor axis and
the initial osculating eccentricity chosen for the Earth from the JPL Ephemeris are constants in
See Explanatory supplement to the Astronomical Ephemeris and the American Ephemeris and Nautical Almanac (1961) H.M.S.O.
558
B.A. Steves
the restricted elliptical problem and these values were not the mean values for the Earth which
give the current synodic lunar month. All the orbital parameters of the Moon with the exception
of longitude of the node were shown to reproduce themselves very well after one Saros period,
thus confirming that the Saros cycle is essentially a three-body phenomenon. The longitude of
the node behaves differently because its revolution period is 18.6 years, slightly longer than that
of the Saros cycle. The net result is that eclipses, which repeat after one Saros period, will occur
with the three bodies aligned in a different direction with respect to a fixed reference frame than
before. All other characteristics of the Earth-Moon-Sun configuration will be repeated.
Generally, it may be concluded that the relative dynamical geometry of the Earth-Moon-Sun
system over one Saros period is repeated at any osculating phase of the period, and not just in
the mean geometry reference frame nor simply at the occurrence of certain particular events such
as eclipses. In other words the perturbations of the Sun on the Earth-Moon system, particularly
the large disturbances in the Moons semi-major axis, eccentricity and inclination, are almost
completely cancelled out by each other over any Saros period started at any time. This suggests
that the Saros period could have relevance to any question of the stability of the Earth-Moon
system against solar perturbations.
8. MIRROR CONFIGURATIONS IN THE SAROS CYCLE
How is it that the solar perturbations acting on the Earth-Moon system are nearly cancelled
over one Saros period to such an extent that no matter when the Saros begins, the dynamical
geometry of the system is very nearly repeated at its end?
A well-known theorem by Roy and Ovenden [24] states that if at a certain epoch a system of
n gravitating point masses (n I 2) is aligned in such a way that every radius vector relative to
the systems centre of mass is perpendicular to every mutual velocity vector, the behaviour of the
system after that epoch will be a mirror image of its behaviour before that epoch. There exist only
two such types of possible configurations, one where the bodies are collinear with their velocity
vectors perpendicular to the line (hereafter called collinear MCs) and one where the bodies are
coplanar with their velocity vectors lying perpendicular to that plane (hereafter called coplanar
MCs). Those solar and lunar eclipse configurations in which the Moon is at perigee or apogee
are examples of collinear MCs. Because of the relatively large value of the inclination of the
lunar orbit, coplanar MCs do not correspond to eclipse configurations.
A corollary to the mirror theorem states that if a dynamical system passes through two such
mirror configurations, then the system is periodic, with a period equal to twice the time interval
between successive mirror configurations.
Even if only a near mirror configuration occurs, the occurrence of a second near mirror configuration can be enough to ensure that the dynamical system moves in a quasi-periodic orbit
for a finite length of time dependent on the deviation of the bodies configuration from exact
mirror configurations. Since the Saros cycle has been known to exist for at least 2300 years, it
would appear that the Earth-Moon-Sun system must pass through a minimum of two near mirror
configurations every Saros period.
This can be easily proven in the case of a hypothetical perfect Saros cycle where the Suns
geocentric orbit is assumed to be essentially circular. Let the Saros period be Tsaros = 6585.3
days and the Saros cycle be exactly
223Ts = 239T~ = 242T~ = Tsms,
If the Barth, Moon and Sun are now taken to be collinear - the Moon to be located at its pericentre, and the Moons line of nodes to be collinear with the line formed by the Earth, Moon
559
(bl
(01
Fig. 4. hvo successive collinear mirror configuration events of the Earth (E)-Moon (M)-Sun (S) system, separated
by one-half Saros period, and occurring at a conjunction (a) and opposition (b) respectively. The location of the
ascending node of the Moons orbit is indicated by 52[ 191.
and Sun - then at that epoch, the mutual velocities of the three bodies are perpendicular to their
radius vectors and an exact mirror configuration exists. Suppose the Earth-Moon-Sun system is
also in conjunction and the Sun is located in the direction of the descending node v (See Fig. 4a).
Then one half Saros period later, when Tsaros/2 = 115.5T, = 119.5T~ = 12lT~ months have
elapsed, the Earth, Moon and Sun are once again collinear but in opposition. The Moon is now
at its apocentre and the Sun is located in the direction of the ascending node Q (See Fig. 4b).
Hence, a second mirror configuration is formed which will reverse the solar perturbations built
up in the first half of the Saros period to return the system to its original mirror configuration, by
the end of the Saros period.
The Saros cycle is, however, not perfect and the Suns geocentric orbit is not circular. If the
observed mean motions of the Moon, the Sun, the Moons pericentre and the Moons ascending
node are then studied, it can still be shown that even in the actual Earth-Moon-Sun mean dynamical system, any mean near mirror configuration of the Earth, Moon and Sun is followed one
half Saros period later by a second near mirror configuration.
The observed mean longitudes of the Moon km, the Moons pericentre m, the Moons ascending node s2 and the Sun )Ls are given by the following formulae taken from The Explanatory
Supplement to the Astronomical Ephemeris (1961, pp. 98 and 107):
a ,,, = 270.434164 + 13.1763965268 d,
m = 334.329556
+ 0.1114040803
d,
Q = 259.183275 - 0.0529539222 d,
hs = 279.696678
+ 0.9856473354d,
d being the number of Julian days that have elapsed from the epoch 241 5020.0 JD or 1900
January 0.5 ephemeris time. Higher order terms of d are neglected since they are very small for
times of the order of one Saros period.

The Moons mean position with respect to the Sun, with respect to the lunar pericentre and
with respect to the lunar ascending node are therefore given by Eqs. (1) to (3), respectively,
AA = AC,- )Ls = 350.737486 + 12.1907491914d,
(1)
Am = A,,, - w = 296.104608 + 13.0649924465 da,
(2)
AQ = &, - s2 = 11.250889 + 13.2293504490d.
(3)
560
B.A. Steves
Let us study the values of AA, Am and AQ at a time d and at a time d + tl later, where tl is
6585.3/2 = 3292.65 days or half a Saros period. If we take the differences between the values
of A&Am and ASZat these two times, we obtain
Ak(d + tl) - Al(d) = 40140.479 = 180.479,
Aw(d + tl) - Am(d) = 179.101,
A52(d + tl) - A52(d) = 0.282.
Thus the results show that if the Earth-MoonSuns mean dynamical system is at, or near, a
mirror configuration at time d, a similar configuration will occur at time d + tl , one half Saros
period later.
Perozzi et al. [ 191 studied the occurrence of mirror configurations in the case of a coplanar
Earth-Moon-Sun system. This is not an unreasonable simplification as the Moons inclination is
small. Using current values of the Suns mean motion n 1 and the rate of change of the Moons line
of apses w, they discovered that the time taken for an opposition of the Ear&Moon-Sun system
to move from the farthest possible angle from the line of nodes to the line of nodes and hence
form a mirror configuration is of the order of 5.08 years, less than one half Saros period. After
5 years the opposition will, at best, be exactly aligned with the apse or, at worst, the opposition
on one side of the moving apse and the succeeding one on the other side of the moving apse
wiIl be equidistant from it at an angle no bigger than 0.36. Therefore even in the worst-case
scenario, the best near mirror configuration that occurs within one half a Saros period deviates
only slightly from a perfect mirror configuration.
By the arguments given at the beginning of this section, once the first good near mirror configuration occurs within a half Saros period, a second near mirror configuration will follow one
half Saros period later. The occurrence of two good near mirror configurations in any Saros period implies that the Earth-Moon-Sun dynamical system is moving in a nearly periodic orbit of
period equal to one Saros period.
9. PERIODIC ORBITS IN THE MAIN LUNAR PROBLEM

A periodic orbit of period one Saros might therefore exist in an Earth-Moon-Sun system
whose lunar mean semi-major axis, eccentricity and inclination were close in value to those
of the Moon. A periodic orbit of period one Saros cannot exist in the elliptic restricted threedimensional three-body model of the Earth-Moon-Sun system because the geocentric distance
of the Sun is not repeated after one Saros period, due to the fact that 223 synodic months do not
correspond to an integral number of years but instead to 18 years 10 days. A circular restricted
model, however, does not have this problem. Since the Earths eccentricity is small and the difference between the Saros period and the duration of the year is only 10 days, the behaviour of
a periodic orbit found in the circular problem should still be very similar to that of the real lunar
orbit.
Valsecchi et al. [32] searched for a periodic orbit of period one Saros in the restricted circular
three-dimensional three-body Earth-Moon-Sun problem with mean semimajor axis Q, eccentricity e and inclination i close to that of the Moon. They discovered, numerically, not just one, but
eight related periodic orbits based on the 8 possible pairs of the 16 different mirror configurations
that exist in the problem.
In the restricted circular three-dimensional three-body problem, the 16 MCs can be uniquely
identified by the values of three angles: the argument of perigee o, the mean anomaly M of
561
Table 6
The 16 possible MCs of the circular restricted three-dimensional three-body problem [32]
MC
A1
ooo
O0
O0
0"
0
9o
9o
90
9o
180
180
180
180
270
270
210
270
O0
O0
180
180
O0
O0
180
180
O0
O0
180
180
0
0
180
180
O0
180
O0
180
O0
180
O0
180
O0
180
0
180
O0
180
O0
180
002
020
022
100
102
120
122
200
202
220
222
300
302
320
322
the Moon and the difference between the mean geocentric longitudes of the Moon and the Sun
A)c = )L - Al. Eight collinear MCs are possible when w, M and A)c are either 0 or 180, while
eight coplanar MCs are formed when u is either 90 or 270 and M and A1 are either 0 or
180. Table 6 unambiguously identifies the 16 MCs with a three-digit code representing w, M
and A)c as multiples of 90.
The revolution periods of the angles AA and M are the synodic month Ts and the anomalistic
month TA respectively, while the revolution period of the angle w + A4is the nodical month TN.
In the Saros, the three months are related by
223Ts = 6585d.32d 21239T~ 2: 242T~.
(4)
Since the difference of duration between TA and TN is due to the secular rotation of w, Eq. (4)
can also be written as
223Ts N- 239T~ N 3T,,
(5)
where To is the period of revolution of w. In periodic orbits of period one Saros = 223Ts, relation
(5) must hold exactly.
In general, for any periodic orbit based on Saros-type commensurabilities between the synodic,
anomalistic and nodical months (or the revolution periods of the angles o, M and AA), the
following relation must hold exactly:
NAA Ts = NM TA = NoTo = 1 &OS period,
(6)
where NAP, NM and No are suitable integers.

Hereafter a Saros period will denote the period of a periodic orbit which results from the
commensurabilities given in Eq. (6) where Ts, TA and T, are variables, while the Saros period
will refer to the period of the commensurability given in Eq. (5) where Ts is that of the current
Moon. From Eq. (6), the pairs of MCs which exist in each of the 8 periodic orbits are then
uniquely given by the values N,, N,u and NAA.If we start from a MC, then half a Saros period
later the second MC will be reached where w, M and AA will differ from the initial values by
562
B.A. States
Table I
The seven possible sets of pairs of MCs contained in periodic orbits of the circular restricted 3- dimensional threebody problem. The coefficients No, NM, NAJ. are, respectively, even, even, odd for EEO, even, odd, even for EOE,
etc. [32]
EEO
EOE
EOO
OEE
OEO
OOE
000
ooo
000
000
ooo
ooo
000
ooo
002
020
022
200
202
220
222
020
022
002
022
002
020
002
202
002
200
002
222
002
220
200
202
200
220
200
222
020
220
020
222
020
200
020
202
220
222
202
222
202
220
022
222
022
220
022
202
022
200
100
102
100
120
100
122
100
300
100
302
100
320
100
322
120
122
102
122
102
120
102
302
102
300
102
322
102
320
300
302
300
320
300
322
120
320
120
322
120
300
120
302
320
322
302
322
302
320
122
322
122
320
122
302
122
300
(N,/2)360, (N~/2)360 and (N~~/2)360, respectively. Table 7 lists the 8 pairs that one can
have, given the different possible parities of N,, NM and NAP, where E = even and 0 =
odd numbers. For the Saros, the parity for N,, NM and NAAis therefore denoted at 000.
Four of the orbits contain collinear MCs, four contain coplanar MCs and all of the orbits
correspond to the same mean values of a, e and i, for a given set of N,, NM and NAP. The three
coefficients N,, NM and NAAmust not be divisible by a common multiple or a shorter periodic
orbit would exist. Hence the case EEE is not allowable.
A restricted circular three-dimensional three-body model with a massless Moon and an Earth
whose mass was augmented by that of the real Moon was used to find the 8 periodic orbits numerically. The Moon was placed at one of the mirror configurations by specifying the appropriate
values for w, M and A)c. A first guess at the starting geocentric orbital elements for the Moon
ao. eg and io was made and the problem was then numerically integrated for one half Saros period, using Everharts [5] RADAU integrator taken to 15th order. After one half Saros period, the
Moons coordinates X, y, z, i, Jo,i were examined in a sidereal ecliptic frame where the SunEarth direction returns to the x-axis every half Saros period. If the orbit is periodic, a second MC
should exist at this time. For collinear MCs, lunar coordinates y, z and i should be zero. For
coplanar MCs, y, i and i should be zero. The initial guesses for ao, eo and io were then adapted
until the relevant lunar coordinates were zeroed at the half Saros period stage.
Table 8 gives the resulting osculating values for a, e and i at each of the 16 MCs in the
8 periodic orbits. Fig. 5 shows the time evolution of the Moons orbital elements a, e, i and
o over one year for: (1) the periodic orbit passing through the MCs coded as 200 and 022 in
Table 8 and (2) the real Moon as given by the JPL DE 102 [16] starting at a time when the
Moon was very nearly in a MC of type 200. Although the periodic orbit was developed from
values of the mean semi-major axis, eccentricity and inclination close to those of the Moon, the
resulting time evolutions of the osculating orbital elements bear a remarkable similarity to the
563
Table 8
The osculating elements a, e and i of the Moon for the 16 possible MCs which form the 8 periodic orbits associated
with the Saros in the circular restricted three-dimensional three-body problem [32]
MC
a (AU)
i 0
000
222
0.00258099716
0.00259063207
0.083356670
0.056488496
5.6908146
5.6881713
200
022
0.00258099716
0.00259063207
0.083356670
0.056488496
5.6908146
5.6881713
002
220
0.00258082066
0.00259085405
0.083864066
0.056953569
5.6915135
5.6887261
202
020
0.00258082066
0.00259085405
0.083864066
0.056953569
5.6915135
5.6887261
100
322
0.00258081914
0.00259043342
0.08393625 1
0.057165911
5.3658476
5.3481729
300
122
0.00258081914
0.00259043342
0.083936251
0.057165911
5.3658476
5.3481729
102
320
0.00258064647
0.00259065 120
0.084452672
0.057640009
5.3655959
5.3475655
302
120
0.00258064647
0.00259065120
0.084452672
0.057640009
5.3655959
5.3475655
real osculating orbital elements of the Moon. The time evolutions of the semi-major axis are
practically indistinguishable, while most of the differences in the evolutions of the eccentricity
and the inclination involve a systematic shift arising from the difference between the values of
e and i for the real Moons orbit and the periodic orbit. Valsecchi et al. [32] show that the close
similarity between the osculating orbital elements continues throughout at least one Saros period.
10. THE SAROS CYCLE AS A POSSIBLE STABILISING MECHANISM FOR THE

MOONS ORBIT
Periodicity, in itself, does not guarantee the stability of a system against perturbations by external forces. A system can be periodic and still be unstable, in the sense that a slight disturbance
by a small external force could send the system into a non-periodic orbit which could result in a
marked irreversible change from the original orbit.
Roy and Ovenden [24] argued that although periodicity does not guarantee stability, periodic
orbits which pass through mirror configurations are more stable, if the time intervals between
successive mirror configurations are shorter. As long as a second mirror configuration is able to
occur before disturbances have enough time to accumulate to the point of causing irreversible
change to the orbit, the system will return to the neighbourhood of its original orbit, with the
second mirror configuration reversing the perturbations caused by the small external force.
While Roy and Ovenden [24] stated that they did not treat the question of stability in an
exhaustive and rigorous manner, they did show that their hypothesis is confirmed by observations
made in the solar system. They proved that two orbiting masses having nearly commensurable
mean motions, and certain values for either of the orbital parameters ti or !& depending on
whether eccentricities or inclinations dominate the system, will produce frequent occurrences
of mirror configurations. They then studied the nearly commensurable systems of low integer
564
B.A. Steves
a(AU)
0.00258
0.00256
0.00254
i /
237!900
2374100
t:]
5.6:
w
5.20:
4.8.
I.
2371900
2372100
t( JD)
2371900
2372100
t( JD)
Fig. 5. (a) Time evolution of the osculating semi-major axis u of the Moon for the JPL Ephemeris DE 102 and two
periodic orbits described in the text over approximately one year starting with an MC. Although practically indistinguishable, tbere are actually three curves in the figure. (b) The equivalent of (a) for the osculating eccentricity e.
The upper curve refers to the periodic orbit associated with the Saros, the lower curves to the long periodic orbit
(see Section 12) and to the DE 102 orbit. (c) The equivalent of (a) for the osculating inclination i. The upperawe
refers to the periodic orbit associated with the Saros, the central one to the DE 102 orbit, and the lowest curve to
the long periodic orbit (see Section 12). (d) The equivalent of (a) for the osculating argument of perigee o. The
individual curves are difficult to distinguish, but the curve with the smaller amplitude refers to the DE 102orbit
andthe longperiodicorbit [34].

values in the solar system and verified that these systems are indeed arranged in such a way as
to allow the most frequent occurrences of mirror configurations. The greater stability of systems
passing through frequent mirror configurations is then suggested to be the reason why more
commensurable systems exist in the solar system than are expected by mere chance [23].
In actual fact, the orbital mean motions do not necessarily have to be nearly commensurable
in order for frequent mirror configurations to occur. That they are generally commensurable for
most of the three-body systems in the solar system exhibiting frequent occurrence of mirror
configurations is simply the result of the fact that most of the systems have values of ti or ti
which are much smaller than their mean motions.
For the collinear-type mirror configurations, the shortest time between successive perfect mirror configurations in a three-dimensional system occurs when the bodies are in conjunction or
opposition every time the bodies are positioned along their mutual line of nodes and their orbital
apsidal lines. For example, if we take a case similar to the Ear&Moon-Sun system where the
Suns orbit is taken to be circular, frequent occurrences of mirror configurations will occur if
565
the satellite, the Sun, the satellites line of nodes and the satellites pericentre or apocentre are
aligned as often as possible, i.e.

AiTs = A~TA = A~TN,
(7)
where Ai for i = 1,2,3 are small integers. In other words, frequent occurrence of mirror configurations occurs when the system contains a perfect Saros cycle.
Eq. (7) can be rewritten in terms of the mean motions of the satellite n, the Sun n 1, the satellites pericentre Tb and the satellites line of nodes fi, i.e.
2n-
At
n -
nl
=27t7
A2
n--m
=2n&
(8)
and hence can be rearranged in the more familiar form describing the conditions that will produce
resonances in the circular three-body problem, i.e.
Bi(n - nt) = Bz(n - ti) =
B3(TZ -
Cl),
(9)
where Bi for i = 1,2,3 are integers.

For example, in the case of periodic orbits associated with the Saros, where
223Ts = 2393~ = 242T~,
we could write
239(n - nt) = 223(n - tb)
and 242T~ = 223(n - S?Z),
which leads to
16n - 239n1 + 223ti = 0
and 19n - 242n1 + 223fi = 0.
In general, Saros-like periodic orbits are equivalent to e-i resonances of the form
iln - iznl + i3ti = 0
and i4n - ipI+
i3d = 0.
(10)
Thus, Saros-like periodic orbits are not necessarily close, in general to mean motion resonances.
Only for those systems where rir and b are small relative to their mean motions n, would
the mean motions be nearly commensurable and frequent occurrences of mirror configurations
occur, viz.
Bl(n-n1)2:B2nCBqz
or irk
Bl
-2:-.
B1 - B2
B1
B1 - B3
The Metonic cycle of 19n 2: 254nl is such a relation in the Earth-Moon-Sun system, but inspection of the lunar orbital behaviour in the IPL Ephemeris shows that the lunar orbit is not
nearly periodic over this cycles period.
In general, frequent occurrences of mirror configurations in the circular three-body problem
result when the dynamical system contains a set of commensurabilities like those of Eq. (7) or,
in other words, when the system contains a Saros cycle. Extension of the solution to that of the
general three-body problem simply requires the addition of commensurabilities with the Suns
anomalistic and nodical period, to enable the frequent alignments of the Suns line of nodes and
apses with a conjunction or opposition, as well as with the Moons line of nodes and apse. Then
for example,
B.A. Steves
566
Bl(n - nl) = Bz(n - ti) =
Bg(n -
h)
= B4(nl
zirl) = B5(n1 -
!&).
(11)
In the simpler case, where the Sun is taken to move in an elliptical orbit with small rates of
change of pericentre and node relative to its mean motion, the following set of commensurabilities is sufficient for frequent occurrences of mirror configurations:
Bl(n - nl) 2: Bz(n - rb)
B3(n -
ti) 2: B4(nl)
Bs(nl).
or in terms of the mean periods

AITS 2: A~TA 2: A~TN = AdTo,
where Bi and Ai are integers and To is the Suns sidereal period. The Hipparchus cycle of - 690
years and the Perchot cycle [ 18,261 of
2078Ts 21 2227T~ N 225ST~ 2: 168To
so that
149n - 2227n1+ 2078ti = 0;
177n - 2255nl+ 20786 = 0;
and
2078n - 2246nt = 0
are examples of the above type of resonance in which there is a possibility that periodic orbits
associated with it may be found in the elliptic problem.
Eqs. (9) and (11) are recognisable as the conditions which will produce resonances in the
circular three-body problem and general three-body problem, respectively. Thus, the statement
that a three-body system moves through two mirror configurations which form a periodic orbit,
is equivalent to the statement that the system is moving in a resonance. The existence of resonances within a planetary system is known to be closely related to the stability of that system
[7,6]. Perhaps the mirror theorem can be used as a simple way of understanding physically how
resonances can act to stabilise a system.
If the hypothesis, that periodic orbits are more stable against external perturbations, the
shorter the time interval between successive mirror configurations is true, then circular threebody dynamical systems containing perfect Saros cycles, which we have already seen move
through two mirror configurations, will be more stable the smaller the Saros period. Saros cycles
whose periods are too large may not have enough time to return the dynamical system to its original geometry before solar perturbations grow to the point where the systems orbital elements
are changed irreversibly.
If the Saros cycle is not perfect, as in the case of the Earth-Moon-Sun system, its duration will
also depend on how closely the near Saros cycle approaches a perfect Saros cycle. Saros cycles
which are too inaccurate can not successfully cancel solar perturbations and therefore will not
last very long.
Also, if a near Saros cycle can help the system to endure long enough to reach a Saros cycle
that is closer to a perfect Saros cycle but of much longer period, then the system will again last
longer than if it was only able to use the solar perturbation cancelling properties of the first Saros
cycle.
In summary, it seems that a circular three-body system will be more stable:
(1) the shorter the Saros period;
(2) the closer the near Saros cycle is to a perfect Saros cycle;
(3) the greater the number of near Saros cycles operating at any given time.
567
11. THE EFFECT OF TIDAL EVOLUTION ON THE SAROS

If the Saros cycle does act as a stabilising mechanism, then of importance is the question of
how probable it is that such cycles comprised of commensurabilities between synodic, anomalistic and nodical periods should exist, especially given the knowledge that tidal evolution has
changed these periods in the Moons past and is continuing to change them today.
Authors such as Mitchell [ 131and Crommelin [2] merely note that the anomalistic period plays
a very convenient role in helping to predict eclipse characteristics. Newcomb [ 151in his paper on
The Recurrence of Solar Eclipses, talks of two remarkable chance relations connected with
the Saros.. . without which the period would not have served the purpose of foreseeing eclipses
so well as it actually does. He is referring to the fact that after one Saros period, the mean
anomalies of the Moon and the Sun have returned to within less than 3 and 12 respectively
of their original positions. He goes on to say, There is no a priori reason that this should be
the case: it arises only from the fact that 18 years is a close multiple, not only of the times of
revolution of the Sun and the Moon, but also of the times of revolution of the Moons node and
perigee.
Many people have remarked on the fortuitous existence of the near commensurabilities forming the Saros cycle, but to our knowledge no one has asked the question, Just how much of
a coincidence is the existence of a Saros-type cycle within the orbital dynamics of the EarthMoon-Sun system? If the existence of a Saros-type cycle is improbable, what implications
does this have for the Moons orbital evolution when in the past or the future, the Moon may not
have had, or may not have, a Saros-type cycle to use as a stabilising mechanism against solar
perturbations?
With regards to the past history of the Moons orbit, Sonett et al. [27] have estimated the
duration of half a synodic lunar month to be 0.038095 f 0.00003 yr in the late Precambrian era
approximately 6.8 x lo* years ago. They determine this value under the assumption that lunar
and solar tides were the source of the laminae of the Elatina Formation in South Australia.
If we use Delaunays expression for the rate of change of the lunar perigee and node as functions of a, e, i, el and assuming that the mean eccentricity and inclination of the Moon have not
changed very much from present values as a result of tidal evolution [ 121,it is found that another
Saros-like relationship exists in the Precambrian era of the form
512Ts = 1424gd.4 N 547T~ 553T~
(12)
Valsecchi et al. [32] showed that a set of 8 periodic orbits in which Eq. (12) holds in its exact
form can be found in the restricted circular three-dimensional three-body problem. The mean
lunar eccentricity and inclination for these periodic orbits are even closer to the current ones
than those of the periodic orbits found for the Saros. Their period of 39.01 yr is very close to
an integral number of years suggesting the possibility that a periodic orbit may also exist nearby
in the mean a, e, i and ei phase space in the elliptic restricted three-dimensional three-body
problem.
Can, therefore, a Saros-like periodic orbit close to the real lunar orbit be found for any value
of the Moons semi-major axis that may exist during the Moons evolution? Recently Steves,
Valsecchi, Perozzi and Roy [29,30] showed that this is not the case. The Earth-Moon-Sun dynamical system exhibits near Saros-like cycles for only 25 to 30% of the time interval between
-5 x IO7 to +5 x lo7 years given an upper limit of 1000 on the size of integers allowed in the
commensurable relations and a maximum error of 1% of the synodic period allowed from exact
equalities in the commensurabilities. In addition, if the variations of the Earths mean eccentric-
568
B.A. Steves
ity are taken into account, a Saros-like cycle which appears to exist for a constant value of et in
fact exists only intermittently throughout its calculated duration.
Curiously, the present Saros is found to have the smallest period of the Saros-like cycles during
this time. It also endures the longest and has a period closest to an integral number of anomalistic
years, making it one of the most efficient Saros-like cycles for reversing solar perturbations in
the main lunar problem.
What happens to the Moons orbit during epochs when tidal friction and/or the change in eccentricity of the Earths orbit take the Moon into situations where no short period Saros-like
cycles exist in its orbital dynamics is still unknown. Possibly, solar perturbations may grow
unchecked to the point where the Moons orbital elements are changed irreversibly before another Saros-like cycle of short period is found.
12. THE ARRANGEMENT

ELEMENT SPACE
OF LONGER SAROS-LIKE CYCLES IN MEAN
Periodic orbits derived from Saros-like cycles (SLCs) of much longer durations are, however, very abundant in the Earth-Moon-Sun dynamical model [33]. This is not surprising given
Poincares famous conjecture [20]:
There is one thing I was not able to demonstrate rigorously, but that I think is very likely.
That given a system of canonical equations (he refers to the N-body equations of motion) and
one of its particular solutions, it must be always possible to find a periodic solution (possibly of
a very long period), so that the difference between the two solutions is arbitrarily small for an
arbitrary long time span.
In other words, Poincare suggested that for every bounded trajectory in phase space there
should exist a periodic orbit arbitrarily close to that trajectory but possibly of very long period.
Valsecchi et al. [33] used the general relationship for a Saros-like cycle given by Eq. (6) to
explore the mean lunar eccentricity and inclination phase space for other SLCs (i.e. other periodic orbits). Keeping the synodic period constant at its present value, the other lunar periods
were varied until integer multiples NAA,NM and NWwere found which satisfied Eq. (6) exactly.
The resulting three lunar periods were then used in Equations (8) to find the mean motion of
perigee and node. The mean motion of perigee and node and the present values for v = nl/n
and er, were then substituted into Delaunays equations (see Ref. [30]) which could then be
solved numerically for the corresponding mean lunar eccentricity and inclination.
Fig. 6 shows the arrangement of the resulting SLCs in e-i phase space for values of No
limited to 10,20,40 and 80 in turn. Each point or SLC corresponds to a set of 8 periodic orbits
which can be found numerically using the procedure in Section 9. The curious figure resembles
a city map, with squares, large avenues and an intricate, self-similar network of narrower
streets. The squares are situated at the crossings of avenues and have at their centres a point
representing a set of periodic orbits whose NAP is much smaller than those of the surrounding
orbits. The streets get narrower and the squares get smaller as values of No get larger.
The point representing the Saros is located near the centre of the figure at the centre of the
largest square (hereafter called Saros square), while the point representing the location of the
Moons present orbit in e-i phase space is, interestingly enough, also close to Saros square.
Approximately 10000 SLCs were discovered in e-i phase space within the ranges of 0 5 e i
0.1 and 0 5 i 5 lo, when a maximum of 115 revolutions of w was allowed.
Valsecchi, Perozzi, Roy and Steves [34] then searched the arrangement of SLCs for periodic
orbits of longer durations whose e and i were much closer to those of the real Moon than the e
569
Fig. 6. Mean eccentricities and inclinations of periodic orbits found in the restricted circular three-dimensional
three-body problem close to the orbit of the Moon, for a number of revolutions of the argument of perigee o of up
to 10 (upper left), 20 (upper right), 40 (lower left) and 80 (lowerright) [33].
and i of the periodic orbit associated with the Saros. The time evolutions of the osculating lunar
orbital elements of one such periodic orbit of period 7571 Ts (called the long periodic orbit) is
shown in Fig. 5. Although difficult to distinguish because of the scale, the long periodic orbit
is indeed an improvement in matching the eccentricity, inclination, semi-major axis and argument of perigee of the Moons orbit. This feature seems to be supporting evidence for the truth
of Poincares conjecture. However, in the case of the real Moons orbit, a preliminary analysis
suggests that even over a short time span of one year the residuals from the much longer periodic
orbit show a significant trend which is probably due to the neglecting of the Earths eccentricity.
Thus, for continued improvement, it would be better to upgrade to a more general model such as
the elliptic restricted three-dimensional three-body model.
13. CONCLUSIONS
It appears that the Saros cycle has been used for little in the past but prediction of eclipses. It is
therefore curious that a feature known for over two thousand years, particularly to all those who
have worked on Lunar theories, should have something new to say to us. Not only does it lead to
the existence and determination of three-dimensional periodic orbits of long duration, but it also
provides supporting evidence for the conjecture made by Poincare over a hundred years ago.
But Selene has yet more secrets. Tidal friction will push the Moon out until the day equals
the month, both Earth and Moon turning the same faces towards each other. What we have not
yet learned is whether, in those far-future times, the Moon will still have Saros-type cycles as
570
B.A. Steves
a defence against the enhanced gravitational disturbances of the Sun or whether the Moon will
escape from the Earth to lead to an independent existence as a planet.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author gratefully acknowledges her indebtedness to her fellow collaborators in Project
POINCARE (Periodic Orbits Involving Numerous Circuits: Assessment, Research, and Exploration): Dr E. Perozzi (Nuova Telespazio, Rome, Italy), Dr G. Valsecchi (CNR, Riparto Planetologia, Rome, Italy) and Professor A.E. Roy (Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, Glasgow University, Glasgow, UK).
References
[l] A. Cook, Halley and the Saros, Q.J.R. Astl: Sot. 37 (1996) 349-353.
[2] A.C.D. Crommelin, The 29-Year eclipse cycle, The Observatory 24 (1901) 379.
[3] Ch. Delaunay, Note sur les mouvements du perigee et du noeud de la Lune, Compt. rend.
hebdom. Acad. Sci. 74 (1872) 17.
[4] J.B.J. Deslambre, Histoire de1 1Astronomie Ancienne II, Paris (1817).
[5] E. Everhart (1985) An efficient integrator that uses Gauss-Radau spacings. In Dynamics of
Comets: their Origin and Evolution, A. Carusi, G.B. Valsecchi, Eds. (Reidel, Dordrecht,
1985) p. 185.
[6] P. Goldreich, An explanation of the frequent occurrence of commensurable mean motions
in the Solar System, Mon. Not. Roy. Ast,: Sot. 130 (1965) 159.
[7] R. Greenberg, Orbital resonances among Saturns satellites. In Saturn, T. Gehrels, M.S.
Mathews, Eds. (Univ. of Arizona Press, Tucson, 1984).
[8] E. Halley, A Proposal of a method for finding the longitude at sea within a degree or twenty
leagues by Dr Edmund Halley Astr. Reg. Vice-President of the Royal Society. With an
account of the progress he bath made therein by a continued series of accurate observations
of the Moon, taken by himself at the Royal Observatory at Greenwich, Philos. Trans. 37,
No. 421 (1731) 185-195.
[9] E. Halley, Edmundi Halleii Astronomi dum viveret Regii Tabulae Astronomicae accedunt
de usu Tabularum Praecepta, J. Bevis, Ed., London (1749);
[lo] E. Halley, Astronomical tables with Precepts both in English and in Latin for computing the
places of the Sun, Moon, &c. (translations of Halley, 1749), London (1752).
[ 1l] N. Kollerstrom, A reintroduction of epicycles: Newtons 1702 Lunar Theory and Halleys
Saros correction, Q.J.R. Ask Sot. 36 (1995) 357-368.
[ 121 F. Mignard, The lunar orbit revisited, III, Moon & Planets 24 (198 1) 189-207.
[ 131 S.A. Mitchell, Eclipses of the Sun, 5th ed. (Columbia University press, New York, 195 1).
[14] 0. Neugebauer, The Exact Sciences in Antiquity (Brown Univ. Press, 1957) pp. 141-142.
[ 151 S. Newcomb, The recurrence of solar eclipses, Astron. Papers of the Amel: Ephemeris 1
(1822) 7.
[ 161 X.X. Newhall, E.M. Standish, J.G. Williams, DE 102: A numerically integrated ephemeris
of the Moon and planets spanning forty-four centuries. Astron. Astrophys. 125 (1983) 150.
[17] A. Pannekoek, A History of Astronomy, (George Allen & Unwin, London, 1961).
[ 181 J. Perchot, Bull. Astron. 11 (1894) 21.
571
[19] E. Perozzi, A.E. Roy, B.A. Steves, G.B. Valsecchi, Significant high number commen
surabilities in the main lunar problem. I: The Saros as a near periodicity of the Moons
orbit, Celest. Mech & Dynam. Astron. 52 (1991) 241-261.
[20] H. Poincare, Les Methodes Nouvelles de la Mecanique Celeste (Gauthier-Villars, Paris,
1893).
[21] A.E. Roy (1983) Asymptotic approach to mirror conditions as a trapping mechanism in
N-Body hierarchical dynamical systems. In Dynamical trapping and evolution in the Solar
System, V.V. Markellos, Y. Kozai, Eds. (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1983) pp. 227.
[22] A.E. Roy, Orbital Motion, 3rd ed. (Adam Hilger, Bristol, 1988).
[23] A.E. Roy, M.W. Ovenden, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Sot. 114 (1954) 232.
[24] A.E. Roy, M.W. Ovenden, On the occurrence of commensurable mean motions in the solar
system II. The mirror theorem, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Sot. 115 (1955) 296-309.
[25] A.E. Roy, B.A. Steves, G.B. Valsecchi, E. Perozzi, Significant high number commen
surabilities in the Main Lunar Problem: a postscript to a discovery of the ancient Chaldeans.
In Predictability, Stability and Chaos in N-Body Dynamical Systems, A.E. Roy, Ed.
(Plenum, London, 1991) pp. 273-282.
[26] K. Schwarzschild, Astron. Nuchl: 147 (1898) 289.
[27] C.P Sonett, S.A. Finney C.R. Williams, The lunar orbit in the late Precambrian and the
Elatina sandstone laminae, Nature 335 (1988) 806-808.
[28] E.M. Standish, M.S.W. Keesey, X.X. Newhall, JPL Development Ephemeris Number 96,
NASA Technical Report 32 (1976) 1603.
[29] B.A. Steves, Finite-Time Stability Criteria for Sun-Perturbed Planetary Satellites, PhD
Thesis, Univ. Glasgow (1990).
[30] B.A. Steves, G.B. Valsecchi, E. Perozzi, A.E. Roy, Significant high number commen
surabilities in the Main Lunar Problem. II: The occurrence of Saros-like near-periodicities,
Celest. Mech & Dynam. Astron. 57 (1993) 341.
[31] J.N. Stockwell, (1901) Eclipse-cycles,Astmn. J. 21(1901) 185.
[32] G.B. Valsecchi, E. Perozzi, A.E. Roy, B.A. Steves, Periodic orbits close to that of the Moon,
Astnm. Astrophys. 271(1993) 308.
[33] G.B. Valsecchi, E. Perozzi, A.E. Roy, B.A. Steves, The arrangement in mean elements
space of the periodic orbits close to that of the Moon, Celest. Mech. & Dynam. Astrvn. 56
(1993) 373.
[34] G.B. Valsecchi, E. Perozzi, A.E. Roy, B.A. Steves, Hunting for periodic orbits close to that
of the Moon in the restricted circular three-body problem, in: From Newton to Chaos, A.E.
Roy, B.A. Steves, Eds. (Plenum, New York 1995) p. 231.

Va41 4 543

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Va41 4 543

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Vistas in Asrronomy Vol. 41, No. 4, pp.

THE CYCLES OF SELENE

2. THE DISCOVERY OF THE SAROS

The cycles of Selene

well-being of the king and country.

3. ECLIPSE PREDICTION USING THE SAROS

The cycles of Selene

4. THR REPETITION OF THE RELATIVE GEOMETRY OF THR

The cycles of Selene

Average absolute differences in

5. EXPLANATION OF THE NEAR REPETITION

OF ECLIPSES EVERY SAROS

The cycles of Selene

The cycles of Selene

25lTs = 7412.1778 days,

These lunar cycles and others are summarised in Table 4.

The cycles of Selene

Again it is not as accurate as the Saros cycle.

7. A MODERN USE OF THE SAROS AS AN INDICATION OF THE

1.091 0.015 0.19

4829.7 2S4.564 -11.633

5398.4 279.984 -11.755

4.86549 359560.4 -2023.8

1.281 0.004 0.05

31.60589 364882.5 -1481.2

11.02729 403657.9 -1749.7

The cycles of Selene

times of the order of one Saros period.

Am = A,,, - w = 296.104608 + 13.0649924465 da,

AQ = &, - s2 = 11.250889 + 13.2293504490d.

9. PERIODIC ORBITS IN THE MAIN LUNAR PROBLEM

The cycles of Selene

where NAP, NM and No are suitable integers.

The cycles of Selene

10. THE SAROS CYCLE AS A POSSIBLE STABILISING MECHANISM FOR THE

andthe longperiodicorbit [34].

The cycles of Selene

aligned as often as possible, i.e.

where Bi for i = 1,2,3 are integers.

and 242T~ = 223(n - S?Z),

and 19n - 242n1 + 223fi = 0.

and i4n - ipI+

or in terms of the mean periods

The cycles of Selene

11. THE EFFECT OF TIDAL EVOLUTION ON THE SAROS

12. THE ARRANGEMENT

OF LONGER SAROS-LIKE CYCLES IN MEAN

The cycles of Selene

The cycles of Selene

Potrebbero piacerti anche