Date: Tue, 04.09.07 10:16
On Monday September 03 2007 16:24, you wrote to me:
DW> When I was a kid, probably in the 1950s, I remember reading
DW> predictions of that eclipse, which was going to be the next total one
DW> visible from Britain. It *was* predicted to be total, not annular,
An observer on the equator is closer to the moon when the moon is in the zenith
than an observer on the pole.
DW> and the path of totality was just going to cross the tip of the
DW> Lizard peninsula, in south-west England.
More to the south than my early prediction of the soutern part of Dutch
Limburg. So closer to the moon. That could explain for total vs annular.
DW> I guess your 1960 prediction was different from the one I saw earlier,
DW> and they were wrong in opposite directions.
We must not be too hard on them. They neither had the accuracy of
interplanetary probes charting the solar system nor the computer power that
DW> the earlier prediction, so a substantial chunk of Cornwall (the
DW> south-westernmost county in England) got to see totality. That was a
DW> good thing, since the earlier prediction would have required
DW> astronmers to stand shoulder-by-shoulder on the little bit of land
DW> from where they would see the eclipse.
The bad news however was that all of Cornwell was overcast. I was lucky as in
Normandy the clouds parted just before totality and we had clear view. I was
within a km of the central line.
--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20060315
* Origin: http://www.vlist.eu (2:280/5555)