Having all the periods be exact, small integer multiples of one another leads to positive feedback and throws the periods off until they are sufficiently odd multiples to be stable over longer periods. But IIRC you can pick some prime numbers so that they make a big cycle cycle equal to the product of all the primes, without flying apart. Then instead of watching objects move against the distant stars you can go by conjuctions like we do now, only the conjunctions are at regular intervals, +/- some small variations due to the earth's varying distance over time..
I'm not sure I understand the concept of positive feedback in this context. If each division of time is a multiple of each other, surely any number of a smaller division will always fit neatly within a larger division. Any multiple of twelve months will always be a given number of years, it can't suddenly pick up another hour or day anywhere.
Probably an example of my astrophysics not being good enough to make authoritative statements :o)
From what I gather, this is to do with planetary bodies around the sun, so I could still have my tidy calendar if there were no other planets (or if the planets weren't arranged in neat cycles)?
Seems a good explanation of why tidy cycles don't exist in our solar system. There's some suggestion that it might exist in other solar systems (although that's underexplained?).
Comments 6
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
From what I gather, this is to do with planetary bodies around the sun, so I could still have my tidy calendar if there were no other planets (or if the planets weren't arranged in neat cycles)?
Reply
Seems a good explanation of why tidy cycles don't exist in our solar system. There's some suggestion that it might exist in other solar systems (although that's underexplained?).
Reply
Leave a comment