Make solar eclipses exceedingly rare, but still have new moons The Next CEO of Stack OverflowWhat are the parameters of a planet having multiple moons?Timekeeping Systems on a Habitable MoonI'm building a fantasy world like Earth but it has two moons adjacent to each other in a co-orbital configuration and need helpVolcanic winter related to moons?Moon orbit perpendicular to planet orbit - possible?Could 2 eclipses be visible simultaneously in the same area?How can I lengthen a total solar eclipse on an earth-like planet?Solar Eclipses on Planet Tidally Locked with Its MoonHow to create an annual celestial event for a worldHow to calculate hour angle of a moon?

Elegant way to replace substring in a regex with optional groups in Python?

How did people program for Consoles with multiple CPUs?

How to safely derail a train during transit?

Cannot send `--` into tmux panes from vim

Return the Closest Prime Number

Anatomically Correct Strange Women In Ponds Distributing Swords

I believe this to be a fraud - hired, then asked to cash check and send cash as Bitcoin

What happened in Rome, when the western empire "fell"?

What do "high sea" and "carry" mean in this sentence?

Do I need to enable Dev Hub in my PROD Org?

Would a galaxy be visible from outside, but nearby?

Why is the US ranked as #45 in Press Freedom ratings, despite its extremely permissive free speech laws?

Contours of a clandestine nature

Is it ever safe to open a suspicious html file (e.g. email attachment)?

Why did we only see the N-1 starfighters in one film?

Written every which way

What does "Its cash flow is deeply negative" mean?

Hindi speaking tourist to UK from India

Unreliable Magic - Is it worth it?

"and that skill is always a class skill for you" - does "always" have any meaning in Pathfinder?

Are there any limitations on attacking while grappling?

At which OSI layer a user-generated data resides?

How to log in to Centos 7 using RDP from Win10

How to prepend a string to only the lines of text which are numbers



Make solar eclipses exceedingly rare, but still have new moons



The Next CEO of Stack OverflowWhat are the parameters of a planet having multiple moons?Timekeeping Systems on a Habitable MoonI'm building a fantasy world like Earth but it has two moons adjacent to each other in a co-orbital configuration and need helpVolcanic winter related to moons?Moon orbit perpendicular to planet orbit - possible?Could 2 eclipses be visible simultaneously in the same area?How can I lengthen a total solar eclipse on an earth-like planet?Solar Eclipses on Planet Tidally Locked with Its MoonHow to create an annual celestial event for a worldHow to calculate hour angle of a moon?










4












$begingroup$


Given a system similar to the Earth/Moon/Sun system, how would one go about making solar eclipses rarer than they are here on earth, but keep new moons similar to how they currently are (or at least similar)?



At first I thought that increasing the lunar tilt from 5 degrees to, say, 10 degrees would help, but there would still always be two "nodes" indicating where solar eclipses could happen on the planet. Even at a 90 degree angle, twice a year, the planet would see solar eclipses. at 10 degrees, new moons would still be relatively as frequent, though at 90 degrees, I don't think there would ever be a new moon.




Is there a way to make total solar eclipses happen infrequently, while keeping new moons frequent? And if so, what variable(s) need to change to make that happen?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$
















    4












    $begingroup$


    Given a system similar to the Earth/Moon/Sun system, how would one go about making solar eclipses rarer than they are here on earth, but keep new moons similar to how they currently are (or at least similar)?



    At first I thought that increasing the lunar tilt from 5 degrees to, say, 10 degrees would help, but there would still always be two "nodes" indicating where solar eclipses could happen on the planet. Even at a 90 degree angle, twice a year, the planet would see solar eclipses. at 10 degrees, new moons would still be relatively as frequent, though at 90 degrees, I don't think there would ever be a new moon.




    Is there a way to make total solar eclipses happen infrequently, while keeping new moons frequent? And if so, what variable(s) need to change to make that happen?










    share|improve this question











    $endgroup$














      4












      4








      4


      1



      $begingroup$


      Given a system similar to the Earth/Moon/Sun system, how would one go about making solar eclipses rarer than they are here on earth, but keep new moons similar to how they currently are (or at least similar)?



      At first I thought that increasing the lunar tilt from 5 degrees to, say, 10 degrees would help, but there would still always be two "nodes" indicating where solar eclipses could happen on the planet. Even at a 90 degree angle, twice a year, the planet would see solar eclipses. at 10 degrees, new moons would still be relatively as frequent, though at 90 degrees, I don't think there would ever be a new moon.




      Is there a way to make total solar eclipses happen infrequently, while keeping new moons frequent? And if so, what variable(s) need to change to make that happen?










      share|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Given a system similar to the Earth/Moon/Sun system, how would one go about making solar eclipses rarer than they are here on earth, but keep new moons similar to how they currently are (or at least similar)?



      At first I thought that increasing the lunar tilt from 5 degrees to, say, 10 degrees would help, but there would still always be two "nodes" indicating where solar eclipses could happen on the planet. Even at a 90 degree angle, twice a year, the planet would see solar eclipses. at 10 degrees, new moons would still be relatively as frequent, though at 90 degrees, I don't think there would ever be a new moon.




      Is there a way to make total solar eclipses happen infrequently, while keeping new moons frequent? And if so, what variable(s) need to change to make that happen?







      science-based orbital-mechanics solar-system eclipses






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 2 hours ago









      Cyn

      10.7k12348




      10.7k12348










      asked 2 hours ago









      Cristian C.Cristian C.

      1989




      1989




















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3












          $begingroup$

          Keep sun and moon sizes, make the orbit of the Earth around the sun more excentric and with a smaller mean distance.



          The new moon is unnafected, but full solar eclipses will only happen if the eclipse happens together with the Earth's apoapsis, or close to it. And that will only happen during a few specific days of the year. Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial.



          That also implies shorter years and a whole different set of conditions on the planet that might not be compatible with life as we know it, though.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            1 hour ago


















          3












          $begingroup$

          Just shrink the moon by 6%, and there will never be another total solar eclipse, but new moons will still happen as normal. The moon will be too small to fully cover the sun, so there will be partial and annular eclipses, but no total ones. If you still want the occasional total eclipse, make the moon slightly bigger again, so that eclipses are total if and only if it happens to be at the closest point to the Earth in its orbit at the time of the eclipse. We’d still get the same number of eclipses at the same time, but hardly any of them would be total.



          Since both the moon and the Earth are in elliptical orbits, the apparent angular sizes of the moon and sun vary. Specifically, the moon varies between 29' 26" and 33' 30" while the sun varies between 31' 36" and 32' 42". You want the moon’s maximum to be just larger than the sun’s minimum, so that there are very occasional total eclipses if we happen to get an eclipse when the moon is at its closest and the sun is at its furthest. So to reduce the moon’s maximum angular size to 31’ 40” you need to make it 5.5% smaller without changing its orbit.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            2 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
            $endgroup$
            – AlexP
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
            $endgroup$
            – Mike Scott
            33 mins ago


















          1












          $begingroup$

          At 90 degree inclination, you could still get new moons near the nodes where the inclination of the moon's orbit with respect to the line from the planet to the sun is low.



          The presence of nodes in the planet's orbit where the inclined orbital path of the moon intersects a line pointing towards the sun, however, is not itself problematic, because it is not itself sufficient to cause eclipses. And that's a good thing for you, because it's a simple geometric fact that you can't avoid them. In order to get an eclipse, the moon also has to actually pass through that intersection point during the brief period when it exists every half-year. As such, a very simple solution to avoid ever having an eclipse presents itself: just tweak the moon's orbital period so that it forms a simple integer ratio with the year, such that the moon is always in the same phase on the same date every year--and then just declare that the phases are such that you never have things line up for an eclipse.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            37 mins ago











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "579"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f142780%2fmake-solar-eclipses-exceedingly-rare-but-still-have-new-moons%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes








          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          3












          $begingroup$

          Keep sun and moon sizes, make the orbit of the Earth around the sun more excentric and with a smaller mean distance.



          The new moon is unnafected, but full solar eclipses will only happen if the eclipse happens together with the Earth's apoapsis, or close to it. And that will only happen during a few specific days of the year. Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial.



          That also implies shorter years and a whole different set of conditions on the planet that might not be compatible with life as we know it, though.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            1 hour ago















          3












          $begingroup$

          Keep sun and moon sizes, make the orbit of the Earth around the sun more excentric and with a smaller mean distance.



          The new moon is unnafected, but full solar eclipses will only happen if the eclipse happens together with the Earth's apoapsis, or close to it. And that will only happen during a few specific days of the year. Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial.



          That also implies shorter years and a whole different set of conditions on the planet that might not be compatible with life as we know it, though.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            1 hour ago













          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          Keep sun and moon sizes, make the orbit of the Earth around the sun more excentric and with a smaller mean distance.



          The new moon is unnafected, but full solar eclipses will only happen if the eclipse happens together with the Earth's apoapsis, or close to it. And that will only happen during a few specific days of the year. Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial.



          That also implies shorter years and a whole different set of conditions on the planet that might not be compatible with life as we know it, though.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Keep sun and moon sizes, make the orbit of the Earth around the sun more excentric and with a smaller mean distance.



          The new moon is unnafected, but full solar eclipses will only happen if the eclipse happens together with the Earth's apoapsis, or close to it. And that will only happen during a few specific days of the year. Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial.



          That also implies shorter years and a whole different set of conditions on the planet that might not be compatible with life as we know it, though.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 1 hour ago

























          answered 2 hours ago









          RenanRenan

          51.7k15119257




          51.7k15119257







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            1 hour ago












          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            1 hour ago







          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          1 hour ago




          $begingroup$
          Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          1 hour ago











          3












          $begingroup$

          Just shrink the moon by 6%, and there will never be another total solar eclipse, but new moons will still happen as normal. The moon will be too small to fully cover the sun, so there will be partial and annular eclipses, but no total ones. If you still want the occasional total eclipse, make the moon slightly bigger again, so that eclipses are total if and only if it happens to be at the closest point to the Earth in its orbit at the time of the eclipse. We’d still get the same number of eclipses at the same time, but hardly any of them would be total.



          Since both the moon and the Earth are in elliptical orbits, the apparent angular sizes of the moon and sun vary. Specifically, the moon varies between 29' 26" and 33' 30" while the sun varies between 31' 36" and 32' 42". You want the moon’s maximum to be just larger than the sun’s minimum, so that there are very occasional total eclipses if we happen to get an eclipse when the moon is at its closest and the sun is at its furthest. So to reduce the moon’s maximum angular size to 31’ 40” you need to make it 5.5% smaller without changing its orbit.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            2 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
            $endgroup$
            – AlexP
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
            $endgroup$
            – Mike Scott
            33 mins ago















          3












          $begingroup$

          Just shrink the moon by 6%, and there will never be another total solar eclipse, but new moons will still happen as normal. The moon will be too small to fully cover the sun, so there will be partial and annular eclipses, but no total ones. If you still want the occasional total eclipse, make the moon slightly bigger again, so that eclipses are total if and only if it happens to be at the closest point to the Earth in its orbit at the time of the eclipse. We’d still get the same number of eclipses at the same time, but hardly any of them would be total.



          Since both the moon and the Earth are in elliptical orbits, the apparent angular sizes of the moon and sun vary. Specifically, the moon varies between 29' 26" and 33' 30" while the sun varies between 31' 36" and 32' 42". You want the moon’s maximum to be just larger than the sun’s minimum, so that there are very occasional total eclipses if we happen to get an eclipse when the moon is at its closest and the sun is at its furthest. So to reduce the moon’s maximum angular size to 31’ 40” you need to make it 5.5% smaller without changing its orbit.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            2 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
            $endgroup$
            – AlexP
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
            $endgroup$
            – Mike Scott
            33 mins ago













          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          Just shrink the moon by 6%, and there will never be another total solar eclipse, but new moons will still happen as normal. The moon will be too small to fully cover the sun, so there will be partial and annular eclipses, but no total ones. If you still want the occasional total eclipse, make the moon slightly bigger again, so that eclipses are total if and only if it happens to be at the closest point to the Earth in its orbit at the time of the eclipse. We’d still get the same number of eclipses at the same time, but hardly any of them would be total.



          Since both the moon and the Earth are in elliptical orbits, the apparent angular sizes of the moon and sun vary. Specifically, the moon varies between 29' 26" and 33' 30" while the sun varies between 31' 36" and 32' 42". You want the moon’s maximum to be just larger than the sun’s minimum, so that there are very occasional total eclipses if we happen to get an eclipse when the moon is at its closest and the sun is at its furthest. So to reduce the moon’s maximum angular size to 31’ 40” you need to make it 5.5% smaller without changing its orbit.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Just shrink the moon by 6%, and there will never be another total solar eclipse, but new moons will still happen as normal. The moon will be too small to fully cover the sun, so there will be partial and annular eclipses, but no total ones. If you still want the occasional total eclipse, make the moon slightly bigger again, so that eclipses are total if and only if it happens to be at the closest point to the Earth in its orbit at the time of the eclipse. We’d still get the same number of eclipses at the same time, but hardly any of them would be total.



          Since both the moon and the Earth are in elliptical orbits, the apparent angular sizes of the moon and sun vary. Specifically, the moon varies between 29' 26" and 33' 30" while the sun varies between 31' 36" and 32' 42". You want the moon’s maximum to be just larger than the sun’s minimum, so that there are very occasional total eclipses if we happen to get an eclipse when the moon is at its closest and the sun is at its furthest. So to reduce the moon’s maximum angular size to 31’ 40” you need to make it 5.5% smaller without changing its orbit.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 15 mins ago

























          answered 2 hours ago









          Mike ScottMike Scott

          11.4k32349




          11.4k32349











          • $begingroup$
            After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            2 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
            $endgroup$
            – AlexP
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
            $endgroup$
            – Mike Scott
            33 mins ago
















          • $begingroup$
            After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            2 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
            $endgroup$
            – AlexP
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            1 hour ago










          • $begingroup$
            @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
            $endgroup$
            – Mike Scott
            33 mins ago















          $begingroup$
          After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          2 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          2 hours ago




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
          $endgroup$
          – AlexP
          1 hour ago




          $begingroup$
          @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
          $endgroup$
          – AlexP
          1 hour ago












          $begingroup$
          @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          1 hour ago




          $begingroup$
          @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          1 hour ago












          $begingroup$
          @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
          $endgroup$
          – Mike Scott
          33 mins ago




          $begingroup$
          @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
          $endgroup$
          – Mike Scott
          33 mins ago











          1












          $begingroup$

          At 90 degree inclination, you could still get new moons near the nodes where the inclination of the moon's orbit with respect to the line from the planet to the sun is low.



          The presence of nodes in the planet's orbit where the inclined orbital path of the moon intersects a line pointing towards the sun, however, is not itself problematic, because it is not itself sufficient to cause eclipses. And that's a good thing for you, because it's a simple geometric fact that you can't avoid them. In order to get an eclipse, the moon also has to actually pass through that intersection point during the brief period when it exists every half-year. As such, a very simple solution to avoid ever having an eclipse presents itself: just tweak the moon's orbital period so that it forms a simple integer ratio with the year, such that the moon is always in the same phase on the same date every year--and then just declare that the phases are such that you never have things line up for an eclipse.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            37 mins ago















          1












          $begingroup$

          At 90 degree inclination, you could still get new moons near the nodes where the inclination of the moon's orbit with respect to the line from the planet to the sun is low.



          The presence of nodes in the planet's orbit where the inclined orbital path of the moon intersects a line pointing towards the sun, however, is not itself problematic, because it is not itself sufficient to cause eclipses. And that's a good thing for you, because it's a simple geometric fact that you can't avoid them. In order to get an eclipse, the moon also has to actually pass through that intersection point during the brief period when it exists every half-year. As such, a very simple solution to avoid ever having an eclipse presents itself: just tweak the moon's orbital period so that it forms a simple integer ratio with the year, such that the moon is always in the same phase on the same date every year--and then just declare that the phases are such that you never have things line up for an eclipse.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            37 mins ago













          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          At 90 degree inclination, you could still get new moons near the nodes where the inclination of the moon's orbit with respect to the line from the planet to the sun is low.



          The presence of nodes in the planet's orbit where the inclined orbital path of the moon intersects a line pointing towards the sun, however, is not itself problematic, because it is not itself sufficient to cause eclipses. And that's a good thing for you, because it's a simple geometric fact that you can't avoid them. In order to get an eclipse, the moon also has to actually pass through that intersection point during the brief period when it exists every half-year. As such, a very simple solution to avoid ever having an eclipse presents itself: just tweak the moon's orbital period so that it forms a simple integer ratio with the year, such that the moon is always in the same phase on the same date every year--and then just declare that the phases are such that you never have things line up for an eclipse.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          At 90 degree inclination, you could still get new moons near the nodes where the inclination of the moon's orbit with respect to the line from the planet to the sun is low.



          The presence of nodes in the planet's orbit where the inclined orbital path of the moon intersects a line pointing towards the sun, however, is not itself problematic, because it is not itself sufficient to cause eclipses. And that's a good thing for you, because it's a simple geometric fact that you can't avoid them. In order to get an eclipse, the moon also has to actually pass through that intersection point during the brief period when it exists every half-year. As such, a very simple solution to avoid ever having an eclipse presents itself: just tweak the moon's orbital period so that it forms a simple integer ratio with the year, such that the moon is always in the same phase on the same date every year--and then just declare that the phases are such that you never have things line up for an eclipse.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 47 mins ago









          Logan R. KearsleyLogan R. Kearsley

          11.4k13157




          11.4k13157











          • $begingroup$
            Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            37 mins ago
















          • $begingroup$
            Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            37 mins ago















          $begingroup$
          Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          37 mins ago




          $begingroup$
          Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          37 mins ago

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f142780%2fmake-solar-eclipses-exceedingly-rare-but-still-have-new-moons%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Bett Inhaltsverzeichnis Geschichte | Bettformen | Bettgrößen | Andere Bezeichnungen | Bettenmangel | Betten in der bildenden Kunst | Schlafmedizinische Gesichtspunkte | Siehe auch | Literatur | Weblinks | Einzelnachweise | NavigationsmenüBett, Bettstatt, BettstelleCommons: BettBabybetten: Anwendung, Ausstattungsmerkmale und VergleichskriterienWasserbetten. Vorurteile im TestHapfnNursch10.1007/s11818-012-0584-74006250-8AKS4329276-8

          Luksemburg Sisukord Nimi | Asend | Loodus | Riigikord | Haldusjaotus | Rahvastik | Riigikaitse | Majandus | Taristu | Ajalugu | Eesti ja Luksemburgi suhted | Haridus | Kultuur | Vaata ka | Viited | Välislingid | Navigeerimismenüü50° N, 6° EÜlevaade Luksemburgi kaitsealadest.Luksemburgi rahvaarv. Statistikaamet.World Bank'i andmebaasÜlevaade Luksemburgi loodusest.Ülevaade Luksemburgi metsadest.Guy Colling. "Red List of the Vascular Plants of Luxembourg." Travaux scientifiques du Musée national d’histoire naturelle Luxembourg. 2005.Luxembourg’s biodiversity at risk.Maailma kahepaiksete andmebaas.Denis Lepage. "Luxembourg." Avibase.Ülevaade temperatuuridest. Luksemburgi meteoroloogiateenistus.Ülevaade Luksemburgist. Euroopa Liidu esinduse koduleht.Système politique. TerritoireÜlevaade Luksemburgi rahvastikust. Luksemburgi statistikaamet.Luksemburgi rahvastik. Luksemburgi statistikaamet.The World FactbookMonique Borsenberger, Paul Dickes. "Religions au Luxembourg. Quelle évolution entre 1999-2008". Luksemburgi statistikaamet. 2011.Luksemburgi peapiiskopkond. Catholic-Hierarchy.Luksemburgi armee koduleht.Luksemburgi armee relvastus.Eesti Välisministeerium.Luksemburgi rahvastik. Luksemburgi statistikaamet.Luksemburgi Eesti Seltsi koduleht.Helen Eelrand. "Raadio, mis muutis maailma." Eesti Päevaleht. 13. märts 2004.Ülevaade Luksemburgi haridussüsteemist.Ülevaade Luksemburgi keskkoolidest.Luksemburgr

          Valle di Casies Indice Geografia fisica | Origini del nome | Storia | Società | Amministrazione | Sport | Note | Bibliografia | Voci correlate | Altri progetti | Collegamenti esterni | Menu di navigazione46°46′N 12°11′E / 46.766667°N 12.183333°E46.766667; 12.183333 (Valle di Casies)46°46′N 12°11′E / 46.766667°N 12.183333°E46.766667; 12.183333 (Valle di Casies)Sito istituzionaleAstat Censimento della popolazione 2011 - Determinazione della consistenza dei tre gruppi linguistici della Provincia Autonoma di Bolzano-Alto Adige - giugno 2012Numeri e fattiValle di CasiesDato IstatTabella dei gradi/giorno dei Comuni italiani raggruppati per Regione e Provincia26 agosto 1993, n. 412Heraldry of the World: GsiesStatistiche I.StatValCasies.comWikimedia CommonsWikimedia CommonsValle di CasiesSito ufficialeValle di CasiesMM14870458910042978-6