Talk:Horizontal coordinate system

message: Azimuth and altitude?  I thought it was azimuth and elevation.  Denelson83 10:28, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have also heard it as elevation. I have added a note to the article to reflect that usage. kostmo 00:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The field of astronomy is very old and has retained a fair amount of antiquated terminology. Praemonitus (talk) 15:50, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsigned: Terminology 

message: I have read on the BDL glossary (Bureau des longitudes, french reference for ephemerides computation, sorry it is in french) that the azimuth is measured from south for astronomers and from north for sailors. So I guess it should be from south for this article about celestial coordinate systems. What do you think about that ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.153.110.3 (talk • contribs) 16:25, 18 January 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsigned: Differences in astronomy/navigation 

message: This whole section is wrong. The transformation between the horizon and equatorial coordinate systems is time-dependant. Jason Quinn 22:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hour angle is time-dependant. Orionus 12:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transformation of coordinates 

message: The picture appears to have an error: the North pole should be to the North of Zenith, not South of it. 130.208.188.164 (talk) 05:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Isn't the image to the right at the start of the article incorrect? The north pole is pointing in the opposite direction of that indicated by the north in the horizon plane.
--Lodorand (talk) 20:51, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is incorrect. Tfr000 (talk) 20:50, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect Image 

message: "The horizontal coordinate system is fixed to the Earth, not the stars. Therefore, the altitude and azimuth of an object changes with time". True for stars, but false by design for geostationary satellites. Simple fix: "the altitude and azimuth of a star changes..."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.210.249.81 (talk) 13:15, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  False Generalization 

message: Both the altitude and azimuth of an object in space are constantly changing as the earth rotates and as it moves in orbit around the sun(constantly changing with time); thus, are time dependent.  The Right Ascension (RA) and Declination (DEC) of an object are fixed to the celestial sphere and are not time dependent.  Any conversion between the two coordinate systems, must consider time of the day and the time of the year. The equations in the article fail to do this; thus, are not valid.
178.146.173.141 (talk) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The article could certainly use some improvement.  In this case the hour angle computed is the Local Hour Angle, not the RA.  In order to convert from LHA to RA, the formula is something like: RA=Greenwich Sidereal Time+longitude+LHA.  The Greenwich sidereal time is the time dependent part of the formula you are looking for.  So the equations as given are valid, but don't take you all of the way through the conversion.  Someday, when I have more time, I'll try to update the article to be more coherent, and make a new figure (the current one has a rather egregious error....).  Sailsbystars (talk) 19:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  incorrect equations 

message: The section about the position of the Sun has little to do with the Horizontal Coordinate System; in fact no horizontal position is calculated in the whole section. It should be moved to Position_of_the_Sun. Opinions?
I will move it within a few weeks if there are no objections. Tfr000 (talk) 18:57, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Position of the Sun is off-topic 

message: ...now points to Celestial coordinate system. There was little point in moving it, as it is already well covered (with nearly exactly the same equations) there. Tfr000 (talk) 15:29, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transformation of coordinates 

message: The article states “the object appears to drift across the sky with the rotation of the Earth”. This is wrong. In a horizontal coordinate system the Earth does not move or rotate, and the drift of celestial objects is not apparent but real.
49.98.162.220 (talk) 13:32, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistake in Description 

message: Topocentric means that the observer is at the origo of the coordinate system, but says nothing more. A horisontal coordinate system is, of course, topocentric, but a topocentric coordniate system in not necessarily horisontal. You can refer to an object (for especially satellites or the Moon this makes sense - where geocentric is too coarse for the observer, but when azimuth and altitude is of less interest than the background sky - e.g. "where on the sky will the faint satellite pass?", not "in what angle should I tilt my head?" or "will the solar eclipse be total?") in topocentric equatorial coordinates or topocentric ecliptical coordinates (or topocentric horisontal coordinates) as well you can refer to geocentric or heliocentric ecliptical/equatorial coordninates. Topocentric (like geocentric and heliocentric) defines the origo, not the reference plane or axises. Episcophagus (talk) 10:11, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Compare Topocentric coordinates in Oxford Reference. Episcophagus (talk) 10:33, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Topocentric?