Talk:Ephemeris

message: Not sure if this is the right place but, the Rig Veda definitely postdates the Middle Bronze Age; the bullet under "History" that:
2nd Millennium BC — Panchanga tables based on Jyotisha in the Vedic period of Indian astronomy.[citation needed]
isn't strictly false in the sense that the Rig Veda was likely composed in the second millennium but, what is considered "Jyotisha" or Hindu astrology, wasn't elaborated till much later. For example, the Rig Veda mentions demons causing eclipses and some of the later material (Atharvaveda and Chandogya Upanishad) also mention eclipse-demons, especially Rahu.  The most firmly datable Indian astrological/astronomical texts are either translations from Greek (Yavanajataka) or much later medieval compositions (Brihat Parashara Horashastra). (sources are from the wiki article on Hindu astrology which is well sourced. In essence this bullet point is like attributing astronomy to the ancient Hebrews because of Joshua 10:13, when the sun stood still for Joshua at Gibeon and Ajalon.  So if it's okay, and because the citation needed has been there for almost 4 years, I will go ahead and delete this bullet point.
This is the citation left there: 
2601:480:4101:B790:8C8D:90FF:C2DC:65AC (talk) 01:43, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Panchanga tables under "History"

message: The articles does currently not differentiate between astronomical tables, like Tabulae Rudolphinae, and an actually computed ephemeris. 
An Ephemeris is an actual list of daily (or other regular interval) positions of a celestial body. Astronomical tables are something different, they contain tabular data out of which positions of a celestial body can be computed, by a more or less simple procedure orf multiple steps (looking up numbers, adding, mulitplying, interpolating) but they do not yet contain the actual positions.--213.3.22.4 (talk) 04:57, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  astronomical tables distinct from ephemeris 

message: Since my  was , there seems to be a need for discussion.
Firstly, about the factual content. Since the original Greek ἐφημερίς/ἐφήμερος has a (long) η in that position (a short e would be ε), it would be very surprising if the Latin had a short e (denoted ĕ) in this place. Vowel lenght was felt much more important in ancient Latin and Greek than in modern English, so this would not normally have changed easily.
Secondly, the citations. I don't have access to the source given (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language), but I have a different paper source supporting what I wrote (Langenscheidts Handwörterbuch Lateinisch–Deutsch). Also the English Wiktionary entry gives a macron in this position, and while it isn't itself a valid source and also doesn't give one, it's French sister entry (which also gives a long IPA pronunciation) does give an online source.
Perhaps the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language was referring to English pronunciation or simply made a mistake. --SpecMade (talk) 21:08, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest we just remove the disputed Latin; it doesn't add much to the Greek anyway. (I will go ahead with that if there are no objections.) --SpecMade (talk) 22:48, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no problem with removing the Latin, since the Greek origin is probably more interesting. I do have the American Heritage Dictionary and just read the notes about how the etymologies were done; they did intend to provide their opinion of how the late Latin was pronounced. Maybe they got it wrong; I'm no expert on Latin. Jc3s5h (talk) 23:04, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I do agree that you rightly reverted my edit, since it contradicted the source that had already been given, and I thank you for your vigilance. I have now changed it to be a bit more vague (and less controversial) and added another reference. There are simply more references to find for Classical Latin than for Late Latin, but if the only difference is the vowel lenght (which got less strict by Late Latin anyway), we are probably best off not to make any claim about that detail and not specify a particular stage of Latin. --SpecMade (talk) 01:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latin pronunciation (''ephĕmeris'' vs ''ĕphēmĕrĭs'') 

message: Think some comment on this above, needs to be clearer about use in modern space ops, maneuver planning, antennae positioning, etc. Lycurgus (talk) 06:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: insufficient clarity on modern use

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ephemeris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050226015740/http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/iau-comm4/README to http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/iau-comm4/README
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:14, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A working link found for Note 7 is https://www.aldebaran.cz/bulletin/2009_24/GAKVAB.pdf
Drankinatty (talk) 05:58, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Note 7 Link