> I was just curious about what exactly measurements astromoners made
> that provided data to those like Kepler to determine
> the relationship between period and radius of a planet.
There are people who know a lot more about history than I do, so
perhaps someone will correct me. As I understand it, Tycho Brahe
measured the positions of visible planets for many years. These
would have been right ascension and declination (or possibly ecliptic
longitude and latitude) at the times of observation. I think his
instrument was probably a transit circle.
The observations themselves were just positions in the sky. Kepler's
theory had to account for the changing position of Earth in order to
explain the observations.

Signature
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123 swillner@cfa.harvard.edu
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
(Please email your reply if you want to be sure I see it; include a
valid Reply-To address to receive an acknowledgement. Commercial
email may be sent to your ISP.)
> Hi,
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> converting this some how to account for the location of earth in its
> orbit?
Kepler used Tycho Brahe's measurements with various mural transit
instruments, so effectively Tycho obtained Declination and Right Ascension,
which could easily be converted to ecliptic coordinates of celestial
latitude and longitude (I say easily, but this routine calculation was
difficult enough because it all had to be done with paper and pencil). By
(in essence) using observations of Mars that were one sidereal martian year
apart, the actual position of Mars could be calculated by triangulation from
the two different positions of Earth. With many pairs of observations the
shape of the orbit could be determined to be an ellipse. There are a lot of
additional details but that's the principle of the method.

Signature
Mike Dworetsky
(Remove "pants" spamblock to send e-mail)
Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply - 31 Jan 2005 17:57 GMT
In article <mt2.0-20855-1107181384@hercules.herts.ac.uk>, "Mike
Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> writes:
> > Hi,
> >
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
> shape of the orbit could be determined to be an ellipse. There are a lot of
> additional details but that's the principle of the method.
The discrepancy in the position of Mars which prompted Kepler to
postulate elliptical orbits was 8 minutes of arc, about a quarter of the
size of the full moon (or, equivalently, a pea held at arm's length),
not bad for pre-telescope observations.
Where could I find out more of these details?
Thanks,
Ted
Mike Dworetsky wrote:
> <teds@intex.com> wrote in message
> news:mt2.0-18780-1106664686@hercules.herts.ac.uk...
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> >
> > Were the astronomers measuring angles relative to some fixed star
over
> > time? Or just the angular position in the skip (2 angles) and
then
> > converting this some how to account for the location of earth in
its
> > orbit?
>
> Kepler used Tycho Brahe's measurements with various mural transit
> instruments, so effectively Tycho obtained Declination and Right
Ascension,
> which could easily be converted to ecliptic coordinates of celestial
> latitude and longitude (I say easily, but this routine calculation
was
> difficult enough because it all had to be done with paper and
pencil). By
> (in essence) using observations of Mars that were one sidereal
martian year
> apart, the actual position of Mars could be calculated by
triangulation from
> the two different positions of Earth. With many pairs of
observations the
> shape of the orbit could be determined to be an ellipse. There are a
lot of
> additional details but that's the principle of the method.