Stella Polaris hitting true north when?

According to Wikipedia, the pole star was closest to true north in
2002.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_north

According to Britannica, it will happen in 2017. And in about 2100 as
well.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...ource=googleSL

Which of the three dates is the correct one, if any?

Regards,

/Kjell K.

"Kjell" wrote in message
...
According to Wikipedia, the pole star was closest to true north in
2002.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_north

According to Britannica, it will happen in 2017. And in about 2100 as
well.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...ource=googleSL

Which of the three dates is the correct one, if any?

Regards,

/Kjell K.

Take a time exposure photograph, like this:
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap061202.html
or this
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap051220.html

Polaris will be the star with the smallest radius and
you won't have to believe anyone, you'll know.

"Kjell" wrote in message
...
According to Wikipedia, the pole star was closest to true north in
2002.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_north

According to Britannica, it will happen in 2017. And in about 2100 as
well.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...ource=googleSL

Which of the three dates is the correct one, if any?

Regards,

My old copy of Burnham's Celestial Handbook, gives the date as 2102 at which
time it will be 27' 31" from the celestial pole.

In article ,
Androcles wrote:

"Kjell" wrote in message
...
According to Wikipedia, the pole star was closest to true north in
2002.

If you look at older versions of the page, it used to say "currently,
in 2002, Polaris is at its closest approach". The "currently" has
been removed. Probably the original author just said "in 2002" to
identify when he was writing, and not to imply that that was the exact
date at which it was closest.

Polaris will be the star with the smallest radius and
you won't have to believe anyone, you'll know.

As usual, "Androcles" misunderstands. If he'd read the posting
properly - even just the subject line - he would have seen that the OP
wants to know *when* Polaris will be nearest to due north, not which
star Polaris is.

-- Richard
--
Please remember to mention me / in tapes you leave behind.

"Richard Tobin" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Androcles wrote:

"Kjell" wrote in message
...
According to Wikipedia, the pole star was closest to true north in
2002.

If you look at older versions of the page, it used to say "currently,
in 2002, Polaris is at its closest approach". The "currently" has
been removed. Probably the original author just said "in 2002" to
identify when he was writing, and not to imply that that was the exact
date at which it was closest.

Polaris will be the star with the smallest radius and
you won't have to believe anyone, you'll know.

As usual, "Androcles" misunderstands. If he'd read the posting
properly - even just the subject line - he would have seen that the OP
wants to know *when* Polaris will be nearest to due north, not which
star Polaris is.


As usual, "Tobin" is a dork who's reading comprehension is dismal.

Polaris will be the star with the smallest radius and you won't have to
believe anyone, you'll know WHEN Earth's axis aligns closest with it
by progressive photographs taken over the next few years.

**** off, "Tobin", you are an "as usual" cretin and snipping *******,
and Wackypedia is the worst pile of crap any encyclopaedia could be,
you ****ing moron.

In article ,
Androcles wrote:

Polaris will be the star with the smallest radius and you won't have to
believe anyone, you'll know WHEN Earth's axis aligns closest with it
by progressive photographs taken over the next few years.

You'd look better if you admitted your mistakes instead of pretending
you meant something else.

-- Richard
--
Please remember to mention me / in tapes you leave behind.

"Richard Tobin" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Androcles wrote:

Polaris will be the star with the smallest radius and you won't have to
believe anyone, you'll know WHEN Earth's axis aligns closest with it
by progressive photographs taken over the next few years.

You'd look better if you admitted your mistakes instead of pretending
you meant something else.

I haven't changed what I wrote, I've merely added to it to include the word
"when" from the title because you bitched about it, you ignorant whining
prick. Your reading comprehension is abysmal, "Tobin". You'd look better
if you ****ed off.

In article ,
Kjell writes:
the pole star was closest to true north in [when?]

A quick web search finds a variety of sources, of which
http://www.umich.edu/news/index.html...l97/chr071697b
(which says 2102) looks most credible at first glance. Someone could
check the date with a good planetarium program.

--
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123
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.)

"Androcles" wrote in message
...

"Richard Tobin" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Androcles wrote:

Polaris will be the star with the smallest radius and you won't have to
believe anyone, you'll know WHEN Earth's axis aligns closest with it
by progressive photographs taken over the next few years.

You'd look better if you admitted your mistakes instead of pretending
you meant something else.

I haven't changed what I wrote, I've merely added to it to include the
word
"when" from the title because you bitched about it, you ignorant whining
prick. Your reading comprehension is abysmal, "Tobin". You'd look better
if you ****ed off.


Androcles, a physicist, and a mathematician all travel by train through a
country and see a black sheep. Androcles says, "The sheep in this country
are black." the physicists says, "Correction: some of the sheep are black."
mathematician says, "Correction: there is at least one sheep at least one
side of which appears to be black."

Androcles claims the physicist and mathematician have comprehension
problems.

In article
,
Kjell wrote:

According to Wikipedia, the pole star was closest to true north in
2002.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_north

According to Britannica, it will happen in 2017. And in about 2100 as
well.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...ource=googleSL

Which of the three dates is the correct one, if any?

Jean Meeus has an article on Polaris's declination in his _Mathematical
Astronomy Morsels_. The question is complicated by the fact that the
precessional drift of the equatorial coördinate system against the fixed
stars doesn't proceed smoothly, but in small, chaotic 'wobbles' from the
effects of nutation and annual aberration. Anyway, his calculations
indicate that the *mean* position of Polaris will reach a maximum
declination of 89°32'23" in February 2102, but the greatest *apparent*
declination will be nearly 89°32'51", occurring in March 2100.

--
Odysseus