Print

Print


A small correction to myself:

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> the epact of 2009 was 3, meaning that January
> 1st should have been the 3rd day of the lunation, so there should have
> been a new moon on December 30th of '08, but the actual new moon was
> on the 27th.)

Actually, the nominal new moon falls on epact "*" (=0 or 30), so an
epact of 3 implies that the nominal new moon was on the 29th, not the
30th.  Which means this is an example of only a 2-day difference
between the computus and astronomical reality.

-- 
Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>