Make solar eclipses exceedingly rare, but still have new moons












7












$begingroup$


Given a system similar to the Earth/Moon/Sun system, how would one go about making solar eclipses rarer than they are here on earth, but keep new moons similar to how they currently are (or at least similar)?



At first I thought that increasing the lunar tilt from 5 degrees to, say, 10 degrees would help, but there would still always be two "nodes" indicating where solar eclipses could happen on the planet. Even at a 90 degree angle, twice a year, the planet would see solar eclipses. at 10 degrees, new moons would still be relatively as frequent, though at 90 degrees, I don't think there would ever be a new moon.





Is there a way to make total solar eclipses happen infrequently, while keeping new moons frequent? And if so, what variable(s) need to change to make that happen?.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    7












    $begingroup$


    Given a system similar to the Earth/Moon/Sun system, how would one go about making solar eclipses rarer than they are here on earth, but keep new moons similar to how they currently are (or at least similar)?



    At first I thought that increasing the lunar tilt from 5 degrees to, say, 10 degrees would help, but there would still always be two "nodes" indicating where solar eclipses could happen on the planet. Even at a 90 degree angle, twice a year, the planet would see solar eclipses. at 10 degrees, new moons would still be relatively as frequent, though at 90 degrees, I don't think there would ever be a new moon.





    Is there a way to make total solar eclipses happen infrequently, while keeping new moons frequent? And if so, what variable(s) need to change to make that happen?.










    share|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      7












      7








      7


      2



      $begingroup$


      Given a system similar to the Earth/Moon/Sun system, how would one go about making solar eclipses rarer than they are here on earth, but keep new moons similar to how they currently are (or at least similar)?



      At first I thought that increasing the lunar tilt from 5 degrees to, say, 10 degrees would help, but there would still always be two "nodes" indicating where solar eclipses could happen on the planet. Even at a 90 degree angle, twice a year, the planet would see solar eclipses. at 10 degrees, new moons would still be relatively as frequent, though at 90 degrees, I don't think there would ever be a new moon.





      Is there a way to make total solar eclipses happen infrequently, while keeping new moons frequent? And if so, what variable(s) need to change to make that happen?.










      share|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Given a system similar to the Earth/Moon/Sun system, how would one go about making solar eclipses rarer than they are here on earth, but keep new moons similar to how they currently are (or at least similar)?



      At first I thought that increasing the lunar tilt from 5 degrees to, say, 10 degrees would help, but there would still always be two "nodes" indicating where solar eclipses could happen on the planet. Even at a 90 degree angle, twice a year, the planet would see solar eclipses. at 10 degrees, new moons would still be relatively as frequent, though at 90 degrees, I don't think there would ever be a new moon.





      Is there a way to make total solar eclipses happen infrequently, while keeping new moons frequent? And if so, what variable(s) need to change to make that happen?.







      science-based orbital-mechanics solar-system eclipses






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 53 mins ago







      Cristian C.

















      asked 8 hours ago









      Cristian C.Cristian C.

      2239




      2239






















          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          7












          $begingroup$

          Just shrink the moon by 6%, and there will never be another total solar eclipse, but new moons will still happen as normal. The moon will be too small to fully cover the sun, so there will be partial and annular eclipses, but no total ones. If you still want the occasional total eclipse, make the moon slightly bigger again, so that eclipses are total if and only if it happens to be at the closest point to the Earth in its orbit at the time of the eclipse. We’d still get the same number of eclipses at the same time, but hardly any of them would be total.



          Since both the moon and the Earth are in elliptical orbits, the apparent angular sizes of the moon and sun vary. Specifically, the moon varies between 29' 26" and 33' 30" while the sun varies between 31' 36" and 32' 42". You want the moon’s maximum to be just larger than the sun’s minimum, so that there are very occasional total eclipses if we happen to get an eclipse when the moon is at its closest and the sun is at its furthest. So to reduce the moon’s maximum angular size to 31’ 40” you need to make it 5.5% smaller without changing its orbit.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 2




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
            $endgroup$
            – AlexP
            7 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
            $endgroup$
            – Mike Scott
            6 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            I think this hits the nail on the head!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            5 hours ago



















          6












          $begingroup$

          Keep sun and moon sizes, make the orbit of the Earth around the sun more excentric and with a smaller mean distance.



          The new moon is unnafected, but full solar eclipses will only happen if the eclipse happens together with the Earth's apoapsis, or close to it. And that will only happen during a few specific days of the year. Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial.



          That also implies shorter years and a whole different set of conditions on the planet that might not be compatible with life as we know it, though.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 3




            $begingroup$
            Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            "Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial" or annular.
            $endgroup$
            – NeutronStar
            4 hours ago



















          2












          $begingroup$

          Why not make the moon's orbit precess? If the precession chases the sun (from the perspective of earth) while staying a bit off from it, you could keep new moons as common as always and eliminate solar eclipses altogether.



          If you made the presession not quite at the same rate as the sun, you could also cause large periods without a single solar eclipse, followed by a period where a solar eclipse happened every month (which, from a story perspective, could be interesting).



          Alternatively, if you had the moon precess in the opposite direction of the earth's movement around the sun (and depending on the length of your lunar month vs solar year), it may be possible to have the moon 'miss' a solar eclipse except for once every few hundreds of years.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Oh man this is very exciting stuff. This might be a really elegant solution to the problem. I'll need to do some research into how this may affect other aspects of the planet, but thats beyond the scope of this question. Thanks for this.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            5 hours ago



















          1












          $begingroup$

          At 90 degree inclination, you could still get new moons near the nodes where the inclination of the moon's orbit with respect to the line from the planet to the sun is low.



          The presence of nodes in the planet's orbit where the inclined orbital path of the moon intersects a line pointing towards the sun, however, is not itself problematic, because it is not itself sufficient to cause eclipses. And that's a good thing for you, because it's a simple geometric fact that you can't avoid them. In order to get an eclipse, the moon also has to actually pass through that intersection point during the brief period when it exists every half-year. As such, a very simple solution to avoid ever having an eclipse presents itself: just tweak the moon's orbital period so that it forms a simple integer ratio with the year, such that the moon is always in the same phase on the same date every year--and then just declare that the phases are such that you never have things line up for an eclipse.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            6 hours ago



















          1












          $begingroup$

          Instead of one moon which is just big enough and close enough to cause a total eclipse whenever it intersects between our planet and our sun, why not have several moons which are each either smaller or more distant such that no single moon can produce a full eclipse.
          New moons would still happen and would actually be much more common than Earth standard, but total eclipses would only occur when all of the moons simultaneously entered the intersection point, each blocking a portion of the available sunshine and collectively blocking it all.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            That's a very creative answer. It would warrant a lot of thinking and tinkering on my part, but technically does answer my question!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            4 hours ago



















          1












          $begingroup$

          Resonance. Pick a ratio of the lunar orbital period to the solar orbital period such that the moon normally in the wrong part of it's orbit when it's both directly sunward and in the plane of the ecliptic. The bigger numbers you need to use to express the ratio the longer it will be between eclipses.



          Unlike normal planetary resonance orbits no force will maintain this or cause it to come into being but as the moon slowly spirals out there will be a time that it happens naturally. You'll have to adjust the size of the moon so it provides a total eclipse at that distance from the Earth.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Sounds very reasonable! I will need to do some research but thanks for the starting point!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            3 hours ago












          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "579"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f142780%2fmake-solar-eclipses-exceedingly-rare-but-still-have-new-moons%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes








          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          7












          $begingroup$

          Just shrink the moon by 6%, and there will never be another total solar eclipse, but new moons will still happen as normal. The moon will be too small to fully cover the sun, so there will be partial and annular eclipses, but no total ones. If you still want the occasional total eclipse, make the moon slightly bigger again, so that eclipses are total if and only if it happens to be at the closest point to the Earth in its orbit at the time of the eclipse. We’d still get the same number of eclipses at the same time, but hardly any of them would be total.



          Since both the moon and the Earth are in elliptical orbits, the apparent angular sizes of the moon and sun vary. Specifically, the moon varies between 29' 26" and 33' 30" while the sun varies between 31' 36" and 32' 42". You want the moon’s maximum to be just larger than the sun’s minimum, so that there are very occasional total eclipses if we happen to get an eclipse when the moon is at its closest and the sun is at its furthest. So to reduce the moon’s maximum angular size to 31’ 40” you need to make it 5.5% smaller without changing its orbit.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 2




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
            $endgroup$
            – AlexP
            7 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
            $endgroup$
            – Mike Scott
            6 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            I think this hits the nail on the head!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            5 hours ago
















          7












          $begingroup$

          Just shrink the moon by 6%, and there will never be another total solar eclipse, but new moons will still happen as normal. The moon will be too small to fully cover the sun, so there will be partial and annular eclipses, but no total ones. If you still want the occasional total eclipse, make the moon slightly bigger again, so that eclipses are total if and only if it happens to be at the closest point to the Earth in its orbit at the time of the eclipse. We’d still get the same number of eclipses at the same time, but hardly any of them would be total.



          Since both the moon and the Earth are in elliptical orbits, the apparent angular sizes of the moon and sun vary. Specifically, the moon varies between 29' 26" and 33' 30" while the sun varies between 31' 36" and 32' 42". You want the moon’s maximum to be just larger than the sun’s minimum, so that there are very occasional total eclipses if we happen to get an eclipse when the moon is at its closest and the sun is at its furthest. So to reduce the moon’s maximum angular size to 31’ 40” you need to make it 5.5% smaller without changing its orbit.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 2




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
            $endgroup$
            – AlexP
            7 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
            $endgroup$
            – Mike Scott
            6 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            I think this hits the nail on the head!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            5 hours ago














          7












          7








          7





          $begingroup$

          Just shrink the moon by 6%, and there will never be another total solar eclipse, but new moons will still happen as normal. The moon will be too small to fully cover the sun, so there will be partial and annular eclipses, but no total ones. If you still want the occasional total eclipse, make the moon slightly bigger again, so that eclipses are total if and only if it happens to be at the closest point to the Earth in its orbit at the time of the eclipse. We’d still get the same number of eclipses at the same time, but hardly any of them would be total.



          Since both the moon and the Earth are in elliptical orbits, the apparent angular sizes of the moon and sun vary. Specifically, the moon varies between 29' 26" and 33' 30" while the sun varies between 31' 36" and 32' 42". You want the moon’s maximum to be just larger than the sun’s minimum, so that there are very occasional total eclipses if we happen to get an eclipse when the moon is at its closest and the sun is at its furthest. So to reduce the moon’s maximum angular size to 31’ 40” you need to make it 5.5% smaller without changing its orbit.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Just shrink the moon by 6%, and there will never be another total solar eclipse, but new moons will still happen as normal. The moon will be too small to fully cover the sun, so there will be partial and annular eclipses, but no total ones. If you still want the occasional total eclipse, make the moon slightly bigger again, so that eclipses are total if and only if it happens to be at the closest point to the Earth in its orbit at the time of the eclipse. We’d still get the same number of eclipses at the same time, but hardly any of them would be total.



          Since both the moon and the Earth are in elliptical orbits, the apparent angular sizes of the moon and sun vary. Specifically, the moon varies between 29' 26" and 33' 30" while the sun varies between 31' 36" and 32' 42". You want the moon’s maximum to be just larger than the sun’s minimum, so that there are very occasional total eclipses if we happen to get an eclipse when the moon is at its closest and the sun is at its furthest. So to reduce the moon’s maximum angular size to 31’ 40” you need to make it 5.5% smaller without changing its orbit.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 6 hours ago

























          answered 8 hours ago









          Mike ScottMike Scott

          11.4k32349




          11.4k32349












          • $begingroup$
            After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 2




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
            $endgroup$
            – AlexP
            7 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
            $endgroup$
            – Mike Scott
            6 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            I think this hits the nail on the head!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            5 hours ago


















          • $begingroup$
            After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 2




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
            $endgroup$
            – AlexP
            7 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
            $endgroup$
            – Mike Scott
            6 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            I think this hits the nail on the head!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            5 hours ago
















          $begingroup$
          After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          7 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          After the edit, this fits what I need. Could you explain further what the size of the moon would need to be for the total eclipses to happen ? Are you saying to make the moon's orbit more elliptical while also shrinking the size of the moon a little bit? Doesn't that still equate to two nodes where eclipses can happen, ergo twice a year?
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          7 hours ago




          2




          2




          $begingroup$
          @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
          $endgroup$
          – AlexP
          7 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          @CristianC.: Total solar eclipses happen because, purely by accident, the angular size of the Moon is just big enough to cover the Sun. A very slightly smaller Moon, or a very slightly larger radius of Moon's orbit, or a very slightly smaller radius of the Earth's orbit would make total solar eclipses impossible.
          $endgroup$
          – AlexP
          7 hours ago












          $begingroup$
          @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          7 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          @AlexP to clarify, what I meant was to make the lunar perigee smaller while also shrinking the size of the moon. This keeps the relative size of the moon the same to an observer on the planet, and therefore would continue to create total solar eclipses. Though I don't think the frequency would be affected.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          7 hours ago




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
          $endgroup$
          – Mike Scott
          6 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          @CristianC. Have edited to answer your queries.
          $endgroup$
          – Mike Scott
          6 hours ago












          $begingroup$
          I think this hits the nail on the head!
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          5 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          I think this hits the nail on the head!
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          5 hours ago











          6












          $begingroup$

          Keep sun and moon sizes, make the orbit of the Earth around the sun more excentric and with a smaller mean distance.



          The new moon is unnafected, but full solar eclipses will only happen if the eclipse happens together with the Earth's apoapsis, or close to it. And that will only happen during a few specific days of the year. Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial.



          That also implies shorter years and a whole different set of conditions on the planet that might not be compatible with life as we know it, though.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 3




            $begingroup$
            Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            "Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial" or annular.
            $endgroup$
            – NeutronStar
            4 hours ago
















          6












          $begingroup$

          Keep sun and moon sizes, make the orbit of the Earth around the sun more excentric and with a smaller mean distance.



          The new moon is unnafected, but full solar eclipses will only happen if the eclipse happens together with the Earth's apoapsis, or close to it. And that will only happen during a few specific days of the year. Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial.



          That also implies shorter years and a whole different set of conditions on the planet that might not be compatible with life as we know it, though.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 3




            $begingroup$
            Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            "Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial" or annular.
            $endgroup$
            – NeutronStar
            4 hours ago














          6












          6








          6





          $begingroup$

          Keep sun and moon sizes, make the orbit of the Earth around the sun more excentric and with a smaller mean distance.



          The new moon is unnafected, but full solar eclipses will only happen if the eclipse happens together with the Earth's apoapsis, or close to it. And that will only happen during a few specific days of the year. Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial.



          That also implies shorter years and a whole different set of conditions on the planet that might not be compatible with life as we know it, though.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Keep sun and moon sizes, make the orbit of the Earth around the sun more excentric and with a smaller mean distance.



          The new moon is unnafected, but full solar eclipses will only happen if the eclipse happens together with the Earth's apoapsis, or close to it. And that will only happen during a few specific days of the year. Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial.



          That also implies shorter years and a whole different set of conditions on the planet that might not be compatible with life as we know it, though.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 7 hours ago

























          answered 7 hours ago









          RenanRenan

          51.7k15119257




          51.7k15119257








          • 3




            $begingroup$
            Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            "Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial" or annular.
            $endgroup$
            – NeutronStar
            4 hours ago














          • 3




            $begingroup$
            Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            "Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial" or annular.
            $endgroup$
            – NeutronStar
            4 hours ago








          3




          3




          $begingroup$
          Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          7 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          Yeah I would have to keep the orbit well within not just the Goldilocks zone, but within our human threshold of said zone. But your answer is fair, and technically answers my question haha.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          7 hours ago




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          "Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial" or annular.
          $endgroup$
          – NeutronStar
          4 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          "Any solar eclipse far from the apoapsis will be partial" or annular.
          $endgroup$
          – NeutronStar
          4 hours ago











          2












          $begingroup$

          Why not make the moon's orbit precess? If the precession chases the sun (from the perspective of earth) while staying a bit off from it, you could keep new moons as common as always and eliminate solar eclipses altogether.



          If you made the presession not quite at the same rate as the sun, you could also cause large periods without a single solar eclipse, followed by a period where a solar eclipse happened every month (which, from a story perspective, could be interesting).



          Alternatively, if you had the moon precess in the opposite direction of the earth's movement around the sun (and depending on the length of your lunar month vs solar year), it may be possible to have the moon 'miss' a solar eclipse except for once every few hundreds of years.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Oh man this is very exciting stuff. This might be a really elegant solution to the problem. I'll need to do some research into how this may affect other aspects of the planet, but thats beyond the scope of this question. Thanks for this.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            5 hours ago
















          2












          $begingroup$

          Why not make the moon's orbit precess? If the precession chases the sun (from the perspective of earth) while staying a bit off from it, you could keep new moons as common as always and eliminate solar eclipses altogether.



          If you made the presession not quite at the same rate as the sun, you could also cause large periods without a single solar eclipse, followed by a period where a solar eclipse happened every month (which, from a story perspective, could be interesting).



          Alternatively, if you had the moon precess in the opposite direction of the earth's movement around the sun (and depending on the length of your lunar month vs solar year), it may be possible to have the moon 'miss' a solar eclipse except for once every few hundreds of years.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Oh man this is very exciting stuff. This might be a really elegant solution to the problem. I'll need to do some research into how this may affect other aspects of the planet, but thats beyond the scope of this question. Thanks for this.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            5 hours ago














          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          Why not make the moon's orbit precess? If the precession chases the sun (from the perspective of earth) while staying a bit off from it, you could keep new moons as common as always and eliminate solar eclipses altogether.



          If you made the presession not quite at the same rate as the sun, you could also cause large periods without a single solar eclipse, followed by a period where a solar eclipse happened every month (which, from a story perspective, could be interesting).



          Alternatively, if you had the moon precess in the opposite direction of the earth's movement around the sun (and depending on the length of your lunar month vs solar year), it may be possible to have the moon 'miss' a solar eclipse except for once every few hundreds of years.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Why not make the moon's orbit precess? If the precession chases the sun (from the perspective of earth) while staying a bit off from it, you could keep new moons as common as always and eliminate solar eclipses altogether.



          If you made the presession not quite at the same rate as the sun, you could also cause large periods without a single solar eclipse, followed by a period where a solar eclipse happened every month (which, from a story perspective, could be interesting).



          Alternatively, if you had the moon precess in the opposite direction of the earth's movement around the sun (and depending on the length of your lunar month vs solar year), it may be possible to have the moon 'miss' a solar eclipse except for once every few hundreds of years.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 5 hours ago









          Elliot SchrockElliot Schrock

          2,298615




          2,298615












          • $begingroup$
            Oh man this is very exciting stuff. This might be a really elegant solution to the problem. I'll need to do some research into how this may affect other aspects of the planet, but thats beyond the scope of this question. Thanks for this.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            5 hours ago


















          • $begingroup$
            Oh man this is very exciting stuff. This might be a really elegant solution to the problem. I'll need to do some research into how this may affect other aspects of the planet, but thats beyond the scope of this question. Thanks for this.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            5 hours ago
















          $begingroup$
          Oh man this is very exciting stuff. This might be a really elegant solution to the problem. I'll need to do some research into how this may affect other aspects of the planet, but thats beyond the scope of this question. Thanks for this.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          5 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          Oh man this is very exciting stuff. This might be a really elegant solution to the problem. I'll need to do some research into how this may affect other aspects of the planet, but thats beyond the scope of this question. Thanks for this.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          5 hours ago











          1












          $begingroup$

          At 90 degree inclination, you could still get new moons near the nodes where the inclination of the moon's orbit with respect to the line from the planet to the sun is low.



          The presence of nodes in the planet's orbit where the inclined orbital path of the moon intersects a line pointing towards the sun, however, is not itself problematic, because it is not itself sufficient to cause eclipses. And that's a good thing for you, because it's a simple geometric fact that you can't avoid them. In order to get an eclipse, the moon also has to actually pass through that intersection point during the brief period when it exists every half-year. As such, a very simple solution to avoid ever having an eclipse presents itself: just tweak the moon's orbital period so that it forms a simple integer ratio with the year, such that the moon is always in the same phase on the same date every year--and then just declare that the phases are such that you never have things line up for an eclipse.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            6 hours ago
















          1












          $begingroup$

          At 90 degree inclination, you could still get new moons near the nodes where the inclination of the moon's orbit with respect to the line from the planet to the sun is low.



          The presence of nodes in the planet's orbit where the inclined orbital path of the moon intersects a line pointing towards the sun, however, is not itself problematic, because it is not itself sufficient to cause eclipses. And that's a good thing for you, because it's a simple geometric fact that you can't avoid them. In order to get an eclipse, the moon also has to actually pass through that intersection point during the brief period when it exists every half-year. As such, a very simple solution to avoid ever having an eclipse presents itself: just tweak the moon's orbital period so that it forms a simple integer ratio with the year, such that the moon is always in the same phase on the same date every year--and then just declare that the phases are such that you never have things line up for an eclipse.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            6 hours ago














          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          At 90 degree inclination, you could still get new moons near the nodes where the inclination of the moon's orbit with respect to the line from the planet to the sun is low.



          The presence of nodes in the planet's orbit where the inclined orbital path of the moon intersects a line pointing towards the sun, however, is not itself problematic, because it is not itself sufficient to cause eclipses. And that's a good thing for you, because it's a simple geometric fact that you can't avoid them. In order to get an eclipse, the moon also has to actually pass through that intersection point during the brief period when it exists every half-year. As such, a very simple solution to avoid ever having an eclipse presents itself: just tweak the moon's orbital period so that it forms a simple integer ratio with the year, such that the moon is always in the same phase on the same date every year--and then just declare that the phases are such that you never have things line up for an eclipse.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          At 90 degree inclination, you could still get new moons near the nodes where the inclination of the moon's orbit with respect to the line from the planet to the sun is low.



          The presence of nodes in the planet's orbit where the inclined orbital path of the moon intersects a line pointing towards the sun, however, is not itself problematic, because it is not itself sufficient to cause eclipses. And that's a good thing for you, because it's a simple geometric fact that you can't avoid them. In order to get an eclipse, the moon also has to actually pass through that intersection point during the brief period when it exists every half-year. As such, a very simple solution to avoid ever having an eclipse presents itself: just tweak the moon's orbital period so that it forms a simple integer ratio with the year, such that the moon is always in the same phase on the same date every year--and then just declare that the phases are such that you never have things line up for an eclipse.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 6 hours ago









          Logan R. KearsleyLogan R. Kearsley

          11.4k13157




          11.4k13157












          • $begingroup$
            Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            6 hours ago


















          • $begingroup$
            Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            6 hours ago
















          $begingroup$
          Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          6 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          Great mathematical explanation. That being said, I don't need eclipses be nonexistent, just rarer, though i suspect this is a harder thing to do than i initially thought.
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          6 hours ago











          1












          $begingroup$

          Instead of one moon which is just big enough and close enough to cause a total eclipse whenever it intersects between our planet and our sun, why not have several moons which are each either smaller or more distant such that no single moon can produce a full eclipse.
          New moons would still happen and would actually be much more common than Earth standard, but total eclipses would only occur when all of the moons simultaneously entered the intersection point, each blocking a portion of the available sunshine and collectively blocking it all.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            That's a very creative answer. It would warrant a lot of thinking and tinkering on my part, but technically does answer my question!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            4 hours ago
















          1












          $begingroup$

          Instead of one moon which is just big enough and close enough to cause a total eclipse whenever it intersects between our planet and our sun, why not have several moons which are each either smaller or more distant such that no single moon can produce a full eclipse.
          New moons would still happen and would actually be much more common than Earth standard, but total eclipses would only occur when all of the moons simultaneously entered the intersection point, each blocking a portion of the available sunshine and collectively blocking it all.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            That's a very creative answer. It would warrant a lot of thinking and tinkering on my part, but technically does answer my question!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            4 hours ago














          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          Instead of one moon which is just big enough and close enough to cause a total eclipse whenever it intersects between our planet and our sun, why not have several moons which are each either smaller or more distant such that no single moon can produce a full eclipse.
          New moons would still happen and would actually be much more common than Earth standard, but total eclipses would only occur when all of the moons simultaneously entered the intersection point, each blocking a portion of the available sunshine and collectively blocking it all.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Instead of one moon which is just big enough and close enough to cause a total eclipse whenever it intersects between our planet and our sun, why not have several moons which are each either smaller or more distant such that no single moon can produce a full eclipse.
          New moons would still happen and would actually be much more common than Earth standard, but total eclipses would only occur when all of the moons simultaneously entered the intersection point, each blocking a portion of the available sunshine and collectively blocking it all.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 5 hours ago









          Henry TaylorHenry Taylor

          46.5k872168




          46.5k872168












          • $begingroup$
            That's a very creative answer. It would warrant a lot of thinking and tinkering on my part, but technically does answer my question!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            4 hours ago


















          • $begingroup$
            That's a very creative answer. It would warrant a lot of thinking and tinkering on my part, but technically does answer my question!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            4 hours ago
















          $begingroup$
          That's a very creative answer. It would warrant a lot of thinking and tinkering on my part, but technically does answer my question!
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          4 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          That's a very creative answer. It would warrant a lot of thinking and tinkering on my part, but technically does answer my question!
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          4 hours ago











          1












          $begingroup$

          Resonance. Pick a ratio of the lunar orbital period to the solar orbital period such that the moon normally in the wrong part of it's orbit when it's both directly sunward and in the plane of the ecliptic. The bigger numbers you need to use to express the ratio the longer it will be between eclipses.



          Unlike normal planetary resonance orbits no force will maintain this or cause it to come into being but as the moon slowly spirals out there will be a time that it happens naturally. You'll have to adjust the size of the moon so it provides a total eclipse at that distance from the Earth.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Sounds very reasonable! I will need to do some research but thanks for the starting point!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            3 hours ago
















          1












          $begingroup$

          Resonance. Pick a ratio of the lunar orbital period to the solar orbital period such that the moon normally in the wrong part of it's orbit when it's both directly sunward and in the plane of the ecliptic. The bigger numbers you need to use to express the ratio the longer it will be between eclipses.



          Unlike normal planetary resonance orbits no force will maintain this or cause it to come into being but as the moon slowly spirals out there will be a time that it happens naturally. You'll have to adjust the size of the moon so it provides a total eclipse at that distance from the Earth.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Sounds very reasonable! I will need to do some research but thanks for the starting point!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            3 hours ago














          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          Resonance. Pick a ratio of the lunar orbital period to the solar orbital period such that the moon normally in the wrong part of it's orbit when it's both directly sunward and in the plane of the ecliptic. The bigger numbers you need to use to express the ratio the longer it will be between eclipses.



          Unlike normal planetary resonance orbits no force will maintain this or cause it to come into being but as the moon slowly spirals out there will be a time that it happens naturally. You'll have to adjust the size of the moon so it provides a total eclipse at that distance from the Earth.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Resonance. Pick a ratio of the lunar orbital period to the solar orbital period such that the moon normally in the wrong part of it's orbit when it's both directly sunward and in the plane of the ecliptic. The bigger numbers you need to use to express the ratio the longer it will be between eclipses.



          Unlike normal planetary resonance orbits no force will maintain this or cause it to come into being but as the moon slowly spirals out there will be a time that it happens naturally. You'll have to adjust the size of the moon so it provides a total eclipse at that distance from the Earth.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 3 hours ago









          Loren PechtelLoren Pechtel

          19.8k2262




          19.8k2262












          • $begingroup$
            Sounds very reasonable! I will need to do some research but thanks for the starting point!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            3 hours ago


















          • $begingroup$
            Sounds very reasonable! I will need to do some research but thanks for the starting point!
            $endgroup$
            – Cristian C.
            3 hours ago
















          $begingroup$
          Sounds very reasonable! I will need to do some research but thanks for the starting point!
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          3 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          Sounds very reasonable! I will need to do some research but thanks for the starting point!
          $endgroup$
          – Cristian C.
          3 hours ago


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f142780%2fmake-solar-eclipses-exceedingly-rare-but-still-have-new-moons%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          How to make a Squid Proxy server?

          第一次世界大戦

          Touch on Surface Book