egg changed the topic of #principia to: Logs: https://esper.irclog.whitequark.org/principia | <scott_manley> anyone that doubts the wisdom of retrograde bop needs to get the hell out | https://xkcd.com/323/ | <egg> calculating the influence of lamont on Pluto is a bit silly…
<_whitenotifier-1adf> [Principia] eggrobin closed pull request #3618: cpplint as a workflow - https://github.com/mockingbirdnest/Principia/pull/3618
<queqiao-> ⟨Al₂Me₆⟩ ⟪egg⟫ I’m not sure what you would want to […] ⮪ Can confirm, 'tis a very boring frame to look at. ~Maybe I'll make the Moon eccentric and see what happens then.~
<queqiao-> Also, l10n thing: is it intentional that the descriptions have an article when the parent is the Sun ('involving _the_ Sun-Earth Lagrange points' vs just 'involving Earth-Moon Lagrange points')?
<queqiao-> ⟨egg⟩ ⟪Al₂Me₆⟫ Can confirm, 'tis a very boring frame […] ⮪ Hmm, lingoona might be trying to be too smart here (assuming the the refers to the body, and removing it where it is inappropriate, whereas it refers to the points).
<queqiao-> ⟨egg⟩ Yeah: https://lingoona.com/cgi-bin/grammar#l=en&t=Is+it+the+%3C%3C1%3E%3E-%3C%3C2%3E%3E+Lagrange+points%2C+or+the+%3C%3C2%3E%3E-%3C%3C3%3E%3E+Lagrange+points%3F&v1=Sun%5En&v2=Earth%5EN&v3=Moon%5En&oh=1
<queqiao-> ⟨egg⟩ This would work in a recent lingoona, but not with the one KSP uses: https://lingoona.com/cgi-bin/grammar#l=en&t=Is+it+%3C%3CA%3A%3C%3C1%3E%3E-%3C%3C2%3E%3E+Lagrange+points%3E%3E%2C+or+%3C%3CA%3A%3C%3C2%3E%3E-%3C%3C3%3E%3E+Lagrange+points%3E%3E%3F&v1=Sun%5En&v2=Earth%5EN&v3=Moon%5En&oh=1
<queqiao-> ⟨egg⟩ Ah, this works and is much nicer: https://lingoona.com/cgi-bin/grammar#l=en&t=Is+it+the+%3C%3Cnom%3A1%3E%3E-%3C%3Cnom%3A2%3E%3E+Lagrange+points%2C+or+the+%3C%3Cnom%3A2%3E%3E-%3C%3Cnom%3A3%3E%3E+Lagrange+points%3F&v1=Sun%5En&v2=Earth%5EN&v3=Moon%5En&v=1.6.5&oh=1
<queqiao-> ⟨egg⟩ ⟪Al₂Me₆⟫ Can confirm, 'tis a very boring frame […] ⮪ On the boredom and eggscentricity, you should be able to see that a satellite in LEO stays around the Earth (though the orbit may grow and shrink), whereas in MEO it moves back and forth illegibly.
<queqiao-> ⟨egg⟩ * in the EML frame (though the orbit may grow and shrink), whereas in the MEO frame
<queqiao-> ⟨test_account⟩ Suppose I have an orbit with a perfectly recurring ground track. Is it right or wrong to say that this orbit is only reachable for rendezvous from locations that are under its ground track? So for example, someone launching from Xichang would never be able to rendezvous with it without a major plane change.
<paculino> Would matching inclination but not orbital period work? The precession rates would be different, so you should drift towards the correct longitude eventually. That'd probably be way too slow though.
<_whitenotifier-1adf> [Principia] pleroy opened pull request #3619: Documentation of the rotation motion of reference frames - https://github.com/mockingbirdnest/Principia/pull/3619
<_whitenotifier-1adf> [Principia] eggrobin commented on pull request #3617: A new frame - https://github.com/mockingbirdnest/Principia/pull/3617#issuecomment-1523964954
<_whitenotifier-1adf> [Principia] eggrobin commented on pull request #3617: A new frame - https://github.com/mockingbirdnest/Principia/pull/3617#issuecomment-1524135046