Talk:Polar motion

I'm don't think that polar motion is just an unpredictable component of nutation. IAU documentation suggest it is another phenomenon, Eulerian Wobble, and the transformation is not applied as part of the Precession-Nutation correction.

Typcially you see a transformation of this form: Precession * Nutation * Rotation * PolarMotion DonPMitchell 10:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

second paragraph?

What does the second paragraph, which seems to be about nutation, have to do with polar motion? --Allen 07:37, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Diagrams

These diagrams included here and linked to are pretty inscrutable. I think it would be useful to post what is an average annual shift of the position of the pole in meters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.196.122.36 (talk) 02:42, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's a clearer diagram on the German wiki but I don't understand the copyright notice so I don't know if it's OK to just copy it to here. Joontheweb (talk) 12:19, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incomprehensible

Can anyone explain what the sentence This can lead to errors in software for Earth observing spacecraft, since analysts may read off a 5-meter circular motion and ignore it, while a 20-meter offset exists, fouling the accuracy of the calculated latitude and longitude is trying to convey? 79.66.204.76 (talk) 12:06, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Taking the whole paragraph into account, I think it's saying that some satellites are following a reference frame that moves with the mean displacement, so they only notice the short-term periodic deviations. I doubt that's true. I'll see if I can find some relevant sources. RockMagnetist(talk) 14:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]