In the span of 18.6 years there is nodal precession of the Moon with respect to the ecliptic of 360 deg. But if we consider this precession with respect to the equator, we will find (unless I'm hugely mistaken) that the nodes hardly move, certainly not 360 deg. I ask in what range does it move, and how to calculate this range. In a recent answer about node precession of the Moon, I wrote on that in point 4:
[T]he node precession of Moon-orbit with respect to the equator is not complete. in the sense the nodes (again with respect to the equator) are not running over 360 deg in 18 years. But they run over much smaller span of maybe around 25 deg, ~12.5 deg from each side of the solar equinox. The precession works as regular (360 deg in 18 years) when we consider the nodes of the intersection not with Earth equator but with the ecliptic.
I have provided there a rough estimate of the range. The calculation of this was as follows: If at the Solar-node we make the declination of the Moon +5 deg. (due to his tilt 5deg to the ecliptic), and if we assume (this is the estimate) that in this setting the max declination of the Moon is 23.5, this Solar node is 12.62 deg from the the Lunar node. ($\sin(x) = \sin(5)/\sin(23.5)$); hence my estimate of ~12.5 on each side of the Solar node.
But I believe the answer should come a little lower, for at this setting the max declination of the Moon is higher than 23.5 and also it seems not to be 5deg at the Solar node. I tried to calculate this but got somewhat confused, and I'm not sure how to calculate this at the end. Also, I didn't find the correct figure online so I was missing something to validate whatever answer I will come up with.
I hope my question was clear, but here is another way to formulate this question: for a period of 18.6 years to take all the RAs of the ascending (or descending) node [dec=0] of the Moon. What is the maximum/minimum RA we will find?
- For calculation lets assume no other perturbation exists.
Edit: It struck me that the inclination that was previously estimated to be 23.5 (and really thought it should be little higher) can be calculated relatively easily. this is because we have 2 points on the arc (RA, dec): (x, 5) and (90+x, 23.5) (because we know that if we tilt the 5 deg at a given location, the locations 90 deg from there not going to change their original declination.) Hence we know where $-x$ is the node location and $z$ the inclination:
$ \sin(x)*\sin(z) = \sin(5) $. and also:
$ \sin(90+x)*\sin(z) = \sin(23.5)$. So we get by division: $$\tan(x) = \dfrac{\sin(5)}{\sin(23.5)}$$ => $x=12.32$ and $z=24.089$.
I now suspect this is the correct answer but not quite convinced yet. Any kind of validation from this forum would be appreciated. I'm afraid that actual observational data - though will be very close for sure - cannot give us the accuracy I seek, because the 5 deg tilt I used is really ranging between 5 and 5.3 and moves quite fast as @PM 2Ring showed in the last graph of this answer - hence the data should range (if we use the more accurate 23.44 ) between 12.35 and 13.07 and perhaps little lower because of the resolution of observation once a month in which the moon actually passes through the node.
Second Edit (Hopefully the last one):
In the method employed in the previous edit we selected $\alpha = 0$ as the angle (or call it RA=0) where we perform the 5 deg tilt. But the same method can be applied to every $\alpha$, so we can actually see at what $\alpha$ we get the highest $x$. Wolfram yielded maximal value at $\alpha = -11.7819$, which in turn produced $x=12.6312$ and $z=22.97$.
Unless I have an error it is what it is.
For the record, the general equations with $\alpha$ as parameter are (reminded in those equations the node is at $-x$ not $+x$):
$ \sin(x+\alpha)*\sin(z) = \sin(5+\arcsin(\sin(\alpha)*\sin(23.5))) $ $ \sin(90+x+\alpha)*\sin(z) = \sin(90+\alpha)*\sin(23.5) $
Third edit:
When comparing second edit to PM 2Ring's answer, there is a discrepancy of less than 0.002 deg in Moon numbers. (For more info read my comment to that answer), nevertheless in other hypothetical numbers - especially if we increase the 5 deg inclination to the ecliptic - the difference becomes bigger: up to more than a full degree even. So the method in the second edit is wrong. I think the mistake was as follows: When I performed the 5 deg tilt, I made this tilt in the equatorial coordinate system by adding +5 deg to the declination in a selected point (RA or $\alpha$) on the ecliptic. But this operation results in a plane which is not 5 deg inclined to the ecliptic. (only 5 deg inclined to the "ecliptic" after some another rotation operation). In other words, when we do the right thing: and perform the tilt in the ecliptic coordinate system by adding 5 to latitude at a given ecliptic longitude, and only then convert the orbit to the equatorial system, we will get somewhat different orbit that cannot be obtained by adding 5 to the declination anywhere. The sole exception being when $\alpha=90$ then this method works.
Another final note: My initial estimate calculation $\sin(x) = \sin(5)/\sin(23.5)$ turned out to be the correct answer. I guess this is not a mere coincidence. It means that the intersection of the Moon orbit with the equator after this 5 deg tilt, is equal to the intersection of another imaginary plane path that keeps the 23.5 inclination, but increase the declination in 5 deg at the node.