Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] world class border arc census was Re: real bjneng try afoot
Date: Jul 13, 2004 @ 04:56
Author: Michael Kaufman (Michael Kaufman <mikekaufman79@...>)
Prev Post in Topic Next [All Posts]
Prev Post in Time Next
> please look for several insertionshttp://www.law.fsu.edu/library/collection/LimitsinSeas/maps/bs1
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, Michael
> Kaufman
> <mikekaufman79@y...> wrote:
> > 1. DZLYTN http://www.manntaylor.com/FtSaintM.jpg
> > (this could be DZLY and LYTN or just DZLY as per
> msg.
> > 13465)
>
> correct & we still dont know which is true
> so you are right to keep counting it or them as
> either 1 or 2
> borders
> but this is apparently only a single sweep of arc in
> any case
>
> > 2. DZLY
> >
>
> b.phphttp://www.law.fsu.edu/library/collection/LimitsinSeas/maps/bs2.
> > 3. LYNE
> >
>
> phphttp://www.law.fsu.edu/library/collection/LimitsinSeas/IBS091.pdf
> > 4.-15. BJNG (12 of these?)
>
> i still cant be sure
> but the following text seems to indicate either 11
> or 12
>
>
> > 16. NENGhttp://www.law.fsu.edu/library/collection/LimitsinSeas/IBS093.pdf
> >
>
> > (but not evident)http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/africa/gambia_pol88.jpg
>
> it is evident in the above text
> but i think we just havent yet found a good enough
> map
>
> > 17.-??? MXUS (msg. 13937; how many are there?)
>
> unknown
> but i believe only 1 has been reported so far
> & suspect the 1970 mxus treaty will reveal all
> if there are any others
>
> > SO,
> > We can't put a firm number on it. Depends on 3
> > variables:
> > 1. Where DZLYTN falls. If there is a short LYTN
> we
> > have 18 not 17.
> > 2. Also, do we know 12 for BJNG? So it would be
> more
> > or less if not exactly 12.
> > 3. And how many more arcs for MXUS on the
> channelized
> > Rio Grande?
> > I am not yet counting ITVA since I think here we
> would
> > be talking about features (not figures) which can
> not
> > be perfectly geometrically true arcs.
>
> true
> & other reasons not to count any of the itva curves
> are
> that they are elliptical rather than circular
> & that their total number is so highly debatable
> amounting to either 1 or 3 or 5 or even more
> depending on point of view
>
> what a mess
> & good idea to sidestep it
> on any grounds
>
>
> so
> we have
> by this exact count
> at least 16 international border arcs
> but still perhaps as many as 18
> or more
> if more are found
>
> & they are evidently situated on 6 different borders
> & 1 tripoint
>
> thanx
>
>
>
> of course some wag will now come along to remind us
> that all
> small & great circle arc borders
> including every single segment between intervisible
> markers
> are technically border arcs too
>
> so we should add an extra zillion or 2
>
>
> end insertions
>
> > --- aletheiak <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
> > > arif
> > > i too believed in this arc report about
> easternmost
> > > gmsn
> > > & may even have been responsible for starting
> the
> > > rumor about it
> > > but i have been unable to substantiate it
> > >
> > > this border is set at a fixed distance from the
> > > river on both sides
> > > presumably from both its banks rather than from
> its
> > > thalweg
> > > just like the manh state line is offset from the
> > > merrimack
> > > except doubly so
> > > as you probably also realized
> > > & can see here
> > >
> >
>
> > >__________________________________
> > > however
> > > as beguilingly arclike as all this may seem
> > > such a regime would not actually presuppose any
> true
> > > arcs at all
> > >
> > > except
> > > i would agree
> > > conceivably a single one centered at the
> headspring
> > >
> > >
> > > however
> > > the source of the gambia river is not in gambia
> > > but in senegal
> > > as you can also see in the above map
> > > & therefore the simple offset regime couldnt
> project
> > > such a
> > > simple terminal arc sector
> > >
> > > only by varying the apparent regime & reducing
> it to
> > > a single
> > > offset center point in the middle of the river
> > > could such a final true arc have been produced
> > >
> > >
> > > also the map doesnt show any such terminal
> rounding
> > > or bulge
> > > as one would expect in such a case
> > > but quite the contrary
> > > something more like a foreshortening or
> truncation
> > > of the basic regime
> > > & indeed it makes the cutoff point look quite
> > > arbitrary & artificial
> > > & somehow distinctly at odds with the basic
> offset
> > > regime
> > >
> > >
> > > so at this point i think the existence of an arc
> on
> > > gmsn hasnt
> > > been & probably wont be demonstrated
> > > & was just a wishful thought & misconception in
> the
> > > first place
> > >
> > >
> > > mind you
> > > i dont actually know how the gmsn border does
> > > accomplish this
> > > remarkable turnabout at its east end if not in
> some
> > > approximation of an arc or arcs
> > >
> > > & i can still imagine how it might somehow
> involve a
> > > true arc or 2
> > > based at some known terminal cross section of
> the
> > > river
> > >
> > > but i dont believe there is any text that
> specifies
> > > to this effect
> > > nor any map that suggests it
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > meanwhile
> > > i have scoured the ghost frgb lines of the
> period
> > > & have discovered nothing new
> > > so our world class border arc census is again
> > > stalled
> > > at a top count of about 20 now & perhaps forever
> > >
> > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, Arif Samad
>
> > > <fHoiberg@y...> wrote:
> > > > Not sure, but isn't there some (at least one
> arc)
> > > in
> > > > the border of Senegal and Gambia. As far as I
> > > > thought, the Easternmost point is directly
> east of
> > > the
> > > > Center of the arc in that border.
> > > > Arif
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > __________________________________
> > > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free
> storage!
> > > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
> > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>
>