Subject: Re: one final mystery among the delaware arcs<br/>
Date: Feb 16, 2005 @ 02:42<br/>
Author: aletheiak (&quot;aletheiak&quot; &lt;aletheiak@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="16737.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="16739.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic12321.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="16737.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="16739.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1232807923">er<br/>
sheepishly<br/>
something must be not quite right here<br/>
hahahaha<br/>
for i am getting equally bizarre readings on several different great <br/>
circle distance calculators<br/>
after several careful tries & retries<br/>
indeed something on the order of a 23 mile arc radius<br/>
yikes <br/>
absurd<br/>
where i was of course expecting 12 to 13 miles <br/>
since thats what perry gives & thats how it measures on the <br/>
paper topos too<br/>
<br/>
& i was so confident i could almost taste success<br/>
oops<br/>
but now cant even figure out why it has so weirdly eluded me<br/>
<br/>
not a clue<br/>
<br/>
quite baffling<br/>
<br/>
feels like i just got supersized into an alternate universe<br/>
with no way of getting back to normal<br/>
<br/>
so if anyone can help <br/>
please dive in & shrink me back down by all means<br/>
<br/>
for i seemed so close to proving something one way or the other <br/>
hahaha<br/>
but now i must leap this unexpected & totally irrational great <br/>
circle distance computation inflation hurdle<br/>
<br/>
& the override is consistently around 78 percent<br/>
hahahahaha<br/>
but why<br/>
<br/>
yikes<br/>
<br/>
--- In <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com">BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com</a>, &quot;aletheiak&quot; <br/>
&lt;aletheiak@y...&gt; wrote:<br/>
<blockquote><span title="qreply"> &gt; <br/>
&gt; digging this message 12321 out of the archive has also rattled <br/>
&gt; my brain enough to completely reconstruct the puzzle <br/>
&gt; & then also to recall that tho i cant put my hands on the really <br/>
&gt; authoritative 1934 article by perry <br/>
&gt; i can still recollect it fairly well <br/>
&gt; & have dug up the paper topos from which i can crib all the <br/>
&gt; necessary coords & then compute independently with a great <br/>
&gt; circle arc calculator exactly where on the mason & dixon west <br/>
&gt; line the original 1701 arc would have had to cross it <br/>
&gt; if not precisely at modern demdpa<br/>
&gt; aha<br/>
&gt; & what fun<br/>
&gt; all of which i ought to be able to do with the help of messages <br/>
&gt; 12156 & 614 <br/>
&gt; but especially message 644 for the exact measurements<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; so first the coords of the new castle county courthouse spire<br/>
&gt; aka the center of the original 1701 depa arc <br/>
&gt; as partially recovered in 1892<br/>
&gt; nad83 nlat 39d29m35s x wlong 75d33m52s<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; & then the latitude of the mason&dixon line at demdpa<br/>
&gt; nad83 nlat 39d43m20s<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; & next the radius of the 1701 depa arc<br/>
&gt; 67637 feet<br/>
&gt; yes i know almost 13 miles but thats what she really wrote<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; & finally the coords of denjpa <br/>
&gt; at the opposite end of the original 1701 arc sweep <br/>
&gt; just as a double check<br/>
&gt; nad83 nlat 39d48m07s5 x wlong 75d24m53s<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; but anyway let me really go out on a limb & post this much first<br/>
&gt; & i will proceed with the great circle calculations after an <br/>
&gt; appropriate pause for fanfare & drumroll  <br/>
&gt; & dinner<br/>
&gt; unless someone beats me to them<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; --- In <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com">BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com</a>, &quot;acroorca2002&quot; <br/>
&gt; &lt;orc@o...&gt; wrote:<br/>
&gt; &gt; we know from pre1849 maps that the depa arc was originally <br/>
&gt; tangent to <br/>
&gt; &gt; demd at modern demdpa<br/>
&gt; &gt; or at least it appears to have been so<br/>
&gt; &gt; &<br/>
&gt; &gt; we understand that the wedge was created in 1849 as a <br/>
&gt; prolongation of <br/>
&gt; &gt; the demd arc<br/>
&gt; &gt; which had a smaller radius than the depa arc as well as a <br/>
&gt; different <br/>
&gt; &gt; center<br/>
&gt; &gt; & <br/>
&gt; &gt; we know that the western part of the depa arc was shaved <br/>
&gt; back at that <br/>
&gt; &gt; time<br/>
&gt; &gt; in order to feather these 2 or 3 slightly different arcs together <br/>
&gt; &gt; into a single continuous curve from the delaware river to the <br/>
&gt; m&d <br/>
&gt; &gt; tangent point<br/>
&gt; &gt; etc<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; but how was it possible that the original 1701 depa arc & the <br/>
&gt; &gt; original 1764 m&d north line from the demd tangent point <br/>
&gt; could both <br/>
&gt; &gt; have struck the m&d west line at precisely the same point<br/>
&gt; &gt; modern demdpa<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; or at least how can they appear to have done so<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; for it seems to me one or the other of these 2 chance <br/>
&gt; intersections <br/>
&gt; &gt; would have produced & become the definitive demdpa<br/>
&gt; &gt; while the other would have had to miss the mark<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; the intersections were independently conceived & generated<br/>
&gt; &gt; one being supposedly 12 miles from the horse dike at new <br/>
&gt; castle<br/>
&gt; &gt; & the other 15 miles south of the southernmost point of philly <br/>
&gt; as <br/>
&gt; &gt; well as due north of the more famous tangent point<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; neither position was derivative of the other <br/>
&gt; &gt; yet both apparently agree<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; so i am thinking <br/>
&gt; &gt; m&d <br/>
&gt; &gt; or at least someone prior to graham in 1849 <br/>
&gt; &gt; might already have done some fudging of the westernmost <br/>
&gt; end of the <br/>
&gt; &gt; depa arc here just to make everything line up <br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; of course in 1849<br/>
&gt; &gt; whatever slight previous fudging may also have been done <br/>
&gt; was <br/>
&gt; &gt; completely obliterated by the much greater fudging produced <br/>
&gt; by graham<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; so this is a question only for ghost pointing<br/>
&gt; &gt; & perhaps only to be answered in some dusty archive if at all<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; but it titillates my sense of & desire for precision </span></blockquote></div>