well lowell i never did phone in today & am off to sleep on it again now
so i guess it must be a longer than usual moment of truth in trypointing
i did compare the official richland map with the topo again tho
& noticed the former southeast corner of richland has somehow gotten nibbled off too
or else never existed as shown on the topo
oops
so presumably the maximum possible southeasting of any supposedly singular new
geodesic segment should actually be revised back north & west a bit
to only about the cursor cross position here
http://topozone.com/map.asp?
z=17&n=4457804&e=686553&s=100&size=l&datum=nad83&layer=DRG25
which means
such a new segment running thru your discovered point actually couldnt displace adcori
by more than a few hundred feet
which in turn seems a comfortable margin for so few as 7 houses to have changed sides
some of them likely not even shown on the topo
but your earlier guess of so much as a 400 foot displacement from the old line at your
found point remains a little disconcerting
because it means a new adcori at the end of a single geodesic running thru your point
would have to fall more than 400 feet west of the old adri
& that would mean many more than 7 houses would change sides
so maybe the single line thesis is what must bite the dust here first of all
or else
i wonder if you could possibly be overestimating at 400 feet offline for that street address
so i wonder if you can think of any reason to shorten up on this guess
or would that only be in my dreams
but in any case
multidimensionally sweet ones to one & all
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak" <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
>
> yes very nice
> & what you add about the possibility of folk allocation may be true
> but the official town of richland map & the usgs topo do at least agree on adri
> all the way from adcori to the first supposed adri turnpoint & beyond
> so the folk who did this allocation must have included the tax collectors of the 2 towns
>
>
> still sleeping on it tho
> zzzzz zzzzz
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@m...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Wasn't that nice of the journalist to include the name of the surveyor and the
> > town in which to find him?
> >
> > Of course, the business about two houses this way and five that might refer to
> > changes from where the people only THOUGHT that they lived (folk allocation),
> > rather than the actual change from the line as conventionally mapped to the one
> > newly surveyed.
> >
> > Lowell G. McManus
> > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "aletheia kallos" <aletheiak@y...>
> > To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2005 10:17 PM
> > Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] a tripointing puzzle joke
> >
> >
> > > haha thanx nice play
> > > & very revealing
> > > for if
> > > as the article seems to indicate
> > > only a single new geodesic segment has resulted from
> > > the survey correction
> > > which is admittedly still a big if
> > > then the point you have evidently discovered upon this
> > > segment would indeed establish a range of distances
> > > for the displacement from the old adcori to a new
> > > adcori
> > >
> > > & since the article says 2 houses have been thrown
> > > into adams & 5 into richland by the change
> > > then it follows further that neither extant terminus
> > > could have been used for the correction segment
> > > but that the southern terminus must have been shifted
> > > far enough to the southeast along the extant boundary
> > > to somehow include those 2 houses
> > > & that the northern terminus must therefore have
> > > pivoted correspondingly to the northwest of your found
> > > point
> > >
> > > now again
> > > any of these assumptions could be mistaken
> > > but if they are all correct
> > > then the turnpoint to the south of your discovered
> > > point would have to lie somewhere on the next extant
> > > geodesic segment to its south
> > > & thus no farther south or east than the subsequent
> > > turnpoint
> > > as indicated by the cursor cross here
> > > http://topozone.com/map.asp?
> z=17&n=4457182&e=686802&s=100&size=l&datum=nad83&layer=DRG25
> > >
> > > & this would then project the new geodesic segment
> > > thru your found point to a new adcori no more than
> > > about a quarter of a mile southwest of old adcori on
> > > extant cori
> > > or roughly no farther from old adcori than the cursor
> > > cross indicates here
> > > http://topozone.com/map.asp?
> z=17&n=4468552&e=685306&s=100&size=l&datum=nad83&layer=DRG25
> > > but probably way way closer to it in fact
> > > since remember only 5 of all those black dots will
> > > change from richland to adams
> > >
> > > indeed if we were trying to guess by just reallocating
> > > black dots
> > > which after all makes a certain amount of sense too
> > > then the drift might only be about a quarter as much
> > > as that
> > > or to only about here
> > > http://topozone.com/map.asp?
> z=17&n=4468755&e=685438&s=100&size=l&datum=nad83&layer=DRG25
> > >
> > >
> > > now do i really want to call the surveyor again first
> > > thing monday morning again
> > >
> > > well happily i can sleep on that
> >
>