aw shucks forget it
unless you have just disappeared for the holidays like everyone else
since this sort of thing seems to be a commonplace on us2pa4
http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/13238144.htm
tho maybe just in central pennsylvania
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak" <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
>
> intertwingling coming up please thanx
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@m...>
> wrote:
> >
> > I think that 400 feet is fairly accurate for the house on the west side of the
> > road near the red dot in the road produced by TerraServer from the Rentons'
> > street address. However, it is possible that the Renton home is a newer one not
> > on the map, across the road on the east, and much closer to the mapped line.
>
> yes i want to believe this
>
> in fact i want to believe it is set way back from the road
>
> & that their bedroom is way in the back of the house besides
> hahaha
>
> so like how many feet at the outside do you think we might reasonably be able to whack
> off of those 400 if we really had to
>
> > Didn't the article say that the surveyor had recovered some old forgotten stones
> > or markers?
>
> indeed
> lost markers plural
> & i have counted with confidence only up to 2 so far
>
> Perhaps the maps show a long geodesic where the actual originally
> > surveyed line (now recovered) is a somewhat imperfect one hopping from stone to
> > stone.
>
> do you mean the straight line we think we see on the maps is actually a series of slight
> wiggles
> well perhaps so
> but i still havent surely counted past the 2 terminal markers that would be necessary for
a
> single geodesic segment
>
> lost & found markers being generally rather scarce i mean
>
> That could account for a few houses one way and a few the other without
> > any wholesale transplant of the entire line and its two termini. Is this what
> > you meant by your suggestion that the single-line theory might bite the dust
> > first of all?
>
> yes but happily it still lives in my mind
> & your revised minimum plausible measurement could promote it dramatically
>
> thanx
>
> > Lowell G. McManus
> > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "aletheiak" <aletheiak@y...>
> > To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 10:45 PM
> > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: a tripointing puzzle joke
> >
> >
> > > 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
> >
>