& come to think of it
i keep liking my sloping natural arrowhead chink
shoulder guess better
when i try to think of how this outlandish location
might have come to be selected for the tripoint in the
first place

for kzuz converges from the north along the 56th
meridian until it reaches the end of the plateau
& then goes slightly over the edge but evidently only
as far down the chink as this marvelously coincident
natural landmark beach point overlooking the lake if
not actually projecting into it as a point of land

but tmuz & kztm do not in fact converge with kzuz
there exactly at right angles
notwithstanding the topo depiction of them along a
parallel of latitude
as if to form a perfect tee junction
for that detail is a totally bogus border depiction i
must tell you
but rather
they converge there as if offhandedly
to meet this idealized rendezvous point at whatever
slightly odd angles they must

better maps show they may both follow geodetic line
segments to the trijunction target point
but neither of them is a true east west line
& they do form a distinct angle by converging at the
landmark in this happenchance way

& i think it is precisely their slightly unusual
angles of convergence that really do point to this
arrowhead tip
& give away their special relationship to it
as they perform & celebrate deliberately what the 56th
meridian has done only by chance

otherwise kzuz might have continued south thru this
wilderness until it really did strike a single
continuous tmuz & kztm at right angles

for the soviets could just as easily have arbitrarily
done it that way as they perhaps really did do it
somewhat more sensibly this way

or so i would dare to speculate at this point

--- aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...> wrote:

> agreed about all of the following
> except i would still say the tripoint is not
> necessarily within
> altho at least partly surrounded by
> your relatively flat lacustrine basin
>
> --- "Lowell G. McManus" <lgm@...> wrote:
>
> > I have gone to Jesper's source, zoomed in, and
> > captured a clearer
> > version for our interpretation. It is attached.
> >
> > First, the contours are in feet, not meters. (The
> > Map Mart site says
> > so.) Note also that the distance scale is in
> miles.
> >
> > The contour interval is 250 feet. On this map,
> > contours of 0, 250, 500,
> > 750, and 1,000 feet are shown.
> >
> > Between the 750 and 500 contours (to the northeast
> > of the lake, anyway),
> > we find the depiction of the escarpment.
> >
> > Descending from the 0 contour, we find, first, the
> > shore of the
> > intermittent lake, then the shore of the more
> > permanent lake.
> >
> > Within the northwestern lobe of the intermittent
> > lake, we find several
> > shoals that rise above the 0 contour (although
> they
> > are covered,
> > incongruously, with the blue stipple indicating
> > intermittent
> > inundation). The tripoint appears upon the
> shoulder
> > of one of these
> > shoals, just slightly above the 0 contour.
> >
> > I think that we can conclude that this best-known
> > topographic map
> > (whatever its possible imprecisions) shows the
> > tripoint in a relatively
> > flat lacustrine basin.
> >
> > Lowell G. McManus
> > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "aletheia kallos" <aletheiak@...>
> > To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 4:37 PM
> > Subject: Re: SV: [BoundaryPoint] yikes kztmuz is
> > reportedly undelineated
> > & definitely elusive
> >
> >
> > > as you say could not be very much higher
> > > please be aware
> > > the map if it can be believed shows the tripoint
> 2
> > > distinct levels above the normal water level of
> > the
> > > recognizably outlined lake
> > > &
> > > at least some if not all the elevation gradients
> > are
> > > 250 meters apart
> > >
> > > --- "Lowell G. McManus" <lgm@...>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Jesper,
> > >>
> > >> Thanks very much for the three PDF maps of the
> > area
> > >> and the referral to Google Earth. When Google
> > Earth
> > >> debuted, I tried it, but it did not work for
> me.
> > I
> > >> tried it again today, and it works great!
> > >>
> > >> I think that your PDF maps demonstrate that the
> > lake
> > >> in the tripoint depression is variable in level
> > and
> > >> size over time or season, flooding the tripoint
> > at
> > >> times. Since this appears to be the case, the
> > >> tripoint could not be very much higher in
> > elevation
> > >> than the more regularly wet lakebed farther
> > >> southeast.
> > >>
> > >> Lowell G. McManus
> > >> Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: Jesper Nielsen/Borderbase
> > >> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 1:47 PM
> > >> Subject: SV: SV: [BoundaryPoint] yikes kztmuz
> > is
> > >> reportedly undelineated & definitely elusive
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> No fancy results of terrain (or 3d) to show
> as
> > the
> > >> entire areas is very flat. The tripoint itself
> is
> > at
> > >> water level at 0m and the surroundings do no go
> > >> higher than 160 meters.
> > >>
> > >> But please learn to use the free Google
> Earth,
> > >> downloadable at http://earth.google.com ,
> > yourself.
> > >>
> > >> Jesper
> > >> --
> > >> Borderbase - your online guide to
> international
> > >> borders and tripoints
> > >> http://www.nicolette.dk/borderbase
> > >
> > >
> > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com