comments intertwingled thruout
--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "granthutchison" <granthutchison@b...>
wrote:
> > btw can you tweak it so your comments dont fall off the page
> Tricky to find anywhere else to put them. But if you just move the
> cursor until a particular comment of interest is the active cell,
> you'll be able to read its entire contents in the formula-entry
text
> box at the top of the screen.
aha thanx
some questions then
which areas of the world are not included in your survey due to their
various problems of indeterminacy
is everyones land accounted for in any way
evidently you have treated the condo areas as simple borders
tho not the trido area
or why do you mention this
was there some special problem to it
> > i am so pleasantly surprised also to see you opening here below
to
> the
> > possibility that a line which is nonphysical in the first place
> might
> > need to disconnect from itself in order to pass over an also
> > nonphysical point that is actually part of that line etc etc
while
> it
> > could easily within nonphysical reality simply cross itself no
> problem
> > so unless such an elegant solution to what you call your odd
> problem
> Did I say that?
no you didnt say all that
only the odd problem part
& it was only i who saw you opening to this possibility of solving
your problem
& who now see you closing it off in my mist opportunity below
I think the boat you're pushing out isn't the one I
> launched. I'm happy to wave as you recede into the mist, though.
>
> As I say in my most recent 24-hr delayed mail, I think of borders
as
> line segments that connect the dots of tri- and higher points.
but which really came first
the borders or the multipoints
still no matter
(Can I
> coin "polypoint", at least for the restricted purposes of this
> posting, to mean "tri-point or higher"? I think you've already
> used "multipoint" for other duties.)
sure you can but there is no difference
you may be thinking of the terms megapoint or maxipoint
> So in my boundaries spreadsheet, a border segment is either a
closed
> loop or a line with a polypoint at each end (that may be the *same*
> polypoint, in the case of Jungholz, and the three other binational
> quadripoints.)
> If you're making a border tour
ahh now i see the source of your problem
linear rather than global thinking
for the boundaries dont really move
so your tour is already extra stuff
tho i realize it was necessary for your survey
you will do your strangest dance tho not at jungholz but at baarle
where the point isnt marked on the ground but can only be determined
by visual alignments
so you will have to stop short & shoot the markers by eye & then
pivot & regain your head of steam in what would & could otherwise
only be a perfectly fluid cruciform intersection
& remember to mark the place or you will have to do it all over again
on the second pass
, you march along a boundary segment
> until you come to a polypoint, and then you can choose a *new*
> boundary segment to follow, from the 2 or more on offer at that
> point. So the lines don't cross the polypoints because, as Bill
says,
> there's a different borders on the other side of the point -
thats not what he said
nor possibly even what he meant
clearly
> so in the case of a tripoint, but not so convincingly in the rare
> case of a binational quadripoint, I admit.
> Now, you can (and do, with some relish) choose to make your border
> tour along the German/Austrian border and around Jungholz in a
> crossed loop. Me, I like to think of the border segments as having
a
> *direction* imposed on them by any border tour: a vector defined by
> some statement like "I'm walking with Germany on my left and
Austria
> on my right"; equivalent to "I'm going round Austrian territory
> clockwise." So at the quadripoint I either turn left and loop
> clockwise around Jungholz, or right to continue my tour
of "mainland"
> Austria, either way maintaining the handedness of my tour. You
steam
> straight ahead, unfazed by the sudden switch of Austria from your
> right to your left hand, doing a sort of interdimensional jig
> analoguous (I just realise) to the outside-becomes-inside
> interpenetration of the single surface of a Klein bottle.
>
> But I think you quite enjoy doing an interdimensional jig.
>
> Grant
exactly
& no surprise or difficulty to change directions when i
interpenetrate myself
for it is only natural
m