Subject: Re: first complete try apparently confirms about 500 tripoints<br/>
Date: May 07, 2002 @ 21:08<br/>
Author: acroorca2002 (&quot;acroorca2002&quot; &lt;orc@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="6413.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Next&emsp;[<a href="topic6405.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="6414.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="6416.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-431611508">okaay grant <br/>
<br/>
thanx<br/>
<br/>
& so evidently it is hard to actually say what a first complete try really is in this case<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
but it is great to know we are within a very few units of agreement<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
now about that tonga nz uncertainty &or wobble<br/>
<br/>
i wonder if you mightnt actually have split the difference in some way at some point in your counts between the 342 & 346 probabilities<br/>
<br/>
& mightnt thus have invented the 344 probability & its resultant 172 tripoints<br/>
<br/>
which tho perhaps not representing anything real does at least strike a balance & a viable temporary median probability<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
anyway we could just assume some such thing or some other nonsuch thing has occurred at least until we have a better explanation<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
more below <br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="qreply"> --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., &quot;granthutchison&quot; &lt;granthutchison@b...&gt; wrote:<br/>
<br/>
&gt; Michael: <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; i have found your apparently most probable grand total of sea <br/>
<br/>
&gt; tripoints 342<br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; & likewise your apparently less probable totals of 344 & 346 <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; including some unknown nz & tonga vagaries<br/>
<br/>
&gt; The New Zealand and Tonga variants go together - either they have a <br/>
<br/>
&gt; maritime border (and two attendant tripoints with Everyone&#39;s Land) or <br/>
<br/>
&gt; they don&#39;t, and Everyone&#39;s Land is directly connected to the South <br/>
<br/>
&gt; Fiji Basin. So the count is either 346 or 342, giving 173 or 171 as <br/>
<br/>
&gt; the overall count after division by 2. Which, you&#39;re right, doesn&#39;t <br/>
<br/>
&gt; match the Everyone&#39;s Land list - somehow I&#39;ve got one more tripoint <br/>
<br/>
&gt; in the EEZ boundaries list than in the Everyone&#39;s Land list.<br/>
<br/>
&gt; <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; so a preliminary question is whether you can easily explain this <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; slight wobble in the data<br/>
<br/>
&gt; And a preliminary answer is &quot;No.&quot; I can only explain it after some <br/>
<br/>
&gt; difficulty! So I&#39;ll need to get back to you after I&#39;ve waded through <br/>
<br/>
&gt; the data again.<br/>
<br/>
&gt; (One reason for uploading this stuff in preliminary form was the hope <br/>
<br/>
&gt; that someone would be able to spot some inconsistency that has eluded <br/>
<br/>
&gt; me for months.)<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
well perhaps we are on the trail of it now<br/>
<br/>
 <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; so i am wondering<br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; can you or anyone confirm or adjust this total <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; before we call it a first complete world class total try<br/>
<br/>
&gt; My current sums on the International Boundaries spreadsheet give 160 <br/>
<br/>
&gt; dry, 159 wet and 173 with Everyone&#39;s Land, for a total of 492.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
ok so lets assume all these numbers are accurate counts<br/>
<br/>
for they might well be accurate at least until contradicted<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
& we may thus either add or not add the 11 de facto tripoints to this sum depending on taste <br/>
<br/>
but again introducing an additional degree of uncertainty<br/>
<br/>
since the spratly tripoint count is only bestguessed & still unconfirmed at 7<br/>
<br/>
to produce a most probable but still rather soft de facto total of 503<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
m </span></blockquote></div>