That's fine by me, because it has nothing to do with it. I give you an F in
measuring a boundary.
> ----------
> From: Brian J. Butler[SMTP:bjbutler@...]
> Reply To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 6:02 PM
> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] OKTX --finally! figures
>
> On Thursday 17 April 2003 07:58 pm, you wrote:
> OK, I give up. And I give you an F in fractal geometry.
> BJB
>
> > I really have not misunderstood any of the points made in opposition to
> > measuring a physical boundary... I have only said that it can be done,
> and
> > it is done. I don't agree with the notion that there is infinite length
> in
> > a river that flkoiws only, say, 10 miles. That's an absurd notion. A
> > highway might be measured by its length along a centerline in the
> median,
> > while the distance along its outside shoulders may be different...
> still,
> > the distance is not infinite! We can prove that by arriving at our
> > destination.
> >
> > Once a high water mark is established, if that is the boundary, then it
> can
> > be measured. I didn't say it was easy to go 1,000 miles along the banks
> of
> > the Red River (I believe the OK-TX boundary is the center of the
> channel,
> > which would be much less difficult to measure), but it can be done.
> >
> > At a human scale, the water line does not have to be measured around
> > molecules, or grains of sand, to be called accurate. As with my highway
> > example.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian J. Butler [mailto:bjbutler@...]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 4:18 PM
> > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] OKTX --finally! figures
> >
> >
> > On Thursday 17 April 2003 05:04 pm, you wrote:
> > Let me trry one more time, and then if you still don't get it, I will
> give
> > up. Suppose a boundary is defined as the high water mark along a river
> > bank.
> > Further suppose the river bank is irregular, which should not be much of
> a
> > stretch if you have ever looked at a river bank. The irregularities
> exist
> > at
> > many scales, from broad bends measured in miles, to smaller meanders
> > measured
> > in hundreds of feet, to smaller gouges measured in tens of feet, to
> rocks
> > meausured in feet, to pebbles measured in inches, to small pebbles, ...
> > etc.
> >
> > Clearly if you consider smaller and smaller irregularities, the length
> of
> > the
> > river bank increases without bound, as illustrated by the two
> measurements
> > given for the OK-TX boundary. Since you think the length is bounded, it
> > implies that you stop measuring around features below some size
> threshold.
> > My
> > question to you is: At what scale do you stop measuring, and why?
> Please
> > actually think about the question.
> > BJB
> >
> > > It would really not go on like that. If the boundary is defined, one
> > > follows that definition. If OK-TX has been defined as a certain
> location
> >
> > in
> >
> > > the channel of the Red River, one would follow that and measure it as
> > > s/he goes. If the menaderings are part of the definition, that would
> be
> > > followed.
> > >
> > > The hard number really is out there. It is not infinite.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Brian J. Butler [mailto:bjbutler@...]
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 1:55 PM
> > > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] OKTX --finally! figures
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thursday 17 April 2003 12:13 pm, you wrote:
> > > And following really small meanders
> > >
> > > Red River - -1234 miles
> > > East Panhandle line -- 133.6 miles
> > > North Panhandle line -- 167 miles (minus 2.2 miles TXNM)
> > >
> > > Total -- 1532.4 miles
> > >
> > >
> > > And following really small meanders and medium sizes irregularities:
> > >
> > > Red River -- 2816 miles
> > > East Panhandle line -- 133.6 miles
> > > North Panhandle line -- 167 miles (minus 2.2 miles TXNM)
> > >
> > > Total -- 3114.4 miles
> > >
> > > Etc.
> > >
> > > > Including only larger river bends:
> > > >
> > > > Red River -- 480.0 miles
> > > > East Panhandle line -- 133.6 miles
> > > > North Panhandle line -- 167 miles (minus 2.2 miles TXNM)
> > > >
> > > > Total -- 778.4 miles
> > > >
> > > > Following the smaller meanderings of the rivers:
> > > >
> > > > Red River -- 726 miles
> > > > East Panhandle line -- 133.6 miles
> > > > North Panhandle line -- 167 miles (minus 2.2 miles TXNM)
> > > >
> > > > Total -- 1024.4 miles
> > > >
> > > > Source: Texas Almanac
> > > >
> > > > --Joe
> > > >
> > > > (Will post some pics of my visit to Copperhill TN/McCaysville GA
> soon.
> > > > The border runs through a grocery store and a church)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> >
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
> --
> Brian J. Butler
> BJB Software, Inc.
> 508-429-1441
> bjbutler@...
> http://www.bjbsoftware.com
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>