Subject: Re: American State Boundaries
Date: May 08, 2003 @ 23:27
Author: acroorca2002 ("acroorca2002" <orc@...>)
Prev    Post in Topic    Next [All Posts]
Prev    Post in Time    Next


hahaha
see there you go again kevin
imagining you are talking about reality
& even pretending to walk the right high water line of the red river
all the way from oksw to aroktx
hahahahaha
except of course for the short geodetic stretches across lake
texhoma & adjoining aroktx

for i will give you these 2 for free
so you wont even have to worry about walking on water for them
being as i am generous

but i suppose next you will be wanting to claim the same
geodetic exemption for walking on water across the mouths of
all the right bank tributaries too
& across all the other dam lakes not geodetically allowable
or perhaps by then you will have mastered walking on water &
water lines anyway
in your dreams

or did you mean someone else was to do the walking

or will you just ascend the banks of all the tributaries until you
can finally ford them

but of course you would have to turn off your pedometer when
you did this
or youd be artificially padding your border measurement too
& i dont think i would stand for that any more than you would
tho your proposed or supposed oktx walk would then surely
come out longer than canv that way
bravo

or maybe you will just water ski over these many gaps & sacrifice
their pedometer value & still hope to come in ahead of canv
for you figure youve got miles & miles to give away anyway
hahaha

still in your dreams i suppose you do too


& it is much more streamlined anyway to just do something sort
of like you are proposing than what you are really proposing

or have we been here before too


anyway we really should change the subject already but i just
cant help wondering if you wouldnt help us to do this by being
good enough to really take
or find someone else who would be good enough to take
that pedometer hike you are urging us to credit you for
because after all this discussion i for one really would like to
know the definitive human scale answer to this question
assuming you are really human & real enough to pull off at least
a creditable semblance of what you are proposing to us
which of course i would be willing to assume
in the interests of truth & beauty & reality

or will you only be giving us an approximately real human
approximation of what might have happened if you or a human or
nonhuman proxy really had performed this human measurement
for all of us also human witnesses
in the name of reality

--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Flynn, Kevin"
<flynnk@r...> wrote:
> Believe me, I am not ignorant of the point on the other side of
the
> argument. But human scale is reasonable when asking the
question "What is
> the longest common state boundary?" and the answer would
NOT be CA-NV, but
> OK-TX. That is, if the questioner were really interested in the
comparative
> lengths to see which is longer.
>
> If one were to walk the high water line of the Red River as
defined in the
> legal document setting up OK-TX, in all of its twists and turns
and dried up
> bayous and wherever it went, that person would not be walking
forever. It
> isn't infinite. Measure that path when he gets to the end and
you will have
> a very good human-scale length. The fact that you can then get
an electron
> microscope and measure around molecules in between each
footstep until the
> end of time doesn't make it sound any less silly to say this is
not truly
> longer than CA-NV, which is demonstrably shorter than even
the smallest
> estimate of OK-TX.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian J. Butler [mailto:bjbutler@b...]
> Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 1:44 PM
> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: American State Boundaries
>
>
> On Thursday 08 May 2003 01:17 pm, you wrote:
> I wish you would read Chapter 5 of "The Fractal Geometry of
Nature" by
> Benoit
> M. Mandelbrot, the title of which is "How Long Is the Coast of
Britain?".
> Here is the second paragraph of that chapter:
>
> "There are various ways of evaluating its length more
accurately, and this
> chapter analyzes several of them. The result is most peculiar:
coastline
> length turns out to be an elusive notion that slips between the
fingers of
> one who wants to grasp it. All measurement methods
ultimately lead to the
> conclusion that the typical coastline's length is very large and
so ill
> determined that it is best considered infinite. Hence, if one
wishes to
> compare different coastlines from the viewpoint of their 'extent',
length is
>
> an inadequate concept."
>
> The book, and this chapter in particular, provide a rigorous
mathematical
> basis for what I have been arguing. I understand your point
about "real
> world" measurements, but I think the salient aspect of such
measurements is
> that they are only estimates. From a legal perspective a
sufficiently
> accurate estimate might suffice, but with natural boundaries it
will always
> be possible to improve on the estimated by considering
smaller and smaller
> scales, and when that happens the length of the boundary
increases without
> limit with mathematical certainty. So, at what scale do we lose
interest
> and
> claim it doesn't matter? I don't think you can get off the hook by
claiming
>
> that it is a "human scale" because that is a meaningless term.
For example,
>
> surveying accuracy standards are much more stringent in
Manhattan than in
> rural areas.
>
> So the coastline of Ellis Island could not have been precisely
measured,
> opinions of the even the measurers notwithstanding. But I will
concede that
>
> at some arbitrary level of precision its length can be estimated
and stated.
>
> BJB
>
> > I didn't say it's always an easy task -- following all the bends
and bows
> > of the Red River at OK-TX is a difficult chore -- but the legal
boundary
> > can be measured and is measured in human scale. It's fun
to argue about
> > measuring around a molecule, but c'mon. Don't get lost in
the theory so
> > much that you're immobilized in the real world.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian J. Butler [mailto:bjbutler@b...]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 4:30 AM
> > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: American State Boundaries
> >
> >
> > On Thursday 08 May 2003 02:07 am, you wrote:
> > I seriously doubt that anyone has attempted to measure the
length of the
> > Ellis Island boundary. Why would they? Estimating and
marking its
> > position
> >
> > has value but determining its length is purely academic.
> >
> > Your analogy to the "angels on a pin" argument made me
realize that your
> > devotion to the "definite length theory for fractal boundaries"
is a
> matter
> > of faith for you, and is therefore impervious to logic. Would
you agree?
> >
> > > Please let's not have the "how many angels can dance on
the head of htis
> > > pin" discussion again. We can and do measure natural
borders, and we
> > > don't need an electron microscope to do it. They did
measure around the
> > > presumed 1934 low water line on Ellis Island and there is
a length to
> it.
> > > It is really silly to say that a river that courses, e.g., 10 miles
must
> > > be regarded as infinite in shorelineand equal to the Nile.
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
> --
> Brian J. Butler
> BJB Software, Inc.
> 508-429-1441
> bjbutler@b...
> http://www.bjbsoftware.com
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/