Stars of the Hill Map

a reply to: dragonridr

Try again...this time think GUI...

a reply to: tanka418

Again useless real time calculations would be useless other than for someone to go oh that's pretty again computers are only concerned with coordinates. A GUI is nothing more than an attempt to let you see what a computer is doing. By the time the computer plots all the points the map is useless for navigation. Since in order to set a course new calculations are needed. Now if you believe they just wanted to show her thr current state if the galaxy fine. But for what pupose to impress the stupid monkey they kidnapped?? It was obviously beyond her since even in her description she truly didn't understand what she was shown since she couldn't even tell them where earth was on the map. And she couldn't refrence a single constellation. And had no point of refrence what so ever. Could have just showed her a map of NY subways for all she knew.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: tanka418

Again useless real time calculations would be useless other than for someone to go oh that's pretty again computers are only concerned with coordinates. A GUI is nothing more than an attempt to let you see what a computer is doing. By the time the computer plots all the points the map is useless for navigation.

Wow...you have completely misconstrued and over thought this...

And I'm glad you are so "up" on computers, applications design/architecture, etc...you really got that GUI thingy nailed!

Ya know...I believe I said some where, near here, that this image wasn't used for navigation, but as a tool for such things as mission planning, and other tasks that required access to the database concerning a selected area of the territory...

Do you even know what a "GUI" is?

a reply to: tanka418

I believe I said some where, near here, that this image wasn't used for navigation, but as a tool for such things as mission planning, and other tasks that required access to the database concerning a selected area of the territory.

So when a naval vessel here on Earth is planning a mission, which chart do they use?



This?



Or this?

Which chart resembles Betty's drawing in terms of style?

a reply to: tanka418

Tell ya what...I'll look at your projection of the template onto stars, but, don't hole your breath on being successful. Probability is not on your side.

No, you will simply find arbitrary reasons to reject it, as you already have with two other examples.

a reply to: tanka418

Did you know that Betty's map is necessarily not to scale? Perhaps you need to pay a bit close attention to some of this. Betty's map (template) was drawn via post hypnotic suggestion, on notebook paper...it was never intended to be anything other than a loose representation of what she observed.

Excellent! That gives us all the wiggle room we need, doesn't it? If you are not limited by scale and exact relationships, there is no need for me to be limited either. In that case, allow me to present the DJW001-Hill star map:



Note how all of the stars in this interpretation match all the stars in Betty's template!



Astonishing, isn't it? The odds against such a perfect match have been calculated at 1.7E+86! Of course, all the background stars were not on the aliens' map for various logical reasons. Some of them did not have planets, some were too old, some were too young, some didn't have a service station with clean restrooms....

ETA: Oh yes, as for the 25th star: just go ahead and pick one at random.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: tanka418

Did you know that Betty's map is necessarily not to scale? Perhaps you need to pay a bit close attention to some of this. Betty's map (template) was drawn via post hypnotic suggestion, on notebook paper...it was never intended to be anything other than a loose representation of what she observed.

Excellent! That gives us all the wiggle room we need, doesn't it? If you are not limited by scale and exact relationships, there is no need for me to be limited either. In that case, allow me to present the DJW001-Hill star map:

Note how all of the stars in this interpretation match all the stars in Betty's template!

Astonishing, isn't it? The odds against such a perfect match have been calculated at 1.7E+86! Of course, all the background stars were not on the aliens' map for various logical reasons. Some of them did not have planets, some were too old, some were too young, some didn't have a service station with clean restrooms....

ETA: Oh yes, as for the 25th star: just go ahead and pick one at random.

Wow...you sure did something there...too bad we can't tell exactly what!

How about you finish your wee exercise and give us the names of those stars...

And for the 25th star...did you know that even IF you produce your 24 stars successfully, you still need the 25th, and that it can't be random? You should have figured this out right away, appears you didn't.

That 25th star...your point of view...you will need to specify it as well...

That you might find it a bit difficult; so for now we can settle for you specifying which of the Hipparcos stars yo have chosen for your demonstration...(your 24 stars)

Remember there are constraints on those stars...so lets see that list!

By the way; I rejected nothing on arbitrary grounds...but you have to believe that so that your notions remain intact...guess you weren't paying attention when I explained "WHY" those others weren't acceptable...your bad.

a reply to: DJW001

I actually see another match in the top right corner it's just upside down.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: DJW001

I actually see another match in the top right corner it's just upside down.

Specify the star ID's and we can see if it is actually a match...

I'm betting that neither your nor DJW001 has found a real match. But, we simply can't tell yet as the stars are not identified...

But then again; I am doubting that either of you has any idea what the criteria for a star is in this context...

a reply to: DJW001

I made this mistake early on in the thread, if you require the stars to be close to one another as if jumping from one to another in exploration, it changes things drastically.

If they also need to be able to support life(Im not sure this should be a condition, but perhaps)
If it also needs to include our sun in the picture

The odds no doubt start shrinking, how much, Im not sure either.

originally posted by: DJW001

Your image seems a bit...wrong! Why is it backwards?!!!?


By IAU and Sky & Telescope magazine (Roger Sinnott & Rick Fienberg) - www.iau.org..., CC BY 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org...

Can you explain this?

a reply to: tanka418

Your image seems a bit...wrong! Why is it backwards?!!!?

What difference does it make? You challenged me to connect a random series of dots in such a way as to match the "template." I chose to use random stars.

a reply to: DJW001


The difference is whether or no your base is real...since what you provided doesn't match space...


And, I'm waiting for that list of names...without it...you have nothing!

a reply to: tanka418

Specify the star ID's and we can see if it is actually a match...

What difference does it make? Imposing your arbitrary template on random points has been accomplished.

I'm betting that neither your nor DJW001 has found a real match. But, we simply can't tell yet as the stars are not identified...

Those are not stars, they are ink spots on a chart. That is all that matters.

But then again; I am doubting that either of you has any idea what the criteria for a star is in this context...

Why don't you choose a set of stars that have been selected by you to meet your arbitrary criteria and see if you can force your "template" on it? Wait, that's exactly what you did.

originally posted by: tanka418
a reply to: DJW001


The difference is whether or no your base is real...since what you provided doesn't match space...


And, I'm waiting for that list of names...without it...you have nothing!

No, it is you who have nothing. I have proven that your "template" can be imposed on randomness. Any order in your solution is the result of your cherry picking. QED.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: DJW001

I actually see another match in the top right corner it's just upside down.

i was originally thinking of filling this chart with patterns of all sizes, like one of those "find the presidents in the picture" puzzles:

a reply to: tanka418

By the way; I rejected nothing on arbitrary grounds...but you have to believe that so that your notions remain intact...guess you weren't paying attention when I explained "WHY" those others weren't acceptable.

Do you have the ETs' Policy and Operations manual in your possession? All the criteria you imposed were based on your own opinion:

You insisted the stars be close together. Why? A civilization advanced enough to make repeat trips between distant stars might not be limited by what we understand of the space-time continuum. In fact, they would need to be able to manipulate space-time to make such voyages possible. If you can manipulate space-time, distance starts to become irrelevant.

You rejected several candidate stars because of their spectral type. Your thinking is stuck in the 1970s, when the writers of Astronomy Magazine had no idea how frequently planets were formed with stars. We now know that planets seem to be an almost universal by-product of stellar formation. Every star has its habitable zone, so your aliens would not need to pick and choose the way you assume.

a reply to: DJW001

Marjorie Fish had the same criticism of the Atterberg map, that the stars were not of significance. Its a debatable point.

Certainly the map only has value if it shows the alien exploration starting with their home planet. There is really no telling what kind of constraints the technology they use has as far as space travel, if they are limited, the map makes sense.

If the map does match up, Im still looking for an online 3d map to verify, I would say at the very least it is a remarkable coincidence, maybe even too good to be a fluke.

If you dont agree(or think it reasonably possible) that the template needs to include the following, no doubt it has no significance at all.

-the stars need to be close to one another as if jumping from one to another in exploration
-our sun in the map
-stars of significance(Im not sure this would necessarily means it has to have life, but maybe)

originally posted by: DJW001

Those are not stars, they are ink spots on a chart. That is all that matters.

Why don't you choose a set of stars that have been selected by you to meet your arbitrary criteria and see if you can force your "template" on it? Wait, that's exactly what you did.

Well now, I'm not sure IF you simply don't understand what I'm doing here, though, it is highly probable that you do, or if you are just a fraud!

Either way...you are completely wrong...

Now perhaps you might want to revise your views and comments...

Actually probability kind of suggests that you are a fraud, intentionally trying to deceive with fake data...

And, IF you had done this right (correctly) I would have shut the "F" up and gone on my way...but for what ever sick reason you may have, you insist on attempting to ridicule me, and deliberately confuse everybody with your fraudulent data.

So DJW001 time for you to apologize and go on about your way...

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: tanka418

By the way; I rejected nothing on arbitrary grounds...but you have to believe that so that your notions remain intact...guess you weren't paying attention when I explained "WHY" those others weren't acceptable.

Do you have the ETs' Policy and Operations manual in your possession? All the criteria you imposed were based on your own opinion:

You insisted the stars be close together. Why? A civilization advanced enough to make repeat trips between distant stars might not be limited by what we understand of the space-time continuum. In fact, they would need to be able to manipulate space-time to make such voyages possible. If you can manipulate space-time, distance starts to become irrelevant.

You rejected several candidate stars because of their spectral type. Your thinking is stuck in the 1970s, when the writers of Astronomy Magazine had no idea how frequently planets were formed with stars. We now know that planets seem to be an almost universal by-product of stellar formation. Every star has its habitable zone, so your aliens would not need to pick and choose the way you assume.

Ya know...this whole post shows that you have no idea what you're talking about!

My thinking is "stuck in the 1970's" because I reject a star on spectral class? Do you have any idea what that spclass says about a star? No, obviously not...

Oh and by the way; we are talking "CLASS" here and not "TYPE" they are actually quite different when talking about stars.

So here is he deal...you go an actually read my paper, it attempts to explain "WHY" stars of some spectral classes are unsuited for the kinds of life we are looking for. For instance a Class "A" star, like Sirius. Not a good candidate for advanced life...do you know why? I bet not!!!

Did you know that with slight improvements to current Terrestrial technologies; a trip to Zeta Reticuli might be possible for a young crew? They probably would have a one way trip, but, they could easily get there without any "novel" science or technology...or perhaps a "Bot"...