It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: james1947
There are billions of stars in our Milky Way.
Surely no matter what stars you draw on a map, something is going to match up somewhere.
originally posted by: roadgravel
Except that her map may not be all that accurate to begin with.
If that is the case then it could "match" to a different place.
edit:
But that is a great effort in research.
originally posted by: Blue Shift
originally posted by: james1947
[...] and that the source was extraterrestrial.
That's quite an assumption.
the ET's should work with 2 star maps
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: manuelram16
the ET's should work with 2 star maps
Because a single three dimensional map would be beyond their capability to deal with?
originally posted by: Archivalist
Your experiment is incomplete.
If you want this to be convincing you need a standard population and probability control.
You need to have people attempt to draw star maps, randomly.
Then try to match those "star maps" and see if you can get matches with any reasonable probability that approaches the Betty Hill percentage.
If random population sample pulls are not even close,then your argument is convincing.
Until you do that, this is just a neat idea.
-- from my white paper draft
We want the first 25 terms of 2826 factorial (2826 is the number of stars returned for our search): result = 1.7102778772488529E+86. So there are 1.71e+86 combinations of 25 stars, there are also 46,656,000 possible angles to view from. The probability of the match is: 1 chance in 7.978176e+93 or 1.25e-94.