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: james1947
It is kind of beyond the scope of this format to attempt to explain how a third party algorithm works. But, if you want to find out, aforgenet.com... has the C# source code (its open source), that will tell you very definitively "how" it does it's thing.
No. I don't know how to communicate this idea to y'all; that Betty's drawing is only an approximation of a group (configuration) of stars that she saw on an extraterrestrial monitor. It can not be a perfect (100%) match to the real world...I've shown you the probability of that event. Yet y'all seem to insist that there must be an exact match.
Well, what can I say; if the software performs as intended then it is working.
Since I use the same data as Celestia, then the only other issue would be the 3D engine; Poser has a very well proven engine (Poser has been around since the 1990's).
Oh, and, as a "self-taught programmer" do you think you verify your work any better than I, a retired professional, do?
Just askin...
originally posted by: ArMaP
It's another part of the system, so it should also be confirmed that it is working was desired for this specific situation.
I don't know, you haven't told us a thing about the way you tested for false positive results from your system. Being a "retired professional" means very little if you have a confirmation bias, so if you want to present your work as a kind of scientific work you should present all your data and explain your method in detail, so anyone can replicate it and confirm (or not) independently your conclusions.
PS: a self-taught programmer can also be a professional, it only means he/she didn't have academic education on that subject.
originally posted by: james1947
Poser is a mature commercial product that is used across a variety of industry. It's major competitors are Maya, Daz3D (on either side...) It is suitable for 3D work on everything from TV commercials, to movies, to the Medical Industry.
It most assuredly performs as expected / required in this instance.
False positive...when you find a way to do that, you let me know, I can find a whole industry that want to know how...lol
Confirmation bias...I should be insulted!!! Seriously, just how, short of explicit code, does one put confirmation bias into software?
Actually, yes, I do want this work taken as a scientific work; however, that wee bit about; presenting all my data, and methods...I did exactly THAT!
originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
In reference to her map, everything Betty spoke about or drew is exclusively human.
originally posted by: james1947
That's a statement you cannot prove...
originally posted by: james1947
Actually this isn't a match at all! You are using only 12 of 25 points in the pattern (template).
originally posted by: james1947
It is beyond the scope of both my paper, and this thread to educate y'all on Computer Vision, and "Template Matching", but, here is a pointer in the right direction.
I also think your map is a better match visually.
originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
Here's your map in comparison to Betty's, then mine above with the background removed and in black & white below yours:
See how you can match many things? I believe mine is a better match.
Here is an example where we can compare a visual match to numbers generated by a computer, for how well data points match a straight line prediction:
I enjoy researching but I have no interest in reading up on computer vision and template matching because your map isn't a match on a visual level. There's nothing to get excited about.
originally posted by: ArMaP
If I thought you did I wouldn't have asked all these questions.
originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
Here's your map in comparison to Betty's, then mine above with the background removed and in black & white below yours:
See how you can match many things? I believe mine is a better match.
I think you're being dishonest in your assertion that you've found evidence of extraterrestrial visitation.
One more comment- I've shown you that Betty mentioned several times that the map she saw contained stars and planets. Why doesn't your map have any planets displayed as Betty's map does? I'm still waiting for you to give a reason. Your map is nonsense without them.
originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
a reply to: Arbitrageur
Yeah, we need to take into account the entire Hill incident. We have both written and visual information to study. This story isn't a small 5 minute portion of this map. You can't cherrypick and obsess on only one part because it best suits your own belief.
I've been down this road with james1947 under all of his usernames. I've learned it's pointless to argue the map with him because he's not looking for someone to challenge it. He's looking to convince others he's right like he's done himself. The sad part is that he will continue this delusion.
Where does Betty mention planets on her map? Seriously? You're going to try that strategy again, feigning confusion? You see it as well as anyone else does. It's a weak defense james1947. You say your map does show planets, then in the same post ask where Betty shows planets. Huh?
You can't respond to me logically when faced with a logical question. You can only argue "technical" garble when faced with technical questions. Can you not see you're favoring this connection and making excuses in order to make it fit your belief? You don't want to address anything outside of the map because you know your map will fall apart.
Go on believing you've shown an extraterrestrial map and trying to prove it.
With you now acting like you don't understand, I'm done wasting energy on this.
originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
I've been down this road with james1947 under all of his usernames. I've learned it's pointless to argue the map with him because he's not looking for someone to challenge it. He's looking to convince others he's right like he's done himself. The sad part is that he will continue this delusion.
originally posted by: james1947
What I see is a Graphical User Interface displaying selected stars, with one star system expanded to its first level.
originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
originally posted by: james1947
What I see is a Graphical User Interface displaying selected stars, with one star system expanded to its first level.
That could be the case, there's no reason to deny it.
But what are the odds of Betty Hill recreating a star map freehand from what she remembered to 99% accuracy?
That's the only unbelievable part of the whole story.
-- from my white paper
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.
PDF The Hill Report page 9
The heavy black lines indicated trade routes between planets; some of these went from one planet to another in a series of lines. Light lines were routes to planets or stars occasionally visited. Broken lines were expeditions or exploration trips to distant bodies.
he did ask questions, what do vegetables look like? My favorite one? Squash, what did it look like, how do we eat it.