sheesh, jeffies, are you really as dense as you are telling us? In other
words, are you so dense you don't even understand you are dense?

or are you a pig of a sophist?

What part of "math problem" do you not understand?

You don't have to be embarrassed that you don't understand "set and drift"
problems; all you have to do is take a Power Squadron course - the nice folks
in
the blue jackets have a special version that doesn't require any "math."



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
jeffies, you seem totally incapable of rational discussion. Everything was
in
there, but displayed so that the math was in the background where it
belonged.

it was not a question on a CG Master's test, that needed -- to pass the
test --
an answer out to 1,000 decimal places. It was a question of How rather
than
What.

See? even now, this moment, you are so confused you are unable to
understand
the two paragraphs above.

Sorry, Jaxie, it was a was a well posed math problem; a variant of the
classic
"set and drift" problem. The fact that you don't recognize it, let alone
have
no idea how to solve it, is pretty pathetic. The fact that you don't even
appreciate Donal's approach as a solution cast considerable doubt on
whether
you've ever learned the rudiments of piloting or navigation. Its really
looking
like you just make this stuff up.

You get one point for a fair guess, but in sum, still a failing grade.



"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
it was a well posed mathematical problem.

jeffie, the assumptions were just assumptions, therefore the answer can
be
no
more accurate than the product of the least accurate assumptions.

You
ignored the complicating issue and solved a simpler case.

There was no complicating issue. It was nothing but assumptions to
start
with.
I dealt with the simpler case of a 90* shift in course rather than a
100*
shift because while the concept was unchanged, the math became more
simple
and
thus did not stand out from its rightful place in the background.

You were 10% off in
the speed and 5 degrees off in the current direction.

there was no speed and no direction. It was just a question as to "how
could
it happen?". you solved precisely to arrive at a vagueness.

You the ignored the
second part because it required some actual math.

I left the second part because it came to the same conclusion.


Donal solved both problems
using a proper navigational method,

there is no "proper navigational method", for the question was "how
could
it
happen?"

though I think his accuracy could have been
better.

you mean his *precision* could have been better. His accuracy could not
improve because the problem started with inaccurate data.

I simply provided the proper mathematical solution.

there is not "proper mathematical solution" to assumptions.

I sorry if a bit of trig is
beyond you.

beyond me? *you* were the one who didn't notice the trig was still
there,
but
presented in a fashion to keep it in the background where it belonged.

BTW, given the numbers you provided, why do you think this was "an
eddy"
and
not
the Gulf Stream itself?

because, the shift to an eastward course happened quickly enough so that
the
"averaging" algarithm on two gps's -- each from a different manufacturer
--
caught the course change at the nearly the very same instant. I looked
up
to
say my gps went idiotic maybe a half second before the other guy looked
to
say
the same thing of his gps. the Gulf Stream would have to very
dramatically
change course in a very short period of time. Eddies, on the other
hand,
do
form quickly and are much smaller so it is easier to sail in or out of
one
in
a
short distance. Keep in mind that we did not change our heading, nor
did
we
notice a change in cloud position relative to the mast/sails.

From: felton
Date: 3/2/2004 12:23 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:


I think ...


seems difficult to prove, felton, but if you say you do, well whatever.

Sorry jaxie, a math problem is a math problem. If you can't do the math, you
could just admit it. Its no shame, lots people have difficulty with math.

And don't worry, you can still enjoy going out on the water. Just make sure you
have someone qualified to navigate on board, and don't worry yourself too much
that you don't understand what they're doing.


"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
sheesh, jeffies, are you really as dense as you are telling us? In other
words, are you so dense you don't even understand you are dense?

or are you a pig of a sophist?

What part of "math problem" do you not understand?

let me guess jeffies, *you* define it as a math problem because you remember
(totally unlikely) or know how to look the formula to find the third side of a
non-right angle triangle if the other two sides are known --- AND YOU ARE SO
PROUD OF YOURSELF FOR THAT!!!!! ---, yet ...

.... you lack the intelligence to consider the question in the context in which
it was asked.

Well, good for you, jefffies, you are one bright mother for being able to look
up a never-used-by-anyone formula, AND are are such a bright mother that you
are totally beyond caring about the question, only the precision of your
inaccurate answer.

congrats, jeffies. you sure are one bright mother. We are so glad for your
company here what with all your ability to answer a trivial part of a larger
question and then to keep us all on our toes by telling us the trivial answer
defines the whole.

to the rest of the ng, jeffies doesn't have a clew what the paragraphs above
say. don't tell him. let dumb cluck think he has solved the world.



Sorry jaxie, a math problem is a math problem. If you can't do the math, you
could just admit it. Its no shame, lots people have difficulty with math.

And don't worry, you can still enjoy going out on the water. Just make sure
you
have someone qualified to navigate on board, and don't worry yourself too
much
that you don't understand what they're doing.


"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
sheesh, jeffies, are you really as dense as you are telling us? In other
words, are you so dense you don't even understand you are dense?

or are you a pig of a sophist?

What part of "math problem" do you not understand?

"JAXAshby" wrote in message ...
let me guess jeffies, *you* define it as a math problem

I define it as a "Math Problem" because the subject of the thread is "Math Problem."


because you remember
(totally unlikely)

You forget the I spent 6 years programming navigation for NASA spacecraft. High school trigonometry
is not that difficult for me.

or know how to look the formula to find the third side of a
non-right angle triangle if the other two sides are known --- AND YOU ARE SO
PROUD OF YOURSELF FOR THAT!!!!! ---, yet ...

Its not that hard. Its on page 325 of the current Bowditch. That's a book, jaxie. The one you
haven't read.



... you lack the intelligence to consider the question in the context in which
it was asked.

The context was as a "Math Problem." Look at the subject of this thead.


Well, good for you, jefffies, you are one bright mother for being able to look
up a never-used-by-anyone formula, AND are are such a bright mother that you
are totally beyond caring about the question, only the precision of your
inaccurate answer.

The question was a "Math Problem." If you are unable to do a "Math Problem" why do you keep
contributing to this thread?


congrats, jeffies. you sure are one bright mother. We are so glad for your
company here what with all your ability to answer a trivial part of a larger
question and then to keep us all on our toes by telling us the trivial answer
defines the whole.

I'll bet there were a few people out there whose memory of trig was refreshed a bit. But most
mariners would probably be better served know Donal's method, or some variant of it. Had his answer
been closer to the right answer I might not have added mine.

Remember Jaxie, you not only got a inaccurate answer to the first question, you didn't bother to
answer the second. And making a guess that's 5 degrees off is not very good navigation. And then
defending it is just plane stupid. Buts its what we expect from you, jaxie.


to the rest of the ng, jeffies doesn't have a clew what the paragraphs above
say. don't tell him. let dumb cluck think he has solved the world.



Sorry jaxie, a math problem is a math problem. If you can't do the math, you
could just admit it. Its no shame, lots people have difficulty with math.

And don't worry, you can still enjoy going out on the water. Just make sure
you
have someone qualified to navigate on board, and don't worry yourself too
much
that you don't understand what they're doing.


"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
sheesh, jeffies, are you really as dense as you are telling us? In other
words, are you so dense you don't even understand you are dense?

or are you a pig of a sophist?

What part of "math problem" do you not understand?

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...
Your accuracy was only slightly better than jaxie's guess. I would think
you'd
aspire to better than that. Actually, that would probably not be good
enough to
pass the USCG chartwork test.

I'd make sure that I was sober if I were taking a test.


Regards


Donal
--

I define it as a "Math Problem" because the subject of the thread is "Math
Problem."

and that proves my statement that you did not understand the question. It
could have been called "Grapefruit" without changing the question -- and answer
-- at all.



You forget the I spent 6 years programming navigation for NASA spacecraft.

no you didn't "spend 6 years programming navigation". you may have spent time
coding nav programs, but that is not hardly "programming navigation". a good
coder -- and everyone else within sight of the code -- knows the difference.
Only a hack coder trying to to lay the cocktail waitress would claim to be
"programming navigation".

High school trigonometry
is not that difficult for me.

It isn't difficult for anyone. That is why it is taught in high school.

Its on page 325 of the current Bowditch.

so, you did look it up rather than recall it from memory. so much for
"programming navigation" for NASA.

The context was as a "Math Problem." Look at the subject of this thead.

no, the context was "Grapefruit". Look at the subject of the thread.

If you are unable to do a "Math Problem" why do you keep
contributing to this thread?

I solved the actual problem -- in my head without looking up any math -- within
a couple minutes of the original posting, and posted an explanation that keep
the math in it proper place in the background. It was not a math problem, but
rather a concept problem. Lower life forms have a hard time dealing with
concepts.

I'll bet there were a few people out there whose memory of trig was refreshed
a bit.

for what purpose? To show that you could look up a math formula used by no
one? Besides, you didn't need the trig to get the answer. *you* used the
trig, but no one else was required to.

Remember Jaxie, you not only got a inaccurate answer to the first question,
you didn't bother to
answer the second.

you dumb cluck, jeffies. "a little over 7 knots" IS the right answer when the
course shift is 90* rather than 100*. In fact, the EXACT number is Sq Rt 50.
To this moment you have no idea why that is true.

And making a guess that's 5 degrees off is not very good navigation.

it wasn't a navigation question, jeffies. It was a concept question.

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
I define it as a "Math Problem" because the subject of the thread is "Math
Problem."

and that proves my statement that you did not understand the question. It
could have been called "Grapefruit" without changing the question -- and
answer
-- at all.


Its was called a "math problem" and its was posed as a "math problem." You
couldn't answer it.




You forget the I spent 6 years programming navigation for NASA spacecraft.

no you didn't "spend 6 years programming navigation". you may have spent time
coding nav programs, but that is not hardly "programming navigation".
a good
coder -- and everyone else within sight of the code -- knows the difference.

Tell us the difference, please.

Only a hack coder trying to to lay the cocktail waitress would claim to be
"programming navigation".

High school trigonometry
is not that difficult for me.

It isn't difficult for anyone. That is why it is taught in high school.

If you took it you might know how to solve the problem.


Its on page 325 of the current Bowditch.

so, you did look it up rather than recall it from memory. so much for
"programming navigation" for NASA.

Actually I just looked up Bowditch for that post. For the first post I simply
googled "law of cosines" and had the formula in less than a second. I certainly
didn't want to post the wrong answer, like you. Frankly, I like spending a few
minutes working out trig or physics problems. I did it for a living for 25
years, and now that I'm retired I miss it a bit.

Had I been on the boat I probably would have done it on a chart. You probably
don't know that method either, do you?


The context was as a "Math Problem." Look at the subject of this thead.

no, the context was "Grapefruit". Look at my head.

I couldn't have said it better.


If you are unable to do a "Math Problem" why do you keep
contributing to this thread?

I solved the actual problem -- in my head without looking up any math --
within
a couple minutes of the original posting, and posted an explanation that keep
the math in it proper place in the background. It was not a math problem, but
rather a concept problem. Lower life forms have a hard time dealing with
concepts.

Then why was it called a "math problem"? I think everyone understands that it
would take a current from the SW to push you E when your course is S.
Obviously, anyone as slow as you could figure that much out. The question was
exactly what was the current, and what happens if you change the numbers a bit?


I'll bet there were a few people out there whose memory of trig was refreshed
a bit.

for what purpose? To show that you could look up a math formula used by no
one? Besides, you didn't need the trig to get the answer. *you* used the
trig, but no one else was required to.

Donal was the only person besides to even attempt both problems. He did it
graphically, which is appropriate. I worked it out with trig to double check
Donal's work.



Remember Jaxie, you not only got a inaccurate answer to the first question,
you didn't bother to
answer the second.

you dumb cluck, jeffies. "a little over 7 knots" IS the right answer when the
course shift is 90* rather than 100*. In fact, the EXACT number is Sq Rt 50.
To this moment you have no idea why that is true.

So the problem posted was too hard for you so you simply gave the answer to a
problem that you knew. How special.

You still didn't answer the second problem.


And making a guess that's 5 degrees off is not very good navigation.

it wasn't a navigation question, jeffies. It was a concept question.

Keep telling yourself that jaxie. You don't need to know how to navigate, you
just need to know the "concept."

jeffie, listen to me. every last person who reads this ng and who has actually
studied physics or math KNOWS that your claim of a degree (BS, let alone BS) is
bogus just by reading your nonsense below. utter nonsense, to everyone who has
studied even one semestrer in what you claim to have a degree in.

Your complete lack of familiarity of the underlying and overlying concepts
makes a lie of your claim.

Discussing concepts with you is like discussing auto mechanics with an art
history major.

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
donny, I don't saying your answer was wrong. it is jeffies who says every
answer given but his narrowly defined, case-specific answer is wrong.

however, you still can't have an "opinion" on the sq rt of 2.


I *do* have an opinion about the square root of 2.

Unlike the square root of 50, I think that the square root of 2 has some
practical applications.


Are you saying that you can quote some practical applications for the square
root of 50? If not, then why would you bother forming an opinion about such
a useless figure?


Regards


Donal
--