+- Earthwaves Earth Sciences Forum (http://www.earthwaves.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Earthwaves (http://www.earthwaves.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=16)
+--- Forum: Miscellaneous (http://www.earthwaves.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=15)
+--- Thread: RBD Progress 15 / 2 / 2017 (/showthread.php?tid=707)
RE: RBD Progress 15 / 2 / 2017 - Roger Hunter - 02-25-2017
(02-24-2017, 07:26 PM)Duffy Wrote:(02-24-2017, 02:36 PM)Roger Hunter Wrote:(02-24-2017, 01:26 PM)Duffy Wrote: 23rd Feb M 5.6 Eastern New Guinea Region, P.N.G. ........ 15:11:05 utAm I supposed to be doing something with this or is it just "for the record"?
Dawn on bearing 152' 58' W - 1' 27' S (B2) ...... 15:11 ut
Sunset on bearing 47' 56' E - 15' 49' S (B5) ...... 15:12 ut
Sunset on bearing 48' 23' E - 17' 59' S (R22) .... 15:12 ut
Dusk on bearing 67' 48' E - 14' 54' S (R7) ......... 15:11 ut
23rd Feb M 5.0 North of Severnaya Zemlya ..................... 20:13:40 ut
Sunrise on bearing 150' 16' E - 15' 30' N (B6) ... 20:14 ut
Sunset on bearing 28' 49' W - 9' 59' S (B21) ..... 20:14 ut
Sunset on bearing 27' 15' W - 15' 45' S (R3) ..... 20:14 ut
CS on bearing 120' 06 W (R16)
24th Feb M 5.9 Lake Tanganyika, Zambia ........................ 00:32:17 ut
Dawn on bearing 68' 04' E - 13' 45' N (B10) ...... 00:32 ut
24th Feb M 5.0 Southern Peru ........................................ 03:11:40 ut
Dusk on bearing 115' 41' W - 9' 32' S (R23) ...... 03:12 ut
Sunrise on bearing 40' 26' E - 16' 42' S (R1) ..... 03:12 ut
24th Feb M 5.3 South Sandwich Islands Region ............... 05:59:06 ut
Sunset on bearing 171' 25' W - 13' 42' S (B11) .. 05:59 ut
Dawn on bearing 17' 55' W - 17' 52' S (R18) ..... 05:59 ut
Sunset on bearing 175' 45' W - 8' 44' S (D8) ..... 06:00 ut
Dawn on bearing 16' 36' W - 10' 22' S (D11) ..... 05:59 ut
24th Feb M 5.0 Northern Sumatra, Indonesia ................... 08:22:36 ut
CS on bearing 57' 39' E (R17)
24th Feb M 5.0 Manipur, India Region ............................. 12:02:44 ut
Dawn on bearing 108' 53' W - 14' 05' S (B9) ...... 12:03 ut
Dusk on bearing 112' 06' E - 9' 46' S (R19) ........ 12:03 ut
CM on bearing 23' 22' W (D9)
Duffy
Roger
Its the same as the test we ran in January ... do you remember helping me with this ?
Duffy
Duffy;
Yes but not in any detail.
Making some progress on the sun/moon program. Seems the date code isn't working correctly. To get the right answer I have to change the input date. I suspect that some of the things I changed in translating from qbasic to truebasic had a function I didn't know about. Need to find a qbasic manual.
Roger
RE: RBD Progress 15 / 2 / 2017 - Duffy - 02-25-2017
24th Feb M 5.1 Kermadec Islands Region .............................. 16:39:40 ut
Dawn on bearing 175' 45' W - 8' 44' S (D8) ............. 16:39 ut
24th Feb M 6.9 South of Fiji Islands ....................................... 17:28:44 ut
Sunrise on bearing 171' 25' W - 13' 42' S (B11) ........ 17:28 ut
CS on bearing 78' 54' W (B22) (B23) (D12)
24th Feb M 5.9 Fiji Region ..................................................... 23:46:44 ut
Sunset on bearing 78' 11' W - 18' 37' S (B22) ........... 23:46 ut
Sunset on bearing 78' 22' W - 18' 48' S (D12) ........... 23:46 ut
Dawn on bearing 75' 03' E - 14' 54' S (D3) ................ 23:46 ut
25th Feb M 5.0 Kep. Tanimbar, Indonesia ................................ 01:11:38 ut
Sunrise on bearing 71' 32' E - 13' 01' S (B18) ............. 01:11 ut
Sunrise on bearing 77' 55' E - 16' 03' N (R4) .............. 01:11 ut
Sunrise on bearing 70' 07' E - 18' 03' S (R20) ............. 01:12 ut
Dusk on bearing 88' 02' W - 12' 17' N (R10) ............... 01:11 ut
Dusk on bearing 82' 43' W - 12' 46' S (R11) ............... 01:11 ut
25th Feb M 5.2 Tarapaca, Chile ................................................ 02:31:23 ut
Sunset on bearing 120' 54' W - 11' 36' S (R16) ........... 02:31 ut
CM on bearing 126' 53' E (R5)
Roger
You have been persistently vocal through out " Joining The Seismic Dots ", " A Fair Test ", and this thread, they all cover this very same subject. If you are not able to grasp the concept of this test, or more importantly " remember detail " then I fear I have set myself up on a fools errand. I will finish this test tomorrow as planned, but there is very little incentive to take it further !
Duffy
RE: RBD Progress 15 / 2 / 2017 - Roger Hunter - 02-25-2017
(02-25-2017, 01:50 PM)Duffy Wrote: 24th Feb M 5.1 Kermadec Islands Region .............................. 16:39:40 ut
Dawn on bearing 175' 45' W - 8' 44' S (D8) ............. 16:39 ut
24th Feb M 6.9 South of Fiji Islands ....................................... 17:28:44 ut
Sunrise on bearing 171' 25' W - 13' 42' S (B11) ........ 17:28 ut
CS on bearing 78' 54' W (B22) (B23) (D12)
24th Feb M 5.9 Fiji Region ..................................................... 23:46:44 ut
Sunset on bearing 78' 11' W - 18' 37' S (B22) ........... 23:46 ut
Sunset on bearing 78' 22' W - 18' 48' S (D12) ........... 23:46 ut
Dawn on bearing 75' 03' E - 14' 54' S (D3) ................ 23:46 ut
25th Feb M 5.0 Kep. Tanimbar, Indonesia ................................ 01:11:38 ut
Sunrise on bearing 71' 32' E - 13' 01' S (B18) ............. 01:11 ut
Sunrise on bearing 77' 55' E - 16' 03' N (R4) .............. 01:11 ut
Sunrise on bearing 70' 07' E - 18' 03' S (R20) ............. 01:12 ut
Dusk on bearing 88' 02' W - 12' 17' N (R10) ............... 01:11 ut
Dusk on bearing 82' 43' W - 12' 46' S (R11) ............... 01:11 ut
25th Feb M 5.2 Tarapaca, Chile ................................................ 02:31:23 ut
Sunset on bearing 120' 54' W - 11' 36' S (R16) ........... 02:31 ut
CM on bearing 126' 53' E (R5)
Roger
You have been persistently vocal through out " Joining The Seismic Dots ", " A Fair Test ", and this thread, they all cover this very same subject. If you are not able to grasp the concept of this test, or more importantly " remember detail " then I fear I have set myself up on a fools errand. I will finish this test tomorrow as planned, but there is very little incentive to take it further !
Duffy
Duffy;
WOW! Got up on the wrong side of the bed or something?
I'm trying my best to do something to help you, while struggling with family problems and programs that mysteriously fail to work correctly.
Cut me some slack, please.
Roger
RE: RBD Progress 15 / 2 / 2017 - Duffy - 02-25-2017
AH! yes I did, but not by your doing ... we all have problems.
I have been annoyed at myself for shaming you into participating in something you clearly stated was not your main priority. And of course I want and appreciate your help, the last thing I want to do is cause offence. I'm just having trouble determining how you could give definitive reason (several times) why my last test results amounted to the same probability as tossing a coin. But this time, you have asked on two occasions what these numbers are for, you can see from my point of view how confusing this sounds. I am accepting your every word because you are the scientist, I am trying to show you that I believe my hypothesis is worthy of further investigation. The detail in this test has to be analysed with detail from the last test for comparison. If your telling me your not remembering detail, then what am I supposed to think ! I know not of your situation, nor you of mine, but again I am sorry if I caused offence. I am trying to interpret where I stand with this, from words on a screen ... nothing personal intended.
Duffy
RE: RBD Progress 15 / 2 / 2017 - Roger Hunter - 02-26-2017
(02-25-2017, 09:32 PM)Duffy Wrote: AH! yes I did, but not by your doing ... we all have problems.
I have been annoyed at myself for shaming you into participating in something you clearly stated was not your main priority. And of course I want and appreciate your help, the last thing I want to do is cause offence. I'm just having trouble determining how you could give definitive reason (several times) why my last test results amounted to the same probability as tossing a coin. But this time, you have asked on two occasions what these numbers are for, you can see from my point of view how confusing this sounds. I am accepting your every word because you are the scientist, I am trying to show you that I believe my hypothesis is worthy of further investigation. The detail in this test has to be analysed with detail from the last test for comparison. If your telling me your not remembering detail, then what am I supposed to think ! I know not of your situation, nor you of mine, but again I am sorry if I caused offence. I am trying to interpret where I stand with this, from words on a screen ... nothing personal intended.
Duffy
Duffy;
>> I have been annoyed at myself for shaming you into participating in something you clearly stated was not your main priority.
Nonsense. I have no shame!
>> And of course I want and appreciate your help, the last thing I want to do is cause offence. I'm just having trouble determining how you could give definitive reason (several times) why my last test results amounted to the same probability as tossing a coin.
Small samples are generally worthless for determining odds.
>> But this time, you have asked on two occasions what these numbers are for, you can see from my point of view how confusing this sounds.
Multiple possibilities need clarification.
>> I am accepting your every word because you are the scientist,
Bit of a stretch. Government called me a geophysicist but their standards are not that high. I worked in a scientific field, that's all.
>> I am trying to show you that I believe my hypothesis is worthy of further investigation. The detail in this test has to be analysed with detail from the last test for comparison. If your telling me your not remembering detail, then what am I supposed to think ! I know not of your situation, nor you of mine, but again I am sorry if I caused offence.
No, just surprised at the tone. And my memory IS short. I spend a lot of time figuring out what I was doing last week.
>> I am trying to interpret where I stand with this, from words on a screen ... nothing personal intended.
Not to worry. You have something worth investigating. I'm guessing it's just chance, that any random date/time would give similar results, but until I can check out several thousand cases I won't KNOW that's the case. And THAT takes a program, which I'm losing sleep over.
Roger
RE: RBD Progress 15 / 2 / 2017 - Duffy - 02-26-2017
25th Feb M 5.0 Eastern New Guinea, P.N.G. ................... 13:24:40 ut
Sunset on bearing 75' 03' E - 14' 54' S (D3) ..... 13:24 ut
26th Feb M 5.5 Vanuatu Region ..................................... 06:44:21 ut
Dawn on bearing 28' 49' W - 9' 59' S (B21) ...... 06:45 ut
Sunset on bearing 173' 15' E - 11' 38' S (B17) .. 06:45 ut
CM on bearing 78' 04' E (R4)
26th Feb M 5.1 Atacama, Chile ....................................... 08:59:16 ut
Dusk on bearing 158' 52' E - 17' 05' S (B1) ....... 09:00 ut
CS on bearing 48' 24' E (B5) (R22)
Roger
Thank you for being straight with me, the only thing worse than frustration is confusion. I didn't mean to portray tone, grammar has never been one of my finer qualities. I don't know if I can be of any assistance with your program issues, but the data you posted is reminiscent of a scenario I tried last October. I chose a bunch of numbers from the September quake list, and ran them up to new moon Oct 30th. I couldn't get it to work at first because I was testing September latitudes against October terminator zones. I had forgotten to account for the difference in sun/moon latitudes between the two months ... bad example but sometimes the most obvious things are overlooked !
This test period has now expired, so I would like to thank you both for contributing and participating in this unusual experiment. Weather there is anything to be gained from the results is not yet clear. But considering it is sunrise/sunset somewhere in the world at any time, and the quakes during this test period averaged 4 a day ... nearly all but 5 got a hit. I have unfortunately been hindered by a less than average broadband service through out this test, but I will post an accurate evaluation when I get things back to normal.
Duffy
RE: RBD Progress 15 / 2 / 2017 - Roger Hunter - 02-26-2017
(02-26-2017, 04:14 PM)Duffy Wrote: 25th Feb M 5.0 Eastern New Guinea, P.N.G. ................... 13:24:40 ut
Sunset on bearing 75' 03' E - 14' 54' S (D3) ..... 13:24 ut
26th Feb M 5.5 Vanuatu Region ..................................... 06:44:21 ut
Dawn on bearing 28' 49' W - 9' 59' S (B21) ...... 06:45 ut
Sunset on bearing 173' 15' E - 11' 38' S (B17) .. 06:45 ut
CM on bearing 78' 04' E (R4)
26th Feb M 5.1 Atacama, Chile ....................................... 08:59:16 ut
Dusk on bearing 158' 52' E - 17' 05' S (B1) ....... 09:00 ut
CS on bearing 48' 24' E (B5) (R22)
Roger
Thank you for being straight with me, the only thing worse than frustration is confusion. I didn't mean to portray tone, grammar has never been one of my finer qualities. I don't know if I can be of any assistance with your program issues, but the data you posted is reminiscent of a scenario I tried last October. I chose a bunch of numbers from the September quake list, and ran them up to new moon Oct 30th. I couldn't get it to work at first because I was testing September latitudes against October terminator zones. I had forgotten to account for the difference in sun/moon latitudes between the two months ... bad example but sometimes the most obvious things are overlooked !
This test period has now expired, so I would like to thank you both for contributing and participating in this unusual experiment. Weather there is anything to be gained from the results is not yet clear. But considering it is sunrise/sunset somewhere in the world at any time, and the quakes during this test period averaged 4 a day ... nearly all but 5 got a hit. I have unfortunately been hindered by a less than average broadband service through out this test, but I will post an accurate evaluation when I get things back to normal.
Duffy
Duffy;
What you need to know is total number of quakes during the time period, total number of hits, total number of days in the test period, total number of days in prediction windows.
The idea is that if 50% of the days are in predicted windows then you should catch 50% of the quakes.
It's a simple test; too simple really because quakes are not uniformly distributed, but it's a good first step.
I'm still fighting with the program. I find I can get the right answer if I shift the date a couple of days but the date calculation is from a renowned expert in the field and should be correct.
Roger