[Roger Hunter]

(01-28-2017, 06:34 PM)Duffy Wrote:

(01-28-2017, 02:53 PM)Roger Hunter Wrote:

(01-28-2017, 12:39 PM)Duffy Wrote: Roger;

Believe me, I don't think your loosing it ... it is more likely that this is in a different context to what you have had experience with, and are struggling to know how to deal with it. In truth, I don't fully understand this either, but the fact is, I posted data that has resulted in showing some kind of inherent link with earthquakes. I have no agenda with this except redemption, and I have no idea where this will lead, so when you ask what exactly am I doing ... then I am posting data, and want somebody to tell me if this has anything to do with earthquakes !  

New moon occurred at 01:19:05 ut, it was followed by a mag 5 in Chile at 01:27:27 ut,  sunset at bearing 100' 51' W - 20' 23' S (18th Jan) occurred at 01:28 ut.  Eight minutes Roger ... it followed with a temporal difference of 8 minutes ! The next 3 quakes have not hit a bearing, the sun is shutting them down as it heads North !

I recall some time ago, jesting with you guy's that if you wanted to find the answer to the earthquake problem, you should be looking up, not down.   I thought it an amusing remark at the time, because naivety with this subject dominated a professional approach ... it doesn't sound as amusing now does it ? 

I'm not shining you on ... so find a way to test this, or it will slip through your fingers !


Duffy

Duffy;

I think a light just turned on. See if this is correct.

1) You get a signal on your screen

>> Not exactly ... but I'll say yes for now, to save complication

2) You find where sunrise/sunset is located at that time

>> No ... I find the exact position of the sun and moon at that time, in longitude and latitude relative to Earth.
      It is sunrise / sunset somewhere in the world every second, how would I know which to choose, and where to look ?

3) The longitudes for sunrise/sunset are flagged as significant locations for future quakes

>>  The longitudes are 180' pole to pole ... the angle of the terminator changes minute by minute over all longitudes ... again, it is sunrise / sunset every second, how would I know which part to flag ?   

4) Any 5+ quake located in any of those 4 longitude bands counts as a hit.
                                                                                                                                                                         >> There have been no hits by any quakes, on any of the selected co-ordinates during the experiments 11 day duration         ... only sunrise / sunset at the same time as 5+ quakes in other parts of the world.  To keep within the bounds of an         exact minute of sunrise time at any of the posted bearings, you are limited to +/- 20 arc minutes of longitude, and           15 arc minutes of latitude due to the angle of the terminator.

5) Same process for the moon.

>> Same as above

If I finally understand it, this means you have 8 significant longitudes per signal and 30 days for a quake to hit one.

>> If my calculations are correct, there are 129, 600 Sq degrees of Earths surface, the data I posted on the 16th                  Jan allows a marginal position of 5 Sq degrees per bearing, which equates to 70 Sq degrees for 16 bearings. On the
     16th and 17th Jan, there were 10 recorded sunrise / sunsets at the exact time 5+ quakes occurred. Up to the 25th          Jan, a further 40 Sq degrees was added making a total of 110 Sq degrees. 

8/360 is a pretty small window but you have a lot of quakes and a lot of time.

>> Ratio of 110 / 129,600 is a very small area, and the duration period of 11 days ... is a very small window !
      Bearing 77' 21' W - 20' 59' S had sunrise / sunset 4 times related to mag 5 quakes in 11 days ... what are the odds           on that happening ?


Duffy
      

Duffy;

Obviously I'm even dumber than I thought.

I got a program converted to the language I use and it runs just fine.

Unfortunately it gives me the sunrise and sunset TIME, not the sun and moon location.

But I see you are using such times somehow. It's that part of your explanation that I get lost.

Please once again, go over it again using words of one syllable so that MAYBE I can understand what you're doing.

Roger