[Roger Hunter]

(02-10-2017, 01:28 AM)Duffy Wrote:

(02-10-2017, 12:45 AM)Roger Hunter Wrote:

(02-10-2017, 12:41 AM)Duffy Wrote: Roger

When you said in an earlier post, you took a random quake every 20.5 days to use as signal, am I assuming correctly that these would similarly represent crosses on a map in longitude and latitude.  If so, does this mean you can input any independent co-ordinate in your program that you have desire to test, and run it against a 90 degree distance ? 


Duffy

Duffy;

I can enter any two lat/lon pairs and get the distance in degrees.

Why?

Roger

Roger; 

My results showed 77' 21' W - 20' 59' S as being the most prominent bearing.  And 154' 29' E - 3' 10' S as one of the least prominent of those that actually got a hit.  I thought it might be interesting to see if this trend remained the same between 1973 and the present.  You may recall, I reported here approx 6 weeks ago that 77' W was not showing on my white board, yet I was surprised to find it figured most in my test. It is of little consequence here because one is proven, and one is not ... but I am still fishing for clues why this might be ...

Late here now, so to be continued.


Duffy

Duffy;

I compared all 72006 quakes to your 2 locations and found 854 hits in the 0.5 degree band centered on 90 degrees.

That's about 1% of the quakes with the first point getting 753 hits to the 101 hits on the second location.

Roger