[Roger Hunter]

(02-10-2017, 05:06 PM)Duffy Wrote:

(02-10-2017, 04:37 PM)Duffy Wrote: Roger 

Quote:Forgive me but I'm not sure how I am able to make a comparison with these numbers. In your last run, 77' W had 753 sunrise/sunset hits using a 0.5 degree band. If I am making this out correctly, this run is saying 81' W  had 498 sunrise/sunset hits using a 0.25 degree band,  and 73' W had no sunrise/sunset hits, but had 224 moon hits.  I'm confused why the moon has entered the equation when I thought this was an analysis of the terminator zones.

No, my fault in not making things clear. Sun and Moon should not be there. It's the first and second locations as entered in the program.

 

Quote:And do these results indicate that because you used a 0.25 range, there are no hits between 0.25 and 0.5 ?.

Range is really half the band width because the program looks for things from (radius - range) to (radius + range.)
 

Quote: You used 0.5 last time, if I want to get a true picture, should the bands not be the same ?

Yes.

Quote:I hold my hand up at being dumb with probability or odds ... am I doing the same thing with this ? 

No, my fault as I said.

I rewrote the program to allow two locations to be entered and analyzed. I noticed one always got more hits than the other and thought it might always be the first one so I reversed them and the second entered got the most so it's the actual geographic location involved.

Roger

Quote:I forgot to mention, I appear to be accumulating new data, 7th Feb 10:55 ut ... 8th Feb 07:14 ut ... 9th Feb 15:32 ut. If I accumulate more, do you have any objection to this being used in conjunction with your selection ?

No but I wouldn't know what to do with it since we're working with location, not time.

Roger

Duffy