NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Sexagesimal (was Newbie - Variation..)
From: Trevor Kenchington
Date: 2002 Feb 17, 09:21 -0400
From: Trevor Kenchington
Date: 2002 Feb 17, 09:21 -0400
Brian Whatcott wrote: > Actually, it is not quite correct to suppose one can strictly refer to > 0 degrees AND 360 degrees. Of course. But we can strictly refer to both zero degrees and 359.99999..... Truncating at either 1 or 359 degrees would loose one 360th of the circle. A small and academic point, perhaps, but one that even a non-mathematical biologist can understand. Trevor Kenchington -- Trevor J. Kenchington PhD Gadus@iStar.ca Gadus Associates, Office(902) 889-9250 R.R.#1, Musquodoboit Harbour, Fax (902) 889-9251 Nova Scotia B0J 2L0, CANADA Home (902) 889-3555 Science Serving the Fisheries http://home.istar.ca/~gadus