Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.


A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding

Compose Your Message

Add Images & Files
    Re: Still on LOP's
    From: George Huxtable
    Date: 2002 Apr 21, 21:44 +0100

    I would go along with Chuck Taylor's proposed computer simulation.
    To my mind, it doesn't matter much to the argument whether or not the
    assumed distribution of bearings is Gaussian. But the result may be more
    convincing if we take the distribution to be Gaussian, or very nearly so.
    I wonder if this will help. A surprisingly simple way of simulating a
    Gaussian distribution can be found by summing 12 random numbers, each
    between 0 and 1. The average value of each random number will be 0.5, so
    the sum of 12 such numbers will be a value somewhere near 6.
    Then each simulated member of the Gaussian-distributed set is obtained from-
    bearing error = (sum - 6)*sigma,  where "sum" has been calculated as above.
    "sigma" would be the standard deviation of the simulated bearing, a measure
    of the scatter, for which Chuck has proposed a value of 1 degree.
    The bearing error will be above zero as often as it is below zero, and its
    average value will be zero, as one would expect.
    This is an easy way of replicating, on a computer, Chuck's proposal-
    >For each bearing line, generate a random number from a Normal distribution
    >with mean 0 and standard deviation 1. (This is the distribution associated with
    >the classic bell-shaped curve; about half the time this number will be negative
    >and about half the time positive.) Treat these numbers as the bearing errors in
    I have now convinced myself that, with the problem defined in the way Chuck
    has done, (that is, with the true position known and defined from the
    start, together with the positions of the landmarks), each set of
    observations of a particular landmark is indeed completely independent of
    the observations of any other landmark. I no longer have any reservations
    about that matter, so I will stick my neck out and predict that if someone
    implements the simulation according to Chuck's proposal, then he will
    indeed find the probability of the cocked hat embracing the true position
    will be 0.25. And if not, I will eat my (cocked) hat.
    George Huxtable.
    George Huxtable, 1 Sandy Lane, Southmoor, Abingdon, Oxon OX13 5HX, UK.
    Tel. 01865 820222 or (int.) +44 1865 820222.

    Browse Files

    Drop Files


    What is NavList?

    Join NavList

    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    Do you want to receive all group messages by email?
    Yes No

    You can also join by posting. Your first on-topic post automatically makes you a member.

    Posting Code

    Enter the email address associated with your NavList messages. Your posting code will be emailed to you immediately.

    Email Settings

    Posting Code:

    Custom Index

    Start date: (yyyymm dd)
    End date: (yyyymm dd)

    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site