# Bruce Hoult - your sig..

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Enkidu, Jul 31, 2005.

1. ### EnkiduGuest

Hi Bruce,

Any particular reason you give your position as a decimal
lat/long in your sig? I'd visit via Google Earth but they do
the standard deg/min/sec format. Sure I could convert it,
but I'm lazy. <grin> ..and I wondered if there was a reason
behind it.

Cheers,

Cliff

Bruce's sig follows:

Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

--

Barzoomian the Martian - http://barzoomian.blogspot.com

Enkidu, Jul 31, 2005

2. ### Bruce HoultGuest

In article <>,
Enkidu <> wrote:

> Hi Bruce,
>
> Any particular reason you give your position as a decimal
> lat/long in your sig? I'd visit via Google Earth but they do
> the standard deg/min/sec format. Sure I could convert it,
> but I'm lazy. <grin> ..and I wondered if there was a reason
> behind it.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Cliff
>
> Bruce's sig follows:
>
> Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
> Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

It's fewer characters for the same precision. I've given that down to
one ten-thousandth of a degree (11 m latitude, about 8 m longitude).
Minutes and seconds would be 3 times less acurate and take at least two
more characters. You wouldn't even know which house.

What's standard about d/m/s? I've seen decimal degrees, d/m/s and d
with decimal minutes all in common use.

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

Bruce Hoult, Jul 31, 2005

3. ### EnkiduGuest

Bruce Hoult wrote:
> In article <>,
> Enkidu <> wrote:
>
>
>>Hi Bruce,
>>
>>Any particular reason you give your position as a decimal
>>lat/long in your sig? I'd visit via Google Earth but they do
>>the standard deg/min/sec format. Sure I could convert it,
>>but I'm lazy. <grin> ..and I wondered if there was a reason
>>behind it.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Cliff
>>
>>Bruce's sig follows:
>>
>>Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
>>Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

>
>
> It's fewer characters for the same precision. I've given that down to
> one ten-thousandth of a degree (11 m latitude, about 8 m longitude).
> Minutes and seconds would be 3 times less acurate and take at least two
> more characters. You wouldn't even know which house.
>

Even with seconds expressed to two decimal places, as Google
Earth do?
>
> What's standard about d/m/s? I've seen decimal degrees, d/m/s and d
> with decimal minutes all in common use.
>

Ah, in answer to that, I've more often seen it in d/m/s. I
assumed that it was more or less standard.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

Barzoomian the Martian - http://barzoomian.blogspot.com

Enkidu, Aug 1, 2005
4. ### EnkiduGuest

Enkidu wrote:
> Bruce Hoult wrote:
>
>> In article <>,
>> Enkidu <> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi Bruce,
>>>
>>> Any particular reason you give your position as a decimal lat/long in
>>> your sig? I'd visit via Google Earth but they do the standard
>>> deg/min/sec format. Sure I could convert it, but I'm lazy. <grin>
>>> ..and I wondered if there was a reason behind it.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Cliff
>>>
>>> Bruce's sig follows:
>>>
>>> Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
>>> Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------

>>
>>
>>
>> It's fewer characters for the same precision. I've given that down to
>> one ten-thousandth of a degree (11 m latitude, about 8 m longitude).
>> Minutes and seconds would be 3 times less acurate and take at least
>> two more characters. You wouldn't even know which house.
>>

> Even with seconds expressed to two decimal places, as Google Earth do?
>>

Well it's pretty fuzzy where you live, and you are only a
couple of decimal points away from me.
>
>> What's standard about d/m/s? I've seen decimal degrees, d/m/s and d
>> with decimal minutes all in common use.
>>

> Ah, in answer to that, I've more often seen it in d/m/s. I assumed that
> it was more or less standard.
>

Cheers,

Cliff

--

Barzoomian the Martian - http://barzoomian.blogspot.com

Enkidu, Aug 1, 2005
5. ### Roger JohnstoneGuest

In <42eddd04\$> Enkidu wrote:
> Bruce Hoult wrote:
>
>> What's standard about d/m/s? I've seen decimal degrees, d/m/s and d
>> with decimal minutes all in common use.
>>

> Ah, in answer to that, I've more often seen it in d/m/s. I
> assumed that it was more or less standard.

Most GPS receivers and electronic plotters use degrees/minutes/decimal
fraction of minutes. They probably use that because the NMEA data
interconnection standard uses it. Now, why does NMEA use it? <shrugs>

I suppose degrees and whole minutes gets you close enough for coarse
and the advantage of using a decimal fraction instead of using seconds
is you can just keep adding more decimal places on the end to improve
the resolution. Early GPS receivers only went to two dp resolution, but
most go to four now which is enough to place you within about 200mm (not
that a normal GPS is that accurate).

--
Roger Johnstone, Invercargill, New Zealand
http://vintageware.orcon.net.nz/
________________________________________________________________________
No Silicon Heaven? Preposterous! Where would all the calculators go?

Kryten, from the Red Dwarf episode "The Last Day"

Roger Johnstone, Aug 1, 2005
6. ### Lawrence D¹OliveiroGuest

In article <>,
Roger Johnstone <> wrote:

>I suppose degrees and whole minutes gets you close enough for coarse
>and the advantage of using a decimal fraction instead of using seconds
>is you can just keep adding more decimal places on the end to improve
>the resolution.

Angular and time measurements use unit multiples of 60 rather than 10
because that's what the ancient Babylonians used. And they did it
because 60 gives you more integer divisors than 10 does. In particular,
10 does not divide by 3.

Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Aug 2, 2005
7. ### JerryGuest

Lawrence D¹Oliveiro wrote:
> In article <>,
> Roger Johnstone <> wrote:
>
>
>>I suppose degrees and whole minutes gets you close enough for coarse
>>and the advantage of using a decimal fraction instead of using seconds
>>is you can just keep adding more decimal places on the end to improve
>>the resolution.

>
>
> Angular and time measurements use unit multiples of 60 rather than 10
> because that's what the ancient Babylonians used. And they did it
> because 60 gives you more integer divisors than 10 does. In particular,
> 10 does not divide by 3.

Neither does a megabyte

Jerry, Aug 2, 2005