It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: tanka418
Then why do you keep quoting a statistic based off finding a match?? The statistic doesn't restrict itself to 33 parsecs that is self imposed by you. Even having 2826 stars you can find a match same as I could using cities in the US. When all you have to find is general shapes with no distance data and point if view unknown your odds greatly increase. Now if you put restrictions saying it has to be viewed from earth at a specific time then the odds of a match would be low. Your data set is far from rigid when basing it off dots made on paper. I could choose any stars in almost any pattern and a tribute it to a 2 d drawing of a 3 d universe.
Then why do you keep quoting a statistic based off finding a match?? The statistic doesn't restrict itself to 33 parsecs that is self imposed by you.
originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
originally posted by: tanka418
the probability of a match has been computed at 1 in 1.7e+86...
Please post the calculations then.
-- www.abovetopsecret.com...
Again...the first 25 terms of 2826! (factorial) or 1.7E+86...Read my paper its all in there.
No the statistic doesn't place such restrictions on us, however, logic and common sense does.
Logic and sense would like to limit the space to the volume that ET is likely to operate in...for now, 100ly radius...
there are also other constraints on the number of stars we can use, like the size of our dataset. I selected Hipparcos because it is the largest database that I felt comfortable with installing on by servers. I had thought about 2MASS but the database is too large to translate into a form that can be imported into either SQL Server, or Oracle easily... It also wants an open source sql engine, I don't have a problem with that, but the size of the data files is gigabytes. I'd rather not install that on my dev system...
And, the reduced number of stars makes a random "hit" more probable.
And there are other restrictions; for instance, this is supposed to be a "trade and exploration route" map...so the kinds, classes and types, of star are important, as is the distance from home.
originally posted by: DJW001
Logic and common sense dictates that Hill's drawing is just a drawing of something she believes she saw under hypnosis. The fact that she was able to project the pattern of lines onto what is essentially a random star field indicates that it is not a map, but a construction of her subconscious.
Why? Logic indicates that beings capable of instantaneously travelling between the stars would not be constrained by distance. Your limit of 100 light years is completely arbitrary.
Let's assume Betty really was shown a map on a spacecraft. She herself describes what she sees as stars and planets. What if her interpretation is wrong? What if what she was really seeing was galaxies? Of course, this ties in to the function of the "map," which you still have not explained.
In other words, your selection method narrows down the options to an infinitesimally small subset of possibilities, making it completely arbitrary in the face of the problem you are purporting to solve.
"And, the reduced number of stars makes a random "hit" more probable.
"
Exactly what we have been trying to explain to you.
Why? What is the function of this map?
originally posted by: tanka418
a reply to: DJW001
Now what is the function of this map? It cannot be used for navigation. Is it something they keep on hand to show to hitchhikers?
ETA: Also wanted to mention that it would be kind of illogical for ET to have both planets and stars in a single display. The two actually exist at different scales. i.e. when viewing stars One typically has an interstellar view, where as when viewing planets, a closer view is required which removes the stars, and replaces them with planets...
So, we would have a view that was only stars, or a view that is only the planets of a specified star. We wouldn't have both in the same view...
There are a couple here, and I'm sure others will arrive, that think this can be a random event. And, of course it is my assertion that it is not, and can not be, random.
For my part, I need to produce data that shows this can not be a random event; which I've done in the form of mathematics, and probability.
Those who wish to insist this is random need to produce their own data to support their position...
To that end...the production of a 25 star (point) page that matches Hipparcos stars within 33 parsec of a POV should work just file. However any wanting to accept this challenge should post here first so that we can arrange for that page of 25 dots.
originally posted by: DJW001
What event? Are you talking about forcing a pattern onto a random array of points? There is a 100% certainty that it can be done if allowed a large enough degree of freedom.
"For my part, I need to produce data that shows this can not be a random event; which I've done in the form of mathematics, and probability."
No, you have not.
If you remove the lines, these...
...look nothing like this:
At least three other examples have been provided, and you have rejected each one on purely arbitrary grounds. You even rejected Betty Hill's interpretation, and she is the only one who actually "saw" the map!
"To that end...the production of a 25 star (point) page that matches Hipparcos stars within 33 parsec of a POV should work just file. However any wanting to accept this challenge should post here first so that we can arrange for that page of 25 dots. "
Once again, let me remind you that your Hipparcos data does not match the drawing. Your 33 parsec constraint is just plain silly. We do not know what the scale of the map is, if it is a map, and if it has a scale. What if the two globes in the "foreground" are the Magellenic Clouds, and the dots represent globular clusters? This is a "logical" interpretation because globular clusters contain older population stars, which means the civilizations there would be more advanced, and therefore capable of interstellar trade. (If this sounds like a flimsy rationalization, now you know what your logic looks like to others.)
Betty herself says that the "map" showed stars and planets.
originally posted by: tanka418
if yo choose to reject the logic, that's on you, and is your error.
originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
originally posted by: tanka418
if yo choose to reject the logic, that's on you, and is your error.
I'm not posting much, but I'm still following this thread and have read every post (most more than once), and I still have not seen any logic in your argument. I've seen arbitrarily chosen data points skewed to fit your presumptuous conclusion, I've seen data points that don't fit your presumptuous conclusion discarded as irrelevant, and I've seen a hell of a lot of confirmation bias. Unbiased data and logic though? Not so much.