Need some advanced Excel help

On 06/05/2011 10:50 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 22:40:08 -0400, wrote
this crap:


I would have tried something like that. I use a spreadsheet to
create polar coordinates from metes and bounds data using
an 80 year old transit and a stadia pole. If anyone understands
what I just wrote please raise your hand.

Actually I've been drinking and I understand it. But everyone prefers
Cartesian coordinates.

I misspoke, I meant Cartesian coordinates.


We all use GPS coordinates.

When you need a lot of points on the ground to be able to
do a contour map GPS is:

1) way more accurate than you need since all
data is local and

2) way too slow, you'll be there several days
at 1/2 hour per point.


Vote for Romney.

On 06/05/2011 11:18 PM, Walt wrote:
On 6/5/2011 10:50 PM, wrote:
wrote this crap:


I would have tried something like that. I use a spreadsheet to
create polar coordinates from metes and bounds data using
an 80 year old transit and a stadia pole. If anyone understands
what I just wrote please raise your hand.

Actually I've been drinking and I understand it. But everyone prefers
Cartesian coordinates.

Actually, I prefer generalized orthogonal curvilinear coordinates.
Especially when I've been drinking. Euclidean space and Cartesian
coordinates are so *rigid*.

When the area concerned is an acre or less, the
errors that creep in from the Cartesian system
are negligible and the system is so much easier
to work with.

I try not to drink when I'm making a map. It could
result in a septic system being built three feet
above the ground. The client would be most unhappy.


//Walt

On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 23:18:43 -0400, Walt wrote
this crap:

On 6/5/2011 10:50 PM, wrote:
VtSkier wrote this crap:


I would have tried something like that. I use a spreadsheet to
create polar coordinates from metes and bounds data using
an 80 year old transit and a stadia pole. If anyone understands
what I just wrote please raise your hand.

Actually I've been drinking and I understand it. But everyone prefers
Cartesian coordinates.

Actually, I prefer generalized orthogonal curvilinear coordinates.

Bull****

Especially when I've been drinking. Euclidean space and Cartesian
coordinates are so *rigid*.

//Walt

This reminds me of an ancient Chinese proverb that I once made up. It
goes a little something like this, "If you can't dazzle them with
brilliance, baffle them with bull****."


Vote for Romney. Repeal the nightmares

VtSkier wrote:



We all use GPS coordinates.

When you need a lot of points on the ground to be able to
do a contour map GPS is:

1) way more accurate than you need since all
data is local and

2) way too slow, you'll be there several days
at 1/2 hour per point.



We have issues at times using gps to build track maps and monitor
vehicle position and collect dynamic data. At 170mph the gps scans at
5hz and that means that about 50 feet pass between each reading. A lot
of stuff can happen in fifty feet. We get more accurate maps with a
lateral accelerometer and a wheel speed indicator

On 06/06/2011 14:47, VtSkier wrote:

I try not to drink when I'm making a map. It could
result in a septic system being built three feet
above the ground. The client would be most unhappy.


Pierre could live with it....

On 06/06/2011 09:17 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 23:18:43 -0400, wrote
this crap:

On 6/5/2011 10:50 PM, wrote:
wrote this crap:


I would have tried something like that. I use a spreadsheet to
create polar coordinates from metes and bounds data using
an 80 year old transit and a stadia pole. If anyone understands
what I just wrote please raise your hand.

Actually I've been drinking and I understand it. But everyone prefers
Cartesian coordinates.

Actually, I prefer generalized orthogonal curvilinear coordinates.

Bull****

Especially when I've been drinking. Euclidean space and Cartesian
coordinates are so *rigid*.

//Walt

This reminds me of an ancient Chinese proverb that I once made up. It
goes a little something like this, "If you can't dazzle them with
brilliance, baffle them with bull****."

You didn't make that up! I'm older than you and I
heard it before you were born!



Vote for Romney. Repeal the nightmares

On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 09:36:11 -0400, down_hill
wrote this crap:

VtSkier wrote:



We all use GPS coordinates.

When you need a lot of points on the ground to be able to
do a contour map GPS is:

1) way more accurate than you need since all
data is local and

2) way too slow, you'll be there several days
at 1/2 hour per point.



We have issues at times using gps to build track maps and monitor
vehicle position and collect dynamic data. At 170mph the gps scans at
5hz and that means that about 50 feet pass between each reading. A lot
of stuff can happen in fifty feet. We get more accurate maps with a
lateral accelerometer and a wheel speed indicator

Have you tried slowing down? Try going only 150mph. Few vehicles go
that fast anyway.


Vote for Romney. Repeal the nightmares.

"Walt" wrote in message
...
On 6/5/2011 10:50 PM, wrote:
VtSkier wrote this crap:


I would have tried something like that. I use a spreadsheet to
create polar coordinates from metes and bounds data using
an 80 year old transit and a stadia pole. If anyone understands
what I just wrote please raise your hand.

Actually I've been drinking and I understand it. But everyone prefers
Cartesian coordinates.

Actually, I prefer generalized orthogonal curvilinear coordinates.
Especially when I've been drinking. Euclidean space and Cartesian
coordinates are so *rigid*.

//Walt


I have to ask, is Walt having a Freudian misunderstanding between Cartesian
coordinates and coordinating with courtesans.

Ernie

On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 10:30:58 -0400, VtSkier wrote
this crap:


This reminds me of an ancient Chinese proverb that I once made up. It
goes a little something like this, "If you can't dazzle them with
brilliance, baffle them with bull****."

You didn't make that up! I'm older than you and I
heard it before you were born!

I made up all the ancient Chinese proverbs, and the new ones.


Vote for Romney. Repeal the nightmares.

On 6/6/11 7:30 AM, VtSkier wrote:

On 06/06/2011 09:17 AM, wrote:
This reminds me of an ancient Chinese proverb that I once made up. It
goes a little something like this, "If you can't dazzle them with
brilliance, baffle them with bull****."

You didn't make that up! I'm older than you and I
heard it before you were born!

Commonly attributed to Caesar's Commentaries. But he cribbed it.