this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2024
40 points (100.0% liked)

earth

12631 readers
9 users here now

The world’s #1 planet!

A community for the discussion of the environment, climate change, ecology, sustainability, nature, and pictures of cute wild animals.

Socialism is the only path out of the global ecological crisis.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It's a Bluesky link but he use adult tags as de facto "spoiler" tags. The problem is that content is hidden if you're not logged into Bluesky. Here's a Bluesky mirror site to show the entire thread...

https://subium.com/profile/c0nc0rdance.bsky.social/post/3kpkcq2ecws22

A huge hint...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (4 children)

The earth isn't a sphere though. Even if that has less error it is not none. A geodesic path would also not be straight because of the shape of the earth.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Also, you can define a geodesic for any surface, the concept isn’t specific to spheres.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Sorry, I shoul've said. The earth isn't a sphere, ellipsoid, or other regular geometric shape. The ocean's surface is less so and changes by the tides. Those shapes can work to model the surface locally and globally depending on accuracy needed but are inherently flawed.

Person 1: Does that matter? Person 2: No, let's just simplify. Person 1: Ok, well we can really simplify using a Mercator projection. Person 2: You're doing it wrong. We need to simplify the part that makes the line not straight, but not so much that it looks bendy again. Our projection needs to be at the level that makes the answer I want to be true look right. Person 1: Does the question even make any sense in this context then?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It doesn’t have to be a regular geometric shape. Any conceivable surface, no matter how awkward and lumpy — unless you have some infinitely rough mathematical object or other weird thing that doesn’t exist in real life — will permit the definition of geodesic curves.

But also, how much detail you account for is inherently a subjective decision tied to the level of precision you need for your specific application. Are you going to consider every whitecap and speck of foam when you describe your path? That depends! If your goal is to steer an ocean liner in a roughly straight line without hitting any landmasses, then probably not!

If you’re a satellite looking for sea-level defects due to gravitational anomalies, then you might need a little more precision.

load more comments (1 replies)