Hi,

On 11/13/2017 06:32 PM, Gregory Beat wrote:
I grew up east of the Iowa/Missouri border, so this boundary dispute was 
well-known ... and occurred at same time Joseph Smith (Mormons) was at Nauvoo, 
IL (1839-1844).
In 2006, the Iowa-Missouri border was investigated with GPS, as much an archeology 
project as locating the historic Sullivan & Brown survey markers.
http://www.theamericansurveyor.com/PDF/TheAmericanSurveyor_MO-IABoundaryLineInvestigation_Mar-Apr2006.pdf
Iowa-Missouri Border War (1826-1849)
http://iagenweb.org/history/soi/soi32.htm

NOAA’s : National Geodetic Survey (NGS) made news in 2009 when media reported 
that the Four Corners monument was in wrong place (by 2.5 miles).
Deseret News
https://www.deseretnews.com/article/705299160/Four-Corners-Monument-is-indeed-off-mark.html
NOAA statement and clarification
https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/INFO/fourcorners.shtml
==
I’m in France and I don’t think that any borders in Europe were defined by 
astronomical observation, but in the US I believe that at least some of the 
state borders were thus fixed. As a second’s error in time will be about a 
nautical mile in US latitudes, I wonder if anyone has measured with GPS, how 
good the original surveys were?

There is a lovely article about the Dixon-Mason line and how they now used GPS to measure it accurately. Turns out that Dixon-Mason measured wrong, but not because they where hacks, they did it very accuratly with the tools they had, but the mercury of their star-scope was not completely flat due to gravitational pull from mountains, so when correcting for that with now known data, they are very accurate with what they had.

I think there was a thread about it some time back, but you should be able to find it knowing what o search for.

I learned about what the whole issue was about from start.

Cheers,
Magnus
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

Reply via email to