Dear Bill,

Thanks for your thorough, and insightful, comments.

To answer your final question, 'Why do you need anything more precise?', I
was thinking about a universal grid for cartography, and I was thinking
along somewhat similar lines to Marcus Berger, in that I was thinking of a
40�000 kilometre reference sphere � I particularly like Marcus' idea of a
reference sphere that gives an exact (theoretical) circumference of
40�000�kilometres or 40�megametres.

Cheers,

Pat Naughtin LCAMS
Geelong, Australia
-- 


on 3/4/04 2:57 AM, Bill Hooper at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Pat Naughtin wrote:
>> Infoplease.com says that the equatorial diameter is 12 760 km and the
>> polar
>> diameter is 12 720 km, so taking a simple average of these two I get a
>> diameter of 12 740 km, which gives a circumference of 40 087
>> kilometres.
> 
> He asked, what is the REAL circumference (and diameter) of the Earth?
> The answer is in his final example (quoted above): there IS NO SUCH
> THING as a single circumference (or diameter) because the Earth is not
> a perfect sphere. It is not even possible to use a "simple average"
> found by averaging the largest and smallest values because, generally
> speaking, the average of a large number of different values of anything
> is seldom equal to the simple average of the largest and smallest
> value.
> 
> The reason for the wide variety of values that Pat cites is that they
> are values obtained for variously measured diameters (including polar
> and equatorial) and perhaps by using various averages. Also, some of
> the various values are older values that have been replaced by later,
> more precise and more accurate values.
> 
> In any case, there is no reason why any of these values should give a
> circumference
> of exactly 40 000 km (40 Mm). That was the value chosen for defining
> the metre in the earliest stages of development of the metric system,
> leading to SI. It was abandoned as technology advanced making different
> ways of defining the metre preferable.
> 
> Since every time the metre (or other base unit) was redefined, the new
> definition was ALWAYS made so that the metre would not change in size
> as far as the precision of then-current technology permitted
> measurements to be made. Thus, the present day metre is still very
> close to the size necessary for the Earth's circumference to be
> approximately 40 000 000 of them, making he Earth's circumference close
> enough
> to 40 000 km to be a good approximation for general use. ALL of the
> various diameters Nat quotes are within about a quarter of one percent
> of the nice round
> approximation of 40 000 km. Why do you need anything more precise?
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Hooper
> Fernandina Beach, Florida, USA
> ========================
> SIMPLIFICATION begins with SI
> ========================
> 

Reply via email to