jfitzpat
-
Posts
420 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by jfitzpat
-
-
quote:
Originally posted by Rigour:The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle postulates that the very act of observing something alters it.
Not quite. It might be more appropriate to say that some properties (ex. particle spin) do not have a determinate value without a context. An observer isn't really necessary, just a point of reference (ex. a measuring instrument).
Interaction between observer and environment cannot really be credited to Heisenberg. Point of view, so to speak, has played a part in many different physics theories (ex. special and general relativity). The impossibility of true objectivity is commented on in the writings of numerous ancient philosphers and scientists.
As for your main point. I think caching should absolutely be permitted. It gives the gun toting, government hating crowd something to do, and a web site to track them (big brother IS wathcing)...
-jjf
-
quote:
Originally posted by seneca:If they really wanted to be helpful, they would allow caches to be placed in their parks, monitor them, and bring to the cachers attention any problems that the cache is causing, and if it is causing a legitimate problem, then request that it be removed (failing which it would be removed)...
Having watched access come up for a number of sports/activities, I've come to the conclussion that the same arguments come up over and over. The lamest, in my opinion, is the flag waving, "our" land, doing what we please with natural resources is an American Tradition rant.
Land managers are, ultimately, accountable to our elected representatives. Majority rule makes some people bristle, at least when they are in the minority. The disdain for government seems strongest in Western states, where we often complain about the brain dead government and its meddling - while sucking down amazing amounts of Federal dollars in the form of various pork and subsidies.
But, the most appealing argument that always comes up is Senaca's. Why can't those stupid land managers permit, monitor, and advise? The problem with this argument is budget and perspective. Enthusiasts always see an activity as being more important and fundemental than it is to society at large.
The amount of money spent on local, state, and federal parks for the support and assistance of recreational users is amazingly small. The NFS budget isn't trivial, but the vast majority of it is spent building logging roads. So, you basically wind up with a shoe string budget ranger/rescue/maintanence system for most public parks in the country.
To a geocacher, it seems reasonable that "our" money be spent supporting "our" sport. But a rock climber, mountain biker, cross country skier, and car camper all feel the same way. Hikers often bristle at the idea that search and rescue costs should be paid, at least partially, by the lost party. Climber's often react the same way. So, you end up with competing demands on limited funds.
As hard as it is to swallow, the easiest way for land managers to deal with caching is to simply ban it. No matter how much red enthusiasts see, land managers would, generally, have little trouble making such a ban stick. The majority of voters just aren't going to get worked up over searching for Happy Meal toys in a park being an inalienable right.
The fact that some land managers are willing to even discuss caching shows, not that they have too much time on their hands to make rules, but that they are legitimately committed to enabling diverse groups enjoy the resources in their care. Form a responsible group and work with them.
As far as the article that started this thread being "fair" (this is general, not directed to Seneca's reasonable comments), I wonder how much more idiotic the sport would look to outsiders if threads here were cited? Imagine an article that contrasts the ranger's fairly modest constraints and concerns with adamant denials that caching has any impact whatsoever? An article that goes on to portray cachers, not as leave-no-trace hikers, but as gun toting red necks that care more about scoring a tinker toy than the environment they are trampling...
There have been threads here that talk about caching by headlamp. Going out at night in order to be "first". To many casual observers, a natural reaction might be, if it is all about the hunt and the toys, why not just stick the boxes in your own yards and be done with it? Why hassle with it in "our" parks?
I realize that many cachers, like my daughters and I, pursue caching as just another way of enjoying the outdoors and being together. But, when it comes to public discourse, it always seems to be the extremists who squawk the loudest.
If an individual wants to tote a gun when they hike, think all rangers are eco-Nazi fascists, and view any form of regulation of Geocaching on public land as un-American. So be it, it is (thankfully) a free country. But, if that is the collective 'voice' of the sport. Get used to getting the boot from parks...
-jjf
-
quote:
Originally posted by seneca:If they really wanted to be helpful, they would allow caches to be placed in their parks, monitor them, and bring to the cachers attention any problems that the cache is causing, and if it is causing a legitimate problem, then request that it be removed (failing which it would be removed)...
Having watched access come up for a number of sports/activities, I've come to the conclussion that the same arguments come up over and over. The lamest, in my opinion, is the flag waving, "our" land, doing what we please with natural resources is an American Tradition rant.
Land managers are, ultimately, accountable to our elected representatives. Majority rule makes some people bristle, at least when they are in the minority. The disdain for government seems strongest in Western states, where we often complain about the brain dead government and its meddling - while sucking down amazing amounts of Federal dollars in the form of various pork and subsidies.
But, the most appealing argument that always comes up is Senaca's. Why can't those stupid land managers permit, monitor, and advise? The problem with this argument is budget and perspective. Enthusiasts always see an activity as being more important and fundemental than it is to society at large.
The amount of money spent on local, state, and federal parks for the support and assistance of recreational users is amazingly small. The NFS budget isn't trivial, but the vast majority of it is spent building logging roads. So, you basically wind up with a shoe string budget ranger/rescue/maintanence system for most public parks in the country.
To a geocacher, it seems reasonable that "our" money be spent supporting "our" sport. But a rock climber, mountain biker, cross country skier, and car camper all feel the same way. Hikers often bristle at the idea that search and rescue costs should be paid, at least partially, by the lost party. Climber's often react the same way. So, you end up with competing demands on limited funds.
As hard as it is to swallow, the easiest way for land managers to deal with caching is to simply ban it. No matter how much red enthusiasts see, land managers would, generally, have little trouble making such a ban stick. The majority of voters just aren't going to get worked up over searching for Happy Meal toys in a park being an inalienable right.
The fact that some land managers are willing to even discuss caching shows, not that they have too much time on their hands to make rules, but that they are legitimately committed to enabling diverse groups enjoy the resources in their care. Form a responsible group and work with them.
As far as the article that started this thread being "fair" (this is general, not directed to Seneca's reasonable comments), I wonder how much more idiotic the sport would look to outsiders if threads here were cited? Imagine an article that contrasts the ranger's fairly modest constraints and concerns with adamant denials that caching has any impact whatsoever? An article that goes on to portray cachers, not as leave-no-trace hikers, but as gun toting red necks that care more about scoring a tinker toy than the environment they are trampling...
There have been threads here that talk about caching by headlamp. Going out at night in order to be "first". To many casual observers, a natural reaction might be, if it is all about the hunt and the toys, why not just stick the boxes in your own yards and be done with it? Why hassle with it in "our" parks?
I realize that many cachers, like my daughters and I, pursue caching as just another way of enjoying the outdoors and being together. But, when it comes to public discourse, it always seems to be the extremists who squawk the loudest.
If an individual wants to tote a gun when they hike, think all rangers are eco-Nazi fascists, and view any form of regulation of Geocaching on public land as un-American. So be it, it is (thankfully) a free country. But, if that is the collective 'voice' of the sport. Get used to getting the boot from parks...
-jjf
-
quote:
Originally posted by Team Screamapillar:Bassoon Pilot, I think your assessment of the article is spot on.
[snip]
Isn't it crazy that National Parks that permit snowmobiles, ATV's, Winnebagoes, camping, concessionaires, dam projects, etc. etc. actively oppose us geocaching because of all the supposed terrible environmental chaos we unleash?
[snip]
For what it is worth, it is a lot more effective to negotiate with land managers about an activity when you actually listen to what they say. According to the article, the ranger in question is happy to get the caches back to the owners and work with geocachers to allow the sport to be pursued in a compatible way.
As for pointing out hypocrisy in public policy, it only gets you so far. Snowmobiling in Yellowstone may very well vanish, or be greatly reduced two seasons from now.
Sooner or later, some people are going to have to decide what they value more, caching in some form, or standing on principle about their God given right to do what they #@$% well please on "our" public land. Too many talking loudly about the later, and access will get a lot worse.
-jjf
-
quote:
Originally posted by Team Screamapillar:Bassoon Pilot, I think your assessment of the article is spot on.
[snip]
Isn't it crazy that National Parks that permit snowmobiles, ATV's, Winnebagoes, camping, concessionaires, dam projects, etc. etc. actively oppose us geocaching because of all the supposed terrible environmental chaos we unleash?
[snip]
For what it is worth, it is a lot more effective to negotiate with land managers about an activity when you actually listen to what they say. According to the article, the ranger in question is happy to get the caches back to the owners and work with geocachers to allow the sport to be pursued in a compatible way.
As for pointing out hypocrisy in public policy, it only gets you so far. Snowmobiling in Yellowstone may very well vanish, or be greatly reduced two seasons from now.
Sooner or later, some people are going to have to decide what they value more, caching in some form, or standing on principle about their God given right to do what they #@$% well please on "our" public land. Too many talking loudly about the later, and access will get a lot worse.
-jjf
-
I'm not surprised that so many people carry, or at least profess to carry, firearms. I am surprised to hear so many people profess to carry concealed.
Wear it on your hip. You can get to it quicker, are less likely to shoot yourself in the crotch, and folks like me can see you coming and give you a wide berth...
Seriously, I don't have anything against firearms, but I do think that, for most people, carrying concealed, particularly illegally, does little for personal safety.
-jjf
-
I'm not surprised that so many people carry, or at least profess to carry, firearms. I am surprised to hear so many people profess to carry concealed.
Wear it on your hip. You can get to it quicker, are less likely to shoot yourself in the crotch, and folks like me can see you coming and give you a wide berth...
Seriously, I don't have anything against firearms, but I do think that, for most people, carrying concealed, particularly illegally, does little for personal safety.
-jjf
-
No, the mapping built into Garmin and Magellan GPS receivers is no replacement for a printed USGS quad map. The view is too small and the resolution is too low (about 1:100,000 for topos).
I've found the street maps and base map a bit more useful, especially if you are trying to find a freeway or interstate in a strange city.
-jjf
-
quote:
Originally posted by Rubbertoe:Apparently those folks supply the images to Mapquest... hopefully MS's terraserver will start updating their maps as well.
That is correct. It defaults to the older USGS NAPP data when no newer imagery is available. The GlobalXplorer data would be a little difficult for USAPhotomaps, etc., because of registration issues. That is, it is tricky to accurately plot coordinates on some of the images.
-jjf
-
FWIW, I hadn't really gotten any requests for track support. I'll make a note of it. If I get any more requests, I'll put it on http://www.lostoutdoors.com
-jjf
-
FWIW, the MapSource Topo set that I have only expects you to run setup from disk 1 (Western). Then, from inside the application you select Topo West, East, Alaska, Hawaii from the drop down menu.
After you've marked maps for download (or zoomed in for detail), you get prompted to insert the appropriate CDs. (You can actually store the map data on your hard disk (at least with the old version I use), but you have to tweak some values with RegEdit.)
Good Luck,
-jjf
-
I'd have to agree that the eTrex Yellow (basic) is a pretty good starting place. Fits in a pocket, runs about 24 hours on a single set of AAs, waterproof... All for <$100.
I'm surprised to hear about a GPS315/320 or MAP330 being more 'durable'. My wife dropped my Vista over 100' on 7/1, and it is still working (though the altimeter was whacked until I cleaned out the tiny pitot hole in the back). The basic eTrex has always seemed even more indestructable.
That said, I think that either the GPS315 or the MAP330 would be a good bargain for a starting GPS as well.
-jjf
-
I'd have to agree that the eTrex Yellow (basic) is a pretty good starting place. Fits in a pocket, runs about 24 hours on a single set of AAs, waterproof... All for <$100.
I'm surprised to hear about a GPS315/320 or MAP330 being more 'durable'. My wife dropped my Vista over 100' on 7/1, and it is still working (though the altimeter was whacked until I cleaned out the tiny pitot hole in the back). The basic eTrex has always seemed even more indestructable.
That said, I think that either the GPS315 or the MAP330 would be a good bargain for a starting GPS as well.
-jjf
-
I suppose that one reason not to use UTM in a database like geocaching.com is that it does not cover the entire globe. There is a different metric system for use at the poles.
-jjf
-
quote:
Originally posted by JDMC:USAPhotoMaps is kind of like ExpertGPS without the Topo map capability (although it does allow you to get USGS elevation data and overlay it onto the aerial photos). And it's free.
I can heartily recommend Mr. Cox's USAPhotoMaps. Had I known it existed at the time, I probably never would have done the Map Maker on LostOutdoors.
-jjf
-
FWIW, The ActiveX control collection at: http://www.etree.com/tech/notsofreestuff/maptools/index.html contains a control for interfacing to Garmin and Magellan receivers, as well as the map generation stuff.
It's not free, but the only restriction on unregistered versions is a nag screen.
-jjf
-
quote:
Originally posted by fizzymagic:Since there are only 3 pieces, their geometry at the time of the explosion _must_ be coplanar.
Really? It would seem that the forces have to add up, but the actual vectors would depend on angle to the original combustion point.
I mentioned crumple zones because of a mental image. The rocket is blown in half, one half tumbles in one direction (because the end nearest the explosion...) then, weakened, seperates again.
But, again, I think it is great as it is. And, I hope G&M does a follow-up.
-jjf
-
Depending on name length, you can put 15-30 markers in on either the aerial or topo maps at http://www.lostoutdoors.com
There is a free demo at http://www.etree.com/tech/notsofreestuff/maptools/vbsample.html
It is is just a quickie VB app, but it will let you plot up to 500 markers on aerial, topo, and tiger views of the same area (I think it uses a post to get around tiger's URL limit). The tiger map zooms in pretty close, but I haven't compared it to the online interactive Tiger maps.
Both LostOutdoors and the sample will read directly from Magellan or Garmin units, so you could go Geocaching.com->EasyGPS->GPSr-> to avoid data entry.
Good Luck,
-jjf
-
quote:
Originally posted by DisQuoi:I'm pretty sure that this problem is not designed to require a three-dimensional analysis of the explosion...
Precisely. What if the explosion occured above the black box, or was a missile that detonated below the rocket? Regardless of the location, there is no way to know that the force was evenly distributed to the rocket's total mass (ex. crumple zones in a car).
FWIW, I wasn't trying to put G&M's cache down above. I think it is very clever, and, based on the log, well done. I just, in general, have a problem with story problems. Too often, the student isn't solving a real world problem with math, he/she is trying to find the math problem hidden in the story.
-jjf
-
quote:
Originally posted by fizzymagic:It was a _very_ powerful explosion!
And a bit magic as well
Kuddos to G&M for a job well done, but I've always disliked that aspect of story problems.-jjf
-
quote:
Originally posted by fizzymagic:It was a _very_ powerful explosion!
And a bit magic as well
Kuddos to G&M for a job well done, but I've always disliked that aspect of story problems.-jjf
-
quote:
Originally posted by majicman:I use a similar trick. When I get clsoe to a cache, I wrap my GPS unit in red meat (sirloin works well, but porterhouse will do) and I seem to find more caches this way.
P.S. Does anyone know how to get a GPS unit out of a large dog's stomach?
You lost me there, I don't even remember posting in the infamous 'red meat' thread. In fact, the only enchange that I can think of that you and I have had convinced me a) you have a rapier wit and
I'm really, really glad I don't do your laundry...-jjf
-
quote:
Originally posted by Jamie Z:Then I _turn off_ my unit, and turn it back on. What I find almost every time is that the "fresh" coordinates will get me closer to the cache.
I suspect that cycling power clears the internal histogram used for averaging. That is, when you first approach the cache, the unit is averaging your position based on new measurements and, to some degree, prior measurements. After you cycle the power, you are getting a fresh measurement without any averaging.
If you just stand still for awhile, the histogram would presumably fill with samples all near your current position and give you a similiar measurement.
-jjf
-
FWIW, It is still about 100 yards off for "Catalina if it is Clear" (GC563).
-jjf
I'm really, really glad I don't do your laundry...
CHECK OUT THIS ARTICLE, "The new game in town: habitat damage"
in General geocaching topics
Posted
No, but all the "sarcastic" remarks I used are pieced together from real quotes from this forum. That's the point. Land managers can always point to extremists and a few bad apples (not nec. the same thing), and justify harsh limitations on all.
That is not conjecture, that's oft repeated history. The only answer I've seen work is to form an advocacy group that promotes a leave-no-trace ethic, forms relationships to other groups, (ex. Sierra Club, etc.) to get a larger collective voice, and works with land managers to secure and maintain access.
-jjf