Geocaching in 50 years?

July 16, 2003

If, by some miracle, some of the caches of today survive that long, will the coordinates be any good? I was reading this on the web from The National GPS Network:

"Secondly, note that the axes of the WGS84 Cartesian system and, hence, all lines of

latitude and longitude in the WGS84 datum, are not stationary with respect to any

particular country. Due to tectonic plate motion, different parts of the world move

relative to each other with velocities of the order of ten centimetres per year. The

International Reference Meridian and Pole and, hence, the WGS84 datum, are stationary

with respect to the average of all these motions. But this means they are in motion

relative to any particular region or country. In Great Britain all WGS84 latitudes and

longitudes are changing at a constant rate of about 2.5 centimetres per year in a

north-easterly direction. Over the course of a decade or so, this effect becomes noticeable

in large-scale mapping. Some parts of the world (for example, Hawaii and Australia) are

moving at up to one metre per decade relative to WGS84."

Will everything be converted to another Datum? will cache owners be responsible for updating coordinates every so often? Why do I care? (I don't know...just thought it would get people's minds off famous lines from movies!)

"Could be worse...could be raining"

38.2k · July 16, 2003

I expect most of my present caches to be retired in 50 years (but it would be really cool if some where still around!), so I'm not losing much sleep over it.

As far as geocaching itself in 50 years, perhaps it will be as popular as biking and hiking, or maybe it will prove to be a fad, to be replaced by the new high tech game of the day.

"Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day" - Dave Barry

July 16, 2003

You could be right Brian, but we can't imagine anything replacing something that is soooooo much fun!

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a cache.

July 16, 2003

Geo-caching will be outlawed..and only outlaws will geo-cache.

If God is your co-pilot, it's time to change seats!!!

http://www.mi-geocaching.org/

8k · July 16, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by ErSamin:
If, by some miracle, some of the caches of today survive that long, will the coordinates be any good? I was reading this on the web from The National GPS Network:

"Secondly, note that the axes of the WGS84 Cartesian system and, hence, all lines of

latitude and longitude in the WGS84 datum, are not stationary with respect to any

particular country. Due to tectonic plate motion, different parts of the world move

relative to each other with velocities of the order of ten centimetres per year. The

International Reference Meridian and Pole and, hence, the WGS84 datum, are stationary

with respect to the average of all these motions. But this means they are in motion

relative to any particular region or country. In Great Britain all WGS84 latitudes and

longitudes are changing at a constant rate of about 2.5 centimetres per year in a

north-easterly direction. Over the course of a decade or so, this effect becomes noticeable

in large-scale mapping. Some parts of the world (for example, Hawaii and Australia) are

moving at up to one metre per decade relative to WGS84."

Will everything be converted to another Datum? will cache owners be responsible for updating coordinates every so often? Why do I care? (I don't know...just thought it would get people's minds off famous lines from movies!)

That's why they put the date hidden on the cache page. You're expected to figure in tectonic drift when you go searching for a cache.

東西南北

Why do I always find it in the last place I look?

July 16, 2003

I hope I'm around in 50 year's ....who else will do the maintanence? Maybe I can will all my (still have to place one...just waiting for my stickers to be delivered) caches to my kid!

4.1k · July 16, 2003

If the accuracy of GPSrs stays the same then the 2.5 centimeter shift will still be within the range of most units. 2.5 centimeters is just over 4 feet. Not much to worry about, huh.

Smile, make others wonder what you're up to!!!

2.5k · July 16, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders):
2.5 centimeters is just over 4 feet.

I will never understand that dadgum metric system.

July 16, 2003

Some people have bigger feet than others.

So whats the rate of tectonic drift in furlongs per fortnight?

===========================================================

"The time has come" the Walrus said "to speak of many things; of shoes and ships and sealing wax, of cabbages and Kings".

July 16, 2003

cachew nut wrote:

I will never understand that dadgum metric system.

__________

Why? What part of it is incomprehensible to you? Or is it just the visualisation of the distances in your mind?

I grew up with the metric system, and some of the empirical system...and visualization just isn't a problem if exercised enough.

Also, here's a puzzle for anyone...

Why is it in USA, the main system for measurement empirical, yet the altitudes are in metres...whereas in Canada the system is metric, and the altitudes are in feet??

Also, in 50 years, do you think USA will be in METRIC or in EMPIRICAL?

______________________________________________ Kanto

______________________________________________

38.2k · July 16, 2003

My wife, being a former chemist, doesn't comprehend gallons, pints, etc... I'm just learning the metric system because of my interest in archaeology. I still remember the guffaws when I was measuring the depth of a unit and announced that it was 26 inches deep. I was looking at the "wrong" side of the ruler.

"Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day" - Dave Barry

3.8k · July 16, 2003

My bicycle computer is set in kilometers. On purpose. (I live in Indianapolis.)

==============?If it feels good...do it?===============

1.1k · July 16, 2003

for the metric deficients, 2.5 cm (2.54cm actually) is one of your inches.

But that idio aside his movement thing is quite daunting, really and it won't take 50 years to be a problem.

In only a few years time one will have a dual freq handheld capable of less then 1.5m (that 4.92 feet for some) and places like Australia will have moved more than that since the time the reference frame was adopted.

Even today some countries for high precision work are computing conversions on a weekly basis.

50 years time we might have to have a real-time dynamic datum and if we only knew where the centre of the earth was "exactly" everyday then that might be a good start.

If this movement keeps up the mailman gunna's miss the slot

Cheers, Kerry.

I never get lost everybody keeps telling me where to go

2.5k · July 17, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Kanto:
_cachew nut_ wrote:

I will never understand that dadgum metric system.

__________

Why? What part of it is incomprehensible to you? Or is it just the visualisation of the distances in your mind?

That must be it. I had no idea that a centimeter was equivalent to 1.6 feet.

July 17, 2003

Hello

1-Center of the Earth

This may be calculated using equations linked to Center of Mass (which takes in variables like volume, mass, and relative distances of those)...or there could be other ways.

2-Yes, I have similar difficulty initially visualising unfamiliar measuring systems, but the more I work with them, on a consistent basis, the visualisation also becomes more accurate.

__________

Kanto

5.3k · July 17, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Kanto:

Also, here's a puzzle for anyone...

Why is it in USA, the main system for measurement empirical, yet the altitudes are in metres...whereas in Canada the system is metric, and the altitudes are in feet??

Maybe I'm missing something, but I've never seen altitude shown in metres...only feet.

"Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand."

July 17, 2003

NOTE: This only relates to the thread in that it follows up a question about how measuring systems in 50 years will change.

Yes, I've only seen them in metres...for example on the news from a USA Channel, or in a magazine which reports USA stories related to aviation (in USA)..etc.

In Canada, I've only heard of altitudes reported and written in feet, from various sources (more direct than indirect, since I've only flown in Canada, not USA yet).

DIRECT USA SOURCE - Oshkosh

NOTE: Once you click on the link, a search result will appear. The first item has a reference in metres, and the others have references to feet. This is new to me, and perhaps USA has been using both all this time, depending on the context.

Where is "WannaFly" Geocacher with the airplane as an Avatar?

__________

Kanto

[This message was edited by Kanto on July 17, 2003 at 09:14 AM.]

4.1k · July 17, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders):
If the accuracy of GPSrs stays the same then the 2.5 centimeter shift will still be within the range of most units. 2.5 centimeters is just over 4 feet. Not much to worry about, huh.

Smile, make others wonder what you're up to!!!

My error, 2.5 centimeters is just about an inch. After 50 years of shift at that rate the total movement will be about 4 feet.

John

Smile, make others wonder what you're up to!!!

July 17, 2003

In fifty years I'll be 99.

On second thought, in fifty years I'll probably be dead.

Maps?!? I don't need no stinking maps! I got coordinates!

There's a fine line between Geocaching and mental illness, I just not sure which side of the line I'm on!

24.7k · July 17, 2003

Geocaching fits well with a lot of outdoor activites. It won't go away though it might change a tad.

It's not techtonic drife that worries me though. It's mental drift. In 50 years I'll be able to find my own caches, when I hide my own easter eggs.

1.6k · July 18, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Kanto:

Also, here's a puzzle for anyone...

Why is it in USA, the main system for measurement empirical, yet the altitudes are in metres...whereas in Canada the system is metric, and the altitudes are in feet??

Empirical? Was that a freudian slip? Aren't you giving away just a little too much? Empirical facts = lawyers treasure. How about another haiku? We know who you might be...

July 18, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by canadazuuk:
Empirical? Was that a freudian slip? Aren't you giving away just a little too much? Empirical facts = lawyers treasure. How about another haiku? We know who you might be...

Yes, I thought it may have been the wrong term for that context...what I meant to use was Imperial...they are similar aren't they?

Though, for the freudian and suspicions, don't get you're hopes up...I've never been to these forums with any other identity than you see now.

Give it up, you're barking up the wrong tree.

__________

Kanto

1.6k · July 18, 2003

I was hoping for some empirical measurement of the rate which rest stop areas in Canada are becoming overrun by undesirables...

even dogs don't go that meter of rhythm

1.4k · July 18, 2003

quote:
Se.. er.. Kanto wrote:
I've never been to these forums with any other identity than you see now.

Give it up, you're barking up the wrong tree.

Give it up yourself -- only 5 days on these forums and you've already formed all these opinions about caching and the rules for caching? Ya right. You're not even a half convincing sock puppet. Your ego must be getting in the way of clear judgement if you think everyone is so stupid that we can't figure out who you are. You're about as transparent as a brick wall. What a moron -- Oh, there's one point for you.

*****

1.4k · July 18, 2003

50 years from now, there will be measures available to ensure that sock puppets can't post to the forums.

*****

July 19, 2003

I have been somewhat puzzled why Jomarac5 and Canadazuuk have been continuously harassing Kanto and accusing him as being a sock puppet. It does seem strange that Kanto has recently been such an active poster while having been a member for only a short time - but of course there is no rule against that. However, it has now suddenly dawned on me that these guys believe that Kanto is my sock puppet!! The reference to my profession in Canadazuuk’s post above made it clear. I have not had a pleasant history with these two (who appear to be good buddies) and it comes as no surprise that they would attempt to defame me - or to readily jump to a conclusion that does. I note that Kanto (also from Canada - but finding his first cache 3000 miles from where I live) coincidently started posting the day after I returned from a 2 week vacation to the US. Due to my vacation (and the 80 hours I worked in the week before) there was a hiatus of my posting to this site. I also note that in one of his earlier posts Kanto quoted my signature line. I figure that these guys (in their oft demonstrated brilliance) added 1 + 1 and got 3 - me!

I find their innuendo to be extremely insulting. Of course I know that many on these boards do not have a great opinion of me (probably because I often behave like an ACK - you can e-mail me if you want to know what that is) but I take being open and candid very seriously, and am proud of the fact that I do NOTHING anonymously.

I have reported this to the admin and have also e-mailed Kanto to ask him to demonstrate to the admin that he is not a sock puppet (or at the very least not mine!).

I will now deal with this privately, but wanted to post here to assure all of the people who post to this site (the vast majority of whom I admire and respect) that I have not created any sock puppet, and that I never will.

I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me.

[This message was edited by seneca on July 19, 2003 at 11:00 AM.]

9.4k · July 19, 2003

Little do they know that this is really Seneca's sock-puppet account. 800+ posts and 120 finds are just to throw them off of the scent!

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

1.4k · July 19, 2003

quote:
Seneca wrote:
However, it has now suddenly dawned on me that these guys believe that Kanto is my sock puppet!!

I wouldn't say 'believe', but certainly we had suspicions. By your own admission you agree that there were a number of references that have a remarkably striking and similar flavour to your own style of forum posting. It appears that Kanto has emulated your personality, possibly to create grief for you (or perhaps it's more of a tribute and maybe you should feel flattered

). Incidentally, we were not the only ones who thought this as e-mails were received by me from others on this board suggesting this as well.

If in fact, you do nothing anonymously and this Kanto character is not your sock puppet, then I offer my apology for the misunderstanding.

*****

July 19, 2003

If Kanto is Seneca's puppet, he has found a way to operate at long range. Check Kanto's profile.

3.8k · July 19, 2003

WHO CARES?

==============?If it feels good...do it?===============

**(the other 9 out of 10 voices in my head say: "Don't do it!")**

.

6.5k · July 19, 2003

GPS SAX wrote:

quote:
Little do they know that this is really Seneca's sock-puppet account. 800+ posts and 120 finds are just to throw them off of the scent!

ROFLMAO. WTG big horn.

These changes in latitudes, changes in attitudes;

Nothing remains quite the same.

Through all of the islands and all of the highlands,

If we couldn't laugh we would all go insane

1.6k · July 19, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by seneca:

I have not had a pleasant history with these two...

In the world of labour negotiations, perception is reality, and while I can't dispute *your* perception of *our* history, my own feeling has not been the same as yours. We may disagree on many things, but I do not equate disagreement with unpleasantness.

On the other hand, we seem to have a mutual respect for each other as a cacher, or for each other's so-called caching style.

I suppose that if we would all stop being off topic, and would lessen our confrontational style, things might be *pleasant* for everyone. Our heated discussion regarding rest areas brought out all kinds of strong words and accusations, and it was not a one-sided affair. I rest my case.

Kudos to the admin for closing all the off topic threads.

1.6k · July 19, 2003

I wonder what they would do myself about the shifting grids... do you just keep updating in WGS84 and provide reference tables for the shifts (for older waypoints), or will another geoid model come along anyway and replace WGS84?

5.3k · July 19, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by canadazuuk:
I wonder what they would do myself about the shifting grids... do you just keep updating in WGS84 and provide reference tables for the shifts (for older waypoints), or will another geoid model come along anyway and replace WGS84?

This is alot like the chicken and the hen. But I think that the coord stays the same and the piece of earth moves independantly. Didn't someone say that Garmins were immune to this??

"Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand."

1.6k · July 19, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Stunod:

I think that the coord stays the same and the piece of earth moves independantly. Didn't someone say that Garmins were immune to this??

Right, the coordinate is the coordinate, but you would have to update the coordinates for the moving bits of land referenced by the coordinates.

July 19, 2003

Satelites being what they are and being owned by the military for their own end use,would it not be possible to shift the satelites to different orbit positions or put new ones in different positions to account for the shifts?If I had all those funds tied up in satelite nav technology I sure wouldn't want my equipment to be out.

1.6k · July 19, 2003

we're way over our heads on this one

Geocaching in 50 years?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation