NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Real accuracy of the method of lunar distances
From: Trevor Kenchington
Date: 2004 Jan 1, 12:26 +0000
From: Trevor Kenchington
Date: 2004 Jan 1, 12:26 +0000
Fred & Jan, With apologies for butting into your exchange but you two seem to be misunderstanding one another: Fred: What you are suggesting is, I think, a paired-comparison t-test of the null hypothesis that the mean of all possible positions estimated by lunars is not different from the mean of all possible positions estimated by chronometer, using a sample of paired position estimates, one each by lunar and chronometer (where, of course, each "estimate" is actually based on multiple sextant observations on the same day). That would be one way to see whether there was a bias in the lunar estimates of position but it would not address Jan's interest in the average absolute magnitude of the differences between the lunar and chronometer estimates. For that, Jan already has someone else's estimate of the "probable error", meaning the absolute difference that will be exceeded by 50% of paired position estimates (on average). To get from that value to the standard deviation of the errors in the lunars, he has assumed that the chronometer positions are exact (which is likely close enough to the truth) and has consulted the percentage points of the _Normal_ distribution, _not_ the t-distribution which you turned to. Armed with the standard deviation, he has again turned to the Normal distribution to read off the error that should occur in 3 estimates in every thousand (i.e. 1-0.997 = 0.003 of lunar estimates). The problem with that, as I have noted in earlier messages, is that the errors in the lunars are unlikely to be exactly Normally distributed. Otherwise, I think that Jan has followed the right path in trying to estimate the magnitude of the errors that a skilled navigator might get with lunars. He doesn't need hypothesis testing and hence he does not need the t or F distributions. Trevor Kenchington -- Trevor J. Kenchington PhD Gadus@iStar.ca Gadus Associates, Office(902) 889-9250 R.R.#1, Musquodoboit Harbour, Fax (902) 889-9251 Nova Scotia B0J 2L0, CANADA Home (902) 889-3555 Science Serving the Fisheries http://home.istar.ca/~gadus