NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Sexagesimal (was Newbie - Variation..)
From: Trevor Kenchington
Date: 2002 Feb 17, 09:21 -0400
From: Trevor Kenchington
Date: 2002 Feb 17, 09:21 -0400
Brian Whatcott wrote:
> Actually, it is not quite correct to suppose one can strictly refer to
> 0 degrees AND 360 degrees.
Of course. But we can strictly refer to both zero degrees and 359.99999.....
Truncating at either 1 or 359 degrees would loose one 360th of the
circle. A small and academic point, perhaps, but one that even a
non-mathematical biologist can understand.
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
