John,
 
I am happy (though embarrassed) to report that I am now convinced
that most of the edge problems I saw in the proposal photos
were apparently artifacts.  They seem to have been introduced
into the PDF images by the compression/decompression processes. 
Perhaps some spatial periodicity aliasing was at work. There are
suspiciously  moire-like patterns in panel areas, as well as less regular
changes somehow introduced at the apparent edges.
 
However, this doesn't alter the bases for the calculation
of time-error vs edge-error that I posted on June 25th.
Photos did not enter into that:
 
>... Thus at that distance, the time required for the 1/2° degree
>wide sun to pass through the meridian plane would be very
>nearly 2 minutes of time during which it would move
>about 9.3 inches relative to the style edge.  Therefore, if the
>style's edge were to be laterally displaced 3 inches, the
>resulting error in time would be about 3/9.3 x 120 = 38.7 seconds
>of time, and a 1 inch wrong location of the effective edge would
>cause nearly 13 seconds of error. ... .
 
which spoke to your comment: 
 
> .....  By placing one eye at the base of a style, we could look
>straight up the edge of the styles. We did see very slight
>undulations in the styles, but we guesstimated that they were
>only between I and 3 inches, a very small amount if you consider
>the enormous size of the sundial. These could only affect the
>precision of the dial by a few seconds.  Time will tell!
 
Indeed, time has already told me some things.
 
Continued best wishes for your endeavors,
 
Bill
 
 
 
 
 

Reply via email to