Re: mapping the world

["Sean L. McLane" <zodo@laf.cioe.com>]

One little nitpick here...

> From steve@ns1.cioe.com Sun Jul  5 12:31:36 1998
> Subject: mapping the world
>
<snip>
>
> Lojem is on the 70 degree lattitude line (wonder why they didn't
> claim zero since they were here first?)
>
> Lojem is about 3000 mets (apx 30% north longitude) north of
> equator.
>
> So... we have Lojem (30% north longitude, 70 degrees latitude).
>
Actually, Latitude is measured north-south, and Longitude is measured
East-West. Logem being on 70 Degrees North Latitude means that is about
as far north as Point Barrow, Alaska, north of the Arctic Circle. There
really isn't a hell of a lot further north to go. For Centralia to be
even farther north than that requires it to be damn close to the top
of the world. The north pole is at 90 degrees N lat., so with 100.3 mets
per degree, that leaves us 2006 mets, or about 760 miles between Lojem 
and the Pole. Incidentally, that distance is smaller than the size of 
Geleia from north to south.

Also, were air travel possible in a stable manner, it would probably be
shorter to get to Geleia by going over the pole, by Great Circle Route.
Depending on how much of an icecap is there in the summer, it may still be 
possible by boat.

-----

I just took a look at my book, and found a bit of an inconsistency. It 
mentions that Karfelon is located about 3000 mets north of the Equator, 
though the description of Lojem places it at 70 degrees Latitude. Using 
Steve's calculation of 100.3 mets to the Degree, this places Lojem at the
30 degrees N Lat. mark, which is about where New Orleans is on Earth.

Dan, we could probably use a bit of clarification on this, whether Lojem
is located in the Arctic, or the Sub-tropics.

Sean L. McLane    |     I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed,
zodo@laf.cioe.com |         briefed, debriefed, or numbered.
                                My life is my own!
                                        -The Prisoner