Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #12427, comment 20
- Timestamp:
- 2016-01-25T07:43:19+01:00 (10 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
Ticket #12427, comment 20
initial v1 2 2 3 3 * in 3D space there exist planes intersecting both points (a) and (b) on the ellipsoid's surface 4 * adding a third point (c), let it be the center of the ellipsoid, a definiteplaneout of the former ispicked4 * using a third point (c), let it be the center of the ellipsoid, a definite ''plane P'' out of the former is chosen 5 5 6 * all of the following are guaranteed to lie in that same plane6 * all of the following are guaranteed to lie in ''plane P'' 7 7 * a non-spherical, possibly [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isosceles_triangle non-isosceles] triangle given by (a), (b), (c) 8 8 * a "great ellipse" for (a) and (b) which we do not know an [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eccentricity_(mathematics) eccentricity] for … … 12 12 * eccentricity and circumference of the "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ellipse great ellipse]" are a function of (a) and (b) and thus varying 13 13 14 For the recursion of {{{curvatureDistance}}} to work flawlessly, thepartial sums must calculate lengths of15 "great ellipse"-segments which ''lie inthat same plane''. But actual ratio of partial lengths is ''not'' important.14 For the recursion of {{{curvatureDistance}}} to work flawlessly, partial sums must calculate lengths of 15 "great ellipse"-segments which lie in ''plane P''. But actual ratio of partial lengths is ''not'' important. 16 16 17 17 A bisecting ray {{{br}}} from (c) intersecting the chord ''will'' also intersect the "great ellipse". … … 23 23 Let the recursion step be {{{return thres > ret ? ret : r(a, m, ret)+r(m, b, ret);}}}, 24 24 then a ray that strictly intersects at the middle is not needed. Using {{{br}}} to simply find a 25 "middle"point ''guaranteed'' to lie on the "greate ellipse" will suffice. Any split ratio will do.25 point ''guaranteed'' to lie on the "greate ellipse" will suffice. Any split ratio will do. 26 26 27 27 {{{thres}}} is not {{{eps}}} - it needs to be chosen in a different way, reasonably large, 28 acknowledging that below a certain threshold distance, ''all'' true distances of arbitrarily29 chosen (a) and (b) do not differ from the thresholdmore than {{{eps}}}.28 acknowledging that for results below a certain threshold distance, ''all'' true distances 29 of arbitrarily chosen (a) and (b) do not differ from {{{thres}}} distance more than {{{eps}}}.


