Re: Bulges

[Jim Green <JMGreen@sisna.com>]

At 04:08 PM 3/5/97 -0800, you wrote:

> My one question would be this: are tide tables constructed by this new
> technique better than tide tables constructed in the old way? I realize
> that performing a fourier transform is no more computationally difficult
> than doing a harmonic synthesis, but is it in any way better? It does
> seem that there is a certain rationality in discarding terms that arise
> from noise (weather and seismic activity), and this can be done if one
> has other prior knowledge such as astronomical information. What is the
> advantage of discarding information?
>
> Leigh

Leigh, et al., There are dozens of tide models -- each one manipulates the
data differently.  None of them are globally accurate -- NOAA's won't work
in Alaska for example (unless they have patched it up recently) -- I confess
that I am tiring of the tide thing for this year, (Yes, I know I started it
this time, but I really thought it was just an innocent question about
Newton) -- but if anyone wants to pursue these models further, I will dredge
up a list and/or a WWW site or two on the subject.  Besides David Bowman has
privately damaged my speed-of-ocean-waves arguments, so I need to go back to
the drawing board anyway. (:-)

We haven't talked about "mass-is-converted-to-energy for a while (:-)

Jim Green

What do you get when you cross a crooked politician with a dishonest lawyer?