• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Makemakean Does Various Graphical Things!

Just a shame that the ideological inclinations and parties of the candidates are completely unknown, otherwise this would have been a goldmine for anyone wishing to study the ecological inference problem in detail.

Are they all completely unknown? Because if you know some you could maybe reverse engineer the positions of the others from the data?

The above is of course Hugo Hubert Ribbing, Chancery President of Sweden since 1861 (slated to be her last)

I guess the unification is very much on Sweden's terms but it does amuse me that in a TL with the premise of "Sweden must conquer the world" you're getting rid of Sweden as an independent entity.
 
Are they all completely unknown? Because if you know some you could maybe reverse engineer the positions of the others from the data?

Some of them are rather easy to find, since the government ministers were MPs. Others have Danish Wikipedia articles. The rest (that is, the vast majority) would probably require me to travel down to Copenhagen and go through newspapers from the era, as Leif Lewin and team did in the late 60s (and then all that data was lost).

I guess the unification is very much on Sweden's terms but it does amuse me that in a TL with the premise of "Sweden must conquer the world" you're getting rid of Sweden as an independent entity.

The interpretation I am going for is that the idea is that Sweden the starting point for bringing about the unification of the world, not really bringing about a world where everyone considers themselves Swedes. Sweden is Terminus, and from Terminus, the Second Galactic Empire will come. ;)
 
Okay, so, all that remains is sorting out the borders of Finland and Swedish Pomerania, add a few more lakes, and then cfometh my favourite part (I'd never thought I'd ever say this), the CHANGE OF COORDINATES!

path841.png
 
Mercator ahoy, I see.

Hence the need for a change of coordinate transformation. Basically, you take every single point making up the svg, project them unto a sphere in 3D space, and then you simply take a reasonably well chosen point som distance from the sphere, draw straight lines from the points on the sphere to this point, and take the intersection of these lines with a plane that is normal to the vector going through both the aforementioned point and the centre of the sphere.
 
Can someone please doublecheck my math so I haven't made some embarrassing mistake?

I’ll confess that your solution seemed strange at first, but I got the same result. The only thing that is a bit off is the first graphic. It looks as though you were trying to outline a problem where the plane is the meeting point between the two triangles, rather than at the circumference of the sphere.
 
I’ll confess that your solution seemed strange at first, but I got the same result. The only thing that is a bit off is the first graphic. It looks as though you were trying to outline a problem where the plane is the meeting point between the two triangles, rather than at the circumference of the sphere.

Thanks! And you are right, that graphic is upon closer inspection wrong.
 
Thanks! And you are right, that graphic is upon closer inspection wrong.

It’s a shame though, it is so pretty an image that it makes me want to solve that problem. Give me a moment...

Edit: I am an idiot, the distance would just be the height multiplied by tan(theta). I really should go eat something...
 
Last edited:
Edit: I am an idiot, the distance would just be the height multiplied by tan(theta). I really should go eat something...

Don't worry, I asked for help doublechecking because I am far from immune from such mistakes myself.

I figure I should probably try to make the most of this Mercator projection map before I do the transformation...

path841.png
 
Those are the post-WWII boundaries around Salla.

I'm trying to type out a way to say thank you that comes across as being genuine, since obviously, as this map should demonstrate, I'm stickler for details and so evidently appreciate comments like this, but everything I keep composing just seems really sarcastic and passive aggressive when I read it in my head. :p

I'll fix that the next time I open up Inkscape. Cheers. ;)
 
You ought to do illustrations for CGP (the revision guide people, not Youtube's Ar-Pharazon)

You know what, I'll drop them an email with a CV and a selection of drawings I've made and just ask them if they're interested.
 
Ha, you might as well. Your style might not be quite the same as theirs but I just meant revision guides in general and their company was the first that sprung to mind.

I am working on making my master's thesis into a full-scale textbook on the McKay correspondence after a friend of mine said I should try to do textbooks. Frankly, it's been something I've been hoping to get into for quite a while after finding out how much money Peter Atkins makes from his tomes which have become the standard references in all things chemistry these days.

I did apply last year to work for a small company that does some sort of mobile app with answers to physics and mathematics questions. However, I didn't get the job, seeing as part of the sample explanations they wanted me to answer included explaining to a 15 years-old why you cannot take the logarithm of a negative number, and err-... I ended up writing four pages on why you most definitely can take the logarithm of a negative number.

They might argue that it's too complex, and not realistic to assume that a fifteen years-old will understand, but I argue that all you need is a little imagination. ;)
 
I am working on making my master's thesis into a full-scale textbook on the McKay correspondence after a friend of mine said I should try to do textbooks. Frankly, it's been something I've been hoping to get into for quite a while after finding out how much money Peter Atkins makes from his tomes which have become the standard references in all things chemistry these days.

I did apply last year to work for a small company that does some sort of mobile app with answers to physics and mathematics questions. However, I didn't get the job, seeing as part of the sample explanations they wanted me to answer included explaining to a 15 years-old why you cannot take the logarithm of a negative number, and err-... I ended up writing four pages on why you most definitely can take the logarithm of a negative number.

They might argue that it's too complex, and not realistic to assume that a fifteen years-old will understand, but I argue that all you need is a little imagination. ;)
Yes, I remember this story. I do sympathise, as part of my own teaching philosophy is to pitch content at a level above what conventional wisdom thinks because you need to capture the minds of the more talented and inspired students, rather than leaving them to get complacent in the pack and lose interest. Obviously that has to be only part of the teaching to avoid leaving everyone else behind, but you can't have one size fits all. Anyway, good luck with your plans: I imagine your hand-drawn style wouldn't work as well on a mobile APP anyway, but in dead tree form I think it could work very well.
 
Yes, I remember this story. I do sympathise, as part of my own teaching philosophy is to pitch content at a level above what conventional wisdom thinks because you need to capture the minds of the more talented and inspired students, rather than leaving them to get complacent in the pack and lose interest.

Well I mean, I wasn't even going for something as sophisticated as that. In my explanation I said that if a 15 years-old asked the question "Can you take the logarithm of a negative number?" it would suffice to answer with "Yes, you can as a matter of fact, but it's not exactly trivial to understand how it all works, and certainly not something you need to worry about us having to do in this class any time soon" to make the kid satisfied in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, but if the kid was really insistant on having it explained to them, this was the answer I would give.

What I would never do, however, would be to say that you cannot take the logarithm of a negative number. To do so, I would have to lie, and lying I know is a sin.
 
What I would never do, however, would be to say that you cannot take the logarithm of a negative number. To do so, I would have to lie, and lying I know is a sin.
Have you read the bit in The Science of Discworld where Iain Stewart and Jack Cohen describe education as "lies to children" for this reason, and it really upset some Scandinavians?
 
Have you read the bit in The Science of Discworld where Iain Stewart and Jack Cohen describe education as "lies to children" for this reason, and it really upset some Scandinavians?

No, but I just read up on it. I'm terribly sorry about all that, but we Swedes are a terribly literal-minded people.
 
Back
Top