I find it absolutely shocking and incredible a machine could and would be invented that would simulate exterior motion having a deleterious effect on its own operation. [/sarcasm]
Why would manufacturers go to the effort of installing something that made their product unusable? Why has nobody noticed that disabling the mechanism, or setting the latitude to zero, improves things? Could it not just be that these things work as intended, because the earth is a rotating globe? You're not offering anything of substance in response - just sarcasm and empty statements.
You missed my point, that being all kinds of operating systems evolve, with some functions being labeled as being based on "something," not really necessary to the function or continued successful operation or even actually based on to the reason given.
For instance, I use a computer everyday with Windows as the operating system. Maybe we should check with them as to whether everything in place for their operating system is necessary or helpful.
I think we both know the answer to that question is a firm "NO."
Why would I possibly agree to an untrue statement that Sigma Octantis could possibly be visible in those three places at the same time.
It is not dark in those three places at the same time.
Your own source proves that to be a fact and you are just plain wrong.
Where and how does the source I gave do that? And when will you start providing links and evidence to support your empty, meaningless statements?
Here's the forecast for 21 June, as per my earlier comment:
It's dark on all three continents - the east coast of South America, the West coast of Australia, and all of Africa. Dark.
Repeating your false claims concerning Sigma Octantis is doing nothing to further debate.
The basic facts are Sigma Octantis is barely visible to the naked eye, and it is not dark enough in all three places you offer for it to be visible to three independent observers at the same time.
Navigation is always performed on a short scale, trips being broken down in sections, utilizing waypoints.
How does that even come close to addressing the point I made? Whether you break your straight line into shorter legs or just do one big straight line, it's still a straight line, with different headings to the great circle route.
Yeah, I will now remind you of your entire post to which this reply was intended.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=18036.msg238127#msg238127"But navigation, other than on a very local scale where grids can be used, is done using lat/long, not X/Y."
As if Lat/Long is not an x-y coordinate system, when it clearly is anyway.
And as if breaking up longer trips into easier to plan and manage shorter sections isn't performed on a daily basis.
Really tiresome and worthless objections on your part, especially when you know the facts are in my corner.
Your repeated failure to address any of the points being made with anything other than Monty Python style disagreement just makes it look even more like you don't have a credible argument. Fine by me, but I rather hoped for a better standard of debate.
Those are the facts.
I have not represented anything but factual information in my replies.
Bye.