In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 13 Apr 2012 07:07:37 -0700: Hi, [snip] >The monolith from 2001 and beyond > >http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47024373/ns/technology_and_science-science/
Quote: "Any curve will look like a series of straight lines if you reduce your resolution enough," Hill told Life's Little Mysteries. " ...note however that pock marks on the planets surface (impact craters?), that are smaller than the monolith, manage to come out quite round. > >Apparently the ratio of thickness to width to height impressed a lot of >observers as being similar to the ACC novel, but the actual size is hard to >determine. In 2001 the monolith ratio was 1-4-9 which relates to the >square of 1-2-3 ... which was supposed to be some kind of clue. Thanks to >Ron Kita for this info. > >HOWEVER - Note that if the same satellite had taken an image of the >4-Corners area of the USA (aka "Hillerman country") then the natural >structure seen in this image (the one on the right but with its base buried >by sand): > >http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_l4z_uk_P7MU/TKqnig2tv9I/AAAAAAAAIrA/LyJJDdn2GGM/s1 >600/Totem+Pole.jpg > >would have looked like the "monolith" due to pixel smoothing ... I think the mound at the base from weathering would give it away. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
