1964: "Spatial Orientation"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

The Synologist
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:50 pm UTC

1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby The Synologist » Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:11 pm UTC

Image
Title text: Here, if you know the number of days until the vernal equinox, I can point you to the theater using my pocket Stonehenge.

As someone just getting into Kerbal Space Program, this gave me a mild GOOMHR moment :D

User avatar
Keyman
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 1:56 pm UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Keyman » Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:17 pm UTC

I'm going to see Stonehenge next month. It always looked bigger than pocket-sized in pictures...
A childhood spent walking while reading books has prepared me unexpectedly well for today's world.

User avatar
sfmans
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 9:09 am UTC
Location: High Peak, UK

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby sfmans » Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:19 pm UTC

Keyman wrote:I'm going to see Stonehenge next month. It always looked bigger than pocket-sized in pictures...


That depends as to whether you’re watching Spinal Tap ...

User avatar
Heimhenge
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 11:35 pm UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Heimhenge » Wed Mar 07, 2018 6:12 pm UTC

When someone asks me for directions the first thing I assess is whether I should use "turn left" or "turn north" (or whatever direction). Some people handle the former better, and others prefer compass directions. Not sure exactly how I make that assessment ... might have something to do with my perception of how intelligent the questioner is. Compass directions are less ambiguous, so that's how I prefer to give directions.

Then again, my wife (a very intelligent person) still gets "left" and "right" mixed up. I hear that's not uncommon.

User avatar
bantler
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:23 pm UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby bantler » Wed Mar 07, 2018 6:25 pm UTC

Heimhenge wrote:When someone asks me for directions the first thing I assess is whether I should use "turn left" or "turn north" (or whatever direction). Some people handle the former better, and others prefer compass directions. Not sure exactly how I make that assessment ... might have something to do with my perception of how intelligent the questioner is. Compass directions are less ambiguous, so that's how I prefer to give directions.

Then again, my wife (a very intelligent person) still gets "left" and "right" mixed up. I hear that's not uncommon.


If I'm driving on a backstreet of a strange town at night I prefer TURN LEFT to TURN NORTH.


I'll bet she writes with her right hand. I can see ambidextrous people getting confused.

sotanaht
Posts: 212
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 2:14 am UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby sotanaht » Wed Mar 07, 2018 6:26 pm UTC

Heimhenge wrote:When someone asks me for directions the first thing I assess is whether I should use "turn left" or "turn north" (or whatever direction). Some people handle the former better, and others prefer compass directions. Not sure exactly how I make that assessment ... might have something to do with my perception of how intelligent the questioner is. Compass directions are less ambiguous, so that's how I prefer to give directions.

Then again, my wife (a very intelligent person) still gets "left" and "right" mixed up. I hear that's not uncommon.

Considering that roads around here usually don't go in the direction they say they do (ie "west" on a certain highway might in fact be more north or south), and that I don't have a compass unless I wanted to rely on my cell phone (in which case I would be using GPS anyway), compass directions are pretty much useless as long as roads are involved.

The Synologist
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:50 pm UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby The Synologist » Wed Mar 07, 2018 6:39 pm UTC

Heimhenge wrote:When someone asks me for directions the first thing I assess is whether I should use "turn left" or "turn north" (or whatever direction).

Wow, I've never heard anyone say "turn <cardinal direction>" before in my entire life, so it's interesting to me that you would consider that a realistic alternative to using "left" and "right". Maybe that's just something that's more common where you're from?...

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4888
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Pfhorrest » Wed Mar 07, 2018 6:41 pm UTC

sotanaht wrote:Considering that roads around here usually don't go in the direction they say they do (ie "west" on a certain highway might in fact be more north or south)

You're on the South Coast too? Ah, I'm glad the days of driving 101 north into the blinding sunset are behind me now...

(Another weird thing about the geography around here: technically, Nevada is due north. But not the same "north" that the sun sets in.)

Add a third option to the cardinal directions and relative directions debate: directions by large geographic landmarks, e.g. "toward the mountains" / "toward the ocean". That's very handy around here, where people might not be clear if inland is east or north but they can always just look up and see the mountains and go toward those, or away from them if they're trying to turn "toward the ocean".
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
rhhardin
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:11 pm UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby rhhardin » Wed Mar 07, 2018 7:06 pm UTC

The sun rises and sets in the same place in Australia as it does in the US, but goes north instead of south.

huenthar
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 6:42 am UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby huenthar » Wed Mar 07, 2018 7:17 pm UTC

I've spent enough time trying to solidify my intuition for how things move relative to all the other things that move that I felt unavoidably compelled to point out that, if he is facing west, the earth should be carrying him backwards around the Sun (seeing as how the Sun moves east through the zodiac ie the earth orbits the sun counterclockwise viewed from the north)... or did I get it wrong? or was the strip deliberately wrong?

User avatar
Heimhenge
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 11:35 pm UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Heimhenge » Wed Mar 07, 2018 7:18 pm UTC

The Synologist wrote:
Heimhenge wrote:When someone asks me for directions the first thing I assess is whether I should use "turn left" or "turn north" (or whatever direction).

Wow, I've never heard anyone say "turn <cardinal direction>" before in my entire life, so it's interesting to me that you would consider that a realistic alternative to using "left" and "right". Maybe that's just something that's more common where you're from?...


No, not really a matter of where I am. I guess it's just a hangover from my Boy Scout days (BGPS) when we had to learn navigation with a compass and map. Me, I prefer to get directions based on cardinal directions probably for the same reason.

User avatar
heuristically_alone
Posts: 280
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2016 7:43 pm UTC
Location: 37.2368078 and -115.80341870000001

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby heuristically_alone » Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:09 pm UTC

There's a town in. North australia where knowing the directions is imperative in their language. The have 10+ different greetings depending on how the person you're talking to is positioned compared to you (whether north or southwest of you ect)
Bow gifted by adnapemit.

You can learn to levitate with just a little help.

:idea: = Surprised Cyclops

keldor
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:18 am UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby keldor » Wed Mar 07, 2018 10:19 pm UTC

huenthar wrote:I've spent enough time trying to solidify my intuition for how things move relative to all the other things that move that I felt unavoidably compelled to point out that, if he is facing west, the earth should be carrying him backwards around the Sun (seeing as how the Sun moves east through the zodiac ie the earth orbits the sun counterclockwise viewed from the north)... or did I get it wrong? or was the strip deliberately wrong?


No, it's correct. Looking down at the Earth from above the north pole, east is the counterclockwise direction and west is clockwise. Therefore, if you're facing in the clockwise direction and the Earth is spinning counterclockwise, it's moving you backwards.

During the day, he's standing on the inside of the Earth's orbit, so in that case, looking clockwise on the curve of the earth translates to looking counterclockwise on the sun's orbit. During the night, however, looking clockwise on the earth translates to looking clockwise relative to the sun. Therefore, we can surmise that it is daytime when the events in the comic occur.

Now the tilt of the Earth is either added or subtracted from your latitude depending on the season, and the time of day also matters.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3575
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Mar 07, 2018 10:42 pm UTC

(I'm surprised nobody has yet done a riff on…)

Practice!

(…or maybe "Rehearse!" as it's a theatre.)

I also remember, BGPS, paying attention to moss on trees. And, later on, satellite dishes on buildings. There are roads around here where the winding and weaving make "keep north at the next three junctions, then west for the two after that" easier to deal with for the geoorientationally-aware. But I'm not sure I've trusted that many strangers to be able to handle this mode of direction, and people I know as capable don't need to be told this sort of thing. (I've said "If I were you, I wouldn't start from here…", at times. With significant amounts of seriousness behind me, even if said with a smile on my face.)

User avatar
da Doctah
Posts: 904
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:27 am UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby da Doctah » Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:24 am UTC

Wish I could find it, but there's an old Peanuts strip that shows Charlie Brown lying on the ground looking at the sky, doing a version of this xkcd about how the earth is turning on its axis, and flying along its orbit, and being carried along by the rotation of the galaxy. The last panel ends with him saying "Sometimes when I lie really still, I can feel it all happening."

Mikeski
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Mikeski » Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:55 am UTC

xkcd wrote:pocket Stonehenge.

What a silly idea.

google wrote:www.stonehengewatch.com

...but not silly enough to prevent its existence!

JohnBurger
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 1:15 am UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby JohnBurger » Thu Mar 08, 2018 1:21 am UTC

There's a brilliant SF book by Gertrude Friedberg, "The Revolving Boy" (1966). It takes this concept and runs with it even further than Randall did (gasp!). The eponymous boy knew his absolute position in space, including the motion of the solar system within the galaxy, and the galaxy within the universe...

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6488
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: 1964: Derv Nagy

Postby ucim » Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:45 am UTC

JohnBurger wrote:There's a brilliant SF book by Gertrude Friedberg, "The Revolving Boy" (1966).
A delightful book! Read it many years ago and never figured on encountering it again, it being kind of obscure. But where else but on xkcd. :)

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

huenthar
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 6:42 am UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby huenthar » Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:30 am UTC

keldor wrote:During the day, he's standing on the inside of the Earth's orbit.


I knew I must have been overlooking something important... Thanks!

rmsgrey
Posts: 3434
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby rmsgrey » Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:27 am UTC

There's one set of directions I give from time to time, which goes something like "Starting from [landmark], head east, go past [minor landmark] and keep going, up the spiral staircase, over the rooftops, across the motorway, past [minor landmark] to the south and turn north at the lights. It's just past the [shop] on your right."

That should catch both people who have difficulty with left and right, and people who have difficulty with east and west...

herbstschweigen
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2017 11:03 am UTC
Location: Arrival City

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby herbstschweigen » Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:06 pm UTC

Heimhenge wrote:When someone asks me for directions the first thing I assess is whether I should use "turn left" or "turn north" (or whatever direction). Some people handle the former better, and others prefer compass directions. Not sure exactly how I make that assessment ... might have something to do with my perception of how intelligent the questioner is. Compass directions are less ambiguous, so that's how I prefer to give directions.

Then again, my wife (a very intelligent person) still gets "left" and "right" mixed up. I hear that's not uncommon.


Yes, here. Mensa member and often confusing left and right. Or at least I really have to think hard. Cardinal directions make much more sense. If something is north of you it is always north of you, but what's left and right depends on where you're facing.
I remember visiting southeast US and I was so delighted that highway signs said "north", "south" etc. That is much more helpful when driving around a country than the name of some city you only roughly know where it is, or maybe even don't know at all.

sotanaht wrote: Considering that roads around here usually don't go in the direction they say they do (ie "west" on a certain highway might in fact be more north or south), and that I don't have a compass unless I wanted to rely on my cell phone (in which case I would be using GPS anyway), compass directions are pretty much useless as long as roads are involved.


Why do you need a compass? Sun's position and time of day is enough to give you a rough idea where the main directions are.

rhhardin wrote:The sun rises and sets in the same place in Australia as it does in the US, but goes north instead of south.

Yes, that always takes a bit getting used to when on the southern hemisphere. I also found it funny how around the equator you don't take much notice of the sun during daytime, because it's so high above you.
It's cooler up here.

DJ JD
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:32 pm UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby DJ JD » Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:36 pm UTC

Today's post reminded me of something I've wondered about before: is there any way for us to know exactly how fast we're actually going, in some sort of absolute terms? The idea came from a friend of mine and I joking about a time machine, how even a few seconds forward or backwards in time would invariably leave you in space because Earth spins, goes around the Sun, which moves relative to other stars in the area, all of which are moving in our galaxy, which is moving, etc. etc. etc. It got me wondering if there was any possible way to correct for that, even hypothetically. Any ideas here?

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2962
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby orthogon » Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:49 pm UTC

herbstschweigen wrote:I remember visiting southeast US and I was so delighted that highway signs said "north", "south" etc. That is much more helpful when driving around a country than the name of some city you only roughly know where it is, or maybe even don't know at all.


OK, I've complained about this before, but imagine you're on the London Underground (map), at Notting Hill Gate, and you want to take the yellow (Circle) line to Victoria. What direction will denote the correct platform on the signs?

Spoiler:
That's right, it's Westbound.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4872
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby HES » Thu Mar 08, 2018 1:36 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:imagine you're on the London Underground (map)
Sure, but that map is geographically nonsense anyway.
He/Him/His Image

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26203
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby SecondTalon » Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:09 pm UTC

DJ JD wrote:Today's post reminded me of something I've wondered about before: is there any way for us to know exactly how fast we're actually going, in some sort of absolute terms? The idea came from a friend of mine and I joking about a time machine, how even a few seconds forward or backwards in time would invariably leave you in space because Earth spins, goes around the Sun, which moves relative to other stars in the area, all of which are moving in our galaxy, which is moving, etc. etc. etc. It got me wondering if there was any possible way to correct for that, even hypothetically. Any ideas here?

No. Speed is just a measurement of how fast you are moving away/from a declared point.

If you have no reference frame, you can’t measure velocity.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6488
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby ucim » Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:19 pm UTC

DJ JD wrote:is there any way for us to know exactly how fast we're actually going, in some sort of absolute terms?
No, because there's no such thing as "absolute" position. It's not like the universe is a grid. There's nothing there, literally, except other moving parts.

There's a whole thread on this, but it's rather high pressure. :)

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2962
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby orthogon » Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:43 pm UTC

HES wrote:
orthogon wrote:imagine you're on the London Underground (map)
Sure, but that map is geographically nonsense anyway.

Maybe, but topologically it's perfect. My point is that, if you're using that kind of map, you need to identify lines and directions in a way that's consistent with the schematic nature of the map. Having "eastbound/westbound" at a station where the line is shown as a platonic vertical is just stupid. Perhaps the easiest solution would be to give the name of the next station served by each platform ("Circle Line via High Street Kensington". They do this sometimes, but the "via" station is often quite far away and ambiguous). But I'd personally prefer the Circle Line platforms to be "clockwise" and "anticlockwise".
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3575
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Soupspoon » Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:08 pm UTC

rmsgrey wrote:There's one set of directions I give from time to time, which goes something like "Starting from [landmark], head east, go past [minor landmark] and keep going, up the spiral staircase, over the rooftops, across the motorway, past [minor landmark] to the south and turn north at the lights. It's just past the [shop] on your right."

That should catch both people who have difficulty with left and right, and people who have difficulty with east and west...

And those who don't think that helices are spirals. ;)

DanAxtell
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 9:59 am UTC
Location: USA (Vermont)

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby DanAxtell » Thu Mar 08, 2018 5:01 pm UTC

Mikeski wrote:
xkcd wrote:pocket Stonehenge.

What a silly idea.
google wrote:www.stonehengewatch.com

...but not silly enough to prevent its existence!

...and on the lingering theme of Namespace Land Rush, pocketstonehenge.com was grabbed back in 2006. Archive.org shows that it's always been a parked domain name. Someone is paying the 18-cent ICANN fee annually to hold on to the silly name.

User avatar
Ranbot
Posts: 173
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:39 pm UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Ranbot » Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:43 pm UTC

sotanaht wrote:
Heimhenge wrote:When someone asks me for directions the first thing I assess is whether I should use "turn left" or "turn north" (or whatever direction). Some people handle the former better, and others prefer compass directions. Not sure exactly how I make that assessment ... might have something to do with my perception of how intelligent the questioner is. Compass directions are less ambiguous, so that's how I prefer to give directions.

Then again, my wife (a very intelligent person) still gets "left" and "right" mixed up. I hear that's not uncommon.

Considering that roads around here usually don't go in the direction they say they do (ie "west" on a certain highway might in fact be more north or south)...

Same thing here where I live (Philadelphia suburbs); many of the roads go in a NE-SW or NW-SE directions. If you're giving driving directions to someone often the only value a compass cardinal direction has is when the road sign actually says North/South/East/West, but just because the road is labeled in one direction doesn't mean you're always going in that direction. In fact, a major interstate (I-95) essentially makes a very wide U-turn over many miles; such that you can drive on I-95 "North" and it slowly turns east and then almost due South where the road changes names to I-295 South. It's very confusing to people unfamiliar with the area.

Also throughout the Appalachian Mountains you'll find most roads strongly influenced by terrain and topography, typically running NE-SW in direction of the mountain ridges and valleys, or NW-SE in the direction of gaps cross-cutting the ridges.

Mikeski
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Mikeski » Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:49 pm UTC

Can you tell left/right people from n/s/e/w people by the way they set up their map on their phone? (or in their car, on their garmin/tomtom GPS device, etc.?)

left/right people set it so the map rotates, so the top is the way they're facing.

n/s/e/w people set it so the map doesn't rotate, and the top is always "north".

Or are there left/right people who like non-rotating maps? (I'm a n/s/e/w non-rotator, myself.)

...

Roads with cardinal directions in their names are nice, as long as they actually go in that direction. Driving from Chicago to Milwaukee will tell you you're on "Interstate 94, Westbound", the whole way. (You're going basically northwards, and you spend almost as much time going due east as due west.)

User avatar
pogrmman
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:53 pm UTC
Location: Probably outside

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby pogrmman » Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:05 pm UTC

One of my pet peeves is that sometimes the navigation map on my phone will start with something like “head north”. If I’m using my phone to guide me in an unfamiliar city, often when it’s dark out, I have literally no sense of what way is north! (I’m fine with this if I’ve been in an area for a while, though.)

Road directions are often helpful, though. Even if they don’t run in exactly that direction, if you’re going a long way on a road, it’ll usually put you more or less just direction from where you started.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3575
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Soupspoon » Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:18 pm UTC

I don't think I could get on with rotating maps (caveated in the last paragraph). Does the text on the map (vector-rendered, or rasterized but upon independent rotational origin points) rotate to always stay screen-upright, likely ruining various map-design paradigms of not overstriking their neighbouring labels, or are they nailed solidly to the rotating substrate? Or, like road-number labels on most maps, are they inclined upon the road with 'up' being the diagonal direction that has a positive screen-up value?

(That latter does not apply to contour-height numbers, on British OS maps, which are laid "top to up-hill", for instant recognition, and necessitated the selective non-inclusion of some numbers during the change from metric to imperial, where the imperial (foot-based, mostly resolved to a multiple of 10, or 25 according to scale and tightness) lines were first relabelled with the metric (equivalent value of metres) value, which sometimes gave a figure (a rounded almost-third of a 10 or 25 multiple value) that could be ambiguous with the invertible digits of 1, 2/5, 6/9 and 8 reversed looking a bit like another number as if on a reversed slope. The eventual retooling of the maps to display straight (10s and/or 5) multiples of metric contour lines largely wiped the problem away, with no number being zero-front-padded, although 25 is its own (rough) inversion if the font isn't clear enough.)


I think I'm mostly a magnetic/axial-orientator, thinking about it. My hand-held and internally imagined maps tend to be north-to-top (where known). That said, if I can see a landmark ahead of me, atop a hilltop across various wild/rural folds of landscqpe or intervening urbanised environment, I might not bother too much to establish the exact north-south axis while taking tracks, roads or open cross-country 'green paths' towards my destination, avoiding such impermiable land-boundaries as properties, un-styled/gated field walls, ribbons/expanses of water or verticalities (up or down) of geology. If I already have the mental map I think I maintain a duality or superposition of upright/experiencial orientation. If I have a physical map, it takes priority whilstsoever the briskness, breeziness or precipitative nature of the air (or the available illumination) allows its constant deployment. Gloved hands, gales, driving rain and moonless darkness sets me onto the memorised fall-back, that is.


A car GPS display (which I don't have, have experienced in other people's vehicles and note that facinatingly distract me as a passenger such that I see far too little of the outside view) does twist and turn (with tilted obliquety, to match thr proposed forward view) and they've obviously worked a lot on that, but the pirouetting labels and icons have to be necessarily much sparser than a fixed-to-substrate map. Maybe still practical, but not as much fun for a true cartophile.

exoren22
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 4:30 am UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby exoren22 » Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:57 pm UTC

herbstschweigen wrote:Yes, here. Mensa member and often confusing left and right. Or at least I really have to think hard. Cardinal directions make much more sense. If something is north of you it is always north of you, but what's left and right depends on where you're facing.


Well, I am convinced I screw up left and right because I am a lefty and the world is broken.

But is this really true? If you move 20 miles north then a thing that was 10 miles north is now 10 miles south. And do most of you live in a place where the roads allow you to keep these things straight? I drive a stretch where a road changes from 440 South to 287 North, all while traveling more-or-less east-to-west. And why doesn't everybody just give coordinates and let Google figure it out? Who leaves the house without a phone these days?

Also,
Soupspoon wrote:A car GPS display (which I don't have, have experienced in other people's vehicles and note that facinatingly distract me as a passenger such that I see far too little of the outside view) does twist and turn (with tilted obliquety, to match thr proposed forward view) and they've obviously worked a lot on that, but the pirouetting labels and icons have to be necessarily much sparser than a fixed-to-substrate map. Maybe still practical, but not as much fun for a true cartophile.


First, No True Cartophile, but secondly, I think you're really over-thinking this "pirouetting labels" thing. They all move together. Therefore there is no collision. They can have the same labels. AND I would think it would be MORE fun because it's not as wrote and monotonous.

mihipte
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2015 4:55 am UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby mihipte » Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:15 pm UTC

I use a non-rotating map, because the landscape gets unfamiliar when I rotate it and I lose my sense of where things are, but I’m often translating to left/right in my head to understand how to turn.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3575
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Soupspoon » Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:54 pm UTC

exoren22 wrote:I think you're really over-thinking this "pirouetting labels" thing. They all move together. Therefore there is no collision. They can have the same labels.

Imagine you're driving on a road from Scarborough, North Yorkshire, to Holyhead, Anglesey. For some reason, you have two particular places marked on your display. Sutton-Under-Whitestonecliff is just ahead of you, while Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch is nearly at your destination.

The map orients to your direction of travel (which, off the top of my head, I'd say was just a tad south of westward, if you want the verisimilitude) and your display has both places marked on it with horizontal-to-display text labelling, one safely above the other.

Then you do a U-turn, just (you forgot your Welsh dictionary!) and the display turns the map round. To get one name 'past' the other without collision is going to be awkward.


Obviously, this is contrived. And one name may disappear off the bottom before the rotation (when it hoves into view as the other slides round the other way on an arc of its own) but any information-rich density of texts, and even off-round symbology, within a given quarter-arc that remains on the screen as you follow a twisty-turny route is going to start interfering in ways that the initial renderer ("what are the most important labels, and do I have space and the right zoom to add these next ones, without over-remdering?") must dynamically decide whether to re-render the text-objects continuously to avoid non-colliding items colliding after a twist to the POV puts them in close contention.

Either that, or just miss out so much detail that each text-label 'reserves' a full circular space on the screen, so that it never threatens to collide in the first place, disqualifying many a useful marker that could display, closer in but above or below, but is nixed 'just in case'.

speising
Posts: 2272
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby speising » Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:55 pm UTC

i've read somewhere that it's a gender thing. apparently, statistically, males prefer to hold their map north-up, while females tend to orient the map to coincide with their viewing direction.

User avatar
Reka
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:21 pm UTC

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Reka » Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:27 pm UTC

Ranbot wrote:
sotanaht wrote:Considering that roads around here usually don't go in the direction they say they do (ie "west" on a certain highway might in fact be more north or south)...

Same thing here where I live (Philadelphia suburbs); many of the roads go in a NE-SW or NW-SE directions. [...] just because the road is labeled in one direction doesn't mean you're always going in that direction. In fact, a major interstate (I-95) essentially makes a very wide U-turn over many miles; such that you can drive on I-95 "North" and it slowly turns east and then almost due South where the road changes names to I-295 South. It's very confusing to people unfamiliar with the area.

You beat me to it. It's even more confusing from the other end, i.e. you're going south through New Jersey (probably on I-95, just to be all, like, crystal-clear and stuff), and then you exit onto US 1, go quite a few miles west(ish)... and then you get to an intersection that essentially says, go north here to get on I-95 south. Which, as we established, is now about 20 miles behind you, because in addition to that U-turn, there are actually two completely different roads, which never meet, that are called I-95.

I'm one of those who never learned "left" and "right" - I mean, I know which side is which, I just don't know which word goes with which side. Growing up in Southern California, I was pretty good about west=north vs. south=east, just based on "the ocean's that-a-way"... and then I moved to the opposite coast. It still feels wrong to be facing north and having the ocean on the right.

Mikeski
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby Mikeski » Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:15 am UTC

speising wrote:i've read somewhere that it's a gender thing. apparently, statistically, males prefer to hold their map north-up, while females tend to orient the map to coincide with their viewing direction.

Not surprising, since there's a measurable difference in spatial intelligence between the sexes. Being better at spatial visualization means you can deal with a more abstract map (one that's rotated relative to yourself) more easily.

User avatar
eviloatmeal
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:39 am UTC
Location: Upside down in space!
Contact:

Re: 1964: "Spatial Orientation"

Postby eviloatmeal » Fri Mar 09, 2018 7:18 am UTC

"The theater is three blocks makai." "But we're in Nebraska!" "Uh... If you get to the sea, you've gone too far."
*** FREE SHIPPING ENABLED ***
Image
Riddles are abound tonightImage


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests