Re: BSG+ Centauri A, B, C and Cally (was Re: Anyone else notice...)

In article <673ll1F2ngah5U2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
KalElFan <kalelfan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>"Brad Templeton" <btm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>> In fact, since she photographed Taurus, that means she
>> photographed the Pleiades... If they spot those in the photo...
>> If she had a good enough camera...
>>
>> If she happened to catch some of the really distant items...
>
>If, if, if... again, there's nothing to nitpicks like this.  You're
>making it all up.

She did shoot the zodiac.   Her camera seems more than adequate.
They did study the photos quite carefully.   I'm not making it up.
>
>> Of course, that's what computers are for.
>
>You're just not realizing the magnitude (pun intended) of the
>calculations here, even assuming they had the hardware and
>software to make it feasible.  It involves 200 million stars,
>from 200 million different perspectives, without any specific

It does not.  I have done these calculations.   They are
trivially within the capability of our modern computers, let
alone those on the fleet.    You don't calculate every star for
every other star.   Quite the reverse, you prune the tree very
quickly because you know what the sky you are seeking looks like,
and as soon as you model the sky from a point and you do not
see stars where they should be, you can skip on to the next try.


>the objects are local (e.g., planets) or extra-galactic.  What
>they have is the ability to confirm it's Earth sky when they get
>there, not the ability to find it that way.

Nonsense.  My local planetarium can show the sky from any point
in our region instantly.   Software that does this is common.  The
only thing incorrect is that if you get 
>
>> If you get some distinctive objects, such as Pleiades, m8,
>> any globular clusters, galaxies like m31... If Starbuck had...
>
>If, if, and yet more if.

No if.  M8 is their main signpost.  They know where it is in
Saggitarius, they saw it in thte tomb.   M45 is very distinctive
and would show up in a shot of Taurus.

However, I believe the following is true:

a) If you are trained to pilot raptors, as Starbuck is, and
considered good at, then interstellar navigation would be a major
part of your training.   And in fact since she has conducted long range
jump missions, such as Kobol to Caprica and back (twice) we can be
certain she is trained in this.

b) A person trained in this would know how to identify useful markers
for navigation.    Her instinct, if trying to navigate an unknown area
would be to look for the basics you can see from everywhere --  first
the galactic plane, then M31, then the major globulars, other local
galaxies and then perhaps major nebula and distinctive super-bright
stars like Deneb, Antares, Rigel, Betelguese from her last known
position.

c) This would be doubly so for somebody realizing, "I'm at Earth, I
definitely need to locate it for the fleet."


Now, Starbuck was under the influence of the powers who took her
there, so she may not have had time to do more than photograph the
Zodiac and planets.   But if she did, it seems crazy to think a
trained interstellar navigator would not have look for and photgraphed
the big markers.
-- 
The history of the net in bullet points
	http://www.templetons.com/brad/nethist.html