Finding the New Azimuth Bearing for Triangulation in Geomagnetic Bearings

  • Thread starter Thread starter getting2it
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Life
AI Thread Summary
To find the new azimuth bearing for triangulation from point A to point B, starting with an initial distance of 87.8333 feet at a bearing of 123 degrees, the user intends to move 20 feet laterally. The calculation involves using the formula for circumference and adjusting for the angle change due to the lateral movement. The user recalls the formula 2πr, which relates to calculating the new bearing based on the distance moved. Ultimately, the discussion highlights the importance of understanding basic geometry and trigonometry in determining the new azimuth bearing without converting to True North. The user expresses gratitude for the insights gained during the process.
getting2it
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Draw this description out on a piece of paper if you would like. I cannot figure this out, it has been years since I have done math at this level.

I am standing at point A and have a distance of 87.8333 feet to Point B, my azimuth bearing is 123 degrees. I want to move over 20 feet and find the bearing to the same point B, this distance will also be 87.8333 feet. So I want to triangulate. The question is: What would my new azimuth bearing be to get to Point B, also please show how to solve. Note: I am dealing with geomagnetic bearings, no need to convert to True North.

Thank You
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Oh my goodness, after posting above I was sitting here thinking and I remembered 2 pi r squared.

so 2 x r x pi = circumference Divided by 360 times 20 gives me the new bearing. basics basics, thanks anyway to all of you.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top