Talk:Haversine formula: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→Different results: Make addendum instead of change if you can?) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Different results == |
--[[User:Eliasen|Eliasen]] ([[User talk:Eliasen|talk]]) 07:34, 24 April 2022 (UTC)== Different results == |
||
I find it interesting that there are two 'clusters' of results around 2886.4 and 2887.26 |
I find it interesting that there are two 'clusters' of results around 2886.4 and 2887.26 |
||
| Line 68: | Line 68: | ||
:With 53 examples, it is too late to make most radical changes. Try appending a recommendation instead. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 07:55, 11 February 2014 (UTC) |
:With 53 examples, it is too late to make most radical changes. Try appending a recommendation instead. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 07:55, 11 February 2014 (UTC) |
||
If you want to use a high-accuracy function for the *actual* distance on earth's geoid, you should probably look at the [https://rosettacode.org/wiki/Haversine_formula#Frink Frink entry]. [https://frinklang.org/fsp/colorize.fsp?f=navigation.frink Frink's navigation library] contains high-accuracy calculations of distances on earth's ellipsoid. These calculations are due to: |
|||
"Direct and Inverse Solutions of Geodesics on the Ellipsoid with Application |
|||
of Nested Equations", T.Vincenty, ''Survey Review XXII'', 176, April 1975. |
|||
http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/PUBS_LIB/inverse.pdf |
|||
There is also a slightly higher-accuracy algorithm (if you want nanometer accuracy instead of sub-millimeter accuracy): |
|||
"Algorithms for geodesics", Charles F. F. Karney, ''Journal of Geodesy'', January 2013, Volume 87, Issue 1, pp 43-55 |
|||
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00190-012-0578-z |
|||
In short, a most accurate distance on the Earth's geoid, given the WGS84 geoid, is: |
|||
2892.776957 km |
|||