It is currently Tue Mar 20, 2018 7:03 pm

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
 Timing & space bodys 
Author Message
Post Timing & space bodys
This is just an idea, will it work? here it going -

Could I nail the timing of a future event by RVing which planet the new Pluto probe "New Horizons" is Nearest to? the probe his a traval time of around 12 years.

Europe/Next deadly terrorist attack/nearest preceding recognizable event
Europe/Next deadly terrorist attack/Pluto probe New Horizons/location/previous solar system planet/Most Visible Feature
Europe/Next deadly terrorist attack/Pluto probe/New Horizons/location/Nearest solar system planet/Most Visible Feature

other project cues:

Topical search:
Next deadly catastrophic event
Next deadly catastrophic event/present location
Next deadly catastrophic event/present location/nearest significant feature
Next deadly catastrophic event/present location/nearest recognizable feature
Next deadly catastrophic event/nearest preceding recognizable event

Fri Feb 10, 2006 3:26 pm
Advanced User
Advanced User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 4:54 am
Posts: 91
Location: New Castle, DE - USA
I'll have a go, and quite possibly make a fool of myself. ;)

Saying "Present Location" to me indicates that the "Next Deadly Catastrophic Event" exists somewhere NOW. In other words, you're asking for example "Where is the next deadly earthquake, right now." Which doesn't really make sense.

Also saying "deadly" is subjective. If one person dies, then it's deadly. Do you mean when more than say 3000 people die? "Catastrophic" also seems subjective. What does that mean exactly?

I'm not sure if you can use "nearest" as a temporal qualifier. "Near" to me suggests "space" not "time" but I could be wrong.

And as far as using the Pluto probe as a time indicator, that's interesting, but I think your cue is backwards. Instead of basically saying: "this event/where is the Pluto probe", you should be saying (again, basically) "Pluto probe/location/when this event happens". If that's even possible, and I'm not sure why it wouldn't be - IF you phrase the question (cue) correctly.

OK, now a pro will be along in a minute to tell us both that I don't know what I'm talking about, but at least I tried!

Good luck!


Fri Feb 10, 2006 4:23 pm
Ultimate User
Ultimate User

Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:06 pm
Posts: 157
Location: Spain
Yes, it is very interesting. Let's see what PROs have to say about it.


Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:31 am
Profile YIM
RV Professional
RV Professional

Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:28 pm
Posts: 301
Location: Montana
Mark is correct. Cues must be structured from the Gross to the General to the Specific to the Detailed. And with each level of specificality, you must be refering to a logical aspect or association with the prior, more general, level.

In the case of an event in the future, it makes no sence to say present location. It would make more sence to first generalize the "cause" (of the event). When you do the session you will determine if the cause is an actual physical thing. If you determine this, you can then add "present location" behind "cause" and do the new session. Hope this helps.

Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:56 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.
[ Time : 0.115s | 15 Queries | GZIP : On ]