SUBJECT: THE HILL ABDUCTION CASE                             FILE: UFO2708




PART 7




   ----------------------------------------------------------------------

   REPLY:  By Michael Peck

     Carl  Sagan  and  Steven  Soter,  in  challenging  the  possibilities
   discussed  in  "The Zeta Reticuli Incident",  suggest that without  the
   connecting  lines drawn into the Hill map and the  Fish  interpretation
   there  is  little resemblance between the two.  This statement  can  be
   tested using only X and Y coordinates of the points in the Hill map and
   a projection of the stars in the Fish pattern.  The method used for the
   comparison can be visualized this way:

     Suppose  points  of  the  Hill map and the Fish map  are  plotted  on
   separate  glass plates.  These plates are held parallel (one behind the
   other),   and  are moved back and forth and rotated until the  patterns
   appear as nearly as possible to match.  A  systematic way of  comparing
   the patterns would be to adjust the plates until corresponding pairs of
   points  match  exactly.  Then the other points in the patterns  can  be
   compared.  Repeating this process for all the possible pairs of  points
   (there   are  105   in  this  case),   the  best  fit  can  be   found.
   Mathematically, this involves a change of scale and a simple coordinate
   transformation.  A  computer program was written which,  using X and  Y
   coordinates  measured  from a copy of the Hill map and a projection  of
   the Fish stars, and using the Hill map as the standard,  computed new X
   and Y coordinates for the Fish stars using  the process described. From
   these  two sets of coordinates,  six quantities were  calculated:   the
   average  difference  in  X  and  Y;   the  standard  deviation  of  the
   differences  in X and Y,  a  measure of the amount of variation of  the
   differences;  and correlation coefficients in X and Y.  The coefficient
   of correlation is a quantity used by statisticians to test a  suspected
   relation  between two sets of data.  In this case,  for  instance,   we
   suspect  that the X and Y coordinates computed from the Fish map should
   equal the X and Y coordinates of the Hill map. If they matched exactly,
   the correlation coefficients would be one. If there were no correlation
   at  all,  the value would be near zero.  We found that,  for  the  best
   fitting  orientation  of  the  Fish stars,   there  was  a  correlation
   coefficient  in X of 0.95  and in Y of 0.91.  In addition,  the average
   difference  and  the standard deviation of the  differences  were  both
   small --  about 1/10  the total range in X and Y. As a comparison,  the
   same  program  was  run  for a set of random  points,   with  resulting
   correlation  coefficients of 1/10  or less (as was expected).   We  can
   conclude,   therefore,  that the degree of resemblance between the  two
   maps is fairly high.

     From another point of view, it is possible to compute the probability
   that  a  random  set of points will coincide with the Hill map  to  the
   degree of accuracy observed here. The probability that 15 points chosen
   at random will fall on the points of the Hill map within an error range
   which  would make them as close as the Fish map is about one chance  in
   10 to the fifteenth power (one million billion). It is 1,000 times more
   probable  that a person could predict a bridge hand dealt from  a  fair
   deck.

     Michael  Peck  is  an astronomy student at Northwestern University in
   Illinois.





**********************************************
* THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *
**********************************************