# HP Forums

Full Version: Applications of math: current events
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
If nothing else, we have a real story problem, with real consequences. Can the application of math reveal the path of evidence, that leads to the real facts?

-Dale-
Interesting problem. There are issues with this analysis though, such as echos, were all the rounds the same type, external noise, etc, etc..
REAL facts? I recommend at least a casual perusal of references such as ...

[attachment=5238]
or
[attachment=5239]

BEST!
SlideRule
(10-11-2017 01:35 PM)DrD Wrote: [ -> ]If nothing else, we have a real story problem, with real consequences. Can the application of math reveal the path of evidence, that leads to the real facts?

-Dale-

Yeah, not once he mentions the location of the recording device in his little analysis. The simple calculation from lag time to distance traveled by the bullet is only valid if the recording device was at the point where the bullet hit the pavement or very close. If the recording device was not there it's all wrong.
Imagine the recording device half way between the shooter and the point of impact. The sound of the muffler travels only half the distance, while the sound of the impact also travels half the distance (back). As an extreme, if the recording device is close to the shooter, you'd hear the sound of the muffler before the sound of the bullet hitting the pavement, so this guy's conclusion would be that a second shooter is shooting standing on the pavement, shooting down into the pavement so the bullets bounce and fly back into the barrel of the other guy's gun.
I understand your thinking. There is usually no shortage of conspiracy theories at times like these. Right or wrong, he does say that there were several recordings, captured on different cellphones, that formed the basis for his audio analysis.

This subject underscores what Norman Schwartzkopf, (desert storm), was talking about using the term, "fog of war," when trying to get facts and fiction sorted out.

The idea presented, using audio analysis as a tool for locating the position of a shooter, set my mind to wondering if a weapon mounted device could be created for military/police personnel to use to help locate enemy shooters on the battlefield.
They probably already have such devices....
(10-14-2017 10:49 AM)DrD Wrote: [ -> ]The idea presented, using audio analysis as a tool for locating the position of a shooter, set my mind to wondering if a weapon mounted device could be created for military/police personnel to use to help locate enemy shooters on the battlefield.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artillery_sound_ranging
I seem to recall reading of similar applications being investigated for use in city centre shooting, with the aim of detecting and locating gunfire.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunfire_locator

But one cannot really experiment with such algorithms on the HP Prime, which hasn't a microphone...though perhaps in conjunction with a Datastreamer?

[I've expertise in implementing software for guidance to target, and displays...]
(10-14-2017 01:12 AM)Claudio L. Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-11-2017 01:35 PM)DrD Wrote: [ -> ]If nothing else, we have a real story problem, with real consequences. Can the application of math reveal the path of evidence, that leads to the real facts?

-Dale-

Yeah, not once he mentions the location of the recording device in his little analysis. The simple calculation from lag time to distance traveled by the bullet is only valid if the recording device was at the point where the bullet hit the pavement or very close. If the recording device was not there it's all wrong.
Imagine the recording device half way between the shooter and the point of impact. The sound of the muffler travels only half the distance, while the sound of the impact also travels half the distance (back). As an extreme, if the recording device is close to the shooter, you'd hear the sound of the muffler before the sound of the bullet hitting the pavement, so this guy's conclusion would be that a second shooter is shooting standing on the pavement, shooting down into the pavement so the bullets bounce and fly back into the barrel of the other guy's gun.