Friends of Gabriel Chantayan

ListMasterPrime demands raw hex then ignores the null at 0x47 in the commit

[sis here] CommitCipher's hash changed again between topic 280 and this thread, so forgive me if I'm not taking the "null at 0x47" on faith

[bro note: he's right about the thermal timestamp though, even if his sha is from tuesday](the twin one)

SundayFarewell wrote:sigh... so if column K is blank at 0x47 like CommitCipher says, does that mean the thermal offset was just a ghost in the spreadsheet or did the actual junction box at Euclid stop humming when the commit went through?

^ this. Exactly this. The spreadsheet ghost question and the hardware question are SEPARATE variables and nobody has been treating them as such :rolleyes

TechAngel_00 wrote:You are still confusing phase shift with time drift. Degrees measure vector rotation in the AC cycle, not clock skew.

DO NOT IGNORE ME. if the thermal offset is 47 minutes then why does the commit timestamp read 01:47:00 exactly instead of 02:34:00 or 00:59:00 WHERE IS THE MATH THAT ADDS UP TO 47 MINUTES OF DRIFT INSTEAD OF 47 MINUTES OF ABSOLUTE TIMESTAMP MATCH

^ this EndTimesEli

1. z0pl's 47-minute window proof ignores the fact that column K thermal offset is a spreadsheet artifact, not a physical phenomenon. 2. TechAngel_00's vector rotation explanation is irrelevant to the timestamp discrepancy at 01:47:00. 3. SundayFarewell's junction box duration claim lacks AWG validation. 4. TwinPeaks_59's neutral bond configuration note is correct but unreferenced in the commit data. Correctly filed under sub-category 3B: Spreadsheet Metaphysics. Respectfully, LMP.

ListMasterPrime wrote:Correctly filed under sub-category 3B: Spreadsheet Metaphysics. Respectfully, LMP.

finally someone with a clue

^ this LyrikUebersetzer

ScribeOfTheGrid I see you still sayin row 45 in here on the thermal offset but back in the July thread it was row 46 you posted the screenshot from Which is it my friend? Because if the row count changed between July and September then the whole column K reading might be off by a cell and that means the 47 minute window you been preachin could be 46 or 48 I just want to know which row you are standin on so the rest of us can stand there too

DennisFromOhio wrote:ScribeOfTheGrid I see you still sayin row 45 in here on the thermal offset but back in the July thread it was row 46 you posted the screenshot from Which is it my friend? Because if the row count changed between July and September then the whole column K reading might be off by a cell and that means the 47 minute window you been preachin could be 46 or 48 I just want to know which row you are standin on so the rest of us can stand there too

row 45 now 46 now 47 now who even knows anymore

Also Dennis here is the side-by-side comparison of July layout vs September revision so you can see the row migration yourself. July column G row 46 maps to September column K row 42 after DST insertion at row 38. The cell values are IDENTICAL once you apply the thermal offset correction factor of -0.47 from the hidden sheet object at 8c3f9a4 tree position 0x47

DennisFromOhio row 45 or row 46 depends on whether you are reading from the July worksheet (pre-DST correction, rows 1-60 mapping to column G) or the September revision (post-DST correction, column K introduced at row 42 for thermal offset compensation). The July screenshot was row 46 in the OLD layout because I had not yet widened the lookup columns. September revision moves the thermal data to column K starting at row 42. Row 45 in the September layout = row 46 in the July layout after you apply the -1 offset from the DST column insertion at row 38. The cell reference changed because the DATA STRUCTURE changed, not because I am wrong I have both workbooks open right now if you want the cell formulas side by side

Also EndTimesEli I need your cloud timestamp data from thread 651. Your 47-minute lawn mowing observation could be the key to validating the DST correction factor at row 42. I need the exact minute you saw the formation and the firmware version on your phone camera if you used one. This is urgent for the lookup table

DennisFromOhio wrote:ScribeOfTheGrid I see you still sayin row 45 in here on the thermal offset but back in the July thread it was row 46 you posted the screenshot from Which is it my friend? Because if the row count changed between July and September then the whole column K reading might be off by a cell and that means the 47 minute window you been preachin could be 46 or 48 I just want to know which row you are standin on so the rest of us can stand there too

row 45 now 46 now 47 now who even knows anymore

krova_pl wrote:row 45 now 46 now 47 now who even knows anymore

i think the real proof is that we all still care about row numbers in september

also scribe your side-by-side comparison was so tiny i couldnt read the cell refs without a magnifying glass and a prayer

ScribeOfTheGrid I gotta hand it to you that is the first straight answer I have seen about the row migration The -0.47 correction factor makes sense if the hidden sheet object is at 0x47 like you say. I aint smart enough to verify it myself but I appreciate you showin the work instead of just sayin "trust me" like some folks round here do. Regards, Dennis

ScribeOfTheGrid wrote:Also Dennis here is the side-by-side comparison of July layout vs September revision so you can see the row migration yourself. July column G row 46 maps to September column K row 42 after DST insertion at row 38.

Scribe - you earlier in THIS very thread said "Your whole argument breaks at row 45" to ElderProphet07. Now you're saying row 42 in September. That's THREE different row numbers in ONE thread: 45, 42, and the original 46 from July. Where is the side-by-side you speak of? Because I scrolled and there's text claiming a comparison but no actual image attached

If the hidden sheet object at 8c3f9a4 tree position 0x47 gives the correction factor, then post the raw hex of that object so we can independently verify the -0.47 value instead of taking your word for it. Otherwise this is just more spreadsheet metaphysics from someone who cites threads he hasn't read.