Chasing Circles

[Rose Livingstone]

The poem is (seemingly) ambiguous, lending itself to myriad interpretations, and at the same time we have a veritable tome of material to draw inferences from. Here's perhaps a better question: If the poem is so ambiguous, what would be a proper way of discerning the correct solving approach*?

I agree that this is a much more interesting question.
Don’t spose ‘gut feeling’ or ‘shimmery curiosities’ would carry much weight here in the lab. We’d have to design an experiment and then account for all variables. It used to be: have hypothesis, go find bronze box or don’t find bronze box, but not sure that will work any longer for anyone looking for the bronze box who also believes its contents sold at auction.
I still believe the question can be answered, however, so I’m still wearing my white coat*.

*which may or may not have buckles in the back.

[Spoon]

It used to be: have hypothesis, go find bronze box or don’t find bronze box

Thanks for your response, Rose. Let's work off of your answer. I agree that everything must start with a hypothesis, particularly given that Fenn didn't really tell us what techniques he used for setting his puzzle, AND, perhaps more importantly, we had to find out for ourselves whether it was even a good puzzle (i.e. solvable using logical, consistent methods). Yet he did tell us that the person who solved the nine clues could "move with confidence", along with other remarks that suggested that a person who solved the puzzle would know he had done so.

Now, given that we have seen on this site alone probably hundreds of searchers convinced that they solved it, almost all of which employ cherry picking (and at best only one of them can be right), there must be another, better approach that could give a searcher that confidence, if Forrest was to be believed. The poem was published in a book that Fenn admitted contained "hints" that could be used to help us with the clues in the poem. If that is the case, and cherry picking will not avail us, it suggests that the book is a more comprehensive tool for helping to solve the poem. Your thoughts, white-coated Rose?

[Rose Livingstone]

Spoon
Well, we know we’re looking for a tiny location in the Rocky Mountains. He said the clues are contiguous and consecutive and that the ‘poem’ (and it’s nine clues) could be ‘married to a map’. Taking all that at face value (and yes, I know the constellations can be mapped and the elements can be mapped, and the earths magnetic alignment can be mapped and Feynman diagrams or DNA or books/ card catalogs or the entirety of the public internet etc can be considered “maps”) assuming the map is a geographical one available to everyone, it’s not an unfair reason to think that the ‘line of clues’ overlaid on a geographical map correspond to geographical/physical points of distinction along that line. Ideally, they would be points that are unambiguous- that determine the correct direction of the line given a fork of decision. That would mean we follow a clue till we get to a fork, then use the next clue to determine direction until we come upon another fork. No fork direction should be randomly chosen- they should all come from a consecutive clue. If we’re looking for a place that corresponds to (the perceived) clue “no place for the meek”, for example, we would have to choose the first one we come upon on our path and not skip 3 and randomly choose the next unless the clue has more direction that says, “the fourth place where meek won’t go”.
This is the method I used for my geographical location.
Now, we know ‘Begin it where warm waters halt’ is the first clue because he said so, and it’s also the most important because it starts the journey. Where to find that? Could use guess and check. Could find the billion he referred to north of Santa Fe and take some mean of them. We could scour the book(s) and interviews and scrapbooks and other people’s comments on ChaseChat and THOR and Reddit and YouTube and all of the dozens of other places, and read all about the man.
I think by your comment you are suggesting the best option is TTOTC? Ok. But he wouldn’t have made a puzzle that required a person to buy the book. Or would he? If not then we have to look at only the parts of the book publicly available, such as the poem, cover art, and ‘My War for Me.’
If we’re going to look for (edit:clues—>hints) to the first location (WWWH), I think we should start with the book parts publicly available. Nothing else. At least to narrow down an approach.
The question still stands how will we know an approach is valid should we encounter an idea for WWWH. Would there be a confirmer of sorts? An obvious confirmer and not ‘my third cousin twice removed once named their front yard treeswing by that name’ confirmer.

IMO.

[trueyeti]

Spoon
Well, we know we’re looking for a tiny location in the Rocky Mountains. He said the clues are contiguous and consecutive and that the ‘poem’ (and it’s nine clues) could be ‘married to a map’. Taking all that at face value (and yes, I know the constellations can be mapped and the elements can be mapped, and the earths magnetic alignment can be mapped and Feynman diagrams or DNA or books/ card catalogs or the entirety of the public internet etc can be considered “maps”) assuming the map is a geographical one available to everyone, it’s not an unfair reason to think that the ‘line of clues’ overlaid on a geographical map correspond to geographical/physical points of distinction along that line. Ideally, they would be points that are unambiguous- that determine the correct direction of the line given a fork of decision. That would mean we follow a clue till we get to a fork, then use the next clue to determine direction until we come upon another fork. No fork direction should be randomly chosen- they should all come from a consecutive clue. If we’re looking for a place that corresponds to (the perceived) clue “no place for the meek”, for example, we would have to choose the first one we come upon on our path and not skip 3 and randomly choose the next unless the clue has more direction that says, “the fourth place where meek won’t go”.
This is the method I used for my geographical location.
Now, we know ‘Begin it where warm waters halt’ is the first clue because he said so, and it’s also the most important because it starts the journey. Where to find that? Could use guess and check. Could find the billion he referred to north of Santa Fe and take some mean of them. We could scour the book(s) and interviews and scrapbooks and other people’s comments on ChaseChat and THOR and Reddit and YouTube and all of the dozens of other places, and read all about the man.
I think by your comment you are suggesting the best option is TTOTC? Ok. But he wouldn’t have made a puzzle that required a person to buy the book. Or would he? If not then we have to look at only the parts of the book publicly available, such as the poem, cover art, and ‘My War for Me.’
If we’re going to look for (edit:clues—>hints) to the first location (WWWH), I think we should start with the book parts publicly available. Nothing else. At least to narrow down an approach.
The question still stands how will we know an approach is valid should we encounter an idea for WWWH. Would there be a confirmer of sorts? An obvious confirmer and not ‘my third cousin twice removed once named their front yard treeswing by that name’ confirmer.

IMO.

Hey RS,
Ambiguous subterfuge is the method of the trickster in his telling tales and making riddles.

Consider that, yes, "WWWh" is the "first clue," however.....that does not exclude the location or the "where," of WWWh. See the trick there is using a "double negative" in saying that "WWWh" is the "first clue" but tricking you out of thinking "where" first....and foremost.....is to be focused on to discern "location." If you set up a formula like.....WWWh = Where (X), (or whatever), and solve for X(Where), then you would get W (Where), or.....location. Doing that cancels out the WWh part and allows you to calculate the first W (Where/location) first. Now stop looking for WWWh....and focus on locality alone....from the poem...yeah sure, after you buy the book, then use the chapter. But that stuff was on the internet too.....

I got to my locality without the book. Just the poem and a Google search: "Brown, New Mexico." Cheers.

[Spoon]

A lot of good stuff there, Rose Livingstone. You impressed me with that bit of logic. How refreshing it is to have a discussion with someone that doesn't begin and end with, "In my solve...."

[starwheel]

The clue to how you find WWWH is in the poem, waiting for you to make the connection. The words 'Warm' and 'Cold' are temperatures, and temperature is measured in degrees as are angles.
The international color codes on water taps are RED for HOT and BLUE for COLD therefore if you mix them together you will get 'WARM'.
The two angles shown in a rainbow are RED seen at 42 degrees and BLUE seen at 40 degrees. It would follow that if you can find where RED and BLUE come together on the map it would be Forrest's WARM WATERS, the one he intended you to find. IMO.

Also worth noting that the end color of the Rainbow is VIOLET which is Blue and Red mixed, so I believe WWWH is the beginning of Fenn's Rainbow also, and the end should be where Blue and Red come together once more.

[Moody Chameleon]

I feel like the first stanza shouldn't be ignored. I think when Forrest said that the first clue was BIWWWH, he made it more difficult to solve the poem in that some called the first stanza "filler". I believe Forrest said that there's a word that's more important than the others, but that you'll need all of them to solve the poem.

[Spoon]

Right on, Moody Chameleon. Don't ignore any of it.