I'm thinking that @SMcNeill has been growing exotic produce on that farm and that he has been smoking it.  Steve wants to pay up for fixes??  He should, if anything, be being paid for all his contributions to QB64.

@Pete Mutiny on the Bounty?  Lovely!

@Pete Who??  Oh blimey!  You're still around then??  Tee-hee!

Yep, this post is definitely a Discussion item, so perhaps I was too precipitate in suggesting that it should be in Programs!

I'm just off to conjugate some Latin verbs with my Mistress.  I'll Master that damned subject yet - it's all a Mister-y to me (terrible pun, but you asked for it)!

Hope Odin's not reading this stuff.  He doesn't want off-topic!  But he is our very own inamorato.

@_vince is quite right if you want to know where the cursor is: POINT(current graphic cursor position method) gives mouse column/row values.

But @MasterGy asks for the formula that _MAPTRIANGLE(3D) uses to work out the 2D screen row(X-)/column(Y-) values.  From the _MAPTRIANGLE (yet another of QB64's amazing bits of coding) wiki, we see that the originator of this code is likely to have been "Andrew L. Ayers" who is not, I think, a current member of the QB64 community but must have been one of @Galleon 's fantastic crew.  So, if you wanted to know what the coding for _MAPTRIANGLE (x,y,z) -> Screen(row,column) is I think we'd have to ask somebody like Steve ( @SMcNeill ) to look into that.  @Petr is a dab-hand at _MAPTRIANGLE(3D), perhaps he knows something?

BUT:  Different (x,y,z) positions can project to the same 2D (row,column) screen positions - because of perspective - so I do not see how looking for cursor(row,column) would uniquely specify a 3D object.

All z- values in _MAPTRIANGLE(3D) must be negative, and all I know is that at z- ~ -400 the projected 3D flat untilted object is the same size as the 2D object (the value of z- to achieve this depends somewhat on the window size): for z- values above this the projection gives a larger size, for z- values below this the projection gives a smaller size.

In other words: "What the dickens was he talking about?"!

Anybody care to explain "Canonical Logarithm"?  That word "Canonical" crops up in places (I seem to remember 'doing' Canonical Distribution in Statistical Physics).  I suspect that its use derives from the fact that pre-industrial mathematicians in Western Culture derived their learning from religion-based teaching.

Aye-aye, Sir!  And I very much regret that in 12 days time I become a Septuagenarian Curator (and I'm still such a kid).

Erik, Junior Librarian can't read, it seems!  No matter that I read it 3 times, I didn't spot the difference between r5.5a and r5.4a.  Disregard previous remark!