Re: Wrong abbreviations
- From: Will <billrigby@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 21 May 2007 08:40:13 -0700
On May 21, 4:08 pm, Purl Gurl <purlg...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Will wrote:
Purl Gurl wrote:
Peter Tan wrote:
athel... wrote:
(snipped)
No, that's a disapprehension.How interesting. This corrects a misbelief of mine.Likewise these are symbols, not abbreviations. The SI doesn't concernThe symbols are called prime ʹ and double prime ʺ - and I don't see
itself with abbreviations, and although some derivative publications,
like IUPAC's "Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry", do
why we should be overly concerned whether they are SI or not. They are
used for time 8ʹ42ʺ (8 mins 42 secs) as well as for length 5ʹ10ʺ (5 ft
10 ins). For example, here is the British road sign for a headroom of
14ʹ-6ʺ
I expected British distance signs to be stated in meters.
I am impressed by your talent to read my mind via
the internet, then correct my wrongful thinking.
Zappa Brain Police, such as yourself, perform a
good service for societies.
Your "disapprehension" is not a valid word.
http://www.gannett.com/go/newswatch/2005/february/nw0211-2.htm
Purl Gurl
.
- References:
- Wrong abbreviations
- From: Claude Weil
- Re: Wrong abbreviations
- From: athel...@yahoo
- Re: Wrong abbreviations
- From: Peter Tan
- Re: Wrong abbreviations
- From: Purl Gurl
- Re: Wrong abbreviations
- From: Will
- Re: Wrong abbreviations
- From: Purl Gurl
- Wrong abbreviations
- Prev by Date: Re: What do the troops want?
- Next by Date: Re: What do the troops want?
- Previous by thread: Re: Wrong abbreviations
- Next by thread: Re: Wrong abbreviations
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading