Re: HA
- From: "Uncle Marvo" <paul.r@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:15:47 +0100
In reply to Gibbo (gibbo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) who wrote this in
5kv7peF5n031U3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, I, Marvo, say :
sprocket wrote:Is it more than 10?
Gibbo wrote:
As you are clearly aware, in reality it is no more logical or
fundamentally based than any other system
But it's consistent and easy to use. How many drachms in a
hundredweight? in Wisconsin? in Jamaica? Come on, quickly!
How many electrons per second in an amp?
Still SI units, but it's no simpler.
It amused me back in the 70s when Hertz became normal as the unit of
frequency. People bellyached like mad- they were quite prepared to
accept Hertz for radio waves, but not for sound- they insisted that
it had to be cycles per second, as it isn't electromagnetic, and
couldn't see that the unit makes no reference to the quantity being
measured. JS
But that's just a change of name not a change of units. 345.672Hz *is*
345.672 cycles per second.
Same as the Hectopascal. Why, though? I liked the millibar. I think it's the
French feeling left out again.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: HA
- From: Tony Clayton
- Re: HA
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: F&M
- Next by Date: Re: Smoke and Mirrors?
- Previous by thread: Re: HA
- Next by thread: Re: HA
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading