t
And what is the difference in temperature that you think that they are measuring? If you want to argue what is precise and what is not we need some numbers. I'm with Lord Kelvin here
"In physical science the first essential step in the direction of learning any subject is to find principles of numerical reckoning and practicable methods for measuring some quality connected with it. I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely in your thoughts advanced to the state of Science, whatever the matter may be." [PLA, vol. 1, "Electrical Units of Measurement", 1883-05-03]
Don't be stupid. If you need a non-contact temperature measurement, you have to pay what it costs, even if the result isn't that precise. Using an expensive non-contact technique when a cheap technique that requires physical contact can be used is stupid, no matter how enthusiastically the people who make the expensive gear recommend it.
ed
You are letting your imagination run away with you again. This is one of many bets that you'd lose.
That may be what you understood - as if that matters - but it isn't what I posted.
That may be what you understood - as if that matters - but it isn't what I posted.
Basing your claim on a contorted and invalid chain of logic.
-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen