That state of metric conversion in the US

Actually, I don't think that is exactly correct. They call it a "unit" and I'm not certain it is still pint. I've been doing platelets lately and there you give a relatively smaller amount even though it takes a lot longer. You get to watch a movie while you donate!

--

Rick

ler when free trade started and US goods appeared cheaper as did any food b y the pound rather than kg or 2.2lb.

ly conversant in millimeters and km

eers compared to 'C.

nverting to metric for Americans, so they shall be in their archaic units o f measure for a long time.

No. The Kelvin scale is based on two points, absolute zero and the triple point of water. The other fixed points are just situations you can set up where the temperature is well-defined. Somebody had to measure these well-defined temperatures in the first place, but now that that has been done, people building practical thermometers can exploit the fact that - for instance - the triple point of mercury exists at an accurately known temperature to calibrate the devices they sell and demonstrate their linearity (or well-defined non- linearity, in the case of platinum resistance thermometers).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

free trade started and US goods appeared cheaper as did any food by the pound rather than kg or 2.2lb.

conversant in millimeters and km

compared to 'C.

to metric for Americans, so they shall be in their archaic units of measure for a long time.

It's not an education issue. Education was the second step of the conversion program and that remained after the rest was abandoned. Every school kid knows what °C is and they know about the meter, the gram, the litre and should know the Newton. But the only time they see any of these is when the weatherman shows (typically without mentioning) temperature in Celsius next to the Fahrenheit or the metric size on all bottles of wine here, so they forget.

--

Rick

compared to>'C.

What???! Can't we fix this problem by everyone just using Celsius? We we really need to use a temperature scale that is optimized for thermodynamic calculations?

--

Rick

it. You can reference the Wikipedia page on surface mount technology and printed circuit boards.

If you mean "reference" as in use these pages as references in the other article, then no, you can't. Wikipedia wisely considers itself to be a

*secondary* reference and does not allow articles to be referenced from other articles. The insist on the use of primary references.

--

Rick

He is the unique example ;)

It's funny how some folk around here get so worked up about the "communist". He is actually near to the "far right" - and virtually indistinguishable from a republican - when viewed from a more dispassionate, global perspective.

--

John Devereux

--
Ummm... No.

ler when free trade started and US goods appeared cheaper as did any food b y the pound rather than kg or 2.2lb.

ly conversant in millimeters and km

eers compared to 'C.

nverting to metric for Americans, so they shall be in their archaic units o f measure for a long time.

I thought is was the triple point of water... and absolute zero. (two points to make a line.)

George H.

ed text -

Joerg schrieb:

Hello,

you are wrong, 1 hektopascal is 1 millibar, 1000 hektopascals are 1 bar. The factor is 1e3 as you prefer. 1 bar is 1e5 pascals.

Bye

Phil Hobbs schrieb:

Hello,

I found in a dictionary:

1 fathom is 6 feet, 1 cable length is 100 fathoms 1 nautical mile is 10 cable's length 1 yard is 3 feet

therefore 1 nautical mile should be 6000 feet, but in fact it is 6076.115.

But there is also the US cable length of 120 fathoms or 720 feet.

We have:

1 cable length (Imperial) = 100 fathom = 600 feet = 182,88 m 1 cable length (US) = 120 fathom = 720 feet = 219,456 m 1 cable length (GB) = 608 feet = 185,3184 m

and 1 nautical is given as 1852 m

A US nautical mile was defined as 6080.20 feet or 1853.24 meter until

1954, but the international nautical mile was defined in 1929 as 1852.01 meter.

If we take 1 arc minute of the earth, we get 1 nautical mile as 1852.216 meters (WGS84), but we also get in north south direction at the equator 1842.90 m and 1861.57 m at the poles. In east west direction at the equator we get 1855.31 m.

Bye

You don't lay out boards, so you know nothing about the issue.

--

John Larkin                  Highland Technology Inc 
www.highlandtechnology.com   jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com    

Precision electronic instrumentation 
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators 
Custom timing and laser controllers 
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links 
VME  analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer 
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

--
What an idiotic thing to say, even for you! 

But, the issue wasn't about board layout, it was about your often 
distorted perception of infinity.

OK, show us a board that you have laid our recently. Surface mount, multilayer ideally... something modern.

Tiresome old hen. You're always playing with words and not with electronics. I suspect you have, basically, nothing to do. Enjoy.

--

John Larkin                  Highland Technology Inc 
www.highlandtechnology.com   jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com    

Precision electronic instrumentation 
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators 
Custom timing and laser controllers 
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links 
VME  analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer 
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

The pedantic dumbass is arguing about your use of the word "endless".

Only a total idiot would believe that claptrap.

It appears that even endless isn't endless.

Everyone thinks they are "central" politically - not too far left and not too far right.

That drawing does not say that the "right-wing" tendency of western economies is *wrong* - or that Obama is not to the left of Romney. Just that there is a wide spectrum beween - say - Obama and Chavez, or Stalin. And that the right-left spectrum is orthogonal to the authoritarian-liberal spectrum.

--

John Devereux

--
Why bother, since all you'll do is use it as a springboard derisive 
comment?