Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: No, they wouldn't. You can use the resolution to make temperature > comparisons. Jed, maybe I misread the specifications. I did not, however, > make this up. And I do know for a fact that most instruments have higher > resolution than accuracy.
I have not seen an electronic thermometer that does. Apples and Oranges. Sure, it might be possible to calibrate the thing. > Galantini mentioned no calibration. > If you don't calibrate, it does not work. No tool works if you do not follow directions and you use it wrong. My Geo Metro gets 35 mpg. If you borrow it and you never shift out of first gear, you will not get 35 mpg. Plus I suppose you would wreck the transmission. > Now, I didn't check something. There is a high-precision probe, but > Galantini has not specified it. > > It does have an accuracy of +/- 0.05 C. > However, Galantini, in his mail to Krivit, said he used "testo 176 H2" > That's a 4-channel data logger for temperature and humidity. Accuracy, +/- > 0.4 C. (Resolution 0.1 C). But those are the probes that come with it. > Well, maybe he is confused in that case. Maybe he forgot which probe he used. Again, this is like what you said above: maybe he did not calibrate. Yes, we all agree that if you don't calibrate or you use the wrong probe, it does not work. Yes, people do make mistakes. (I think my HH12B auto-adjusts the display from 0.1 deg C to show 1 deg C when you put a different kind of probe with a wide range into it. Haven't got one . . .) He used another kind of instrument in earlier tests. > This isn't about percentage accuracy. It's about absolute temperature > accuracy. > I know. You have to calibrate to achieve that. That's what the manual says. Put it in boiling water. Compare it to a better instrument. That's what you have to do with at $74 electronic thermometer. Then, for the rest of the week, you can be sure it will hit the same spot accurately. - Jed
