My brother's girlfriend had their first child in November. His (the baby, not
my brother!!) weight was expressed in lb and oz although I would have thought
that if they had asked for it they could have been told the metric values too.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: usma@colostate.edu Subject:
Each frequency specified in Hertz has a specific wave length. Some frequencies
can be heard by humans while others cannot. There is a direct relationship
between frequency and wave length.
The fundamental frequency of a stretched string or wire is given by:
n = 1/2L (sq route of T/m)
Pat Mike all, sirs:
.violently opposed.
Don't you agree that 'violent opposition' itself is SELF admission to examine
the need to metricate in its totality!Regards,Brij Bhushan Vij (MJD
2454481)/995+D-016W02-02 (G. Tuesday, 2008 January 15 H 21:21(decimal) ISTAa
Nau Bhadra Kritvo Yantu
On 2008 Jan 15 , at 1:31 AM, Bill Potts wrote:
That's a helluva fast pulse. 56 Hz is 56 beats per second, not per
minute.
Ooooh! You're so right.
Sorry about that. I was trying to be cute when I tacked that note onto
my previous message, hurriedly, at the last moment, and without
On 2008 Jan 15 , at 6:43 AM, STANLEY DOORE wrote:
Each frequency specified in Hertz has a specific wave length. Some
frequencies can be heard by humans while others cannot. There is a
direct relationship between frequency and wave length.
Sorry, Stanley, it is not quite true that
On 2008 Jan 15 , at 10:58 AM, Bill Hooper wrote:
Clearly, it is not true that a specified wavelength (of 1 m or any
other specified size) does not correspond to a specific frequency
for all waves.
I wrote the above and typed the word not in two places. The double
negative was incorrect
I have never seen violent opposition to a measurement system.
Am I correct in suspecting that there were riots, agitation, revolutionary
attempts etc during the metrication events of the 19th century?
Even with that I cannot imagine society collapsing due to an attempt at metric
When my two kids were born at Kaiser Hospital in San Francisco in 1984 and
1986, they were reported on the It's a Boy! card on the bassinet as 3690 g
and 4390 g respectively. That's all I remember. I still do not know what they
were in colonial units and I never remembered their length.
True, but only for a particular medium. In other media, the relationships of
frequency and wavelength are different. i.e. where the speeds (phase
velocities) of wave propagation are different.
But always: phase velocity = frequency times wave length at each particular
frequency. However, the
Bill makes the same correction by numerical examples that I made in
generalities before reading his posting.
Gene Mechtly.
Original message
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:58:59 -0500
From: Bill Hooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [USMA:40061] Re: Stuart Sons Pianos
To: U.S. Metric
Gene:
Below, you wrote but *always* less than c = 3 x 10^m/s.
I guess you meant 3 x 10^8 m/s.
Bill Potts
Roseville, CA
http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15,
On 2008 Jan 15 , at 10:58 AM, Bill Hooper wrote:
The (one metre) wavelength for electromagnetic waves (light, radio,
etc.) would be:
f = (3 x 10^9 m/s)/(1 m) = 3 x 10^9 Hz = 3 GHz
This is my week for making stupid errors and correcting myself. In my
note on frequency and wavelength of
Maybe you should quit while you're ahead, Bill.
0.93 Hz is 930 mHz, not 93 mHz. :)
At 93 mHz, I suspect you'd be flat lined with spikes (probably very small
ones) just over 10 s apart. I don't think that would be a sustainable
condition.
To use a British expression, you would really have a
Bill and I both muddled the exponent of 10 for the speed of light in free
space. It is not 10, or 9, but 8.
That is: The correct value is c is 3 x 10^8 m/s (with better than 1% accuracy).
Gene Mechtly.
Original message
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:49:23 -0600 (CST)
From: [EMAIL
Steve,
If you consulted the hospital's records, you would find the baby's weight
recorded in grams. Pounds and ounces are just for granny's benefit - the
mother need not really worry how heavy her baby is as all the real figures
are in official records where they can only be accessed by
Since the speed of light is of the order of 1,000,000 times the speed of
sound, I would agree with you. (2.9979 * 10^8 m/s (always) as against 340
m/s for an ICAO atmosphere).
The figure of 1,000,000 is an easy one to remember.
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Martin and everyone:
At my hospital, our delivery protocol states that the baby's length and weight
shall be recorded in both traditional and metric units. Even today, in 2008,
U.S. healthcare professionals let customary units stand in medical records.
Besides being unscientific, this is
You are correct, Bill (Potts).
Both Bill (Harper) and I posted misstatements of c.
I wrote m/s for the unit which belongs with 3 x 10^8. It is the submultiple
cm/s which belongs with 10^10, which many of us learned before the introduction
of SI in 1960, and continue to confuse when careless
On 2008 Jan 15 , at 3:07 PM, Bill Potts wrote (to Bill Hooper):
Maybe you should quit while you're ahead, Bill.
0.93 Hz is 930 mHz, not 93 mHz. :)
I surrender!
That makes 4 very public errors in about 24 hours.
I'm going to go back to reading email instead of writing it.
Paul,
Please try to persuade your hospital to reword the protocol by substitution of
body mass for weight; as used in body mass index which is coming into
wide usage, and to define BMI as originally created; body mass in kg divided by
height squared (height in meters).
Gene.
Original
Bill Hooper,
Please, don't be upset Bill, I made the more egregious errors by addressing you
by the name Harper. We once had a Univ. of Illinois (and later an NBA) star by
the name of Harper, an explanation but not an acceptable excuse for me.
I should quit while I am ahead, not you. Please,
I've often thought of the similarity between sound and RF propagation with
respect to diffraction around terrain, since longer wavelengths should more
easily bend around terrain while shorter wavelengths are more line-of-sight.
Hiking the nearby Appalachian Trail in PA, you can have one side of a
Point well taken, Gene. It IS mass, not weight, in the term BMI.
I'll put down money that most clinicians do not know, or have forgotten, the
distinction between mass and weight, nor do they know that the kilogram is a
unit of mass.
Paul
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Paul,
Please try to
As long as we're playing Who Wants To Be The Most Technical, I'll go ahead
and add my own
entry...
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But always: phase velocity = frequency times wave length at each particular
frequency.
However, the group velocity of a packet of waves of many frequencies which
When my twins were born in Los Angeles the scale was digital and weighed
in grams only to the nearest gram. They told us the weight in pounds
and ounces, which I assume they must have converted from the measurement
in grams since I never saw another scale nor saw anyone weight the
babies a
There is a difference that gives frequency a fundamental importance
relative to wavelength, especially for sound. A vibrating string has a
specific fundamental frequency. For that particular string frequency
there is a well-defined wavelength. The vibrating body of the
instrument (piano
26 matches
Mail list logo
