I've given Pat a longer and private reply, but my analysis of his data
says that an inch is (24.9�0.3) mm. Of course, that's based on the
variety of barley obtained by Pat and probably grown in 2001, not
several centuries ago when barley corns were perhaps smaller. The
Barcelona to Dunkirk survey was much more precise than the 1.2 %
relative standard deviation of the mean indicated above, thus making the
"olde inch" less precise, as well as smaller than today's inch, which of
course benefitted from being defined in metric units. Perhaps the BMWA
would prefer the smaller, short-measure inch of yore.
Jim
Gene Mechtly wrote:
>
> Pat,
>
> Suppose that "full and round" from the "middle of the ear" is better
> approximated by the set of *largest grains* from a large sample (in
> the absence of a complete ear from which to select grains) rather than
> a random sample which includes "end" grains, what then is your measured
> value and standard deviation of the inch, by the ancient definition,
> expresses in mm?
>
> Gene.
> ..................
> On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Pat Naughtin wrote: ...
--
Metric Methods(SM) "Don't be late to metricate!"
James R. Frysinger, CAMS http://www.metricmethods.com/
10 Captiva Row e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Charleston, SC 29407 phone/FAX: 843.225.6789
