Why not go with millimetres? :-) Duncan -----Original Message----- From: Pat Naughtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: September 7, 2001 20:42 Subject: [USMA:15138] Re: From the middle of the ear - full and round >Dear Gene, > >I thought of this approach, but I couldn't decide whether to choose the long >ones or the fat ones - I had both. > >The selection of the *largest grains* would face the same issue. Should I >select the longest grains or the fattest grains as the *largest grains*? > >As you know, in the end, I decided on the random approach and I'll stick >with that. > >Cheers, > >Pat Naughtin >CAMS - Certified Advanced Metrication Specialist > - United States Metric Association >ASM - Accredited Speaking Member > - National Speakers Association of Australia >Member, International Federation for Professional Speakers >-- > > > >on 2001/09/07 10.02, Gene Mechtly at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: ... >> >
