Still wrong.

The speed of light is 299.792  458 x 10^6 m/s (2.997 924 58 x 10^8 m/s).

Incidentally, the solidus (/) is not used where the units are spelled out.
It's either meter per second or m/s.

By the way, your light is still slow. Try removing the decimal point in the
definition of the meter.

Bill Potts, CMS
Roseville, CA
http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
>Behalf Of Brij Bhushan Vij
>Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 13:30
>To: U.S. Metric Association
>Subject: [USMA:23756] Re: Dallasnews - kilogram
>
>
>Hi friends:
>My appology, I missed to typr (x10^8).
>It should have been 299.7924562 x 10^8 metre/second. I know the current
>definition, One Metre=1/299.792 458 s.
>  The term "pico-metric second* related to the interval, then defined as
>metric second =43.2% of SI-second (s). Sorry for omission/lapse!
>Brij
>
>>From: "Bill Potts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Subject: [USMA:23750] Re: Dallasnews - kilogram
>>Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:29:38 -0800
>>
>>That's very slow light.
>>
>>I think you meant 299.792 456 2 Mm/s. The correct figure, by the way, is
>>299.792 458 Mm/s. The meter is defined as the distance traveled
>by light in
>>1/299.792 458 s. The official definition uses only that fraction and does
>>not attempt to rationalize it to a non-fraction. However, if it were
>>expressed as a non-fraction, it would be 3.335 640 95 ns, not 77.162 709 5
>>ps.
>>
>>And what's a "pico-metric second?" The term is picosecond (ps).
>>
>>Bill Potts, CMS
>>Roseville, CA
>>http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
>> >Behalf Of Brij Bhushan Vij
>> >Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 11:01
>> >To: U.S. Metric Association
>> >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >Subject: [USMA:23748] Re: Dallasnews - kilogram
>> >
>> >
>> >James and John Nichols, sirs:
>> >Refined value for velocity of light, c, was reported by Time,
>New York in
>> >their issue of 4 December 1972 as: 299.7924562 metre/second; and I
>> >attempted
>> >to define in term for measure of length Unit,METRE to be the distance
>> >traversed by light during 77.1627095 pico-metric second (Refer: The
>>Metric
>> >Second; ISI Bulletin, Vol 25, No.4, 1973 April - a publication of
>> >Bureau of
>> >Indian Standards, New Delhi).
>> >Regards,
>> >Brij Bhushan Vij<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >
>> >>From: "James R. Frysinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >>Subject: [USMA:23741] Re: Dallasnews - kilogram
>> >>Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 09:44:08 -0500
>> >>
>> >>John Nichols wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > I thought someone found that c is not constant recently but is
>>slowing
>> >>up
>> >> > like me.
>> >> >
>> >> > Just a thought.
>> >>
>> >>   And still a fairly new hypothesis as I understand it, John.
>> >This is far
>> >>from being widely accepted. However, the change of other
>constants (such
>> >>as G, the gravitational constant) are fairly widely believed to be
>> >>changing very slowly over time; that comes from the general theory of
>> >>relativity and it relates to the cosmological constant that Einstein
>> >>suggested, then removed, then wished he hadn't. Put it up
>there with the
>> >>recent "dark energy" hypothesis. I think the two are related, actually.
>> >>
>> >>   For practical purposes, though, the effect on SI units is
>> >vanishingly
>> >>small. We would be overly proud to consider that our standards will
>> >>stand for millions of years.
>> >>
>> >>Jim
>> >>
>> >>--
>> >>James R. Frysinger
>> >>Lifetime Certified Advanced Metrication Specialist
>> >>Senior Member, IEEE
>> >>
>> >>http://www.cofc.edu/~frysingj
>> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >>
>> >>Office:
>> >>   Physics Lab Manager, Lecturer
>> >>   Dept. of Physics and Astronomy
>> >>   University/College of Charleston
>> >>   66 George Street
>> >>   Charleston, SC 29424
>> >>   843.953.7644 (phone)
>> >>   843.953.4824 (FAX)
>> >>
>> >>Home:
>> >>   10 Captiva Row
>> >>   Charleston, SC 29407
>> >>   843.225.0805
>> >
>> >
>> >_________________________________________________________________
>> >Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
>> >http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
>> >
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Reply via email to