Yes - that's how I learned it. That Fahrenheit had chosen body temperature
as 100 and frozen salt solution as zero, but had a fever on the day he
calibrated it.
Maybe in "those days" they never knew that feeling 'under the weather'
caused a change in body temperature.
From: "Remek Kocz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
CC: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:38187] RE: One
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 18:38:46 -0400
Dan, chill a bit OK? (Pun intended). This is actually an interesting
topic. My cousin who is an inorganic chemist, told me that Fahrenheit
screwed up with the original 100 degrees. He had a bit of a fever the day
he measured his body temperature, but Mr. Fahrenheit's 100 degrees stuck,
and we ended up with a ridiculous 98.6F. Can anyone confirm this? I
certainly don't remember this from my chemistry days, but then again,
Fahrenheit wasn't even mentioned in my curriculum.
Remek
On 3/13/07, Daniel Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Fahrenheit is not only inaccurate, it is in error. Fahrenheit originally
chose 96° as human body temperature. He also wanted zero to be the
coldest
a salt-water mixture could be before it froze. That also proved to be in
error. Thus the whole Fahrenheit scale is in error.
See:
http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/solutions/faq/zero-fahrenheit.shtml
_________________________________________________________________
Get Hotmail, News, Sport and Entertainment from MSN on your mobile.
http://www.msn.txt4content.com/
