Dear Martin and Ezra,
It is odd that the purveyors, promoters, or pushers of the angstrom
are working at the 'The California NanoSystems Institute at UCLA'.
By the way at this level of measurement I would be inclined to choose
picometres. ; their 3.3 Angstroms would become 330 picometres for
example. This would give a range of values that are almost always
simple whole numbers. Surely the aim of these scientists is to
understand the science and to move the boundaries of knowledge outward
– not to senselessly slide decimal points back and forth. Hhhrrrmmmph!
See http://www.metricationmatters.com/docs/WholeNumberRule.pdf
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin
Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can obtain
from http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html
PO Box 305 Belmont 3216,
Geelong, Australia
Phone: 61 3 5241 2008
Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has
helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the
modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they
now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for
their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many
different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial
and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA.
Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST,
and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com
for more metrication information, contact Pat at [email protected]
or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter
to subscribe.
On 2010/05/05, at 03:51 , Martin Vlietstra wrote:
I certainly used angstoms when I did my degree in South Africa in
the late 1960’s. Today I tutor physics to 17 & 18 year-olds (in the
UK) and everything is certainly in nm.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of [email protected]
Sent: 04 May 2010 18:24
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:47308] UCLA uses angstroms in this press release
I'm just wondering why these guys are still using angstroms instead
of nanometers.
Is this peculiar to this particular scientific discipline?
http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/new-microscope-allows-atoms-to-156969.aspx
