Odo,

Regarding your question of January 12th @ 9:21 a.m.

''Common Temperature Scale go from 32° – 212°, you know this explain?''

Odo, the Common/Fahrenheit Temperature Scale is not 32° - 212°

Odo, no temperature scale, or any other scale, is 32 – 212

Odo, no temperature scale, or any other scale, has been 32 – 212

Odo, no temperature scale, or any other scale, will be 32 – 212

Odo, all scales begin at the same beginning scale point, or end at the same ending scale point. What is that scale point? I'll tell ya:

ZERO

You will find the letter/figure ''0'' represents ''zero'' & ''Roy Orbison'' & ''Only The Lonely''.

Below are the most widely know temperature scales:

0° – 96°
0 Rk – 555.67 Rk
0 R – 80 R
100 C old – 0 C old
100 C New – 0 C New
0 Ct old – 100 Ct old
0 Ct New – 100 Ct New
0 Ct 2New – 100 Ct 2New
0 K – 373.150 K

Below are the reference points for the above temperature scales:

32° – 96°
491.67 Rk – 555.67 Rk
0 R – 80 R
100 C old – 0 C old
100 C New – 96 C New
0 Ct old – 100 Ct old
0 Ct New – 4 Ct New
0.010 Ct 2New – 3.984 Ct 2New
273.160 K – 277.134 K

The following temperature scales have temperature reference points that do not align with the begin scale point, or end scale point, or both:

0° – 96°
0 Rk – 555.67 Rk
100 C New – 0 C New
0 Ct New – 100 Ct New
0 Ct 2New – 100 Ct 2New
0 K – 373.150 K

The following temperature scales have reference points that are the same as both the begin scale point, and the end scale point:

0 R – 80 R
100 C old – 0 C old
0 Ct old – 100 Ct old

Reaumurgrade & Celsiusgrade & Centigrade temperature scales, were created to align the begin scale point and the end scale point with both temperature reference points.

The Reaumurgrade Temperature Scale maintains the reason for its' existence.

The New Celsiusgrade & New Centigrade & 2New Centigrade temperature scales destroy the reason for their existence.

Under the napoleonic nere scheme ''Hectograde'' means 100 grade, and therefore old Centigrade & New Centigrade & 2New Centigrade should mean 1/100 grade, not 100 grade

Info @

http://www.weights-and-measures.com

And topic:

Common Temperature Scale
Rankine Temperature Scale
Reaumurgrade Temperature Scale
old Celsiusgrade Temperature Scale
New Celsiusgrade Temperature Scale
old Centigrade Temperature Scale
New Centigrade Temperature Scale
2New Centigrade Temperature Scale
Kelvingrade Temperature Scale

I maintain that the triple point of water is 440 degrees Parry.

...which is "degrees P" when shortened.

Giese, min gesiώ.

Bryan,

Is that Icelandic or Old English?

Woah,

Now I'm confused

Steve,

Bryan used the letter "ώ" (thorn). It is in use in modern Icelandic (at any rate it was in 1983 whrn I went there). It is also a modern representation of the Old English letter that looks a little like a "Y".

When you see signs saying "Ye Olde wotnot", the letter "Y" is really a very bad copy of the letter "thorn" which is pronounced "th".

So "Ye Olde wotnot" would actually be pronounced "The Olde wotnot"?

(I might have actually learned something off these boards!)

Yes!

The "e" in "Olde" is also optional - after all Shakespeare apparently spelt his name in a dozen different ways!

Martin, it's old English. And actually ώ looks exactly like thorn (just in a different font- in fact, it IS thorn!), it is just that thorn changed over time post-conquest til sometime it eventually resembled so closely "y" as to be virtually indistinguishable from it (in England leastways).

Steve, I said "Yes, my companion".. companion more in the sense of "fellow" than in the sense of "lover" :p I could have said "min freond" instead ;)

Also Martin, if you look in older texts by academics etc, Shakespeare's name is spelt quite variously.

This thread is turning in to an English lesson.

araf! os gwelwch yn dda!

forgyf mec, Stefn!

Copied from newsgroup misc metric-system under the thread "Definition of the acre and the °F.

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 10:46:27 +0100, "Papou" <papou.vauchel@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

>Could any of the imperial system nostalgics give a (or the) definition of an
>acre.

From the Wikipedia:

An area of land that is one furlong (220 yards) long and one chain (22 yards)
wide has an area of one acre.

The acre was selected as approximately the amount of land tillable by one man
behind an ox in one day. This explains its definition in terms of the non-square
one-chain by one-furlong parcel of land; a long narrow strip of land is more
efficient to plough than a square plot, since the plough does not have to be
turned so often.

>I would also be interesred in having the same for the Farenheit degree.

In the words of Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit himself:

"Yet before I undertake a review of these experiments it will be necessary to
say a few words about the thermometers that I have built, and the division of
the scale they use, and in addition the method of producing a vacuum I have
used. I make two particular types of thermometer, one of which is filled with
alcohol and the other with mercury. Their length varies in accordance with the
use to which they are put. Yet all use the same scale, and their differences
relate only to their fixed limits. The scale of those thermometers that are used
only for observations on the weather begins with zero and ends on the 96th
degree. The division of the scale depends on three fixed points, which can be
determined in the following manner. The first is found in the uncalibrated part
or the beginning of the scale, and is determined by a mixture of ice, water and
ammonium chloride or even sea salt. If the thermometer is placed in this
mixture, its liquid descends as far as the degree that is marked with a zero.
This experiment succeeds better in winter than in summer. The second point is
obtained if water and ice are mixed without the aforementioned salts. When the
thermometer is placed in this mixture, its liquid reaches the 32nd degree. I
call this ‘freezing point’. For still waters are already covered with a very
thin layer of ice when the liquid of the thermometer touches this point in
winter. The third point is situated at the 96th degree. Alcohol expands up to
this point when it is held in the mouth or under the armpit of a living man in
good health until it has completely acquired his body heat. But if the
temperature of a man suffering from fever or some other heating disease is to be
investigated, another thermometer must be used, with a scale extended to the
128th or 132nd degree. I have not yet discovered by experiment whether these
degrees are sufficient for the most intense heat of some fever, but it is
scarcely credible that the heat of any fever should exceed the degrees I have
described. When a thermometer is being used to investigate the temperature of
boiling liquids, it too starts from zero and contains 600 degrees, for around
this point mercury itself (with which the thermometer is filled) begins to
boil."

D. G. Fahrenheit.
Experimenta et Observationes de Congelatione aquae in vacuo factae a D. G.
Fahrenheit, R. S. S..
Philosophical Transactions (London), volume 33, page 78 (1724).
Translated for Sizes by J. Holland


And before all you metric-heads go crowing about how wonderful Anders Celsius's
centigrade scale is, remember that his original incarnation had the freezing
point at 100, and the boiling point at 0. It was turned right-side-up after his
death. The definition of the Celcius scale is today even more convoluted than
the Fahrenheit scale, since the boiling point of water is dependent on a
standard pressure, which in turn is dependent on temperature. Now the official
definition fixes the triple point of water at 0.01C, and one degree C is
1/273.16 of the difference in temperature between the triple point of water and
absolute zero.

<<
The definition of the Celcius scale is today even more convoluted than
the Fahrenheit scale, since the boiling point of water is dependent on a
standard pressure, which in turn is dependent on temperature. Now the official
definition fixes the triple point of water at 0.01C, and one degree C is
1/273.16 of the difference in temperature between the triple point of water and
absolute zero.
>>

I thought the Celsius scale was simply defined in terms of the kelvin scale with a shift. The degree kelvin is 1/273.16 of the thermodynamic triple point of water.

I believe that Fahrenheit scale is still defined in terms of water at standard pressure, but I'm not sure.

Bud wrote

<<
I thought the Celsius scale was simply defined in terms of the kelvin scale with a shift. The degree kelvin is 1/273.16 of the thermodynamic triple point of water.

I believe that Fahrenheit scale is still defined in terms of water at standard pressure, but I'm not sure.
>>

The change in the definition of the degree Celsius was in about 1960. Although the definition was changed, in practical terms the unit stayed the same, in exactly the same way that when the definition of the metre changed, the old metre sticks were still valid, because they were too inaccurate to detect the change.

As regards the definition of the Fahrenhiet scale, - Fahrenheit has no legal standing in the UK. I would however be surprised if it was anything other than F = 32 + 1.8*C . in exactly the same wasy 1 ft = 0.3048 m (Those are metres Steve, not miles)

<<<The acre was selected as approximately the amount of land tillable by one man
behind an ox in one day.>>>

Thats the beauty of the imperial system, the units are more relevant to daily life

I mean what the hell is a hectare? Not even a man with a modern genetically modified ox could do that in a day

<<
Thats the beauty of the imperial system, the units are more relevant to daily life
>>

Origianlly an acre of land varied according to the land type. Nowadays, if I am worried about the economic value of farming land, there might be a case is adjusting the size of the acre to reflect the land's fertility. If, however, I am calculating the expected run-off after a rain-storm as part of a drainage-planning exercise, I have no interest in the economic value of the land at all.

Furthermore, if I am interested in the economic value of the land for farming, the economic value depends of the type of farming.

The prototype gramme is locked in a vault in Paris.

Thats the beauty of the metric system, the units are more relevant to daily life

The metre is the distance travelled by the speed of light in a vacuum over a very tiny amount of time (a time length of which is very 'unrounded').

Thats the beauty of the metric system, the units are more relevant to daily life

Steve you missed my (not entirely serious) point entirely. I'm not saying metric units relate more to daily life, I'm saying it doesn't matter at all where the unit comes from, as long as its a handy size for measuring with!

SteveH wrote

<<
The prototype gramme is locked in a vault in Paris
>>

Actually the prototype is a kilogramme, not a gramme. It is stored on international territory (in the same way that the UN Headquarters is in international territory in New York or the International Maritime Organisation is in international territory in London.

It is kept secure in a vaccuum to ensure that it does not deteriorate. It's mass is consistent ot one part in 10^8. National copies of the kilogramme are regularly sent to the BIPM headquarters for re-calibration against the one of the BIPM working copies of the prototype.

See http://www1.bipm.org/en/scientific/mass/

"Steve you missed my (not entirely serious) point entirely"

I wasn't being entirely serious either - I was in "Question Time" mode; didn't you hear the audience applaud?

;-)

I watched Fahrenheit 911 last night.

What a crock!

<<
I'm not saying metric units relate more to daily life, I'm saying it doesn't matter at all where the unit comes from, as long as its a handy size for measuring with!
>>

So where is the handy size for measuring weight in the supermarket in the metric system? Is it the gram or the kilogram? How about volume of drinks in pubs?

^Indeed. and why isn't the kilogram/metre/litre divided into a useful amount (i.e. binary fractions or suchthing)?

<<It is kept secure in a vaccuum to ensure that it does not deteriorate>>

1) Well that's really handy isn't it?
2) Does being in a vacuum prevent all forms of deterioration?
3) Why on earth is a "kilo-something" the base unit? How inconsistent with the rest of SI is that?




[Warning - 'tangent' ahead]





P.S. Those grapes are back in Tesco, being sold only by price per pound.
So it's deliberate, rather than an "oversight"

To follow up..

It is a fact that the kilogramme HAS deteriorated. I would find a link but I can't be bothered.

<<
It is a fact that the kilogramme HAS deteriorated. I would find a link but I can't be bothered
>>

If it has deteriorated and you know of a way to halt that deterioraiton, I am sure that the people of BIPM would like to hear from you.

Likewise, if you are able to devise a better standard for mass (including a demonstration on how you can use it to better that 1 part in 10^8), then again the people at the BIPM would love to hear from you.

Until then, the prototype kilogramme at Sevres is the best that we have - there is no prototype pound - the UK calibrates her copy of the kilogramm against the copy at Sevres every 25 years.

^ Is caught up in a fit of rabid nationalism (for metric). I never even IMPLIED that there was a better way, I merely stated, contrary (to I think it was) your statement that the Kilogram has no detiorated, that is has.

Martin, you may find this article interesting
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0327/p16s01-stss.html
It mentions a 20 ppb accuracy of the master kilogram, which is not good compared to the definitions of the metre, second, etc. Although there is currently no more accurate method, it is only a matter of time before someone comes up with another definition that does not rely on a prototype and is more accurate.

Bud,

An interesting article. It is worth reading the final two paragraphs:

<<
You've got to hand it to scientists who are willing to devote many years to such painstaking - but fundamentally important - research.

They deserve a hug.
>>

Get ready for "Hug a scientist" day folks!

It's bound to happen.