The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 27, 2023, 02:04:37 am
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Celebrating 30 years of Star Control 2 - The Ur-Quan Masters

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  Starbase Café (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  Evolution of math in the USA
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 Print
Author Topic: Evolution of math in the USA  (Read 11010 times)
Draxas
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1044



View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #60 on: August 24, 2009, 06:13:12 pm »

Like was pointed out,how is it that when it comes to length measurement there's no need to be too precise, but temperature needs to pretty exact? Anyhow, most modern digital thermometers give the temperature with one decimal point, i.e 16,7 C or so. Hopefully that might satisfy your craving for exactness on this one point.

That's sort of the point; it's so precise that the decimal becomes significant. Granted, yes, modern digital thermometers can handle that now. But let's be honest here: I'd hate to have to consider that a difference of 2 degrees is whether or not I need a coat that morning, and which one I actually need. That's a "pain in the ass" level of precision.

Quote
Regarding speeds, I'm sure you're right. After all, the Irish and English are much closer to the metric system countries, it makes sense for them to have it. I'd think stuff like that would be pretty common at the Canadian border as well, but perhaps not? And as I've said earlier, I do agree that changing your system would be insanely expensive. I just think it's worth the price since I won't be paying for it Wink

And I am, which is why I keep trying to futilely argue the point. Wink

Of course, it's not like we're actually GOING to change or anything.

Quote
We're still talking past each other. I'm referring to the example with planks in the timber yard, not the length of a person you keep returning to. ever since you asked me about why we need more exact measurements, I've been trying to give examples (houses, timber, hair and so forth). When you reply and quote those examples, I simply assume that we're still talking about that subject and haven't returned back to the original length of a person, which I thought we had dropped some time back. That's also why the length was over two metres, I was talking about timber. The example I wrote involved figuring out how many planks of a certain meter length we need and my reply was to that, how you'd have to stack your units up the exact same way if you were doing it in English units, only to then divide them again to get a measurement that can be easily comprehended. Sorry if I've been unclear. Of course you don't have to stack a persons length the same way since you don't need to figure out how many persons of a certain type you need to make a wall unless you're a very special person.

I suppose. I assumed we were past using building materials as examples, since I agreed that they required a greater degree of precision in order to get things to work out right and not have bugs and drafts in your house.

As for lumber, as far as I'm aware, typically they're cut to whole feet or half feet, and cutting them down to the size you need is your own responsibility once you've got them back to your workbench... Which pretty much brings this full circle back to a few pages ago. Of course, if you need a pair of 3'8" baords, and the lumber yard is selling 6 foot and 8 foot boards, you would be smart to get the eights.

I'm still missing the mark on this point, aren't I. *sigh*

Quote
Quote
Wait, you actually measure the length of your hair? I just tell the lady that does mine to cut it a bit shorter, but not a buzzcut. Maybe that's why you folks need so much precision. Tongue

In Europe we have this amazing thing called a hair trimmer. They can be set to cut at different heights, depending on what length you want on your hair. It's a lot cheaper and more efficient than going to the barber. If my alternatives were -2 inches-1inch-bald then I'd be pretty annoyed. On my cutter the shortest length is 3 mm, and from there on up you have 3 mm intervals. Inches for intervals would suck. On the other hand, our lawn movers can't be set to mm standards. those examples were provided because I thought your question "How exact do you need length to be" to be silly, since it can have so many different applications. but I guess you missed that. I still think that question is silly, but since you've moved on to nitpicking examples instead of addressing it I guess we might as well drop it.

Ah. See, I have really thick hair. It jams the average trimmer pretty easily, and the professional-grade ones are pretty expensive. Plus I'm completely clueless when it comes to actually styling my hair. So yeah, I get someone else to cut it for me.

And here's a funny coincidence: your 3mm gradations correspond almost exactly to 1/8 of an inch. Somehow I think you can guess what the gradations are on the US models. Wink

Quote
Yes, but what you don't seem to get is that this isn't an argument over superiority. We're not having a "devils advocate" discussion here. I'm not saying "Look at all the uses metric has, it is superior to your archaic system" and expecting you to throw out witty comebacks.. I'm simply trying to show how metric is used in everyday life, since you seem to believe that metric users only us ml and l, metres and kilometres. I don't really care if you never use small measurements because you're the toughest salsa eater of all time and can afford saffron by the boatload. I'm simply trying to illustrate that it's not as simple as "Metric is only useful for really big or really small things!" You on the other hand, seem determined to quip every example I give rather than taking to heart that there are actually metric units that can be used in every day situations, rather than just "really big and really small".

Of course I'm quipping you. I wouldn't be doing my job otherwise, seeing as how I acknowledged the superiority of the metric system ages ago. And honestly, I do prefer English for everyday use, though as has been pointed out countless times already, it's because I've been using the system for my whole life and am used to it. To be entirely truthful, I couldn't care less if everything else in this country converted to metric, as long as I can still check my speed in mph and get the weather forecast in Fahrenheit. I'll even get used to measuring my height in millimeters if that's what it takes. Tongue

Quote
To be honest, apart from the deci- (and sometimes the hecto-) those aren't used in everyday life. You don't need to know them any more than you need to know how many furlongs there is in whatever furlongs are used with. They're there if you need them, but they aren't everyday units. I don't get your reasoning either. First you think that we only use the extreme ends oft he scale, i.e millilitres and litres. But now the scale is suddenly too complex because you think we use every prefix somewhere and you'd have to know them all. Make up your mind already. the truth lies in between the two extremes you're pushing for.

But that's the thing. You've already mentioned that everything from milli- right on up to 10K (which I've already forgotten the prefix for) is used somehow in everyday things (except deka-, I guess). You trim your hair in millimeters, drink centi- and deciliters, buy your deli meats in hectograms, and drive Sweedish miles. Granted, we also have a long of crazy measurements, but we really do only stick to a few for everyday use.

Quote
Um, yeah. The Scandinavian Mile must be connected to the English mile, it surely can't be a remnant of the old Swedish and Norwegian systems, wherein you'd have a Swedish foot, a Norwegian foot and so on. Because before metric, naturally we all used English units. It's not like the metric system arose because every nation have their own version of inches and feet and we needed to get a standardized measurement... This is an interesting comment though, and says a lot about the danger of making assumptions. for what, like the third time in this thread? ml and l, everyone using pints, mile being only an English thing. Maybe you should stop and think a bit about this?

What can I say, I've made an ass out of u and me (mostly me, as usual). I apologize for not being learned on all of the different European measurement systems that predated the universal use of metric. Honestly, if there really was that much variation between every country and its neighbors, then everyone converting to metric makes metric tons of sense. But the US is relatively isolated, at least geographically, which I guess is why we never felt as great a need.

Quote
About the same that it has to do with the use of archaic conventions I suppose Wink

Touche. sir,

Quote
Quote
And this is a nice topic, but what's the objective here? Do the metric users want Americans to switch? Why? It's been working fine for America. All international science is done in metric, what's the difference?

I can't speak for anyone else, but my objective is mostly to point out to people who use the English system that this:

Quote
Metric is most useful for measuring very large or small quantities, whereas the English system seems to be designed around being useful for everyday tasks.

is ignorant and wrong. I'm just giving examples on how metrics is used, in case there are more people out there who think we have like two units and are always stuck with dozens of zeroes or really small fractions in everyday life. Draxas on the other hand, is arguing my examples as unnecessary for some reason.  Smiley

Well, mostly because this thread is silly and I want to keep it going. Also because I hate Celsius and kph. Other than that, no reason. Wink
Logged
Lukipela
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3620


The Ancient One


View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #61 on: August 25, 2009, 07:25:55 pm »

That's sort of the point; it's so precise that the decimal becomes significant. Granted, yes, modern digital thermometers can handle that now. But let's be honest here: I'd hate to have to consider that a difference of 2 degrees is whether or not I need a coat that morning, and which one I actually need. That's a "pain in the ass" level of precision.

While this is of course pure opinion, I don't quite get this. I'd say that anywhere between 16 and 19 is a grey area, where you might need a coat and might not, depending on whether it's sunny, humid, windy and so forth. Just going by temperature is likely to trick you in our climate, but maybe yours is different. In fact, when we approximate temperature in Finland as "it's about 16-17" rather than going "it's probably 15.7". apparently we move at a broader spectrum than you. Funny considering our units are otherwise more precise.

Anyhow, one more thing on temperature and then I'm done. I can understand that we're used to different things, and you think centimetres are too small and centigrades are too big. The units we have mold the way we think, so I'm down with that. What I don't get, is how you can then calmly accept that inches may sometimes need to get trimmed down to 0.125 in. but really dislike the idea of 1/10th of a degree Celsius. Isn't that exactly the same thing? Or am I missing something?

Quote
I suppose. I assumed we were past using building materials as examples, since I agreed that they required a greater degree of precision in order to get things to work out right and not have bugs and drafts in your house.

Fair enough, things do get convoluted at times.

Quote
As for lumber, as far as I'm aware, typically they're cut to whole feet or half feet, and cutting them down to the size you need is your own responsibility once you've got them back to your workbench... Which pretty much brings this full circle back to a few pages ago. Of course, if you need a pair of 3'8" baords, and the lumber yard is selling 6 foot and 8 foot boards, you would be smart to get the eights.

That's actually pretty interesting. I don't know squat about lumber yards in the US. To be honest I've forgotten the point by now, but I think it was about ease of multiplication.

Quote
Ah. See, I have really thick hair. It jams the average trimmer pretty easily, and the professional-grade ones are pretty expensive. Plus I'm completely clueless when it comes to actually styling my hair. So yeah, I get someone else to cut it for me.

This is the second most interesting thing to come out of this thread. Are you telling me, that if you use a scissor to get your hair as short as you can, a trimmer still sticks in it when you try to even it out? I would like some photos of this. Wink

Quote
And here's a funny coincidence: your 3mm gradations correspond almost exactly to 1/8 of an inch. Somehow I think you can guess what the gradations are on the US models. Wink

See, this is where the thread shines. My current trimmer goes from 3 mm upwards with a mm in between. But most models I see have a step rate of 3 mm. I've always wondered about that, and now I know why. Thanks for that.

Quote
Of course I'm quipping you. I wouldn't be doing my job otherwise, seeing as how I acknowledged the superiority of the metric system ages ago. And honestly, I do prefer English for everyday use, though as has been pointed out countless times already, it's because I've been using the system for my whole life and am used to it. To be entirely truthful, I couldn't care less if everything else in this country converted to metric, as long as I can still check my speed in mph and get the weather forecast in Fahrenheit. I'll even get used to measuring my height in millimeters if that's what it takes. Tongue

I'm perfectly fine with you liking the system you've grown up in. It's only natural. My interest here isn't to show you how superior metric is in every fashion (which it isn't always anyhow). It's just to make sure that next time, you won't make a fool out of yourself by pretending to know the everyday workings of a system just because you've used it in a lab.

Quote
But that's the thing. You've already mentioned that everything from milli- right on up to 10K (which I've already forgotten the prefix for) is used somehow in everyday things (except deka-, I guess). You trim your hair in millimeters, drink centi- and deciliters, buy your deli meats in hectograms, and drive Sweedish miles. Granted, we also have a long of crazy measurements, but we really do only stick to a few for everyday use.

I googled the Swedish mile and found out what it was called. I've never heard of that before, because I don't need it. It's enough that someone tells me that it's 10 km. And by menioning the more obscure units I may have confused you a bit I'm afraid. The commonly used units in length are milli-, centi- meter and kilometer. Hectometer is only used for area. Swedish Mile is only used in Scandinavia, or at least the western parts. When it comes to drinks it's centi-, deci and liter. Millilitre is more of a lab thing, or maybe spices. When we're talking about weight, it's grams and kilograms. The hectogram is used in old deli scales, but those are very uncommon. Digital ones just show grams and kilos.

Something worth remembering is that we used to have lots of different units in the different countries. Metric allows everyone to find a close fit, the Swedes with their Mile and others with other measures. I don't know why a alcohol measure is 4 cl, but I'm guessing there used to be an older measure of roughly the same size. I do know why pints are either 0.4, 0,5 or 0.6, they are remnants of old pint sizes. Even though we don't use most of the scale, it's still there, ready in case we ever find something we need it for. 50 years ago Mega and Giga were pretty useless units in the common language. Who knows what we'll need in another 50 years?

Quote
What can I say, I've made an ass out of u and me (mostly me, as usual). I apologize for not being learned on all of the different European measurement systems that predated the universal use of metric. Honestly, if there really was that much variation between every country and its neighbors, then everyone converting to metric makes metric tons of sense. But the US is relatively isolated, at least geographically, which I guess is why we never felt as great a need.

To be honest, this thread has been pretty interesting to watch just for these small things. While I know you're a bright guy, you've pretty much managed to fit the stereotypical American role here, arrogantly telling people that you know how their system works and that it's inferior when you don't have a clue and assuming that your own units (pints and miles) span the entire civilized world and mean the same everywhere. What did you think, that we all used the English system before metric and then just decided to mess with the brits? It might be worth mentioning here that I lived for a year in a country with English units when I was younger. I still don't know every unit in your system and while I think Iunderstand it fairly well, I don't make myself out to be an expert. A year in a foreign country isn't enough to learn everything there is to it. Consider that the next time you think your lab experience makes you qualified to give opinions on how people in other parts of the world surely must be living.

Actually, that sound a bit harsh. It's not meant to be, but I think you might want to think about it. Have a hug from the Carebear squad while I'm at it.  Smiley

Quote
Well, mostly because this thread is silly and I want to keep it going. Also because I hate Celsius and kph. Other than that, no reason. Wink

What is your opinion on mpg versus l/km?
Logged

What's up doc?
Draxas
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1044



View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #62 on: August 25, 2009, 08:13:35 pm »

Anyhow, one more thing on temperature and then I'm done. I can understand that we're used to different things, and you think centimetres are too small and centigrades are too big. The units we have mold the way we think, so I'm down with that. What I don't get, is how you can then calmly accept that inches may sometimes need to get trimmed down to 0.125 in. but really dislike the idea of 1/10th of a degree Celsius. Isn't that exactly the same thing? Or am I missing something?

Because the practical applications of 1/8 of an inch are few and far between. On the other hand, everyone wants to know how cold it is outside, every day. If I needed 1/8 inch precision in measuring length every single day, I'd probably not be happy with that system either. But most of the time, whole units suffice just fine.

Quote
That's actually pretty interesting. I don't know squat about lumber yards in the US. To be honest I've forgotten the point by now, but I think it was about ease of multiplication.

I don't exactly claim to be an expert carpenter or anything, but that's my experience anyway. It makes sense; why bother with fractional sizes if you're not cutting boards to order anyway?

Quote
This is the second most interesting thing to come out of this thread. Are you telling me, that if you use a scissor to get your hair as short as you can, a trimmer still sticks in it when you try to even it out? I would like some photos of this. Wink

My hair is a thing to be feared. I just had it cut fairly recently, but it's truly great and terrible when it gets long. It doesn't grow down as much as out, and gets huge and poofy if left to its own devices. It's also REALLY thick; my hairdresser says she has never seen anything like it before. Of course, that was before she met my grandmother, who is the source of that trait.

And yeah, if I try to shorten my own hair, I butcher it. That's at least partly because it gets so unruly so quickly.

Maybe I'll send you a pic when I'm ready for another hair appointment.

Quote
I'm perfectly fine with you liking the system you've grown up in. It's only natural. My interest here isn't to show you how superior metric is in every fashion (which it isn't always anyhow). It's just to make sure that next time, you won't make a fool out of yourself by pretending to know the everyday workings of a system just because you've used it in a lab.

Oh, I'm sure I can find plenty of other ways to make a fool out of myself.

Well, now you've piqued my interest. In what ways is metric not superior?

Quote
To be honest, this thread has been pretty interesting to watch just for these small things. While I know you're a bright guy, you've pretty much managed to fit the stereotypical American role here, arrogantly telling people that you know how their system works and that it's inferior when you don't have a clue and assuming that your own units (pints and miles) span the entire civilized world and mean the same everywhere. What did you think, that we all used the English system before metric and then just decided to mess with the brits? It might be worth mentioning here that I lived for a year in a country with English units when I was younger. I still don't know every unit in your system and while I think Iunderstand it fairly well, I don't make myself out to be an expert. A year in a foreign country isn't enough to learn everything there is to it. Consider that the next time you think your lab experience makes you qualified to give opinions on how people in other parts of the world surely must be living.

Actually, that sound a bit harsh. It's not meant to be, but I think you might want to think about it. Have a hug from the Carebear squad while I'm at it.  Smiley

Well I suppose my arrogant yankee gringo gaijin self deserved that.

To be honest, between all the wars and inbreeding of royal families, yeah, I kind of did think the English system was pretty universal. You learn something new every day.

And I graciously accept your Carebear Squad hug. But if they stare at me, I'm going to kill them all.

Quote
Quote
Well, mostly because this thread is silly and I want to keep it going. Also because I hate Celsius and kph. Other than that, no reason. Wink

What is your opinion on mpg versus l/km?

*Seethes quietly*
Logged
Lukipela
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3620


The Ancient One


View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #63 on: August 25, 2009, 09:01:09 pm »

Because the practical applications of 1/8 of an inch are few and far between. On the other hand, everyone wants to know how cold it is outside, every day. If I needed 1/8 inch precision in measuring length every single day, I'd probably not be happy with that system either. But most of the time, whole units suffice just fine.

Fair enough, that makes sense.

Quote
Maybe I'll send you a pic when I'm ready for another hair appointment.

I'm eagerly waiting Wink

Quote
Well, now you've piqued my interest. In what ways is metric not superior?

To be clear, I think metric is better in that it allows for easier conversion and easier scaling. I don't think the metric units are inherently superior in themselves in any way. Like I said, I've lived with inches and miles and whatnot. It didn't make my life horribly complicated and frustrating except when I tried to scale or convert something.

Quote
To be honest, between all the wars and inbreeding of royal families, yeah, I kind of did think the English system was pretty universal. You learn something new every day.

European kings and lords were stubborn mules. If one of them declared that the sky was blue, the others would probably declare it to be an other colour just out of spite.

Quote
*Seethes quietly*

This is one of those instances where I don't think either is so much better. One needs to be high, to show how many miles you can go. the other needs to be low, to show how little gas you need to travel. But i think it's remarkable that we ended up at the exact opposite ends of the spectrum there.
Logged

What's up doc?
RTyp06
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 491



View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #64 on: August 26, 2009, 12:44:29 am »

This from Lukipela caught my eye.

Quote
Funny considering our units are otherwise more precise."

Then further down we get:

Quote
My interest here isn't to show you how superior metric is in every fashion (which it isn't always anyhow).

and

Quote
To be clear, I think metric is better in that it allows for easier conversion and easier scaling. (then in the same sentence)I don't think the metric units are inherently superior in themselves in any way.

I just gotta laugh...And euro's say we're arrogant?

BTW exactly how is metric more precise? You can carry out fractions in both systems indefinately.
Logged
Lukipela
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3620


The Ancient One


View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #65 on: August 26, 2009, 07:02:38 am »

This from Lukipela caught my eye.

Quote
Funny considering our units are otherwise more precise."


Well, if you bother to read through the thread and the discussion, you'll find that a recurring theme is that Draxas thinks our units are unnecessarily precise. The cm is more precise than the inch, the litre is more precise than the gallon, kilometre is more precise than mile and so on. But a degree Celcius is actually less accurate than a degree Farenheit. And that is pretty funny.


Quote
Then further down we get:

Quote
My interest here isn't to show you how superior metric is in every fashion (which it isn't always anyhow).

and

Quote
To be clear, I think metric is better in that it allows for easier conversion and easier scaling. (then in the same sentence)I don't think the metric units are inherently superior in themselves in any way.

I just gotta laugh...And euro's say we're arrogant?

Well, I don't think you're arrogant but I do think you're confusing. You've quoted two lines of me clarifying that I think ease of scaling and conversion is better in the metric system, but that I don't think that the units are necessarily better. Why is that laughably arrogant? I'd understand if you'd quoted me saying your units suck and ours are superior in every fashion. But maybe in 'merica it's arrogant to politely explain what one sees as the key difference between two systems and what one doesn't think are big differences?

Quote
BTW exactly how is metric more precise? You can carry out fractions in both systems indefinately.

Read the thread, then hopefully comprehend that me and Draxas having been talking abut the size of the base units and not fractions. Of course if you add ten decimal points to a unit you can make it super precise But Draxas has been specifically pointing out that he doesn't want to add decimal points to commonly used units for temperature and that metric units for length and so on are more precise than they need to be for every day use.
Logged

What's up doc?
Resh Aleph
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 319


Rottem Tomatoes


View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #66 on: August 26, 2009, 10:21:47 am »

This is one of those instances where I don't think either is so much better. One needs to be high, to show how many miles you can go. the other needs to be low, to show how little gas you need to travel. But i think it's remarkable that we ended up at the exact opposite ends of the spectrum there.

For some reason, we use km/l here in Israel. So it's like a direct metric equivalent of mpg. It's quite confusing when most of the world does l/km. But in a few years we'll probably all be looking at car battery time anyway.
Logged

Marines on Maulers and limpets on Earthlings  /  Bright Podship plasma and warm Kohr-Ah death rings  /
Shofixti Scouts doing gravity whips  /  These are a few of my favorite ships!
       © meep-eep
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3870


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #67 on: August 26, 2009, 04:16:49 pm »

I've never seen l/km anywhere, and km/l and its non-SI equivalent a lot of places.
Logged
Draxas
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1044



View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #68 on: August 26, 2009, 05:08:24 pm »

Interesting you guys should mention that. I misinterpreted Luki as having typed km/l, which I thought was a direct conversion of mpg, hence the sarcastic response. l/km is also something I've never seen before, and honestly makes little sense to me. Do you even wind up with whole numbers with that measurement, or is this just another example of how Europeans love their numbers after decimal places (commas)? Wink
Logged
Lukipela
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3620


The Ancient One


View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #69 on: August 26, 2009, 07:21:04 pm »

That's pretty interesting. I had no idea there was an actual km/l measurement as well. To be exact, we measure it in 1 liter per 100 km, so you get something like 5 l (per 100 km,, but that isn't often written out). Here's a link to examples. I'll freely admit that this is kind of a weird measurement, and if there is an actual km/l in use as well, I think I'll have to start a campaign for that. Maybe it's only a Scandinavian thing? not owning a car I don't know. But two SI units are really one too much.

Man I like this thread. I'm learning a lot!
Logged

What's up doc?
RTyp06
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 491



View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #70 on: August 27, 2009, 12:02:12 am »

Ok fair enough, perhaps I mistook some of your statements. Perhaps you could explain what you meant by "I don't think the metric units are inherently superior in themselves in any way."

The "within themseleves" makes no sense to me. What are you referring to exactly?

To me you've already made it clear you felt metric was superior (which I agree by the way and for the same reasons) But the to "make things clear "statement seems an empathetic gesture to Draxas at best.

To me this is like the racist/phobic guy at work who talks about an ethnic/social minority and adds the obligatory "not that I have anything against (blank)". Likewise you seem to be saying not that I have anything against the english system.

I dunno, that is how it honestly struck me and I meant no disrespect or offense.
Logged
Zeracles
Frungy champion
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 69


Icon of X


View Profile WWW
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #71 on: August 27, 2009, 01:48:15 am »

I'm just glad we use dimensionless parameters to describe the geometry of the universe . . .
Logged

Fear not the Arch Viles and Spectres of the Deepest Reaches, for the X is strong in this place.
Alvarin
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 795



View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #72 on: August 27, 2009, 03:31:03 am »

Why dimentionless ? We use Parsecs and light years .
Logged
SweetSassyMolassy
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 271



View Profile
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #73 on: August 27, 2009, 03:49:44 am »

Parsecs and light-years are units of distance, they don't describe the geometry of space. There is a curvature constant, which I believe is unit-less, that describes the curvature of space in the universe, but I don't know if that's what Zeracles means.
Logged

I am not always understand about what you speak, unfortunately.
Zeracles
Frungy champion
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 69


Icon of X


View Profile WWW
Re: Evolution of math in the USA
« Reply #74 on: August 27, 2009, 05:41:58 am »

Why dimentionless ? We use Parsecs and light years .
Personally, I prefer h-1 megaparsecs Cool

There is a curvature constant, which I believe is unit-less, that describes the curvature of space in the universe, but I don't know if that's what Zeracles means.
Close.

Logged

Fear not the Arch Viles and Spectres of the Deepest Reaches, for the X is strong in this place.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!