Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:27:11 +0000 (UTC) From: amesnopsamrak.demon.co.uk (Andrew Stephenson) Subject: Re: Get me the President of Saab !
In article <Xns9474B2924EA10fritzfriicomnopsam17.128.40> fritzxxxnopsamrii.com "Gary Fritz" writes: > Dave Hinz <davehinznopsamcop.net> wrote: > > One _Kelvin_ is the same temperature difference as one Degree > > Celcius, but it's a Kelvin, it's not a "degree Kelvin". > > Well if yer gonna pick nits: > > * It's one degree Celsius, not Celcius, and > > * It's not a _Kelvin_, but a _kelvin_, no caps. > > See e.g. http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/kelvin.html I'm puzzled. (Well, actually, I'm Andrew Stephenson; but we'll let that pass, as they can't touch you for it.) Maybe one ought to go look at that page whose URL you so kindly provided. OTOH, doing so involves procedures I don't have time for now. And as there's no guarantee I'd be any the wiser... Point is: IIRC, the two units are named for Anders Celsius and Lord Kelvin. Both were/are proper names. Wherefore therefore the inconsistent loss of initialisation? We write/talk of amps (Ampere), volts (Volta), farads (Faraday) and many other safely buried worthies. Seems we should w/t of "celcius" and "kelvin". Or was that covered in the footnotes? <g> (This thread is fun.) -- Andrew Stephenson
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
