Re: A pint's a pound....
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:56:16 -0500, A.J. Padilla, M.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Imagine that you have some water and want to quantify it. It fills a one-pint container It weighs one pound (or 454 gm, or thereabouts) Which is more valid, or superior - volume or weight? Always? Peace. Al Specific Gravity. Doesn't vary. Of course for water, which is the base substance for comparing liquids, it won't help you in quantifying the water above. Unless... you have minerals and other impurities in the water that is in your one-pint container. Then how far you deviate from the specific gravity of pure water will tell you how impure your water is, and maybe give you an idea if you really want to drink the liquid in your one-pint container. :) The Other. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
RE: A pint's a pound....
Which is more valid, or superior - volume or weight? Weight is superior to volume, but a further refinement accrues from using mass instead of weight. Weight depends upon altitude, where the moon is, latitude, which planet you're on, nearby underground deposits of gold ore, etc. Always? Weight/mass are practically superior. However, under relativistic effects (eg, radioactivity), things become more complicated. For example, a cruising jet is slightly shorter and slightly more massive than it was at the airport gate. If the jet were going fast enough (around the world 7 times per second), and you had sufficiently fast shutter speed, you might be surprised to see the jet only one inch long. Also, if the jet were to crash into a mountain, the damage it would do would be wildly out of proportion to its speed, due to its increased mass. It is interesting to see these effects derived, like a geometry theorem, from simple axioms. They are well verified in the laboratory. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
RE: A pint's a pound....
Dear Al, If it's only water then it doesn't matter now if you were talking about Legend ale, we could have an interesting discussion. Of course, whoever's paying for the round would have the superior opinion :) Peace-would-be-nice-if-we-can-ever-get-it! GB -Original Message- From: A.J. Padilla, M.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 6:56 PM To: Chad McAnally; lute Subject: A pint's a pound Imagine that you have some water and want to quantify it. It fills a one-pint container It weighs one pound (or 454 gm, or thereabouts) Which is more valid, or superior - volume or weight? Always? Peace. Al To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
Re: A pint's a pound....
While the weight or mass will always be the same, the volume will change depending on temperature. -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
RE: A pint's a pound....
Seems that weight would be more precise. Volume would vary with temperature, atmospheric pressure, properties of the container, etc. -Original Message- From: A.J. Padilla, M.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 5:56 PM To: Chad McAnally; lute Subject: A pint's a pound Imagine that you have some water and want to quantify it. It fills a one-pint container It weighs one pound (or 454 gm, or thereabouts) Which is more valid, or superior - volume or weight? Always? Peace. Al - Original Message - From: Chad McAnally [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: lute lute@cs.dartmouth.edu Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 6:30 PM Subject: Byrd, Tabluature etc. Hello all, The problem with lists like this is generally you have a bunch of fairly well educated and well meaning people get together and discuss something of real importance to them. This occasionally evokes strong emotional debates and reactions from the participants. And more often than not , because of the de-personalized format of e-mail the authors of posts attack others in ways they would not in more public personal forum. I have see this on more than one list. What we are here for if not to discuss and debate the issues we care about? But do we have to do it in an adversarial, combative and demeaning fashion??? Despite many assurances to the contrary, I do think the tenor of many posts on this last topic ( tablature) is getting far out of hand. Most listers are not conflict mongers. Pointless argument wastes our time. We are here to learn from each other, not attack each other. If someone talked down to me in this pompous fashion, I doubt I'd be nearly as civil as Michael Thames has managed to be. Put yourself in his shoes. How would you react? I don't think anyone should be censured on this list by anything but common sense and actual tact. Both are becoming rarities in the world and I'd hate to think that people who ought know better would act like this too. This sort of garbage is what turns of people from lists like this. Can we behave like adults now? Chad McAnally -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
