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
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?
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
: 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
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
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
