Title: Re: [USMA:18452] RE: Whatever happened to centigrade??
2002-02-28
 
How did he check this "male in good health" to make sure he was getting the right temperature?  Which orifice did he use? 
 
Also, if the human body temperature is suppose to be 96 on Fahrenheit's scale, why is it 98.6 (=37.0�C) today?  Does this constitute some type of error in the Fahrenheit scale.
 
 
What is meant by this:  Danzig (Gdansk actuellement)?  Is the reference trying to imply the cities real name is Gdansk?  Gdansk is the Polish name and was not applied to the city until it came under Polish jurisdiction and its German population was expelled in 1945. 
 
John
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, 2002-02-28 17:09
Subject: [USMA:18455] RE: Whatever happened to centigrade??

At 12:05 -0800 02/02/28, Bill Potts wrote:
Fahrenheit's scale is also, of course, based on a 100-unit interval (from
the freezing point of a saturated saline solution to alleged body
temperature).

Bill,

I disagree on this 100-unit interval of the Fahrenheit scale.

From my book :

Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit, n� allemand � Danzig (Gdansk actuellement) mais ayant v�cu principalement en Hollande, construisit son premier thermom�tre � mercure en 1717, trois ans apr�s Celsius. Comme il ne concevait pas qu'on puisse utiliser des temp�ratures n�gatives, il prit pour z�ro la temp�rature la plus basse que l'on pouvait obtenir alors, celle d'un m�lange (eutectique) de glace et de sel ; il avait v�rifi� que m�me les hivers les plus rigoureux de Danzig n'atteignaient pas cette temp�rature. Il lui fallait une r�f�rence "chaude" : il choisit la temp�rature du corps d'un " m�le en bonne sant� " et lui donna la valeur 12, en bon adepte du syst�me duod�cimal. Plus tard, am�liorant la pr�cision de ses thermom�tres, il pensa qu'il pouvait utiliser des graduations plus fines et divisa ses graduations par 2, puis encore par 2 et finalement par 2 encore : le z�ro resta z�ro mais le 12 devint 96.

For those who don't read French : Fahrenheit choosed as a reference for the lowest point of his scale the temperature of a mixture of ice and salt and gave it the value of zero. For the warm reference, he took the temperature of a "male in good health" and gave it the value of 12. Later on, having improved the accuracy of his thermometers, he wanted to have finer graduations and divided them by 2, and again by by 2, finally by another 2 : zero remained 0 but 12 became 96.

Louis


Reply via email to