I'm sitting here in my lab Sunday morning, with an Omega temperature guage on the racks and the thermocouple stuck outside the window, since I'm not doing experiments right now. Hmmm, let's see it's reading: -5.5..., -5.8..., -6.3..., -5.9..., etc. as various little convection currents blow past near the window.
I wish I could turn off the tenths digit in this case. It doesn't mean anything, its just noise. Nat -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chimpsarecute Sent: Sunday, 2004 January 25 10:56 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:28369] Re: temperature That is nonsense. Degrees Fahrenheit has more resolution then degrees Celsius without going into decimal parts. There are 9 divisions in the Fahrenheit scale for every 5 divisions in the Celsius scale. But the same decree of resolution can be achieved in the Celsius by reporting Celsius temperatures to every 0.5°C. Accuracy depends on the instrument used to take the measurements. No matter what the resolution. Accuracy can also depend on the stability of the temperature of the medium being measured. If the temperature in a medium is not homogenous, high resolution readings would be erroneous. E.g.: If the temperature in a room is taken and the temperature is known to vary between 19 and 21°C, resolving the temperature to a higher degree of accuracy would imply a narrower tolerance band then what is actually observed. Formula for calculating temperature rise and resistance changes in wire are all done in degrees Celsius (or Kelvin). The relationship is very linear with changes in resistance per degree Celsius (Kelvin) change in temperature. I would tend to think that energy levels in media are quantized and energy levels changes are not infinite. They change in steps and those steps seem to be in harmony with the Celsius scale. Thus there is no reason to resolve temperatures or temperature variations finer then 1°C. To do so will produce fictitious results. >From the Honeywell website, there was an FAQ which stated that humans could detect temperature changes as low as 1°C (ok...they really said 1.8°F). Someone must have done the research and found that nature is in tune with degrees Celsius. Thus all the crap about Fahrenheit being more accurate is made by people who know nothing about temperature measurements. Euric ---- Original Message ----- From: john mercer To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, 2004-01-25 00:37 Subject: [USMA:28367] temperature Hi everyone, could someone tel me whitch temperature scale degrees F or degrees C is more accurate. I have heard some people say that F is more accurate because it has more degrees between freezing and boiling. They say that a degree F is smaller than a degree C so it is more accurate. I feel that if degrees F were more accurate it would be used more in the world then it is. Thanks John
