Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage [message #391458 is a reply to message #391455] 
Wed, 04 March 2020 14:02 
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 4743 Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0

Senior Member 


On 20200304, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Mar 2020 16:40:19 GMT
> nobody@example.org (Scott) wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 14:30:56 0000 (UTC), Thomas Koenig
>> <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>
>>> Now, assume you have a 1000 cubic foot tank which you empty with 5
>>> gallons per minute, that gives you how many hours before the tank
>>> is empty?
>>
>> Would it be easier to talk about moving 28,315 liters at 18.9 LPM?
>
> Yes it's only one sum to do and no risk that it might have been
> 22.7 lpm that was meant by 5 gallons per minute. Of course the metric
> designers might well have gone for a 30,000 litre tank and a 20 lpm pump
> because they like round numbers too and when they use them everyone wins.
Whew. I still remember the saga of the Gimli Glider, the Boeing 767 that
ran out of fuel but fortunately was able to glide to an abandoned airport
where it was landed with no injuries. An error in conversion to metric
during refueling resulted in not enough fuel being added for the flight.
In addition, the fuel gauges failed, which meant the crew could not detect
the error (at least until the engines flamed out).
Shortly afterwards, a cartoon appeared showing one of the refueling staff
kneeling on the wing of an airplane with a dipstick, calling out to one
of the passengers on board: "How many feet in a liter?"

/~\ Charlie Gibbs  Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>  Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus  Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way.  Pick your poison.



circular measure [was Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage] [message #391466 is a reply to message #391256] 
Wed, 04 March 2020 17:05 
Rich Alderson
Messages: 390 Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0

Senior Member 


Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>> Also, I never understood the point of centrigrade. Temperature
>> doesn't get converted to different units, so what is the
>> advantage of having freezing and boiling at 0 and 100?
> Why not 100 degrees in a circle?
The 360 degrees/circle standard was extablished by the Sumerians, who used
base 60 in their mathematics. Easily divided by 3, 4, 5. Anything that's
stood for 5500 years is good enough for you.

Rich Alderson news@alderson.users.panix.com
Audendum est, et veritas investiganda; quam etiamsi non assequamur,
omnino tamen proprius, quam nunc sumus, ad eam perveniemus.
Galen



Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage [message #391484 is a reply to message #391448] 
Thu, 05 March 2020 14:03 
hancock4
Messages: 6663 Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0

Senior Member 


On Wednesday, March 4, 2020 at 9:30:57 AM UTC5, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> I remember standing in a chemical plant in the US. The people
> had conversion tables for units of volume on a note on the wall.
>
> Why?
>
> Well, the tanks they had were rated in cubic foot, and the
> pumps were rated in gallons per minute.
>
> Now, assume you have a 1000 cubic foot tank which you empty with 5
> gallons per minute, that gives you how many hours before the tank
> is empty?
We had to do those kinds of problems in school to learn measuring
units, conversion, and practice our long division.
Most calendars have a page in the back with all sorts of
conversion units.



Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage [message #391511 is a reply to message #391455] 
Fri, 06 March 2020 10:04 

Originally posted by: nobody
On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 17:51:12 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Mar 2020 16:40:19 GMT
> nobody@example.org (Scott) wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 14:30:56 0000 (UTC), Thomas Koenig
>> <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>>
>
>>> Now, assume you have a 1000 cubic foot tank which you empty with 5
>>> gallons per minute, that gives you how many hours before the tank
>>> is empty?
>>
>> Would it be easier to talk about moving 28,315 liters at 18.9 LPM?
>
> Yes it's only one sum to do and no risk that it might have been
> 22.7 lpm that was meant by 5 gallons per minute. Of course the metric
> designers might well have gone for a 30,000 litre tank and a 20 lpm pump
> because they like round numbers too and when they use them everyone wins.
It was stipulated to be sited in the US, so chances are that the pump
is rated in US gallons and not UK. There would be a rating plate that
says so.
In practice, I speculate that if you don't have time to look at the
rating plate on a howling fluid pump that's going to cost thousands of
dollars if it runs dry in the next few minutes, then you don't have
time or presence of mind to do simple arithmetic in your head
regardless of what units you have, therefore there's a cheat sheet
taped to the wall.




Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage [message #392548 is a reply to message #391449] 
Sun, 29 March 2020 14:10 
Quadibloc
Messages: 4089 Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0

Senior Member 


On Wednesday, March 4, 2020 at 7:33:39 AM UTC7, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> There is the "gon" (400 degrees to the circle).
I had never heard of the "gon", but I had heard of that unit being called the
"grad". In fact, I think I even saw one pocket calculator that allowed you to
switch the trig functions from degrees to radians or grads.
John Savard



Re: circular measure [was Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage] [message #392549 is a reply to message #391466] 
Sun, 29 March 2020 14:15 
Quadibloc
Messages: 4089 Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0

Senior Member 


On Wednesday, March 4, 2020 at 3:05:20 PM UTC7, Rich Alderson wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>> Why not 100 degrees in a circle?
> The 360 degrees/circle standard was extablished by the Sumerians, who used
> base 60 in their mathematics. Easily divided by 3, 4, 5. Anything that's
> stood for 5500 years is good enough for you.
On Barsoom, the circle is divided into 300 parts. That's why a karad is 2,339
feet, as recorded in Thuvia, a Maid of Mars... and not 1,949 feet, as Burroughs
wrote in A Fighting Man of Mars when he forgot that, and divided the equatorial
circumference of Mars by 360 instead.
John Savard



Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage [message #392551 is a reply to message #392548] 
Sun, 29 March 2020 15:06 
Jorgen Grahn
Messages: 528 Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0

Senior Member 


On Sun, 20200329, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 4, 2020 at 7:33:39 AM UTC7, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
>> There is the "gon" (400 degrees to the circle).
>
> I had never heard of the "gon", but I had heard of that unit being called the
> "grad". In fact, I think I even saw one pocket calculator that allowed you to
> switch the trig functions from degrees to radians or grads.
My 1980s calculators from Casio all had that: a deg/rad/grad button.
I never had reason to use the last one.
/Jorgen

// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .



Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage [message #392557 is a reply to message #392551] 
Sun, 29 March 2020 18:33 

Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On 29 Mar 2020 19:06:24 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>
wrote:
> On Sun, 20200329, Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Wednesday, March 4, 2020 at 7:33:39 AM UTC7, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>>
>>> There is the "gon" (400 degrees to the circle).
>>
>> I had never heard of the "gon", but I had heard of that unit being called the
>> "grad". In fact, I think I even saw one pocket calculator that allowed you to
>> switch the trig functions from degrees to radians or grads.
>
> My 1980s calculators from Casio all had that: a deg/rad/grad button.
> I never had reason to use the last one.
It was an attempt at a metric degree100 degrees in a right angle,
400 degrees in a circle.




Re: circular measure [was Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage] [message #392587 is a reply to message #392549] 
Mon, 30 March 2020 21:26 
John Varela
Messages: 15 Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0

Junior Member 


On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 18:15:16 UTC, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 4, 2020 at 3:05:20 PM UTC7, Rich Alderson wrote:
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>>> Why not 100 degrees in a circle?
>
>> The 360 degrees/circle standard was extablished by the Sumerians, who used
>> base 60 in their mathematics. Easily divided by 3, 4, 5. Anything that's
>> stood for 5500 years is good enough for you.
>
> On Barsoom, the circle is divided into 300 parts. That's why a karad is 2,339
> feet, as recorded in Thuvia, a Maid of Mars... and not 1,949 feet, as Burroughs
> wrote in A Fighting Man of Mars when he forgot that, and divided the equatorial
> circumference of Mars by 360 instead.
Getting on topic: When I used to work with digitized radar data, the
circle was divided into 4096 Azimuth Pulse Units.

John Varela



Re: circular measure [was Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage] [message #392589 is a reply to message #392587] 
Mon, 30 March 2020 23:28 
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 4743 Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0

Senior Member 


On 20200331, John Varela <jv919a.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 18:15:16 UTC, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, March 4, 2020 at 3:05:20 PM UTC7, Rich Alderson wrote:
>>
>>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Why not 100 degrees in a circle?
>>>
>>> The 360 degrees/circle standard was extablished by the Sumerians, who used
>>> base 60 in their mathematics. Easily divided by 3, 4, 5. Anything that's
>>> stood for 5500 years is good enough for you.
>>
>> On Barsoom, the circle is divided into 300 parts. That's why a karad is
>> 2,339 feet, as recorded in Thuvia, a Maid of Mars... and not 1,949 feet,
>> as Burroughs wrote in A Fighting Man of Mars when he forgot that, and
>> divided the equatorial circumference of Mars by 360 instead.
>
> Getting on topic: When I used to work with digitized radar data, the
> circle was divided into 4096 Azimuth Pulse Units.
This discussion wouldn't be complete without mention of the "mil", which
NATO defines as 1/6400 of a circle. Other jurisdictions use slightly
different values, but they're all pretty close to one milliradian, i.e.
arctan(1/1000). They're used in firearm sights.

/~\ Charlie Gibbs  Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>  Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus  Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way.  Pick your poison.



Re: circular measure [was Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage] [message #392604 is a reply to message #392589] 
Tue, 31 March 2020 14:01 
John Varela
Messages: 15 Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0

Junior Member 


On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 03:28:55 UTC, Charlie Gibbs
<cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 20200331, John Varela <jv919a.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 18:15:16 UTC, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, March 4, 2020 at 3:05:20 PM UTC7, Rich Alderson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>> > Why not 100 degrees in a circle?
>>>>
>>>> The 360 degrees/circle standard was extablished by the Sumerians, who used
>>>> base 60 in their mathematics. Easily divided by 3, 4, 5. Anything that's
>>>> stood for 5500 years is good enough for you.
>>>
>>> On Barsoom, the circle is divided into 300 parts. That's why a karad is
>>> 2,339 feet, as recorded in Thuvia, a Maid of Mars... and not 1,949 feet,
>>> as Burroughs wrote in A Fighting Man of Mars when he forgot that, and
>>> divided the equatorial circumference of Mars by 360 instead.
>>
>> Getting on topic: When I used to work with digitized radar data, the
>> circle was divided into 4096 Azimuth Pulse Units.
OK, that was almost 60 years ago. It has come to me that they were
actually Azimuth Change Pulses. ACPs, not APUs. Produced in the
radar pedestal as the sail rotated. 4096 of them in a circle.
> This discussion wouldn't be complete without mention of the "mil", which
> NATO defines as 1/6400 of a circle. Other jurisdictions use slightly
> different values, but they're all pretty close to one milliradian, i.e.
> arctan(1/1000). They're used in firearm sights.
All that is after my time.

John Varela



Re: circular measure [was Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage] [message #392605 is a reply to message #392587] 
Tue, 31 March 2020 14:19 

Originally posted by: Brian Reay
On 31/03/2020 02:26, John Varela wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 18:15:16 UTC, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, March 4, 2020 at 3:05:20 PM UTC7, Rich Alderson wrote:
>>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>>
>>>> Why not 100 degrees in a circle?
>>
>>> The 360 degrees/circle standard was extablished by the Sumerians, who used
>>> base 60 in their mathematics. Easily divided by 3, 4, 5. Anything that's
>>> stood for 5500 years is good enough for you.
>>
>> On Barsoom, the circle is divided into 300 parts. That's why a karad is 2,339
>> feet, as recorded in Thuvia, a Maid of Mars... and not 1,949 feet, as Burroughs
>> wrote in A Fighting Man of Mars when he forgot that, and divided the equatorial
>> circumference of Mars by 360 instead.
>
> Getting on topic: When I used to work with digitized radar data, the
> circle was divided into 4096 Azimuth Pulse Units.
>
6400 mils is used my the military, in particular the artillery. 1 mil is
the angle subtended my 1m at 1km.
There is, of course the 'true' mil or milliradian, 6283 (2*Pi*1000) to
the circle, based on the radian.
There is also the gradian, which is 1/400 of a circle, so 100 to the
right angle. I believe it is used in surveying in some places.



Re: circular measure [was Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage] [message #392606 is a reply to message #392604] 
Tue, 31 March 2020 15:26 
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 4743 Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0

Senior Member 


On 20200331, John Varela <jv919a.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 03:28:55 UTC, Charlie Gibbs
> <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 20200331, John Varela <jv919a.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Getting on topic: When I used to work with digitized radar data, the
>>> circle was divided into 4096 Azimuth Pulse Units.
>
> OK, that was almost 60 years ago. It has come to me that they were
> actually Azimuth Change Pulses. ACPs, not APUs. Produced in the
> radar pedestal as the sail rotated. 4096 of them in a circle.
>
>> This discussion wouldn't be complete without mention of the "mil", which
>> NATO defines as 1/6400 of a circle. Other jurisdictions use slightly
>> different values, but they're all pretty close to one milliradian, i.e.
>> arctan(1/1000). They're used in firearm sights.
>
> All that is after my time.
Depends on where you were, I guess. The one time I encountered mils
was at a militia camp in 1969.

/~\ Charlie Gibbs  Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>  Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus  Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way.  Pick your poison.



Re: circular measure [was Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage] [message #392633 is a reply to message #392606] 
Wed, 01 April 2020 14:03 
John Varela
Messages: 15 Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0

Junior Member 


On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 19:26:48 UTC, Charlie Gibbs
<cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 20200331, John Varela <jv919a.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 03:28:55 UTC, Charlie Gibbs
>> <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 20200331, John Varela <jv919a.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Getting on topic: When I used to work with digitized radar data, the
>>>> circle was divided into 4096 Azimuth Pulse Units.
>>
>> OK, that was almost 60 years ago. It has come to me that they were
>> actually Azimuth Change Pulses. ACPs, not APUs. Produced in the
>> radar pedestal as the sail rotated. 4096 of them in a circle.
>>
>>> This discussion wouldn't be complete without mention of the "mil", which
>>> NATO defines as 1/6400 of a circle. Other jurisdictions use slightly
>>> different values, but they're all pretty close to one milliradian, i.e.
>>> arctan(1/1000). They're used in firearm sights.
>>
>> All that is after my time.
>
> Depends on where you were, I guess. The one time I encountered mils
> was at a militia camp in 1969.
I was only talking about digitized surveillance radar technology
that dates from the 1950s. Modern radars may have narrower beams
and use a finer azimuth measure; I wouldn't know about that.

John Varela



Re: Superman, was: Chicago P.D. TV seriescomputer usage [message #393764 is a reply to message #391457] 
Sun, 26 April 2020 06:54 
Bernd Felsche
Messages: 123 Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0

Senior Member 


Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 20200304, Scott <nobody@example.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 14:30:56 0000 (UTC), Thomas Koenig
>> <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>>> Scott <nobody@example.org> schrieb:
>>>
>>>> Metric has its uses, but there's nothing magical about it.
>>>
>>> I remember standing in a chemical plant in the US. The people
>>> had conversion tables for units of volume on a note on the wall.
>>>
>>> Why?
>>>
>>> Well, the tanks they had were rated in cubic foot, and the
>>> pumps were rated in gallons per minute.
>>>
>>> Now, assume you have a 1000 cubic foot tank which you empty with 5
>>> gallons per minute, that gives you how many hours before the tank
>>> is empty?
>> Would it be easier to talk about moving 28,315 liters at 18.9 LPM?
Maybe easier to guesstimate than 25,000 pounds at 4.7 GPM
> Sheesh. Give him 2.54 centimeters and he'll take 1.609 kilometers.
1.609344 km ... except for mariners and aviators

/"\ Bernd Felsche  Somewhere in Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign  For every complex problem there is an
X against HTML mail  answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
/ \ and postings  HL Mencken


