Re: Ohms Law - NOT

From: Kryten (kryten_droid_obfusticator_at_ntlworld.com)
Date: 11/19/04 

Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 01:15:29 GMT

"jsmith" <juddo@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:1100820053.ozq8/Rlf4l0vSeqyfa/Xcw@sonicnews...
> Aw geese, grovel, grovel !!
> "Robert Monsen" <rcsurname@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:qT9nd.631003$8_6.510047@attbi_s04...
>> jsmith wrote:
>> > Sez who????
>> http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/units.html
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Robert Monsen

Thanks Robert, for that clarification.
I confess I was unsure of the convention, but had leaned to thinking that if
a unit was named after a person it would take the capital with it. I welcome
your correction with good grace.

On a humorous note, would anyone care to propose other fundamental units?

I propose the metric dam as a unit of caring, defined as the threshold of
caring about something.
If you don't give a dam, it is below your caring threshold.

It replaces the imperial ***, and the near-equivalent US turd, both of
which are fundamentally quantised units. One either has a ***, or not.

Quantcast