Empathy List Archives

SG

steve gunsel

Fri, Aug 21, 2009 11:56 AM

At least an acre is acre throughout the US (I think). The real
problem was in olden France where virtually all measurements varied
from village to village. So a bushel of wheat in one locality
differed from a bushel elsewhere. Same with all of the other units.
Made for nasty trade issues once they expanded beyond dealing with
the immediate neighbors. They HAD to adopt common measurement system
of some kind, and they sure weren't going to use anything that the
English did!

At least an acre is acre throughout the US (I think). The real problem was in olden France where virtually all measurements varied from village to village. So a bushel of wheat in one locality differed from a bushel elsewhere. Same with all of the other units. Made for nasty trade issues once they expanded beyond dealing with the immediate neighbors. They HAD to adopt common measurement system of some kind, and they sure weren't going to use anything that the English did!

UB

Ulrich Bangert

Sat, Aug 22, 2009 7:19 AM

Steve,

.....They HAD to adopt common measurement system
of some kind, and they sure weren't going to use anything that the
English did!

So it was! However, the idea to make something completely new and not to
follow something existing did not result from political reasoning or from
what countries they had a friendship with or not.

The basic idea behind creating something new was: The new measures should
make sense to EVERYBODY who was forced by law to make use of them and should
therefore make it easy for everybody to adopt them. This reasoning is well
backed up by other ideas falling into the time of the French revolution.

For example: Since we all share mother earth it was decided that the meter
should have a definition that is based on the size of earth. So the original
definition of a meter was to be 1/40000 of or earth's circumference. This
lead to a minor problem: Earth's circumference was not well known at that
times. Which in turn lead to the invention of a new class of surveyor
instruments, which in turn enabled the French to measure the distance from
the equator to the north pole (assumed to be 1/4 of the circumference) with
a precision that must be admired even from a today point of view. I do not
know the english term for it but in German these instruments are called
"Repetitionskreis". You can find a pictue of one here:

http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repetition
skreis.htm

A very good literature about this topic is Ken Alders "The measure of all
Things"

Best regards
Ulrich Bangert

-----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
Von: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com
[mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] Im Auftrag von steve gunsel
Gesendet: Freitag, 21. August 2009 13:56
An: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] Measurements

At least an acre is acre throughout the US (I think). The real
problem was in olden France where virtually all measurements varied
from village to village. So a bushel of wheat in one locality
differed from a bushel elsewhere. Same with all of the other units.
Made for nasty trade issues once they expanded beyond dealing with
the immediate neighbors. They HAD to adopt common measurement system
of some kind, and they sure weren't going to use anything that the
English did!

time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

Steve, > .....They HAD to adopt common measurement system > of some kind, and they sure weren't going to use anything that the > English did! So it was! However, the idea to make something completely new and not to follow something existing did not result from political reasoning or from what countries they had a friendship with or not. The basic idea behind creating something new was: The new measures should make sense to EVERYBODY who was forced by law to make use of them and should therefore make it easy for everybody to adopt them. This reasoning is well backed up by other ideas falling into the time of the French revolution. For example: Since we all share mother earth it was decided that the meter should have a definition that is based on the size of earth. So the original definition of a meter was to be 1/40000 of or earth's circumference. This lead to a minor problem: Earth's circumference was not well known at that times. Which in turn lead to the invention of a new class of surveyor instruments, which in turn enabled the French to measure the distance from the equator to the north pole (assumed to be 1/4 of the circumference) with a precision that must be admired even from a today point of view. I do not know the english term for it but in German these instruments are called "Repetitionskreis". You can find a pictue of one here: http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repetition skreis.htm A very good literature about this topic is Ken Alders "The measure of all Things" Best regards Ulrich Bangert > -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- > Von: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com > [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] Im Auftrag von steve gunsel > Gesendet: Freitag, 21. August 2009 13:56 > An: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement > Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] Measurements > > > At least an acre is acre throughout the US (I think). The real > problem was in olden France where virtually all measurements varied > from village to village. So a bushel of wheat in one locality > differed from a bushel elsewhere. Same with all of the other units. > Made for nasty trade issues once they expanded beyond dealing with > the immediate neighbors. They HAD to adopt common measurement system > of some kind, and they sure weren't going to use anything that the > English did! > > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there.

BG

Bruce Griffiths

Sat, Aug 22, 2009 8:15 AM

Ulrich

Looks like some kind of transit circle.

Bruce

Ulrich Bangert wrote:

Steve,

.....They HAD to adopt common measurement system
of some kind, and they sure weren't going to use anything that the
English did!

So it was! However, the idea to make something completely new and not to
follow something existing did not result from political reasoning or from
what countries they had a friendship with or not.

The basic idea behind creating something new was: The new measures should
make sense to EVERYBODY who was forced by law to make use of them and should
therefore make it easy for everybody to adopt them. This reasoning is well
backed up by other ideas falling into the time of the French revolution.

For example: Since we all share mother earth it was decided that the meter
should have a definition that is based on the size of earth. So the original
definition of a meter was to be 1/40000 of or earth's circumference. This
lead to a minor problem: Earth's circumference was not well known at that
times. Which in turn lead to the invention of a new class of surveyor
instruments, which in turn enabled the French to measure the distance from
the equator to the north pole (assumed to be 1/4 of the circumference) with
a precision that must be admired even from a today point of view. I do not
know the english term for it but in German these instruments are called
"Repetitionskreis". You can find a pictue of one here:

http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repetition
skreis.htm

A very good literature about this topic is Ken Alders "The measure of all
Things"

Best regards
Ulrich Bangert

-----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
Von: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com
[mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] Im Auftrag von steve gunsel
Gesendet: Freitag, 21. August 2009 13:56
An: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] Measurements

At least an acre is acre throughout the US (I think). The real
problem was in olden France where virtually all measurements varied
from village to village. So a bushel of wheat in one locality
differed from a bushel elsewhere. Same with all of the other units.
Made for nasty trade issues once they expanded beyond dealing with
the immediate neighbors. They HAD to adopt common measurement system
of some kind, and they sure weren't going to use anything that the
English did!

Ulrich Looks like some kind of transit circle. Bruce Ulrich Bangert wrote: > Steve, > > >> .....They HAD to adopt common measurement system >> of some kind, and they sure weren't going to use anything that the >> English did! >> > > So it was! However, the idea to make something completely new and not to > follow something existing did not result from political reasoning or from > what countries they had a friendship with or not. > > The basic idea behind creating something new was: The new measures should > make sense to EVERYBODY who was forced by law to make use of them and should > therefore make it easy for everybody to adopt them. This reasoning is well > backed up by other ideas falling into the time of the French revolution. > > For example: Since we all share mother earth it was decided that the meter > should have a definition that is based on the size of earth. So the original > definition of a meter was to be 1/40000 of or earth's circumference. This > lead to a minor problem: Earth's circumference was not well known at that > times. Which in turn lead to the invention of a new class of surveyor > instruments, which in turn enabled the French to measure the distance from > the equator to the north pole (assumed to be 1/4 of the circumference) with > a precision that must be admired even from a today point of view. I do not > know the english term for it but in German these instruments are called > "Repetitionskreis". You can find a pictue of one here: > > http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repetition > skreis.htm > > A very good literature about this topic is Ken Alders "The measure of all > Things" > > Best regards > Ulrich Bangert > > > > >> -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- >> Von: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com >> [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] Im Auftrag von steve gunsel >> Gesendet: Freitag, 21. August 2009 13:56 >> An: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement >> Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] Measurements >> >> >> At least an acre is acre throughout the US (I think). The real >> problem was in olden France where virtually all measurements varied >> from village to village. So a bushel of wheat in one locality >> differed from a bushel elsewhere. Same with all of the other units. >> Made for nasty trade issues once they expanded beyond dealing with >> the immediate neighbors. They HAD to adopt common measurement system >> of some kind, and they sure weren't going to use anything that the >> English did! >> >>

SG

Sanjeev Gupta

Sat, Aug 22, 2009 8:56 AM

On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 15:19, Ulrich Bangert df6jb@ulrich-bangert.dewrote:

Which in turn lead to the invention of a new class of surveyor
instruments, which in turn enabled the French to measure the distance from
the equator to the north pole (assumed to be 1/4 of the circumference) with
a precision that must be admired even from a today point of view. I do not
know the english term for it but in German these instruments are called
"Repetitionskreis". You can find a pictue of one here:

http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repetition
skreis.htmhttp://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repetition%0Askreis.htm

That sounds like the Repeating Theodolite, used for the survey from Dunkirk
<-> Paris <-> Barcelona

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_circle

The basic idea is to mark out repeatedly the angle to be measured, but
actually measure the sum, only at the end, which you then divide. It
gives you the arithmetic mean of the value directly. The major advantage
over doing this mechanically, rather than adding it up in your notebook, is
a that you have reduced the least-count of your graduated scale.

--
Sanjeev Gupta
+65 98551208 http://www.linkedin.com/in/ghane

On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 15:19, Ulrich Bangert <df6jb@ulrich-bangert.de>wrote: > Which in turn lead to the invention of a new class of surveyor > instruments, which in turn enabled the French to measure the distance from > the equator to the north pole (assumed to be 1/4 of the circumference) with > a precision that must be admired even from a today point of view. I do not > know the english term for it but in German these instruments are called > "Repetitionskreis". You can find a pictue of one here: > > > http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repetition > skreis.htm<http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repetition%0Askreis.htm> > That sounds like the Repeating Theodolite, used for the survey from Dunkirk <-> Paris <-> Barcelona http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_circle The basic idea is to mark out repeatedly the angle to be measured, but actually measure the sum, _only_ at the end, which you then divide. It gives you the arithmetic mean of the value directly. The major advantage over doing this mechanically, rather than adding it up in your notebook, is a that you have reduced the least-count of your graduated scale. -- Sanjeev Gupta +65 98551208 http://www.linkedin.com/in/ghane

MD

Magnus Danielson

Sat, Aug 22, 2009 9:33 AM

Sanjeev Gupta wrote:

On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 15:19, Ulrich Bangert df6jb@ulrich-bangert.dewrote:

Which in turn lead to the invention of a new class of surveyor
instruments, which in turn enabled the French to measure the distance from
the equator to the north pole (assumed to be 1/4 of the circumference) with
a precision that must be admired even from a today point of view. I do not
know the english term for it but in German these instruments are called
"Repetitionskreis". You can find a pictue of one here:

http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repetition
skreis.htmhttp://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repetition%0Askreis.htm

That sounds like the Repeating Theodolite, used for the survey from Dunkirk
<-> Paris <-> Barcelona

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_circle

The basic idea is to mark out repeatedly the angle to be measured, but
actually measure the sum, only at the end, which you then divide. It
gives you the arithmetic mean of the value directly. The major advantage
over doing this mechanically, rather than adding it up in your notebook, is
a that you have reduced the least-count of your graduated scale.

Cool. I completely understands it yeat, it was new to me. So now I know
what I learned today.

Thanks Sanjeev!

Cheers,
Magnus

Sanjeev Gupta wrote: > On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 15:19, Ulrich Bangert <df6jb@ulrich-bangert.de>wrote: > >> Which in turn lead to the invention of a new class of surveyor >> instruments, which in turn enabled the French to measure the distance from >> the equator to the north pole (assumed to be 1/4 of the circumference) with >> a precision that must be admired even from a today point of view. I do not >> know the english term for it but in German these instruments are called >> "Repetitionskreis". You can find a pictue of one here: >> >> >> http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repetition >> skreis.htm<http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repetition%0Askreis.htm> >> > > That sounds like the Repeating Theodolite, used for the survey from Dunkirk > <-> Paris <-> Barcelona > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_circle > > The basic idea is to mark out repeatedly the angle to be measured, but > actually measure the sum, _only_ at the end, which you then divide. It > gives you the arithmetic mean of the value directly. The major advantage > over doing this mechanically, rather than adding it up in your notebook, is > a that you have reduced the least-count of your graduated scale. Cool. I completely understands it yeat, it was new to me. So now I know what I learned today. Thanks Sanjeev! Cheers, Magnus

NM

Neville Michie

Sat, Aug 22, 2009 9:52 AM

Not only does it increase the least count of the scale, but it tends
to average out the errors of the scale
like ellipticity and eccentricity, because there is always
360.000000000000000000000000000000 degrees in a full circle.
cheers, Neville Michie

On 22/08/2009, at 7:33 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote:

Sanjeev Gupta wrote:

On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 15:19, Ulrich Bangert <df6jb@ulrich-
bangert.de>wrote:

Which in turn lead to the invention of a new class of surveyor
instruments, which in turn enabled the French to measure the
distance from
the equator to the north pole (assumed to be 1/4 of the
circumference) with
a precision that must be admired even from a today point of view.
I do not
know the english term for it but in German these instruments are
called
"Repetitionskreis". You can find a pictue of one here:

http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/
ausstellungen_moenche_repetition
skreis.htm<http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/
ausstellungen_moenche_repetition%0Askreis.htm>

That sounds like the Repeating Theodolite, used for the survey
from Dunkirk
<-> Paris <-> Barcelona
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_circle
The basic idea is to mark out repeatedly the angle to be measured,
but
actually measure the sum, only at the end, which you then
divide. It
gives you the arithmetic mean of the value directly. The major
advantage
over doing this mechanically, rather than adding it up in your
notebook, is
a that you have reduced the least-count of your graduated scale.

Cool. I completely understands it yeat, it was new to me. So now I
know what I learned today.

Thanks Sanjeev!

Cheers,
Magnus

time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

Not only does it increase the least count of the scale, but it tends to average out the errors of the scale like ellipticity and eccentricity, because there is always 360.000000000000000000000000000000 degrees in a full circle. cheers, Neville Michie On 22/08/2009, at 7:33 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote: > Sanjeev Gupta wrote: >> On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 15:19, Ulrich Bangert <df6jb@ulrich- >> bangert.de>wrote: >>> Which in turn lead to the invention of a new class of surveyor >>> instruments, which in turn enabled the French to measure the >>> distance from >>> the equator to the north pole (assumed to be 1/4 of the >>> circumference) with >>> a precision that must be admired even from a today point of view. >>> I do not >>> know the english term for it but in German these instruments are >>> called >>> "Repetitionskreis". You can find a pictue of one here: >>> >>> >>> http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ >>> ausstellungen_moenche_repetition >>> skreis.htm<http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ >>> ausstellungen_moenche_repetition%0Askreis.htm> >>> >> That sounds like the Repeating Theodolite, used for the survey >> from Dunkirk >> <-> Paris <-> Barcelona >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_circle >> The basic idea is to mark out repeatedly the angle to be measured, >> but >> actually measure the sum, _only_ at the end, which you then >> divide. It >> gives you the arithmetic mean of the value directly. The major >> advantage >> over doing this mechanically, rather than adding it up in your >> notebook, is >> a that you have reduced the least-count of your graduated scale. > > Cool. I completely understands it yeat, it was new to me. So now I > know what I learned today. > > Thanks Sanjeev! > > Cheers, > Magnus > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ > time-nuts > and follow the instructions there.

BC

Brooke Clarke

Sat, Aug 22, 2009 2:54 PM

Hi:

It's even better. The procedure we learned in surveying class was to first zero
the reading then lock the upper movement to the lower movement and aim at stake
A and lock then lock the lower movement to the tripod. Release the upper
movement and turn to stake B and lock the upper movement. Record this first
estimate of the angle. Unlock the lower movement and turn back to stake A (no
change in the reading) and lock. Now unlock the upper movement and turn to
stake B (reading is now 2X) and lock. Do it again (reading is now 3X).
http://www.prc68.com/I/Leitz115A.shtml
At this point plunge the scope, i.e. flip 180 degrees in vertical plane or in
other words turn the scope upside down.

Do the above three more times ending up with a reading that's 6X the actual
angle. By knowing roughly the angle you can figure out how many complete
turns to add to the reading before dividing by six.

Plunging the scope has the effect of canceling some of the mechanical errors
and results in more accuracy. When all the angles in a closed polygon have
been measured you know what the sum should be and if the measured sum is
different then there's that much error in your readings. For that class the
result was 30 arc seconds off which was the spec on the transit used. The next
step is to spread the error over all the measurements, called an adjustment,
resulting in an even more accurate result.

Most people on this list know of the "Longitude" problem and Harrison's
contribution in making very good clocks. But the "Latitude" was a much larger
problem for science.

Ukiah, California was one of five "Latitude Observatories" that operated from
1899 to 1962 (maybe the longest running science ever?) and the Zenith Telescope
(ZT) was accurate to something like 0.1 arc seconds. I'm still trying to learn
more about how they did it.
http://www.prc68.com/I/UkiahObs.shtml
The Photographic Zenith Tube was developed for this application and later
larger versions of the PZT were used to determine the time. It turns out the
the ZT gives about the same results and the PZT for measuring the latitude so
the PZT was not adopted for the latitude measurements.

Have Fun,

Brooke Clarke
http://www.prc68.com

Hi: It's even better. The procedure we learned in surveying class was to first zero the reading then lock the upper movement to the lower movement and aim at stake A and lock then lock the lower movement to the tripod. Release the upper movement and turn to stake B and lock the upper movement. Record this first estimate of the angle. Unlock the lower movement and turn back to stake A (no change in the reading) and lock. Now unlock the upper movement and turn to stake B (reading is now 2X) and lock. Do it again (reading is now 3X). http://www.prc68.com/I/Leitz115A.shtml At this point plunge the scope, i.e. flip 180 degrees in vertical plane or in other words turn the scope upside down. Do the above three more times ending up with a reading that's 6X the actual angle. By knowing roughly the angle you can figure out how many complete turns to add to the reading before dividing by six. Plunging the scope has the effect of canceling some of the mechanical errors and results in more accuracy. When all the angles in a closed polygon have been measured you know what the sum should be and if the measured sum is different then there's that much error in your readings. For that class the result was 30 arc seconds off which was the spec on the transit used. The next step is to spread the error over all the measurements, called an adjustment, resulting in an even more accurate result. Most people on this list know of the "Longitude" problem and Harrison's contribution in making very good clocks. But the "Latitude" was a much larger problem for science. Ukiah, California was one of five "Latitude Observatories" that operated from 1899 to 1962 (maybe the longest running science ever?) and the Zenith Telescope (ZT) was accurate to something like 0.1 arc seconds. I'm still trying to learn more about how they did it. http://www.prc68.com/I/UkiahObs.shtml The Photographic Zenith Tube was developed for this application and later larger versions of the PZT were used to determine the time. It turns out the the ZT gives about the same results and the PZT for measuring the latitude so the PZT was not adopted for the latitude measurements. Have Fun, Brooke Clarke http://www.prc68.com

UB

Ulrich Bangert

Sun, Aug 23, 2009 9:14 AM

Sanjeev,

That sounds like the Repeating Theodolite, used for the
survey from Dunkirk <-> Paris <-> Barcelona

Exactly!

Thanks for your help
Ulrich

-----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
Von: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com
[mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Sanjeev Gupta
Gesendet: Samstag, 22. August 2009 10:56
An: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] Measurements

On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 15:19, Ulrich Bangert
df6jb@ulrich-bangert.dewrote:

Which in turn lead to the invention of a new class of surveyor
instruments, which in turn enabled the French to measure

the distance

from the equator to the north pole (assumed to be 1/4 of the
circumference) with a precision that must be admired even

from a today

point of view. I do not know the english term for it but in German
these instruments are called "Repetitionskreis". You can

find a pictue

of one here:

http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repe

tition

skreis.htm<http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstel
lungen_moenche_repetition%0Askreis.htm>

That sounds like the Repeating Theodolite, used for the
survey from Dunkirk <-> Paris <-> Barcelona

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_circle

The basic idea is to mark out repeatedly the angle to be
measured, but actually measure the sum, only at the end,
which you then divide. It gives you the arithmetic mean of
the value directly. The major advantage over doing this
mechanically, rather than adding it up in your notebook, is a
that you have reduced the least-count of your graduated scale.

--
Sanjeev Gupta
+65 98551208 http://www.linkedin.com/in/ghane

time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

Sanjeev, > That sounds like the Repeating Theodolite, used for the > survey from Dunkirk <-> Paris <-> Barcelona Exactly! Thanks for your help Ulrich > -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- > Von: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com > [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Sanjeev Gupta > Gesendet: Samstag, 22. August 2009 10:56 > An: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement > Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] Measurements > > > On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 15:19, Ulrich Bangert > <df6jb@ulrich-bangert.de>wrote: > > > Which in turn lead to the invention of a new class of surveyor > > instruments, which in turn enabled the French to measure > the distance > > from the equator to the north pole (assumed to be 1/4 of the > > circumference) with a precision that must be admired even > from a today > > point of view. I do not know the english term for it but in German > > these instruments are called "Repetitionskreis". You can > find a pictue > > of one here: > > > > > > > http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstellungen_moenche_repe > > tition > > > skreis.htm<http://www.bistumsmuseen-regensburg.de/html/ausstel > lungen_moenche_repetition%0Askreis.htm> > > > > That sounds like the Repeating Theodolite, used for the > survey from Dunkirk <-> Paris <-> Barcelona > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_circle > > The basic idea is to mark out repeatedly the angle to be > measured, but actually measure the sum, _only_ at the end, > which you then divide. It gives you the arithmetic mean of > the value directly. The major advantage over doing this > mechanically, rather than adding it up in your notebook, is a > that you have reduced the least-count of your graduated scale. > > > -- > Sanjeev Gupta > +65 98551208 http://www.linkedin.com/in/ghane > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there.

time-nuts@lists.febo.com

Re: [time-nuts] Measurements