Re: Conversion factors
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Conversion factors
I really, really, really hate flame wars so I hesitate to do this but I'm
going to anyway. OK Bhuvanesh I think we all agree that the SI system is
easier (and possibly better), BUT the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE MOST
POWERFUL COUNTRY IN THE WORLD, rather unfortunately still uses the
british system. This is not going to change anytime soon so why don't
you just get your little US Education and go back to where ever you come
from and gloat from there. Pounds are still used and they are still
going to be used for a while.
There is one thing that I do wonder, (although I may be wrong about
this...) why doesn't the TI-85 have a conversion to slugs?
Peter Kovacs
(A man who recently purchased a TI-92 and gave his 85 to his father.)
On Mon, 23 Dec 1996, Bhuvanesh Bhatt wrote:
> why do we want pounds, anyway? it's a million times easier to
> work in the systeme international (SI system of units).
>
> Bhuvanesh Bhatt.
>
> On Sat, 21 Dec 1996, J.P. McClain wrote:
>
> > are you sure its not under both? you _can_ convert pounds to mass,
> > assuming the earth's gravity. If there really isn't a pound under
> > force, you can do Pounds->Kilograms and then by Weight=Mass*g do
> > W=Kilograms*10m/s^2 which is of course gives newtons
> >
> > J.P.
> >
> > danlarsen@CENTURYINTER.NET wrote:
> > >
> > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but can anybody correct me on a mistake I believe
> > > I found on the TI-85? Under conversion factors, "pounds" is listed under
> > > mass. Pounds is technically a force. So, how do you change from pounds to
> > > newtons (the metric force)?
> > >
> > > -Dan
> >
>
References: