tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 09 08:55:34 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: the qelI'qam, was Re: Nonexistent words ...?
- From: [email protected] (Matt Whiteacre)
- Subject: Re: the qelI'qam, was Re: Nonexistent words ...?
- Date: Wed, 09 Nov 1994 10:55:03 -0600
>
>
>On Tue, 8 Nov 1994, ...Paul wrote:
>
>> To debunk a theory, the meter is NOT based on a portion of the Earth, it is,
>> in fact, the distance that some particle travels through a vacuum in
such-and-
>> such time. Unfortunately, I don't know what the particle is, or how much
>> time they allow it to travel. BUT. I do know that the distance is always
>> the same, and thus is a very good way to accurately record a unit of
distance.
>>
>To un-debunk a theory... The original meter was developed I believe as a
>portion of the earth. It was only later, then they had the equiptment,
>did they use the measurement of 300 cycle of a Hydrogen atom(or whatever
>it is :-P) so they could have a Universaly unchangable constant.
>
>1 gram probably started as the weight of a marble, but now it is the
>mass of 1 cubic cm of water at 4 degrees celcuis. They refine, and
>redefine the measurements, not change them. Originaly, there was a
>platinum bar that was kept in France I think, that was the standard for 1
>gram for the longest time.
>
>OK... enough about nothing... :-)
>
The original definition of a meter was 1/10,000,000 (one ten millionth) of
one meridian quadrant of the earth (one quarter of the circumfrence going
through the poles). It has since been specified more accurately as
1,650,763.73 times the wavelength of the Kr86 orange-red radiation.
____
|INRI|
____| |____
| |
|____ ____|
| | Matt Whiteacre
| | [email protected]
| |
| |
|____|