v for frequency?...

[Fredxx]

On 22/03/2023 14:06, NY wrote:

\"The Natural Philosopher\" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:tvf08h$l0k5$2@dont-email.me...
On 22/03/2023 01:12, rbowman wrote:
On Tue, 21 Mar 2023 23:24:59 +0000, NY wrote:

At least Celsius makes the freezing and boiling point of the
earth\'s most common liquid nice round numbers 0 and 100.

I suppose you get used to it and it doesn\'t make all that much
difference
in everyday life but the compression throws me.

Indeed you DO get used to it.

And its difficult to tell the difference between one celsius and the
next one up.

By \"compression\" do you mean the fact that the range from freezing to
boiling is only 100 degrees Celsius but is 180 degrees Fahrenheit?

Given that there are fewer degrees C than degrees F in a given range of
temperatures (so each degree is \"bigger\"), I\'d have thought that a
change from n deg C to n+1 deg C would be *more* noticeable than a
change from n deg F to n+1 deg F.

I imagine that apart from in America, the number of people who still use
and prefer F to C is dwindling as older people (who know F) die off and
new people (who are brought up with C) are born.

I like a lot of things about \"the way we sued to do it in the past\" but
I draw the line at absurd systems of measurement like deg F, inches,
feet, yard, miles, ounces, pounds, stones, hundredweight which use every
base under the sun except the only one that matters - base 10 which we
are taught to calculate in.

Which in itself is quite a shame. Base 12 would be easier and I spend
too much time with hexadecimal!

There are also units which have the same
name but different sizes: for example the apothecaries, troy and
avoirdupois definitions of the dram/drachm and ounce, and the UK and US
definition of pint and gallon having different numbers of fluid ounces.
And the \"little\" problem that the volumetric and linear measurements are
not related by a simple integer: in the UK, 1 gallon is 277.4 in^3
https://www.convertunits.com/from/cubic+inch/to/imperial+gallon. When I
wanted to estimate the weight of a full hot water cylinder (which was
not marked with its volume), having only an inches tape measure and no
calculator (and no access to a phone to phone-a-friend) I had to convert
everything to metric because I knew that 1000 cc was a litre whcih
weighed a kilogramme, whereas I hadn\'t the remotest idea of the imperial
equivalent cubic inches to gallons (where a gallon weighs 10 lb - I knew
that bit).

There are also some issues over the mile, where there is more than one
standard: The US survey mile is 0.999998 statute mile.

The statute mile being exactly 1,609.344m

 

[NY]

\"Fredxx\" <fredxx@spam.uk> wrote in message
news:tvf6cd$m3o2$1@dont-email.me...

I like a lot of things about \"the way we sued to do it in the past\" but I
draw the line at absurd systems of measurement like deg F, inches, feet,
yard, miles, ounces, pounds, stones, hundredweight which use every base
under the sun except the only one that matters - base 10 which we are
taught to calculate in.

Which in itself is quite a shame. Base 12 would be easier and I spend too
much time with hexadecimal!

Yes, 12 has factors that are more similar (3, and 2 or 4) which allows
almost-square boxes when object are packaged in 12s, rather than long thin
2x5 boxes when they are packed in 10s.

12 is a great number. We should have adopted it as the base in which we
count and calculate, having invented two new symbols to denote what in base
10 we call 10 and 11 (the equivalents of A-F in hex).

But since we *aren\'t* taught to count/calculate in base 12, it is a right
PITA to work with quantities where there may be one or two digits in the
old-pence column and one or two digits in the shillings column, in £sd
calculations.

I suppose it\'s a matter of priorities: do you design a system where the
conversion from one unit to the next (pence to shillings to pounds, or
ounces to pounds-weight to stones) uses the *same* base (that we are taught
to count in), for ease of calculation, or do you design a system with a
variety of bases such that all the units are \"human-sized\".

For me, ease of calculation trumps all other conditions. Other people may
feel differently.


If we were to go back to the imperial system (as Jacob Rees-Mogg has
advocated) then two pre-conditions are:

- we teach children to count/calculate in base 12 (and maybe not teach base
10)
- we invent single-symbols to denote 10 and 11 (in base 10)

And we standardise on that one base: no more...

12 inches = 1 foot
3 feet = 1 yard
1760 yards (or 5280 feet or 63360 inches) = 1 mile

8 ounces = 1 lb
14 lb =1 stone
112 lb (or 8 stones) = 1 cwt
20 cwt = 1 ton

As it happens, I have committed the linear conversions to memory: 5280 feet
or 1760 yards or 63360 inches = 1 mile for quick conversion. 63360 sticks in
my mind because it is the scale factor for a 1-inch OS map and 63360/50000
is the scale factor to rescale a scan of a 1-inch map so it matches a
1:50000 map.

That 8 stones = 1 cwt is bloody scary - it means I\'m getting on for 2 cwt in
weight so 10 of me would weigh a ton :-(

 

[Max Demian]

On 22/03/2023 13:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 21/03/2023 23:24, NY wrote:

Fahrenheit always struck me as a bodged job (like so much of the
imperial system) - it was a case of \"what\'s the coldest and the
hottest temperatures we can create in the lab today? Right, let\'s call
the coldest one 0 and the hottest one 100. Oh, that makes ice freeze
at 32 and water boil at 212.\" At least Celsius makes the freezing and
boiling point of the earth\'s most common liquid nice round numbers 0
and 100.

AIUI It was \'the hottest and coldest temperatures recorded in Paris\' or
somesuch

0 Fahrenheit is the freezing point of saturated brine; 100 F was Mr
Fahrenheit\'s \"blood heat\" (body core temperature); he had a fever at the
time.

\"Degrees of frost\" is an odd one: it\'s the number of Fahrenheit degrees
below 32 (freezing points). Do people use that in the US?

--
Max Demian

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 22/03/2023 15:54, NY wrote:

\"Fredxx\" <fredxx@spam.uk> wrote in message
news:tvf6cd$m3o2$1@dont-email.me...
I like a lot of things about \"the way we sued to do it in the past\"
but I draw the line at absurd systems of measurement like deg F,
inches, feet, yard, miles, ounces, pounds, stones, hundredweight
which use every base under the sun except the only one that matters -
base 10 which we are taught to calculate in.

Which in itself is quite a shame. Base 12 would be easier and I spend
too much time with hexadecimal!

Yes, 12 has factors that are more similar (3, and 2 or 4) which allows
almost-square boxes when object are packaged in 12s, rather than long
thin 2x5 boxes when they are packed in 10s.

12 is a great number. We should have adopted it as the base in which we
count and calculate, having invented two new symbols to denote what in
base 10 we call 10 and 11 (the equivalents of A-F in hex).

But since we *aren\'t* taught to count/calculate in base 12, it is a
right PITA to work with quantities where there may be one or two digits
in the old-pence column and one or two digits in the shillings column,
in £sd calculations.

I suppose it\'s a matter of priorities: do you design a system where the
conversion from one unit to the next (pence to shillings to pounds, or
ounces to pounds-weight to stones) uses the *same* base (that we are
taught to count in), for ease of calculation, or do you design a system
with a variety of bases such that all the units are \"human-sized\".

For me, ease of calculation trumps all other conditions. Other people
may feel differently.


If we were to go back to the imperial system (as Jacob Rees-Mogg has
advocated) then two pre-conditions are:

He has never advocated it. He merely remarked it shouldnt be illegal to
use it

- we teach children to count/calculate in base 12 (and maybe not teach
base 10)
- we invent single-symbols to denote 10 and 11 (in base 10)

And we standardise on that one base: no more...

12 inches = 1 foot
3 feet = 1 yard
1760 yards (or 5280 feet or 63360 inches) = 1 mile

Almost 64k inches
You left out rods poles or perches, chains and furlongs.
Not to menytion hands

8 ounces = 1 lb
14 lb =1 stone
112 lb (or 8 stones) = 1 cwt
20 cwt = 1 ton

As it happens, I have committed the linear conversions to memory: 5280
feet or 1760 yards or 63360 inches = 1 mile for quick conversion. 63360
sticks in my mind because it is the scale factor for a 1-inch OS map and
63360/50000 is the scale factor to rescale a scan of a 1-inch map so it
matches a 1:50000 map.

That 8 stones = 1 cwt is bloody scary - it means I\'m getting on for 2
cwt in weight so 10 of me would weigh a ton :-(

I am managing to stay the south side of 13 stone.


--
“But what a weak barrier is truth when it stands in the way of an
hypothesis!”

Mary Wollstonecraft

 

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-03-22, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

On 22/03/2023 13:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/03/2023 23:24, NY wrote:

Fahrenheit always struck me as a bodged job (like so much of the
imperial system) - it was a case of \"what\'s the coldest and the
hottest temperatures we can create in the lab today? Right, let\'s call
the coldest one 0 and the hottest one 100. Oh, that makes ice freeze
at 32 and water boil at 212.\" At least Celsius makes the freezing and
boiling point of the earth\'s most common liquid nice round numbers 0
and 100.

AIUI It was \'the hottest and coldest temperatures recorded in Paris\' or
somesuch

0 Fahrenheit is the freezing point of saturated brine; 100 F was Mr
Fahrenheit\'s \"blood heat\" (body core temperature); he had a fever at the
time.

\"Degrees of frost\" is an odd one: it\'s the number of Fahrenheit degrees
below 32 (freezing points). Do people use that in the US?

I\'ve never heard of it. Seems like it\'s for people who are
uncomfortable with negative numbers.

--
Cindy Hamilton

 

[NY]

On 22/03/2023 17:43, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 22/03/2023 15:54, NY wrote:
\"Fredxx\" <fredxx@spam.uk> wrote in message
news:tvf6cd$m3o2$1@dont-email.me...
I like a lot of things about \"the way we sued to do it in the past\"
but I draw the line at absurd systems of measurement like deg F,
inches, feet, yard, miles, ounces, pounds, stones, hundredweight
which use every base under the sun except the only one that matters
- base 10 which we are taught to calculate in.

Which in itself is quite a shame. Base 12 would be easier and I spend
too much time with hexadecimal!

Yes, 12 has factors that are more similar (3, and 2 or 4) which allows
almost-square boxes when object are packaged in 12s, rather than long
thin 2x5 boxes when they are packed in 10s.

12 is a great number. We should have adopted it as the base in which
we count and calculate, having invented two new symbols to denote what
in base 10 we call 10 and 11 (the equivalents of A-F in hex).

But since we *aren\'t* taught to count/calculate in base 12, it is a
right PITA to work with quantities where there may be one or two
digits in the old-pence column and one or two digits in the shillings
column, in £sd calculations.

I suppose it\'s a matter of priorities: do you design a system where
the conversion from one unit to the next (pence to shillings to
pounds, or ounces to pounds-weight to stones) uses the *same* base
(that we are taught to count in), for ease of calculation, or do you
design a system with a variety of bases such that all the units are
\"human-sized\".

For me, ease of calculation trumps all other conditions. Other people
may feel differently.


If we were to go back to the imperial system (as Jacob Rees-Mogg has
advocated) then two pre-conditions are:

He has never advocated it. He merely remarked it shouldnt be illegal to
use it

- we teach children to count/calculate in base 12 (and maybe not teach
base 10)
- we invent single-symbols to denote 10 and 11 (in base 10)

And we standardise on that one base: no more...

12 inches = 1 foot
3 feet = 1 yard
1760 yards (or 5280 feet or 63360 inches) = 1 mile

Almost 64k inches
You left out rods poles or perches, chains and furlongs.
Not to menytion hands

Yes, every \"industry\" devised its own units - eg rods, poles, perches,
chains for surveying and cricket pitches, and hands/furlongs for heights
of horses and lengths of horse racecourses. They didn\'t use the
standard, universally-understood inches, feet, yards.

That 8 stones = 1 cwt is bloody scary - it means I\'m getting on for 2
cwt in weight so 10 of me would weigh a ton :-(

 I am managing to stay the south side of 13 stone.

I used to be a bit heavier, then I had a heart attack and when I came
out of hospital several weeks later I had lost about 15 kg. Over the 12
years since then, even though I\'ve tried to eat more healthily (*) and
to take more exercise (walking, cycling and even using a treadmill) the
weight has gradually crept up again. The other day I came across a pair
of trousers with 40\" waist that I\'d bought when I was at my
heaviest/biggest. It was gratifying to find that even though I\'m bigger
than I was after hospital, those trouser are still too big - so I\'m not
as big as I once was. But now the extra girth is in the dreaded region
from the bottom of my ribs to my waist: so my waist is fine (36\") but my
belly hangs over it :-(

Why is it that all the nice food is fattening and all the good food (eg
vegetables) tastes vile? Dr Sod (of the Law) really *is* a sod.


(*) Hell, I even gave up eating doughnuts!

 

[Rod Speed]

NY <me@privacy.net> wrote

The Natural Philosopher wrote
NY wrote
Fredxx <fredxx@spam.uk> wrote

I like a lot of things about \"the way we sued to do it in the past\"
but I draw the line at absurd systems of measurement like deg F,
inches, feet, yard, miles, ounces, pounds, stones, hundredweight
which use every base under the sun except the only one that matters
- base 10 which we are taught to calculate in.

Which in itself is quite a shame. Base 12 would be easier and I spend
too much time with hexadecimal!

Yes, 12 has factors that are more similar (3, and 2 or 4) which allows
almost-square boxes when object are packaged in 12s, rather than long
thin 2x5 boxes when they are packed in 10s.

12 is a great number. We should have adopted it as the base in which
we count and calculate, having invented two new symbols to denote what
in base 10 we call 10 and 11 (the equivalents of A-F in hex).

But since we *aren\'t* taught to count/calculate in base 12, it is a
right PITA to work with quantities where there may be one or two
digits in the old-pence column and one or two digits in the shillings
column, in £sd calculations.

I suppose it\'s a matter of priorities: do you design a system where
the conversion from one unit to the next (pence to shillings to
pounds, or ounces to pounds-weight to stones) uses the *same* base
(that we are taught to count in), for ease of calculation, or do you
design a system with a variety of bases such that all the units are
\"human-sized\".

For me, ease of calculation trumps all other conditions. Other people
may feel differently.


If we were to go back to the imperial system (as Jacob Rees-Mogg has
advocated) then two pre-conditions are:

He has never advocated it. He merely remarked it shouldnt be illegal to
use it

- we teach children to count/calculate in base 12 (and maybe not teach
base 10)
- we invent single-symbols to denote 10 and 11 (in base 10)

And we standardise on that one base: no more...

12 inches = 1 foot
3 feet = 1 yard
1760 yards (or 5280 feet or 63360 inches) = 1 mile

Almost 64k inches
You left out rods poles or perches, chains and furlongs.
Not to menytion hands

Yes, every \"industry\" devised its own units - eg rods, poles, perches,
chains for surveying and cricket pitches, and hands/furlongs for heights
of horses and lengths of horse racecourses. They didn\'t use the
standard, universally-understood inches, feet, yards.
That 8 stones = 1 cwt is bloody scary - it means I\'m getting on for 2
cwt in weight so 10 of me would weigh a ton :-(
I am managing to stay the south side of 13 stone.

I used to be a bit heavier, then I had a heart attack and when I came
out of hospital several weeks later I had lost about 15 kg. Over the 12
years since then, even though I\'ve tried to eat more healthily (*) and
to take more exercise (walking, cycling and even using a treadmill) the
weight has gradually crept up again. The other day I came across a pair
of trousers with 40\" waist that I\'d bought when I was at my
heaviest/biggest. It was gratifying to find that even though I\'m bigger
than I was after hospital, those trouser are still too big - so I\'m not
as big as I once was. But now the extra girth is in the dreaded region
from the bottom of my ribs to my waist: so my waist is fine (36\") but my
belly hangs over it :-(

Why is it that all the nice food is fattening and all the good food (eg
vegetables) tastes vile?

Roast potatoes aren\'t vile and neither are tomatoes.

Dr Sod (of the Law) really *is* a sod.

(*) Hell, I even gave up eating doughnuts!

 

[rbowman]

On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 14:06:47 -0000, NY wrote:

By \"compression\" do you mean the fact that the range from freezing to
boiling is only 100 degrees Celsius but is 180 degrees Fahrenheit?

Given that there are fewer degrees C than degrees F in a given range of
temperatures (so each degree is \"bigger\"), I\'d have thought that a
change from n deg C to n+1 deg C would be *more* noticeable than a
change from n deg F to n+1 deg F.

Yes. The 9/5 or 5/9 however you want to look at it means 1 degree C is
roughly 2 degrees F. However unless you\'re looking at a thermometer of
some sort as you say can someone tell the difference between 1 degree in
either scale?

 

[rbowman]

On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 15:20:44 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

There are also some issues over the mile, where there is more than one
standard: The US survey mile is 0.999998 statute mile.

Ah, yes, that one. I do quite a bit of GIS work, often with the State
Plane Coordinate System.

 

[rbowman]

On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 15:54:27 -0000, NY wrote:

But since we *aren\'t* taught to count/calculate in base 12, it is a
right PITA to work with quantities where there may be one or two digits
in the old-pence column and one or two digits in the shillings column,
in £sd calculations.

My mother worked for a shirt manufacturer and brought home a mechanical
adding machine that had become obsolete. Being designed for a shirt
company it worked in dozens.

 

[Peeler]

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:41:19 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin\'s latest trollshit unread>

--
williamwright addressing Rodent Speed:
\"This is getting beyond ridiculous now. You\'re trying to prove black\'s
white. You\'re arguing with someone who has been involved with the issues all
his working life when you clearly have no knowledge at all. I think you\'re
just being a pillock for the sake of it. You clearly don\'t actually believe
your own words. You must have a very empty life, and a sad embittered soul.
MID: <j08o6bFeqc1U1@mid.individual.net>

 

[Peeler]

On 23 Mar 2023 05:24:43 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> My mother

Blithering idiotic gossip! LOL

--
More of the pathological senile gossip\'s sick shit squeezed out of his sick
head:
\"Skunk probably tastes like chicken. I\'ve never gotten that comparison,
most famously with Chicken of the Sea. Tuna is a fish and tastes like a
fish. I will admit I\'ve had chicken that tasted like fish. I don\'t think I
want to know what they were feeding it.\"
MID: <k44t5lFl1k3U4@mid.individual.net>

 

[Peeler]

On 23 Mar 2023 05:22:33 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


> Ah, yes, that one. I do quite a bit of GIS work

So you say! But the ONLY thing you do is blather, drivel and gossip! NO time
for you to hold down a job as you keep claiming, you deranged bigmouth!

--
Yet more of the so very interesting senile blather by lowbrowwoman:
\"My family loaded me into a \'51 Chevy and drove from NY to Seattle and
back in \'52. I\'m alive. The Chevy had a painted steel dashboard with two
little hand prints worn down to the primer because I liked to stand up
and lean on it to see where we were going.\"
MID: <j2kuc1F3ejsU1@mid.individual.net>

 

[Peeler]

On 23 Mar 2023 05:20:25 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:

Yes. The 9/5 or 5/9 however you want to look at it means 1 degree C is
roughly 2 degrees F.

It\'s yet more of your endless off topic senile shit that you keep trashing
these poor ngs with, you self-admiring, self-important senile cretin!

--
More typical idiotic senile gossip by lowbrowwoman:
\"It\'s been years since I\'ve been in a fast food burger joint but I used
to like Wendy\'s because they had a salad bar and baked potatoes.\"
MID: <ivdi4gF8btlU1@mid.individual.net>

 

[NY]

\"Rod Speed\" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
newsp.118pu5bjbyq249@pvr2.lan...

Why is it that all the nice food is fattening and all the good food (eg
vegetables) tastes vile?

Roast potatoes aren\'t vile and neither are tomatoes.

Roast veg (carrots, parsnips - and potatoes) are lovely. As are raw carrots
or celery as a snack, though less so in combination with anything savoury.
It\'s boiled/steamed broccoli, beans, carrots, cauliflower (*), etc which
have such a strong \"green veg\" taste that they completely swamp everything
else. I\'ve never really liked cooked veg, and after my heart attack my sense
of taste changed so veg tasted stronger and savoury meat etc was less strong
than before. Think of the sound of birdsong: perfectly audible... until
someone starts using a pneumatic drill ;-)

I eat my veg - but I get it out of the way first so it doesn\'t ruin the
enjoyable part of my meal.



(*) I think it\'s leaf/stem veg that I don\'t like, and root veg that I do.

 

[NY]

\"rbowman\" <bowman@montana.com> wrote in message
news:k825soF37p5U6@mid.individual.net...

On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 14:06:47 -0000, NY wrote:

By \"compression\" do you mean the fact that the range from freezing to
boiling is only 100 degrees Celsius but is 180 degrees Fahrenheit?

Given that there are fewer degrees C than degrees F in a given range of
temperatures (so each degree is \"bigger\"), I\'d have thought that a
change from n deg C to n+1 deg C would be *more* noticeable than a
change from n deg F to n+1 deg F.

Yes. The 9/5 or 5/9 however you want to look at it means 1 degree C is
roughly 2 degrees F.

However unless you\'re looking at a thermometer of
some sort as you say can someone tell the difference between 1 degree in
either scale?

Yes I agree. I was only puzzled because you seemed to imply that the
difference between adjacent deg C was less noticeable than between adjacent
deg F. Maybe I read something into your wording that you didn\'t intend.

Sensation of temperature is very subjective: I can feel cold when the room
is 25 deg C but I\'ve been sitting still for a long time but warm at 18 deg C
if I\'ve been active. And radiant heat from the sun through a window or from
a wood stove can sometimes make a cold room feel warm. The body is not a
good thermometer

 

[Cindy Hamilton]

On 2023-03-23, NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

\"Rod Speed\" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
newsp.118pu5bjbyq249@pvr2.lan...

Why is it that all the nice food is fattening and all the good food (eg
vegetables) tastes vile?

Roast potatoes aren\'t vile and neither are tomatoes.

Roast veg (carrots, parsnips - and potatoes) are lovely. As are raw carrots
or celery as a snack, though less so in combination with anything savoury.
It\'s boiled/steamed broccoli, beans, carrots, cauliflower (*), etc which
have such a strong \"green veg\" taste that they completely swamp everything
else. I\'ve never really liked cooked veg, and after my heart attack my sense
of taste changed so veg tasted stronger and savoury meat etc was less strong
than before. Think of the sound of birdsong: perfectly audible... until
someone starts using a pneumatic drill ;-)

I eat my veg - but I get it out of the way first so it doesn\'t ruin the
enjoyable part of my meal.



(*) I think it\'s leaf/stem veg that I don\'t like, and root veg that I do.

Cauliflower and broccoli (as well as other members of the cabbage
family) can be roasted or cooked by other dry heat methods. It
makes them sweeter and less watery. Just a brush of oil is all that\'s
really needed, although you can apply various spices if your palate
can handle them.

--
Cindy Hamilton

 

[rbowman]

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 10:46:01 -0000, NY wrote:

Yes I agree. I was only puzzled because you seemed to imply that the
difference between adjacent deg C was less noticeable than between
adjacent deg F. Maybe I read something into your wording that you didn\'t
intend.

After a particularly cold winter 12 C and sunny was shirtsleeve weather
for my hike on Sunday. The upcoming Sunday is predicted to be 0 C with
possible snow. Ah, spring!

 

[Peeler]

On 23 Mar 2023 13:10:44 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:

After a particularly cold winter 12 C and sunny was shirtsleeve weather
for my hike on Sunday. The upcoming Sunday is predicted to be 0 C with
possible snow. Ah, spring!

Fascinating! Just like everything you keep telling us about you! <EG>

--
More of the senile gossip\'s absolutely idiotic senile blather:
\"I stopped for breakfast at a diner in Virginia when the state didn\'t do
DST. I remarked on the time difference and the crusty old waitress said
\'We keep God\'s time in Virginia.\'

I also lived in Ft. Wayne for a while.\"

MID: <t0tjfa$6r5$1@dont-email.me>

 

[Mark Lloyd]

On 3/23/23 05:46, NY wrote:

[snip[

Sensation of temperature is very subjective: I can feel cold when the
room is 25 deg C but I\'ve been sitting still for a long time but warm at
18 deg C if I\'ve been active. And radiant heat from the sun through a
window or from a wood stove can sometimes make a cold room feel warm.
The body is not a good thermometer

I remember going outside one day when the temperature was below freezing
and there was a lot of snow. No wind, and it was NOT cold (unless I
picked up some ice).

BTW, that was a strange day. It was hot earlier that afternoon.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

\"nullifidian n. & a. (Person) having no religious faith or belief,\" --
f. med. L nullifidius fr L nullus none + fides faith; see IAN