Re: [Phys-l] Historical trivium

["John Clement" <clement@hal-pc.org>]

Do they still adhere to this policy?

As to historical standards, there is a current "standard" in math that equations are parsed left to right.  This standard came in with the advent of computers.  So ab/cd is interpreted as ((a*b)/c)*d  But the older standard was (a*b)/(c*d).  Math teachers practically never know this or acknowledge that this could be true.  But I used to have a math book that used the older standard, and there is one math journal that mandates the older standard for papers.  But with advent of programs that typeset equations, this standard has become moot in journals.

Then s US government web site, as I recall, states that weight and mass are the "same thing".  But I saw that statement a number of years ago, so they may have changed it.  I don't recall exactly where this was.  It may be referenced in an old post of mine if anyone wants to look it up.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX



> > From the Last page:   HP Journal
>
> CORPORATE OFFICES  1501 PAGE MILL ROAD	  PALO ÀITO, CALIFORNIA 94304
> VOL. 16, NO. 10 JUNE, 1965
>
>
>
> CYCLES PER SECOND AND HERTZ
> A year or so ago the Hewlett-Packard Journal published a table of the SI
> Sys tem of Units of Physical Quantities. This Table had been adopted by
> the Inter national Conference on Weights and Measures and subsequently by
> the Na tional Bureau of Standards for use in its publications.
> One of the units listed in the table was the unit hertz for frequency. As
> a result of this listing in the Journal, many have inquired and urged our
> adoption of this unit in place of cycles per second.
> Recently, however, the IEEE, through its Abbreviations Subcommittee of the
> Symbols Committee, issued a new Standard Symbols for Units (IEEE No. 260,
> dated January, 1965). This Stand ard is consistent with most of the units
> in the International System. With regard to units of frequency, though,
> the Standard retains cycles per second (c/s) with the notation that the
> International Electrotechnical Commission recom mends the name hertz (Hz).
> Very likely, a major reason for retaining cycles per second is the fact
> that the unit hertz is little known in the power field in the U. S.
> It is understood that the IEEE, in its publications, will use whichever
> unit is preferred by an individual author.
> The Hewlett-Packard Journal has adopted a similar policy, i.e., both
> cycles per second and hertz may be used for a transitional time of a year
> or more. It is expected that full adoption of the unit hertz will then be
> made after this time and after broader knowledge of the unit exists.
>
> -Editor
>
> * "International System of Units," Hewlett-Pjckjrd Jivnal, Vol. 15, No. 7,
> March, 1965.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l