If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Science
People doing science or maths often do not seem to be using a graphic
interface, on the other hand you could not do it with the ordinary command line window. What are they using. -- Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Science
Martin Edwards wrote:
People doing science or maths often do not seem to be using a graphic interface, on the other hand you could not do it with the ordinary command line window. What are they using. Well, that's a whole lot of detail you've provided. I'm going to go ahead and say that those people are possibly not using Windows. While there are amazing things that can be done from the Windows command line (go dig through the archives of alt.msdos.batch.nt for some examples) the *nix world uses the terminal as a matter of course, and there are often terminal utilities included with a standard system install that have no equivalent under Windows. Alternately, if you are indeed seeing a Windows system, they could be using Powershell (which is included with modern versions of Windows starting with Windows 7, and can be added to systems as old as XP) or a third-party command prompt. But without more information, or a little context, it could be LITERALLY ANYTHING. -- Admit it, you actually believed me all the times I said I wouldn't do this. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Science
Auric__ wrote:
Martin Edwards wrote: People doing science or maths often do not seem to be using a graphic interface, on the other hand you could not do it with the ordinary command line window. What are they using. Well, that's a whole lot of detail you've provided. I'm going to go ahead and say that those people are possibly not using Windows. While there are amazing things that can be done from the Windows command line (go dig through the archives of alt.msdos.batch.nt for some examples) the *nix world uses the terminal as a matter of course, and there are often terminal utilities included with a standard system install that have no equivalent under Windows. Alternately, if you are indeed seeing a Windows system, they could be using Powershell (which is included with modern versions of Windows starting with Windows 7, and can be added to systems as old as XP) or a third-party command prompt. But without more information, or a little context, it could be LITERALLY ANYTHING. And I was going to give him a copy of BC to play with. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bc_(programming_language) http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/packages/bc.htm Once you've "calculated something" with your science, you can use GNUPlot, for the graphs. http://www.gnuplot.info/ It's better to copy someone else's example to get one of those going, than to just read the manual and do it. Paul |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Science
| People doing science or maths often do not seem to be using a graphic
| interface, on the other hand you could not do it with the ordinary | command line window. What are they using. I usually use either my cheapo solar calculator or a scrap of paper. What do you use? Windows GUI and console windows are the operating system. They host software. That's why Windows is called a "platform". Whether you're using GUI or console, you're still running some kind of executable. The GUI was just a way to make it all easier, more convenient, more complex and more functional. Drag-dropping a file into a folder is a lot easier than writing a DOS line to move the file. Writing a document in MS Word allows for all sorts of extra functionality, like fonts, margins and embedded images, that console windows would not be well suited for. I think the people who use console are mostly tech people, such as system administrators who manage a large number of machines for corporations. They're used to keyboard and console from the old days and still like to use those tools because they're comfortable. Just as some people still like to use typewriters. Microsoft know that and cater to that market. PowerShell was created specifically to create a soft landing for Linux admins who might be lured into switching to Windows. It mimics the one-EXE-for-one-job model popular with Linux console operations. There's also a slight macho element to using console and scorning the mouse, like smoking non-filter cigarettes, wearing jeans and a T-shirt, or driving a stick shift. It feels gritty. Just as there are millions of young cowboys in America who look like they're ready to wrestle a calf to the ground, as they drive down suburban streets on their 4-wheel-drive "horse", wearing riveted jeans and cowboy boots, with AC, stereo and a gun rack in the back window. The vast majority of pickups sold never carry anything much. (That might mar the wax polish. And the vast majority of riveted jeans will never be worn to do physical work. Keyboard and console window are the nerd's strut, their version of riveted jeans and cowboy boots. Ever notice that whenever movie makers want to portray computers as arcane and magical, handled by a special kind of magician, they just show a lot of C++ code scrolling on a glowing monitor? It might just as well be heiroglyphics to most people. Incantations worthy of Merlin. But C++ is not written in a console window, despite the movie special effects. (Though I wouldn't be entirely surprised if a few hardcore Linux people do it.) Command line is for single commands. Code writing needs a good editor with sophisticated luxuries that command line can't provide. An architect might use CAD software to create blueprints and Sketchup to do renderings. I once met a chemist who used some kind of browser plugin that displayed molecular structure. I think it was a custom plugin provided by some academic or industry group. So most work done on computers is done with some kind of GUI software. Computer maintenance is sometimes done with command line. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Science
On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 07:42:42 +0000, Martin Edwards wrote:
People doing science or maths often do not seem to be using a graphic interface, on the other hand you could not do it with the ordinary command line window. What are they using. I worked for 30 years as a computer scientist/mathematician doing scientific software support and development. Our platform since 1990 was X-windows on Unix, and later on Linux. Nearly all the software ran from the graphical interface. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Science
ray carter wrote:
Martin Edwards wrote: People doing science or maths often do not seem to be using a graphic interface, on the other hand you could not do it with the ordinary command line window. What are they using. I worked for 30 years as a computer scientist/mathematician doing scientific software support and development. Our platform since 1990 was X-windows on Unix, and later on Linux. Nearly all the software ran from the graphical interface. I wonder what the OP is saying or wondering or meaning. Here's a wp article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathem...arkup_language // When the purpose is informal communication with other humans, syntax is often ad hoc, sometimes called "ASCII math notation". ... Ad hoc syntax requires context to interpret ambiguous syntax, for example "=" could be "implies" or "greater than or equal to", and "dy/dx" is likely to denote a derivative, but strictly speaking could also mean a finite quantity dy divided by dx. ... Markup languages optimized for computer-to-computer communication include MathML,[5] OpenMath, and OMDoc. These are designed for verbosity and to minimize ambiguity. However, the verbosity makes them clumsier for humans to type directly. // -- Mike Easter |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Science
On 12/31/2015 9:29 AM, Auric__ wrote:
Martin Edwards wrote: People doing science or maths often do not seem to be using a graphic interface, on the other hand you could not do it with the ordinary command line window. What are they using. Well, that's a whole lot of detail you've provided. I'm going to go ahead and say that those people are possibly not using Windows. While there are amazing things that can be done from the Windows command line (go dig through the archives of alt.msdos.batch.nt for some examples) the *nix world uses the terminal as a matter of course, and there are often terminal utilities included with a standard system install that have no equivalent under Windows. Alternately, if you are indeed seeing a Windows system, they could be using Powershell (which is included with modern versions of Windows starting with Windows 7, and can be added to systems as old as XP) or a third-party command prompt. But without more information, or a little context, it could be LITERALLY ANYTHING. Forgive my ignorance. I am only saying what I have seen on tv. I am not remotely a techhead. -- Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Science
On 12/31/2015 2:57 PM, Mayayana wrote:
| People doing science or maths often do not seem to be using a graphic | interface, on the other hand you could not do it with the ordinary | command line window. What are they using. I usually use either my cheapo solar calculator or a scrap of paper. What do you use? Windows GUI and console windows are the operating system. They host software. That's why Windows is called a "platform". Whether you're using GUI or console, you're still running some kind of executable. The GUI was just a way to make it all easier, more convenient, more complex and more functional. Drag-dropping a file into a folder is a lot easier than writing a DOS line to move the file. Writing a document in MS Word allows for all sorts of extra functionality, like fonts, margins and embedded images, that console windows would not be well suited for. I think the people who use console are mostly tech people, such as system administrators who manage a large number of machines for corporations. They're used to keyboard and console from the old days and still like to use those tools because they're comfortable. Just as some people still like to use typewriters. Microsoft know that and cater to that market. PowerShell was created specifically to create a soft landing for Linux admins who might be lured into switching to Windows. It mimics the one-EXE-for-one-job model popular with Linux console operations. There's also a slight macho element to using console and scorning the mouse, like smoking non-filter cigarettes, wearing jeans and a T-shirt, or driving a stick shift. It feels gritty. Just as there are millions of young cowboys in America who look like they're ready to wrestle a calf to the ground, as they drive down suburban streets on their 4-wheel-drive "horse", wearing riveted jeans and cowboy boots, with AC, stereo and a gun rack in the back window. The vast majority of pickups sold never carry anything much. (That might mar the wax polish. And the vast majority of riveted jeans will never be worn to do physical work. Keyboard and console window are the nerd's strut, their version of riveted jeans and cowboy boots. Ever notice that whenever movie makers want to portray computers as arcane and magical, handled by a special kind of magician, they just show a lot of C++ code scrolling on a glowing monitor? It might just as well be heiroglyphics to most people. Incantations worthy of Merlin. But C++ is not written in a console window, despite the movie special effects. (Though I wouldn't be entirely surprised if a few hardcore Linux people do it.) Command line is for single commands. Code writing needs a good editor with sophisticated luxuries that command line can't provide. An architect might use CAD software to create blueprints and Sketchup to do renderings. I once met a chemist who used some kind of browser plugin that displayed molecular structure. I think it was a custom plugin provided by some academic or industry group. So most work done on computers is done with some kind of GUI software. Computer maintenance is sometimes done with command line. Phew! Thanks. -- Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Science
On 12/31/2015 7:09 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
ray carter wrote: Martin Edwards wrote: People doing science or maths often do not seem to be using a graphic interface, on the other hand you could not do it with the ordinary command line window. What are they using. I worked for 30 years as a computer scientist/mathematician doing scientific software support and development. Our platform since 1990 was X-windows on Unix, and later on Linux. Nearly all the software ran from the graphical interface. I wonder what the OP is saying or wondering or meaning. Here's a wp article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathem...arkup_language // When the purpose is informal communication with other humans, syntax is often ad hoc, sometimes called "ASCII math notation". ... Ad hoc syntax requires context to interpret ambiguous syntax, for example "=" could be "implies" or "greater than or equal to", and "dy/dx" is likely to denote a derivative, but strictly speaking could also mean a finite quantity dy divided by dx. ... Markup languages optimized for computer-to-computer communication include MathML,[5] OpenMath, and OMDoc. These are designed for verbosity and to minimize ambiguity. However, the verbosity makes them clumsier for humans to type directly. // Thanks to all who replied, though I did not understand all of it. -- Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Science
Martin Edwards brought next idea :
People doing science or maths often do not seem to be using a graphic interface, on the other hand you could not do it with the ordinary command line window. What are they using. Probably Python, if they use a computer at all. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Science
Martin Edwards wrote:
On 12/31/2015 9:29 AM, Auric__ wrote: Martin Edwards wrote: People doing science or maths often do not seem to be using a graphic interface, on the other hand you could not do it with the ordinary command line window. What are they using. Well, that's a whole lot of detail you've provided. I'm going to go ahead and say that those people are possibly not using Windows. While there are amazing things that can be done from the Windows command line (go dig through the archives of alt.msdos.batch.nt for some examples) the *nix world uses the terminal as a matter of course, and there are often terminal utilities included with a standard system install that have no equivalent under Windows. Alternately, if you are indeed seeing a Windows system, they could be using Powershell (which is included with modern versions of Windows starting with Windows 7, and can be added to systems as old as XP) or a third-party command prompt. But without more information, or a little context, it could be LITERALLY ANYTHING. Forgive my ignorance. I am only saying what I have seen on tv. I am not remotely a techhead. If you're talking about any sort of "real science" kind of show, then it could be as I said above. But if you're talking about anything fictional... well, it's fiction. Meaning doesn't exist. The most recent fiction I can think of where they used something non-fictional was The Matrix Reloaded, where Trinity used a real- world hack to break into the power plant computers. -- What the flying feral ferret **** is this ****? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Science
On 1/1/2016 10:36 PM, Auric__ wrote:
Martin Edwards wrote: On 12/31/2015 9:29 AM, Auric__ wrote: Martin Edwards wrote: People doing science or maths often do not seem to be using a graphic interface, on the other hand you could not do it with the ordinary command line window. What are they using. Well, that's a whole lot of detail you've provided. I'm going to go ahead and say that those people are possibly not using Windows. While there are amazing things that can be done from the Windows command line (go dig through the archives of alt.msdos.batch.nt for some examples) the *nix world uses the terminal as a matter of course, and there are often terminal utilities included with a standard system install that have no equivalent under Windows. Alternately, if you are indeed seeing a Windows system, they could be using Powershell (which is included with modern versions of Windows starting with Windows 7, and can be added to systems as old as XP) or a third-party command prompt. But without more information, or a little context, it could be LITERALLY ANYTHING. Forgive my ignorance. I am only saying what I have seen on tv. I am not remotely a techhead. If you're talking about any sort of "real science" kind of show, then it could be as I said above. But if you're talking about anything fictional... well, it's fiction. Meaning doesn't exist. The most recent fiction I can think of where they used something non-fictional was The Matrix Reloaded, where Trinity used a real- world hack to break into the power plant computers. No, I am talking about "real science", but as I say, only what I can make out from a tv picture. -- Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Science
Martin Edwards wrote:
No, I am talking about "real science", but as I say, only what I can make out from a tv picture. Real science requires a kind of discipline or organized way of doing things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method Other than that, anyone can do science for themselves. There is no need for a degree from a university. And anyone doing real science, builds on the work of others. It's not often that a topic is so obscure, someone else hasn't worked on it before. As a scientist if you aren't spending half your time in the library, you're not getting the benefit of the successes and failures of others. ******* As for the computer part, I own a multimeter. It measures voltage and current. Now, with a $20 multimeter, I can sit down, and record the measurements with a pencil and a pad of paper. Many times, this has been sufficient. However, one project I did here in the last couple of years, involved measurements on 100 LED lights. Each LED has two wires, and you apply DC current to it, to make it light up. I needed to read the characteristics of each LED. My $100 multimeter has a serial port on the side. I can connect the multimeter to the computer. And the most important part - the multimeter is "opto-isolated", so any high voltages cannot leap through the meter and burn up the computer. I can even plug this setup into an AC outlet, safely, and measure line voltage. multimeter ---- RS232_cable ---- computer The multimeter spits out a reading every second. Using the computer, the numbers can be recorded in a file for me. In this way, I can have a "journal" of numbers. For this experiment, the measurement has to "settle down". There is around 30 seconds worth of measurements per LED. The LED has to warm up to its operating temperature, to get a representative reading from it. Taking the first reading is not good enough. By observing the voltages, I can tell when the next LED was installed in the test circuit. This is the actual log from my "science"... 0.400 V DC 09:44:57pm 0.400 V DC 09:44:58pm 0.400 V DC 09:44:59pm 0.400 V DC 09:45:00pm OK 005 --- the voltage is stable at 0.400V after waiting for at least 30 seconds. --- I post-annotate the file showing I'm happy with the reading for LED 005. 1.264 V DC 09:45:01pm 1.887 V DC 09:45:02pm --- Voltage is unstable. Paul is 1.902 V DC 09:45:03pm preparing to install LED 006. 1.902 V DC 09:45:04pm This is the open-circuit voltage 1.903 V DC 09:45:05pm in my test circuit. 1.903 V DC 09:45:06pm 1.902 V DC 09:45:07pm 1.902 V DC 09:45:08pm 1.902 V DC 09:45:09pm 1.901 V DC 09:45:10pm 1.903 V DC 09:45:11pm 0.465 V DC 09:45:12pm --- New LED is in, it is warming up. 0.419 V DC 09:45:13pm 0.417 V DC 09:45:14pm 0.415 V DC 09:45:15pm 0.413 V DC 09:45:16pm 0.412 V DC 09:45:17pm 0.412 V DC 09:45:18pm 0.411 V DC 09:45:19pm 0.410 V DC 09:45:20pm 0.410 V DC 09:45:21pm 0.409 V DC 09:45:22pm 0.409 V DC 09:45:23pm 0.409 V DC 09:45:24pm 0.408 V DC 09:45:25pm 0.408 V DC 09:45:26pm 0.408 V DC 09:45:27pm 0.407 V DC 09:45:28pm 0.408 V DC 09:45:29pm 0.408 V DC 09:45:30pm 0.407 V DC 09:45:31pm 0.407 V DC 09:45:32pm 0.407 V DC 09:45:33pm 0.407 V DC 09:45:34pm 0.407 V DC 09:45:35pm 0.407 V DC 09:45:36pm 0.407 V DC 09:45:37pm 0.406 V DC 09:45:38pm 0.406 V DC 09:45:39pm 0.406 V DC 09:45:40pm 0.406 V DC 09:45:41pm 0.406 V DC 09:45:42pm 0.406 V DC 09:45:43pm 0.406 V DC 09:45:44pm 0.406 V DC 09:45:45pm 0.406 V DC 09:45:46pm 0.406 V DC 09:45:47pm 0.406 V DC 09:45:48pm 0.405 V DC 09:45:49pm 0.405 V DC 09:45:50pm 0.405 V DC 09:45:51pm 0.405 V DC 09:45:52pm 0.405 V DC 09:45:53pm 0.405 V DC 09:45:54pm 0.405 V DC 09:45:55pm 0.405 V DC 09:45:56pm 0.405 V DC 09:45:57pm 0.405 V DC 09:45:58pm 0.405 V DC 09:45:59pm OK 006 --- thermal equilibrium 1.173 V DC 09:46:00pm 1.885 V DC 09:46:01pm 1.902 V DC 09:46:02pm --- Pull out LED 006 1.902 V DC 09:46:03pm 1.902 V DC 09:46:04pm 1.903 V DC 09:46:05pm 1.902 V DC 09:46:06pm 1.902 V DC 09:46:07pm 1.902 V DC 09:46:08pm 1.903 V DC 09:46:09pm 1.903 V DC 09:46:10pm 1.902 V DC 09:46:11pm 1.901 V DC 09:46:12pm 1.901 V DC 09:46:13pm 1.901 V DC 09:46:14pm 1.902 V DC 09:46:15pm 0.574 V DC 09:46:16pm --- new LED 007 stuffed in circuit 0.403 V DC 09:46:17pm warming up 0.369 V DC 09:46:18pm 0.367 V DC 09:46:19pm 0.365 V DC 09:46:20pm 0.364 V DC 09:46:21pm 0.364 V DC 09:46:22pm 0.363 V DC 09:46:23pm 0.363 V DC 09:46:24pm 0.362 V DC 09:46:25pm 0.362 V DC 09:46:26pm 0.361 V DC 09:46:27pm 0.361 V DC 09:46:28pm 0.361 V DC 09:46:29pm 0.361 V DC 09:46:30pm 0.361 V DC 09:46:31pm 0.361 V DC 09:46:32pm 0.361 V DC 09:46:33pm 0.360 V DC 09:46:34pm 0.360 V DC 09:46:35pm 0.360 V DC 09:46:36pm 0.360 V DC 09:46:37pm 0.360 V DC 09:46:38pm 0.360 V DC 09:46:39pm 0.360 V DC 09:46:40pm 0.360 V DC 09:46:41pm 0.360 V DC 09:46:42pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:43pm 0.360 V DC 09:46:44pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:45pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:46pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:47pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:48pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:49pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:50pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:51pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:52pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:53pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:54pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:55pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:56pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:57pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:58pm 0.359 V DC 09:46:59pm 0.359 V DC 09:47:00pm 0.359 V DC 09:47:01pm 0.359 V DC 09:47:02pm OK 007 --- thermal equilibrium Now you can see how science is made easy with computers. Instead of a pad and paper, now my readings are in a file. And I can share my research work with you, without needing to scan the measurements written in my paper lab book. Things should still be recorded in a lab book. For patent purposes, you may want a witness signature on a page of the lab book, if you have done something significant you want recognized later in a patent. The witness may be called, to verify the signature belongs to them, the signature was applied on the date recorded in the lab book, and they did actually witness your new creation. But when the measurements involve thousands of lines of stuff, we store them in a computer. I was able to take the measurements, put them in a spreadsheet, work out mean and standard deviation, and more importantly, match the LEDs with their new partners. Computers made it easy. ******* Even for science involving observation, computers can be used. People from this museum, fly around the world, "collecting bugs". But they also take high resolution pictures of the collected items, before forwarding the samples to other institutions. So nothing gets lost. Where do you store high resolution photos ? On a computer, is one place. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...-_DSC00172.JPG And the people who did that, had to go into tropical rain forests, get all sweaty, get bitten by the insects. They worked hard to get those samples. So you can look at them in the museum. And new species can be recorded in big reference books of insects. In fact, the people on this trip, carry a "pocket reference book" with pictures of previous collected insects, to help them get more unique new samples. Don't ask me who paid for that :-) Paul |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Science
| No, I am talking about "real science", but as I say, only what I can
| make out from a tv picture. | It sounds like you're talking about what I mentioned earlier: The "tradition" in TV and movies to portray anything techy by showing a glowing screen with code scrolling down. It might look like it's a DOS screen, but in most cases that I've seen that code is C++ and the display is nonsense. In other words, it's just a random sample of programming code, which looks very "computery" to most people. Or sometimes it's just a pattern of 1s and 0s. They just take some code that looks mysterious and show it scrolling. It's not connected to anything that anyone is actually doing on the computer. It's probably just a few pages of random open source code that the prop crew downloaded from the Internet. People who actually use computers don't use programming code, any more than you're using code to write your posts in this group. This is sort of like guessing what brand of flour was used in a sitcom when the main character made bread, based on seeing a corner of the package. In most cases, unless they've been paid for product placement, there is no flour. The box is just a prop. No one ever baked bread. There was no kitchen. Rather, the set director decorated a fake kitchen counter with fake packages to create a scene that most people would think seemed realistic. You might be surprised to learn that scientists also don't use monitors that glow with an other-worldly green color, placed in the center of a darkened room. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Science
Mayayana wrote:
| No, I am talking about "real science", but as I say, only what I can | make out from a tv picture. | It sounds like you're talking about what I mentioned earlier: The "tradition" in TV and movies to portray anything techy by showing a glowing screen with code scrolling down. It might look like it's a DOS screen, but in most cases that I've seen that code is C++ and the display is nonsense. In other words, it's just a random sample of programming code, which looks very "computery" to most people. Or sometimes it's just a pattern of 1s and 0s. They just take some code that looks mysterious and show it scrolling. It's not connected to anything that anyone is actually doing on the computer. It's probably just a few pages of random open source code that the prop crew downloaded from the Internet. People who actually use computers don't use programming code, any more than you're using code to write your posts in this group. This is sort of like guessing what brand of flour was used in a sitcom when the main character made bread, based on seeing a corner of the package. In most cases, unless they've been paid for product placement, there is no flour. The box is just a prop. No one ever baked bread. There was no kitchen. Rather, the set director decorated a fake kitchen counter with fake packages to create a scene that most people would think seemed realistic. You might be surprised to learn that scientists also don't use monitors that glow with an other-worldly green color, placed in the center of a darkened room. My favorite science is the chemistry lab, where all the beakers are filled with food coloring. And when they want to simulate boiling, they drop a chip of dry ice into the beaker. Which of course, looks ridiculous. http://f.tqn.com/y/chemistry/1/W/N/n/experimentgirl.jpg Can anyone spot the two errors in that picture ? Paul 1) The two "scientists" are not wearing their safety goggles. You would get thrown out of the lab for that. 2) The young girl in the foreground, has grabbed the burette by the tensioning nut on the back, rather than by the T-handle on the front. The burette should be rotated 180 degrees so she can use it. Science, my ass. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|