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 |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
NY wrote:
I'd forgotten about the US habit of measuring dry goods by volume (US dry gallon) rather than by mass (pound) until I read other pages on that site, but then US recipes often specify quantities of flour, marg and dried fruit in cups (ie volume) rather than in ounces (mass). I presume there mist be a "standard" cup of some well-known capacity in fl oz or cu in, in order to match items such as eggs which are specified by number ("three standard-sized eggs") rather than by measured units. The venerable "cooking cup" isn't what it once was. At one time, we had a proper 8 oz measuring cup for baking. There was a glass one for stuff like a chunk of butter. There was an aluminum one if you wanted to measure flour and the glass one was dirty. As examples. Years later, when I went to the store, the cup had been replaced by "political correctness". A monstrosity was available, also in Pyrex, and it's two cups in size. This is a picture of a thing to waste cupboard space. The cooking cup amount is circled in blue. http://s9.postimg.org/j7i99z9qn/metric.jpg Paul |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 18:08:55 +0100, mechanic
wrote: On Mon, 04 Apr 2016 09:33:23 -0700, Ken Blake wrote: I just used convert.exe. It tool a fraction of a second to find out that there are 231 cubic inches in a gallon. English gallon or US? They are different. These conversions can trip people up very easily (as Wolf, above). US gallon. Yes, I know they are different. But I was replying to NY's message, and I had assumed that NY was short for "New York," which is in the USA. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 20:37:27 +0100, "NY" wrote:
"Ken Blake" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 10:45:33 +0100, "NY" wrote: (*) I needed to work out roughly how heavy a copper water cylinder would be when full of water. I only had an imperial tape measure. Measure diameter and length, and volume is pi r-squared l - but this gives volume in cubic inches and I only know that "a pint of pure water weighs a pound and a quarter" ie that a gallon weighs 10 lb. How many cubic inches ina gallon - buggered if I know, even to an order of magnitude. I ended up converting lengths to centimetres (using 2.5 cm = 1 in approximation) and working out the volume in cc, and then the mass follows from knowing that 1000 cc weighs 1 kg. I just used convert.exe. It tool a fraction of a second to find out that there are 231 cubic inches in a gallon. This was in the days before people had computers, the internet etc, and even calculators were just basic four-function ones, with no built-in conversion factors. Ah, OK. Understood. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
On Mon, 04 Apr 2016 16:18:49 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote: On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 18:08:55 +0100, mechanic wrote: On Mon, 04 Apr 2016 09:33:23 -0700, Ken Blake wrote: I just used convert.exe. It tool a fraction of a second to find out that there are 231 cubic inches in a gallon. English gallon or US? They are different. These conversions can trip people up very easily (as Wolf, above). US gallon. Yes, I know they are different. But I was replying to NY's message, and I had assumed that NY was short for "New York," which is in the USA. Looking at his message again, I see that he said "imperial tape measure" and "centimetres," so I guess my assumption was wrong. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
Paul wrote:
(snip) Years later, when I went to the store, the cup had been replaced by "political correctness". A monstrosity was available, also in Pyrex, and it's two cups in size. This is a picture of a thing to waste cupboard space. The cooking cup amount is circled in blue. And Pyrex has not been made of expensive borosilicate since at least 1998. It's now garbage soda-lime that breaks when exposed to changing temperatures. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
On 4/4/2016 8:20 PM, Paul in Houston TX wrote:
Paul wrote: (snip) Years later, when I went to the store, the cup had been replaced by "political correctness". A monstrosity was available, also in Pyrex, and it's two cups in size. This is a picture of a thing to waste cupboard space. The cooking cup amount is circled in blue. And Pyrex has not been made of expensive borosilicate since at least 1998. It's now garbage soda-lime that breaks when exposed to changing temperatures. I used a lot of Real Pyrex mirror blanks for amateur telescope making from 1964 to 1975, in the following sizes. 4 1/4 Inch x 3 6 inch x 3 7 inch x 3 8 inch x 1 12 1/2 inch x 1 a total of about 11 mirrors thickness varied from 1 inch to 2 1/2 inches These were Corning Glass pieces. Rene |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
Paul in Houston TX wrote:
Paul wrote: (snip) Years later, when I went to the store, the cup had been replaced by "political correctness". A monstrosity was available, also in Pyrex, and it's two cups in size. This is a picture of a thing to waste cupboard space. The cooking cup amount is circled in blue. And Pyrex has not been made of expensive borosilicate since at least 1998. It's now garbage soda-lime that breaks when exposed to changing temperatures. And Pyrex has size limits, before it becomes susceptible to stress. Over the years, I've seen a few 4 liter ones fail, on electric heat, and with water in them and everything. In each case, there was no chemistry going on, so no exceptional mess to clean up. I would trust the "ordinary sized" ones, just not the 4 liter ones. Paul |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 22:08:23 -0500, Rene lamontagne
wrote: On 4/4/2016 8:20 PM, Paul in Houston TX wrote: Paul wrote: (snip) Years later, when I went to the store, the cup had been replaced by "political correctness". A monstrosity was available, also in Pyrex, and it's two cups in size. This is a picture of a thing to waste cupboard space. The cooking cup amount is circled in blue. And Pyrex has not been made of expensive borosilicate since at least 1998. It's now garbage soda-lime that breaks when exposed to changing temperatures. I used a lot of Real Pyrex mirror blanks for amateur telescope making from 1964 to 1975, in the following sizes. 4 1/4 Inch x 3 6 inch x 3 7 inch x 3 8 inch x 1 12 1/2 inch x 1 a total of about 11 mirrors thickness varied from 1 inch to 2 1/2 inches These were Corning Glass pieces. Rene Here is an interesting article from Smithsonian Magazine about Pyrex: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innova...955513/?no-ist |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
On 4/5/2016 11:30 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 22:08:23 -0500, Rene lamontagne wrote: On 4/4/2016 8:20 PM, Paul in Houston TX wrote: Paul wrote: (snip) Years later, when I went to the store, the cup had been replaced by "political correctness". A monstrosity was available, also in Pyrex, and it's two cups in size. This is a picture of a thing to waste cupboard space. The cooking cup amount is circled in blue. And Pyrex has not been made of expensive borosilicate since at least 1998. It's now garbage soda-lime that breaks when exposed to changing temperatures. I used a lot of Real Pyrex mirror blanks for amateur telescope making from 1964 to 1975, in the following sizes. 4 1/4 Inch x 3 6 inch x 3 7 inch x 3 8 inch x 1 12 1/2 inch x 1 a total of about 11 mirrors thickness varied from 1 inch to 2 1/2 inches These were Corning Glass pieces. Rene Here is an interesting article from Smithsonian Magazine about Pyrex: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innova...955513/?no-ist Thanks Norman, Yes Pyrex has played an important part in the Kitchen, Lab and observatory.. Rene |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
Lots of people here used to read ton instead of tonne. We say tonelada. But
maybe now I know who understands the difference between ton and tonne. Maybe there's nothing wrong with windows calculator. Besides I don't need to know every unit system in US and UK. "mechanic" escreveu na mensagem ... On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 04:41:48 +0100, Blue Citizen wrote: How is the weather in Portugal? Someone in Portugal doesn't recognise the metric tonne? We're even using it on official docs in the UK. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 22:44:30 +0100, "Blue Citizen"
wrote: Just curious about the history that lead to these differences between short and long ton. Thought American ton was greater than Great Britain's one. "Wolf K" escreveu na mensagem ... On 2016-04-02 23:05, Blue Citizen wrote: Hello you, today I was trying unit conversion with Windows Calculator and now it looks different. Can't find Newton unit, plus it shows new units I've never seen before, Tonne for example, do you know this unit? 1,000kg, aka as "metric ton" for them as can't spell. English "ton" is 2,000lb. "Long ton" is 2,200lb, or approximately 999kg. I can't agree with your definitions of English ton (2,000lb) and Long ton (2,200lb). The description below is from Encyclopedia Britannica and reflects what I learnt in school about 70 years ago. " Ton, unit of weight in the avoirdupois system equal to 2,000 pounds (907.18 kg) in the United States (the short ton) and 2,240 pounds (1,016.05 kg) in Britain (the long ton). The metric ton used in most other countries is 1,000 kg, equivalent to 2,204.6 pounds avoirdupois. Ton came to mean any large weight, until it was standardized at 20 hundredweight although the total weight could be 2,000, 2,160, 2,240, or 2,400 pounds (from 907.18 to 1088.62 kg) depending on whether the corresponding hundredweight contained 100, 108, 112, or 120 pounds." I am not aware of any "ton" being defined as 2,200lb. The best conversion resource is a little book I got 60 years ago as 1st year engineering student. Don't need no built-in stuff, just a plain calculator and the ability to turn paper pages and read 'em. :-) Hope you can help me. Thanks, You're welcome. -- Blue Citizen |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
So is this a Windows Calculator bug or is just ignorance about metric ton?
"Monty" escreveu na mensagem ... The description below is from Encyclopedia Britannica and reflects what I learnt in school about 70 years ago. " Ton, unit of weight in the avoirdupois system equal to 2,000 pounds (907.18 kg) in the United States (the short ton) and 2,240 pounds (1,016.05 kg) in Britain (the long ton). The metric ton used in most other countries is 1,000 kg, equivalent to 2,204.6 pounds avoirdupois. Ton came to mean any large weight, until it was standardized at 20 hundredweight although the total weight could be 2,000, 2,160, 2,240, or 2,400 pounds (from 907.18 to 1088.62 kg) depending on whether the corresponding hundredweight contained 100, 108, 112, or 120 pounds." I am not aware of any "ton" being defined as 2,200lb. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 22:44:30 +0100, Blue Citizen wrote:
English "ton" is 2,000lb. No it isn't. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:21:04 -0600, Ken1943 wrote:
On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:30:56 +0100, mechanic wrote: On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 22:44:30 +0100, Blue Citizen wrote: English "ton" is 2,000lb. No it isn't. Yes it is Has anyone posted this reference as of yet? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ton "ton" has numerous definitions. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Desktop calculator bug
On 12/04/2016 16:32, Ken1943 wrote:
... Didn't know if the other person could read !!!! You're the one who just incorrectly agreed that an English ton is 2000lb. -- Brian Gregory (in the UK). To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|