CAD CAM EDM DRO - Yahoo Group Archive

Re: rant

on 2008-04-06 11:09:26 UTC
I fear this thread will be banned sooner than later, but I think that
using the yellow band has inherent difficulties. one is that the
blueprint would not reflect the color properly,
second, since low presure sodium lamps are between 570 and 589 nm,
there is no good reference standard.

I propose using a blue-green wavelength as it will copy on a copy
machine (yellow will not) and it is near the 500mn or rounded number
that makes measuring easier.

I also propose not going with the longer orange side of the spectrum
as that is getting further away from the problem.

If we use SI and inch, why not just change the mm to be 0.040 inches ?
and be done with it ?

Dave




--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com, "R.L. Wurdack" <dickw@...> wrote:
>
> Someone fameous (Archimedes Aristotle ???) once tried to edict pi as
exactly 3.0 but his circles kept coming up short.
>
> At the risk of starting a metric/inch measurement war . . . One of
the big difficulties in getting everyone onto a common standard is the
installed base of machinery, equipment, and stuff. Though I have no
hard data to support it I might take a wager that when the academics
decided that SI was the way to go there was far more machinery,
equipment and stuff on this planet that was inches than there was metric.
>
> I personally measure all my stuff in multiples of the yellow
wavelength of the emission spectrum of Cesium. (In a neutral gravity
field, of course.)
>
> D.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Discussion Thread

Peter Reilley 2008-04-06 07:02:46 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant stan 2008-04-06 07:51:17 UTC Ref: rant Peter Reilley 2008-04-06 08:03:07 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant Tony Jeffree 2008-04-06 09:23:56 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant stan 2008-04-06 09:36:38 UTC Ref: rant Jon Elson 2008-04-06 09:47:27 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant stan 2008-04-06 10:27:13 UTC Ref: rant Peter Reilley 2008-04-06 10:46:01 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant R.L. Wurdack 2008-04-06 10:51:29 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant stan 2008-04-06 10:52:38 UTC Alternatives to ballscrews stan 2008-04-06 11:02:02 UTC Ref: rant turbulatordude 2008-04-06 11:09:26 UTC Re: rant R.L. Wurdack 2008-04-06 11:33:07 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: rant stan 2008-04-06 11:34:51 UTC Ref: rant stan 2008-04-06 12:05:36 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: rant Jim Peck Stamping 2008-04-06 12:32:54 UTC rant Jim Peck Stamping 2008-04-06 13:00:51 UTC rant R.L. Wurdack 2008-04-06 13:34:40 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant Peter Reilley 2008-04-06 15:13:21 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: rant Steve Blackmore 2008-04-06 16:59:36 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant stan 2008-04-06 17:08:12 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant Matthew Tinker 2008-04-06 17:16:38 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant Jon Elson 2008-04-06 17:35:54 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant stan 2008-04-06 17:44:04 UTC Ref: rant wanliker@a... 2008-04-06 17:53:03 UTC Ref: rant Jim Register 2008-04-06 17:57:55 UTC Laser Metrology (was Re: rant) stan 2008-04-06 18:31:33 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Laser Metrology (was Re: rant) stan 2008-04-06 18:55:02 UTC Ref: Laser Metrology Brian Foley 2008-04-06 20:52:42 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant Jim Peck Stamping 2008-04-07 04:00:27 UTC rant caudlet 2008-04-07 06:47:18 UTC Re: Ref: rant [Off Topic] Matthew Tinker 2008-04-07 06:49:42 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant Tony Smith 2008-04-07 07:45:14 UTC RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant dickw@n... 2008-04-07 13:16:10 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: Laser Metrology stan 2008-04-07 14:16:07 UTC Ref: Laser Metrology Graham Stabler 2008-04-07 15:28:14 UTC Re: Ref: Laser Metrology R.L. Wurdack 2008-04-07 19:40:34 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Ref: Laser Metrology vrsculptor 2008-04-07 20:20:05 UTC Re: Ref: Laser Metrology Peter Reilley 2008-04-07 20:21:26 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: Laser Metrology