On Mon, 14 Jan 2002 08:53:40 Ron Nossaman wrote: >>At 1:47 AM -0800 12/19/01, Robin Hufford wrote: >>>In the interests of amicable discussion I would have to say however that >>>as the members of this list are at least able to operate computers and are, >>>evidently, literate, it is not likely they misconstrue what an >>>accelerometer is >>>or what it can do although in point of fact the motion itself is not what is >>>measured but rather the time rate of change of velocity... >> >> >>I'm afraid, Robin, that likelihood is very real indeed! It really >>does appear that they think it is measuring bodily movement, >>fantastic though you and I find that. >> >>JD > >Apparently so. I certainly don't see that it is logically reconcilable that >a body can experience a change in velocity at a measurable rate without >having moved. > >Ron N > Right. This is like saying we were talking about force and everyone knows you can't measure force with a strain gauge. OK, strictly speaking, that's right. A strain gauge measures strain. But the presence of strain indicates the presence of force. I hope this bogged down thread isn't going to bog down further in discussions of semantics. Phil F
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC