RE: SI Units (continuing history)

[Rick_Strickert@radian.com]

The continuing (unending?) debate over SI units on the RADSAFE list has also
been a sore (though sometimes humorous) point with both chemists and
physicists in the past.  Even theological arguments (Proverbs 20:10) have
been employed.

Arthur W. Adamson. "SI Units? A Camel is a Camel", J. Chem. Ed., 55(10),
October, 1978, pp.634-637.

Jack L. Lambert. "Provocative Opinion: A m3 is Bigger than a Breadbox", J.
Chem. Ed., 55(10), October, 1978, p.638.

Robert A. Nelson, "On finding a Middle Ground for SI", J. Chem. Ed., 56(10),
October, 1979, pp.661-662.

P.G. Wright, "An Apologia for Accepting at Least an Approximation to SI", J.
Chem. Ed., 56(10), October, 1979, pp.663-665.

R.B. Heslop, Comments on "SI Units? A Camel is a Camel", J. Chem. Ed.,
56(10), October, 1979, p. 665.

David Dingledy, Comments on "SI Units? A Camel is a Camel", J. Chem. Ed.,
56(10), October, 1979, p. 665.

Artuhur W. Adamson, Response to Comments on "SI Units? A Camel is a Camel",
J. Chem. Ed., 56(10), October, 1979, pp. 665-666

John S. Rigden, Editorial: "Are SI Units tending towards the ideological?",
Am. J. Phys., 52(3), March, 1984, p.205.

John P. McKeley, Letter supporting Rigden's editorial, Am. J. Phys., 52(9),
September, 1984, p.777.

Rick

Richard G. Strickert, Ph.D.
Radian International
Austin, TX
rick_strickert@radian.com <mailto:rick_strickert@radian.com> 

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html