Standard Measures of United States, Great Britain and France: History and actual comparisons. With appendix on introduction of the mètreWurtele, Arthur S. C.
History
Standard Measures of United States, Great Britain and France: History and actual comparisons. With appendix on introduction of the mètre
Wurtele, Arthur S. C.
Metric system; Weights and measures -- History
STANDARD MEASURES
OF
UNITED STATES,
GREAT BRITAIN, AND FRANCE.
HISTORY AND ACTUAL COMPARISONS.
WITH
APPENDIX ON INTRODUCTION OF THE MÈTRE.
BY
ARTHUR S. C. WURTELE,
ASS’T ENG., N. Y. C. & H. R. R.
[Illustration]
E. & F. N. SPON,
NEW YORK: 44 MURRAY STREET.
LONDON: 16 CHARING CROSS.
1882.
COPYRIGHT, 1882, BY ARTHUR S. C. WURTELE.
INTRODUCTION.
During the preparation of this investigation of Standard Measures a large
number of authorities were examined, including the following: Kelly’s
“Universal Cambist,” Maunder’s “Weights and Measures,” “Encyclopædia
Britannica,” “Chambers’ Encyclopædia,” Williams’ “Geodesy,” Hymer’s
works, “Smithsonian Reports,” “Coast Survey Reports,” Herschel’s
“Astronomy,” etc. The only concise and clear statement I found was J. E.
Hilgard’s report to the Coast Survey on standards in 1876, which I was
gratified to find coincides with my deductions.
ARTHUR S. C. WURTELE.
ALBANY, November 26, 1881.
STANDARD MEASURES.
A standard measure of length at first sight appears to be very
simple--merely a bar of metal of any length, according to the unit of any
country; and comparisons of different standards do not seem to present
any difficulty. But on looking further into the thing, we find that
standards are referred to some natural invariable length, and we are at
once confronted with a mass of scientific reductions giving different
values to the same thing, according to successively improved means of
observation. We find, also, that comparisons of one standard with another
differ, as given by reductions carried to great apparent exactness.
Every author appears to assume the right of using his own judgment as to
what reduction is to be considered the most exact, and the result is a
very confusing difference in apparently exact figures, with nothing to
show how these differences arise.
I have endeavored to indicate what may be the cause of this confusion by
giving the figures of actually observed comparisons and reductions; in a
manner, the roots of the figures used as statements of length.
Sir Joseph Whitworth gives 1/40000 of an inch as the smallest length that
can be measured with certainty, with an ultimate possibility of 1/1000000
of an inch; but imperceptible variations of temperature affect these
infinitesimal lengths to such an extent that he believes the limit can
only be reached at a standard temperature of 85° F., to avoid the effect
of heat of the body.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account