To: | "tentec@contesting.com" <tentec@contesting.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [TenTec] Fwd: Re: hz / KC Correction |
From: | Peter Bertini <radioconnection@gmail.com> |
Reply-to: | Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com> |
Date: | Fri, 27 Mar 2015 15:14:17 -0400 |
List-post: | <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com> |
Kc is not, but kc per second (kc/s) is as valid a kHz. A cycle is meaningless, unless it references a time period. kHz, cp/s, etc. The purpose of Hertz was to remove the ambiguity. But 1 Hz and 1 cp/s should be universally acceptable. Pete _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [TenTec] hz / KC, Frank Tucker |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [TenTec] Fwd: Re: hz / KC Correction, Tony Lelieveld |
Previous by Thread: | [TenTec] Make big money as a metric conversion specialist!, Katz Ajamas |
Next by Thread: | Re: [TenTec] Fwd: Re: hz / KC Correction, Clayton Brantley via TenTec |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |