On 21 Oct 2005 14:23:49 GMT, Allodoxaphobia wrote:

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 23:00:49 -0400, Walter Maxwell wrote:
On 21 Oct 2005 02:50:10 GMT, Allodoxaphobia wrote:
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 21:05:31 -0400, Hal Rosser wrote:

I noticed also you referred to frequencies in KHZ. But shouldn't that have
been "KC" or for historic accuracy.
;-)

Well, it should've been "kc/s".
More 'short-handedly': "kcs".
A Hertz is a "cycle per second".

Jonesy W3DHJ

Then I should have said KHz/s, or KHzs, right?

_That_ would be doubly redundant. :-)
It would be the equivalent to saying "kilo-cycles per second per second".
Some sort of "FM propagation", I suppose.

Jonesy

As I see it, Jonesy, kc = kilocycles, but we think of it as kilocycles per sec.
kc/s = kilocycles/sec, which accurately specifies it as such, so it is not
redundant.

Therefore, KHz is also proper, but KHz/s more accurately specifies it, and is
also not redundant.

But aren't we being a little picky picky?

Walt