You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

**MathsIsFun****Administrator**- Registered: 2005-01-21
- Posts: 7,559

I updated the Unit Conversion Tool using Flash.

Any good? (... any bad?)

Offline

**simron****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-10-07
- Posts: 237

It's great! I especially like the slider part for quick calculations.

Linux FTW

Offline

**MathsIsFun****Administrator**- Registered: 2005-01-21
- Posts: 7,559

Thanks, simron.

I have done my best to research the conversions, but there is always the risk of a mistake.

So if anyone would like to take the time to confirm any of the calculations, that would be good.

Offline

**MathsIsFun****Administrator**- Registered: 2005-01-21
- Posts: 7,559

Testing out a new version.

Current version: Unit Conversion Tool

New Version: Unit Conversion Test

What do you like/dislike about each version ?

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 92,914

Hi MIF;

Nice idea for the slider on the new one.

Sometimes when I was using the Mass conversions the numbers in purple, next to the slider are missing their units.

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.**

**I agree with you regarding the satisfaction and importance of actually computing some numbers. I can't tell you how often I see time and money wasted because someone didn't bother to run the numbers.**

**Online**

**ganesh****Moderator**- Registered: 2005-06-28
- Posts: 16,065

Hi MathsIsFun,

I think the newer version is elaborate and neatly presented.

Every possible detail has been incorporated.

I didn't find any error on the page.

The first version is good too; I think the information detailed in the higher version is much better.

Thanks!

Character is who you are when no one is looking.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,787

Hi MathsIsFun,

I'm amazed! I'm staggered! It's not just good; it's brilliant!

I'm checking the factors now. (Well not quite now as I'm still typing this; but soon!)

Bob

You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,787

hi again,

I've played with the conversions for half an hour. The only thing I threw up was when I tried to mess around with LY, parsecs and AU along with fathoms and feet. At this point I had 1 fathom = 6.00000002 feet. So just a rounding error caused I suppose by the big numbers I had previously been using. When I cleared and restarted the fathoms came out as expected, so I don't think this is a problem. Anyone who uses a conversion factor and expects it'll be accurate at the 9th sig fig deserves what they get.

There are so many options, so I haven't done more than scratch the surface but here's what I checked:

accceleration

area

electricity (Provoked an interesting discussion with Mrs B about whether a coulomb should be on the same screen as a faraday. So how much is one faraday she asked. When I said 96521.9 coulombs she remembered. Eh? She didn't remember they measured the same thing but remembers the conversion value to 6sf. Interesting!)

but have a look at

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top … 98/faraday

energy

length

mass

power

temperature

time ( oh wow ... sidereal day!!)

velocity

All seem ok to me.

And then I went to check degrees to radians .

...........................................

Oh I'm so sorry.

Bob

*Last edited by bob bundy (2011-12-01 02:19:16)*

You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei

Offline

**MathsIsFun****Administrator**- Registered: 2005-01-21
- Posts: 7,559

LOL ... will add angles.

Thanks everyone!

Offline