You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

**MathsIsFun****Administrator**- Registered: 2005-01-21
- Posts: 7,560

I updated the Unit Conversion Tool using Flash.

Any good? (... any bad?)

"The physicists defer only to mathematicians, and the mathematicians defer only to God ..." - Leon M. Lederman

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: 7,560

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.

"The physicists defer only to mathematicians, and the mathematicians defer only to God ..." - Leon M. Lederman

Offline

**MathsIsFun****Administrator**- Registered: 2005-01-21
- Posts: 7,560

Testing out a new version.

Current version: Unit Conversion Tool

New Version: Unit Conversion Test

What do you like/dislike about each version ?

"The physicists defer only to mathematicians, and the mathematicians defer only to God ..." - Leon M. Lederman

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 95,922

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.**

**If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.**

Offline

**ganesh****Moderator**- Registered: 2005-06-28
- Posts: 16,970

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: 7,016

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: 7,016

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)*

Offline

**MathsIsFun****Administrator**- Registered: 2005-01-21
- Posts: 7,560

LOL ... will add angles.

Thanks everyone!

Offline