Abstract
May I contribute to the ‘tempest in a teapot’ in Forum? R. H. Bushnell (EOS, 60, July 17, 1979) chides S. A. Morse, who, in an earlier issue (EOS, 60, April 10, 1979), stated a preference for continuing use of the bar, instead of the Sl‐related pascal, as the measure of pressure for his particular work in geophysics. Bushnell said ‘we prefer the pascal.’ I do not know who is included in his regal ‘we,’ but I prefer the bar.I do not fault Bushnell's statement regarding coherence of the pascal within the SI system of units. However, I believe more considerations are involved in the choice of a unit best suited to a particular purpose than just simplicity of definition. For one thing, scientists invoke units with numerical values when they quantify in their minds visual images of physical phenomena, and therefore the more readily visualized units are to be preferred when conceptualizing relationships. And the most readily conceptualized numbers are certainly 1 to 10. For example, it seems to me to be much easier to visualize and mentally utilize surface atmospheric pressure as being about 1 bar rather than 105 pascal.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
