![]() |
|
letters... |
|
|
Just the Facts David R. Taylor Fort Calhoun, Neb. |
To the Editor: Arun Majumdar's
article, "Not Without Engineering," (March 2001) was a fascinating
look into the issues associated with nanoscale technology. I look forward
to reading more about this emerging technology. This is indeed science fiction
becoming science fact. However, at one point the article diverges to state, "The fact that the tiny biological motors [referring to bacterial flagella] are the only natural objects that generate rotary motion suggests that evolution may have selected rotary motion at nanoscales due to its efficiency." This statement is purely philosophical, and argues more convincingly that bacteria's flagella are evidence of intelligent design rather than a random, undirected process of evolution. As engineers, we are intelligent and educated enough to recognize the boundary between objective science and philosophical speculation. Unless we wish to expand our forum of engineering dialogue into philosophical debate, perhaps we should confine our discussion to sound, observable, test-able, technical information.
|
|
Credit (or Criticism) Where It's Due Wm. F. (Fred) Fulcher, P.E. Pine Knoll Shores, N.C. |
To the Editor: While the American government has given away more
money and resources (with taxes paid by Americans) than any country in
history, our free enterprise system is the model (if not the envy) of
the rest of the world. With it, we have provided more financial assistance,
exported more technology, provided more employment to foreign nationals
in their respective countries of origin and have started more business
and manufacturing programs in those countries than any other nation in
the entire world, while still consuming France's wine and cheeses
and Egypt's cotton. Editor's note: The letter written by Sherif Samy Shenouda referred to the Washington Window column published in January 2001, reporting on a failure to reach an international agreement on the Kyoto Protocol on climate change.
|
|
Alexander R. Kovnat West Bloomfield Township, Mich. |
To the Editor: Sherif Samy Shenouda
(Letters, August 2001) compares a 4.0-liter, 6-cylinder engine with a 2.0-liter,
4-cylinder engine. He points out that the latter, though smaller, has the
same rated power as the former. While big engines may develop no more power than small, high-revving engines, the former develop more torque. This may not be needed for small cars, but is needed for larger vehicles to get moving with alacrity when the driver gets the green light. Large vehicles consume more fuel not so much because their engines are less efficient, but rather because of their size (aerodynamics) and weight (inertia). But let's face it: We can't all drive small cars. Ever try to travel any distance in a small car with two restless children in the back seat? There's got to be a better way of dealing with our national problems than cramming everybody into smaller and smaller cars.
|
| Orders in Units Richard T. Salter II Bedford, Mass. |
To the Editor: In his August
2001 letter, John G. Crofts claims to point out an error in the table of
"Physical Quantities and Typical Values" (April 2001). In
fact, he is only perpetuating an old idea that never had any validity: that
the two parts of the combination unit should be written in different order
for work and torque, i.e., ft.-lb. and lb.-ft., respectively. It is not the unit's function to provide information about the physical quantity other than the unit of measure; the quantity must be identified in some other way, and the order of the individual parts of a combination unit is completely irrelevant. Crofts thinks the SI order Nm is "correct"; this is a coincidence, since in SI individual units always appear in the same arbitrary order. SI does recognize the difference between work and torque by using the special name "joule" in place of newton-meter only for work (or other energy quantities), but not for torque. I have also seen a reasonably persuasive argument that the unit of torque ought to be newton-meter per radian. Finally, if unit order does matter, why does no one complain that steam tables use Btu/lb.-°F for both specific heat and specific entropy, which are physically different, instead of changing the order to Btu/°F-lb. for one of them?
|
| Larry S. Zelson Allentown, Pa. . |
To the Editor: There need be
no confusion between English units for work and torque, as suggested in
the letter in the August 2001 issue: 33,000 ft.-lbs. of work per minute
is 1 horsepower; likewise 33,000 ft.-lbs. of torque over 1 radian per minute
is 1 horsepower. In the example cited, the writer apparently failed to realize that the appropriate measure of rotational distance is a radian and not a revolution, and that there are two pi radians in a revolution (hence his answer of 6.28 hp). Thus, while it might be a helpful notation to use ft.-lbs. to represent work and lbs.-ft. to represent torque, the two unit measures are equivalent for calculation purposes, and there is no inconsistency in the mathematical results obtained from one versus the other.
|
| Blackout Politics Joseph J. Neff Indianapolis |
To the Editor: The statement
that the California rolling blackouts are neither Democrat nor Republican
("Blackout Punch," August 2001) is not true. Politics caused
the shutdown of both nuclear and coal-powered generators and prevented the
building of large power generators over a 10-year period. Democratic and Republican California legislators approved the deregulation that restricted the power supply and froze the retail price charged to customers, but ignored the fact that natural gas would double and triple in price when there was a cold Midwest winter, that a normal cyclic drought restricted hydropower, and that several years of low oil prices shut down domestic drilling rigs. Gasoline-powered small generators are inefficient and have high emissions, compared with any alternative diesel, coal-fired, nuclear-, oil-, or natural gas-powered generator. I hope few Californians will use their gas-guzzling SUVs or trucks as a small business or home power generator.
|
| Women in Engineering Ken Cole Holdrege, Neb. |
To the Editor: Recent studies show that fourth- and fifth-grade girls lose the ability to do math because of a lack of iron due to the hormonal changes going on at that age. It would seem that the profession would be better served if ASME lobbied for an iron-rich middle school lunch menu than anything else. Editor's note: Studies linking iron deficiency in adolescents, particularly in teenage girls, to poor learning skills have been conducted by Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore under Ann Bruner and by King's College, London, under Michael Nelson.
|
| Myron Kayton Santa Monica, Calif. |
To the Editor: I was puzzled by your April 2001 issue
on women in engineering. I do not see why ASME should be concerned about
the sexual or ethnic mix of engineers. ASME should encourage all people
who are capable of quantitative thinking to be engineers, but should not
single out sexes, politically powerful groups, or government-protected
minorities.
|
| Correction |
An article in December 2001 misstated statistics
on oil reserves. Venezuela had 11,048,000,000 metric tonnes of proved recoverable
reserves of oil and natural gas liquids at the end of 1999. Africa had 10,122,000,000,
and South America 13,370,000,000.
home | features | news update | marketplace | departments | about ME | back issues | ASME | site search © 2002 by The American Society of Mechanical Engineers |