Posted by Rik Wasmus on 12/05/07 12:12

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 12:46:37 +0100, Toby A Inkster
<usenet200712@tobyinkster.co.uk> wrote:
> Rik Wasmus wrote:
>
>> Nono. Volume/length is totally valid to check for efficiency.
>
> I suppose so, but then the measurement goes up as efficiency decreases,
> so
> I'd probably call it a measure of fuel *inefficiency*.

Well, you've got a point there. If 'energy-footprint' wasn't allready
taken by those CO2 enthousiasts it would be ideal as a name.

> I suppose then that while one measures height in metres one could measure
> "shortness" in terms of metres^-1 (i.e. how many of them fit in one
> metre). :-)

Hehe, I like that :). I'm 0.52 metres^-1 short!
--
Rik Wasmus

[Back to original message]