From: ruffrecords@yahoo.com   
      
   On 15/06/10 23:46, flipper wrote:   
   > On Thu, 29 Apr 2010 02:37:37 +0100, "Ian Iveson"   
   >   wrote:   
   >   
   >> flipper wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>> [below]   
   >>   
   >> I've said that the strange notation of the dB and its   
   >> derivative expressions is part of the reason why it causes   
   >> confusion to the novice.   
   >   
   > Any notation is 'confusing to the novice', till they learn it.   
   >   
   >> Perhaps it's different in the US,   
   >> but here the standard school curriculum strictly and   
   >> explicitly adheres to the SI system. In this context, the SI   
   >> and I consider the dB to be strange but unavoidable, whereas   
   >> its derivatives are particularly inconsistent with the   
   >> standard, and therefore confusing. That's enough for me.   
   >   
   > You sound like a sales brochure for SI but SI has no mechanism   
   > whatsoever for dealing with referenced logarithmic ratios. There is no   
   > 'labeling' that *could* be 'consistent' with SI, as it stands, so it's   
   > a red herring to complain the clearly useful dB is 'inconsistent' with   
   > something that has no means to deal with it, or anything like it, or   
   > any substitute.   
   >   
      
   Not to mention that the dB is the ratio of two identically dimensioned   
   quantities and is therefore dimensionless so a system of standardising   
   dimensions is meaningless in this context.   
      
      
   Cheers   
      
   Ian   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)