From the Epistle, Oh, The Hills Are Alive With The Sound of Music,
There appears the solemn discordant turdification of scientific
abberation not caught by we users of scientific/mathematical notation.

Oh, woe is me.

Please refer to the following paragraph, and specifically to the
hypothetical size of the residue kibble pellet at the end of its travel
down Canalis Alementarium.

And so, I say lo unto thee of greater wisdom than thine humble servant,
who gleans melodious phrases generated in the neighborhood of RAN,
please reconsider the numbers.

>And it's this end from which we glean the finality of the digestive
>process and the realization that in this finality there is not much
>more than 1/670th ( 0.0014925 inch = 1.4925 X 10 to the 3rd
>power[SIC]) of that kibble particle that was briefly chewed and ground
>up into chunks, formed a slurry with the saliva, and was swallowed,
>its sizing being decremented both physically and biochemically as it
>traversed Canalis Alementarium, the GI tract.

Consider the number, 0.0014925 inch. Converted to scientific notation
the number can be written as, 1.4925 after translocating the decimal
to the right three places. However, in so doing we need to indicate by
powers of 10 the DIRECTION the decimal point has been moved as well
as the number of units or powers. If you look back at the original
notation you will not see the DIRECTION that should've been displayed.
Hence, 0.0014925 inch = 1.4925 X 10 to the 3rd power is incorrectly
written.

Oh, more woe is me.

Methinks the correct expression should be as follows:

0.0014925 inch = 1.4925 X 10 to the minus 3rd power inch.

And all this jabberwocky for a messly minus sign. What will Lipinski
think of next? Not many will stick around to find out, that's for sure.

Oh lowly ferret, you do make beautiful music; we's just gotta listen
better.

Edward Lipinski
Ferrets North West Foundation.

[Posted in FML 6290]