Another excuse for more failures:-)

[Jack Harry Teesdale]

Nearly 3 minutes to run 440 yards? They were running 4 minute miles in the 1950's.

[Tim+]

Where are you all seeing 52.3?? The paper I?m seeing clearly says 52X3. Dunno why it?s like that but that?s what?s on the exam paper.

Tim

[Tim+]

Doesn?t say anything about how long the runner is running for, just his pace. 12 mile miles is pretty good for an ultra-marathon. ;-)

12 minute miles is probably faster than 99% of followers of this group could run.

Tim

[Jack Harry Teesdale]

Well, at least 2 of us are seeing 52.3 secs on the linked page, which would have been about right for 440yds in the 1950's. Nearly 3 mins for

440yds is little more than walking pace!

[Tim Lamb]

This was on the travelling carriage and noise not much of a problem.

>

[Jack Harry Teesdale]

Tell you what, next time you are passing Specsavers, pop in for a test.

[Tim+]

Okay, this is weird. My wife?s iPad (iPad Air 3rd gen) it opens it with Pages and warns that formulae may not display properly. It shows 52.3

My iPad (8th generation) says nothing about Pages and gives no warnings. It displays 52X3.

My wife?s MacBook shows 52.3.

Looking like there?s an issue with displaying the characters BUT, I?m not convinced that my version is the wrong one. ;-)

Tim

[Tim+]

Well I?m following the first link given.

Which are you following.

[Tim+]

Looking at the first part of Q2 I see that P (Pi) is given as 3X142 so clearly it?s not being displayed properly. Weird that of all the symbols not to display properly on my iPad it should be the humble decimal point.

I think you can see why I was confused.

Tim

[Colin Bignell]

You are, however, outnumbered. I see 52.3 as well.

[Colin Bignell]

On 09/02/2022 19:10, Tim+ wrote: ...

Running. I remember doing that once.

[Andrew]

But was it scientific calculator or one that just did mundane arithmetic ?. And HP were never known for underpricing :-)

[ARW]

:-)

My Grandad bought a TV for the Coronation. The only TV on the street.

[Roger Mills]

It gives all the information you need! It doesn't matter what a 'unit' is. It tells you the unit price and the number of units consumed, so you just have to multiply them together - and then add the standing charge in order to find the total cost.

Once you know that, you have to deduct the gas standing charge and divide what's left by the price per therm to work out the number of therms, and then multiply by 200 to get cubic feet. Simple!

It's essentially the same question as "If I buy 200 rabbits which cost £3 each, how many £5 hares could I buy for the same money?". OK - there's also the standing charge to take into account - but the important point is that it doesn't matter how units of electricity and gas are defined as long as you know the unit price of each.

[Roger Mills]

It was a 1950 paper - looong before decimal currency. All we knew in those days was pounds shillings and pence!

[Colin Bignell]

Knowing guineas also helped me with the answer.

[Roger Mills]

There weren't any pocket calculators around until the 1970's. Before that, it was slide rules - or log tables if you needed greater accuracy.

The principle of log tables is that 10^n x 10^m = 10^(n+m). So it means that multiplication and division can be performed by means of addition and subtraction - which is a lot easier.

[Steve Walker]

And raising to a power by multiplication; dividing by subtraction; and finding an arbitrary root by division.

[Tim Streater]

But you knew how many d were in an s and how many s were in a £. So conversion was simple.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 09/02/2022 19:52, Tim+ wrote: Weird that of all the symbols

Not weird at all. No person who buys an Apple product has any idea of numbers or they wouldn't have confuse the £1500 price tag with £150...

You are simply the sort of person that buys apple products.