Thread: Why "Groupset"?
View Single Post
Old 06-29-24 | 05:54 PM
  #85  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 8,145
Likes: 11,080

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Originally Posted by Duragrouch
Perhaps, but the definition I noted was expounded in day one of Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer by the professor (who I also took for thermodynamics). I've got game in those subjects but they were not my primary area of specialization in industry, so given that prof had a PhD and was a specialist in that area, I accepted his word for it. He didn't harp on it, but just pointed out with amusement, that, despite (in his words) the wrong term used in the actual title of the class, because that is most person's perception of it, that it's actually a redundancy in terms, or as I like to say, repetitively redundant.
I'd say that professor was in the minority among physicists regarding the phrase, and the fact that his Physics Department had no qualms using it in the title of the class is a pretty clear indication of that. Personally, I've never heard another physicist take issue with the term.
tomato coupe is offline  
Reply