[BC] need a NON-technical explanation

[Gary Glaenzer]

I'll take a shot at the meters vs kc aspect

It is a matter of non-confusion, mainly

While we say 80-40-20 meter ham bands, it bets difficult when dealing with 
fractional parts of a meter of wavelength

 30.99 meters = 9680 kHz, which is easier ?

plus, as frequency goes up, wavelength goes down, which is non-intuitive

Hope that helps

Gary

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Donna Halper" <dlh at donnahalper.com>

> This may be an old-radio query, but I know some of you are hams so perhaps 
> you can help me explain something.  I am finishing up my dissertation for 
> my PhD after all these years (I always wanted a Doctorate, and you're 
> never too old to study something new) and am struggling with how to 
> explain in non-technical terms why radio stations of the 1920s moved away 
> from using meters and embraced the term "kilocycles".  (I know they did it 
> beginning in 1923, and it basically seems to have become fait accompli by 
> around 1927.)  I believe hams still use meters, do they not?
>
> But to further confuse the neo-Luddites like me, today's radio receivers 
> are in kilohertz-- I grew up with using "kc" and it all changed further at 
> some point to "kHz", but I never understood that change either.  Soooo, if 
> somebody could explain these changes and the reasons for them, in English 
> that the average non-techie could understand, I'd be grateful.
>