I vote yes.
I agree with most of Seth's post except his conclusion
to vote no. The likely confusion generated by
"flux density" has to be weighed against the current
_and future_ confusion generated by "flux", and will lessen over
time in any case. Among the upsides of switching to
terminology that is more scientifically accurate
must be counted the improved consistency and authority
of CF. Fewer instances of "Why does CF call it something
different than my textbook?". Finally, science is an
iterative process where "mistakes" are corrected
not glossed-over once recognized. The exercise
of renaming so many quantities will help ensure that people
and automated tools retain that perspective.
Hashtag #CFY2K.
cz
--
Charlie Zender, Earth System Sci. & Computer Sci.
University of California, Irvine 949-891-2429 )'(
Received on Wed May 20 2015 - 10:11:27 BST
