Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site calmasd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcc3!sdcc6!calmasd!dmm
From: dmm@calmasd.UUCP (David M. MacMillan)
Newsgroups: net.nlang
Subject: Re: "Controlled experiment": redundancy or retronym?
Message-ID: <515@calmasd.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 30-Jul-85 17:01:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: calmasd.515
Posted: Tue Jul 30 17:01:47 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 2-Aug-85 06:41:30 EDT
References: <477@utai.UUCP> <1521@aecom.UUCP> <1449@sdcc7.UUCP>
Reply-To: dmm@calmasd.UUCP (David M. MacMillan)
Distribution: net
Organization: Calma Company, San Diego, CA
Lines: 24


     I'm just working through back-postings in nlang, so please
pardon me if this is redundant.  The terms "GO" and "NO GO"
are legitimate machining and manufacturing terms.  A "GO" gauge
and a companion "NO GO" gauge together bracket the tolerances of
a particular piece.  (They are often combined into one instrument.)
Thus they permit a quick test to see if a part has been 
manufactured within tolerance.

     I have seen training films on the subject from the 1940's,
but do not know the ultimate origin of the terms.  (The use of
such gauges may in fact predate these terms.)  Since these gauges
are closely connected with interchangeable parts, a good place
to look might be the beginnings of mass production (the Colt
arms factory?).  The development of modern machine tools 
(Whitworth, the 1830's, and all that) might be another source.

     From an information processing point of view, it is interesting
that these terms which originated in the static measurement of a
part were adopted for the dynamic control of a process (e.g.
"all systems GO").


                                  David M. MacMillan