The metric system sucks
in [Physics]
|
Prev: connecting Poincare-Luminet Dodecahedral Space with AP-reverse concavity #380 Correcting Math
Next: Hiding random?
From: Mark Borgerson on 4 Feb 2010 22:29 In article <gerry-4EAAE0.12594505022010(a)news.eternal-september.org>, gerry(a)maths.mq.edi.ai.i2u4email says... > In article <f7jmm5trftkja8ikb1r2lcu6gmthcptdpg(a)4ax.com>, > Antares 531 <gordonlrDELETE(a)swbell.net> wrote: > > > On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 09:09:55 +1100, Gerry Myerson > > <gerry(a)maths.mq.edi.ai.i2u4email> wrote: > > > > >In article <hkeig101lnd(a)news3.newsguy.com>, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> > > >wrote: > > > > > >> I grew up in the US and cannot think in metric terms so I > > >> always have to do a conversion to make guesstimates. > > >> For some strange reason, kilometers seem to take "longer" > > >> to drive than miles when I drove from Buffalo to Port > > >> Huron, Michigan. :-) > > > > > >Probably because of those metric Canadian hours, what with > > >each one being 100 minutes long. > > > > > When are they likely to change over to a metric week of 10 days? > > I believe that idea was tried and found wanting in the earliest days > of the metric system in Revolutionary France. Those pesky days, months and years---are, unfortunately, tied to the orbital and rotational periods of the Earth and Moon. Those intervals have, so far, not been easy to change! ;-) Lots of science fiction novels have proposed clocks and calendars with more decimal-like intervals. At some point, though, they have to define a small integral unit of time or distance. The meter started out as one ten-millionth of the circumference of the earth along a meridian passing through Paris. Just as logical as measuring Longitude from Greenwich, I suppose. ;-) Mark Borgerson
From: Matt on 4 Feb 2010 22:30 On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 17:18:26 +0000 (UTC), Paul Ciszek wrote: > >In article <Xns9D15464AACB40goddardbenetscapenet(a)74.209.136.93>, >Bart Goddard <goddardbe(a)netscape.net> wrote: >>nospam(a)nospam.com (Paul Ciszek) wrote in >>news:hke1bi$n19$6(a)reader2.panix.com: >> >>> What is the density of water in pounds per cubic foot? >> >>As usual, the decimaphile offers us a calculation that >>1. is already known and 2. nobody ever does. Against > >If you mean non-technical people, they get through most of their >lives without doing any calculations at all. Engineers, on the >other hand, have to deal with the density of water quite a bit. Things >get submerged in it, containers are built empty and later filled >with it, it can end up standing on the roofs of buildings if you >didn't design them right, etc. I think you ascribe too much apathy about units of measure to non-technical people. They outnumber techies by a large factor. And they have need to calculate for various reasons: cost per unit weight, fuel per unit distance, cost per unit of household energy, etc. None of which are made easier by using metric units. Who came up with early units of measure, like the cubit? It wasn't some scientist in a lab. The cubit was quite anthropocentric and was arguably superior to either the foot or the meter for everyday use by humans.
From: J. Clarke on 4 Feb 2010 22:36 Bart Goddard wrote: > Mark Borgerson <mborgerson(a)comcast.net> wrote in > news:MPG.25d525fa77809083989a71(a)news.eternal-september.org: > >>> I must point out that the normal word is 'decimalisation'. >>> Decimation is something quite different ;) >>> >> Especially if you're a legionaire in a misbehaving Roman Legion! ;-) >> >> I was a bit hasty in following the lead of the person to whom >> I responded: >> >> "It is a fact that in almost all real calculations in >> English units, one unit is chosen and it is decimated." >> >> After you've done that, do you only have 9 units left? ;-) > > "Decimalization" isn't the normal word. Just read the > newspapers. Indeed, the uproar (much of it comedic) > in the UK over decimation (their word) You do understand, do you not, that they are using "decimation" for its humorous effect. Decimation, since you seem unfamiliar with it, is the practice, which was common in the Roman Empire, of killing one person out of every ten in a recalcitrant military unit or barbarian village as an object lesson to the rest. > of the monetary > system is an admission that decimation of the U.S. > measuring system would be quite painful. Are we > _sure_ it's worth it? > > B.
From: Heidi Graw on 5 Feb 2010 00:15 >"Ostap S. B. M. Bender Jr." <ostap_bender_1900(a)hotmail.com> wrote in >message news:e73456da-44c3-46d8-bb58-( >Ostap wrote: > How can you not see that all science - especially Evolution - is a > leftist plot?! Only leftists evolved from apes. REAL Americans evolved > from clay, as the Bible tells us. ....and REAL Germanic types, such as I, were hewn from logs of wood as the Eddas tell us. If Americans are allowed their invisible friend, then surely I can be allowed mine. LOL... Take care, Heidi > > > > >
From: Mike Dworetsky on 5 Feb 2010 01:58
Mark Borgerson wrote: > In article <gerry-4EAAE0.12594505022010(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > gerry(a)maths.mq.edi.ai.i2u4email says... >> In article <f7jmm5trftkja8ikb1r2lcu6gmthcptdpg(a)4ax.com>, >> Antares 531 <gordonlrDELETE(a)swbell.net> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 05 Feb 2010 09:09:55 +1100, Gerry Myerson >>> <gerry(a)maths.mq.edi.ai.i2u4email> wrote: >>> >>>> In article <hkeig101lnd(a)news3.newsguy.com>, jmfbahciv >>>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I grew up in the US and cannot think in metric terms so I >>>>> always have to do a conversion to make guesstimates. >>>>> For some strange reason, kilometers seem to take "longer" >>>>> to drive than miles when I drove from Buffalo to Port >>>>> Huron, Michigan. :-) >>>> >>>> Probably because of those metric Canadian hours, what with >>>> each one being 100 minutes long. >>>> >>> When are they likely to change over to a metric week of 10 days? >> >> I believe that idea was tried and found wanting in the earliest days >> of the metric system in Revolutionary France. > > Those pesky days, months and years---are, unfortunately, tied > to the orbital and rotational periods of the Earth and Moon. Those > intervals have, so far, not been easy to change! ;-) > > Lots of science fiction novels have proposed clocks and calendars > with more decimal-like intervals. At some point, though, they > have to define a small integral unit of time or distance. > > The meter started out as one ten-millionth of the circumference of > the earth along a meridian passing through Paris. Just as logical > as measuring Longitude from Greenwich, I suppose. ;-) Not the full circumference, but the length of the 90-degree arc from pole to equator. The decision to base longitude from the Greenwich meridian was at least reached by an international agreement after long negotiations, and was done to reduce navigational confusion and the cost of carrying multiple copies of charts around in every ship. At the time the (serious) choice was between Washington (US Naval Observatory meridian), Greenwich Observatory meridian, and Paris Observatory meridian. -- Mike Dworetsky (Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply) |