The metric system sucks
in [Physics]
|
Prev: connecting Poincare-Luminet Dodecahedral Space with AP-reverse concavity #380 Correcting Math
Next: Hiding random?
From: toby on 12 Feb 2010 18:24 On Feb 3, 12:04 am, "Heidi Graw" <hg...(a)telus.net> wrote: > >"Bart Goddard" <goddar...(a)netscape.net> wrote in message > >news:Xns9D13CCB0DF19Egoddardbenetscapenet(a)74.209.136.81... > > "Heidi Graw" <hg...(a)telus.net> wrote in > >news:tC4an.64378$PH1.2203(a)edtnps82: > > >> He prefers the metric. It's easier to learn and easier to use. > >> I also prefer metric for those same reasons. > > > Which is also a reason for choosing Cosmetology school > > over Engineering. > > > B. > > <chuckle> ...and lots of folks do just that. A good question > to ask is, "How do you get the most using the least amount of > energy?" If cosmetology earns one an adequate living, and it > requires less energy and effort, then why not? Because you'd rather be doing something else? > > Haven't you noticed that those who earn the most conserve > the most energy? Being an energy efficient person can be > rather quite profitable. ;-) > > Heidi
From: Andrew Usher on 12 Feb 2010 18:25 On Feb 12, 12:02 pm, mstem...(a)walkabout.empros.com (Michael Stemper) wrote: > In article <joo1n55f1f4is2notocvi6elvku27ar...(a)4ax.com>, Matt <30d...(a)net.net> writes: > >On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 08:39:37 -0500, jmfbahciv wrote: > >Electricity and fields don't care what units we use. > > >The engineers who design the equipment may care; or they may be more > >interested in the project than a religious war about systems of units. > > Of course, all electrical engineering units are metric. Volts are > joules/coulomb, and a joule is a kg-m^2/s^2. An Ampere is (or was) > defined in terms of Newtons of force per meter on conductors separated > by one meter. The electrical units, as I mentioned in my essay (Secs. IV, VII), can't be called fully metric as they depend on one arbitrary unit that wasn't originally metric. Of course, then, SI co-opted them to hide that. Anyway, that comment you replied to related to the invention of the Internet. The creation of the Internet was a software and systems issues, and did not depend at all on the units the hardware was made in. > >They may dismiss the metric crusaders as noise. > > Electrical engineering is already metric. We look with pity upon our > brother (and sister) mechanical engineers, who through no fault of > their own, still need to deal with BTUs and Farenheit degrees. Because obviously non-metric units can't possibly be suitable for anything. Meters, kilograms, joules, Kelvin were handed down on Mount Sinai according to you people! Andrew Usher
From: Andrew Usher on 12 Feb 2010 18:27 On Feb 12, 11:49 am, Osmo R <ok...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Seriously, do people who write these think think at all? > Traditionally one would have needed exact measures of mass/weight > when one traded things. The buyer is interested in getting enough > of the stuff he buys and the seller is interested in getting > enough the valuable metal used as money. The issues is about > amount or mass. The forces are irrelevant even though the scales > used gravity as means of comparing the masses. Causing and > responding to gravity is one of the two main properties of mass. > Therefore the fact that one uses gravity as means to compare > masses does not mean one is not comparing masses. A pound of > silver is same at the sea level as it is in the mountains. > > I do not think the concept of force was well formulated before > Newton, so the concept of pound being originally force is strange. Add to this the fact that the government defines the pound in terms of the kilogram, not the Newton. This is pretty much a summary of what Nygaard had on his page. Of course, it originally comes from pro-metric propaganda - the English system has no proper unit for mass, horrors! Andrew Usher
From: toby on 12 Feb 2010 18:27 On Feb 3, 5:38 am, "Heidi Graw" <hg...(a)telus.net> wrote: > "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...(a)vianet.on.ca> wrote in messagenews:2d8ea280-58fb-41da-900d-8c6777b446c6(a)n33g2000yqb.googlegroups.com... > > >Ken wrote: > > I build houses, and very much respect an old 1940's decision > > to base housing construction on 4" x 4" square, leading to > > such things like 4'x8' plywood... > > ...that is 5/8" thick... > > >... and 2"x4" studs, and much more. > > ...like those 2"x10"? > > > That decision resulted in building high quality low cost homes, > > that fit together with a minimum of customized thinking. > > Well...instead of building by the square foot, you could build > by the square metre. > > > The base 12 of the foot is divisible by 2,3,4,6, the number > > 10 cannot be divided by those without screeeching decimals. > > 2.5 doesn't involve all that much screeching...no worse than > trying to finangle something that is 3/16" of whatever. > > > > > My wife finds MEtric to be annoying, when cooking, when table > > spoons, ozs etc work fine. Cups, quarts and gallons works ok. > > I use metric measures and metric recipes. Works just fine. > > > > > In Canada kms are too small cuz miles is what a big country > > needs, 60 mph is a mile a minute. > > Hey, I like driving 120 km/hr down the freeway. In my experience, that would make you the slowest driver on Ontario highways... > It gives me > the impression I'm going much faster than I'm actually driving. ;-) > > > I figure ya gotta be bi-measureable now a days. > > Yes, it comes in handy knowing both, especially when it > involves cross-border trade and tourism with the US. 70F also > sounds a lot warmer than 20C. No wonder the Americans > think Canadians live in igloos. > > > Common units work extremely well, but if you want your house > > built in MeTric I'll add 25% to the cost, and you've got it. > > No need. I wouldn't be hiring you anyway. My husband > built the house I designed. Custom? Very...and rather > quite unique. > > Take care, > Heidi <...whose house is a mishmash of German metric and British standard.
From: Andrew Usher on 12 Feb 2010 18:33
On Feb 12, 8:02 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > > My assertion is not a metaphor here. It's entirely literal: Americans > > now feel they must apologise for having a 'backward' system of > > measure. > > I'm an American and I have never felt the need to apologize. Well, that's because you're a woman and so never feel the need to apologise. > Why do you? _I_ don't, obviously! Andrew Usher |