The metric system sucks
in [Math]
|
Prev: connecting Luminet-Poincare Dodecahedral Space with AP-Reverse -Concavity for 10% #379 Correcting Math
Next: Cantor's Diagonal?
From: Paul Ciszek on 4 Feb 2010 03:56 In article <2d8ea280-58fb-41da-900d-8c6777b446c6(a)n33g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, Ken S. Tucker <dynamics(a)vianet.on.ca> 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 and 2"x4" studs, Which are nowhere near 2" by 4", last I checked. -- Please reply to: | "Evolution is a theory that accounts pciszek at panix dot com | for variety, not superiority." Autoreply has been disabled | -- Joan Pontius
From: Paul Ciszek on 4 Feb 2010 04:04 In article <UI3an.64365$PH1.41676(a)edtnps82>, Heidi Graw <hgraw(a)telus.net> wrote: > >...and mechanics in Canada use two sets of tools, one for metric >and one for non-metric. Car parts are now made all over the world >and are combined into one vehicle. This means certain parts require >metric tools and others not. It's a massively confusing thing to work >on a globally manufactured vehicle. Btw, my own husband prefers >the metric system. I thought the only auto manufacturers still using imperial units were American, and most of them (as in, 2/3) went bankrupt recently... -- Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice." Autoreply is disabled |
From: Paul Ciszek on 4 Feb 2010 04:09 In article <hkbrpu$e0j$1(a)news-int2.gatech.edu>, Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18(a)verizon.invalid> wrote: >On 02/02/2010 11:53 PM, Andrew Usher wrote: > >>> How often do you measure stuff in terms of 10^21? >> >> Not often, I suppose. But how do you specify, say, the mass of the >> Earth? > >Why would people use that in everyday usage? I happen to be reading this thread in sci.geo.geology, FWIW. -- Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice." Autoreply is disabled |
From: Aatu Koskensilta on 4 Feb 2010 04:11 Marshall <marshall.spight(a)gmail.com> writes: > Also your correction, while a fine and justified one, leaves > completely intact my point, which was a defense from an entirely > unjust slur against American and British engineering. Well, it wasn't my intention to cast doubt on the awesome awesomeness of American and British engineering. The bee's knees and cat's whiskers, they are. -- Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta(a)uta.fi) "Wovon man nicht sprechan kann, dar�ber muss man schweigen" - Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
From: Paul Ciszek on 4 Feb 2010 04:14
In article <Xns9D149007B59A1goddardbenetscapenet(a)74.209.136.91>, Bart Goddard <goddardbe(a)netscape.net> wrote: > >> So, while the rest of the world marches on, Americans >> are certainly free to remain behind. > >Right, people who use your preferred system are "ahead" >while anyone else is "behind". This is an odd definition >of "ahead" and "behind", and is, in fact, just a >restatement of the original, unsupported thesis. No, a nation of people who insist that the world is only 6,000 years old, and refuse to teach their teenage children anything about birth control or even the most basic facts about human reproduction are behind. -- Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice." Autoreply is disabled | |