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: Andrew Usher on 2 Feb 2010 20:44 On Feb 2, 6:47 pm, "Heidi Graw" <hg...(a)telus.net> wrote: > Btw, my own husband prefers > the metric system. And why should his opinion matter, if he hasn't looked at it from the perspective I have? Andrew Usher
From: Heidi Graw on 2 Feb 2010 20:45 >"Frogwatch" <dbohara(a)mindspring.com> wrote in message >news:b743d9a3-3aeb-478e-a827>> >>Heidi had written: >> ...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. >> >> Heidi > Frogwatch wrote: > This evening, I did a calculation of the amount of charge necessary to > levitate a dust particle on thge moon. Using SI units, I could do all > of it in my head because there is then no conversion of pounds of > force to anything else or Volts/foot to some other units. The old > english units are simply stupid and unnatural confusing so many people > that they never like technical subjects. If we went metric, > engineering would be so much motre obvious that we would have more > American engineering students. The old english system simply promotes > stupidity. Which reminds me: It's not known as "German Engineering" for nothing. These top-notch masterminds use the metric system. When was the last time anyone extolled the virtues of American Engineering? Or, British Engineering? As a global customer what sort of engineering might you pick of those three? Heidi
From: Heidi Graw on 2 Feb 2010 20:49 "Andrew Usher" <k_over_hbarc(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:59061f76-2ea5-4dc4-8e76-4065498271ec(a)z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com... > On Feb 2, 6:47 pm, "Heidi Graw" <hg...(a)telus.net> wrote: > >> Btw, my own husband prefers >> the metric system. > > And why should his opinion matter, if he hasn't looked at it from the > perspective I have? > > Andrew Usher As a Canadian he has experience working with both systems. He prefers the metric. It's easier to learn and easier to use. I also prefer metric for those same reasons. Heidi
From: Bart Goddard on 2 Feb 2010 21:02 Frogwatch <dbohara(a)mindspring.com> wrote in news:b743d9a3-3aeb-478e-a827- 94243899e421(a)u41g2000yqe.googlegroups.com: > This evening, I did a calculation of the amount of charge necessary to > levitate a dust particle on thge moon. Using SI units, I could do all > of it in my head because there is then no conversion of pounds of > force to anything else or Volts/foot to some other units. The old > english units are simply stupid and unnatural confusing It seems natural to want to divide units into halves, thirds and fourths. It's not often that a person needs to levitate a dust particle to the moon. But note that it takes more mental effort to divide a meter into thirds than it does a foot. B. -- Cheerfully resisting change since 1959.
From: Bart Goddard on 2 Feb 2010 21:06
Uncle Al <UncleAl0(a)hate.spam.net> wrote in news:4B68CC20.DC152D86 @hate.spam.net: > HEY STOOOPID - tell us how many fluid ounces and how many weight > ounces there are in a cubic mile of water at 39.20 degrees Fahrenheit. > > 10^15 milliliters and 10^15 grams in a km^3 of 4 C water. Hey Genius, what if someone wants to multiply or divide by something besides powers of 10? Note that there is NO reason to compute the number of millilitres in a cubic kilometer of water. You may as well brag that you're a 43-degree wizard in <whatever fantasy game>. B. -- Cheerfully resisting change since 1959. |