Shavian eGroup Archive Browser

Odd. We're the last superpower standing too...

--Star

--- Ethan <ethanl@...> wrote:

> Hugh Birkenhead wrote:
>
> > It's nothing to do with freedom! If you're SENSIBLE and think on an
> > international level, you'll bite the bullet and switch to metric!
>
> I'm not sensible, I guess, preferring to think of myself as an
> American
> and not an "internationalist". I use our system of measurements
> because
> I am free to do so, unlike so many people who are literally forced to
>
> use the SystC(m Internationale, or be found in violation of the law.
> I
> also use it because it is the standard here, and we are not like the
> rest of the world - we are unique as a nation.
> --
> B7p?0p?p?)p?/ - Ethan
>


=====
http://www.photobucket.com/albums/v382/StarRaven

Numfar! Do the Dance of Joy!



_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now.
http://messenger.yahoo.com


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/mx3olB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.770 / Virus Database: 517 - Release Date: 27/09/2004

Ethan:

This is not a question of freedom. It is a question of utility. Of course you are free to use any system of measurement you like. Why not research and resurrect the system the Mayans used? No doubt it was fascinating, and it was used in America centuries before the system imported by the colonists from Britain. Oh, I forgot. The Mayans didn’t really trade with countries around the world did they so it was not as important what system they used.

As an aside: In the last year, I have been reading the collected writings of the Wright brothers regarding their development of the first heavier-than-air conveyance. It was interesting to note that in their research and experiments they used the metric system at times as well as the traditional system. This was in 1901-1903. So here we are one hundred years later still engaged in the same stupid argument that Americans shouldn’t have to change.

In my opinion, the main point of the metric system is that it uses a system built on the base of the prevalent number system for humans – base 10. If the world used base 12 (for which there are proponents), then I would promote a base 12 measurement system as that would make more sense. The particular units that the system is based upon are immaterial. Whether they are related to anything terrestrial is immaterial. The fact that calculations using the metric system are much simpler than our traditional system is what is important. It simply makes no sense to make measuring things more difficult than need be.

The thing that really puzzles me is why humans are so resistant to change even when the particular change being promoted is clearly a big improvement over the traditional method of doing something. Sometimes it can be argued that the change may not be an improvement, but with the metric system, there is no doubt.

The most recent example I am aware of involving our insistence in using our traditional system was about three years ago when a satellite to Mars (I believe) was lost as a result of conversion from metrics to the traditional system. The reason: someone translated the distance from the planet from kilometers into miles for the media (because it is naturally assumed that United States citizens have no clue what a kilometer is.) When the time came for an a rocket burn to adjust the path of the satellite to insure proper entry into orbit around Mars, the figure in miles was input into the computer as if it were kilometers. The result was an incorrect calculation of the time the rocket needed to fire so that the satellite crashed onto the surface of the planet. The cost to the United States taxpayers was $120 million -- another victory for maintaining our current system of measurement.

Near the end of the 19th century, Alexander Graham Bell testified before Congress regarding the efficacy of the metric system. That did no good either.


Paige

-----Original Message-----
From: Ethan [mailto:ethanl@...]
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 4:00 PM
To: shavian@...
Subject: Re: [shavian] Re: SI

Hugh Birkenhead wrote:

> It's nothing to do with freedom! If you're SENSIBLE and think on an
> international level, you'll bite the bullet and switch to metric!

I'm not sensible, I guess, preferring to think of myself as an American
and not an "internationalist". I use our system of measurements because
I am free to do so, unlike so many people who are literally forced to
use the Systèm Internationale, or be found in violation of the law. I
also use it because it is the standard here, and we are not like the
rest of the world - we are unique as a nation.
--
·???????? - Ethan




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129771n2a/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=groups/S=1705213030:HM/EXP=1097035109/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http://companion.yahoo.com>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=groups/S=:HM/A=2128215/rand=439296250>

________________________________

Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@... <mailto:shavian-unsubscribe@...?subject=Unsubscribe>

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.770 / Virus Database: 517 - Release Date: 27/09/2004

On Oct 5, 2004, at 05:58, Paige Gabhart wrote:

<<SNIP>>


The fact that calculations using the metric system are much simpler than our traditional system is what is important. It simply makes no sense to make measuring things more difficult than need be.




The assumption is that measuring using the metric system is easier. That is not always the case. You can see that is measuring an atmosphere. Then there is the fact that one degree Fahrenheit has a smaller range than one degree Celsius. This means that if one were attempting to keep degree measurements in whole units using Fahrenheit give you a more accurate measurement.





The thing that really puzzles me is why humans are so resistant to change even when the particular change being promoted is clearly a big improvement over the traditional method of doing something. Sometimes it can be argued that the change may not be an improvement, but with the metric system, there is no doubt.



Whether changing to the metric system is an improvement can be debated. Certainly it is easier to determine how many smaller units fit into a larger unit since it is base-10. Certainly it would be easier to trade with someone who is already using metric measurement. However, these do not make switching to metric a guaranteed improvement.

--
·???????? ·???????????? Scott Harrison PGP Key ID: 0x0f0b5b86

I have bad credit, I am self employed and I
was able to re-finance at a really low rate.
I am saving hundreds a month
Just fill out this simple FREE form for a quick quote

simply copy and paste this link into your web browser now!
http://diplender.net/?partid=rcc1

Save more of your hard earned money
Raise the quality of your family's life.
The time is now, be sure not to miss out.
Find out why you should act now.

simply copy and paste this exact link into your web browser.
http://diplender.net/?partid=rcc1

This email was sent because you joined our group.
If you do not wish to recieve any emails, unsubscribe.
by sending a mail here shavian-unsubscribe@...





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/mx3olB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.770 / Virus Database: 517 - Release Date: 27/09/2004

Whether changing to the metric system is an improvement can be debated. Certainly it is easier to determine how many smaller units fit into a larger unit since it is base-10. Certainly it would be easier to trade with someone who is already using metric measurement. However, these do not make switching to metric a guaranteed improvement.



Changing to the metric system is definitely an improvement. The UK decimalized its existing currency for the reason that base 10 is the easiest system to work with. Why would they have gone to such lengths if there hadn’t been promised improvements of use?



And on the question of trading with others already using metric, that would mean the whole world, since every other country internationally (bar the few mentioned in an earlier post) uses the metric system for all major commercial purposes.



Does the US like having to convert everything when trading with everyone else around the world?



Hugh B


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=1298ojf28/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=groups/S=1705213030:HM/EXP=1097155442/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http://companion.yahoo.com>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=groups/S=:HM/A=2128215/rand=914688195>

________________________________

Yahoo! Groups Links


* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@... <mailto:shavian-unsubscribe@...?subject=Unsubscribe>

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.770 / Virus Database: 517 - Release Date: 27/09/2004



---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.770 / Virus Database: 517 - Release Date: 27/09/2004

Re-finance now, even with bad-credit!

*Best Re-finance Rate for credit challenged.
*Best Customer Service
*Lowest Interest-Rates in Years
*SAVE $100-$400 per month

Our easy application only takes a minute.

http://lenderto.com/?partid=rcc2

I posted this on shavian, if you dont want to be a member anymore just email shavian-unsubscribe@...





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/mx3olB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.770 / Virus Database: 517 - Release Date: 27/09/2004

On Oct 6, 2004, at 15:23, Hugh Birkenhead wrote:



Whether changing to the metric system is an improvement can be debated. Certainly it is easier to determine how many smaller units fit into a larger unit since it is base-10. Certainly it would be easier to trade with someone who is already using metric measurement. However, these do not make switching to metric a guaranteed improvement.



Changing to the metric system is definitely an improvement. The UK decimalized its existing currency for the reason that base 10 is the easiest system to work with. Why would they have gone to such lengths if there hadn’t been promised improvements of use?




This is a very limited example. Yes, simplifying from 240 pennies to a pound to 100 pence to a pound should make life easier. Though the concept of an auction charging the sale in guineas but paying the seller in pounds to take their commission seems quite quaint to me. :-)





And on the question of trading with others already using metric, that would mean the whole world, since every other country internationally (bar the few mentioned in an earlier post) uses the metric system for all major commercial purposes.



Does the US like having to convert everything when trading with everyone else around the world?



I have no idea what happens when people engage in trade around the world since that is not within my area of expertise. I do note that many commodities are not traded (or I should say measured) in metric measurements -- gold in ounces, oil in barrels, various things in bushels, etc.

Note that just because a system uses 10 units to make a larger unit does not necessarily make it easier to use when used for measuring real world objects. Yes, the math is quite easy to perform because people only have to learn the prefixes for the various measurements to be able to determine what math to do. And the prefixes work across all the different types of measurements -- gram, meter, liter, etc. However, as a real simple example 1 atmosphere is a really easy concept to convey, versus 101.325 kilopascals.

--
·???????? ·???????????? Scott Harrison PGP Key ID: 0x0f0b5b86

--- In shavian@..., Scott Harrison <scott@m...> wrote:
> I have no idea what happens when people engage in trade
around the
> world since that is not within my area of expertise. I do note
that
> many commodities are not traded (or I should say measured) in
metric
> measurements -- gold in ounces, oil in barrels, various things in
> bushels, etc.

These things have just hung onto their traditional measurements.
The U.S. also buys more oil than any other nation; so, if we want to
buy it in barrels, everybody who produces it wants to sell it in
barrels. Everybody else gets stuck with that. And I'm not even
certain that the barrels used for oil are standard barrels. But I
don't know how much a barrel is, anyway. Most people just don't use
them in everyday measurements.


> Note that just because a system uses 10 units to make a
larger unit
> does not necessarily make it easier to use when used for measuring
real
> world objects. Yes, the math is quite easy to perform because
people
> only have to learn the prefixes for the various measurements to be
able
> to determine what math to do. And the prefixes work across all
the
> different types of measurements -- gram, meter, liter, etc.
However,
> as a real simple example 1 atmosphere is a really easy concept to
> convey, versus 101.325 kilopascals.

That's true. I much prefer 1. But if you're using gas laws, you
don't have to convert units. If you start with kP, you keep kP.
And you have to remember, that if you change the unit for pressure,
you have to change the constant. As far as the math, I prefer to
work in Torrs (the same as milibars, I believe). Of course, I would
rather not do the math at all. That's not really my area.





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/mx3olB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.770 / Virus Database: 517 - Release Date: 27/09/2004

Paige Gabhart wrote:
> Ethan:
>
>
>
> This is not a question of freedom. It is a question of utility. Of
> course you are free to use any system of measurement you like. Why not
> research and resurrect the system the Mayans used? No doubt it was
> fascinating, and it was used in America centuries before the system
> imported by the colonists from Britain. Oh, I forgot. The Mayans
> didn’t really trade with countries around the world did they so it was
> not as important what system they used.

As you said, we are free to use either (or any) system we want. In
fact, both SI and standard systems are officially recognized by our
government. This is not the issue, though - the issue seems to be the
fact that our government has not *forced* the American people to use
*only* metric measurements, because we Americans value our freedom too much.

Oh, and Mayan measurements don't have over five centuries of common use
in this land, which is why we use the American standard system rather
than the Mayan one, and also one reason why SI measurements are less common.

> As an aside: In the last year, I have been reading the collected
> writings of the Wright brothers regarding their development of the first
> heavier-than-air conveyance. It was interesting to note that in their
> research and experiments they used the metric system at times as well as
> the traditional system. This was in 1901-1903. So here we are one
> hundred years later still engaged in the same stupid argument that
> Americans shouldn’t have to change.

I myself occasionally use metric measurements when necessary. I have
that choice. I still prefer to use American measurements whenever the
standards are based on them. Let me give a couple examples.

Land in the US is surveyed in square mile sections. Each square mile
contains four quarter sections, which are 1/2 mile square. Each quarter
section is further divided into four eighth sections, which are 1/4 mile
square. Each eighth section contains 40 acres, which can be easily
divided into 2 twenty acre plots, or 4 ten acre plots, or 8 five acre
plots. What happens if suddenly everybody is forced to start using
hectares or square kilometers instead? Confusion!

How about another one. Most airports around the world conform to
standards set out by the International Civil Aviation Organization, or
ICAO. These standards assure that pilots will not be confused by
strange systems whenever they leave the country. One of their standards
sets the spacing of approach lights along the last 900 meters of the
approach before the runway threshold. They are placed every 30 meters,
in line with the runway centerline. Cross-bar lights can be placed at
150 meter intervals, beginning 150 meters out from the runway threshold
starting point. Using the system typical of many airports in Britain,
Europe, and other parts of the world, called the Calvert system, lights
are placed in the center, beginning at the runway and working out, at
30, 60, 90, 120, 150*, 180, 210, 240, 270, 300*, 330, 360, 390, 420,
450*, 480, 510, 540, 570, 600*, 630, 660, 690, 720, 750*, 780, 810, 840,
870, 900. * marks the location of cross-bar lights. This seems
complicated, right? Now let's convert the same measurements from meters
to feet. The lights are now placed at 100, 200, 300, 400, 500*, 600,
700, 800, 900, 1000*, 1100, 1200, 1300, 1400, 1500*, 1600, 1700, 1800,
1900, 2000*, 2100, 2200, 2300, 2400, 2500*, 2600, 2700, 2800, 2900, 3000
feet. Sound easier?

Why do people torture themselves with the wrong measurement for the job?
It works both ways. Ask the typical American to go to the store and
pick up a 67.6 fl. oz. bottle of Coca-Cola, and he'll give you a strange
look! But ask him to pick up a 2 liter of Coke, and he'll know exactly
what you're talking about.

>
>
>
> In my opinion, the main point of the metric system is that it uses a
> system built on the base of the prevalent number system for humans –
> base 10. If the world used base 12 (for which there are proponents),
> then I would promote a base 12 measurement system as that would make
> more sense.

Personally, I like base 16, or hexadecimal. This lovely number can be
divided evenly by 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16. Plus you can count from 0 to 255
(0 to ff) with only two digits. The duodecimal (base 12) system is
likewise easy to work with, and has advantages over other systems. The
decimal system, however, requires more computation and is less accurate.
Try to state the value "1/3" (one third) in decimal notation!

> The particular units that the system is based upon are
> immaterial. Whether they are related to anything terrestrial is
> immaterial. The fact that calculations using the metric system are much
> simpler than our traditional system is what is important. It simply
> makes no sense to make measuring things more difficult than need be.

Neither makes it any more sense to use the wrong measurement for the job.

>
>
>
> The thing that really puzzles me is why humans are so resistant to
> change even when the particular change being promoted is clearly a big
> improvement over the traditional method of doing something. Sometimes
> it can be argued that the change may not be an improvement, but with the
> metric system, there is no doubt.

It's not always an improvement, in every situation.

>
>
>
> The most recent example I am aware of involving our insistence in using
> our traditional system was about three years ago when a satellite to
> Mars (I believe) was lost as a result of conversion from metrics to the
> traditional system. The reason: someone translated the distance from
> the planet from kilometers into miles for the media (because it is
> naturally assumed that United States citizens have no clue what a
> kilometer is.) When the time came for an a rocket burn to adjust the
> path of the satellite to insure proper entry into orbit around Mars, the
> figure in miles was input into the computer as if it were kilometers.
> The result was an incorrect calculation of the time the rocket needed
> to fire so that the satellite crashed onto the surface of the planet.
> The cost to the United States taxpayers was $120 million -- another
> victory for maintaining our current system of measurement.

Human error was responsible, *not* one of our two current systems of
measurement.

>
> Near the end of the 19^th century, Alexander Graham Bell testified
> before Congress regarding the efficacy of the metric system. That did
> no good either.

Not much has changed since then.

>
>
> Paige

--
·???????? - Ethan


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/mx3olB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.773 / Virus Database: 520 - Release Date: 05/10/2004

Hugh Birkenhead wrote:

> Changing to the metric system is definitely an improvement. The UK
> decimalized its existing currency for the reason that base 10 is the
> easiest system to work with. Why would they have gone to such lengths if
> there hadn’t been promised improvements of use?
>
>
>
> And on the question of trading with others already using metric, that
> would mean *the whole world*, since every other country internationally
> (bar the few mentioned in an earlier post) uses the metric system for
> all major commercial purposes.
>
>
>
> Does the US like having to convert everything when trading with everyone
> else around the world?
>
>
>
> Hugh B

As has been stated, not all measurements are in metric. Not even
foreign trade is always done in metric measurements. Flexibility is
better than rigidly adhering to one system.

BTW, what do you call British money less than a pound? We have 100
cents to a dollar, 50 cents to a half-dollar, 25 cents to a quarter, ten
cents to a dime, five cents to a nickle, one cent to a penny.

--
·???????? - Ethan


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/mx3olB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.773 / Virus Database: 520 - Release Date: 05/10/2004