I just happened to come across a Popular science link and found all the articles in SI. I was so taken aback that I had to back up and see if this really was Popular Science. I’ve not looked at any print editions and from Marks comments they appear to be Wombat only.
It may be possible to read the magazine online only though I’ve not checked into that. Mike On 23 Jan 2014, at 15:23, mechtly, eugene a <mech...@illinois.edu> wrote: > Mark (Henschel), > > The American Society for Nondestructive Testing (ASNT) is publishing a new > industry Handbook; Aerospace NDT. > > The editor at Boeing in Seattle is Dr. Richard H. Bossi. > > The editor at ASNT is Patrick O. Moore, who sometimes contributes to this > USMA list. > > Patrick has invited me to verify the conversions to SI Units of Measurement > in draft Chapters of Aerospace NDT. > > You will be pleased to know that numbers + units are expressed *first* in SI, > and second in units outside the SI! > > There are some problems with this "duality"; e.g. three significant digits > increasing to four digits of implied precision, > and graphs with only unit markers outside the SI. > > Is "duality" a problem in recent issues of Popular Science? Which issue did > you examine? Which issue did Mike examine? > > Gene Mechtly > From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [owner-u...@colostate.edu] on behalf of Mark > Henschel [mwhensch...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2014 9:49 AM > To: U.S. Metric Association > Cc: U.S. Metric Association > Subject: [USMA:53519] Re: Popular Science > > Mike: > I don't know what you have been smoking, but I went to the book store and > looked through the latest issue of Popular Science. Where do you see the > metric units? The whole thing was in inch pound. They even used pounds when > they should have used tons. > I remember writing letters to Popular Science years ago asking them to use > SI, and I was hoping you were right. > Sadly, even magazines like "The Futurist" still uses inch pound. One would > think we would use SI in the future, right? > Years ago back I even got a response from an editor at Discovery Magazine, > who was convinced Discovery would gradually move into a metric future. But > that never happened either. > > Wish I could see more metric usage in science and technology magazines. About > the only thing that's metric is the cigarette ads, back when they advertised > cigarettes. They were advertised as 100 millimeters long. > > When I was in Canada, all the weather reports were metric, and they even > pronounced kilometer correctly. A bit of hope for a metric advocate since all > of that happened in my lifetime. > > Mark > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Michael Payne <metricmik...@gmail.com> wrote: > Popular Science in the US used to be entirely non metric, but looking at it > today every article I’ve clicked on has been 100% metric. > > http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2013-09/worlds-tallest-skyscrapers-have-insane-amount-unoccupied-space?src=related&con=outbrain&obref=obinsite > > The above article on skyscrapers is interesting with heights in metres. > > Mike Payne > >
