Jim Elwell wrote in USMA 17748: >I did NOT forget how other countries or industries ended up metricating, >but that is not germane to the premise Adrian posted: he said "if ALL >countries were IFP." > >If you disagree with my conclusion to that premise, Marcus, then are you >saying that some country (or industry) in the world should switch to some >more rational time measurement system, the rest of the world be damned? > >I stand by my statement: switching to a different measurement system >contrary to everyone else in the world is foolish. If you disagree, do you >have some kind of metric clock in your house?
A principal reason that the metric system was developed in France was that the 'weights' and measures there were such a mess, varying from one city to another. Merchants bought in large units and sold in small ones. In Europe they varied from country to country. The original draft of the metric system, in 1793, only involved length, area, volume and mass. A decimal division of time was attempted and decimal clocks were constructed. Since the rest of the world was workimg with the 24 hour day, the decimal idea was dropped in 1795. The units involving the second were not defined until the 19th century. Britain did not feel the need of reform, although there was probably a lot of chauvinism in the British attitude. England had uniform "weights" and measures from 1215. Britrain's response to the metric system was the introduction of the imperial gallon, which was the volume of 10 pounds of water at 65�F (?) The division of the right angle into 100 grads, grades, or gons, was only partially successful. It makes life slightly easier for surveyors, but machinists stick with 360� because it is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 15, 18, 20, 24, 30, 36, 40, 45, 60, 72, 90, 120, and 180. Joseph B.Reid 17 Glebe Road West Toronto M5P 1C8 TEL. 416-486-6071
