On Sun, 7 Apr 2002 19:24:33 Joseph B. Reid wrote: ... >Would Ma Be be happier if the metre was defined by "Light travels in vacuum >299 792 458 metres during a time interval of one second"?... > Good try, Joe, but I'm afraid the above would also NOT be acceptable. While it would address the fraction aspect it would continue to be silly. Usually one would require to define what a UNIT of the measurement in question is! In other words, it would solve one aspect while creating a much bigger problem.
So... Nah... Get rid of using the second and stick with some definition that would point *directly/straight* to a length size just like it was with the previous definition. Marcus Is your boss reading your email? ....Probably Keep your messages private by using Lycos Mail. Sign up today at http://mail.lycos.com
