[USMA:20366] Re: CALENDAR REFORM - the decimal way

[kilopascal]

2002-06-09   Nobody is against the idea of calendar reform.  But, if that reform entails changing the present SI, then the reform is out of bounds.  As others have mentioned, your suggested change to the metre and second themselves would have a profound change on almost every other unit in existence as most are derived  from these two units.  And that includes the present size of non-SI units, such as the inch, foot , mile, etc.  There are other things you have suggested that show a dis-harmony concerning units, a break from the  harmony already existent in SI.  Such a change as you suggest would disrupt the entire economy of the world for a very long time to come and will be met with utter rejection.  Forget it!!!!!   I do not understand what this nautical kilometre is suppose to be.  First of all, the kilometre is not an actual SI unit.  The actual SI unit is the metre.  The prefix kilo does not create an additional unit, but only scales the metre to allow for the elimination of zeros.  Second, if this is an attempt to be a play on the term nautical mile, then it shows ignorance of the meaning of that term.  There are many different types of miles, (in other words, units using the same name that have no link or relationship to each other) and to distinguish one from another different "prefixes" are attaches.  Nautical is attached to the longer unit (1852 m) to distinguish it from the land mile of 1.609 3444 m.  Your attempt to recreate a copy of a non-SI unit is really an attempt to recreate SI in the image of non-SI.  You want an SI that entails all the bad practices of the present hodge-podge used in the USA.  Bad, very bad idea!   No one would go for it.  Whatever you sent to Madam Valerie Antoine is a waste of time and effort.  She has no power to make any changes, nor can she even suggest hem to those who have the power to do so.  Or would it be in her interest or the interest of others to do so.  Those that do have the power to do so are the BIPM and CGPM.  They see no need to change the name of the present unit kilogram to a non-prefixed name to make the unit more consistent with SI harmony.  If they see no need to do this simple task, what would ever make you think they would consider changing SI from its present form?   You are literally pissing the wind.  If you really want to bring about calendar change, then find a method that will work with the present SI, not radically change it.  Otherwise, no one will take you seriously.  I for sure don't!  We happen to like SI the way it is.....Thank You.   John     ----- Original Message ----- From: BB VIJ To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, 2002-06-08 19:47 Subject: CALENDAR REFORM - the decimal way Hi friends:         Some friends have labeled me saboteur rather than �a friend of metrication�; some other felt my note, a propagandist literature or �shit� of an idea - may good investigative sense prevail upon and I would appreciate, realization to be the keyword. I do invite healthy criticism!     I have now grown beyond discouragement and suggest that �investigative mind� commented upon my base work: Calendar Reform the Decimal Way: OF METRE, ARC-ANGLE AND YEAR COUNT BY WEEKS AND DECIMALISED HOUR OF THE DAY; a document that I recently sent to , to share among mentally alert but greedy educationists. It may be small mouth talking big things but willing to accept and blocked black holes ahead.     Attached document (384 KB) contain a necessary photo that may help understand my attempts for 'Time to Change time & calendar'. BRIJ BHUSHAN VIJ [EMAIL PROTECTED]