Hi Markus and friends:
  This proposal reminds me of my basic intitative "Metric Norms for Time 
Standrard; Standards Engineer, Bureau of Indian Standards; V5 N4;
1971 Oct.-Dec.; pp 58-62---published in Standards Engineer of Indian 
Standards Instition, New Delhi (India)
Brij Bhushan Vij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2108 Henry Court, MAHWAH, NJ, 07430-3805
  Tele: +1(201)684-0191/6696 (care MUNISH VIJ)

>From: "Ma Be" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [USMA:20923] Re: AAT ICAS metric-time initiative
>Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 09:10:29 -0700
>
>John is evidently quite right about the ICAS' proposal being one that would 
>'destroy' key characteristics of the SI system, such as coherence and 
>consistency.
>
>However, if one approaches this as a proposal that would *change* the SI 
>system in this regard, then it would be worthy of consideration (this is 
>evidently wishful thinking...).  So, instead of considering the 'chron' as 
>an "addendum" unit to the SI, I'd propose that it be considered as a 
>*replacement* for the second itself!
>
>But I do have serious reservations about this proposal as it unfortunately 
>does not follow the basic fundamental KISS principle.  It's indeed far too 
>complicated for the Joe Six pack on the street to follow or relate to.
>
>Therefore, Mr. Stone, please take my comments as constructive criticism.  
>I'd simply forget about this business of t, tt, t before, t after, etc.  
>I'd just stick with defining the chron as 0.864 of a second and define time 
>as having 100 000 chrons in a day, write a clock like HH:CCC and get it 
>over with!  Simple, direct to the point.
>
>The trick though starts with changes to the calendar.  I'd vehemently 
>condemn ANY attempt to change the 7-day weekly cycle as it was proven 
>disastrous in the 18th century, and we should NOT make that same mistake 
>again.
>
>Since we're at it, let me propose that you consider a change to the 
>calendar system that would finally address the difficulty in stating time 
>overall as we normally do with any other measurement.  Since we're... 
>"dreaming" here, why not make a proposal that would allow us to finally 
>write time thusly:
>YYYY:M:DD:HH:CCC?
>
>In the above-proposed framework we would have 10 months of 36-37 days (odd 
>months would have odd days, even months would have even days) with 
>corrections made as we do nowadays when it comes to adding leap days.
>
>I'm honestly not sure if we could do better than that...  :-S
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Marcus
>
>On Tue, 9 Jul 2002 18:11:44
>  kilopascal wrote:
> >2002-07-09
> >
> >Ron,
> >
> >Many have come along with ideas on reforming out present system of 
>measuring
> >time.  None have really stuck out as being nothing more than different 
>from
> >our present system.
> >
> >One major flaw in your scheme for calendar reform is that your proposal 
>does
> >not fit coherently within the framework of the International System of 
>Units
> >(SI).  There already is a valid and coherent unit of time within SI.  
>That
> >unit is the second (s).  No other time unit can exist and be a part of 
>SI.
> >Those are the rules.
> >
> >A unit like your Cron would not fit in properly.  SI units relate to each
> >other simply.  That is with a factor of 1:1.  Your Cron would destroy the
> >harmony and coherency of SI.  Therefore, I can't see it ever being 
>accepted.
> >
> >Instead of conceiving new units of time, why not come up with a standard
> >that would be based on the second and be coherent with SI.   Then you 
>will
> >be heading in the right direction.
> >
> >John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Alliance for the Advancement of Technology (AAT)" 
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Tuesday, 2002-07-09 11:57
> >Subject: [USMA:20908] AAT ICAS metric-time initiative
> >
> >
> >> Hello all,
> >>
> >> I have recently subscribed for information about
> >> metrication. I am interested in strategies for
> >> presenting uses of metric measures.
> >>
> >> The nonprofit Alliance for the Advancement of Technology
> >> (AAT) is pursuing development of a metric-time standard,
> >> the Integrated Chronological Applications System (ICAS),
> >> and has explored certain strategies of presentation
> >> in the current version 6.02.
> >>
> >> Along the way a number of technical issues have also
> >> been considered, however certain standards issues
> >> also remain.
> >>
> >> AAT ICAS in Brief version 6.02 is available in both HTML
> >> and PDF versions from AAT ICAS Itinica on the
> >> aatideas web at http://www.aatideas.org/itinica via Internet.
> >>
> >> Until later,
> >>
> >> Ron
> >> --
> >> Ronald L. Stone, programs manager
> >> Alliance for the Advancement of Technology (AAT)
> >>
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> http://www.aatideas.org
> >>
> >> AAT
> >> PO Box 141155
> >> Mpls., MN 55414-1155
> >> USA
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>Is your boss reading your email? ....Probably
>Keep your messages private by using Lycos Mail.
>Sign up today at http://mail.lycos.com




_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

Reply via email to