There is no dispute that 'science' uses the SI-second as far as time is
concerned. So speed got me measured in Metres/second; however, for
day-to-day use and man's need hours-minutes-seconds are used. Since, a
number of experts have been arguing that 'second' being an already SI unit
and uses 'splitting' of this unit any other unit must be divided in DECIMALS
to be recognised as of the 'metric system'.
Why, decimals and not METRES, has been a suggestion since I started my
venture and as many called it my 'obsession with the METRE'. If this point
is taken into consideration, angular rotation of Earth becomes important and
linking 100000 or 200000 seconds to the day would need to be reconciled with
200 or 400-degree circle; to establish TIME zones etc. This, shall need
necessary changes in re-thinking about mathematical functions and a total
revision. This FEAR has potential in defeating the Metrication of Time
argument and Calendar Reform.
I support HOURS be the link; since science has already tried the
'second, the day, the Bessilian Year: especially when the needs are kept in
mind about Calendar Reform. So, keeping the minimal changes:
the 7-day 'sabbath'; the 24-hour clock; the interval of Earth's ONE
revolution and the 90-degree 'quadrant' and dividing the ONE degree x
100x100 arc-second, the scheme FITS well.
May be I have to learn more BLACK HOLES in my thinking; but I must get
positive hints to work further. All other fears can be resolved, by using
the factors for NEW time interval and the length unit and their RECIPROCALS
for alignment of 'other derived units.
Brij Bhushan Vij
>From: Carl Sorenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [USMA:21203] RE: Unit for Speed
>Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 17:44:14 -0600
>
>Gene wrote:
> >Would you recommend m/s or km/h for rates of ascent and descent of
>aircraft, or
> >would you argue that ft/s should be retained because most pilots
>(except pilots
> >from eastern Europe) are already more comfortable with ft/s?
>
>Of course I would not argue in favor of ft/s! There is no benefit to
>using feet except the pilots are already more familiar with it.
>Familiarity, of course, is not likely to be much of an argument to
>anyone on this mailing list (including me). That is not the issue as
>with km/h vs. m/s. In that issue, I am talking about whether we will
>likely be measuring time intervals in hours or seconds.
>
>I'm not a pilot, but I would imagine they would be interested in both
>m/s and km/h. If they want to know how many hours it will take to get
>to a city, km/h will probably be more natural.
>
> >Nevertheless, I want m/s as a "option" relating to closing distances
> >and time intervals before a collision.
>
>I suspect that pilots would entirely agree with this. They are much
>more likely to quantitatively analyze closing distances and time
>intervals than the average motorist.
>
>With digital readouts on dashboards now, it would be easy to include the
>option of m/s. I wouldn't mind the option of seeing speed in m/s, but I
>wouldn't use it all the time.
>
>Carl
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
>Behalf Of Gene Mechtly
>Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 5:10 PM
>To: U.S. Metric Association
>Cc: U.S. Metric Association
>Subject: [USMA:21202] Unit for Speed
>
>
>On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Carl Sorenson wrote:
> > ... If even the metric countries don't use m/s in cars and on
> > highways, it will be a lonely crusade, ...
>
>Carl,
>
>Nevertheless, I want m/s as a "option" relating to closing distances and
>time intervals before a collision.
>
>On a related question, we are told that international rules for air
>traffic control are being revised.
>
>Would you recommend m/s or km/h for rates of ascent and descent of
>aircraft, or would you argue that ft/s should be retained because most
>pilots (except pilots from eastern Europe) are already more comfortable
>with ft/s?
>
>Gene.
>
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
