Well written Carl

'Are' (100 square meters) and 'Hectare' (10,000 square
meters) are very convenient for area just like liter
is for cubic volume.
Unfortunately it is not adopted.

Madan
--- Carl Sorenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 12:19:42 -0600
> From: Carl Sorenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [USMA:21856] Re: Dual labeling, hectares
> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> David Owen wrote:
> >The metric system would catch on faster if its
> evangelists were more
> >sensitive to other traditions, and less unbending
> about deviations 
> >from theoretical consistency.
> 
> I couldn't have said it better myself.  I think all
> USMA members should
> engrave this on a plaque and post it in a place they
> will see often.
> 
> My XML page has moved to
> http://ssp-web.lib.byu.edu/measurement/ and it
> now includes an option to specify significant
> figures.  I can't
> guarantee that the site will always be up.
> 
> I have a question about the hectare.  According to
> NIST at
> http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/outside.html, the
> hectare is one of
> the "units outside the SI that are currently
> accepted for use with the
> SI, subject to further review" whose "continued use
> is not encouraged."
> The hectare seems to me to be a very useful unit. 
> It seems more
> practical for some purposes than square kilometers
> and square meters for
> the same reason that the liter is more practical
> than cubic meters and
> cubic millimeters.
> 
> I presume that a hectare is 100 "ares" and an "are"
> is 100 square
> meters.  Is this correct?  How is this unit
> pronounced?  I have a
> calculator with a conversion chart that refers to
> "acre" rather than
> "are".  Is this a typo?
> 
> Carl
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com

Reply via email to