Dear Brij, What is *use of seer*? I have no knowledge of this expression.
If you mean that the use of 500�grams, as a substitute for a pound, would facilitate metrication, I disagree with you. Cheers, Pat Naughtin CAMS Geelong, Australia on 2002-08-27 00.34, Brij Bhushan Vij at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi Pat and John: > Had this been considered and pound was 'taken' at 500g for daily > commercial use; like we in India argued for *use of seer*, METRICATION could > be imbedded into minds much earlier. Yes, for scientific operations and > allied *exactness* the pound was to be 453.6g and used as such. > It may not be late even today, if US industry is willing to gain from this > concept! > Brij B. Vij > >> From: "kilopascal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: [USMA:21926] Re: question >> Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 23:41:36 -0400 >> >> 2002-08-25 >> >> >> Pat, >> >> I see where you are coming from. Britain, and thus its colonies, have, a >> longer tradition of having a "standard pound" and thus this 454 g value is >> more set in stone. In all other countries where the various "pounds" >> existed and varied from locality to locality right up to the time of >> metrication, there was never an attachment to a "standard pound" and thus >> it >> was easier to just set the value at 500 g without any worry about what it >> would affect. And I'm sure there were few recipes written down or that >> were >> that critical that the incorporation of the old measures into the new >> metric >> ones didn't make much of a difference if they varied somewhat. I'm believe >> that even before metrication, any recipe, either oral or written, would >> have >> produced varying results based on where it was used, as the FFU varied so >> much across Europe. In this regard metrication made recipes more >> standardised. >> >> I just wonder how many Australian recipes would be off balance if the chef >> used a 500 g amount when a pound is called for. And since your response >> indicates that my comments are not strictly so, can I infer that there are >> significant cases where 500 g is used as a valid interpretation of a pound? >> I feel that despite Australia's history with the imperial measures, it too >> will succumb to the same "shortcuts" others have adopted. Albeit the time >> will be longer before all requests for pounds end up with becoming 500 g. >> But, it will still happen. It is just a matter of time. >> >> John >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Pat Naughtin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sent: Sunday, 2002-08-25 16:25 >> Subject: [USMA:21923] Re: question >> >> >> Dear John, >> >> on 2002-08-26 02.16, kilopascal at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> <snip> >>> For example, if an Australian asks for a pound of ham at the >>> deli counter, the attendant will weigh out 500 g on a pure metric scale, >>> price it at 500 g and as far as the store is concerned only a metric >> amount >>> was vended. The customer who has no clue as to what a pound is, just >> the >>> use of the name, does not feel cheated if he/she did not get exactly >> what >> he >>> asked for based on the American concept of a pound, that is 454 g. >> <snip> >> >> What you say here is not strictly so. I will use your example to explain. >> >> if an Australian asks for a pound of ham at the deli counter, the attendant >> will weigh out 450 g on a pure metric scale, price it at the 'per kilogram' >> or at the 'per 100 gram rate', and as far as the store is concerned only a >> metric amount was vended. The customer wants a pound. She is probably old >> and she knows that for her particular recipe (which her grandmother >> inherited from her grandmother) a pound is required. [It may also be true >> that she is young and that she has no clue as to what a pound is � but this >> is a digression]. >> >> Australian butchers have no tradition that a pound is 500 grams, so they >> serve about 450 grams to those who ask for a pound. They know that they are >> serving to a recipe size and not to an ignorant person. No doubt, in >> nations >> (say France and Germany) where 500 grams to a pound has been common argot >> for a century or two, the recipes passed from generation to generation have >> been quietly adjusted to suit the fatter pound. This transition has yet to >> take place in Australia, but I suppose it could. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Pat Naughtin CAMS >> Geelong, Australia > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com >
