Your conclusions and mine are not mutually exclusive, John. It's also true that it would be a monumental task to change clocks under time decimalization. However, watches could be easily "retroffited" with a metric decal for the percentime approach I suggested (a very cheap option, worth just a few cents). And new watches could be produced (just like Swatch has been doing) thereafter.
Marcus On Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:39:46 Joseph B. Reid wrote: >Marcus wrote in USMA 23731: >> >>Religious 'renouncing' apart, the fact of the matter is that >>calendar reform brought the demise of metric time since these were >>intrinsically related or part of the package, so to speak. >> >>Had metric time been *dissociated* from the calendar proposal and >>the stupid 60-60-24 would be history by now!!! >> >>Marcus >> >I suggest that "metric time" was rejected because existing clocks >around the world showed 12-60-60. The Frecnh revolutionaries were >unable to persuade the world to scrap its clocks. The 10-month >calendar survived longer because it did not affect existing hardware. > >Joseph B. Reid >17 Glebe Road West >Toronto M5P 1C8 Telephone 416-486-6071 > > ____________________________________________________________ Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus! Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus
