Precisely, why should the likes of 14.434 m bother people? Do you prefer 14 434 mm, fine, use it. But would you rather see 1443.4 cm? Sure, anything goes!!! What really matters is to what accuracy the value was measured. If mm show it, if not, forget about it (in which case a value in cm would be just fine).
Marcus On Wed, 25 Dec 2002 12:36:50 CarletonM wrote: >In a message dated 2002-12-24 22:35:50 Eastern Standard Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >> Even if we gave them the decimetre, the FFU-ists would still claim it is too >> small compared to the foot and too big compared to the inch. Let's ignore >> those who would fool us with such nonsense or else we will start to believe >> it is true ourselves. We need to convince the masses that once learned, SI >> is better. >> > >Why does everything need a different name anyway? There is only one unit of >length, the meter. > >What is wrong with: > >15.833 m >7.35 m >158.875 m > >If under a certain amount, call it mm. The second figure could as easily be >7350 mm. > >Just change the NUMBER already. Leave the (one) name alone. > >Carleton > ____________________________________________________________ Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus! Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus
