I do hope you have been following some of my views while on usma list. Refer USMA 24414 and the following eample:
62415 09704.40790 51426
to read *62415 million 9 thousand 7 Hundred and four decimal point four zero seven nine zero five one four two six*.
Regards,
Brij Bhushan Vij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Aa Nau Bhadra Kritvo Yantu Vishwatah -Rg Veda.
*****The New Calendar Rhyme*****
Thirty days in July, September:
April, June, November, December;
All the rest have thirty-one; accepting February alone:
Which hath but twenty-nine, to be (in) fine;
Till leap year gives the whole week READY:
Is it not time to MODIFY or change to make it perennial, Oh Daddy!
And make the calendar work with Leap Week Rule! ***** ***** ***** *****
From: "brian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [USMA:25213] Re: Nonsense on Metricsucks board Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:43:11 -0500
Ok now. This is getting silly.
What's up with the "96 % of 5 000 444" stuff.
Whatever happened to 96% of 5,000,444 stuff?
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:35:49 -0500, kilopascal wrote
> 2003-03-18
>
> I wonder if these so-called new boards aren't just the same old
> boards sponsored by the known anti-metric crowd. In order to
> generate interest, they change their name a little and make it sound
> like they are something new. Now there trick seems to be to
> convince the casual browser to think that metric is being replaced
> by some new "natural" system, which for obvious reasons they don't
> describe, but one could easily guess it is US customary or imperial.
>
> But, when your consider that 96 % of 6 000 000 000 or about 5 750
> 000 000 people world wide us metric, there is no way these fools
> will be able to change that. It seems to me the organisers of these
> boards must have some "experience" that not only is metric not going
> to disappear or diminish, but its use must be increasing where they
> work or live. This try to counter this, they sound the alarm.
>
> Let them. While the rest of us will enjoy easy calculations and rational
> packaging, they will be fumbling with conversion factors. And of
> course, they will blame metric for it.
>
> I really think we all need to go to their site and post messages on
> how we promote metric in our daily lives. How we are engineers and
> tradesmen who specify and design only in metric and how we are
> buying through our companies millions of dollars in metric goods,
> which helps drive the cost of metric down and drives the cost of
> FFU up. We are the silent, behind-the-scenes, users of metric.
>
> John
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Han Maenen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, 2003-03-18 14:40
> Subject: [USMA:25210] Nonsense on Metricsucks board
>
> > Quote
> > The new anti-metric message board (for people who like science and the
> > scientific basis of measurement) had over 700 page-reads in March as of
> > mid-month. This means that March is roughly like February (which had over
> > 1400 reads for the month).
> >
> > The reason for all the read-only activity is still unclear.
> >
> > Your picture is an oversimplification.
> >
> > the metric system is not a coherent stable whole (it has internal
> > contradictions and it is in flux) and the US does not use the "Imperial
> > System".
> >
> > The gist of this board is that METRIC SUCKS. It is a sterile evolutionary
> > dead-end. The leading-edge work in fundamental physics has abandoned
> metric
> > and is using so-called "natural units".
> >
> > * I wonder what these 'natural units' are.
> >
> > Cosmology likewise. It is a pre-revolutionary situation. Very
> interesting.
> > Quotes by top people utterly dismissing metric (once the Sacred Cow) are
> > easy to find by google or in sci.phsics.research of Usenet.
> >
> > One would have to be a fool or simpleton to try to limit discussion here
> to
> > a debate between "Imperial" and "Metric". what the hell is Imperial, what
> is
> > its energy unit and its force
> > unit, and I mean consistent with the fundamental natural laws. And what do
> > you mean by Metric---the 1990
> > electrical standards (inconsistent with the metal kilogram) are what one
> > actually uses for accurate measurement at the national labs.
> > So do you mean the official (antiquated) defs or the 1990 standards.
> >
> > Say! We must be bored by different things! How about that? I am bored by
> the
> > metric system because it is so out-of-date and ugly. I like modern more
> > completely decimal systems---think powers of ten are cool.
> >
> > Metric sucks bigtime---like how many electron volts does it take to make a
> > joule?
> > Is it a power of ten?
> > No, it is 6,241,509,704 billion!!!!
> > Metric's ugly non-decimal numbers are what is boring.
> > Have a nice day, Richard.
> > Unquote
> >
> > The electron-volt is not recognized in the modern metric system and I sent
> a
> > message to the board, stating that fact. I said the only the joule should
> be
> > used for energy. They could just as well have used the so-called 'metric'
> > horse power to 'prove' their point. I blamed these inconsistencies not on
> > the metric system but on human unwillingness to change. The metric system
> > would not be in a flux if it was used properly.
> >
> > Han
> > Historian of Dutch Metrication, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
> >
_________________________________________________________________ Call US for just Rs. 5. http://www.msn.co.in/webtelephony/ Get a phone card
