I am sorry for you, but I can not and will not support any other distance
unit side by side with the kilometer. I want SI to evolve and to improve
further, but I do not support radical changes like changes in the units of
length, mass and time, as this will just suit the ifp camp and their new
offspring, these so-called Planckians, who want to destroy the metric
system and when the world speaks English and measures 'English' at last will
most probably disband and the Planck units will be placed on the deepest and
most remote shelf possible. Unadulterated GPS uses the kilometer for all
measurements of distance.

Han



----- Original Message -----
From: "Brij Bhushan Vij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, 2003-03-23 18:04
Subject: Posting on metricsucks_Nautical Kilometres


> Han and friends:
> I tried to home on my views in creating a definition for nautical
Kilometre since 1973 April via my contribution: The Metric Second (Time &
Arc-Angle).
While *Nautical Mile - is 1/60th of ONE degree arc-angle on Earth
curvatutre; what is wrong if the Natical Kilometre - is concieved as 1/100th
of ONE degree arc-angle?*. Yes, the definition for 'Distance METRE' would
need be linked to define the 'new' Time interval Decimal Second to be
1/240000th of the atomic day.
Thus, the day shall be 24hx100mdx100sd or 240000 decimal seconds (instead of
the present 24hx60mx60s or 86400 seconds); and the QUADRANT remain of
90-degree with each degree divided into 1-degrees 100'x100" instead of the >
present 1-degreex160'x60" like the HOUR.
 This can and has the potential to *Shelve the Nautiocal Mile*. Also refer
to my published document: Shelving Nautical Mile in Favour of Nautical
Kilometre; Proceedings 3rd International Conference MMGT-2001; NPL New
> Delhi; 8-10 February 2001; pp 164-169.
> 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!
> *****     *****     *****     *****

See further USMA 25273


Reply via email to