Why does this list continually degrade into discussions of changing time
standards?

It's pretty annoying.


On Tue, 25 Mar 2003 17:39:03 +0000, Brij Bhushan Vij wrote
> Hi Marcus and carl, sirs:
> Between 1970 thro 1990 I argued with who ever came across and 
> interested in 'metric or centime *idea*' but thought of putting it 
> on shelf to revert and come up with a NO CHANGE 'to human mind' 
> status i.e. we do not change the face of Clocks or calendar but only 
> re-adjust OUR THINKING process. The Nautical Kilometre gets driven 
> out of itself as 1/100th of ONE degree instead of the Nauical Mile 
> of 1/60th of the degree. The change is introduction of the Leap 
> Weeks in Calendar using *Divide by Six(6) Rule*. Read the RHYME 
> below as 'signature'. What else can be the "Sureset, easiest and 
> cheapest" mode to achieve results expected by and for Systeme 
> International d'Unites! 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: "Ma Be" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: [USMA:25303] Re: Clocks and time units
> >Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 10:55:43 -0800
> >
> >Dear Carl,
> >
> >The issue of changing the time construct is evidently *academic* at this 
> >stage.  However, one MUST address this from a technical point-of-view.  
> >It's with this spirit in mind that I'd like to comment on your points 
> >below, ok?
> >
> >On Sun, 23 Mar 2003 23:26:38
> >  Carl Sorenson wrote:
> >...
> > >I support SI as it now stands and as it is practiced in metric countries. 
> >  Units of time are already standardized worldwide, and minutes and hours 
> >are accepted for use with SI.
> >
> >True, however, it does not hide the fact that the use of our present time 
> >construct is horrible.  This 60-60-24 babel is mediocre to say the least 
> >and is blatanly against the decimal nature of the SI system.
> >
> > >  Lots of people have tried to introduce new units, and they always are 
> >ignored because 1) no one else understands them,
> >
> >This is debatable.  For example, what is to 'understand' about the 
> >percentime construct, among other alternatives?  Once one knows there are 
> >100 percentime hours in a day, and that time reckoning is *finally* purely 
> >decimal, what is difficult to understand?  The rest would obviously only be 
> >a matter of becoming familiar with reckoning time in this new construct.
> >
> > > 2) the "improvement" is often marginal or simply non-existent,
> >
> >Again, highly debatable.  If time was *truly* decimalized there would be 
> >tremendous advantages in its use.  No more silly conversions between hours, 
> >minutes and seconds would be necessary.  Runners, for instance, would have 
> >a much easier life keeping track of his progress during a race.  
> >Calculations would be extremely easy under a decimal scenario than with 
> >this 60-60-24 crap.
> >
> > > and therefore 3) almost no one thinks we need to change the system.
> >
> >The problem with changing the time construct is a one of convenience.  
> >However, I expect that once technology evolves to the point that changes of 
> >this magnitude become a matter of "flipping a button" even this change 
> >would be largely feasible and easy to implement.
> >
> > >  In the U.S., lots of people think we need to adopt the metric system, 
> >the rest of the world uses the metric system, and it still is tough to get 
> >the conversion going...
> >
> >Granted.  That's why I've been leaving this issue aside and considering it 
> >as "a work in progress" or belonging to R&D.  So, it's safe to say that we 
> >all agree that this is unnecessary at the present time.
> >
> >Cordially,
> >
> >Marcus
> >
> >
> >____________________________________________________________
> >Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus!
> >Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus
> >
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Still unmarried? http://www.msn.co.in/Matrimony/ Find a life partner 
> now



Reply via email to