on 2003-07-16 02.44, Paul Trusten, R.Ph. at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In reading this discussion of angular measurement, I'm kinda glad that the > American public isn't looking over my shoulder. This is the kind of dialogue > that the anti-metric forces use as a caricature against us to try to > convince the public that the metric system is anything but simple. The truth > is, of course, that the more arcane, derived units will seldom see the > public light of day. I must try to keep my eyes on the prize---of measuring > areas, lengths, weights, and volumes in an elegant decimal manner which is > the same everywhere on earth. The simplicity of the everyday metric system > will sell itself.
Dear Paul, To me, this list serves two main functions: 1 It allows us to share our successes (and rare failures) as we actively seek to bring the world to being completely metric. This is the sharing and discussing of metrication ideas. 2 It allows us to share ideas for improving the metric system and recognising that anything can benefit from Kaizen (Continuous Improvement). This is the sharing and discussing of metrology ideas. I try to keep my contributions to the metrication function of these two. However, I firmly believe that we have made so little progress with respect to plane angle measurement since the 1790s that we need to discuss this issue somewhere and the USMA list is the only place I know where this can be done. Cheers, Pat Naughtin LCAMS Geelong, Australia --
