The only time reform that I would accept is one that eliminates all time
units other then the second.  We pick a point in time past to designate it
as zero (as an example, maybe the time of the big bang, but only if we know
its start time exactly) and just count the seconds forward.  To alleviate
the problem of big numbers, we use the SI prefixes.  If we need to have
cycles, then we can do repetitive things every 100 ks and every 1 Ms.
Birthdays would be celebrated every 1 Ms.

But I'm going to be realistic.  As long as we are stuck on old terra firma,
we are a prisoner of its cycles.  And we are stuck to the present time
measurements.  Yes, the clock and the calendar do need reforming, but unless
those reforms don't just shift the confusion from one form to another, I see
no reason to change.  People world-wide saw a need to reform measurements,
did so and adopted the changes.  Just because some dimwits out of nastiness
and spite refuse to go along with the rest doesn't mean the reforms were not
needed.  They were!

You also said:

> Calculating elapsed time in the current system if awkward. For example,
how
> much time elapsed from 2003/05/31 23:45:58.35 UT to 2004/02/12 06:13:30.10
UT?
> To perform the calculations we have to use base 24 for the hours, base 60
> for the minutes and seconds, and base 10 for less than a second.
Calculations
> using base 10 for all for all the units less than a day,


No matter how you calculate the result, you are always using only one "base"
and that is base 10.  As long as you are using 10 distinct numeric symbols,
you are using base 10.  In order to work out a problem in base 24, your
number system would have to have 24 symbols, in which 24 itself would be
written as "10".  The same is for base 60.  Here you would need 60 numeric
symbols, in which case "10" would mean 60 (in base 10 numeration).

What you are calling bases are really conversion factors.  Nothing more,
nothing less.  You have fallen into the FFU trap, where FFU-ists confuse
bases with conversion factors and fractional divisions.  A measurement unit
is not binary because it can be divided into successive halves.  It is
binary when it only uses two numeric symbols, 1 and 0.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, 2004-02-15 14:04
Subject: [USMA:28700] Re: Decimal "Metric" time is already in use and the
use is growing


> I wrote a lengthy reply but it looks like it never got sent due to me
getting
> timed out from my web based email. I have thus attempted to recreate that
email.
>

Reply via email to