Well...  As can be seen by Gavin's "nagging"* post below, it looks like this issue 
would not go away after all, eh?...  ;-)

* - I'm making use of this adjective here not in a derogatory sense, but to illustrate 
that until some issues are addressed by the SI system developers they will NOT be able 
to provide us with satisfying answers!

Unfortunately though, m/s would suffer from "application-related" shortcomings, 
something that apparently can only be reasonably addressed by a unit of the magnitude 
of km/h (not 'hr', ok, Gavin?...).

Evidently, it goes without saying that had time been "metricated" and we wouldn't have 
such problem, since we'd use a legitimate prefixed unit of time to satisfy such 
requirement (example: km/ks, or km/h, where hour is "metric hour").

Marcus

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:54:29  
 Gavin Young wrote:
>If hours are not considered a derived unit of the SI second and thus a part of 
>SI, then why does the USMA and SI promote using kilometers/HOUR (km/hr) in 
>place of miles/hour? If the hour is not considered a derived SI unit, then the 
>USMA and SI should be promoting only saying kilometers/SECOND or meters/SECOND -
> instead of promoting use of the term kilometers/HOUR!!!!
>
>Why does the USMA tell people to use km/hr for road signs if the hours are not 
>considered part of SI??? If hours are not a part of SI, then you are not 
>following your own admonitions when you use the USMA server to promote use of 
>the term km/hr. Hence the inconsistency of the time units being promoted by 
>USMA and and many SI promoters, thus the need for decimal (aka "metric") time 
>units! If the inconsistency or flaw of using hours does not exist in SI, then 
>it exists in those who are promoting the use of the term kilometers/HOUR as a 
>part of proper SI usage!!!
>
>Lets fix the SI system by using decimal time units, or at least insist on using 
>m/s instead of km/hr!!
>
>Quoting Bill Hooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > ... you seem to prefer to swallow up (or put up) with this clear flaw 
>> > in the SI system
>> 
>> Sorry, but days, hours and minutes are not part of SI and have never 
>> been intended to be. They do not represent a flaw in SI. If anything, 
>> they represent a flaw in the way we measure the time of day. The uses 
>> to which scientific and technical time measurements (and units) are 
>> used are so different from the ways in which time of day is used that 
>> there does not seem to be any reason why the two need to be (or can be) 
>> coordinated or reconciled.
>> 
>> It's not a flaw in SI because it is not part of SI at all, and 
>> therefore is not of much interest to proponents of SI (many of whom are 
>> members of USMA and subscribers to this list).
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Bill Hooper
>> Fernandina Beach, Florida, USA
>> 
>> 
>
>
>Gavin Young
>http://www.xprt.net/~hightech , http://www.renewableelectricity.com, 
>http://www.electric-automobile.com
>
>


____________________________________________________________
Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus!
Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus 

Reply via email to