After the the entrie world has converted to the current SI system, the SI 
second shown be thrown out the door. Then a new SI time unit should be 
created that is based upon a standard day (which would equal exactly 86,400 of 
the current SI seconds).

I know you don't like posts about decimal time on this server, but as long as 
you comment about decimal time on this server in a negative manner, I will 
defend decimal time on this server! 

Interesting I notice that your website at http://metric1.org/ on the page 
called Date and Time Notation says the following:

"Although there is a metric unit of time (the second), there is no such thing 
as metric time. There have been several proposals, over the years, to 
decimalize the way we express time � at least for the hours, minutes and 
seconds in a day. None of them ever caught on."

The reason why metric time (decimal time) has not caught on is because people 
like you try to prevent discussion of it in forums that are devoted to metric, 
even though people like you are fans of metric for other usage. As long as 
forums even devoted to metric are against metric being used for talk of 
decimal/metric time proposals (other than the SI second) and as long as such 
forums prefer that Babylonian units (hours and minutes) to be used 
in conjunction with the SI second, then of course metric time will have a hard 
time catching on. However it is ironic that fans of SI metric are against 
reforming the SI system to expand the metric system to include all of the time 
units that are equal to a day and smaller!

Your comment of "bastardizing of the prefixes" is outrageous and a 
misrepresentation of what I think Pat Naughtin was trying to say. I believe he 
was saying what I also have said, namely that the SI second should be scrapped 
as the fundamental time unit and that the new fundamental time unit should be 
called the SI day and the SI day should be defined in such a manner that it 
exactly equals 86,400 of the current SI seconds. After the new SI unit becomes 
the SI day, it will then be appropriate to use the metric prefixes of deci, 
centi, amd milli in conjunction with it.

I notice that you often use inflammatory language (such as your use of the 
word "bastardizing") directed to anyone (such as myself and Pat Naughtin) that 
posts comments contrary to your views. How would you like if myself and others 
started using the same language directed at your posts? Must you be so 
combative? Can't this forum be used in a civilized manner? Can we disagree 
without be disagreeable?

The above comments are reply to Bill Potts comments listed below.
-------------------------------------------------------

Recently Pat Naughtin suggested:
> 1 milliday = 86.4 s          1 new minute    a bit longer than an old
> minute
> 1 centiday = 864 seconds    about a quarter of an old hour
> 1 deciday = 8640 seconds    a little under 2 1/2 hours

I can't help feel uncomfortable using the SI prefixes with non-SI units
(SI prefix milli with non-metric day to make milliday).

We may not be able to control what others do but I'm not sure those of
us who want to promote SI metric should encourage such bastardizing of
the prefixes.

Also, I would maintain that breaking the day into smaller units of
millidays, centidays and decidays, where each is an odd multiple of
seconds, is not much of an improvement over 24 hours, 60 minutes and 60
seconds.

However, I am happy to see that Pat agrees with the importance of not
changing the size of the SI second in any half baked effort to simplify
civil (daily) time. That would cause more problems than it would solve.


Regards,
Bill Hooper
Fernandina Beach, Florida, USA
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
Make it simple; Make it Metric
<><><><><><><><><><><><>

Reply via email to