--- David King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would like to say that the second, and of course > minutes and hours, > are based on the physical earth,
??? Excuse me? How so? Could you please elaborate? You totally lost me! What is the *basis* for 60-60-24 framework aside from the fact that these have "favorable" prime divisions? I know of NO "natural" (or otherwise) phenomenon(a) that relate(s) to this sillyness. Perhaps you refer to how people reckon angles (a concept that Brij insists on mentioning and which I find to be sound BTW!), and how these should relate to each other. If you accept this as the explanation then why not, *technically*, consider a MUCH superior proposal around a decimal framework like 400 gr (or 1000 quads, whatever) + 100 ki to a day? > as Bill pointed > out, and its movements > and rotations, etc. ? What do 'movements and rotations' have to do with this framework? Please forgive me my ignorance. > Also the metre, the SI metric standard of length, > was originally based > on the physical circumference of the earth. Indeed, excellent! > Thus it makes sense to have a measure of time based > on the movement of > the earth and fits in with metric being based on > earth's dimensions, > rather than something arbitrary like the size of a > man. > ? Quite intriguing! Your argumentation is flawless, however, I cannot relate that to finding the relationship between 'movement of the earth' fitting with 'metric' (vis-a-vis the metre dimension I suppose?). BUT, your argument is *PRECISELY* harmonious with the very proposal I made at the top of this response of mine! As 'movement of the earth' and 'meter' would be superbly served by a 400 gr / 100 ki/day framework! For instance, 0.01 geographical location on the sphere is *precisely* 1 km! (as opposed to 1 nautical mile (SIC to the power of infinity!...) = 1 minute of arc! Neither of which is used by SI!!!!!). The beauty though is that one can easily go from 0.01 to the SI equivalent by a simple SINGLE/UNIQUE conversion factor, pi/200 - now try that with some monstrous 01" of an arc!... > Decimal time is unnecessary, as the whole world uses > the current > measurement of time that works well, even though it > might be imperfect. Not entirely true! I can give you zillions of reasons where decimalized time would make our lives A LOT easier! And just because we still cling to this hideous framework doesn't mean we cannot get rid of it. We did with the 12/3 (in/ft/yd) for line measurements, didn't we, so why not this one, either? See the parallel? in/ft/yd - 12/3 s/min/h/d - 60/60/24 Now compare: i (for ip) - 1!!!!! >... > If it makes sense to have the whole world using > metric, and to get the > USA to go metric, to fit in with the majority of the > world, then it > makes sense to stick with a time measurement system > that the majority of > the world uses, too. > ? I honestly don't follow your rationale, my friend. Unfortunately it seems like you are tackling this issue from the point-of-view of "majority rules"! Nothing can be more damaging for progress and technology! Perhaps you're defending the right cause for the wrong reasons! The fact of the matter is, we defend SI because *it makes sense*, PERIOD! As for the majority rules thing please let me share an anecdote with you I learned from my time in the military: Question: If ALL (but one) soldiers are aligned *perfectly*, but the *anchor* is the one that is right, and he is "crooked" relatively to all the others, what should the troop do? Answer: ALL soldiers should move to align themselves with THAT SINGLE one that was right from the beginning! (This is a TRUE *military rule*, by the way!) (Food for thought!... ;-) ) Respectfully, Marcus ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
