Robert, I am very interested in where you get the $4 billion amount spent on education. I knew there would be a significant savings but I didn't think that much. If that is not an argument alone on what can be saved then I don't know what is. These kinds of figures along with what industries will save are the types of numbers we need to make our case.
Thanks, Phil -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 5:44 PM To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:31661] letter to Astronomy magazine I just sent this letter to the editor of Ohio State Astronomy, a magazine for the general public. 2004 December 13 Editor Ohio State Astronomy Dear Ms. Weber: It was good and quite helpful of you to reply Dec 1 to my letter of November 22. In the matter of inch-pound units, I have taken time to try to find words to move you to less use of them. Words are not easy to find because you express the view widely held by editors that, as you say, "to communicate with a lay audience ... we generally kept to common usage." May I say that "common usage" need not be the rule? While inches are common, the general public (the lay audience) has little problem with millimeters. Most people want the US to change to metric use. How do I know? NIST here in Boulder held a 50-year festival this summer. I worked the metric table all day at which I asked "Do you want the US to change to metric use?" Hundreds of people said Yes. Only one person said No. Can it be that your readers need inches? I do not believe it. Do you? Could it be that you keep to common usage by inertia? Maybe with a push you might change. Maybe if you consider the damage inches do to society you might give them up. The teaching of inch-pound units has two bad features. 1. It sustains the split of society into two societies, humanities and sciences. It used to be that we did not have this split. The people who founded the USA knew both of these subjects. Even now we have the "College of Letters and Science" which includes the two. But teaching inch-pound with its use of fractions makes many students disconnect. They "learn" that science and technology are not rational, are not to be understood. They go over to humanities where reason prevails. The result is that US students do badly in tests in comparison with students outside the US. 2. Teaching inch-pound units (with fractions) costs the US $4 billion each year in lost class time. Politicians ignore this cost. They do not believe it. Few constituents bring it to their attention. If editors can ignore the damage, so can politicians. I hope you find some reason in this matter. Thanks for your attention. Sincerely, Robert Bushnell PhD PE
