Eight out of 10 qualified engineers might respond by saying - it's the decimally divided science of Weights & Measures."
No - that's the correct response to the term 'decimalisation'
(IMHO)
From: "Brij Bhushan Vij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:32426] Re: USMA announcement Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:06:42 +0000
Hi friends:.....metricated world.....?Failure or success of any country (India inclusive) lies in understanding: How you term 'metrication'?
Eight out of 10 qualified engineers might respond by saying - it's the decimally divided science of Weights & Measures. Be sincere and ask yourself: How many answered - the science related to weights & Measures, as related to length unit, METRE?
Where does the failure lie - in teaching, learning, practising or the very understanding of the word *Metrication belonging to Metre & hence the metric system*?
Brij Bhushan Vij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20050310H1559(decimal) PM(IST)
Aa Nau Bhadra Kritvo Yantu Vishwatah -Rg Veda.
*****The New Calendar Rhyme*****
Thirty days in July, September:
April, June, November, December;
All the rest have thirty-one; accepting February alone:
Which hath but twenty-nine, to be (in) fine;
Till leap year gives the whole week READY:
Is it not time to MODIFY or change to make it perennial, Oh Daddy!
And make the calendar work with Leap Week Rule! ***** ***** ***** *****
From: "Stephen Humphreys" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:32422] Re: USMA announcement Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:47:21 +0000
"Ultimately, I believe that these empty emotional arguments will gradually diminish and we will achieve a metricated world."
Sorry, but that sounds both emotional and against all those things you said you disliked.
Personally I've never met an anti-metric person - it's just not emotional enough. However, I have read the opinions of anti-imperial people - in various degrees of extremity.
Here in the UK there is a mix of imperial and metric, and most people (ie, not measurement activists) are quite happy in this natural state of choosability.
I'd say that America probably needs to accept metric a bit more, but talking about new world orders and "anti-textual" legislation is just going to cause more harm than less to the metric system.
I want to ask an honest question though - would you regard me as an "anti-metric person hiding behind a 'choice' smokescreen"?
From: Pat Naughtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:32416] Re: USMA announcement Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 08:07:22 +1100
Dear David and All,
I think that you make a very valuable point here, when you say:
'This is not about culture, language, or who rules who. It is about working
together to make a better world by moving forward and using the best
measurement system available to us, and having everyone using the same
system'.
Unfortunately, to many anti-metric people metrication is about power over
others and often they selfishly feel this as a loss of personal power over
others. We often see rational debate about metrication issues subverted to
an emotive exchange about who has power over who. This shift in emphasis is
often used by anti-metric people for the simple reason that they know it has
an immediate effect.
Ultimately, I believe that these empty emotional arguments will gradually
diminish and we will achieve a metricated world. However the selfish motives
of the anti-metric people does help to make the metrication process
painfully slow.
Just remember that no individual, no group, no industry, no company, and no
nation has ever gone permanently back to old measures once they have made
their metrication transition.
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin ASM (NSAA), LCAMS (USMA)* PO Box 305, Belmont, Geelong, Australia Phone 61 3 5241 2008
Pat Naughtin is the editor of the free online monthly newsletter, 'Metrication matters'. You can subscribe by going to http://www.metricationmatters.com and clicking on 'Newsletter'.
* Pat is the editor of the 'Numbers and measurement' chapter of the Australian Government Publishing Service 'Style manual � for writers, editors and printers', he is an Accredited Speaking Member (ASM) with the National Speakers Association of Australia, and a Lifetime Certified Advanced Metrication Specialist (LCAMS) with the United States Metric Association.
This email and its attachments are for the sole use of the addressee and may
contain information that is confidential and/or legally privileged. This
email and its attachments are subject to copyright and should not be partly
or wholly reproduced without the consent of the copyright owner. Any
unauthorised use of disclosure of this email or its attachments is
prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please immediately delete it
from your system and notify the sender by return email.
on 2005-03-10 06.49, David King at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This just reminds us all of the need for a universal standard of
> measurement. This is not about culture, language, or who rules who. It
> is about working together to make a better world by moving forward and
> using the best measurement system available to us, and having everyone
> using the same system. Just imagine the chaos if we all used different
> ways of measuring time, so that some countries had 20 hours in the day,
> some 24 hours, some 30 hours, some 15 hours, etc. Or maybe some might
> have 100 minutes in one hour or they might not use hours at all. By
> continuing to avoid going fully metric, countries like the UK, Canada
> and the USA are all making the world harder to live in, as so much time
> is wasted on conversions of measurements to one's preferred system.
>
> Of course the USA chose to go metric back in the 19th century, and
> officially made it legal for use back then.
>
> So if the EU is requesting that all US imports into the EU are labelled
> metric only, then the US only has itself to blame for not keeping its
> word and using metric which it promised to do over 100 years ago.
>
> And I think having metric only labelling on all products makes things
> easier to compare, I hate seeing products from America that have both US
> units and metric units on, as the US units just take up unnecessary
> space and are confusing. Metric units are consistent and should be the
> only internationally legal units for trade.
>
>
> David King
>
> ** Get Fast Broadband from �14.99
> ** http://tinyurl.com/5y7mf
>
> Excellent web hosting and email
> http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=3899401
>
> Buy UKMA's report "A Very British Mess" ISBN 0750310146
> http://bookmark.iop.org/bookpge.htm?&isbn=0750310146
>
>
>
> Paul Trusten wrote:
>
>> Some critics of U.S. metrication might frame the EU/NIST conference as
>> "European interference with U.S. commerce." At such a juncture, NIST, and
>> the rest of us, need to stand firm and quote the 1988 amendment to the
>> Metric Conversion Act, which designates metric as the preferred U.S. system
>> for trade and commerce. Congress said it, and that settles it!
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "James Frysinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 11:43
>> Subject: [USMA:32408] Re: USMA announcement
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> I'm hoping that the EU stands firm. Even without that, many US companies
>>>
>>>
>> want
>>
>>
>>> the ammendment, as noted in the two recent NIST conferences on the matter.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>> On Wednesday 09 March 2005 12:11, Hillger, Don wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> From USMA President, Lorelle Young:
>>>>
>>>> ______________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Last week, officials from the NIST Laws and Metric Group met with EU
>>>> officials in Brussels to discuss their Metric Directive and learned that
>>>> they intend to proceed with the implementation of the metric only
>>>> directive in 2010 unless the EU industry requests a delay. They also
>>>> told us they want to see the U.S. adopt the FPLA amendment to
>>>> demonstrate that we are making progress. More details will follow when
>>>> the official report of the meeting is released.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ______________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> James R. Frysinger
>>> Lifetime Certified Advanced Metrication Specialist
>>> Senior Member, IEEE
>>>
>>> http://www.cofc.edu/~frysingj
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> Office:
>>> Physics Lab Manager, Lecturer
>>> Dept. of Physics and Astronomy
>>> University/College of Charleston
>>> 66 George Street
>>> Charleston, SC 29424
>>> 843.953.7644 (phone)
>>> 843.953.4824 (FAX)
>>>
>>> Home:
>>> 10 Captiva Row
>>> Charleston, SC 29407
>>> 843.225.0805
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Want to meet David Beckham? http://www.msn.co.in/gillette/ Fly to Madrid with Gillette!
