Just some comments.. Nat
>>The conflicts over metrication tell a messy truth: no single system of measurements is ideal for all uses. Like any object of human design, a measurement system trades one advantage for another. In its avoidance of thirds, for example, >> The only admitted weakness I see. >> the metric system has no colloquial equivalent of the foot. >> Is such a unit necessary? Britain prefers the yard, which is just under a meter. >>Decimeters are seldom used; >> That's what I use all the time! I just think of it as 0.1 m or 100 mm, depending on the job. >>the system skips an order of magnitude from the centimeter to the meter. >> See previous answer. Does everything have to be "one" of something? >>And liters exceed normal individual human thirst. >> So do quarts. So you use a smaller size - such 0.1 L or 100 ml - if you like to be able to scale up and down readily, or fl oz, if you like Chinese jigsaw puzzles. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Elwell Sent: Friday, 2005 April 15 14:45 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:32710] MIT Technology Review Article on the metric system Interesting article. Those who are perpetually offended will find offense in it; others will likely learn a thing or two. <http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/05/issue/megascope.asp> Jim Jim Elwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] 801-466-8770 www.qsicorp.com
