.....Frankly it's the best we have.....?While I agree the SI-Metric System is the best for today's technology: there is a need to improve upon the base definitions. The measurement of the Metre is related to the value of 'physical measure of Metre from North Pole to Equator passing through Dunkirk & Barcelona' to become the base of METRE and hence the *Metric System*.
In my several posts to USMA, I suggested to link TIME unit and LENGTH unit via Earth being considered a hypothetical sphere of 2 Pi radians. I proposed Metre New (m') to be: 1/10^5th of Pi/180 (ONE degree) of arcAngle at centre of Earth, on Earth curvatutre.
The argument against this, as I see, has been the undefined status of VALUE for Pi or the Radian please see:
http://www.the-light.com/cal/bbv_pi-radian.jpg
The value for Pi=100000/31831 fixes radian to be=57*.2958 (57* 17' 44:88); and when this is run throgh a computer it reapat ALL by itself after 5244th decimal, see:
http://www.the-light.com/cal/bbv_pi-worked.doc
Apart from this value 'several other values' were brought up BUT these could not stand to define *either Pi or the Radian*.
Brij Bhushan Vij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Tuesday) 2005 April 19(D-110/W01-02)H0887(decimal) IST Aa Nau Bhadra Kritvo Yantu Vishwatah -Rg Veda Jan:31; Feb:29; Mar:31; Apr:30; May:31; Jun:30 Jul:30; Aug:31; Sep:30; Oct:31; Nov:30; Dec:30 (365th day of Year is World Day) ******As per New VGRCalendar Rhyme****** Telephone: +91-11-25590335
From: "Philip S Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:32737] RE: The MIT article is flawed! Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:32:46 +0100
The basis of those alleged imperfections was unfair and a misiguided criticsm of the metric system. It's one thing to say that human technology will have limitations and to suggest that the original definition of the meter was flawed (though the level of accuracy achieved at the time was pretty good for its day) and not the best choice as a way of measuring it, but it is quite something else to criticise it for not having thirds or lacking an order of magnitude unit when it's actually there, or saying that a litre is too big when it can easily be subdivided etc.
Whatever mistakes may have been made or limitations existed in the past the present day metric system has been refined to overcome them and is continually improving. Frankly it's the best we have. The same cannot be said of the alternatives and, to answer an earlier suggestion of my not being even handed, the history of non-metric units does genuinely hamper them and makes them cumbersome to use.
Phil Hall
----- Original Message ----- From: Phil Chernack To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 7:37 PM Subject: [USMA:32734] RE: The MIT article is flawed!
I'm very confused. Nowhere in the article did I see anything making arguments against the metric system. What I did read was a statement of facts concerning its development and adoption throughout the world. Why do others in this group seem to be getting that this article is in opposition to the metric system. If anything, it goes on to state that there are advantages to it. The one point that was made is that NO measurement system is perfect. As measurement systems are created by humans, I think we can all agree to that.
Phil
_________________________________________________________________ The MSN Gamezone! http://www.msn.co.in/gamezone Get set to get hooked!
