|
I must agree with Pat. While numerator/denominator
fractions should be dispensed with as much as is practical, zealously trying to
eradicate them everywhere will needlessly create new barriers to metrication by
turning more people against it.
An example of common numerator/denominator fraction usage is
antenna design. Due to physics, the best antenna lengths for
self-resonance, radiation efficiency, and convenient dual-band operation are
lengths such as 1/4 wavelength (classical Marconi vertical), 3/8 wavelength
(dual-band Marconi), 1/2 wavelength (classical Hertz dipole), and 5/8 wavelength
(highest field strength possible with a classical Marconi
vertical).
In users' manuals and laymen's antenna literature, these
fractions are predominant. Even in the antenna engineering literature, the
numerator/denominator form is more commonly used than the decimal form, and I
have also seen this in metricated antenna engineering literature. These
fractions are even commonly used with the Greek letter lambda, which is the
symbol used to denote wavelength. -- Jason
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 1:09
PM
Subject: [USMA:34947] Re: fractions and
related topics
Dear
Bill Hooper and All,
I have interspersed some remarks in red.
on 2005-10-18 10.39, Bill Hooper at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The
continuing discussion of fractions is considerably off the topic of
metric.
That may be so, but I don't
believe that it is off the subject of metrication. It is my firm belief, based
on my extensive observations, that any metrication transition goes a lot more
smoothly, and a lot more rapidly if the metrication leaders plan to limit
fractions (to zero or near zero) by an appropriate choice of
prefixes.
As I believe that there are many metrication leaders who read
this list, I think that it is a good idea to further explore where metrication
transitions can be improved using the simple technique of avoiding
fractions.
It saddens me to see so many otherwise intelligent folk who
choose to go down the fraction path as they begin their metrication
transition. I have an extremely bad example right in front of me on the
Microsoft Word screen. I have set the default ruler to metric and the
Microsoft Company has, by default, divided the ruler into quarters of
centimetres. Even if I set my choice to millimetres, each 10 mm space is
divided into quarters of 10 mm or lots of 2.5 mm -- it's quite odd,
unnecessarily complex and, I think, will retard the metrication process in the
USA by many years.
I
think I probably started it with my suggestion that adopting metric would
eliminate the need to teach fractions at the elementary school
level.
It might also have been
promoted based on my re-reporting of the efficiency of metrication programs
that avoid fractions by the wise use from among the metric prefixes by the
metrication leaders. Examples of this are many.
The film department at Kodak introduced the 16 mm film in
1923 (with 10 mm for the film and 3 mm each side for the sprocket holes) and
the metric transition was smooth, cheap, and rapid; it was all over in a few
months with very few laggards hankering after calling this film 5/16ths of
an inch. By the end of 1924, metrication of the film industry was a done
deal!
I often quote the building industry in Australia in this
context; using only millimetres, metres, and kilometres, they began their
metrication transition in early to mid 1974 and it was all over -- again a
done deal -- by the end of 1975. There are now near enough to no fractions
used at all in the Australian building industry and this comes with all the
attendant savings that this efficiency brings. (See http://metricationmatters.com/articles
for more information on this in the article, 'Costs of
non-metrication').
So
I'm going to ask that we take the discussion to private correspondence
instead of continuing to post it on the USMA chat list. I have already begun
doing so myself. When occasional comments on common fractions contain more
explicit connections to metric, I am sure that they would be welcome on the
USMA list. Otherwise, I'm afraid that the topic I began is beginning to
clutter up the metric list to the detriment of those who wish to discuss
metric ideas.
I
have to disagree with you here. Although much of the discussion about
fractions had little to do with metrication leadership and the planning of
metrication transitions, it did begin to focus our attention on the problems
that fractions have brought to us in the past and to suggest some ways we
might move around them as we individually and collectively plan for
metrication transitions in our various
industries.
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/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. For
more information go to: http://metricationmatters.com
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.
|
