Going to the SI is more than a PR problem.
If all manufacturing of products is converted to rationalized SI, people would
use the products just like they do today. They don't really care about the
small differences in sizes so long as products have unit/prices.
The main problem is to make the interfaces among hard goods like plumbing and
building materials work. The number of fasteners have been reduced from more
than 100 in English units to less than 30 in metric. All autos made in the US
are made to metric specs and people really don't care because they buy and
drive them. However, training kids to design and engineer and to perform well
in science, the SI is very important if the US is to compete worldwide.
Stan Doore
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Millet
To: U.S. Metric Association
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 12:36 PM
Subject: [USMA:38200] Re: Is the U.S. customary system easier to use than the
metric system?
Interesting analogy Paul, Maybe you can tape SI unit posters in the
Congressional bathrooms so people are forced to look at them everytime they
make use of one :). I hope you're keeping pressure on the little Congress
critters to amend the FPLA as well. Maybe with enough slow cooking the
proverbial metric lobster will be ready to eat by 2010.
Mike
On 3/14/07, Paul Trusten, R.Ph. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
HUH? Has USMA's PR Director lost his freaking mind?
A few words from Satan's lawyer.
SI has a big PR problem. Yes,it is a better measurement system. But,
really--to
most Americans, does "better" mean "easier?"
A table of customary unit values reads like a nursery rhyme. Twelve inches
to
the foot. Three feet to the yard. Yes, at 5280 feet to the mile, it gets
cumbersome, but I think most people don't seem to have to deal with the
5280.
They just may not care about decimal, about "better." Leave well enough
alone,
they'd say. Or, to quote my Dad on metric, "I just couldn't be bothered."
The
nursery rhyme suffices. It has sufficed for two centuries.
Efficient mathematical manipulation, metrological coherency, a true
standard of
measurement? I can hear the refrain coming from those who are far, far away
from this forum: "Who gives a f---?"
So, it comes down to leadership, society, industry, and, as Australian
officials
described, the need for a technical change in measurement practices. With
regard
to measurement, it is a matter of the U.S. maturing. Just this morning, I
was
talking to a friend about his daughter finishing her potty-training. This
vast
and complex nation, the nation put to melody in Dvorak's Ninth Symphony "For
The New World," for all its progress, still has metrological toilet
training to
do. The path to measurement maturity is going to be a challenging one. We
are
going to have to sell the "easier" of SI. The good news is, I think we can
do
it, and I think we shall do it.
--
Paul Trusten, R.Ph.
Public Relations Director
U.S. Metric Association, Inc.
Phone (432)528-7724
www.metric.org
3609 Caldera Boulevard, Apartment 122
Midland TX 79707-2872 USA
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://home.grandecom.net/~trusten
--
"The boy is dangerous, they all sense it why can't you?"
