Jim, Gene sirs:
>Please use your keen mind to >help us metricate the U.S. instead of trying to
>significantly change the >SI via this list. I do believe, THIS list is 'not to
>promote my work'; however I have used this forum to make the list members
>aware that WORK has been done that may mean *the possibility EXISTS, to bring
>in the changes that SI may need to implement.....tomorrow, if not today*. This
>may also mean HUGE savings in 'conversion & implementation costs; and the tax
>to tax-payers in United States'. I still have my mind active and desire to
>contribute at this age http://www.brijvij.com/bbv_2col-vipBrief.pdf.
I wonder if there is any agency/organisation in United States who would want to
use my INPUTS, for a better future for Metric Reform & SI (Time, Length &
Calendar) inclusive.
I, however, thank you for your views, sirs.Brij Bhushan Vij (MJD
2454557)/995+D-050W13-01 (G. Monday, 2008 March 31 H 19:81(decimal) ISTAa 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) HOME PAGE: http://www.brijvij.com/******As per Kali
V-GRhymeCalendaar*****"Koi bhi cheshtha vayarth nahin hoti, purshaarth karne
mein hai"Contact # 011-9818775933 (M)001(201)962-3708(when in US)> Date: Sat,
29 Mar 2008 09:19:00 -0500> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:40705] Re: repurcussions RE: RE: sm vs sd - definitions RE: RE:
Promoting Metrication> > Brij,> > I share the observation made by Bill Potts
that you have been persistent > in reiterating your suggestions for radical
revisions to the SI.> > Your recommendations represent extreme changes and they
stand no chance > of acceptance. Please review the history of the SI as it
developed. You > will see that changes have been incremental and in small
increments at > that! Indeed, that is the intent and purpose of the
administrative > structure that was set up under the Treaty of the Meter -- to
avoid > sweeping changes and to keep a consistent design in place.> > The
purpose of the USMA mail list, in my view, is primarily to monitor > and to
promote the metrication of the U.S. This list also serves well to > help people
get answers to questions they have about the **current** SI. > It can also
provide a vehicle for suggesting **small** changes, such as > the content of
the SI brochure, NIST publications, and SI 10. Occasional > suggestions for a
new name for the kilogram are about as heady as most > people here care to get,
I think.> > Therefore your repeated recommendations for large revisions of the
SI > are not of interest to me and just clutter the list I see in my inbox. I >
prefer to see reports on progress made, examples of actions taken to > push
metrication, and suggestions on supporting the cause. New > calendars, new
definitions for units of time, and the like do nothing to > meet those goals.>
> Your thoughts may be brilliant, Brij -- I don't have the ability to > judge
that -- but I suggest that they may find more fertile ground on an > academic
discussion forum. I encourage you to find such outlets for your > suggested
changes to the SI and to spend your efforts on this list in > the metrication
goals I mentioned above. Please use your keen mind to > help us metricate the
U.S. instead of trying to significantly change the > SI via this list.> > Jim>
> Brij Bhushan Vij wrote:> > Bill, sir:> > >.....make changes to the basic
units that would have staggering > > repercussions.> > I thank you for mixed
feelings and your trust in my approach. While I > > agree, enough is enough, I
generally respond to mail that I feel is > > likely to be of interest in
'taking USA & the world' towards total > > metrication; in that I have provided
solutions to most problems > > *demonstrated at my Home Page:
http://brijvij.com/*.> > I point to a consolidated suggestion: > >
http://www.brijvij.com/bb_metro-contrbn.2007.pdf and the general input > > on
calendars: http://www.brijvij.com/bb_Wikia-calendar.pdf> > I shall be glad to
'discuss any expected repurcussions', if you deem > > approperiate (in private
or otherwise) since my thoughts are OPEN for > > the advantage of *man's
struggle to improve upon the existing norms*.> > With regards,> > Brij Bhushan
Vij > > (MJD 2454555)/995+D-048W12-06 (G. Saturday, 2008 March 29 H > >
17:91(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)> > HOME PAGE:
http://www.brijvij.com/> > ******As per Kali V-GRhymeCalendaar*****> > "Koi bhi
cheshtha vayarth nahin hoti, purshaarth karne mein hai"> > Contact #
011-9818775933 (M)> > 001(201)962-3708(when in US)> > > > > >
------------------------------------------------------------------------> >
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected]> > Subject: [USMA:40702] RE:
sm vs sd - definitions RE: RE: Promoting> > Metrication> > Date: Fri, 28 Mar
2008 14:03:57 -0700> > > > Brij:> > > > You certainly get high marks for
persistence. But, please, enough is> > enough. I'm happy with SI as it stands
(with some minor exceptions> > not related to your quest to make changes to the
basic units that> > would have staggering repercussions).> > > > Peace.> > > >
Bill> >
------------------------------------------------------------------------> >
Bill Potts> > Roseville, CA> > http://metric1.org <http://metric1.org/> [SI
Navigator]> > > >
------------------------------------------------------------------------> >
*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Brij
Bhushan Vij> > *Sent:* Friday, March 28, 2008 09:37> > *To:* U.S. Metric
Association> > *Subject:* [USMA:40701] sm vs sd - definitions RE: RE:
Promoting> > Metrication> > > > Bill, Martin & all:> > >In the case of
calculating 1 Ms, I realized that 86400 x 11> > was a little> > >under 10^6
while 86400 x 12 was a little over 10^6.> > My earlier contributions during
1970-71....onwards reflected> > THIS aspect, as listed are:> >
http://brijvij.com/eBookCopyrights-n-Patent_ParliamentaryReferences.doc> > If
we go by the proposed Metric Second (1973), A Quinto-Day> > (5-day interval
would be: (5*20)*100mm*100sm is 10^6 metric seconds.> > However, I have for the
time, now shelved the ideas in favour of> > 24hx100mdx100sd i.e. the day-night
be of 2*12 hours as existing> > now, with 100x100 sub-divisions of the hour.
Please see:> > http://www.brijvij.com/bb_deci-sec-nu-mtr.pdf> > Regards,> >
Brij Bhushan Vij > > (MJD 2454554)/995+D-047W12-05 (G. Friday, 2008 March 28 H>
> 22:11(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)> > HOME PAGE:
http://www.brijvij.com/> > ******As per Kali V-GRhymeCalendaar*****> > "Koi bhi
cheshtha vayarth nahin hoti, purshaarth karne mein hai"> > Contact #
011-9818775933 (M)> > 001(201)962-3708(when in US)> > > > > From: [EMAIL
PROTECTED]> > > To: [email protected]> > > Subject: [USMA:40691] RE: Promoting
Metrication> > > Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 21:31:21 +0000> > >> > > Bill,> > >> >
> My start point was that there are 86400 seconds in a day. I> > calculated
this> > > some years ago when I was working out the best way to> > represent
time in a> > > computer and I noticed that you could not represent the time> >
of day using a> > > 16 bit unsigned integer.> > >> > > In the case of
calculating 1 Ms, I realized that 86400 x 11> > was a little> > > under 10^6
while 86400 x 12 was a little over 10^6.> > >> > > -----Original Message----->
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf> > > Of Bill
Potts> > > Sent: 27 March 2008 01:15> > > To: U.S. Metric Association> > >
Subject: [USMA:40684] RE: Promoting Metrication> > >> > > I was about to
correct you when I read your own correction.> > >> > > I always remember that 1
Ms is 11 days, 13 hours, 46 minutes,> > 40 seconds,> > > because I set myself a
challenge, when I was in my teens, to> > calculate it in> > > my head. There
any many things about my teens that I've> > happily forgotten> > > (mostly very
embarrassing stuff), but not that.> > >> > > Bill> > >
________________________________> > > Bill Potts> > > Roseville, CA> > >
http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]> > >> > >> > > -----Original Message-----> >
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf> > > Of Martin
Vlietstra> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 14:40> > > To: U.S. Metric
Association> > > Subject: [USMA:40683] RE: Promoting Metrication> > >> > >
Oops, 11 days is about 1 Ms, so 100 Ms is about 3 years.> > >> > >
-----Original Message-----> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [mailto:[EMAIL
PROTECTED] On Behalf> > > Of Martin Vlietstra> > > Sent: 26 March 2008 21:35> >
> To: U.S. Metric Association> > > Subject: [USMA:40682] RE: Promoting
Metrication> > >> > > 100 Ms? That is about every 11 days :-)> > >> > >
-----Original Message-----> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [mailto:[EMAIL
PROTECTED] On Behalf> > > Of Bill Potts> > > Sent: 26 March 2008 20:41> > > To:
U.S. Metric Association> > > Subject: [USMA:40680] RE: Promoting Metrication> >
>> > > Martin:> > >> > > Nobody is denying the status of the word "metric," as
a noun,> > OUTSIDE the> > > scope and context of SI.> > >> > > However, WITHIN
the scope and context of SI, "metric" is only> > ever used as> > > an
adjective.> > >> > > Outside SI, "metric" does not refer to a standard, but to
a> > means. "Metrics"> > > typically consist of counts and percentages (and,
often, very> > subjective> > > ones). Where those who use the term "metrics"
need to use> > units of measure,> > > there is no implicit standard that
determines what those> > units will be.> > > Here, of course, we hope they'll
use SI units (and, in almost> > all other> > > countries, they would do so as a
matter of course), but> > that's beside the> > > point.> > >> > > This, by the
way, is a topic we dealt with on this list over> > 10 years ago. I> > > guess
it does need to be brought up, though, from time to> > time (maybe every> > >
100 Ms or so).> > >> > > Bill> > > ________________________________> > > Bill
Potts> > > Roseville, CA> > > http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]> > >> > >> > >
-----Original Message-----> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [mailto:[EMAIL
PROTECTED] On Behalf> > > Of Martin Vlietstra> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 26,
2008 13:03> > > To: U.S. Metric Association> > > Subject: [USMA:40679] RE:
Promoting Metrication> > >> > > Gene,> > >> > > Metric is a noun as well as an
adjective. Consider the> > following sentence> > > "The metrics used to
describe the technological development> > of a nation> > > include energy
consumption per capita, GNP per capita, number> > of cars,> > > telephone, TV
sets etc per capita".> > >> > > Martin> > >> > > -----Original Message-----> >
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf> > > Of [EMAIL
PROTECTED]> > > Sent: 26 March 2008 18:17> > > To: U.S. Metric Association> > >
Subject: [USMA:40676] Promoting Metrication> > >> > > Ernie,> > >> > > I
applaud your efforts to promote metrication in the USA!> > >> > > However,
please *do consider* Bill Potts message below.> > >> > > The word "metric" is
an adjective.> > >> > > Appropriate terms for USMA objectives are "metric
units" or> > "metric system"> > > or "metric system of units"; or the symbol SI
for each of the> > above terms.> > >> > > The word "metrics" is a noun,
unrelated to SI in particular,> > although it is> > > widely used as Bill
explains below to access performance of a> > campaign or> > > process.> > >> >
> Gene Mechtly.> > >> > > ---- Original message ----> > > >Date: Wed, 26 Mar
2008 08:28:05 -0700> > > >From: "Bill Potts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > > >Subject:
[USMA:40674] RE: Furthering Metrics> > > >To: "U.S. Metric Association"
<[email protected]>> > > >> > > > Ernie:> > > >> > > > Did you miss my recent
message about the use of the> > > > term "metrics?"> > > >> > > > Basically, it
said that the word "metrics" appears> > > > nowhere in official documentation
on the metric> > > > system or in related standards documentation.> > > >
Rather, it's a non-technical term, unrelated to the> > > > metric system, that
refers, broadly, to the means by> > > > which one measures the effectiveness of
something> > > > (e.g., an advertising campaign).> > > >> > > > Metric, as used
in the context of the Modern Metric> > > > System (SI) is an adjective and,
therefore, is never> > > > written in the plural.> > > >> > > > The goal of
organizations like the US Metric> > > > Association is to further the use of
the Modern> > > > Metric System (which, of course, involves the use of> > > >
metric units).> > > >> > > > Please accept this as information, not as
criticism.> > > >> > > > Bill Potts> > > >> > > >
------------------------------------------------> > > >> > > > Bill Potts> > >
> Roseville, CA> > > > http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]> > >> > > > > >
------------------------------------------------------------------------> > In
a rush? Get real-time answers with Windows Live Messenger.> >
<http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_realtime_042008>>
> > > > > > >
------------------------------------------------------------------------> >
Watch “Cause Effect,” a show about real people making a real difference. > >
Learn more. <http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/MTV/?source=text_watchcause>> > --
> James R. Frysinger> 632 Stony Point Mountain Road> Doyle, TN 38559-3030> >
(H) 931.657.3107> (C) 931.212.0267>
_________________________________________________________________
Test your Star IQ
http://club.live.com/red_carpet_reveal.aspx?icid=redcarpet_HMTAGMAR
