As a citizen of the USA, born in Pennsylvania, I consider the misspelling of 
meter as coming from a "foreign" source or otherwise objectionable influence.
EAM 

---- Original message ----
>Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 07:42:13 -0400
>From: "Kilopascal" <[email protected]>  
>Subject: [USMA:50103] Re: Another NASA use of Ye Olde English units  
>To: <[email protected]>, "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
>
>   Remek & Bill,
>    
>   I highly doubt that if someone sees the word
>   kilometre they would think it is coming from outside
>   the US.  You are attributing to much intelligence
>   to Americans, especially reporters and editors. 
>   They would simply think it is a spelling error.  So,
>   don't make more out of it than what it is or else
>   you will start another useless thread on spelling. 
>    
>   If Bill signed his message to them as being a US
>   Metric Association member he will probably be
>   ignored as harbouring a bias against things
>   American.   That would stick out more in their mind
>   than the spelling of a word.
>    
>   Bill said:
>    
>   > What's wrong with:
>   > ... slowing the spacecraft by 3104 km/h ... The
>   rendezvous took place about 154 million kilometres
>   from Earth  ... through its 7.9-billion-kilometre
>   journey.
>   >
>   > or even simpler
>   >
>   > ... slowing the spacecraft by 3.104 Mm/h ... The
>   rendezvous took place about 154 Gm from Earth.   ...
>   through its 7.9-Tm journey.
>   I don't understand why the spacecraft speed has to
>   be 3104 instead of 3100 km/h.  The extra 4 km/h is
>   just noise.   The speed could even have been stated
>   as 860 km/s.  I too would prefer to see 154 Gm from
>   earth and either a 7.9 Tm or 8.0 Tm journey, as I
>   loathe a mixture of numbers and words.  That
>   practice is a hang-over from USC/imperial as neither
>   hodge-podge has an effective means of handling large
>   and small numbers.  It would look silly in USC to
>   write of a 4 900 000 000 mile journey, so zeros are
>   omitted by inserting words like million, milliard,
>   billion, billiard, etc.  In SI we have prefixes to
>   replace those words.  We need to use them and make
>   ourselves comfortable seeing them in print.   
>    
>   Most intelligent people are use to the prefixes
>   mega, giga, tera, etc in the description of memory
>   and hard drive space.  So NASA can not claim that
>   these prefixes are unknown to the readers.  They may
>   be unknown to the reporter and editor, but any one
>   interested enough in space travel would be
>   intelligent enough to understand the prefixes. 
>   Those who don't understand the prefixes most likely
>   wouldn't understand much else in the article and
>   wouldn't even bother to read it or even be bothered
>   with it.
>    
>    
>
>[USMA:50103] Re: Another NASA use of Ye Olde English units
>
>   Remek Kocz
>   Fri, 18 Mar 2011 19:31:20 -0700
>
> I hate to stir up the spelling discussion again, but sending comments to
> NASA using non-US-English spellings of the units makes us look like people
> from outside the US having a beef with the agency's presentation.  The place
> is already intransigent, let's not give them any more ammunition to say "no
> metric for us."
>
> Remek
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Bill Hooper <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Another case of resistance to metric units from NASA.
> > Below is my reply including the quotes from NASA's press release to which I
> > was referring.
> >
> > Bill Hooper
> > Member, US Metric Association
> > www.metric.org
> >
> > ========================
> >
> > Would it kill you to let us know what those figures are in metric in
> > addition to (or preferably instead of) King George's Olde English measures?
> >
> > You [NASA] wrote, in RELEASE : 11-079 - NASA'S MESSENGER Spacecraft Begins
> > Historic Orbit Around Mercury
> >
> > ... slowing the spacecraft by 1,929 miles per hour ... The rendezvous took
> > place about 96 million miles from Earth.
> > ... through its 4.9-billion-mile journey.
> >
> >
> >
> > What's wrong with:
> > ... slowing the spacecraft by 3104 km/h ... The rendezvous took place about
> > 154 million kilometres from Earth.
> > ... through its 7.9-billion-kilometre journey.
> >
> > or even simpler
> >
> > ... slowing the spacecraft by 3.104 Mm/h ... The rendezvous took place
> > about 154 Gm from Earth.
> > ... through its 7.9-Tm journey.
> >
> > where Mm = megametres (1 Mm = 1000 km)
> > and Gm = gigametres (1 Gm = 1 000 Mm)
> > and Tm = terrametres (1 Tm = 1000 Gm)
> >
> >
> >
>
>    

Reply via email to