Google for NASA JPL.  Locate "Basics of Space Flight" and you will find a large 
dose of numerical values stated in SI units. (plus light years, of course).

---- Original message ----
>Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:49:20 -0400
>From: "Kilopascal" <[email protected]>  
>Subject: Re: [USMA:50103] Re: Another NASA use of Ye Olde English units  
>To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, "U.S. Metric Association" 
><[email protected]>
>
>   I'm sure you would because you pay attention to the
>   subject.  But not everybody does and since Americans
>   today are not good spellers nor good typists there
>   is a possibility they may spell words differently
>   than you would like.  It may not be intended so you
>   can't always assume the source is foreign. 
>    
>   SI is foreign in the sense that it is international
>   and foreign in that it is unfamiliar to Americans. 
>   Spelling the units differently than the rest of the
>   English speaking world is not going to make it less
>   foreign.  American spellings are not going to endear
>   Americans to SI units and using English spellings is
>   not going to frighten them away.  If some
>   Americans claimed to be turned off to SI because of
>   English spellings, then they are lying and just
>   using it as an excuse.  If there was no spelling
>   difference then these people would find some other
>   excuse to oppose metrication.
>    
>   I hope that this comment doesn't lead to another
>   long nonsensical thread on spelling preferences. 
>    
>   --------------------------------------------------
>   From: <[email protected]>
>   Sent: Saturday, 2011-03-19 11:38
>   To: "Kilopascal" <[email protected]>;
>   <[email protected]>; "U.S. Metric Association"
>   <[email protected]>
>   Subject: Re: [USMA:50103] Re: Another NASA use of Ye
>   Olde English units
>
>   > 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)
>   >> >
>   >> >
>   >> >
>   >>
>   >>   
>   >
>   >
>   > -----
>   > No virus found in this message.
>   > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>   > Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1498/3516 -
>   Release Date: 03/19/11
>   >

Reply via email to