>The truth is, those you are trying to dumb down to by using AU don’t
understand AU either.

​I must be misunderstanding you, because this sounds remarkably similar to
you telling me that I am bad at my job and that you can tell me how to do
it.  I most certainly do not "dumb down" my work, which anyone who has
actually seen me work could tell you.

I did not invent the AU.  It is accepted for use with the SI and I use it.
I also use liters and centimeters if you'd care to reprimand me for that.

In the mean time, I have to insist that all the complaints on this mailing
list about things not being metric enough are entirely self-defeating.

ES

On 27 June 2014 18:37, Harold_Potsdamer <[email protected]> wrote:

>   Eric,
>
> I have to agree with John on this.  Units only become meaningful with
> use.  This is why SI is so superior.  You can pick a prefix that puts the
> numbers in a meaningful range.
>
> The truth is, those you are trying to dumb down to by using AU don’t
> understand AU either.
>
> Harold
>
>  *From:* John M. Steele <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Friday, 2014-06-27 06:40
> *To:* U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* [USMA:54069] Re: New supplement to the SI Brochure
>
>  But gigameters, terameters, petameters, etc.  are not.  That's what
> prefixes are for, and they continue to a range that could handle the
> universe.  The AU is approximately 149.6 Gm, the parsec about 30.86 Pm.
>
>
>   ------------------------------
> *From:* Eric L Shuman <[email protected]>
> *To:* U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Friday, June 27, 2014 2:48 AM
> *Subject:* [USMA:54068] Re: New supplement to the SI Brochure
>
>   Because the numbers are beyond human comprehension.  This part of my
> job requires me to provide some meaningful sense of proportion.
>
> Earth is 149 597 871 km from the Sun.  That's our STARTING point.  Meters,
> kilometers, miles, furlongs, parasangs and stadia are totally meaningless
> on the astronomical scale.
>
>
>
>
> On 26 June 2014 17:45, Harold_Potsdamer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>   Why?  Since the AU is fixed to the metre, why not just use the metre
> and its prefixes?
>
>
>
>  *From:* Eric L Shuman <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, 2014-06-26 15:31
> *To:* U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* [USMA:54054] Re: New supplement to the SI Brochure
>
>   Thanks for bringing this to my (our) attention!  I use the astronomical
> unit in outreach work that I do, so this is good to be aware of.
>
>
>  On 26 June 2014 07:36, James <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Dear Folks,
>
> The BIPM has issued a supplement to the SI Brochure. It alters the order
> of the base units in defining derived units (Tables 6 and 7), it reflects
> the recent IAU decision to define the astronomical year as a fixed and
> exact number, and it makes some updates reflecting the latest CODATA, among
> other things.
>
> http://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/si_supplement_2014.pdf
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jim Frysinger
>
> --
> James R. Frysinger
> 632 Stoney Point Mountain Road
> Doyle TN 38559-3030
>
> (C) 931.212.0267
> (H) 931.657.3107
> (F) 931.657.3108
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to