[USMA:43410] Re: Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK.
My local Tesco in Grimsby weighs ONLY in metric units for trade purposes (at the deli and fish counters primarily). Yes, the customer-use weigh scales are dual marked, with metric as the primary (outer) scale, and imperial as the secondary (inner) scale. All our other local supermarkets (Morrisons, Sainsbury's, ASDA, Somerfield) only retail weigh products in metric, this is the law. Annoyingly, some counter staff insist on converting it to imperial for me (even when I have asked for it in metric), but that is sporadic. Also to confirm - all fuel, whether petrol (gasoline) and diesel at the pumps, or the fuel oil we buy for our heating system, is sold in liters ONLY. Even aircraft fuel is calibrated in liters (a friend of mine works at my local airport). I have NEVER seen automotive fuel in other than metric. Same for Canada - since conversion in 1978, all gasoline can be dispensed ONLY in liters. The UK is primarily metric (e.g. the laptop computer I am typing this out on is shown as weighing 3.5 kg, no imperial equivalent), and officially all government is metric, even though there is some backsliding. Only the road signage, and pints in the pub, are not metric. These are the sole areas that those who resist metric conversion are holding out on. - Original Message - From: Ken Cooper To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:23 PM Subject: [USMA:43401] Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK. As you suggest, Jerry, one individual on one website seems to believe that liquid fuel in the UK is dispensed in air miles rather than litres. I think that his views can safely be ignored. I can assure you that UK law still states that litres MUST be used whenever liquid fuels are sold by retail in the UK. My view of the law is backed up by my own experiences in filling my car at pumps in dozens of filling stations throughout the UK, and in passing hundreds of other filling stations with large roadside price displays marked solely with prices per litre. UK petrol pumps normally have 3 active displays at any one time. One tells the price per litre, one tells the number of litres dispensed and one tells the total price to pay. Some pumps omit the price per litre a few omit the price to pay. In every case, however, there is a requirement that the pump shows the number of litres dispensed. I'm sure that other UK contributors to this site can confirm my findings. With regard to Tesco's supposed return to using imperial scales at their fish counter in their Loudwater store, I would point out that this information is provided by the same individual on the same website I mention above. This tine, he makes a claim that Tesco are using dual scales for trade purposes in this store. Unfortunately, he refuses to provide any meaningful detail about the scales, making it impossible to verify whether he is telling the truth or not. I've never been in the Loudwater Tesco, so I cannot comment on that particular store. However, during the last 12 months or so, I have visited Tesco stores in Dundee (4), Edinburgh (3), Glasgow (2), Helensburgh (2), Arbroath, Ayr, Budapest(non-UK!), Campbeltown, Dumbarton, Dublin(non-UK!), Inverness, Lochgilphead, London, Oban, Perth Stirling. None of these stores use dual-marked weighing equipment for any trade purposes (a few have dual non-trade customer checkweighers in the FV aisle). Each and every one of those stores had weighing and/or measuring equipment in use for trade. Without exception, the equipment indicated in metric units only. Again, I would ask other UK contributors to post their experiences in Tesco stores. I'm pretty sure that only one person will claim to have seen such a scale, yet will prove to be surprisingly reluctant (or perhaps unable) to provide any real proof that it exists. --- On Sat, 3/7/09, Jeremiah MacGregor jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com wrote: From: Jeremiah MacGregor jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com Subject: Re: [USMA:43385] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices! To: k_cooper1...@yahoo.com, U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Saturday, March 7, 2009, 1:48 AM Ken, I've heard a rumor recently that the UK no longer uses the liter for dispensing gasoline but has instead switched to a new unit called air miles. Can you provide some further information on this? I also understand that some super markets are now re-introducing scales in pound units that are being used to weigh goods asked for by customers. I believe that a Tesco located in the town of Loudwater has already changed over. Can you provide some further information on this reversion? Jerry
[USMA:43411] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices!
Boxing Day is a legal holiday in Canada and the UK. Solicitor is used in Canada, although not as much as the UK. Medicare is unknown in Canada, which has a federally prescribed provincially run universal health system (e.g. in Ontario, it is OHIP - Ontario Health Insurance Plan, this was 10 years ago when I last lived there, it may be different now). - Original Message - From: Ken Cooper To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:36 PM Subject: [USMA:43403] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices! John Your theory holds water, as further purusal of the diary throws up the following:- UK-specific (ie non-US) references *Boxing Day* *Solicitor* US-specific (ie non-UK) references *Medicare number* All three of these references would be valid in Canada, I believe. --- On Tue, 3/3/09, John M. Steele jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net wrote: From: John M. Steele jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net Subject: [USMA:43342] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices! To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 2:03 PM Solicitor is not a common term here, listings would be under lawyers or attorneys in a telephone directory. Also Boxing Day is virtually unknown here; it appears only on calendars that try to appeal to a universal English-speaking audience. Those try to list all Australian, Canadian, UK and US holidays as a big jumble. You might look for signs it is Canadian. Being right next door but a Commonwealth nation, they are most likely to mix UK and US practices. They tend to accept USC measure as dual marking provided the metric is correct.. I'm not sure it is legally accepted, but there doesn't seem to be enforcement. I would also guess that few Americans could tell you the correct size of a US gallon or bushel either in cubic inches or liters, so the reverse error would go equally undetected here. --- On Tue, 3/3/09, Ken Cooper k_cooper1...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Ken Cooper k_cooper1...@yahoo.com Subject: [USMA:43341] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices! To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 8:35 AM Paul I had a look this morning - it's not clear. The picture on the wrap-around cover is definitely local (probably supplied by the hotel) the printer has coped with the Scots Gaelic hotel name has given the UK postcode phone number in the normal manner. There's no mention of a publisher's name, and I think that the Public Holidays marked would relate to both the UK US (New Year's Day, Good Friday, Easter Sunday, Easter Monday, Christmas Day Boxing Day) There are no mentions of US holidays like the 4th of July or Thanksgiving, or of UK public holidays like May Day. The only other clue would be that in the important numbers section, one of the categories given is solicitor - wouldn't that tend to be lawyer or advocate in a US diary? Is solicitor an accepted term for a legal practitioner in the USA? --- On Tue, 3/3/09, Paul Trusten, R.Ph. trus...@grandecom.net wrote: From: Paul Trusten, R.Ph. trus...@grandecom.net Subject: Re: [USMA:43336] USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices! To: k_cooper1...@yahoo..com Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 1:09 AM Ken, could it be that the diaries are imported from the U.S.? Quoting Ken Cooper k_cooper1...@yahoo.com: One of my local hotels hands out small diaries as new year gifts to customers/visitors etc. I note that this year's version has a section entitled conversions underneath the time-zones map. I was intrigued to note that it had different sections for dry for liquid measure, and that the liquid measure gave conversions for fluid ounce, quart gallon - but not for pint. On closer examination, I found that the fluid ounce was defined as 29 and a bit millilitres, the quart as ~946ml the gallon as ~3.79 litres. Now, as everyone knows, these figures would be correct in USC, but are all incorrect in UK imperial. I'll lay odds that practically no-one actually
[USMA:43428] Re: Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK.
My car, a Citroen C5 for the UK market, can calculate in imperial (mpg) or in metric (L/100 km). I keep it in metric, especially as I got used to metric in Canada, where both distances and fuel are given in metric values. My C5, over the last 7000 km, is averaging 7.5 L/100 km, not bad for a 2.2 L twin turbo 129 kW (173 hp) diesel, with 6-speed tiptronic automatic, driven, how shall say, rather sprightly. But then the French always were rather good at diesel engines. I would think that the majority of cars sold in the UK in the last three years have on board computers - even basic cars today have them, and most likely all are capable of displaying in metric or imperial for the UK market. - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 4:48 PM Subject: [USMA:43416] Re: Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK. Thank You Ken for the enlightenment. I'm curious about the use of the mpg when fuel is dispensed in liters. The calculation is complex and I can't see most people going through the bother. So, in your opinion how does the average person come to know his/her mpg? I was told a few weeks back about the car computer doing it, but how many people have such a device? Do you calculate your mpg manually or do you use a mixed unit like miles per liter? How much do you think L/100 km is used? Jerry -- From: Ken Cooper k_cooper1...@yahoo.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Saturday, March 7, 2009 9:23:48 AM Subject: [USMA:43401] Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK. As you suggest, Jerry, one individual on one website seems to believe that liquid fuel in the UK is dispensed in air miles rather than litres. I think that his views can safely be ignored. I can assure you that UK law still states that litres MUST be used whenever liquid fuels are sold by retail in the UK. My view of the law is backed up by my own experiences in filling my car at pumps in dozens of filling stations throughout the UK, and in passing hundreds of other filling stations with large roadside price displays marked solely with prices per litre. UK petrol pumps normally have 3 active displays at any one time. One tells the price per litre, one tells the number of litres dispensed and one tells the total price to pay. Some pumps omit the price per litre a few omit the price to pay. In every case, however, there is a requirement that the pump shows the number of litres dispensed. I'm sure that other UK contributors to this site can confirm my findings. With regard to Tesco's supposed return to using imperial scales at their fish counter in their Loudwater store, I would point out that this information is provided by the same individual on the same website I mention above. This tine, he makes a claim that Tesco are using dual scales for trade purposes in this store. Unfortunately, he refuses to provide any meaningful detail about the scales, making it impossible to verify whether he is telling the truth or not. I've never been in the Loudwater Tesco, so I cannot comment on that particular store. However, during the last 12 months or so, I have visited Tesco stores in Dundee (4), Edinburgh (3), Glasgow (2), Helensburgh (2), Arbroath, Ayr, Budapest(non-UK!), Campbeltown, Dumbarton, Dublin(non-UK!), Inverness, Lochgilphead, London, Oban, Perth Stirling. None of these stores use dual-marked weighing equipment for any trade purposes (a few have dual non-trade customer checkweighers in the FV aisle). Each and every one of those stores had weighing and/or measuring equipment in use for trade. Without exception, the equipment indicated in metric units only. Again, I would ask other UK contributors to post their experiences in Tesco stores. I'm pretty sure that only one person will claim to have seen such a scale, yet will prove to be surprisingly reluctant (or perhaps unable) to provide any real proof that it exists. --- On Sat, 3/7/09, Jeremiah MacGregor jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com wrote: From: Jeremiah MacGregor jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com Subject: Re: [USMA:43385] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices! To: k_cooper1...@yahoo.com, U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Saturday, March 7, 2009, 1:48 AM Ken, I've heard a rumor recently that the UK no longer uses the liter for dispensing gasoline but has instead switched to a new unit called air miles. Can you provide some further information on this? I also understand that some super markets are now re-introducing scales in pound units that are being used to weigh goods asked
[USMA:43437] Re: Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK.
To be honest Jerry, I have not actually checked whether they get it right - I simply look at the scales (in metric), and ignore their conversions. They never use a calculator - these are busy deli counters, so I assume they guess. When I order in metric (e.g. 500 g of pork and egg pie), they will not convert it at that point, but simply cut off their own estimate (which is usually quite close, so they must know how much 500 g of pork and egg pie looks like), and then say to me as they put it on the scales something like That's just over a pound - is that OK?. To which I reply on the lines of You've weighed me 486 g, that's just fine. The receipts are ONLY in metric - that is the law. - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: j...@frewston.plus.com ; U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 5:49 PM Subject: Re: [USMA:43410] Re: Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK. Even though they try to convert to imperial for you, how close do them come to getting it right? Do they use a calculator to do the conversion or do they just give you a guess? What do they usually say when you order in metric? Do you get a receipt of your purchase and is it metric only or dual? Jerry -- From: John Frewen-Lord j...@frewston.plus.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Saturday, March 7, 2009 10:52:47 AM Subject: [USMA:43410] Re: Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK. My local Tesco in Grimsby weighs ONLY in metric units for trade purposes (at the deli and fish counters primarily). Yes, the customer-use weigh scales are dual marked, with metric as the primary (outer) scale, and imperial as the secondary (inner) scale. All our other local supermarkets (Morrisons, Sainsbury's, ASDA, Somerfield) only retail weigh products in metric, this is the law. Annoyingly, some counter staff insist on converting it to imperial for me (even when I have asked for it in metric), but that is sporadic. Also to confirm - all fuel, whether petrol (gasoline) and diesel at the pumps, or the fuel oil we buy for our heating system, is sold in liters ONLY. Even aircraft fuel is calibrated in liters (a friend of mine works at my local airport). I have NEVER seen automotive fuel in other than metric. Same for Canada - since conversion in 1978, all gasoline can be dispensed ONLY in liters. The UK is primarily metric (e.g. the laptop computer I am typing this out on is shown as weighing 3.5 kg, no imperial equivalent), and officially all government is metric, even though there is some backsliding. Only the road signage, and pints in the pub, are not metric. These are the sole areas that those who resist metric conversion are holding out on. - Original Message - From: Ken Cooper To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:23 PM Subject: [USMA:43401] Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK. As you suggest, Jerry, one individual on one website seems to believe that liquid fuel in the UK is dispensed in air miles rather than litres. I think that his views can safely be ignored. I can assure you that UK law still states that litres MUST be used whenever liquid fuels are sold by retail in the UK. My view of the law is backed up by my own experiences in filling my car at pumps in dozens of filling stations throughout the UK, and in passing hundreds of other filling stations with large roadside price displays marked solely with prices per litre. UK petrol pumps normally have 3 active displays at any one time. One tells the price per litre, one tells the number of litres dispensed and one tells the total price to pay. Some pumps omit the price per litre a few omit the price to pay. In every case, however, there is a requirement that the pump shows the number of litres dispensed. I'm sure that other UK contributors to this site can confirm my findings. With regard to Tesco's supposed return to using imperial scales at their fish counter in their Loudwater store, I would point out that this information is provided by the same individual on the same website I mention above. This tine, he makes a claim that Tesco are using dual scales for trade purposes in this store. Unfortunately, he refuses to provide any meaningful detail about the scales, making it impossible to verify whether he is telling the truth or not. I've never been in the Loudwater Tesco, so I cannot comment on that particular store. However, during the last 12 months or so, I have visited Tesco stores in Dundee (4), Edinburgh (3), Glasgow (2), Helensburgh (2), Arbroath, Ayr, Budapest(non-UK!), Campbeltown, Dumbarton, Dublin(non-UK!), Inverness
[USMA:43440] Re: Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK.
More and more height (and to a lesser extent, width) signs are becoming dual marked. The imperial is legally required, the metric is optional. But too many EU registered trucks were becoming stuck under low bridges (often on routes which are not usually used by big trucks - blame sat nav for that), and so the recommendation is for dual signs. Many of them are now dual marked, usually metric first, then imperial. Width signs are more of a problem, especially temporary signs in road construction projects, where lanes have been narrowed. - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 5:57 PM Subject: [USMA:43436] Re: Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK. Are the dual height restriction signs common in the UK? Haven't most of the metric been wiped out by ARM? Jerry -- From: Ken Cooper k_cooper1...@yahoo.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Saturday, March 7, 2009 12:05:44 PM Subject: [USMA:43421] Re: Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK. Carleton As John Frewen-Lord states, you will see imperial measurement used for the majority of UK roadsigns. Normally, official signs giving distances don't use an abbreviation for miles. A sign would say York 10 rather than York 10 m, York 10 mi or York 10 miles You obviously spotted one of the m means miles signs. m is also used to mean metres on some UK road-signs.. These signs are mainly confined to signs showing restricted heights or widths are also accompanied by imperial measurements in feet/inches. --- On Sat, 3/7/09, Carleton MacDonald carlet...@comcast.net wrote: From: Carleton MacDonald carlet...@comcast.net Subject: [USMA:43413] Re: Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK. To: U.S.. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Saturday, March 7, 2009, 4:32 PM When I was in the UK in June 2005 our friend took us driving from Southsea to Stonehenge. On the motorway the distance to the next exit was noted on the sign as “1 m”. Funny, even though that looked metric, I didn’t see it all that close. Carleton From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of John Frewen-Lord Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 10:53 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:43410] Re: Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK. My local Tesco in Grimsby weighs ONLY in metric units for trade purposes (at the deli and fish counters primarily). Yes, the customer-use weigh scales are dual marked, with metric as the primary (outer) scale, and imperial as the secondary (inner) scale. All our other local supermarkets (Morrisons, Sainsbury's, ASDA, Somerfield) only retail weigh products in metric, this is the law. Annoyingly, some counter staff insist on converting it to imperial for me (even when I have asked for it in metric), but that is sporadic. Also to confirm - all fuel, whether petrol (gasoline) and diesel at the pumps, or the fuel oil we buy for our heating system, is sold in liters ONLY. Even aircraft fuel is calibrated in liters (a friend of mine works at my local airport). I have NEVER seen automotive fuel in other than metric. Same for Canada - since conversion in 1978, all gasoline can be dispensed ONLY in liters. The UK is primarily metric (e.g. the laptop computer I am typing this out on is shown as weighing 3.5 kg, no imperial equivalent), and officially all government is metric, even though there is some backsliding. Only the road signage, and pints in the pub, are not metric. These are the sole areas that those who resist metric conversion are holding out on. - Original Message - From: Ken Cooper To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:23 PM Subject: [USMA:43401] Jerry's questions regarding imperial fuel fish sales in the UK. As you suggest, Jerry, one individual on one website seems to believe that liquid fuel in the UK is dispensed in air miles rather than litres. I think that his views can safely be ignored. I can assure you that UK law still states that litres MUST be used whenever liquid fuels are sold by retail in the UK. My view of the law is backed up by my own experiences in filling my car at pumps in dozens of filling stations throughout the UK, and in passing hundreds of other filling stations with large roadside price displays marked solely with prices per litre. UK petrol pumps
[USMA:43501] Re: the UK--metrophobia run riot
Paul: What you say is perfectly true, although the US and the UK have different reasons for maintaining a perception of national identity (and I will also include Canada here, as I lived there for very many years and experienced that country's, as yet incomplete, switch to SI). In the UK's case, national identity does come into it, but this is primarily because of the UK's membership of the EU, headquartered in Brussels. Many of the UK's current laws and directives now come from Brussels rather than Westminster, and a good proportion of the UK population resents this - and, it has to be said, with good reason, for the EU in making these laws is subjected to far too little accountability and oversight. Unfortunately, completing the UK's switch to SI is now inextricably caught up in this, aided and abetted by those UK politicians who have shamelessly capitalized on this EU phobia to win votes, and further reinforced by a media that is openly hostile to SI. Compounding this is the perception, also reinforced by the media, that the UK and the US share a common (non-metric) measuring system (much of it is not common at all, but again that is ignored by the media), and therefore, so the reasoning goes, the UK should not go any further down the metric road until the US does. I am sure that similar reciprocal sentiments operate in the US, even if only at a low level. Where politicians of all stripes in the UK have failed miserably in their duty to the country is showing that the metric system is world-wide, and has nothing at all to do with Brussels ramming it down the UK's throat. It is however going to take a brave leader to sell that to the country, even though having two systems (one legal, one quasi-legal, even though it's not taught officially in schools!) is costing the country huge amounts in lost productivity and education time. Finally, in Canada's case, while the country does not have quite the same hang-ups about sovereignty in the same way the US and the UK have, it is also caught between two competing national identity idealogies - one, wanting to keep some (metric) distance (sorry!) between itself and the US, in case it becomes subsumed by the US, the other recognizing that the US is by far Canada's largest trading partner, and that therefore Canada is still going to have to undertake some business in Imperial units. If we could square that circle, resistance would be much more easily overcome. I do hope you enjoy Scotland - a lovely country. - Original Message - From: Paul Trusten To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 4:13 PM Subject: [USMA:43491] the UK--metrophobia run riot It seems to me that the U.S. and the UK share one thing in common with measurement: a jingoistic fear of changing to metric. A past issue of Metric Today (March-April 2005) theorized on the origins of this fear, part of which is a kind of metrological nationalism. The editorial stated, in part: But metrophobia finds one of its best lightning rods in patriotism: that Americans will be somehow less American if they use metric. The often-repeated riddle in the 1994 film, Pulp Fiction, What do they call a (McDonald's) Quarter PounderT in France? . . .they have the metric system . . . popularized the distorted concept in the U.S. that metric is an overseas threat instead of a world standard. The issue often comes down to tying U.S. superpower status with its measurement units: that the country is somehow supreme because it adheres stubbornly to its antiquated system, as if the adherence to outdated measurement units confers a talisman-like protection against conquest. I have never lived in the United Kingdom, and cannot speak personally for the British people. Maybe I'll be able to find out more when I visit Scotland in August. But, now, I see an island nation beset with a world measurement system closing in on all sides. Ireland, which, in 2005, changed its road signs to read in kilometers and kilometers per hour, faces the UK border at Northern Ireland. And, of course, the Channel Tunnel pipes the metric system into the country from the southeast. So, in the case of the UK, it seems that a new system of measurement is closing in. I wonder to what extent, in both America and Britain, it remains necessary to continue to reinvest in the old units as a cache of national identity. I hope that, one day, for the sake of both countries, national strength and popular honor will be found in common sense. Both Britons and Americans should conclude that metrication is victory, not defeat. Paul Trusten, R.Ph. Public Relations Director U.S. Metric Association, Inc. www.metric.org 3609 Caldera Blvd. Apt. 122 Midland TX 79707-2872 US +1(432)528-7724 trus...@grandecom.net
[USMA:43527] Re: Metric discussion on the railroad list (1)
Standard guage all over the world is 1435 mm. However Russia (and the old USSR, as well as some satellite states such as Finland) used - quite why for totally metric countries - a gauge of 5' 0 (1520 mm). Ostensibly that was to preserve Russian sovereignty by preventing through running of trains from Western Europe. I do not know however quite why an imperial dimension was used in a totally metric country. Does anyone know the answer to this? - Original Message - From: Martin Vlietstra vliets...@btinternet.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 8:10 PM Subject: [USMA:43526] Re: Metric discussion on the railroad list (1) The US standard rail gage was derived from the British standard gauge of 4ft 8½in (1435.1 mm). However the Irish works out in round numbers in both metric and imperial units - 1600 mm differs from 5ft 3in by 0.2 mm - well within tolerance limits. -Original Message- From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of John M. Steele Sent: 08 March 2009 16:34 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:43495] Re: Metric discussion on the railroad list (1) Assuming Wikipedia is correct, the tolerance of 1435 mm gauge track is 1423 mm to 1460 mm for track rated for 60 MPH travel. I assume lower grade (lower speed) track is allowed a wider tolerance. Thus, that 0.1 mm confusion in nominal is entirely negligible. I assume the tolerance is asymmetric because the width can not be narrower than maximum wheel flange spacing (the flanges are on the inside, and ideally do not touch) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_gauge --- On Sun, 3/8/09, Jeremiah MacGregor jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com wrote: From: Jeremiah MacGregor jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com Subject: [USMA:43489] Re: Metric discussion on the railroad list (1) To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Sunday, March 8, 2009, 11:53 AM Carleton, Also in the design of railroad equipment, can you tell us what the usual tolerance ranges usually are? You are correct that in the world they don't get precise to sub-millimeter precision unless they have to. They would round everything to whole numbers if it wouldn't effect the outcome or if it falls within acceptable tolerances. The standard rail gage in the US is 56.5 inches, which equals 1435.1 mm. Everywhere else it is equal to exactly 1435 mm. I don't know anything about railroads but I bet that nowhere will one find the tracks consistently 1435 mm due to many factors that distance will vary to some degree. There is constant exposure to heat and cold. There are movements in the earth which can shift tracks, etc. Thus to worry about sub-millimeter lengths is ridiculous.
[USMA:43624] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices!
When I lived in Canada, we used to do some of our shopping at a large Costco in Mississauga, Ont, where most products seemed to be packaged in larger sizes suitable for, and directed towards, the non-retail hospitality and instutional industries (hotels, restaurants, hospitals, etc). What surprised me was that all this packaging was in hard metric sizes - 2 kg tins of coffee, 1 kg packs of bacon (Canadian of course!), 4 L jugs of milk (although that is also a Canadian retail size sold in normal supermarkets and convenience stores), 10 kg bags of potatoes, etc, etc. It strikes me it would not be beyond the realms of possibility for Costco to simply switch their US packaging operations to the same as their Canadian ones? (I know, I am on dangerous ground here, but just pointing out some logical - commercially sensible - moves to help metrication in the US). - Original Message - From: John M. Steele jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 10:57 PM Subject: [USMA:43612] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices! I made a point of checking my supermarket milk (in the frig) and the milk at Costco while I shopped today. Here in Michigan both are labeled 1 GAL / 3.78 L and have a nutrition label exactly like any other food regulated under FPLA and the nutrition label requirements. However, I suppose it could be under UPLR or even similar State requirements. If State requirements, then there is a 50 States = 50 Ways problem. On the Costco milk, the net contents is printed on the label. On the supermarket milk it is stamped into the plastic container and a little hard to read unless you turn the bottle correctly. I still believe they could fill to 4 L if they wanted too. --- On Mon, 3/9/09, STANLEY DOORE stan.do...@verizon.net wrote: From: STANLEY DOORE stan.do...@verizon.net Subject: Re: [USMA:43487] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices! To: jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net, U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Monday, March 9, 2009, 1:37 AM I can't cite a specific law about dual labeling milk and other dairy products, however they are not dual labeled now. Milk comes under special state laws for farm products. Stan Doore - Original Message - From: John M. Steele jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 9:13 AM Subject: [USMA:43487] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices! Are you sure about that? Can you cite a law? I can't see an exception for milk in the FPLA, and sectio 1461 seems to be pretty clear that it supercedes state law, requiring less or different information.. I believe it must be dual labelled and could be sold in either a round Customary or metric quantity. Specifically, I believe a 4 L fill would be legal, but it would also have to be properly labeled in Customary. --- On Sun, 3/8/09, STANLEY DOORE stan.do...@verizon.net wrote: From: STANLEY DOORE stan.do...@verizon.net Subject: [USMA:43486] Re: USC units spread to the UK - and no-one notices! To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Sunday, March 8, 2009, 8:58 AM milk which must be sold by the gallon due to government laws and regulations. Stan Doore
[USMA:43628] Re: 24 hour time
The best way for the US to change its date format is to go straight to the ISO format of /MM/DD. When Canada converted in the late '70s, this was the official format at the time, and all Canadian Federal and Provincial government documentation at the time had to follow this format. Regretfully, and primarily thanks to Mr Gates, this seems to have been abandoned, due in no small part to Windows defaulting to the US-only format, regardless of which country it is sold in. This is not merely of academic interest. I bank with HSBC, and have both UK and Canadian bank accounts, including something called Global View, where I can view on line (and switch money on line between) my accounts in both countries simultaneously. The UK accounts are shown in DD/MM/YY format. The Canadian ones are shown in MM/DD/YY format when looking at statement summaries or selecting a date range to view a statement - but the individual entries in that statement are shown in DD/MM/YY format! Needless to say this is infuriating and confusing, and I wonder why HSBC do this, as they are UK-based. However, my printed Canadian statements are postmarked in NY State with US postage, so there must be a US connection in there somewhere. If anyone does online currency trading, all the trading platforms are in /MM/DD format, and various online videos I receive from US-based gurus and experts are also usually shown in this format. This does save a lot of confusion. - Original Message - From: David To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 9:07 AM Subject: [USMA:43625] 24 hour time What are the changes of the United States adopting 24 hour time instead of the AM/PM thing? Would there be some kind of law (which would probably occur after metrication) or would it just be one of those things people just adopt? What about date standards? I would like to see America start using DD/MM/YY instead of MM/DD/YY. What does it take for a country to adopt a date/time standard?
[USMA:43660] Re: 24 hour time
It was me who mentioned the default Windows date format. I agree - it really is no problem to change it - when you are aware of the options (either in Windows, or, as you rightly point out Bill, in Excel). The problem is that most people are simply too lazy or unaware to change the default - they assume that what Windows comes with is what you get. Hence the regression (in Canada) to the MM-DD- format as the default, and I can trace this regression to the period between 1995 (when Windows first appeared) and today. Notwithstanding this, I do notice that my recently renewed Ontario Drivers Licence is still in -MM-DD format (which caused some confusion when I rented a car in San Diego a few years ago) - issue date 2008/06/25, Expiry 2012/04/13, height 175 cm. (And yes, the separator is the forward slash, not the hyphen.) Martin mentioned the use in South Africa of DD-MM- in English and MM-DD- in Afrikaans. I must admit this must have been bizarre! I did live in SA in 1969 to 1971, and was not aware of this difference - but then I didn't speak Afrikaans, so probably didn't come into direct contact with it. - Original Message - From: Bill Potts To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 7:48 PM Subject: [USMA:43648] Re: 24 hour time I don't see it as a major problem. I have no difficulty saying 1776-07-04 out loud and without hesitation as July the fourth, seventeen-seventy-six. I have to admit, though, I can see it as a problem for anyone who is dyslexic. (Dyslexics of the World untie!) Someone mentioned the MS Windows default on date format. As Windows allows an easy change to ISO-8601 format (-mm-dd hh:mm:ss), resetting it is simply a one-time task. MS Excel is equally flexible for cells in date and time columns. The ISO-8601 formats are in the Custom list. I receive membership spreadsheets, regularly, with expiration dates in US format. It takes me about 15 s to change the applicable column to ISO-8601 format. Bill -- Bill Potts WFP Consulting Roseville, CA http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Mangum Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 11:38 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:43645] Re: 24 hour time I prefer DD-MM- (and other formats in this order), but have found myself writing -MM-DD as of late. The problem I have with the latter is the difficulty in reading it. 4 July 1776 can be read the fourth of July, seventeen seventy six. How does one read 1776-07-04? Or is the discussion about announcements and hours and not prose? What I like about the ISO standard is the lack of confusion: I think most Americans will know what it means, while they will read 04/07/1776 as March seventh. Stephen Mangum On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Brian J White br...@bjwhite.net wrote: There aren instances where that's handy.but really, ISO standard is the way to go, worldwide. It's more hidden than anything else. I usually see it on receipts and schedules and such. But not for human use per se. Shame too, because it works nicely worldwide. At 11:08 2009-03-10, Stephen Humphreys wrote: I like the Oracle (huge US software company) way of doing things: 'DD-MON-RR' or 'DD-MON-' So today would be 10-MAR-09 or 10-MAR-2009 From: stan.do...@verizon.net To: usma@colostate.edu Subject: [USMA:43635] Re: 24 hour time Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 12:18:24 -0400 You are correct in fostering the use of the ISO date format; however, I prefer to use a dash (-) rather than a slash (/) as a separator in the date format. For example 20009-03-10. A dash makes it better readable. Stan Doore - Original Message - From: John Frewen-Lord To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 5:49 AM Subject: [USMA:43628] Re: 24 hour time The best way for the US to change its date format is to go straight to the ISO format of /MM/DD. When Canada converted in the late '70s, this was the official format at the time, and all Canadian Federal and Provincial government documentation at the time had to follow this format. Regretfully, and primarily thanks to Mr Gates, this seems to have been abandoned, due in no small part to Windows defaulting to the US-only format, regardless of which country it is sold in. This is not merely of academic interest. I bank with HSBC, and have both UK and Canadian bank accounts
[USMA:43680] Re: Arizona I-19 losing kilometer signs
It goes back to the old message about what sticking with customary measures really costs the average American. Pat Naughtin did some work on this, and came up with something like 9% (if memory serves) of the total US GDP. I once (as an economist - construction) also did some numbers, and while I came to a much lower figure, it was still huge. And this is an annually recurring cost. Americans, probably more than any other nation, truly value not spending any more on what is perceived to be government and other non-discretionary spending than they have to. If we can get the message out to enough people, that having two systems is costing the US economy big time, perhaps Arizona and all other States, as well as the Federal Government, might start to look at the big picture. Converting would be a good way to both provide short term economic stimulus at a time when jobs are disappearing fast (as evidenced by last week's Non Farm Payroll) AND improve the US's competitiveness in the longer term. - Original Message - From: John M. Steele jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 1:29 PM Subject: [USMA:43678] Re: Arizona I-19 losing kilometer signs I'm not sure if it was the same or another article, but the mile signs were placed MUCH later, and presumably aren't worn out yet. The reflector material does wear out. However, the later placement of the mile signs indicates they have been plotting this for a while, but needed an excuse to suck Federal pork. Given the design of the U-channel posts, you can't just mount the sign on another face to rotate 90°. You have to dig it up and replant it. (I think). As the mile markers are mostly for the highway department, I think this is affirmation that AZDOT will NEVER use metric again, sadly. --- On Wed, 3/11/09, Pierre Abbat p...@phma.optus.nu wrote: From: Pierre Abbat p...@phma.optus.nu Subject: [USMA:43675] Re: Arizona I-19 losing kilometer signs To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Wednesday, March 11, 2009, 9:00 AM On Saturday 07 March 2009 09:45:59 John M. Steele wrote: This article http://www.gvnews.com/articles/2009/03/06/breaking_news/00mileposts0308.txt reports that Arizona Dept. of Transportation will spend $1.5 million of its Federal economic stimulus money to remove the metric distance signs along a 100 km stretch of I-19. This will include removal of the metric and rotation of already placed Customary signs to face traffic. Perhaps not quite the way we hoped stimulus money would aid metrication. (On the other hand, being a leader for 30 years, with no follower or plans for followers is proabaly silly too.) I just heard on NPR that the signs are worn out and need to be replaced. That doesn't explain, though, why a rotated sign isn't worn out, or why they don't put both units on the signs. Pierre
[USMA:43688] Fw: Re: Metric personal data was Re: 24 hour time
- Original Message - From: John Frewen-Lord To: vliets...@btinternet.com Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:43 PM Subject: Re: [USMA:43685] Re: Metric personal data was Re: 24 hour time Both my Canadian citizenship card and my Ontario Drivers Licence give my height in centimetres. I contributed an article to the UK Metric Views website entitled 'User Friendly' metric. Go to http://www.metricviews.org.uk/ There I suggest using cm (sorry Pat N), as people can then express their height verbally as, say, One Seventy Eight - which can be interpreted by the listener as either 178 cm or 1.78 m - both are the same value. - Original Message - From: Martin Vlietstra To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:24 PM Subject: [USMA:43685] Re: Metric personal data was Re: 24 hour time I have never seen people's heights given in millimetres, only in centimeters or metres. -- From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Hooper Sent: 11 March 2009 15:17 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:43679] Re: Metric personal data was Re: 24 hour time On Mar 10 , at 5:02 PM, John M. Steele wrote: Interesting. Has anyone ever insisted on giving metric height on either a US Passport application or a state driver's license? If so, how did it go? It's been a long time since I was issued my passport and my drivers license so I don't remember those particular cases. However, when asked for my height and/or mass, I routinely give my height in metres (or centimetres or millimetres - I'm still a little ambivalent in this regard) and my mass in kilograms. I just checked my passport and find that neither height nor mass is listed on my infomation page. It is possible that it was never required in the application in the first place. My height in ft in is on my driver's license but my mass is not given. So I must have given them my height. If I gave it in metres they converted it; more likely they specified ft. in. so I gave it that way. (I do admit to acquiescing to official government agencies when they specify that they want the information in Ye Olde English units.) Regards, Bill Hooper Fernandina Beach, Florida, USA == Make It Simple; Make It Metric! ==
[USMA:43798] Re: NPR, part 2: meddling with the pint.
I've often thought that McDonalds could introduce metric sizes AND downsize their portions at the same time. The Quarter Pounder (113.5 g) could become the Big 100 (can sit alongside the Big Mac). Where do I send McDonalds the bill for my fee? - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 2:20 AM Subject: [USMA:43768] Re: NPR, part 2: meddling with the pint. This is how metric sizes can be introduced. Instead of 1.42 L they could have made it 1.5 L. Are there any brands that are metric? Jerry -- From: John M. Steele jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 8:29:21 AM Subject: [USMA:43707] Re: NPR, part 2: meddling with the pint. Almost every brand of ice cream has downsized. Half-gallons (2 quarts) used to be the standard large size in the supermarket. They shrank first to 1.75 quarts, and now many are shrinking to 1.5 quarts. The obscure compound units, quarts, pints, fluid ounces help hide the reduction. The metric label makes it much clearer to those who read it (1.89 L to 1.42 L). --- On Wed, 3/11/09, Remek Kocz rek...@gmail.com wrote: From: Remek Kocz rek...@gmail.com Subject: [USMA:43698] NPR, part 2: meddling with the pint. To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Cc: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Wednesday, March 11, 2009, 9:19 PM Seems today is a day heavy on measurement stories on NPR's morning edition. In addition to the Arizona I-19 story going back to miles, we have a story about the pint of premium ice-cream not being a pint anymore: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101689498 Haagen-Dazs will shrink their pint to 14 fl oz due to increasing costs. Make your voices heard with this story as well. It's obvious that the imperial measurements make this kind of meddling easier, since it's difficult to compare between ounces and pints. Please take the time to make your comments heard or seen--NPR is a nationwide forum, and it would be nice to have metric spotlighted there. Remek
[USMA:44123] Re: Firefighter return to S. Oregon after battling Australian wildfires
Why try to convert when actually 'on the job'? What does converting achieve, when you're communicating only with others who are also talking metric? All this does is (a) slow down your understanding of the metric system (or anything new, for that matter), (b) increase the probability of errors, which, in this particular snenario, could have serious consequences, and (c) slow down your overall performance, again not what is wanted in a fast moving situation like the wildfires. I wonder if the Australian authorities gave out any training to those from the US on metric units, and using the UTM? - Original Message - From: John M. Steele To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 12:44 PM Subject: [USMA:44121] Firefighter return to S. Oregon after battling Australian wildfires A brief news article: http://kdrv.com/news/local/101516 Brief quote: The biggest challenge Mitchell says he faced was adapting to the metric system and doing quick conversions. I guess he was not trained in (or does not use) the US National Grid. For those not familiar with the USNG, it is a modification of Universal Transverse Mercator mapping. 100 km squares are designated with letters (and over very large area with UTM zone and latitude band) so that coordinates within a square are 10 m. The tiling of lettered 100 km squares is similar to the MGRS used by the US military and NATO allies. There has been an initiative (obviously not very successful) to train first responders in USNG and use it as the ONLY location coordinates in emergencies. The main reason is to avoid numerous local coordinate systems that will not be understood by emergency responders brought in from other areas. Had he been trained and used USNG adapting to Australian mapping would have been trivial. Perhaps it should be a training requirement for firefighters certified to work outside their local area. NOTE: You can't cover a round earth with squares, so adjustments are required. UTM zones are 6° of longitude wide, and incomplete squares exist along the zone edges.
[USMA:44141] RE: Stephen and other off-topic contributors
Can I just intersperse some comments in these statements? Some are based on my own experience, but some are also based on outside observation during the time I lived in Canada. If anything I say is incorrect, corrections welcome! I confess that some Google research would have been advisable, but I am away this weekend, so am getting this off before we leave. - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2009 3:55 AM Subject: [USMA:44139] RE: Stephen and other off-topic contributors I believe that the UK got as far as it did for reasons that don't apply to the US. 1.) They are close to Europe and do a lot of business with Europe and needed to be on the same page. It would not be feasible for the UK to have a different measurement system then their trading partners nor for the population not to be able to function on the job that produces the goods that will be exported. Basically true, but I seem to remember that, in 1965 when the decision was officially made to go metric, there was a general consensus that metrication was the way the world was going (or was already there), and that this was not just a Europe thing. Britain has always been a world-wide trading nation, and in the 1950s and '60s, coined the slogan Export or die. Going metric was part of the awareness that the country depended on world-wide trade in order to pay off its war debts. 2.) The British Commonwealth is practically fully metric and that too would have an effect on what measurements the UK uses. Australia was probably the first Commonwealth country to go metric, but the UK's decision in 1965 preceded many other Commonwealth countries, including Canada, South Africa (which was part of the Commonwealth), other African nations (e.g. Kenya), the whole of the Caribbean, what is now Malaysia, and many other places too numerous to mention. 3.) The UK is small in comparison to its trading partners compared to the US. True, although this is a relatively recent phenomenon. Back in 1965, the UK had quite a prominent position in terms of world trade. 4.) The US is mostly isolated from the rest of the world. Yes, very true unfortunately! Something that President Obama is aware of? (The world has changed, and we must change with it.) 5.) US trade is virtually one way. The US imports produced goods, but does not export. As long as the US can survive being the ultimate consumer and can continue to run high trade deficits then there is no reason for the US to metricate. I once read that 90 to 95% of all US-based economic activity (i.e. production of goods and services, but excluding imports and other off-shore activities) remains inside its borders, which is far higher than anywhere else on earth. That was some years ago, and I would imagine that it is no better today. But, this system is highly strained. In the news recently, China has openly defied the US by questioning the role of the dollar in international trade and calling for a basket of currencies for the world to use instead of the dollar. Sooner then Washington and Wall Street realize, China will get its wish. The outcome will mean the US can no longer operate as the ultimate consumer and will be forced to run a more balanced economy. To do so, it will have to produce in order to trade for what others produce and in order for its goods to be accepted, it will have to show a willingness to cooperate and adopt the metric system. If memory serves correctly (and increasingly it doesn't as I get older!), the US was once quite open to producing for the world, and improving its world image. In 1971, I lived in Boston, MA, working alongside a local architecture practice on a major project (Tufts New England Medical Center), and remember all the roadsigns in the city, which were of European style (e.g. No Entry signs as a red disc with a horizontal white stripe, then unknown in the US; speed limit signs consisting of a white circle with a red band around the edge; etc).In talking to my architect colleague, he explained that America was very concerned with its image in the world, and this was part of that process (and being trialled in Boston). Also to be part of that process was conversion to the metric system (he was one of its promoters), and I guess what he said was borne out when the Metrication Board was established in 1975. It will be a very simple choice. Either adopt the metric system or be shut out. What choice will America make? The key is to get the American in the street to realise that such a choice has to be made. I would wager that most Americans still believe that the US doen't need to metricate, and that the rest of the world will just have to adapt to America's use of customary units. At what point will the (rude) awakening occur? - John F-L
[USMA:44142] smoots
Jerry talked about US isolationism in terms of measurements. Not only the US as a whole - how about this one (tongue in cheek) from Boston, MA: Smoots on the Harvard Bridge MIT students are world-famous for their brains and creativity, and the invention of the Smoot as unit of measure is no exception. In 1958, the pledge class of the Lambda Chi Alpha fraternity marked the length of the Harvard Bridge (which goes to MIT) using pledge Oliver Smoot as a measuring tool. For the record, Smoot was 5 feet 7 inches tall, and the bridge is 364.4 Smoots (plus an ear) long. The bridge is marked with colored lines to mark every 10 Smoots, and the markers are painted on the sidewalk on the outbound side of the bridge. Location: Over the Charles River between Back Bay and Cambridge
[USMA:44160] Re: smoots
I can assure everyone that I didn't actually write the text of my original post, but simply copiedpasted from the website I found it on. Hence the reference to feet and inches. If I was the orginal author, it would have been metric! John - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2009 3:54 PM Subject: [USMA:44155] Re: smoots They can be just as much fun when expressed as 170 cm instead of something not related to metric, wouldn't you agree? My point was that when we come across something like this we should be relating to it metrically. Describing it in inches and feet defeats the purpose of metrication. Jerry -- From: Carleton MacDonald carlet...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2009 10:31:34 AM Subject: [USMA:44151] Re: smoots Because smoots are FUN!! Carleton From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Jeremiah MacGregor Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2009 10:05 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:44146] Re: smoots By the same token, we can define a smoot as 170 cm. Every 10 smoots is then 17 m. If we are going to promote metric here, then why mention non-metric words? Jerry -- From: John Frewen-Lord j...@frewston.plus.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2009 5:33:12 AM Subject: [USMA:44142] smoots Jerry talked about US isolationism in terms of measurements. Not only the US as a whole - how about this one (tongue in cheek) from Boston, MA: Smoots on the Harvard Bridge MIT students are world-famous for their brains and creativity, and the invention of the Smoot as unit of measure is no exception. In 1958, the pledge class of the Lambda Chi Alpha fraternity marked the length of the Harvard Bridge (which goes to MIT) using pledge Oliver Smoot as a measuring tool. For the record, Smoot was 5 feet 7 inches tall, and the bridge is 364.4 Smoots (plus an ear) long. The bridge is marked with colored lines to mark every 10 Smoots, and the markers are painted on the sidewalk on the outbound side of the bridge. Location: Over the Charles River between Back Bay and Cambridge
[USMA:44221] Metrication US
Who is responsible for the Metrication US website? Is it officially related to the USMA? All our emails appear on it. Its tag line is '...slowly getting there, inch by inch'. I think this needs changing! 1. While (sadly) we may be slowly getting there, we don't need to make it an attribute! It should be something more positive. 2. Inch by inch? This is a METRIC website!!Whether the inch by inch was meant to be tongue in cheek, I don't know, but a lot of people will take that literally (especially the Stephen Humphreys of this world). This tag line needs to be changed! John F-L
[USMA:44322] RE: Caribbean
In Panama, which is a metric country (speed limits in km/h, distances in km, most products in metric values), petrol/gasoline is sold in gallones. I assume these to be US gallons (3.78 L), and are probably a holdover from the US presence in Panama. John F-L - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 11:29 PM Subject: [USMA:44302] RE: Caribbean Except that in the UK you don't need to worry about the difference because you fill up in litres. Jerry -- From: Stephen Humphreys barkatf...@hotmail.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2009 2:19:05 PM Subject: [USMA:44205] RE: Caribbean Agreed. However - coming from the UK the cost to fill up the tank was enough to make smile whether it be a US *or* UK gallon!!! :-) BTW - Barbados pumps are in litres. -- Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 12:25:58 -0400 From: spam.t...@verizon.net To: usma@colostate.edu Subject: [USMA:44197] RE: Caribbean One of the more confusing items of measurement in the British Caribbean is the units in which petrol (gasoline) is sold. With few exceptions, pumps are metered in gallons but it is not clear whether the gallon is the UK or the US one. And of course there is quite a difference in size which in turn has a significant impact on the amount of money you pay when the price is around $6 per gallon. At most service stations I ask which gallon is being dispensed. I have yet to receive a reply more informative than a shrug. If you buy milk, the units of sale are occasionally litres but far more frequently, the US gallon and fractions thereof. Stephen Humphreys wrote: Most areas of the caribbean I mentioned are frequented most by Brits (except the Bahamas). Canadians make up the next group then Americans and finally Europeans. Watching the planes coming in across the south coast of Barbados is a give away - 2 Virgin 747's a couple of long haul BA Boeings and several charters - then the 3 or 4 Air Canada flights followed by a few American Airways flights daily. Except for the Bahamas the areas of the Caribbean I mention are very 'British'. I suggest that the measurement usage (which, by the way, probably ranks quite lowly as a major concern in paradise) is due to British influence and US goods (the supermarkets tend to use local and US produce - so you see the familiar US packaging). BTW - it's also one of those areas where countries are 'officially metric but practically imperial' - very like the UK. There are loads of examples - enough to bore the hell out of you!!! ;-) From: carlet...@comcast.net To: usma@colostate.edu Subject: [USMA:44148] RE: Caribbean Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 10:08:40 -0400 My guess is that the Caribbean area is like that because of all the American tourists. Countries less dependent on American tourism – that is, countries with their own economies, such as Europe – don’t feel they have to do this. Carleton From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Humphreys Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2009 10:02 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:44145] RE: Caribbean The Caribbean I have seen is mixed or less metric than even the UK. This applies to St Lucia, Grenada, Bahamas, Barbados (although their road signs, if you can find them, are metric), Antigua and Montserrat. Places I have been to or regularly go to. Unfortunately sometimes assumptions are made where the best basis for fact is literally going to these places (hence John P Schweisthal [Jerry] never having visited the UK for example). Also there is a common mistake to only include the big ones when talking commonwealth - from experience the smaller players are more interesting (and house the most friendliest people on earth too!)* Steve * Disclaimer -this is not to say that people in the big Commonwealth nations are not friendly etc - although this one wants to leave one of them for a smaller one!! From: j...@frewston.plus.com To: usma@colostate.edu CC: usma@colostate.edu Subject: [USMA:44141] RE: Stephen and other off-topic contributors Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 08:49:53 + Can I just intersperse some comments in these statements? Some are based on my own experience, but some are also based on outside observation during the time I lived in Canada. If anything I say is incorrect, corrections welcome! I confess that some Google research would have been advisable,
[USMA:44323] Re: hungry anyone?
I see why they call it the XL restaurant - the hamburgers and cheeseburgers are 30 cm in diameter! And everyone says that obesity is just a US/UK problem? John F-L - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, April 04, 2009 12:22 AM Subject: [USMA:44308] hungry anyone? Check out this interesting power point file on this unique Restaurant in Germany. There has been an attempt to include non-metric, but when you go to the website http://www.derwaldgeist.de/cms/website.php There is only metric. Check out the drink menu: http://www.derwaldgeist.de/root/img/pool/karten/getraenke_taunusstein..pdf?sid=e2ebdbfe799be3488952fa6fca1bd757 The food menu: http://www.derwaldgeist.de/root/img/pool/karten/speisen_taunusstein.pdf Jerry
[USMA:44324] Tata Nano
The Nano is predicted to become the next peoples car, not only in India from where it originates but in much of the less developed world. Euro-legal versions, with an upgraded spec, are predicted to go on sale in 2010 or 2011. In India the basic version is to be sold for around £1500/US$2500, although versions that will be sold in other countries will likely cost quite a bit more, especially when they contain mandated safety features like airbags and anti-lock brakes. I notice that the front page scrolling ad uses '23.6 kilometres per litre', which is non-standard. It should be written as 4.24 L/100 km. About the same as many small cars, and still some way from the eco-target of 3 L/100 km (the so-called 'three litre car'). In looking at the spec sheet, it weighs (basic version) just 600 kg (not much more than a third of my Citroen C5). Payload is shown as 300 kg, which 50% of its empty weight. Yet 300 kg is just four average people, with no luggage. Like most minimal means of transportation in third world countries, I suspect that these poor cars will spend much of their time grossly overloaded. John F-L - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, April 04, 2009 12:28 AM Subject: [USMA:44310] RE: Nail in the coffin for hydrogen (at least for now)? Check out this car! Only metric is used. http://tatanano.inservices.tatamotors.com/tatamotors/ Jerry -- From: David totakeke...@yahoo.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 4:39:50 AM Subject: [USMA:44247] RE: Nail in the coffin for hydrogen (at least for now)? I believe that episode of Top Gear was about the Tesla Roadster. The Model S is supposed to be a much bigger improvement.. As for hydrogen, isn't it wasted energy to use electricity to get hydrogen instead of just using the electricity to power the car directly? --- On Mon, 3/30/09, Stephen Humphreys barkatf...@hotmail.com wrote: From: Stephen Humphreys barkatf...@hotmail.com Subject: [USMA:44230] RE: Nail in the coffin for hydrogen (at least for now)? To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Monday, March 30, 2009, 5:39 PM Yes -I saw that episode - blistering acceleration (faster than the normal elise) but as you say useless longevity. -- From: br...@bjwhite.net To: usma@colostate.edu CC: usma@colostate.edu Subject: [USMA:44228] RE: Nail in the coffin for hydrogen (at least for now)? Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 08:27:48 -0700 And on the other hand, check out the Top Gear episode where they review the Tesla (a car I really like) and then right after they review the Tesla (including some laps against the Lotus Elise on which it is based) they go and test the Honda Clarity FCX in California. I tell you, James May certainly had my questioning the true future of pure electric cars for anything other than short distance novelty. Original Message Subject: [USMA:44222] Nail in the coffin for hydrogen (at least for now)? From: David totakeke...@yahoo.com Date: Mon, March 30, 2009 12:53 am To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu I found this interesting article today about an electric car manufactured by Tesla Motors Inc. They already have a car on the market, but their next model, called the Modesl S, is supposed to go on sale in the third quarter or 2011, and can go about 260 km on one charge. It looks like electric cars are going to be more economically viable than hydrogen, at least for the time being. The Tesla Motors website also has a nice mix of English and (sometimes incorrectly labeled) metric units. When they list power in kilowatts, it's sometimes abbreviated kw, and on the performance specifications page newton-meters is abbreviated nm and foot-pound is abbreviated ft/lb. -- Windows Live Hotmail just got better. Find out more!
[USMA:44372] Re: Even with dual, you can't please everybody
In Canada, butter is packed in hard metric sizes (250 g, 500 g, etc), but is not called a pound. There a pound is still 454 g. In the 30 years I lived there, I don't ever recall coming across a 'stick' of butter - that must be a unique US term. John F-L - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, April 05, 2009 12:02 AM Subject: [USMA:44347] Re: Even with dual, you can't please everybody I don't see a need to preserve recipes in English form once they have been converted to metric. The fact that the recipe is preserved in some form then the history is not lost. Anyway which version of pre-metric measures do you want to preserve? When you say a stick of butter is 0.25 lb, what about in places where the pound is 500 g? What about historically where the pound was not 454 g? In places where the pound is 500 g, then each quarter is 125 g. Doesn't Canada use 500 g pounds for butter? If so, then how would that affect the use of sticks of butter in American recipes? If the butter is not exactly a pound and each stick is not precisely 0.25 lb, then to state to a precision of 113.4 g is incorrect. There seems to be too much granting of precision where precision doesn't practically exist. Those official definitions are ignored in the real world. Unless we can show that each stick is cut exactly the same, then I don't see the need to express the mass of a stick of butter to the decigram level. Even you state the volume of the butter is not precise and give an amount of 8.3~8.5 tablespoons (=15 mL) or 124.5 mL to 127.5 mL. If I use the average of 126 mL. If I use 113 g for the stick mass, and divide it 126 mL, I will get a more practical 900 g/mL. A much easier number to remember and deal with. Jerry -- From: John M. Steele jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Saturday, April 4, 2009 2:35:52 PM Subject: [USMA:44341] Re: Even with dual, you can't please everybody Yes, it does say something about isolationism. However, recipes represent history, the past. Quite apart from the argument of whether we should continue to use the old terms, we should document them, so we don't lose track of the past. A stick of butter is 0.25 lb, therefore about 113.4 g. The pound of butter is divided into 4 sticks, each wrapped in waxed paper. As US cooking is volumetric, not weight based, the wrapper is marked in tablespoons and teaspoons, so a smaller unit can be cut off using the wrapper as a ruler. The stick is slightly longer than the 8 tablespoons marked off, perhaps 8.3 - 8.5 tablespoons. Thus, the density of US butter is approximately 113.6 g/124.2 mL = 0.915 g/cm³, with a bit of conversion. If you Google the term stick of butter you will find this definition, although it may be a problem in the dictionary. There are a number of terms in British cooking that I don't understand either, and a number of vegetables have different names. --- On Sat, 4/4/09, Martin Vlietstra vliets...@btinternet.com wrote: From: Martin Vlietstra vliets...@btinternet.com Subject: RE: [USMA:44329] Re: Even with dual, you can't please everybody To: jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net, 'U.S. Metric Association' usma@colostate.edu Date: Saturday, April 4, 2009, 12:40 PM John, My father was Dutch and my mother British. One of their wedding presents was a Dutch cookery book – measurements in metric units of course. The statement “100 g zuiker” can easily be translated to “100 g sugar” and is totally unambiguous. All that is needed is a tourist’s phrase book to look up “zuiker”. The phrase book could have been from either a Dutch publishing house or a British publishing house. A number of American recipes have the term “a stick of butter”. As a Brit, that is a meaningless concept to me. I checked in my copy of the “Oxford Concise Dictionary” what was meant by “a stick”. The dictionary gave 16 different meanings for the word “stick” spread over nearly an entire page, but none of them could enlightened me. Similarly with Chamber’s dictionary. Doesn’t this say something about the isolationism that is cause by the use of customary measures? -- From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of John M. Steele Sent: 04 April 2009 15:36 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:44329] Re: Even with dual, you can't please everybody Pat, You understandably write from a Commonwealth or Australian perspective (I don't mean spelling), and as a metric consultant, you
[USMA:44395] RE: Records
I've just measured a number of my old LPs, acquired or produced in a number of countries (UK, USA, Canada, South Africa, France, Germany, USSR). The European, South African and British ones are all exactly 300 mm in diameter, +/- about 0.2 mm, no more. The American and Canadian ones are all 302 mm in diameter. I also have a couple of very old '10 inch' 78s. These are EXACTLY 250 mm in diameter, not even a shade of a mm either way. I would say records are in the first instance metric products. John F-L - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, April 05, 2009 3:52 PM Subject: [USMA:44383] RE: Records Stephen asserts the records are true to their name (ie a 12 inch named record is really 305 mm in diameter). But since the rounded metric sizes are the true and original sizes, then they are metric based and only were converted to inches for US manufacturing at the time. It is obvious from the RIAA spec that the original metric based dimensions were still intended but that the slight differences within tolerances occurred as they wanted them to be described in inches in vulgar fractions. How does one accurately express a rounded millimeter value in a vulgar inch fraction and stick to either 8-ths, 16-ths or 32-nds? For example, if you were an engineer in the 1920s and had to convert a European metric spec for American use, how would you do it and still retain the same original dimensions in the converted value? Jerry -- From: John M. Steele jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu; jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com Sent: Sunday, April 5, 2009 10:34:35 AM Subject: Re: [USMA:44375] RE: Records Your dimension of 302 mm is correct, more correct than the nominal 12. However, Steve's assertion that it is inch based is also correct, as written in the specification. Since the International size is claimed to be 300 mm, and 302 mm differs from it by a few multiples of the tolerance, as an engineer, I have to say they were engineered to be different sizes, even if they are close. Assuming the International size has a similar tolerance, they will not overlap. --- On Sun, 4/5/09, Jeremiah MacGregor jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com wrote: From: Jeremiah MacGregor jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com Subject: [USMA:44375] RE: Records To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Sunday, April 5, 2009, 9:59 AM John, Thanks for verifying what I have said. We now have proof that I am correct and Stephen is wrong. But I highly doubt Stephen will change his position and continue to spout error. The RIAA spec is very interesting as it butts up against an interesting problem in converting millimeter dimensions to fractional inches. I would say that in 1963 when the spec was made (possible from an older spec) that decimal inches were rare and not popular and it was common to express all (or most) inches in fractions. So, how do you convert a rounded metric number to a fractional inch and then come up with a usable fractional size that is in either 16-ths or 32-nds? Anything smaller is not practical. 302 mm converts to 11.89 inches. The nearest fraction is 11.875 mm which is 11-7/8 inches. This however is only 301.625 mm. The reason for the asymmetrical tolerances is to accommodate rounded numbers in both units, the 302 mm in metric and the 11-7/8 in inches. If we add the 1/32 tolerance to 301.625 mm we get 302.42 mm. The average of the two is the 302.02 mm you noted, which for all practical purposes is the 302 mm intended. However, in inches there is no common fraction to equate to 302.02 mm. So the closest common fraction was chosen and the tolerance was made asymmetrical. If the RIAA spec were ever to be updated it could simply drop the 0.02 mm extra you noted and simply make it 302 mm +/- 0.4 mm. Would you agree? I do find it interesting that the RIAA wanted their records to be an extra millimeter in radius bigger then the standard 300 mm. Could be they wanted to have extra leader space at the beginning. As a side note I wonder if the 1963 spec was an update to an earlie spec and how far back the spec really goes? If so, and the inches were in fact not post 1960 inches, then how would pre-1960 inches or even pre-1900 inches affect the outcome of the conversions? At least we now know that the dimensions are what is intended and that the reference to shrinkage is just wishful thinking. It just goes to show that the extremist propaganda that claims everything in the past started out as inch based is wrong and that there are many examples that actually started out as metric based
[USMA:44400] metric Britain
Regarding the recent discussions on dual marking/labelling in respect of the UK, I just thought I'd do a quick check on various items I have in my house. I have listed a total of 57 items (no connection to Mr Heinz!), these I feel being somewhat representative of our shopping and DIY activities. This is far, far from exhaustive (we obviously have far too much stuff in our house!). Some items are national name brands (e.g. Branston, makers of pickle and other garnishes), and are shown in single quotes. Tesco, Asda (owned by Wal-Mart), Morrisons, Somerfield and Waitrose are UK supermarket chains, Tesco being the biggest. I couldn't find any Sainsburys items, another supermarket chain, so I guess we don't shop there much! BQ, Wickes and Homebase are DIY chains. I found just four items that had imperial marking as well as metric - and for only one of them was the quantity a rational imperial quantity (but shown as metric first). However, this is an item we have had in our fridge for a long time, and it is quite likely to have since been repackaged in a rational metric size. The interesting thing is that I really had to hunt for ANYTHING that had an imperial marking - everything IS metric. That said, some of the metric sizes are a bit odd (740 mL, 340 g, etc). But still metric, no imperial shown. I have shown the quantity labelling EXACTLY as it appears on the packaging, errors and all. If you like metric (and we obviously all do, with the exception of Stephen Humphreys), then enjoy!! John F-L -- Garage/workshop BQ 'Zorbo' halogen light fixture - base 50 cm long, projection 70 cm long Wickes quick drying varnish - 1 Litre BQ bevelled edge mirror - 600 mm x 600 mm (24 x 24 approx.) 4mm thick 3.6kg weight Wickes marking chalk - 50g/1.75oz Homebase pine cladding - 94mm x 9mm, Length = 2.4metre BQ Plastic angle - 2400 x 12 x 12 BQ Chamferred architrave [wood door trim in US-speak] - 15mm x 45mm x 2.1M [that is an upper case M] Wickes pine Scotia moulding - 15 x 15 x 2400 Wickes silicone sealant - 310 ml BQ foam/rubber draft excluder - 15mm x 5.1m Halfords windscreen [windshield in US-speak] washer antifreeze concentrate - 2 Litres (makes up to 5 Litres of washer fluid) Food and kitchen Specialty coffee for cafetierres, package of 8 boxes, each box - 75g/2.65oz Morrisons pre-packed bacon - 250 g 'Natures Best' cod liver oil - 300ml 'Pure' non-dairy soya spread - 500g 'Whole Foods' pear apple spread - 227g/8oz 'Bay Tree' Christmas marmalade - 340g Morrisons pre-wrapped individually priced broccoli - 0.370 kg [and priced at 192p/kg] Morrisons pre-packaged mozzarella cheese - 200g Evian bottled water - 1l [cursive l] Tesco bottled water - 5 Litres Quaker instant porridge oats - 1 kg Tesco grapefruit juice - 1 Litre 'Veggie Wash' fruit and vegetable wash - 500ml Tesco frozen peas - 1 kg 'Julian Graves' rice crackers - 250g Somerfield custard powder - 300 g 'Amoy' soy sauce - 250ml 'Young's' 5 Coley Fillets (frozen) - 500 g 'Branston' canned spaghetti Bolognese - 410 g 'Lindt' Dark Chocolate - 100 g Tesco kitchen foil - 10 metres, 30cm wide approx. Waitrose syrup - 740ml 'Birds Eye' petis pois - 750g Cleaners/laundry 'Flash' cleaning spray - 500 ml 'Fairy' washing up liquid - 500ml Tesco dishwasher powder - 3 kg Tesco fabric conditioner - 1 Litre 'Finish' dishwasher salt - 2 kg Asda dishwasher rinse aid - 250 ml Boots [national chemist/drugstore chain] sterilising liquid - 600 ml Somerfield bathroom spray cleaner - 500 ml 'Domestos' spray cleaner - 500ml 'Delta' carper cleaner refill - 500ml 'Ecover' ecological laundry detergent - 1,5 L 'Vanish' laundry spray treatment - 500ml Asda toilet cleanser - 500ml 'Shower Shine' shower cleaner - Big 1 Litre Value for the price of 750ml Bathroom Tesco shaving foam - 250 ml RightGuard stick deodorant - 50 g 'Nivea' face wash - 30 ml L'Oreal shampoo/conditioner - 250ml 'Imperial Leather' 4-pack bar soap - 4 x 125g 'Wella' hair toner - 14ml 'Boots' SPF15 suntan lotion - 200 ml 'Nivea' spray deodorant - 92g/150ml Tesco herbal shampoo - 750ml
[USMA:44643] Re: Bahamas
I believe the Bahamas is not (yet?) officially metric. I am a consultant (rather sporadically) on The Princess Margaret Hospital in Nassau and the Rand Memorial Hospital in Freeport. Everything is imperial, primarily because so much, including the building code, comes from, or is based on, what happens in Florida. Most products are in imperial sizes (again, these come from the USA). Road signs and car speedometers/odometers are still in miles. (As an unusual aside, and a recent phenomenon, many cars in the Bahamas are private import late model right hand drive Japanese cars - you drive on the left in the Bahamas, but most cars are left hand drive. These RHD Japanese imports come direct from Japan, where there are limits on how old a car can be, and of course all have metric speedometers/odometers - but I was told by a Bahamian government official that there is no law requiring them to be converted to miles.) I seem to remember reading something recently about the Bahamas converting to metric, but I do not believe that it has officially been mandated yet. Hope this helps. John F-L - Original Message - From: Michael Payne To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 3:36 AM Subject: [USMA:44639] Bahamas Anyone have any idea of what the law in the Bahamas states regarding the preferred or mandated system of measurement there? I looked at http://laws.bahamas.gov.bs/statutes/statute_CHAPTER_338.html and could not find anything except some imported stuff had to be by the Bushel. I'll be going there next week and wanted to know what the situation was before I left. Thanks Mike Payne
[USMA:44731] Re: Is this a joke or is it supposed to be serious?
I agree that what this columnist said is utterly stupid. Howver, I think we can be encouraged by the responses - not one totally agreed with him, and even those who sort of sympathised qualified their comments by saying that the US is really out of touch and must change if it wants to be a part of this world. John F-L - Original Message - From: Han Maenen To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 12:18 PM Subject: [USMA:44730] Is this a joke or is it supposed to be serious? I was on the USMA site on the page 'Published articles about metric - 2009' and found this: Metric is no way to measure By Glynn Moore| Columnist Augusta (Georgia) Chronicle, 2009-Mar-16, 1p., Moore,G.; Metric is no way to measure. [http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/2009/03/16/moo_514811.shtml] I can hardly believe that an intelligent person can spout such trash. All the old scare mongering canards are back again like: A body temperature of 37.77 degrees, converted from 101.8 degrees Fahrenheit - too accurate. A weatherman predicting 26.7 C = 80 degrees Fahrenheit. That is new to me: nature has standardized the weather to the Fahrenheit scale (and I also suppose to the inHg and the inch of precipitation). Using metric the weatherman would predict 27 degrees of course. A speed limit of 55 mph equates to 88 km/h. In metric it would be 90 km/h. As globalization continues, a football field is destined to become 91.44 meters long. Of course, if American football should go metric one day, it would be wile to move to a 100 m field. Although soccer still uses soft converted measurements. Not one valid argument against metric, just garbage. Maybe is this supposed to be funny. Han
[USMA:44782] SKA
If there is any doubt that we live in a metric world, BBC news today has an article on a new radio telescope array just being commissioned. The article goes on to tell about an even newer array currently being planned: The Square Kilometre Array (SKA), which will be based in either Australia or South Africa, will link thousands of telescopes spread over thousands of kilometres, creating a system 50-times more powerful than anything we have now. The full article can be read at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7828174.stm Cheers John F-L
[USMA:44790] Re: Bushfire Commission
Neater to say 100 MW per square metre? John F-L - Original Message - From: Pat Naughtin To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 3:59 AM Subject: [USMA:44788] Bushfire Commission Dear All, The investigation into the Victorian bushfires began yesterday. In the early evidence it was stated: The blazes probably reached an intensity of 100,000 kilowatts per square metre. The maximum intensity for control of forest fires is about 4000 kilowatts per metre, Mr Rush said. You can read the full report at http://www.theage.com.au/national/bushfires-commission-to-examine-mass-evacuations-20090420-acr5.html Cheers, Pat Naughtin PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat at pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe.
[USMA:44859] Re: IEEE/ASTM SI-10
Actually, the non-American way of spelling a demand drawn on a bank is cheque (no 'c' before the 'q'). In terms of pronunciation (and a bit off topic I admit), there are something like 6 or 7 ways of pronouncing -ough. Finally, I am reminded of the old joke about a newly married couple on their honeymoon, and the wife wrote to her mother saying: Fred and I had a long row this morning. The mother went bananas, untill she remembered that the couple were holidaying on the Norfolk Broads... (For the benefit of US readers, the Norfolk Broads is a part of England famed for its rivers and waterways.) John F-L - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 3:07 PM Subject: [USMA:44857] Re: IEEE/ASTM SI-10 There is also tow and toe, bow and bough. Then bow can have two different pronunciations depending on its meaning. Then there is Polish (people from Poland) and polish (to make something shine). The people should be called Pollacks. That is what they call themselves. Then there is check, which means a mark of approval or a bank note. However, the bank note is spelled checque outside the US to distinguish the different meanings. Then again there is the Czech people, the name pronounced like check. Even bank has two meanings, the land next to a river or a place to keep money. Maybe the place to keep money should be spelled as banque (along with checque) to note the difference. I won't even get into to all of the different pronunciations for the -ough spelling. Sometimes simplicity causes confusion. Jerry -- From: STANLEY DOORE stan.do...@verizon.net To: jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com; U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 9:20:43 AM Subject: Re: [USMA:44848] Re: IEEE/ASTM SI-10 American English uses to and too for two different meanings. So spellings of metre and meter, and litre and liter etc.would be consistent with clearly different meanings and would improve comprehension. Stan Doore - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 8:02 AM Subject: [USMA:44848] Re: IEEE/ASTM SI-10 I don't understand their short-sightedness in preferring the -er spelling over the -re. They should prefer the spelling that is already accepted in the English speaking world. Since English is already the international language of trade and SI is the international language of measurement, than there should be harmonization and agreement as to spellings, at least in terms of technical use. As I noted in a previous post, there are logical reasons for preferring the -re spelling for metre and litre. Don't the people at the NIST understand logic? I'm sure the person who made the decision at ASTM to prefer the -er spelling didn't understand the logic of the -re spelling either. Jerry From: John M. Steele jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 7:43:25 AM Subject: [USMA:44844] Re: IEEE/ASTM SI-10 I would agree that both spellings are acceptable in the US. NIST SP330 simply says the -er spellings are preferred. (Just as l and L can be used as the symbol for liter, but L is preferred.) I am a bit surprised by ASTM. They are one of the professional organizations that jointly publish SI10. There, they go along with -er spelling. Not that either is wrong, but they are inconsistent. Do any of the pages give a rationale? --- On Sat, 4/25/09, John Frewen-Lord j...@frewston.plus.com wrote: From: John Frewen-Lord j...@frewston.plus.com Subject: [USMA:44842] Re: IEEE/ASTM SI-10 To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Saturday, April 25, 2009, 2:47 AM I agree with Jerry on this one. Both spellings are acceptable to me, but the -re spelling makes a bit more sense as a whole (and as Jerry points out harmonises with the rest of the world). Still, I would suggest the -re spelling is acceptable in the US. I don't know about the latest editions, but my copy of ASTM E 621 - 84, Standard Practice for the Use of Metric (SI) Units in Building Design and Construction (Committee E-6 Supplement to E 380) uses the -re spelling throughout (see attached scan). John F-L - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 4:03 AM Subject: [USMA:44833] Re: IEEE/ASTM SI-10 I can't believe
[USMA:44985] RE: Supplementary indications
The largest branches of the major supermarket chains in the UK (Tesco, Asda, etc) can have as many as 50 000 separate products on their shelves. I would venture to say that Jerry's estimate of 90% being labelled metric only is conservative - probably like 95%. Tesco is huge (it was recently estimated that 8% of ALL UK retail consumer spending - not just supermarkets - is spent in Tesco stores. Imagine a large US supermaket combined with a large Wal-Mart - that is a typical large Tesco store, my local one has 40 checkouts, although it's rare for more than 30 to be 'manned' at any one time). Whether you want a bottle of wine, packet of fresh Scottish salmon, a flat screen TV, all kinds of exotic foods (e.g. imported Italian octopus), or a laser printer (not to mention all your routine shopping), you can get it at a Tesco. The only imperial items or descriptions you will see at Tesco and the other supermarkets are: TV and computer screens (but that seems to be universal around the world). But laptop computers will have their weights given in kg only. The customer weigh scales at the fruit and veg aisles (dual calibrated, but not legal for trade - the legal scales at the checkouts are metric only). Some milk (but not all - I recently bought some soya milk, 500 mL). Some (but by no means all) unit display pricing on loose fruit and veg - but metric is first and much more prominent. (Unit pricing - e.g. £/kg, £/L, etc - is mandatory for most food and drink items, and is displayed on the shelf edge as part of the item pricing. All unit pricing on all non-loose items - 98% of the total store's food and drink - is metric only.) And that is about it. As Jerry says, these are remnants, and will surely die out as the older generations pass on (and those of the younger generation, who for some weird reason like imperial, come to realise how ignorant they are, and the damage they are doing to our children who HAVE to grow up in a metric world - this last point alone should make these people ashamed of themselves). It comes down to attitude. I remember my mother, now 89, managing to get used to millilitres when they were introduced in the UK in the early 1970s - em-ells, she called them. If she can do it, then so can people like Stephen Humphreys. John F-L - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, May 02, 2009 12:12 AM Subject: [USMA:44978] RE: Supplementary indications Aside from milk, are there any other products sold in supermarkets in the UK? One gets the impression that all one can buy is milk. In the US our shelves are stocked with thousands of different items. What about the UK? Don't they have thousands of different items for sale too? And aren't the vast majority of them (90 %) labeled in rounded metric only? So what does it really mean if you find some remnant product like milk in a remnant size? Even with that in mind it isn't 100 % in remnant units, as there is rounded metric milk sizes too. Stephen's claim that he purchases items by their visible scale proves the vast majority of products are labeled in rounded metric only. Otherwise Stephen would know their imperial size and make mention of it frequently instead of constantly sounding like a broken 300 mm record and repeating the same old dribble about milk container sizes. Jerry -- From: Ken Cooper k_cooper1...@yahoo.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Friday, May 1, 2009 4:46:40 PM Subject: [USMA:44964] RE: Supplementary indications Stephen said Realistically though - it still must be the case that people pick up a can, tin, bottle etc of red bull/coke/etc on visual size rather than be specific about the numbering on the side of the product How would you describe this can then Stephen? 473 ml/1 US pt isn't exactly a common size in the UK. Without using measurement, how can you distinguish it from the 440 ml 500 ml cans that are commonly available? (even if he [ahem] wouldn't allow it lol!). It's you that claims I'm a TSO, Stephen. That's the sort of decisions they make. Obviously the figures are there to meet regulations but ultimately the customer would choose a packed item on it's visual scale. Have you been to Tesco recently Stephen? Have you seen the new size of Rice Krispie packages? Can you tell them apart from the 500 g packs on a visual scale? I see the 2l coke and pint of milk as the only real examples where figures are used in packed supermarket items. Yeah. No-one has ever suggested that a bag of sugar can be used to visualise a kilogramme. And wine doesn't come in a standard 750ml wine bottle or anything. And didn't you go on (and on on) about a waffle marked with a supplementary
[USMA:44986] RE: FPLA 2010
There is no reason why it shouldn't disappear, now that prescribed quantities are gone. Depends I suppose on whether manufacturers still think they have an economic advantage to produce packaging in both metric and imperial sizes. - Original Message - From: Jeremiah MacGregor To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 11:57 PM Subject: [USMA:44976] RE: FPLA 2010 Do you feel that the 1.136 L size is destine to disappear completely in the near future? Jerry -- From: Ken Cooper k_cooper1...@yahoo.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu; jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com Sent: Friday, May 1, 2009 3:46:55 PM Subject: Re: [USMA:44946] RE: FPLA 2010 Because (until last month) the UK used a system of prescribed quantities. Milk in non-returnable containers had to be sold in prescribed metric measures (which could also bear a supplementary indication). The prescribed measures included 1 litre 1.136 litres. They didn't include 1.1 litres --- On Fri, 1/5/09, Jeremiah MacGregor jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com wrote: From: Jeremiah MacGregor jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com Subject: [USMA:44946] RE: FPLA 2010 To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Friday, 1 May, 2009, 3:38 AM Is there really a need to mark a non-returnable milk carton as 1.136 L? Why not just mark it as 1.1 L and make that the average? Jerry -- From: k_cooper1...@yahoo.com k_cooper1...@yahoo.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 7:14:15 PM Subject: [USMA:44935] RE: FPLA 2010 The bottles aren't filled to an exact anything. The requirement is that the average of a batch is equal to or greater than the nominal quantity. The nominal quantity used is metric, of course (unless it's those oh-so-common milk in returnable containers) --- On Wed, 29/4/09, Jeremiah MacGregor jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com wrote: From: Jeremiah MacGregor jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com Subject: [USMA:44909] RE: FPLA 2010 To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Wednesday, 29 April, 2009, 3:17 AM This brings to mind a question as to how these milk bottles are filled in the factory. Do the machines that fill them use pints or litres? I would assume litres, and if I'm correct, then what excellent machines they must be to measure the contents to the accuracy of 1 mL without any variance. A perfect fill for each container. Since they are able to accurately fill the bottle to a 1 mL accuracy, then why doesn't the pint declaration also contain the same level of accuracy? Why is it labeled as 2 pints and not 2.000 pints in order to have the same level of accuracy. With that in mind, those milk bottles that are in rounded litres, why don't they mark the amount as 1.000 L instead of just 1 L to show that the accuracy of the fill is to 1 mL? Jerry -- From: Martin Vlietstra vliets...@btinternet.com To: U.S.. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 1:12:08 AM Subject: [USMA:44894] RE: FPLA 2010 I have just checked a plastic milk ”bottle” in out fridge. It says “1.136 litres 2 pints”. This is almost universal. If the “1.136 litres” was missing, then the buyer should take the empty bottle back once finished so that the seller could reuse it. Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:07:58 -0700 From: jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com Subject: [USMA:44890] RE: FPLA 2010 To: usma@colostate.edu But isn't the requirement for milk in pints (568 mL) limited to those glass bottles delivered only at ones door? Do you know approximately how many people still purchase milk from a milkman? Jerry From: Martin Vlietstra vliets...@btinternet.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 5:00:24 PM Subject: [USMA:44886] RE: FPLA 2010 The UK is a member state of the EU and in theory the packaging requirements of all states is identical, except for a few items such as milk that is
[USMA:45011] metric progress in USA
In terms of progress, I have just come across a Julia Child cookbook that my other half brought back from the US when she lived there. Title: Julia Child More Company. Publication 1979 - 30 years ago. The entire book, some 250 pages, has every single recipe in both USC and metric measures. Sample: 'Set pan so that surface of meat is 3 inches (8 cm) from heat source.' I find this book quite remarkable for its forward thinking in terms of metric. How much progress have we made since then? Are today's cookbooks in the US dual measured? John F-L - Original Message - From: Harry Wyeth hbwy...@earthlink.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Cc: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 5:11 AM Subject: [USMA:45010] Jerry's comments Well, Jerry does make a point (I just wish he would limit his postings to good points), which is that although we (the USMA) has been around a long time, we ARE NOT making much progress. We can talk a lot, but no one really knows about us and popular knowledge/support for metrication in the US is pretty pathetic. I know that there is a lot of hidden metric, but when it comes to everyday encounters and activities by the average citizen, there very limited progress. Contrary to what he writes, however, is is not at all easy to change this state of affairs. I have said for years that real metrication will not occur here without top-down leadership. That means from the White House. I don't see the US declining into a state of poverty and struggle, but our influence has been declining for years and will continue to do so. Non-metrication is just one part of that decline. HARRY WYETH
[USMA:45078] Re: Two sytems.
What I found quite disconcerting is that the questions seemed to be very imprecise in relation to the pictures. For example, the picture of the pop/water bottle, and asking whether it was bigger/same as/smaller than a liter. That bottle in the picture could have been all 3! I am not sure what current typical practice is in the US, but here in the UK water and pop is sold in plastic bottles of the kind shown anywhere from 250 mL to 2 L. So how can a child know WHY his answer his right or wrong without some sort of size reference in the picture? This is simply sloppy setting of education standards and materials, and surely exacerbates the problem of poor maths showing by US children. Regards John F-L - Original Message - From: Michael Payne To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 4:58 PM Subject: [USMA:45076] Two sytems. I picked up a scrap of paper on the street outside my home the other day, probably blew out of the garbage truck. Anyway it was a sheet filled in by an elementary age school kids on measurement. Shows how US kids have to learn 2 systems and don't know either one. Picture of Rake. a. Longer than 1 foot b. About 1 foot c. longer than 1 foot They got this one right. Picture of single Carrot a. lighter than 1 kilogram b. About 1 kilogram c. Heavier than 1 kilogram They marked about 1 kilogram. How is a kid in the US going to know how much a kilogram is? The interesting question to me was a picture of a green bean with an inch ruler marked in inches only with 3 graduations in between (for 1/4, 1/2 3/4 inches). The question was how many inches is the bean? To me it was 3-3/4 inches. The kid marked down 3.3. The teacher put down 3.5 (in red) crossed that out and put 4. Kids see calculators, they count the graduations and that becomes a decimal, hence 3.3. This is a good example of how and why the US does so poorly in math and science when compared to other nations. I think I'll make a copy of the sheet and attach. Apologies for one side being upside down. You can have Adobe rotate it but it does the whole document. I'll also send it to my legislators. If everyone on this list sent this to their Congressional Representative, we might make a difference! Mike Payne
[USMA:45097] Re: Commerce Secretary Gary Locke
Convince him of the economic benefits. If necessary do a cost-benefit study. Metrication should be seen as an investment into the US's future, not as a cost for today. Makes more economic sense than bailing out Chrysler, GM - and there was plenty of money for that. John F-L - Original Message - From: ezra.steinb...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: Valerie Antoine ; Lorelle Young ; Gary Brown ; U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2009 5:10 AM Subject: [USMA:45095] Re: Commerce Secretary Gary Locke Locke used to be governor of the State of Washington (where I've lived since 2003) and had a solid reputation as reasonable and fairly progressive. I'm convinced that with someone like Locke and President Obama we would have pretty good luck not only amending the FPLA but putting in place a metrication program if the economy were doing well. As things are, I think we'll consider ourselves lucky to get the FPLA amended in the next year or two. Ezra - Original Message - From: Paul Trusten, R.Ph. trus...@grandecom.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Cc: Valerie Antoine valerie.anto...@verizon.net, Lorelle Young lorelle...@aol.com, Gary Brown gsbr...@aol.com Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 5:31:12 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [USMA:45094] Commerce Secretary Gary Locke I guess I wasn'tlooking: America has a new Secretary of Commerce, Gary Locke. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Locke. Does anyone know any more about him? Paul Trusten, R.Ph. Public Relations Director U.S. Metric Association (USMA), Inc. www.metric.org 3609 Caldera Boulevard, Apartment 122 Midland TX 79707-2872 US +1(432)528-7724 mailto:trus...@grandecom.net
[USMA:45140] Re: NASA Going English
With very few (and very misguided) exceptions, no country in the world allows a 'free-for-all' in terms of measurement (primarily weights and measures) legislation, regardless of how 'libertarian' they are. WM has always been decreed and defined (and never on a voluntary basis) ever since the first caveman first tried to put one over on his fellow caveman next door. The only thing that has changed has been the units of measurement used, which have evolved over time, and now culminate in SI. So freedom of choice is a red herring. There never has been such freedom. What a disaster in the long term for America (not that we in the UK or Canada are that much further ahead - we are a bit, but not as much as we should be). Watch the BRIC countries (Brasil, Russia, India, China) take over in the next 10 - 20 years - and the rest of the (metric) world will be right with them. Obama in his inaugauration speech said: The world has changed, and we must change with it. Sounds a bit hollow right now. Something about the words 'shoot, foot, yourself' in the same sentence springs to mind John F-L - Original Message - From: Carleton MacDonald To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 3:15 AM Subject: [USMA:45134] Re: NASA Going English I know this will inflame the libertarians here but the ONLY thing that is going to fix this, fix Arizona, fix the highway departments reverting, etc. is for nationwide legislation, passed by this Congress and signed by this President, to immediately begin a coordinated, concerted and mandatory effort to finish the metrication job in all aspects of American government, commerce, and society, and in a span of time no more than two years. Do not listen to the “freedom of choice” whiners, to those who want this to be “voluntary”, etc. That’s what has put us in the terrible situation we are now in, with reversions all over the place. I really do think they’d get a lot less resistance than they think they would, if only they would get the cojones to just get the job done and stop worrying about or listening to the complainers. Carleton From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of ezra.steinb...@comcast.net Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 19:20 To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:45125] Re: NASA Going English So, this is the change we need? Back to the 19th century - Original Message - From: John M. Steele jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 4:11:49 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [USMA:45124] NASA Going English Unbelievable. http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=31353 Quoted from link: Subject: New Management Directive on Units All, You've all heard the news that we're going back to English as the primary unit of measure. Attached is the draft Management Directive. We're planning on bring this MD to the CxCB on 6/5/09. Please let me know if you have any issues.
[USMA:45216] Re: UK Conservative Party brochure
This document was printed by the Conservatives for all Constituencies in the country. I believe it is inaccurate. While local trading standards officers may be turning a bit of a blind eye to (primarily) street market vendors weighing loose food items in imperial units on imperial-only scales, this practice is illegal. Scales can ONLY be calibrated and certified in metric units - that's all the law permits. Therefore, any non-metric scales are uncertified, and therefore illegal, not to mention that they may indicate any amount of short measure without the consumer knowing. The UK right now has much bigger poltical problems, which is why I suspect this innacuracy has slipped under the radar. I think the brochure, going into the EU elections, was designed to capitalize on the recent directive from the EU, which said that the UK MAY continue to use imperial units if it chooses to do so. The UK has NOT made that choice - only metric units are legal for (most) trade (the major exception being the use of the imperial pint - 568 mL - for beer dispensed in pubs). John F-L - Original Message - From: Carleton MacDonald To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 2:56 AM Subject: [USMA:45215] UK Conservative Party brochure The UK had elections a day or two ago, and the Conservatives (Tories) came in first. Labour took a beating. Note the first item on the back page. Carleton
[USMA:45229] Re: Why the UK must relaunch and finish metrication
Hi Pat - thanks for the link. Yes, the UK is in a measurement mess (as is my other country of citizenship, Canada). Here in the UK, on the roads I encounter miles (only encountered elsewhere in the world in the USA, perhaps the odd Caribbean country), yards (encountered NOWHERE else in the world), and so on. At least Canada has converted its roads (1977), although it is far behind the UK in other areas. I do believe that the vast majority of the public in the UK want to complete the process. I see example after example of metric used where there is no official or even organizational pressure to convert - e.g. a farm near us has a hand painted sign on the roadside Fresh free-range eggs 100 mtrs [sic] ahead. On the other hand, we visited a farm last weekend (UK farm open day), and encountered an odd mix of units - we went on a tour in a trailer pulled by a tractor of the entire farm, and were told about a field being so many acres of wheat, excluding a six metre exclusion zone around its perimeter. How the young kids on that tour made any sense of that I don't know. Glob's article is correct about the UK press - not just the tabloid, but the higher quality broadsheet press as well. The Sunday Times will default to feet rather than metres, although you will more often see metric used by contributors rather than their own journalists, which says something. I still cringed though regarding an article a couple of weeks ago about driving in mainland Europe - EVERY reference to speed limits in each country was given using kph. UGH!!! I wrote a letter to the editor saying that, as the ST prides itself on its literacy, perhaps it should apply the same standards to its numeracy. The letter was not published. Regards John F-L - Original Message - From: Pat Naughtin To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 7:05 AM Subject: [USMA:45228] Why the UK must relaunch and finish metrication Dear All, In reading this blog: http://globonsomeday.blogspot.com/2009/06/why-uk-must-relaunch-and-finish.html I was intrigued with the thought that in the UK: Ironically roads and road signs are designed, built, and positioned using metric units and have been for decades, yet the information on the signs themselves are required to be mostly imperial which must be really inconvenient for road contractors as well. Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the forthcoming book, Metrication Leaders Guide. PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat at pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe.
[USMA:45257] 787 Delayed again
Dear all: Today's news contained the item that Boeing's 787 is delayed again, citing 'structural problems' in the wing box area, and saying that certain sections 'need strengthening'. The 787 is of course designed in imperial units - why, only the people inside Boeing can answer that one. But it looks like a decision that Boeing may come to regret (if it has not already done so). Some 70+% of the aircraft is subcontracted out to 1st tier subcontractors (who in turn sub-sub-contract various sections to 2nd and 3rd tier subcontractors). Most of these are not in the US, but in the rest of the (metric) world. Boeing earlier cited delays that some of these subcontractors had experienced in getting non-metric fasteners (primarily bolts) - not surprising really, as they are available only in the US. I know from personal contacts that at least one 3rd tier subcontractor is Canada was sending some sub-assemblies as 'boxes of bits' (as they called them) rather than fully assembled, due to problems in obtaining the specified non-metric fasteners. The latest delay must involve some composite materials (fundamental in bringing the weight down to some 15-20% less than an equivalent all-aluminum aircraft). Much of the previous work in composite materials was done by Airbus (and there are questions there to be answered, especially after the recent Air France A330 disaster - the A330 has some large composite sections). Could Boeing have taken Airbus's work (done in SI) and got the conversions wrong, causing the latest delay? Just speculation of course, and there may well be other reasons for the structural problems behind the latest delay. But it seems surprising that Boeing, at this late stage, and with all its past history of designing planes, needs to be essentially admitting it got its structural calculations wrong. Now it may be asked why this is so, since all previous Boeings have been designed in imperial, without the problems that the 787 has experienced. I think there are two main reasons: 1) As noted above, so much of the aircraft has been both designed and manufactured in imperial units by companies and their people who have little or no experience in imperial units. That should have rung some alarm bells in Boeing right from the get-go. 2) While there may have been senior engineers in these and other non-US companies who have had some experience working in imperial units in the past, these now are probably retired. The new generation are metric-only. Even if the company had worked for Boeing previously, it is some 15 years since Boeing's last new plane (the 777) was designed. Does anyone here have an 'inside track' at Boeing? Can what I've said above be verified (or refuted, as the case may be)? If working in imperial units HAS cost Boeing dearly, it would be a wonderful case-study of why the US needs to join the metric world. Regards John F-L
[USMA:45263] Re: NASA feedback about metric use
I think that the fact that photo in the PS article is attributed to Boeing probably explains a lot John F-L - Original Message - From: John M. Steele To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 12:50 AM Subject: [USMA:45260] Re: NASA feedback about metric use Popular Science has a relatively similar article, which may get more exposure. http://www.popsci.com/military-aviation-amp-space/article/2009-06/nasa-gets-heat-ditching-metric-system-new-shuttle-replacement?page= --- On Wed, 6/24/09, Hillger, Don hill...@cira.colostate.edu wrote: From: Hillger, Don hill...@cira.colostate.edu Subject: [USMA:45258] NASA feedback about metric use To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Wednesday, June 24, 2009, 1:47 PM NASA can take online feedback at the following site http://www.nasa.gov/about/contact/ask_nasa_form.html for those who would like to suggest that NASA use the metric system for the Constellation Program. (They backed off of an earlier metric commitment, in case someone does not know, see http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17350-nasa-criticised-for-sticking-to-imperial-units.htm) Don USMA Webmaster USMA list owner
[USMA:45268] RE: Gratifying use of SI in my home town
Last week we were in Bournemouth, Dorset. We walked virtually the entire seafront between Hengistbury Head in the east to Poole in the west (a distance of around 10 km or so). Every 300 or 400 m there is a signboard showing nearest amenities, plus nearest point of interest. Everything was metric (e.g. Bournemouth Town Centre 2.5 km, Bistro Restaurant 120 m, toilets 85 m, clifftop elevation 48 m, etc). Not an imperial measurement to be seen. John F-L - Original Message - From: Martin Vlietstra To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 7:19 PM Subject: [USMA:45266] RE: Gratifying use of SI in my home town Bill, It is a legal requirement in the UK that berths be quoted per metre. UKMA members have often scoured local government websites to remind local councils of their legal obligations. BTW, the .gov.uk URL is used by central government, county councils, district councils, government agencies and so on, not just central government. For example, visit www.hart.gov.uk to visit the Hart District Council website. (Hart District, where I live, is home to about 70,000 people) -- From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Potts Sent: 24 June 2009 22:47 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:45259] Gratifying use of SI in my home town I was looking for information on free broadband wi-fi in my hometown of Scarborough, UK. I discovered it was only in the Harbour (sic) area. However, while exploring, I came across the following page, which gives the rates for private marina berths in UK pounds per square meter: http://www.yorkshireports.co.uk/content/scarborough/leisure/pb_prices.aspx As the site is a government one, the use of metric units is unsurprising, but it's gratifying nonetheless. I was thinking that, if Yorkshire Ports can get it right, there's no reason NASA (and Boeing) can't also. Bill -- Bill Potts WFP Consulting Roseville, CA http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
[USMA:45271] RE: Gratifying use of SI in my home town
I believe Ezra that it is Bournemouth Borough Council - certainly all the signs had the Bournemouth logo on them. I agree with you - as I mentioned in a previous email, I find a lot of use of metric at local and at the individual level. It seems only central and other high level government departments that are afraid to use metric, likely in the (mistaken) belief that the public aren't ready for it. It could well be that the public is more than ready for it. Could there be something here that the US could use? John F-L - Original Message - From: ezra.steinb...@comcast.net To: j...@frewston.plus.com Cc: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 12:20 AM Subject: Re: [USMA:45268] RE: Gratifying use of SI in my home town Any idea who are responsible for the signage? It might be interesting to find out because it could provide additional evidence that the UK public (or most of it) is ready for metric road signs. Ezra - Original Message - From: John Frewen-Lord j...@frewston.plus.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 12:00:46 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [USMA:45268] RE: Gratifying use of SI in my home town Last week we were in Bournemouth, Dorset. We walked virtually the entire seafront between Hengistbury Head in the east to Poole in the west (a distance of around 10 km or so). Every 300 or 400 m there is a signboard showing nearest amenities, plus nearest point of interest. Everything was metric (e.g. Bournemouth Town Centre 2.5 km, Bistro Restaurant 120 m, toilets 85 m, clifftop elevation 48 m, etc). Not an imperial measurement to be seen. John F-L - Original Message - From: Martin Vlietstra To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 7:19 PM Subject: [USMA:45266] RE: Gratifying use of SI in my home town Bill, It is a legal requirement in the UK that berths be quoted per metre. UKMA members have often scoured local government websites to remind local councils of their legal obligations. BTW, the .gov.uk URL is used by central government, county councils, district councils, government agencies and so on, not just central government. For example, visit www.hart.gov.uk to visit the Hart District Council website. (Hart District, where I live, is home to about 70,000 people) From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Potts Sent: 24 June 2009 22:47 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:45259] Gratifying use of SI in my home town I was looking for information on free broadband wi-fi in my hometown of Scarborough, UK. I discovered it was only in the Harbour (sic) area. However, while exploring, I came across the following page, which gives the rates for private marina berths in UK pounds per square meter: http://www.yorkshireports.co.uk/content/scarborough/leisure/pb_prices.aspx As the site is a government one, the use of metric units is unsurprising, but it's gratifying nonetheless. I was thinking that, if Yorkshire Ports can get it right, there's no reason NASA (and Boeing) can't also. Bill Bill Potts WFP Consulting Roseville, CA http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
[USMA:45324] RE: Yellow Jacket
Martin _ I remember this 'notice' from many (around 30) years ago (when I lived in Canada). I had completely forgotten it! Thanks for reminding me of it. I think all of us where I worked at the time (Canadian Institute of Steel Construction) had a good laugh when it was taped to the wall next to the photocopier (which was always going wrong until eventually replaced with a new one). Especially the German engineer amongst us, who (contrary to the stereotyping that Germans don't have a sense of humour) thought it was very funny. But you are right when it comes to dealing with things 'foreign'. Brits to some extent, but, I have to say, citizens of the US probably most of all. We used to have an expression in Canada when dealing with our US friends and colleagues - NIH (Not Invented Here). We always had to adapt to the US way of doing things, rarely the other way round. That really hurt when our way was acknowledged as being much superior technically. The response from Yellow Jacket is very worrying if I were considering buying from them - if for no other reason than they appear to not understand the distinction between temperature and pressure. Do they sell to metric countries (which would be anywhere outside the US)? If so, then that would be in spite of (not because of) their perceived capabilities (or lack of them) in making these products. American companies like this need to raise their game if they are not to get obliterated by the Chinese, Indians and the Russians in the coming years. As these countries become stronger, they will stop making the concessions to the US (especially in dealing in non-metric units) that the rest of the world has been making for many years now. John F-L - Original Message - From: Martin Vlietstra To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 7:56 AM Subject: [USMA:45323] RE: Yellow Jacket The Brits are as bad when it comes to anything foreign. Some years ago I sent a stylized version of http://www.grahamdavies.net/node/247 around the office. The response was two people rolling with laughter and thirty looking at it blankly. -- From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Payne Sent: 08 July 2009 21:58 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:45322] Yellow Jacket http://www.yellowjacket.com/images/A_Maniflds/Brute-II-C-hose.jpg Yellow Jacket is a company that makes equipment for servicing Air Conditioning equipment, both Home and Auto. The A/C guy was around my house and I noticed the guage had psi and kg/cm2 indications as well as Celsius and Fahrenheit. I wrote asking if they had guages marked in kilopascals. Here is the reply, just shows the total ignorance of most of the American population. Michael Payne Subject: RE: Manifold gauges Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 13:04:38 -0500 From: Customer Service custs...@yellowjacket.com To: 'Michael Payne' mike_pa...@verizon.net References: 4a4e2d32.6070...@verizon.net We only have gauges in Fahrenheit and metric. We do not make any gauges that read kilopascale. All of our metric gauges are sold for international companies. Sorry we could not help. Thank you. Donna Borgstahl Customer Service Rep. 952-943-1333 -Original Message- From: Michael Payne [mailto:mike_pa...@verizon.net] Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 11:09 AM To: custs...@yellowjacket.com Subject: Manifold gauges Do you make an air conditioning manifold (gauges) that display kilopascals? I notice you have a gauge that includes kg/cm2 which is not an SI unit. See:http://www1.bipm.org/en/si/si_brochure/chapter2/2-2/table3.html Michael Payne
[USMA:45326] Re: Yellow Jacket
I've just seen this picture for the first time. If you look closely at the bottom right of each gauge, it looks as if the outer pressure scales are marked MPa? Hard to see, the picture is not sufficiently hi-res. If this is true, then the original email received my Michael may just have been written by a know-nothing minion, in order to not have to bother someone in the company who actually might know about these things. John F-L - Original Message - From: Pierre Abbat p...@phma.optus.nu To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 1:26 PM Subject: [USMA:45325] Re: Yellow Jacket On Wednesday 08 July 2009 16:58:27 Michael Payne wrote: http://www.yellowjacket.com/images/A_Maniflds/Brute-II-C-hose.jpg Yellow Jacket is a company that makes equipment for servicing Air Conditioning equipment, both Home and Auto. The A/C guy was around my house and I noticed the guage had psi and kg/cm2 indications as well as Celsius and Fahrenheit. I wrote asking if they had guages marked in kilopascals. Here is the reply, just shows the total ignorance of most of the American population. Is it OK for us to write to Yellow Jacket? What are all the scales on each gauge? There appear to be five scales on each, which is too many if one indicates temperature and the other pressure. Pierre
[USMA:45370] Re: Speed in metres per second
I am not convinced! One of the criteria needed in driving on the roads is the need to provide some form of relationship between speed and distance over time we that can relate to. If distance is measured in km, then speed needs to also use km, and km/h is as convenient a measure as any. I once wrote to Road and Track (US auto magazine) providing a counter argument to technical editor Denis Simonaitis's (I think that is how his name is spelled) assertion that imperial measures have some handy 'yardsticks', such as 60 mph is equal to 1 mile per minute. My argument was that metric has even more (and better): 1. Urban journeys are generally measured in minutes. A good urban average is 60 km/h (equal to 1 km per minute), therefore a journey of say 15 km will take 15 minutes. 2. Long distance journeys are generally measured in hours. A good freeway average is 100 km/h, therefore a journey of 450 km will take 4.5 hours. 3. And a (perhaps slightly over the speed limit) rate of progress on the freeway of 120 km/h will mean that the kilometres are slipping by at the rate of 2 km per minute - useful in calculating the time to your next exit. I was quite gratified that Denis devoted a good section of his next article in putting my case forward. I cannot see though how the use of m/s would fit in with any of the above, as metres (except in short distances to intersections and the like) are not used in measuring travel distances on the roads, and seconds are not used to measure time taken. Regards John F-L - Original Message - From: Pat Naughtin To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 1:47 AM Subject: [USMA:45365] Speed in metres per second Dear All, I have just been reading this blog at http://globonsomeday.blogspot.com/2009/07/improving-metric-system.html where they say: Another metric unit commonly encountered in everyday usage is the unit of speed, kilometres per hour. The official SI base unit for time is seconds, and therefore a more appropriate measurement of speed is metres per second. For example, 100 km/h is equivalent to 27.78 m/s. I wonder if we will ever be ready to embrace the idea of using the SI unit, metres per second, for speed in everyday conversations. Let's take the example given above with sensible rounding. The speed limit on a highway might then become 25 metres per second. Other limits might go like this (using Australian examples): School zone 40 km/h 10 m/s Suburban street 60 km/h 15 m/s Main (4 lane) cross town road 70 km/h 20 m/s Highway 100 km/h 25 m/s Freeway 110 km/h 30 m/s It might be interesting to see this idea applied to speed limits in Asia, Europe, the UK and the USA. Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the forthcoming book, Metrication Leaders Guide. PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat at pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe.
[USMA:45412] Re: mix of measurements
Thanks for this John. This came from a US website. All the UK sites I have checked for similar suppliers/items are virtually exclusively metric - only very occasionally is an imperial dimension shown. In looking at the US websites, there is quite a sprinkling of metric measures, although sometimes it is obvious that the authors of the material shown do not fully understand what they are writing about when using metric dimensions (e.g. one site showed a bracket dimension of 120mm [sic] for one mechanism, and then 12CM [sic] for the identical item but including a clock face). Still, a very positive sign that the US, even at the 'public' or consumer level, will show metric measures where necessary. John F-L - Original Message - From: John M. Steele To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 1:39 PM Subject: [USMA:45411] Re: mix of measurements My guess would be that the mounting hole sketch is direct from the manufacturer, and needs to be somewhat exact. The other dimensions are all clearance dimensions and can be rounded up to the next Imperial fraction with no risk; those were probably measured or converted for the US (or UK?) market. --- On Fri, 7/17/09, John Frewen-Lord j...@frewston.plus.com wrote: From: John Frewen-Lord j...@frewston.plus.com Subject: [USMA:45408] mix of measurements To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Friday, July 17, 2009, 6:20 AM Dear all: I have been browsing the net looking for parts/mechanisms to restore an antique clock I have. Many of the potential suppliers are in the US, and I have found quite a mix of imperial and metric measures. Mostly imperial, but metric here and there (likely when describing German or other non-US sourced components). The attached picture really intrigued me - don't know whether the company on whose website it appears created it, or was supplied from elsewhere. The font used for both the metric and imperial dimensions is the same, so likely the same person added the mixed measurements. Cheers John F-L
[USMA:45473] Re: Fw: default units for height
Tom: You are very right IMHO, but this is nothing new! See my article at http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2009/01/20/metric-user-friendly/ Cheers John F-L - Original Message - From: Tom Wade tom.w...@tomwade.eu To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 12:10 PM Subject: [USMA:45455] Re: Fw: default units for height It is good of you to promote metric height numbers. However, I do not like centimeter. I want schools to stop teaching and using centimeter. I also want schools to stop teaching inch-pound numbers. So, I want height to be in millimeters. What is it with the anti-centimeter prejudice that many people have on this group ? Just because mm are more appropriate for nearly all industrial use doesn't mean the humble cm doesn't have a role. To place cm alongside inch-pound as in the above paragraph is way over the top, and to try and pretend that that units between kilo and milli don't exist is to miss out on a huge advantage of the use of metric prefixes: the ability to scale the unit to the most appropriate size (and to advocate not teaching a unit that is not only officially recognized but is in wide use internationally simply because purists have a dislike of them is to recommend leaving holes in young people's education). The fact is that cm *are* the most appropriate unit for people's height. If you don't like using cm, then quote your height in meters (which is effectively 'hidden centimeters' as you will typically quote it to two decimal places, i.e. centimeters). Thus the centimeter is the unit that is closest to the required precision for people's height. It also gives a nice manageable range of whole numbers. My height is 174 cm or 1.74 m. If I am writing it down, I may write '1.74 m', but in saying it, I will say one seventy four without any units, which can be understood as one hundred seventy four centimeters or 1 meter plus 74 centimeters. Quoting height in millimeters is simply plain stupid - height is never expressed with that precision, as something as simple as a haircut will change your height. People who insist on using mm for height are like people who are so impressed with a screwdriver as a tool, that they think it can be used for everything (whereas a less generally useful tool such as a hammer would be more appropriate for *some* applications). I doubt very much you will see mm being used for height in countries where metric is the system used. Also, using mm for height gives an unnatural feeling, rather like the putative New York 96.56 km sign that anti-metric activists insist would replace a more natural 60 mile sign. As for the choice of using meters or centimeters, I would point at that the use of centimeters has the advantage of yielding a whole integer without the need for decimal places -- something that is often (quite correctly) pointed out by people recommending the advantages of mm over inches or centimeters in other applications such as engineering drawings. Why not apply the same logic here ? Use the unit that is best suited to the range and precision required by the application. Tom Wade
[USMA:45530] Re: I blew it! (The conversion of 2/100ths of an inch, that is)
As a surveyor in the construction industry (and having worked in both imperial and metric in the UK, the US, Canada and South Africa), something about this story doesn't quite ring true. 1. In-the-field tolerances are never less than 1/16 imperial (1.6 mm), or 1 mm metric (at least I've never come across tolerances tighter than that, and that includes a lot of precision hospital work). The 2/100ths of an inch is almost exactly 0.5 mm, a tolerance virtually impossible to achieve on a construction site. 2. The 2.52 is almost exactly 64 mm. Allowing for a tolerance of say +/- 1 mm, the trench should have been specified at 65 mm. 3. I'm no electrical expert, but I do know that cables when conducting electricity heat up and expand. Was no allowance made for this? And would it not have been wise to allow a tiny bit of airpace between the cable and trench walls to allow air circulation and help the cable to stay cool(er)? I wonder if there's more to this story than is being told? Cheers John F-L - Original Message - From: ezra.steinb...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 12:07 AM Subject: [USMA:45529] I blew it! (The conversion of 2/100ths of an inch, that is) OK, I got my conversion wrong. But I bet we would be using whole numbers in millimiters if we were using and familiar with metric and had adopted millimeters for construction as Pat has observed works best in industry. -- Ezra
[USMA:45532] Re: I blew it! (The conversion of 2/100ths of an inch, that is)
Hi Pat: I believe (any electrical experts here that could confirm this?) that cables are all based on a rational progression of their (metric) cross sectional areas. Even the cable to my electric kettle is shown in terms of its mm2 value. I would imagine that the 2 inch value is a (rough) approximation of its actual metric diameter, for the benefit of the US public. All this still doesn't answer the nagging questions in my mind how this state of affairs came about. It looks like a lot of finger pointing over some error discovered somewhere when things didn't fit, likely on the drawings or specifications and long before construction actually took place. The 0.5 mm 'error' turned out to be a convenient hook to try to hang an accusation on. Cheers John F-L - Original Message - From: Pat Naughtin To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 8:04 AM Subject: [USMA:45531] Re: I blew it! (The conversion of 2/100ths of an inch, that is) Dear John, I noticed the closeness of 2.52 inches and 64 mm and then I wondered whether they were trying to fit a metric cable into an old- pre-metric space or vice-versa. On another issue from the same article, I wondered about where in Italy you could buy a 2 inch cable. This would be a most unusual size in Italy and would have to be a special order as I don't think any Italian cable maker would routinely make products to inch sizes. Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the forthcoming book, Metrication Leaders Guide. PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat at pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe. On 2009/08/06, at 4:32 PM, John Frewen-Lord wrote: As a surveyor in the construction industry (and having worked in both imperial and metric in the UK, the US, Canada and South Africa), something about this story doesn't quite ring true. 1. In-the-field tolerances are never less than 1/16 imperial (1.6 mm), or 1 mm metric (at least I've never come across tolerances tighter than that, and that includes a lot of precision hospital work). The 2/100ths of an inch is almost exactly 0.5 mm, a tolerance virtually impossible to achieve on a construction site. 2. The 2.52 is almost exactly 64 mm. Allowing for a tolerance of say +/- 1 mm, the trench should have been specified at 65 mm. 3. I'm no electrical expert, but I do know that cables when conducting electricity heat up and expand. Was no allowance made for this? And would it not have been wise to allow a tiny bit of airpace between the cable and trench walls to allow air circulation and help the cable to stay cool(er)? I wonder if there's more to this story than is being told? Cheers John F-L - Original Message - From: ezra.steinb...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 12:07 AM Subject: [USMA:45529] I blew it! (The conversion of 2/100ths of an inch, that is) OK, I got my conversion wrong. But I bet we would be using whole numbers in millimiters if we were using and familiar with metric and had adopted millimeters for construction as Pat has observed works best in industry. -- Ezra
[USMA:45536] Re: I blew it! (The conversion of 2/100ths of an inch, that is)
Martin: I would think that these cranes would run on something like 405 V (or 435 V, I've forgotten which), which is the voltage that lifts/elevators operate on in North America. 115 V (actually, normally 110 V) would be much too low a voltage to run a dockside crane on. Cheers John F-L - Original Message - From: Martin Vlietstra To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 7:18 PM Subject: [USMA:45535] Re: I blew it! (The conversion of 2/100ths of an inch, that is) John, Pat Whereas you and I are used to systems that use 230 V, most readers of this forum are used to using 115 V systems and as a result the regulations are probably different. Also, if the trench was made of steel, would air cooling be needed - steel is probably much better. Having said that, I agree that 0.5 mm is a very tight tolerance. Regards Martin -- From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of John Frewen-Lord Sent: 06 August 2009 08:50 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:45532] Re: I blew it! (The conversion of 2/100ths of an inch, that is) Hi Pat: I believe (any electrical experts here that could confirm this?) that cables are all based on a rational progression of their (metric) cross sectional areas. Even the cable to my electric kettle is shown in terms of its mm2 value. I would imagine that the 2 inch value is a (rough) approximation of its actual metric diameter, for the benefit of the US public. All this still doesn't answer the nagging questions in my mind how this state of affairs came about. It looks like a lot of finger pointing over some error discovered somewhere when things didn't fit, likely on the drawings or specifications and long before construction actually took place. The 0.5 mm 'error' turned out to be a convenient hook to try to hang an accusation on. Cheers John F-L - Original Message - From: Pat Naughtin To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 8:04 AM Subject: [USMA:45531] Re: I blew it! (The conversion of 2/100ths of an inch, that is) Dear John, I noticed the closeness of 2.52 inches and 64 mm and then I wondered whether they were trying to fit a metric cable into an old- pre-metric space or vice-versa. On another issue from the same article, I wondered about where in Italy you could buy a 2 inch cable. This would be a most unusual size in Italy and would have to be a special order as I don't think any Italian cable maker would routinely make products to inch sizes. Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the forthcoming book, Metrication Leaders Guide. PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat at pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe. On 2009/08/06, at 4:32 PM, John Frewen-Lord wrote: As a surveyor in the construction industry (and having worked in both imperial and metric in the UK, the US, Canada and South Africa), something about this story doesn't quite ring true. 1. In-the-field tolerances are never less than 1/16 imperial (1.6 mm), or 1 mm metric (at least I've never come across tolerances tighter than that, and that includes a lot of precision hospital work). The 2/100ths of an inch is almost exactly 0.5 mm, a tolerance virtually impossible to achieve on a construction site. 2. The 2.52 is almost exactly 64 mm. Allowing for a tolerance of say +/- 1 mm, the trench should have been specified at 65 mm. 3. I'm no electrical expert, but I do know that cables when conducting electricity heat up and expand. Was no allowance made for this? And would it not have been wise to allow a tiny bit of airpace between the cable and trench walls to allow air circulation and help the cable to stay cool(er)? I wonder if there's more to this story than is being told? Cheers John F-L
[USMA:45573] Re: Metric Style Question
I don't agree Bill regarding the USA's abandonment of the æ. There are words with different roots and hence meanings that could lose their distinction if you abandon the æ - e.g. ped--- meaning something do to with feet (pedicure, etc), and pæd--- , meaning something to do with children (pædiatrician, etc). I am not sure about Australia, but I do know that in Canada, official spelling is to use the æ, though much of that is now lost due to, once again, US obliteration of other cultures and customs. Cheers John F-L - Original Message - From: Bill Potts w...@wfpconsulting.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 4:21 AM Subject: [USMA:45568] Re: Metric Style Question No, Carlton, because there is really no a. It should be orthopædics, with an ae ligature (æ). The U.S. has sensibly decided to replace all instances of æ with e. Bill -Original Message- From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Carleton MacDonald Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 12:40 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:45565] Re: Metric Style Question I've often wondered about the extra letters in words like orthopaedics - do the people in the UK really pronounce the a ? Carleton -Original Message- From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of James R. Frysinger Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 15:02 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:45541] Re: Metric Style Question Jim, John Steele gave a good answer. English tends towards simplification of writing style over time. There was a time that cooperative required (!) an unlaut over the second o to show that a diphthong (oo) was not intended. I recall when one saw catalogue more often than catalog. I still use a comma before and and or in a series of equal parts (Bob, Bill, and Bubba). My impression is that the double adjective hyphen is slowly going away. The SI Brochure and NIST SP 811 demand that for metric values in symbolic form (10 mm bolt), even when used as adjectives. The world is still split on spelled out forms (ten millimeter bolt or ten-millimeter bolt). Jim Jim Elwell wrote: My grammar checker keeps trying to get me to hyphenate a metric unit of measure when used as an adjective (apparently seeing the number and the unit as a compound adjective). I wrote: put all those resources into a 180 mm industrial panel-mount unit And it suggests put all those resources into a 180-mm industrial panel-mount unit I thought I was quite familiar with metric style, but I am not sure about this one. Can anyone shed some light on it? Thanks! Jim -- ** Jim Elwell jim.elw...@qsicorp.com 801-466-8770 www.qsicorp.com -- James R. Frysinger 632 Stony Point Mountain Road Doyle, TN 38559-3030 (C) 931.212.0267 (H) 931.657.3107 (F) 931.657.3108
[USMA:45600] Re: Hawaii metric
I have often wondered what measurement system was used in Hawaii before it became a US State in the early 1960s. Does anyone know? John F-L - Original Message - From: Nat Hager III neha...@msi-sensing.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Cc: Nat Hager neha...@vzw.blackberry.net Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:31 PM Subject: [USMA:45599] Hawaii metric Back in June I got stuck with the dirty job of having to attend an NSF grantees conference, in of all places, Honolulu. So I managed, particularly considering it was being paid for out of the grant. When the conference was over I was stuck in Honolulu on a Thursday night, with not much on the calendar for the following week as it was a short week due to 4th July. So I made the best of a bad situation, and spent a few days on the Big Island, Maui, and Kauai. g In the course of the week I noticed a lot of metric road signs, which I've attached. More general pictures are at http://www.win.net/dorsea/nehager follow the obvious links. Nat
[USMA:45628] Re: OK Simon.....try this.
I agree. The quick brutal approach is, rightly or wrongly, the most effective. Short term pain for long term gain. The persuasive gentle approach has been shown to not work, and is, as has been said here many times before, the primary reason why the UK (and Canada) are in such a measurement muddle. John F-L - Original Message - From: Stephen Davis To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 7:09 PM Subject: [USMA:45626] OK Simon.try this. Do you think that for effective integration of SI into American society, it would have to forced through and made mandatory to only use SI units? Or do you think freedom of choice and polite persuation would be more effective in getting the benefits of SI across? Something that seems to be the consensus of quite a few on this board? Personally, I think a properly organised mandatory implementation of SI both in the US and Britain is the only effective way doing it, much like the way decimal currency was introduced in the UK way back in 1971. - Original Message - From: simon_m...@live.com To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 6:46 PM Subject: [USMA:45625] Re: Maths (or should that be math?) Amen! I beginning to wonder what kind of forum this is. When a topic involving the metric system is brought up the responses are almost zero. Talk about something other then the metric system or something loosely connected and then everybody joins in. I hate to complain since I'm so new here but I came here to discuss the metric system and so far its not happening at the level I would like to see. Simon From: Aaron Harper Sent: Friday, 2009-08-14 12:20 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:45624] Re: Maths (or should that be math?) The question of whether decimals or fractions are better has nothing to do with the purpose of this forum: Metrication.
[USMA:45708] Re: the metric system and cooking recipes
Pretty well all recipes today in the UK are metric. All the cookbooks from the likes of Jamie Oliver, Delia Smith, etc are in metric, as are the recipes each week in the Sunday Times Magazine. A popular TV series, titled Come Dine With Me, also gives out its recipes in metric only. The non-metric recipe is, except for older ones, essentially dead. John F-L - Original Message - From: Paul Trusten To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: Sally Mitchell Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 5:00 PM Subject: [USMA:45705] the metric system and cooking recipes When I posted an item on my pharmacy blog about the metric system, one person commented, That's fine, but keep it out of my kitchen! That was an interesting response. We usually have to deal with nationalism, or just plain stubbornness, when someone opposes metric so pointedly, but the dislike of metric units in cooking is a different prejudice. As a pharmacist, I found myself wanting to use metric units on this very point. The symbol for pharmacy or a prescription, Rx, is actually shorthand for rhe word recipe, and a prescription can be considered just that: a list of ingredients along with directions for preparation. Compounding medications requires objectivity and accuracy, but why do you think people who enjoy preparing food from recipes have a nerve struck on metrication? This whole subject is particularly engaging because USMA member Sally Mitchell is particularly emphatic about using the metric system in cooking. Paul Trusten, R.Ph. Public Relations Director U.S. Metric Association.Inc. www.metric.org trus...@grandecom.net
[USMA:45737] Re: [Fwd: Energy and power]
I was once told by a very experienced engineer, involved in wind turbine design, that the energy used to manufacture all these devices can actually exceed the energy they will produce over their lifetimes. I haven't worked any numbers out for myself, but it would be interesting to see if he is right or not. John F-L - Original Message - From: James R. Frysinger j...@metricmethods.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2009 1:27 AM Subject: [USMA:45736] Re: [Fwd: Energy and power] Right you are, John! I had the conversion factor for watt hour in my head and forgot to apply the value for the prefix. Ah, well, if Rich Leventhal picks up on that we'll know that he's done some studying. And if he replies, I'll give him that correction. The hype on this device is what you say and more. This is what drives me nuts about the wind and solar energy crowd. They love to quote peak values with no mention of the calm spells and night hours. If the difficulties of integrating such sporadic sources into the distribution grid are addressed at all, they are mentioned only in passing. By the time one looks at storage needs to smooth out the wrinkles, the capital costs rise many times over the advertised capitalization figures for the raw devices. As Kermit said, It's not easy being green. Jim John M. Steele wrote: Jim, You missed a factor of 1000 somewhere. 1 kWh is 1000 W for 3600 s, hence 3.6 MJ. In a drivethru application, this might hit 2 kW instantaneous power, but the window will have a significant transaction time severely limiting the average power. He, of course, may have slightly different numbers, but my estimates are an average vehicle with mass 2.5 t, driver accelerates to 2 m/s in a stop-and-go line and needs to stop at the window, where he will have a 60 s transaction to receive his food, pay, receive change Kinetic energy, (½mv²) is 0.5* 2500 kg * (2 m/s)² = 5000 J If the car stops in 2 s, 2500 W would be generated during that period. However, with a 60 s transaction at the window, the average power is 5000 J/60 s = 80 W more or less. Even this (useless) level of power assumes 100% efficiency, so real world results will be lower. Assuming a line of cars awaiting their turn at the window, perhaps one device for each waiting position in line could improve this somewhat. I don't see it making a lot of power. Especially if anyone is stopped in the wrong place and everybody has to use their real brakes. --- On *Fri, 9/4/09, James R. Frysinger /j...@metricmethods.com/* wrote: From: James R. Frysinger j...@metricmethods.com Subject: [USMA:45733] [Fwd: Energy and power] To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Friday, September 4, 2009, 2:44 PM I recently posted this email to Rick Leventhal at FoxNews.com. Jim Dear Mr. Leventhal, I have just finished reading your online article N.J. Burger King Testing Energy-Producing Speed Bump http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,546512,00.html posted on FoxNews.com. In this article you have made an error that detracts significantly from your report. You apparently confused the two distinctly different quantities energy and power. Power is the rate at which energy is produced, used, or transferred. Think power equals energy divided by time. Conversely, energy equals power times time. In your article you state, That force turns gears inside, generating 2000 watts of electricity instantaneously, according to the engineers who designed it. The implication is that some amount of electrical energy is produced in a short period of time. But energy is measured in joules (J), not in watts (W). In the electrical utility industry, they often use kilowatt hours to measure energy; a kilowatt hour is equal to 3600 joules, or 3.6 kilojoules (kJ). The watt (W) is used to measure power. It is defined to be 1 J/s. Let's assume that object 1 transfers 1000 joules (1000 J) of energy over the time span of 1 second (1 s) to object 2 and this generates electricity with 100 % efficiency. The power of this generation event would then be 1000 J divided by 1 s or 1000 W. If instead the transfer of energy and energy production took 0.5 seconds, the power level would be 2000 W. Or if the transfer and generation took 2 seconds, the power level would be 500 W. All of these would of course be the average power levels during the time span of the interaction; between interactions the power level would be zero. The way you should have worded your sentence would be of the form, That force turns gears inside, generating an average of 2000 watts of electrical power during the time span of the energy transfer, according to the engineers who designed it. The website for New Energy Technology states: All
[USMA:45857] Re: Posters for National Metric Week in the USA
Dear all: While I think Pat's poster idea at http://metricationmatters.com/docs/SIMetricUnitsVsUSAMeasures.pdf is good in concept, I do have some issues with the actual poster itself. As it stands, i believe it can, in a general workplace environment, actually do more harm than good, as it makes metric look too hard! And the use of so many 'pre-metric' (as the non-metric side is titled) units looks a bit too contrived to be believable (even if true), while some bits of it are open to challenge. Overall, and without getting too specific, I believe that the following changes should be made: 1. List only the first 5 base units - the remaining two are not commonly encountered in daily use in most industries and professions, and can scare people into thinking they have to learn some strange new units in order to understand metric - they don't.. 2. Likewise, filter the derived units and the prefixes to those commonly encountered (e.g. for prefixes, limit the list from say nano to tera). 3. There are some issues regarding the choice of units in the 'pre-metric' list, viz: Again, list only those units commonly encountered in daily use in most industries or professions (this will still be a big list). Why the inclusion of compound units (e.g. gallons per day) - why not equivalent compound units on the metric side? Why the inclusion of UK-specific units (the list is headed ...still in use in the USA) Why the inclusion of Mach number (Mach numbers are dimensionless, and can be converted to km/h or mph, or any other compound unit involving distance per unit of time) Is it right to say that the metric yard, millimeters of mercury, and so on, are 'pre-metric'? They may not be SI, but they are metric (sort of). Cheers John F-L - Original Message - From: Paul Trusten To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 6:09 AM Subject: [USMA:45856] Re: Posters for National Metric Week in the USA Pat et al., Please note that the NCTM Web page for National Metric Week has not yet been updated for 2009. This year's NMW runs for the week of 4 to 10 October (not sure why the 2008 NCTM dates only covered five days). I have contacted NCTM to request that this page be updated. Paul T. - Original Message - From: Pat Naughtin To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: 19 September, 2009 20:13 Subject: [USMA:45848] Posters for National Metric Week in the USA Dear All, This year 'National Metric Week' will be from October 6 to October 10, see http://www.nctm.org/news/content.aspx?id=10248 You may recall that I suggested that one way to support National Metric Week in the USA is to place posters around your place of work. With the help of Bill Hooper and Jim Palfreyman, I have slightly revised this suggestion for a poster: http://metricationmatters.com/docs/SIMetricUnitsVsUSAMeasures.pdf So now the item from the Metrication matters newsletter would read: One thing you can do to promote the metric system at your work place is to pin pro-metric items on to notice boards around your school or work place. Here are some that you might like to download and print ready for 'National Metric Week' in the USA. For a general-purpose notice board think about: http://www.metricationmatters.com/docs/degreesCelsiusPoster.pdf , http://www.metricationmatters.com/docs/NationalMetricDay.pdf and http://www.metricationmatters.com/docs/SIMetricUnitsVsUSAMeasures.pdf Or if you work in a scientific or engineering environment you might like: http://www.metricationmatters.com/docs/EnergyWords.pdf The 'National Metric Week' is strongly supported by the U.S. Metric Association; see http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/metric-week.html for details. As a gift for your friends and to remind them of 'National Metric Week' you might like to pass along this one minute YouTube reference to 'Let's Get Metric' by Scott Wheatley: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeyGEwjLPGw Or if you want to illustrate the cost of not going metric refer them to the YouTube video, American Chopper vs The Metric System, where the mechanics are trying to figure out the answer to the question: 'What is the difference between 180 millimetres and 140 millimetres'? except they seem unaware of the initial metric design and build specifications for this all-metric model bike, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Omh8Ito-05M And finally a YouTube reference for schools apparently made with the support of NASA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQPQ_q59xywfeature=rec-HM-rev-rn Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can obtain from http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has
[USMA:45868] Re: Electrical transmission and distribution
Jim: In broad terms, the way it works here in the UK is that the central government (equivalent to the federal government in the US, Canada and Australia) owns the power stations, which then contract with National Grid plc, who own the main overhead wires (either at 230 kV or 400 kV as they are upgraded), to distribute the electricity generated. This in turn gets distributed via substations through secondary lines (in my case owned by YEDL - Yorkshire Electricity Distribution Limited, who have responsibility for ensuring the electricity gets physically delivered in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, which is the county in which I live) to the end user. However, I don't buy my electricity directly off YEDL - instead, it gets sold to to providers (in my case it is Scottish Power), who contract with YEDL to buy so many units. The more units they buy, (hopefully) the lower the unit cost (i.e. per kW.h), which competition means they will (in theory) pass on to the consumer. The idea was (and still is) to provide competition within the marketplace (i.e. at end user level), by separating the distributor (i.e. National Grid and the local distributors) from the providers. Whether it works or not is a moot point - it probably did work in the beginning, but intense competition has more or less levelled the playing field. I should add that there is a government body called Ofgen who oversee the whole consumer pricing structure, and are supposed to make sure that the consumer is getting a fair deal, especially when it comes to passing on wholesale price increases (i.e. what the power stations initially charge). Hope this helps John F-L - Original Message - From: James R. Frysinger j...@metricmethods.com To: j...@frewston.plus.com Cc: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu; Robert Bryce rob...@robertbryce.com Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 4:25 PM Subject: Electrical transmission and distribution First of all, I'm changing the subject line. Second, John has said something here that intrigues me. How do you go about changing your provider of electrical energy, John? Do you have to connect your house to a different set of distribution wires? Or, if you keep the connection the same, who owns the wires you're connected to and how are they reimbursed for their use? In the U.S., one has no choice in provider. Only one company's wires pass down the street and one must buy from them. The companies buy and sell electrical energy amongst themselves under regulations established by regional authorities. Indeed, the Cap and Trade bill in our Congress at this time would require companies to generate or purchase a certain percentage of the electrical energy they distribute from green sources, which in fact might not be directly attached to their transmission grid. Jim John Frewen-Lord wrote: In the UK (and Oz will use broadly similar terminology), electricity comes from things we call 'power stations'. My electricity is supplied by Scottish Power (and no, I don't live in Scotland, they are just the provider - I can choose between any number of providers) -- James R. Frysinger 632 Stony Point Mountain Road Doyle, TN 38559-3030 (C) 931.212.0267 (H) 931.657.3107 (F) 931.657.3108
[USMA:45903] Re: Greenhouse Gas Reporting
I have seen mt used as an abreviation of 'metric tonne' Still wrong. John F-L - Original Message - From: Bill Hooper hooperb...@bellsouth.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2009 3:58 PM Subject: [USMA:45901] Re: Greenhouse Gas Reporting On Sep 26 , at 9:16 AM, Jason D Darfus wrote, regarding reports on emissions of greenhouse gases: The symbol mt (militon) is the same as a kilogram and could possibly be interpreted as such (oops!) Quite right! Actually, it not only COULD be, but actually SHOULD be interpreted to mean millitonne since the SI symbol for tonne is t and the SI prefix m means milli- or one-thousandth. Thus, the maverick mt really does mean a kilogram (not the million kilograms the authors apparently meant). Made up symbols that uninformed people invent willy-nilly to suit narrow, specific purposes can always be misinterpreted and can be misinterpreted in many different ways (sometimes in ways that are more SI correct than the intended meaning). That is why they should not be used. That's the whole point of objecting to mt as a symbol in this case. There is a proper name and symbol for everything in SI and it should be used. In SI, the symbol for million tonnes is Mt (not mt) and the version expressed in kilograms is gigigram, whose symbol is Gg. In no case should the unit symbol be appended with CO2e or any other qualifiers. Bill Hooper 72 millitonnes body mass (ha, ha!) Fernandina Beach, Florida, USA
[USMA:45965] Re: teaching customary units
Blair is pro-EU because he has always wanted a prominent EU position - now it looks like he's going to get to be EU president (ughh!). As for the UK being the world's laughing stock for clinging to imperial - IT IS!! My friends, colleagues and family in Canada and Australia really do laugh at the UK for clinging to miles, yards, feet and inches on the roads, and pounds in the markets. That the UK is a laughing stock in this respect is something I have been banging on about for a long time - glad someone else is of a similar opinion. It's actually embarrassing, and I am careful to distance myself from our stupid government (and those stupid individuals who support it) on this issue. Fortunately, there is hope yet. I have recently been selling some of my surplus stuff on eBay (with only two of us we really don't need a huge 4 bedroomed house to rattle around in, so are looking to downsize), and whenever I look to see what similar items are selling for, item descriptions (and these are descriptions placed there by everyday people like you and me) are almost always in metric (even if the centimeter gets used rather than the millimeter - not a problem in my view). The UK is far more metric than our politicians give us credit for. And that can only be a good thing. John F-L - Original Message - From: Stephen Humphreys To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 12:59 PM Subject: [USMA:45963] Re: teaching customary units I suspect that is the reason why imperial made a return to the curriculum in the UK from the 90's (when I was at school in the 80's I can't remember being taught any imperial, although I can imagine teachers 'spoke it' so to speak). I believe the real reason was that those who were anti-EU successfully linked metrication in the public mind with European integration (despite the fact that metrication was initiated as a British Commonwealth wide project). Thus retention of these units became part of defending British culture, rather than ensuring that British people and industry could enjoy a better tool by which to conduct commerce. Pupils have since paid the price in terms of additional baggage they have to endure in schools. It was under Blair that the current curriculum was formed - arguably the most pro-EU and pro-metric government we've had since Heath in the early 70's By all means teach both sets of units if your desire is to end up with the mess of units used in the UK, but if you want to lay the foundations for a complete transition in the long run, international experience would suggest removing them completely from the classroom as soon as possible. It's really not perceived as a mess of units by the ordinary punter in the street. Only those with an interest in the subject might hold that opinion - but for obvious reasons. It's a bit like the imperial measures makes us a laughing stock in the world quote. I've yet to hear a Barbadian say Ha ha! You said 'mile' ! However I fully understand why some people might think this way if they have a strong opinion on this - but let's balance that with how the wider community views it. Just a thought. -- Add other email accounts to Hotmail in 3 easy steps. Find out how.
[USMA:46043] Re: Fwd: USA Science Festival tents
Canada converted all its speed limit signs in one night. Went to bed, signs were in mph. Woke up next morning, all were in km/h. The stick on solution was used - very cheap, very fast, and very effective. Most lasted until they needed to be replaced for other reasons. When you consider Canada's vastness, and the fact that every road has speed limit signs by the million (roads 60 km/h and under by law have to have signs every 500 m [exception - blanket '50 km/h unless signed otherwise' signs when entering a metropolis], while those roads over 60 km/h had to be signed every 1 km, including freeways), this was quite some achievement. John F-L - Original Message - From: Pat Naughtin To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: UKMA Metric Association Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:08 AM Subject: [USMA:46042] Re: Fwd: USA Science Festival tents Dear John, Well said. It is interesting to note that changing all road signs in an entire nation can be done in a day – that's right – in a single day. It all depends on the method you choose. Australia, New Zealand, India, South Africa, and Ireland chose successful methods largely by copying each others successes. They all chose to change to metric only signs and the job done in a day was the result. Others have chosen other methods based on simple conjectures or prejudices. The UK chose two methods that proved to be unsuccessful so far: 1 Design, build, and repair roads all in metric measures while you provide the public with signs based on the metric inch, the metric foot, the metric yard, and the metric mile that were all defined in metric terms in 1959. This truth was hidden from the UK people by an arbitrary decision made at the time of the Thatcher government – it was based on a simple political prejudice that was encapsulated in the phrase (as I recall Margaret Thatcher's words), 'WE have saved the pint and the mile for Britain'. 2 'Dual signs are good for educating the public' is an interesting conjecture that, as far as I can find, has no basis in fact and no precedent in history. It is simply a false conjecture that has always proved to be false wherever its application has been attempted. These two thought have led to the current situation in the UK. They began to use this prejudice and this conjecture in about 1965 and there are many who still support them even despite their obvious failure after 44 years – so far – and with many more years still to come! Remember that the alternative is to look at a nation that has made the upgrade in a single day and copy the successful methods that they chose to use. Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can obtain from http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat at pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe. On 2009/10/20, at 22:58 , John M. Steele wrote: I hear you, but I think I have to disagree. The 10' tent doesn't really make them anti-metric, but it does perpetuate the status quo of duality is fine. We have been stuck in stasis since 1866 when duality is fine first became the law of the land. In 143 years, progress has been limited to: *The 1893 Mendenhall order, and 1959 adjustment of the foot and pound. *In 1994, requiring most consumer goods to have both metric and Customary net contents, under FPLA. (But meat, deli, produce, and beer remain Customary only). I suppose I should note a few things are metric-only like wine, spirits. We have backpedalled or failed to complete: *Metric in Federally-funded highways and Federal buildings. *Enforcing EO12770, making Federal agencies metric (look at NASA). *Completing permissive-metric-only for either FPLA (stalled at NIST) or UPLR (stalled by 2 States). Unless we are more agressive, it could take another kiloyear. An activity planned for a 3 m x 3 m tent would fit fine in a 10' x 10' tent AND send a message. A message that scientists and
[USMA:46057] Re: Interview with UKMA leader Robin Paice on Rado 4 regarding metrication
I think Robin got the short end of the stick on that. Clark got both the opening say AND the closing say. I think that Robin should have had the chance to say that metrication of the UK is NOT an EU thing - which is where I thought the dialogue was going. Unfortunately, it stopped somewhat short, giving the impression that metrication in the UK was being forced by the EU. I also roughly timed both Clark's and Robin's comments, and Clark by far got the most time. I was going to say the usual BBC anti-metric bias, but as my previous email said - sometimes the BBC can get it (mostly) right, just not this time. For the benefit of US readers, Radio 4 is the BBC's flagship radio program, predominantly serious political/socio/economic talk, but also a lot of 'intellectual comedy', current affairs, documentaries, etc. No advertizing or sponsorship of course, and supposedly impartial, although too many of 'the beeb's' reporters and commentors have been accused (sometimes rightly so) of a left wing bias. John F-L - Original Message - From: ezra.steinb...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: Robin Paice ; Phillip S Hall ; Roddy Urqhart ; Chris Keenan Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 7:10 PM Subject: [USMA:46055] Interview with UKMA leader Robin Paice on Rado 4 regarding metrication I figure USMA folks would find this interesting (taken from UKMA web site at http://ukma.org.uk): http://www.youtube.com/UKMetric#p/c/04DE7CACFA86D7A4/0/LQpc7BMi1bE -- Ezra
[USMA:46173] RE: Moon water
What a pity that they didn't take the opportunity to equate that 100 kg of water to a 100 L. Or 50 2-L pop bottles if they must compare it with something familiar. And 20 m is quite a bit less than 80 feet. - Original Message - From: Cole Kingsbury To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 8:45 AM Subject: [USMA:46172] RE: Moon water LiveScience has an article that gives predominately metric units. Fair-use excerpt: Based on the measurements, the team estimated about 100 kilograms of water in the view of their instruments — the equivalent of about a dozen 2-gallon buckets — in the area of the impact crater (about 80 feet, or 20 meters across) and the ejecta blanket (about 60 to 80 meters across), Colaprete said. I'm pretty impressed by the amount of water we saw in our little 20-meter crater, Colaprete said. Source: http://is.gd/4W3M6 I wish that the news media would at least gradually up their metric usage. I have personally converted myself to metric -- even though I get strange looks from family and friends when discussing things in metric. Prosper! -Thanks!- Cole Kingsbury - Original Message - From: Carleton MacDonald carlet...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 8:05:32 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [USMA:46171] RE: Moon water Yup, the Washington Post dumbed it down too. Carleton From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Harry Wyeth Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 22:51 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:46170] Moon water I suppose I am not the only one who noticed the press articles re the amount of water found on the moon as 26 gallons. Obviously, the NASA guys calculated 100 L. HARRY WYETH
[USMA:46175] Re: Monday Puzzle: Conversion Factors - TierneyLab Blog - NYTimes.com
Pity about the: 1 inch = 2.54 cms John F-L - Original Message - From: Nat Hager III To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: Nat Hager Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 6:49 PM Subject: [USMA:46174] Monday Puzzle: Conversion Factors - TierneyLab Blog - NYTimes.com Someone might find interesting. http://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/16/monday-puzzle-conversion-factors/ Nat
[USMA:46195] BBC article
Nice article on the BBC website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ethicalman/2009/11/why_cars_are_greener_than_buses.html All metric. Even the readers' posts are substantially (if not totally) metric, which is very encouraging especially when it is considered that this is a transportation article and the UK's transportation (road and rail signage) system is primarily imperial. As for whether you agree with the article or not, it can be seen that the subject is highly complex with ne easy solutions.
[USMA:46224] Re: Ergs???
What's wrong with Citroens? I have two - a C2 and a C5, both diesels, both untterly reliable, both very strong, VERY quiet, smooth and very 'long legged' cars (C5 at 2000 rpm is doing 110 km/h). Previous C5 - 180 000 km, no problems, routine maintenance only. Current C5 - 75 000 km - ditto (and maintenance every 32 000 km only). C5 is an incredible car - totally digital (including its hydropneumatic suspension), and after 32 months I am STILL finding new things about it that I can program or it can do. Our C2 is new - just 8 000 km so far. Fuel economy an incredible 4.5 L/100 km. It replaced a very unreliable Ford. Don't knock Citroens - they are as bulletproof as a Mercedes at half the price. I guess it really does take a few years to live down old reputations. John F-L - Original Message - From: Pierre Abbat p...@phma.optus.nu To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 10:17 PM Subject: [USMA:46222] Re: Ergs??? On Monday 30 November 2009 16:06:39 ezra.steinb...@comcast.net wrote: Anyone have an idea why the article (from our friends at NASA ;-) below would mention ergs for energy? http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/stereo/news/solar_tsunami.html Beats me. It's not out of range of prefixes applied to the joule, assuming that 1029 ergs is supposed to be 10^29 ergs (10^22 joules). When I run the megatons of TNT through the units program, however, it comes out on the order of 10^19 joules. The erg is obsolete, except in the Sahara, where it is still in use, along with the chott and the jebel. :) Pierre -- Don't buy a French car in Holland. It may be a citroen.
[USMA:46253] Re: Simple Metric web site.
I do not know the basis of how all this is calibrated, but 1000 km - when talking about standard atmospheres?? THINK about it - 1000 km is way above what close proximity satellites orbit the earth at!!! Not much air up there. Regards JF-L - Original Message - From: John M. Steele To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 11:02 PM Subject: [USMA:46251] Re: Simple Metric web site. I believe the CGPM just copies it. It actually originates in the US, ICAO, and ISO Standard atmospheres, which define that sea level pressure, temperature (15 °C) and temperature lapse rate. (The lapse rate changes in various segments above 11 km). This leads to the assumptions used in calibration of aircraft altimeters, which really measure pressure but indicate altitude. The US defines a standard atmosphere to 1000 km, ICAO and ISO agree at lower altitudes, but end at a lower altitude as no commercial aircraft flies at 1000 km. --- On Fri, 12/4/09, Bill Hooper billhoope...@gmail.com wrote: From: Bill Hooper billhoope...@gmail.com Subject: [USMA:46250] Re: Simple Metric web site. To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Date: Friday, December 4, 2009, 4:51 PM On Dec 4 , at 11:38 AM, Pierre Abbat wrote (in response to my earlier note): (I wrote) Normal or average atmospheric pressure is about 101.3 kPa. (There may be different standards for identifying normal or average air pressure.) (Pierre replied) 101.325 kPa, to be exact, is the standard. The value of 101.325 kPa is the exact value (the standard) specified by CGPM for the standard atmospheric pressure, as Pierre correctly points out. That value is as close to a universal value as is possible. In addition, however, there are other circumstances where different standards are used. Here are two I've encountered (from Wikipedia): ... International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) recommended that for the purposes of specifying the properties of substances, “the standard pressure” should be defined as precisely 100 kPa ... rather than the 101.325 kPa value of “one standard atmosphere”. ... For natural gas, the petroleum industry uses a standard temperature of 15.6 °C (60.1 °F), pressure 101.56 kPa (14.730 psi). (air pressure) The CGPM standard is probably more precise than is reasonable for many uses, such as reporting air pressure in weather reports. For such measurements, a rounder value of 101.3 kPa or even 101 kPa might be suitable as a state normal or average. Certainly, atmospheric pressure is affected by altitude and other factors. For specific locations or specific special conditions, the CGPM standard atmosphere may not be too close to the actual average of the ambient pressure. This is not meant to be argumentative. I recognize the value of 101.325 kPa as the best value to use for most technical purposes. I just felt it was necessary to indicate in my note that there are different possible averages or normal values that might be used. Regards, Bill Hooper == If you have not already done so, please note my new email address: billhoope...@gmail.com (Old address will still work OK temporarily.)
[USMA:46268] Re: black n red in the USA
I think that Americans can thank their Northern neighbours for the invention of Letter and Legal paper sizes - for once the Canadians got it wrong. Some years ago, one of my clients, an architectural firm in Toronto, tried to switch to 'metric' sized paper, as they called it. I didn't realise it at the time, but they were probably talking about A-series sizes. They had to give it up, as a lot of their printers in those days (mid/late 1980s) couldn't handle it as they switched from typewriters to word processors, and the shops that initially stocked it gave up, as demand was so tiny. Time perhaps for North America to once again look at how smart it is in being out of step with the rest of the world. John F-L - Original Message - From: LPS To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 12:00 AM Subject: [USMA:46266] black n red in the USA I was shopping for a few items today and came across a hard bound set of writing paper. The company that makes the hardbound writing paper is black n Red. I saw that the size was in old style measurements, but I then realised that I was looking at A4 and A5 formatted paper! Here in north America at a Walmart! Anyway, I picked up two and took them home for my note taking. interestingly enough I also saw a separate product called Pink and Black (breast cancer research) spiral bound set in A4 and A5+ with tear outs and the two holes for A5 and 4 holes for A4. I got those for my daughters. What a day. I have only one A4 binder for the 4 hole punched paper. I would like to see that set of products continue to reach our shores. :) LPS here is the link: http://www.blacknred.com I wrote them a thank you for A4 and A5 formats here in the USA.
[USMA:46306] Re: YouTube metric
Well, it was a bit interesting, if somewhat childlike in its presentation. Pity that in the last segment, when explaining that there are 1000 m in 1 km, they sort of treated the m and the km as two discrete units, rather than simply one unit with a prefix. Still, progress of sorts! Interesting that NASA seems to be promoting this, when we all know that they are as much the villain as anyone in resisting the US's conversion to the metric system. - Original Message - From: Pat Naughtin To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2009 5:36 AM Subject: [USMA:46304] YouTube metric You might find this interesting: http://www.encyclopedia.com/video/DQPQ_q59xyw-metric-standard-measurement-systems.aspx Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can obtain from http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat at pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe.
[USMA:46313] Re: YouTube metric
was compared to the Imperial yard in 1876 and 1888. Discrepancies were noted, and the US felt they were not entirely due to #11. This fits with the shrinking Imperial yard you noted. Bronze #11 was measured in 1893, just before the Mendenhall order at 0.914 399 80 m against the US's prototype meter received via the Treaty of the Meter. Assuming no aging of either the Troughton bar or bronze #11, this would place the Troughton yard at 0.914 421 90 m, using mixed 1855 and 1893 data. This is close to the length used by the 1819 Commission. In spite of the measurement above, the Mendenhall order made a statutory declaration that the meter was equivalent to 39.37 (1 yd = 0.914 401 83 m). This was known to be wrong, but thought to be sufficiently accurate and easy to remember. It was used until 1959 (and still used for Survey foot). I think it is obvious that had they chosen the reciprocal relationship with the same considerations, they would have used 1 yd = 0.9144 m. Note: I followed the lead of these articles and use 8 figures in the values of the yard. However, I doubt they could measure to 10 nm at the time, and some decimal dust is involved. With interferometry, they would be hard pressed to measure 1/10 wavelength or around 50 nm. -- From: Pat Naughtin pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Mon, December 28, 2009 12:41:02 AM Subject: [USMA:46309] Re: YouTube metric On 2009/12/28, at 01:04 , John Frewen-Lord wrote: Well, it was a bit interesting, if somewhat childlike in its presentation. Pity that in the last segment, when explaining that there are 1000 m in 1 km, they sort of treated the m and the km as two discrete units, rather than simply one unit with a prefix. Still, progress of sorts! Interesting that NASA seems to be promoting this, when we all know that they are as much the villain as anyone in resisting the US's conversion to the metric system. Dear John, I agree with you about the distinction between metres and kilometres. I am also intrigued by the NASA sponsorship. I also had a concern about the underlying assumption that 'there are two systems of measurement' as I don't think that this is true. There is certainly a metric system but to my way of thinking there never was a single previous system of measuring units. My analysis of the old pre-metric situation is that they were more or less randomly generated collections of measuring words that were more or less associated with measuring activities. As an example, consider the inch. Prior to the defining of the metric inch, in 1959, as exactly 25.4 millimetres, the inch had many different definitions that included the width of a thumb, the length of three grains of barley, dry and round, placed end to end, lengthwise, 1/3 of a palm, 1/4 of a hand, 1/12 of the foot of St Paul's, and 1/36 of the distance between King Henry I of England's nose and his thumb. More formally, legal definitions of the UK inch have included: 1814 three grains of sound ripe barley being taken out the middle of the ear, well dried, and laid end to end in a row 1819 A preliminary yard was made in anticipation of the Imperial yard in 1824. This yard has been precisely measured as 39.3694 inches to a metre which means that each inch was about 25.4004379 mm. 1824 1/36 of an Imperial yard. This yard was precisely measured as 914.398416 metres giving an inch of 25.399956 mm. Note this was the first Imperial measure; earlier measures were not legally 'Imperial'. 1834 The British Standard yard was destroyed in a fire when the British Houses of Parliament burnt down. The inch was destroyed along with the yard. 1841 New standard yards were made. Unfortunately, as a standard, the metal chosen for these standard yards (Baily's metal) began to shrink. In: * 1895 the inch was 25.399978 mm * 1922 the inch was 25.399956 mm * 1932 the inch was 25.399950 mm * 1947 the inch was 25.399931 mm (See http://home.att.net/~numericana/answer/units.htm and search for nara) 1842 a standard inch measure was kept in the Exchequer chamber, Guildhall, and that was the legal definition of the inch. 1855 1/36 of a standard yard defined as the length of a 36 inch yard derived from a seconds pendulum beating 86 400 times between two meridians of the Sun. The pendulum was held in a vacuum in a temperature controlled chamber at sea level in Greenwich, London. The length of this pendulum was 39.1392 inches (about 994.1357 mm). 1878 A new physical standard yard was made and this remained the UK Imperial standard until 1964. 1964 The Uk legally adopted the metric inch, of exactly 25.4 mm, as the Imperial standard inch. During this time, while the length of the metre and hence the millimetre remained constant
[USMA:46316] Re: Freeway Exit Numbers
When Canada converted from miles to km, all the distance-based exit numbers were of course converted at the same time. I don't see this as being a problem. John F-L - Original Message - From: Martin Vlietstra To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, December 28, 2009 8:03 PM Subject: [USMA:46314] Freeway Exit Numbers I understand that most US freeway exits are numbered with reference to the number of miles from the state line (or the start of the freeway concerned). In the Wikipedia article Exit numbers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exit_number), I saw the following: United States - The use of sequential or distance-based exit numbering currently varies by state, with 43 states using distance-based exit numbering and seven states using sequential numbering. The latest edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), issued by the Federal Highway Administration on December 16, 2009, eliminates the option for states to use sequential exit numbering, and requires the seven states that presently number their exits sequentially to convert to distance-based numbering by January 2020. There is more in the Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exit_numbers_in_the_United_States. Anybody have any comments? -- From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Victor Jockin Sent: 28 December 2009 19:34 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:46312] Re: Column by Terry Dickson This half-serious piece is ignorable. I just wish the international pressure he mentioned actually existed, or that the President had any inkling to act on the issue of metric conversion. I've said a few times on this discussion group that the biggest problem is the combination of the undemocratic nature of the US Senate (single senators can block action) and our inherently corrupt campaign finance system (Senators use that undemocratic power to serve monied private interests). The result is an inability of the US Congress to act in the public interest when powerful private interests might be harmed. This is both why the US stands alone among industrialized countries in not adopting the world's standard system of measurement, and why we stand alone in not providing universal healthcare for our citizens. The current healthcare debate has placed this glaring fault in our democracy in full view once again. We don't need a revolution to change this, just common sense campaign finance reform and, as Thomas Friedman wrote in the NY Times last week, a change in Senate rules to end filibusters. Neither are unthinkable. From: Pat Naughtin Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2009 7:53 PM To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:46307] Column by Terry Dickson Dear All, In this column at http://jacksonville.com/news/georgia/2009-12-27/story/my_list_of_wishes_for_the_new_year Terry Dickson writes: I hope our president doesn't bow to international pressure and put the U.S. on the metric system. We'd have to convert miles to kilometers and dabs and smidgens to deciliters and centiliters. Is this an important column that deserves a response? Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can obtain from http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat at pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe.
[USMA:46331] Re: 144 years to go....
And Canada also uses a metric based grid for first responders. My house in Ontario not only had a street adress, but also a 6 figure grid reference, which emergency services would use to locate it. John F-L - Original Message - From: John M. Steele To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 6:44 PM Subject: [USMA:46330] Re: 144 years to go The army uses the Military Grid Reference System (as does NATO) which is a UTM projection using metric grid. Assuming the bad guys are ex-military gone mercenary, this situation would exist today. MGRS is also the basis of US National Grid (USNG) which the Feds are trying to teach at least to first responders as a universal mapping system, in case they are deployed to areas they are not familiar with (forest fires, hurricanes, etc). For those not familiar with it, navigation within 100 km squares is in meters of easting and northing from SW corner, identical to UK Ordnance Survey. Because we are a bigger country, the designation and tiling of 100 km squares is a little different to cover the larger area. -- From: Harry Wyeth hbwy...@earthlink.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Wed, December 30, 2009 1:21:28 PM Subject: [USMA:46329] 144 years to go Only 144 years to go before SI is implemented in (presumably) the US, according to Avatar, the latest blockbuster hit. In 2154 the bad guys measure military distances in klicks (I hate the term!) and I think there is a reference to meters in one part dealing with firing distances. It is, off topic, a simply beautiful and truly innovative movie, but it would be a waste to see it in other than 3D. Plot is so-so. HARRY WYETH
[USMA:46334] Re: 144 years to go....
John: Every household was given its grid reference by means of a postal drop. We then had to get a white-on-green sign made up (at our own expense!) with the grid reference on it and stick it on a post at the end of our driveway. This was a legal requirement. Hope this helps. John F-L - Original Message - From: John M. Steele To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 7:28 PM Subject: [USMA:46332] Re: 144 years to go John, Do they teach you that grid reference to give to first responders or do they determine it by address look up? USNG seems like a good idea but appears to be a bit of a flop here because it is not used for general mapping and no one knows their USNG address. Well, I have mine written down somewhere, but I doubt 1% of families would know it, I can't find a road map marked in USNG (but topographical maps have either that or the underlying UTM grid), and I don't know if my town's first responders could understand USNG coordinates if I could recite them. One of my two GPS units will display it on request, however. -- From: John Frewen-Lord j...@frewston.plus.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Wed, December 30, 2009 1:50:17 PM Subject: [USMA:46331] Re: 144 years to go And Canada also uses a metric based grid for first responders. My house in Ontario not only had a street adress, but also a 6 figure grid reference, which emergency services would use to locate it. John F-L - Original Message - From: John M. Steele To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 6:44 PM Subject: [USMA:46330] Re: 144 years to go The army uses the Military Grid Reference System (as does NATO) which is a UTM projection using metric grid. Assuming the bad guys are ex-military gone mercenary, this situation would exist today. MGRS is also the basis of US National Grid (USNG) which the Feds are trying to teach at least to first responders as a universal mapping system, in case they are deployed to areas they are not familiar with (forest fires, hurricanes, etc). For those not familiar with it, navigation within 100 km squares is in meters of easting and northing from SW corner, identical to UK Ordnance Survey. Because we are a bigger country, the designation and tiling of 100 km squares is a little different to cover the larger area. From: Harry Wyeth hbwy...@earthlink.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Wed, December 30, 2009 1:21:28 PM Subject: [USMA:46329] 144 years to go Only 144 years to go before SI is implemented in (presumably) the US, according to Avatar, the latest blockbuster hit. In 2154 the bad guys measure military distances in klicks (I hate the term!) and I think there is a reference to meters in one part dealing with firing distances. It is, off topic, a simply beautiful and truly innovative movie, but it would be a waste to see it in other than 3D. Plot is so-so. HARRY WYETH
[USMA:46374] Re: The Ultimate Muddle
If the interview was being made for the benefit of Canadian listeners, then that would be the reason for converting the distance to km - few Canadians think in miles any more. And the CBC's pronunciation standards prescribe the correct pronunciation of kill-oh-meters. Didn't realise that As It Happens was still running! This was one of my favourite programs when I lived in Canada - must catch up with it. John F-L - Original Message - From: ezra.steinb...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 7:42 AM Subject: [USMA:46373] The Ultimate Muddle Our friends over at the UKMA have referred to the strange mixture of units used these days in the UK as the metric muddle. Tonight I was listening to As It Happens from the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) and heard them interviewing the world's gravy wrestling champion. This chap is actually a barrister from Leicestershire who participates in a wide variety of odd sporting events to raise money for charities. His usage of measurement units turned out to be the quintessential metric muddle: diameter of the wrestling ring given in meters, height of the wrestlers given in feet and inches, weight of the wrestlers given in stones, running distance (for another event he participates in) given in kilometers, and the location of his home town from London (when asked by the interviewer for the benefit of Canadian listeners) in miles. How is anyone supposed to make any sense of all that? Oddly enough, once the interview had ended, the interviewer translated the distance Leicestershire is from London from miles to kilometers (pronounced KILL-oh-meters, which I liked :-) Go figure! Cheers, Ezra
[USMA:46392] Re: Top Gear
Actually, that is a bit unfair on Richard Hammond. He recently did a series of programs on BBC2 on wonders of our age (buildings, trains, aircraft, etc), and it was all virtually 100% SI. This was of course outside the Top Gear arena, so if he says anything on TG not metric, I would imagine that is due to pressure from either the show's producers or the other presenters. All is not totally hopeless. James May has been known to talk in metric terms, and in today's Sunday Times Clarkson talked about the Bugatti Veyron - he talked about all its speed issues in 'kph' (ugh!), with mph in parentheses. Better than nothing, I suppose. John F-L - Original Message - From: Pat Naughtin To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:09 AM Subject: [USMA:46390] Top Gear Dear All, I have just submitted the following to the BBC car evaluation program, 'Top Gear': Dear Jeremy Clarkson, Richard Hammond, and James May, I have watched your 'Top Gear' program on several occasions and I have enjoyed your style of presentation and your program's content. My problem with watching your program is that you stress old pre-metric measuring words as though these had some relevance in the motor industry. I live in Geelong – a Ford manufacturing town – where we were aware of the 'world car concept' based on the metric system from the early 1970s. We knew then, that in the motor industry, the metrication process was both inevitable and irreversible and this has subsequently proved to be the truth. I have no doubt that you have also seen the inevitability and the irreversibility of metric measuring in the motor vehicle industry in all car, truck, and bike manufacturing industries, yet your team seems to disregard metric measuring units like watts and kilowatts as if they don't exist. In the Australian motor manufacturing industry most engineers simply accepted the simplicity and ease-of-use provided by metric units and then got on with improving the excellence of their engineering skills. Some whinged and whined and I suspect that these might be the people who are influencing your choices such as whether you use horsepowers or kilowatts. As I watch your program I simply don't know whether you have a quite deliberate policy to lead the British people toward the ancient past of the Roman invasion of England (with their inches and ounces), and the French invasion of 1066 (with their avoirdupois pounds, quarters, hundredweights, and tons), or whether you are acting innocently simply kowtowing to whingers and whiners in the BBC audience who operate on the principle that 'it's the squeaky wheel that gets the oil'. I suspect (and hope) that it is the latter However, I have to say that I find it extremely sad to watch you promote untruths and obfuscation to the people of the UK – whether deliberate or not. Some of the whingers and whiners you support possibly believe that they are avoiding the foreign metric system as a point of national UK pride. This is a totally erroneous view as the metric system was invented in England and first published in London in 1668 by Bishop John Wilkins (see http://www.metricationmatters.com/who-invented-the-metric-system.html ). The French did not develop the decimal metric system from Bishop John Wilkins plan until more than 120 years later in the 1790s. You also know that many of the words appropriate to cars and their engines are quintessentially English words – the James Watt inspired watts and kilowatts are obvious examples. Another concern that I have is that I think by your choice of old pre-metric foreign words, such as inch, ounce, and pound, you are actively sabotaging the education of children in the UK. I know that sabotage is a strong word so let me explain. Children in the UK, especially children who might be interested in cars, motors, and mechanical engineering have to learn the metric system to understand cars and motors; then they have to find out about all of the old pre-metric words to understand your comments on 'Top Gear'. In my considered opinion, this is a pure and simple sabotage of these children's education as they feel they have to learn multiple measuring words simply to understand you and your comments. I know of only one study of this from the USA, where Richard Phelps estimates that it takes USA children an extra year to learn the mathematics of inches and ounces when compared to (say) Singapore children who only need to learn the metric system; the USA has to spend an extra 10 % of its mathematics education budget just to be something like 37th out of 38 OECD nations in comparative mathematics tests. You are encouraging this same differentiation in the UK by your choice of measuring words – and I don't believe that this is at all fair to British children. You can view Richard P. Phelps' article after you register on the Education Weekly database at:
[USMA:46424] Re: I thought only Americans were innumerate
There has been a large US presence in the Phillipines for many years now, so the use of Imperial units may result from that. I notice that they use 2.5 feet, rather than 2ft 6in, which is how the British would say it. I notice that further into the article, conversions into metric are shown, so obviously many Phillipinos are probably more comfortable with metric. John F-L - Original Message - From: John M. Steele To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 12:03 PM Subject: [USMA:46423] I thought only Americans were innumerate I was surprised by this article from the Phillipines using inches first. Are they only marginally metric? I was also surprised by the level of innumeracy (check the conversions) http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view/20100117-247870/25-foot-ballot-seen-with-144-partylist-groups-in-polls [quoted snippets] Comelec spokesman James Arthur Jimenez said the ballot, as has been designed, has a “maximum” length of 26 inches or a little over two feet but a backup ballot design measuring 29 inches or nearly 2.5 feet could be used instead after the poll body’s approval of 144 party-list groups participating in the elections. . . . Converted to the metric system, 26 inches is about 66 centimeters or one-third of a meter; 29 inches is 77.66 cm or nearly four-fifths of a meter. [end quote]
[USMA:46429] Re: Metric domestic streetcars
USC do say they are licensing a Skoda design, as well as using some of Skoda's parts (40% is imported), so that would most likely be the reason. Even allowing for the mods made for the US, it would make sense to not try to convert to imperial - no gain, and potentially lots of pain, especially if metric part A didn't fit with (converted) part B. Back in the very late 1950s/early 1960s, an Italian company Piaggio made (and still make) Vespa scooters. They started to be made under license in the UK, its biggest market. At first the drawings were converted to imperial, but it was found that minor conversion errors meant that some parts didn't fit properly, or that some tolerances became too big/too small. Once manufacture reverted back to the original metric drawings, the problems disappeared. Interesting that USC didn't mention that Skoda is part of Volkswagen. John F-L - Original Message - From: Carleton MacDonald To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 10:52 PM Subject: [USMA:46426] Metric domestic streetcars Note the dimensions on the drawings, about 2 min 26 sec in. Carleton http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU1W9EOxBhE
[USMA:46475] Re: Wood and Combustion Heat Values
Canadians know what it's like to be cold. John F-L - Original Message - From: James R. Frysinger j...@metricmethods.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 6:22 PM Subject: [USMA:46470] Re: Wood and Combustion Heat Values Sure. Send 'em on! Jim mech...@illinois.edu wrote: Jim and Stan, We use a Canadian air-tight wood stove which burns efficiently and almost smoke free by using secondary combustion of flue gases. Over the years I have compiled heat values of seasoned (dry) woods (in J/kg). If you are interested, I'll send some numbers. Gene. Original message Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:39:29 -0600 From: James R. Frysinger j...@metricmethods.com Subject: [USMA:46464] Re: Wood and Combustion Heat Values To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu ... I have a Dutch West large non-catalytic stove (model 2479) and the manufacturer (Vermont Castings) claims a 63 % efficiency... -- James R. Frysinger 632 Stony Point Mountain Road Doyle, TN 38559-3030 (C) 931.212.0267 (H) 931.657.3107 (F) 931.657.3108
[USMA:46492] Re: Too entrenched to change
In Canada, the R-factor was changed in the 1970s to the RSI- factor, using the m^2·C°/W formula. The values were a lot lower than the imperial R-factor. And as North Americans like bigger rather than smaller numbers for just about everything, only the National Building Code refers to RSI. People still carried on using R. John F-L - Original Message - From: Pierre Abbat p...@phma.optus.nu To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 5:53 AM Subject: [USMA:46490] Re: Too entrenched to change On Tuesday 26 January 2010 20:46:41 Bill Hooper wrote: Clearly this can be converted to m^2·C°·s/J . Furthermore, factor, s/J, is equal to 1/W so the R value can be simplified even further to m^2·C°/W. And as 1 C° of temperature difference is the same as 1 K, it's a kelvin square meter per watt. That's still a mouthful. One tenth of a kelvin square meter per watt is called a tog, but I think the kelvin square meter per watt itself should have a short name, since the 0.1 factor can cause some order of magnitude errors (as does the concurrent use of centimeters and millimeters). I've thought of calling it the coat; does anyone have a better name? The clo (https://www.swarpa.net/pipermail/fictionary/2002/thread.html) is another unit of thermal insulation (0.155 coat), which is not the same as the unit of R (0.176 coat). Anyone know where 0.155 came from? (For the R value, I asked the units program.) Pierre -- When a barnacle settles down, its brain disintegrates. Já não percebe nada, já não percebe nada.
[USMA:46517] RE: [USMA:46512] Re: [USMA:46509] Oh how our minds .
Most of our cookbooks that we currently own (here in the UK) are mostly metric, or metric with imperial in parentheses. A random sample, with ISBN numbers for anyone who is interested: Metric/imperial in parentheses: Vegetarian Suppers - no ISBN, produced by Sainsbury's, a UK supermarket chain, as a 'freebie' some years ago as part of a promotion Greek Cooking - 0583197329 30 Day diet - 0852238312 Sensational Vegetable Recipes - 0864113676 The Popular Potato - 9781862563780 (this is an Australian book, mostly metric but using lots of cups with mass equivalents in grams in parentheses, conversion table in the back including deg C to dec F - printed 1989) Many more stacked away, but it's late, so will leave it at that for now. John F-L To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 9:04 PM Subject: [USMA:46516] RE: [USMA:46512] Re: [USMA:46509] Oh how our minds . Dear Martin, Of all the Australian cook books that are available might I suggest, 'Cookery – the Australian Way'. It is a school text and reference book that is rarely found in charity shops because students who use it at school then keep it for life because it is a very useful basic cookbook that contains all of the common Australian recipes. Another source on this topic is Metric Cooking with Confidence by Wendy Pomroy (and myself) that you can find at http://www.metricationmatters.com/docs/MetricCookingWithConfidence.pdf Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can obtain from http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat at pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe. On 2010/01/30, at 06:51 , Martin Vlietstra wrote: May I make a cheeky suggestion – look at Aussie and South African cookery books. Also visit http://www.cutecook.co.uk/ for metric units in British cookery. (Cutecook is publicity officer for the UKMA). From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of John M. Steele Sent: 29 January 2010 13:59 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:46512] Re: [USMA:46509] Oh how our minds … … snip Certainly there is a large storehouse of US recipes that would need to be converted if the US ever fully metricated (or a metric cook cooked them). I don't know whether we would convert to mass-based cooking or stay volumetric. Certainly a large table of foood densities is necessary to convert from volumetic to mass-based cooking. Hopefully you do it once and write it down. … snip
[USMA:46545] Re: Go Metric bumper sticker; centimeters
I believe that the centimeter does have a place in everyday life. We need to think not just in linear terms, but in areas and volumes as well. Consider an area 400 mm x 200 mm. Area = 80 000 mm2 - not a practical number. Or else 0.4 m x 0.2 m - 0.08 m2. Equally impractical. But 40 cm x 20 cm = 800 cm2 - quite usable. Only when you start getting to much bigger areas do you need to think in terms of m2. With volumes, the numbers become even more impractical if something between the millimeter and the meter is not used. But consider this little scenario. 1 cm3 is equal to 1 mL. 1000 cm3 = 1 L. Which weighs (or has a mass of) 1 kg. Neat, and very practical for everyday use. I agree that industrial and construction sites should only use the millimeter. When I worked in the construction industry as a construction cost consultant, I only ever used mm. And that is how it should be in those industries. John F-L - Original Message - From: Harry Wyeth To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 3:45 AM Subject: [USMA:46543] Go Metric bumper sticker; centimeters It has been years since I have seen a Go Metric bumper sticker, but there was one on a silver Subaru with a ski rack driving downhill on I-80 in California today. Could it belong to one of our readers? Aren't these bumper stickers sold by the USMA? On centimeters: They are really useful for measuring ski lengths and bicycle tube lengths. No one refers to 1700 mm skis or a 490 mm seat tube on a bicycle. HARRY WYETH
[USMA:46546] centimetre
Forgot to add in my little scenario - the 1 L weighing 1 kg is of course only for water. John F-L
[USMA:46782] Re: babies produced, UK
in kilograms as well. - Original Message - From: John Frewen-Lord To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 2:47 PM Subject: [USMA:46734] metric products UK To all those who say that the UK is not really metric: I was researching the town of Axminster on Google, and came across this website regarding hydraulic bricquette presses. All specs as far as I can see are in metric units. http://www.axminster.co.uk/product-Rojek-BrikStar-50-Hydraulic-Briquette-Press-582182.htm John F-L -- Do you want a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free -- Do you want a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free
[USMA:46783] Re: More on the I 19
Re Arizona's proposals to revert to miles on I-19: When Obama was inaugaurated, he said: The world has changed, and we must change with it. Well, he got the first bit right. John F-L - Original Message - From: Pat Naughtin To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 5:56 AM Subject: [USMA:46761] More on the I 19 Dear All, There are some interesting comments attached to this article: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2010/02/25/20100225thurlets255.html#commentform Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can obtain from http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat at pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe.
[USMA:46896] Re: The Good the Bad
I have noticed for many years the ℮ symbol on most packaged products, both in the UK and to some extent in Canada, usually next to the imperial equivalent of a rational metric sized quantity. I always thought this was something to do with the EU (the ℮ representing the first letter of Europe?). But I just recently stumbled on this ℮ symbol in Windows character map (unicode U+212E). It is designated as the Estimated Symbol. Am I right then in assuming that where a product is dual labelled, only one of the quantities is legally correct (i.e. the metric quantity where metric first is the legal requirement) and the other is the Estimated (imperial) equivalent? That assumption certainly fits in with how most products that are dual dimensioned (metric first) appear here in the UK. NB - when I first tried to send this email, I got a message saying that the Unicode symbol may not get sent or be displayed on the receipients' computers, so if you don't see the ℮ symbol you will have to look it up in the Windows character set. John F-L - Original Message - From: Stephen Davis To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 4:53 PM Subject: [USMA:46894] Re: The Good the Bad I did mean to point out (but obviously didn't) that the US imports did indeed have metric measurements on them alongside the cutomary. I believe also (though not entirely sure) that the customary units were printed in a smaller font. As to does it matter, well, in the grand scheme of things, it may not be the most important thing in the world. However, as almost 100% of pre-packaged items over here all all in metric measurements, so it seems to be a backward step, that's all. I would like to do a bit of research to find out if this packaging from the US is strictly legal as well. - Original Message - From: John M. Steele To: Stephen Davis ; U.S. Metric Association Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 4:33 PM Subject: Re: [USMA:46886] Re: The Good the Bad Are those deodorants ALSO labeled with metric? Dual is the law here (US). If the floz are only supplementary, and the metric is correct, does it really matter is the floz is our floz or your floz? (Here, the floz must be correct because it is one half of the law, both are mandatory.) The mandatory dual makes it harder to determine whether metric is growing. The only way to judge is whether the metric is a rounder or more sensible qunatity. By that criteria, it is growing, but not by leaps and bounds. From: Stephen Davis stevo.da...@btinternet.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Wed, March 10, 2010 10:36:26 AM Subject: [USMA:46886] Re: The Good the Bad Sorry to refer to the UK again (its just that the UK is in my sphere of experience) but, in the last few years, certain US imports, particularly deoderants, are coming into UK ahops with floz readings on the boxes and cannisters.. I'm not sure if this is legal or not, but I would strongly suspect not. On the other hand Coke just came out with two new smaller sizes in our areas. I think its in anticipation of our wonderful governors proposal to tax sugary soft drinks by the oz. (gee I wonder how they are going to compute that on a 2 L bottle). The new sizes are 12 oz plastic bottles (cans are hard to reseal) and a new 8 oz can. O well. There just seems to be a ridiculous mix of units here. The Listerene kids mouth rinse are in metric units (albeit with customary units in brackets) but they appear to sell Coke in cans by the fluid ounce.. Just a thoughtwould anybody care all that much over there if a can of Coke was in hard metric units only? Nobody here does (probably because bottles and cans haven't been measured in floz for decades over here). People just ask for a can of Coke, they don't really care about the amount that's in the can. There are a few exceptions to the all-metric rule in regard to packaged goods in the UK. 1136ml bottles of milk will have 2 pints written on them in smaller letters, as will 568ml bottles (1 pint). Very occasionally, you will see 568ml cans of lager with Pint Can written on it. These are very much the exception to the rule though, and they MUST have their metric equivalents written in a larger font. Are there any signs that metric, particularly with food and drink, is becoming more prominent in the US? -- - Original Message - From: Howard Ressel hres...@dot.state.ny.us To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 2:36 PM Subject: [USMA:46885] The Good the Bad Listerine fluoride kids mouth rinse 500 ml size with instructions in metric first and English in parentheses 10 ml does (two tablespoons). Also the storage temps. were in Celsius
[USMA:46910] Re: Common Core State Standards for Mathematics
One doesn't of course 'convert' between centimeters and meters - they are essentially one and the same thing. This reveals a fundamental failure to understand what the metric system (let alone SI) is about. As for mentioning the centimeter, and not the millimeter - Pat N should be having fits by now! Still, all part of the failure in teaching SI. John F-L - Original Message - From: mech...@illinois.edu To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 7:31 PM Subject: [USMA:46909] Common Core State Standards for Mathematics On Page 16 of the DRAFT (for Grade 2), under Length Measurement is the statement: Understand that 1 inch, 1 foot, 1 centimeter, and 1 meter are conventionally defined lengths used as standard units. There is no mention of SI. On Page 20 (for Grade 3) is the statement: Determine and compare areas by counting square units. Use cm^2, m^2, in^2, ft^2, and improvised units. There is no mention of SI. On Page 24 (for Grade 4) is the statement: ...show distances along a race course to tents of a mile on a number line, by dividing the unit of length into 10 equal parts to get parts of length 1/10 There is no mention of SI. On Page 28 (for Grade 5)is the statement: Convert among differently sized standard measurement units within a given measurement system (e.g. feet to yards, centimeters to meters, and use conversions in solving multiple word problems. also ...determine and compare volumes...by counting cubic units (using cm^3, m^3, in^3,ft^3, and improvised units. There is no mention of SI. These are all the measurement related statements I have found to data. The failure to even mention SI is a serious omission in my opinion. I expect to more formally call attention to this major deficiency. Gene Mechtly
[USMA:46912] Re: Common Core State Standards for Mathematics
Jim: I beg to differ! I used the word 'fundamental' in my previous email very deliberately. With customary units, miles, yards, feet, inches (length); pounds, ounces (mass), etc, are each discrete units, with a conversion factor to convert one from the other (12 inches in a foot, etc, etc). As we all know, SI does not work like that - you simply add a, or change an existing, prefix to better reflect the magnitude of a particular quantity. Rescaling -yes. Converting - no. Without teaching that, you cannot understand what SI is truly about. I got the impression in reading the Common Core State Standards that the person who wrote those standards missed this fundamental concept altogether - i.e. he/she wrote the metric part in the same context (i.e. with conversion factors) as for the customary part. And to me that's wrong. Hence my comment - to me this is fundamental, and not simply a minor nit-pick. John F-L - Original Message - From: James R. Frysinger j...@metricmethods.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 8:05 PM Subject: [USMA:46911] Re: Common Core State Standards for Mathematics I suppose one could make a point for using something like rescale as opposed to convert when changing a value statement in centimeters to one in millimeters, for example. However, I don't see this as a major point. The word convert can mean a wide variety of things. I would say convert common fractions to decimal fractions even though 1/2 is the same value as 0.5. To me, the major focus ought to be getting the children not only to learn metric units but also to use them! And the latter ought to include projects and work in lessons for English, foreign languages, art, social studies, etc. I have a fear that if we get to nit-picky about some of these little things, we will only make the metric system seem obscure and difficult. Jim John Frewen-Lord wrote: One doesn't of course 'convert' between centimeters and meters - they are essentially one and the same thing. This reveals a fundamental failure to understand what the metric system (let alone SI) is about. As for mentioning the centimeter, and not the millimeter - Pat N should be having fits by now! Still, all part of the failure in teaching SI. John F-L - Original Message - From: mech...@illinois.edu To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 7:31 PM Subject: [USMA:46909] Common Core State Standards for Mathematics On Page 16 of the DRAFT (for Grade 2), under Length Measurement is the statement: Understand that 1 inch, 1 foot, 1 centimeter, and 1 meter are conventionally defined lengths used as standard units. There is no mention of SI. On Page 20 (for Grade 3) is the statement: Determine and compare areas by counting square units. Use cm^2, m^2, in^2, ft^2, and improvised units. There is no mention of SI. On Page 24 (for Grade 4) is the statement: ...show distances along a race course to tents of a mile on a number line, by dividing the unit of length into 10 equal parts to get parts of length 1/10 There is no mention of SI. On Page 28 (for Grade 5)is the statement: Convert among differently sized standard measurement units within a given measurement system (e.g. feet to yards, centimeters to meters, and use conversions in solving multiple word problems. also ...determine and compare volumes...by counting cubic units (using cm^3, m^3, in^3,ft^3, and improvised units. There is no mention of SI. These are all the measurement related statements I have found to data. The failure to even mention SI is a serious omission in my opinion. I expect to more formally call attention to this major deficiency. Gene Mechtly -- James R. Frysinger 632 Stony Point Mountain Road Doyle, TN 38559-3030 (C) 931.212.0267 (H) 931.657.3107 (F) 931.657.3108
[USMA:46929] Re: Disappointing science program ... and it's Canadian!!!
Ezra: The Nature of Things used to be presented by David Suzuki, who always did use metric in the past. Do you know who the presenter was on the program you watched? Unfortunately, this is one of those programs that don't stream outside North America. John F-L PS We haven't yet switched so summer time here in the UK (last weekend in March) - but I wished we had. Evenings still too dark! - Original Message - From: ezra.steinb...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 6:47 PM Subject: [USMA:46928] Disappointing science program ... and it's Canadian!!! Just watched an otherwise terrific show on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) thanks to cable TV on alternative energy generation. I say otherwise because, while the content was most interesting and well presented, I was quite surprised to hear the narrator, who sounded Canadian and was presenting on a science show (The Nature of Things, I believe), talk about how many miles of tubing a solar plant in the Mojave desert had and how many acres it occupied and that he didn't translate the American plant engineer's use of Fahrenheit when giving the temperature of the solar heated oil in the tubes into Celsius. On the other hand, he did give the span of the wind turbine blades being manufactured in Denmark in meters, so it wasn't a total washout for metric. I guess I was not expecting that a Canadian educated his whole life in metric and who I presume was consistently exposed to kilometers and hectares on Canadian TV and who was presenting a science program to a Canadian audience would use mostly US Customary units. I conclude we have more of a bad influence on Canada than I had ever suspected! As an aside, I hope everyone is adapting to Daylight Saving Time here in North America. I rather wish we had kept to the old schedule of waiting until early April to switch, but that's just me. Cheers, Ezra
[USMA:46936] Re: U.S. still the last major metric system holdout
The author got the conversion from FEET TO MILES wrong! He used 5260. It is of course 5280. If people like this can't get USC right, with its arcane conversion factors for everything, then all the more reason to bring on metric! John F-L - Original Message - From: Nat Hager To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: 'Nat Hager' Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 10:31 PM Subject: [USMA:46931] U.S. still the last major metric system holdout Story appeared today: http://www2.tbo.com/content/2010/mar/14/la-us-still-the-last-major-metric-system-holdout/ I also made some editorial corrections A nice day of 80 degrees Fahrenheit doesn't seem so nice when it's 26.7 27 degrees Celsius . Highlands Today asked a few employees what 1 inch correlates to in the metric system and nobody had a clue that 1 inch is roughly 2 1/2 centimeters, or 25.4 25 millimeters. Nat
[USMA:46940] Re: Guidelines or Requirements on Units of Measure for the Nature ofThings
Thanks Ezra - at least that confirms my initial comment, which was that David Z always did use metric on The Nature of Things. John F-L - Original Message - From: ezra.steinb...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 7:03 PM Subject: [USMA:46939] Guidelines or Requirements on Units of Measure for the Nature ofThings Here is the response I got from The Nature of Things regarding the use of metric on their program. -- Ezra - Forwarded Message - From: Vance Chow vance.c...@cbc.ca To: ezra steinberg ezra.steinb...@comcast.net Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 7:54:42 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: Guidelines or Requirements on Units of Measure for the Nature ofThings Dear Mr. Steinberg, Thanks for your msg and interest in The Nature of Things. Currently, all of Dr. Suzuki's narrations are done in metric, as that is the standard here in Canada. However in the past, it may very well have occurred that specific shows produced in partnership with independent companies may have been done in Imperial. Dr. Suzuki has now been the host of The Nature of Things for 30 years, so there has been quite a large array of different programming over the course of that time. All I can tell you is that as of the moment, our current protocols are to use metric. Hope that helps. Thanks again for your interest, and best wishes. Vance Chow Researcher - The Nature of Things Science Natural History Unit CBC Television (416) 205-6892 vance.c...@cbc.ca www.cbc.ca/natureofthings ezra.steinb...@comcast.net 3/14/2010 4:40 PM Dear Mr. Chow: I was watching The Nature of Things for the first time today here where I live in the Seattle WA area (via Comcast cable) and I enjoyed the show very much. Today's topic was the use of alternative sources of energy production for electricity and it was most informative and revealing. The one thing that surprised me was Mr. Suzuki's use of old Imperial units, such as miles and acres. I was also surprised that he did not convert the temperature at one of the power plants given by the American plant engineer from degrees Fahrenheit to degrees Celsius. Does The Nature of Things have any guidelines or requirements for the use of metric units in the narration of the show? If so, can you share them with me? Also, do you have any idea why in this particular show Mr. Suzuki might have chosen to use Imperial units? (I am told by a viewer familiar with the show in the past that he recalled hearing Mr. Suzuki use metric units rather consistently.) Thank you in advance for your assistance in clearing this question up for me. Best regards, Ezra Steinberg Technical Writer Google, Inc. (speaking for myself only and not my employer) Kirkland, Washington USA
[USMA:47013] Re: FW: Special Employee Advisory: Message from Joe Boardman
Dear all:
It's not often I agree with Stephen Humphreys, but on this occasion I think
he's right. I once wrote an article for the UKMA Newsletter, suggesting that
we might need to make more use of what I call the 'vernacular' in our use of SI
for the everyday person. That using metric must become as natural as it seems
for people brought up on imperial/USC to continue using those units. Hence I
suggested that we could describe our height as 'one-seventy-eight' (1.78 m or
178 cm - your choice), our weight as 75 kaygees (I really hate kaygees, but
recognise that it makes using metric less intimidating or clinical), our speed
as 130 'kays' (or klicks') and so on.
When it comes to km/h, that is what the entire world uses for measuring speed,
rightly or wrongly. Maybe it is 'wrong', but are you going to change the
entire world in this regard? As the US hardly uses metric in the everyday
sense (agreed that there is a lot of hidden metric), then there is little
chance the rest of the world is going to take much notice if the US starts
pontificating that we should be using m/s rather than km/h, and even less
chance that the rest of the world is going to actually change.
Regardless of what measuring units we use, most of us relate to them in a
comparative or relative sense only, not in absolute terms. We know that we
take a size 8 shoe, or that we (at least the ladies do!) fit into a size 14
dress, and so on, without ever knowing exactly what those numbers mean. And we
currently measure speed on that basis. We know (at least those of us living in
those countries which measure our speed in km/h, which is virtually the entire
world USA and UK excepted) that 50 km/h is a typical urban speed, that 80-100
km/h is a typical two lane highway speed and that 100-130 km/h is a typical
freeway/motorway speed. We don't need to actually visualise how many metres
per second that represents, and even if we did, we probably wouldn't be able to
make practical use of it. On the other hand, when planning journeys, a typical
suburban/rural average speed is say 60 km/h, which is 1 km per minute. So a 20
km journey will take 20 minutes. On longer journeys, where we might measure
our time in hours, we might be able to average 100 km/h, so a 400 km journey
will take 4 hours. Km/h allows these calculations to be made; m/s doesn't.
I think if we want the general populace to embrace metric, we have to accept
such 'vernacular' in its use. The clinically correct stuff we can reserve for
professional usage. Oh, and as a surveyor working in the UK, I can assure
everyone that I was indeed 'clinically correct' in my usage of SI in my
professional work. For everyday usage, I find I am quite happy to 'lighten up'
and use the 'vernacular'.
John F-L
- Original Message -
From: Stephen Humphreys
To: U.S. Metric Association
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 8:13 PM
Subject: [USMA:47012] Re: FW: Special Employee Advisory: Message from Joe
Boardman
I fully understand where you are coming from but even in 'fully' metric
countries km/h is used. I cannot see that changing but furthermore I would not
recommend pushing clinical use of si on non metric people. Remember that in
effect you have to 'sell' this change so being critical about specifics should
really be low on your priorities. Of course this just my opinion
From: mech...@illinois.edu
Subject: Re: [USMA:47008] Re: FW: Special Employee Advisory: Message from
Joe Boardman
To: barkatf...@hotmail.com; usma@colostate.edu
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:04:08 -0500
Stephen,
The point you always seem to miss is that the question is not the
traditional units habitually used since the 18 century or earlier, but the best
units from SI for use in the future.
Original message
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:07:22 +
From: Stephen Humphreys barkatf...@hotmail.com
Subject: [USMA:47008] Re: FW: Special Employee Advisory: Message from Joe
Boardman
To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu
I admire your scientific brain Martin ;-) but I'll
bet you a large sum of money that most (British)
people would quickly understand 95 mph and have a
'feel' for what that looks like over 50 m/s based
upon some maths even though what you say
technically makes a lot of sence.
Of course, 'practice' often proves things and if you
ever hear one of the bowlers/batters for the England
and Wales side talking about fast-bowlers and
spin-bowlers then you note they will always use
mph. In fact my quote below about Flintoff came
from an Aussie cricketer(!). Note sure whether the
aussie chap in question used mph because they knew
it was SkySports interviewing them or not, however
whenever I have heard a feed from Australian criket
games I have often heard both mph and km/h
(admittedly more km/h from Australian broadcasts
than
[USMA:47065] RE: The Europeanization of the U.S.? --was Re: BBC debate about road signs
Perhaps I can add how Canada's metrication was promoted, at least initially, back in the early/mid 1970s. There was (and to some extent still is) a great antipathy towards the USA, especially in the area of what was called the USA's cultural imperialism, something that Canada's prime minister of the day, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, was passionate about. Going metric was one of the ways that Canada was able to express its own identity - something that is very hard to do when your next door neighbour is 10 times bigger than you, is your biggest trading partner and is the most powerful country on earth. Over the years, there has been some softening in Canada's stance towards the USA, and that has almost exactly coincided with Canada's partial regression towards imperial measures. Maybe we need another Trudeau. John F-L - Original Message - From: Martin Vlietstra To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:52 PM Subject: [USMA:47049] RE: The Europeanization of the U.S.? --was Re: BBC debate about road signs By 1979 the metrication program in the UK had slowed down into bottom gear. In that year Mrs Thatcher became prime minister and one of the things on the agenda was the harmonization of units of measure across the EU. Mrs Thatcher's antipathy towards the EU was well known and she used the failure to complete the metrication program as a symbol of defiance towards EU regulations. Intricate details of how VAT was collected meant nothing to the man in the street, but changing of everyday things like miles and pints were highly visible. When I compare this to South Africa - the bulk of the South African metrication program was complete by 1975 - South Africa had been a republic for over a decade and metrication was seen as being a step in the direction of the country asserting its independence - in particular South Africa did not have to wait for the British lead in everything. Pat might be able to mention whether or not there was a similar mood in Australia. -- From: owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Trusten Sent: 05 April 2010 17:13 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:47048] The Europeanization of the U.S.? --was Re: BBC debate about road signs This is a 2006 program, hence the discussion of 2010 and supplementary indications. Perhaps the U.K. citizens can enlighten me on this point, but in that country and in mine (the U.S.), metrication seems to me to have become a political issue, not a technical one, when it is more technical than it is political. Right now, in the U.S., there is a great deal of complaining about President Obama seeking to Europeanize America with his political agenda. and I hate to see this argument spill over into the metrication discussion, as it seems to be doing in the UK . My counter to this is that the SI metric system does not belong to Europe alone. Far from it. It belongs to North America, South America, Asia, Africa, the Pacific states--- it is global. If we take into account the U.S. Metric Act of 1866, the Metre Convention of 1875, and the Metric Conversion Act of 1975, SI is the entire world's system of measurement, and its avoidance by a few countries should be seen a form of deprivation, not a form of exceptionalism, for those countries' citizens. The lad who asked what a pint was is part of our future. In the government publication Metrication In Australia, the Australian government stated its wish to be part of the future, not the past, when it launched metrication in the 1970s. As it was in Ireland in 2005, Metrication of road signs in the UK would be forward-looking, and for the long term. Paul Trusten,R.Ph. Public Relations Director U.S. Metric Association, Inc. www.metric.org - Original Message - From: Pat Naughtin To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: 05 April, 2010 02:27 Subject: [USMA:47044] BBC debate about road signs Dear All, I have just watched this completely bizarre BBC program called, 'Question Time' at http://www.youtube.com/user/UKMetric I say completely bizarre because we, in Australia, changed all of the road signs in this very large country in a single day (Sunday 1974 July 1). We did this with with minimum cost by simply applying stick on signs over all the old signs. Some approximations were made (1/4 mile became 400 metres for instance) and all the the signs were replaced and perhaps moved slightly in the normal order of maintenance plans. This completely bizarre BBC program illustrates clearly that the UK government has no plans to learn from others about how to go about the road sign change. Instead they appear to want to extend the discussion well
[USMA:47134] RE: Decimal currency Metrication
The US and Canadian coins (1c, 5c, 10c and 25c) are nominally the same, certainly same diameter and thickness, but differences in metals used in their manufacture mean that they are not always interchangable in vending machines and the like. As the Canadians coins are (usually - current week excepted) worth less than the US equivalents, US vending machines are calibrated to invariably reject Canadian coins. John F-L - Original Message - From: carlet...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 5:07 PM Subject: [USMA:47132] RE: Decimal currency Metrication The US coins and the corresponding Canadian coins (through the loonie) are pretty much the same size. The US has no equivalent to the Canadian $2 coin (the 'toonie'). It is an incredible and unfortunate waste that the unnecessary $1 bill is still in production, but the same mentality that hinders metrication also keeps that bill in production. Carleton - Original Message - From: John M. Steele jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 6:32:05 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [USMA:47129] RE: Decimal currency Metrication The dime (10¢ piece) is the smallest US coin. Back when we used real silver, it was the smallest silver coin, the quarter, half dollar, and dollar coins being larger (presumably in proportion to weight?). The penny and nickel (5¢) were always base metals. Now, they all are. The modern dollar coin is considerably smaller than than the silver dollar was, about the size of a quarter, but distinctive color and edging. The link gives info on US coin dimensions and weights. Note the utility of the penny and nickel as cheap small balance weights. http://www.usmint.gov/about_the_mint/?flash=yesaction=coin_specifications Fivel nickels and a penny roughly approximate what can be mailed at the 1 oz rate, but won't buy a stamp (44¢). -- . . . . On 2010/04/15, at 02:30 , Tom Wade wrote: Incidentally, which is bigger: the American 5c or 10c :-; ? Tom Wade
[USMA:47152] Fw: Degrees Fahrenheit gone the way of the guinea?
- Original Message - From: John Frewen-Lord To: ezra.steinb...@comcast.net Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 10:08 PM Subject: Re: [USMA:47151] Degrees Fahrenheit gone the way of the guinea? Even the British Murdoch-controlled newspapers, which resolutely give all dimensions in imperial units (even those obviously converted from metric values), give temperatures in degrees Celsius. Canadian media (and the general population) also use Celsius, never a mention of Fahrenheit. Degrees F are now only found in the US. John F-L - Original Message - From: ezra.steinb...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 9:32 PM Subject: [USMA:47151] Degrees Fahrenheit gone the way of the guinea? I heard on the BBC World Service last night about a location (which I missed) where the presenter said that the temperature in mid-April was already 45 degrees (no mention of Celsius even, just degrees). So, I poked around a few of the British papers online (Independent, Daily Mirror, Sun) as well as Sky News and could not find any mention of Fahrenheit anywhere (or even a way .. at least not an obvious one that I could find! ... to change the temps display from Celsius to Fahrenheit. In fact, the Mirror also gave wind speed in kph. (Yes, yes, it should be km/h, but I'm thrilled that a paper like the Mirror has managed to dump wind speeds in mph given that all speed limits are currently displayed on roads in mph I presume the Met gives the wind speed in km/h and the Mirror has simply not bothered to dumb down the values. So, it seems that Fahrenheit temps have gone the way of the guinea, the shilling, and the farthing. Why isn't anyone citicizing the Labour Party for not having saved the Fahrenheit for Britain? I also see from those papers that there is a new poll out showing that the Lib-Dems have pulled ahead of Labour and the Tories. Wouldn't that be a kick in the pants (as we say) if the Lib-Dems could form the next government? -- Ezra
[USMA:47232] new tankers
EADS (Airbus parent) have confirmed that they will be putting in a bid (for the third time) for the Pentagon's air refueling tankers, based on the A330 tanker now flying for the Australian military. The A330 is of course an all metric plane. The US military I understand works in metric. The rival Boeing 767 tanker is of course a non-metric plane. I wonder if anyone knows (a) what units are used (or primarily used) in the bidding documents; and (b) following on from this, what units will be used in the aircraft's operation and maintenance? John F-L
[USMA:47453] Re: Bespoke tailoring
In January 2009, I wrote an article in the UKMA's Metric Views, suggesting that we have to make metric 'user friendly' if we want to get people to use it in every day speech. This may mean accepting various colloquialisms. This is an excerpt from that article, and reinforces what Ezra has just said: Ask an American how tall he is and how much he weighs, and he will likely answer something like “Five-ten and one-sixty-five” Implicit in this is the fact that ‘five-ten’ refers to five-feet-and-ten-inches, and ‘one-sixty-five’ refers to 165 pounds. The British may add the word ‘foot/feet’ (Five-foot-ten) and give their weight in stones (eleven-stone-eleven). We need to get metric usage on similar lines. My Canadian citizenship card shows my height as 178 cm. This could also be stated as 1.78 m, which is how citizens of continental Europe would describe their height. Either way, it can be orally expressed as simply ‘one-seventy-eight’. If the listener thinks in metres rather than centimetres, the decimal point is implicit - we do this anyway in other areas, such as when looking at prices in, say, supermarkets: “Which brand of pork pie do you want, dear - the shop’s own at one-ninety-nine, or the national brand at two-forty-three?” ‘Dear’ knows without explanation you mean £1.99 and £2.43, not £199.00 and £243.00. Notwithstanding Australian expert Pat Naughtin’s comments to the contrary, I think if we tried to use millimetres in expressing our height to each other, that would kill metric in every day usage right from the start. Sad, maybe but likely true. Same for our weight. It’s quite easy to simply say ’seventy-five’ (for 75 kg). Some may prefer to add the word ‘kilos’ (ugh!) after it. If the unit MUST be added, Canadians and Americans will likely say ‘kaygees’ (ugh!!!). But saying ‘kilograms’, although technically correct, just sounds so, well, technical (and even a bit pompous). A turn-off for too many people. John F-L - Original Message - From: ezra.steinb...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 7:35 PM Subject: [USMA:47452] Re: Bespoke tailoring Ironically, the same line of reasoning I came up with for using millimeters for the garment industry leads me (perhaps surprisingly) to the conclusion that centimeters are actually the right submultiple of the meter for specifying human height. So, for instance, I would imagine law enforcement authorities would be trained to use centimeters when metricating from feet and inches ) and not meters for the same reasons that millimeters are best for the building trades and for engineering: they are the right order of magnitude for the precision required (nearest whole centimeter is good enough) and you then can use whole numbers to sweep away vulgar fractions and compound unit expressions. By sticking rigorously to expressing heights as, say 150 cm, you break the old Imperial habits and get nice clean usage of metric (as opposed to getting one and a half meters or one meter fifty centimeters if you tried to get those folks to say 1.5 meters, which for many will fail just because their deeper Imperial mind set will corrupt their thinking). By the same token, millimeters would truly be overkill and put people off since something like 1500 mm would seem to most as both outlandish and ludicrous (and unnecessary since centimeters gets you the whole numbers you need to wean those folks off of Imperial). -- Ezra - Original Message - From: ezra steinberg ezra.steinb...@comcast.net To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 2:55:48 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [USMA:47451] Re: Bespoke tailoring Where this line of reasoning is taking me is that engineering and the building trades may have benefited from a happy confluence of two different factors: appropriate precision for their measurement needs (by using millimeters) and the use of whole numbers to sweep away the Imperial mindset of vulgar fractions (1/3, 1/2, 3/4, etc.) and compound unit expressions (3 ft 6 in) without having to re-educate people to use decimal fractions (again, by using millimeters). Two very powerful reinforcing attributes to promote rapid adoption of metric! In an area like the garment industry it gets a little trickier just because millimeters do seem to be overkill and centimeters do seem to be more aligned with the order of magnitude of precision required for those kinds of measurements. However, I am inclined to believe that it is more important to stamp out the old Imperial mindset of vulgar fractions and compound unit expressions, which argues then in favor of using millimeters. Once a whole new generation grows up knowing nothing but metric (and trained to be comfortable and accurate converting between different submultiples of a unit and using decimal fractions and moving decimal
[USMA:47478] Re: Opponents of metrication change
I fully endorse free speech. However, having said that, you have to put that principle in the context of the forum concerned. Yes, let's have lots of debate on HOW to metricate, WHO to metricate, even WHY to metricate. But a discussion on WHETHER to metricate? Doesn't make sense to me on this forum. Surely whether to metricate is a given, else why bother with the USMA? Or is the USMA itself so unsure about whether the US should metricate it needs to allow (even encourage?) opponents of metrication free access to post their anti-metric views? If the USMA is in fact fully convinced that the US needs to metricate (and presumably it is, else why would it even exist?), then any postings (and subsequent discussions) that are anti-metric in nature are at the very least 'off-topic' and a waste of everyone's time. Stephen Humphreys, as has been pointed out in the past, is a 'wind-up' merchant. He posts here just to cause mayhem. The best thing is, if he is to be continued to be allowed to post here, is for everyone of us to simply ignore him. John F-L - Original Message - From: Paul Trusten To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 6:50 AM Subject: [USMA:47477] Re: Opponents of metrication change Ametrica, The USMA Listserver is a forum on metrication, not an executive body for its enforcement. I think you are confusing freedom of speech with enforcement. Perhaps this is why the U.S. Constitution was crafted to divide power among three branches of government:, to separate discourse from enforcement. The legislatures are deliberative bodies. They give voice to both supporters and opponents of an idea, and then hold votes to arrive (or not arrive) at a plan. But. once a plan is approved, and then endorsed by the executive, the process must be carried out with total unity. In Constitutional terms, once the Congress has fixed the standard of weights and measures (Article I, Sec.8) and gives the go-ahead for the changeover, all else folllows. Metrication is like the central nervous system. It starts in the brain. The 1970s U.S. Metric Board (USMB)was a toothless and divided body. It was born of watered-down legislation, was premised upon a vague mission (coordinate the increasing use of the metric system) and it died due to a lack of national leadership on metrication and also due to disunity from within. I certainly agree with you that there should be no anti-metric members on the USMB. To appoint such people to that board is absurd. But to include opposing views in a discussion group is just that: to allow free speech, and not necessarily to endorse the contents of the speech. I have been a subscriber to the USMA Listserver since 1997. It has been one of the most useful tools I've had for advancing the national goal of U.S. metrication. As a private citizen, as editor of USMA's newsletter Metric Today, and now as the organization's public relations director, I could not have done without the list. It has been a very rich source of both background information and late-breaking news on metric that has helped supply the newsletter with articles of interest, and it has been an invaluable source for keeping USMA and its members welcome in the circles of government and industry that will make metrication a fact in America. In that spirit, our Web site has been honored with a place on the International Bureau of Weights and Measures' list of useful links, and has made USMA a primary metric source for journalists across the country. Over the years, the list has given voice to the opposition, but almost all of that opposition was of the disruptive variety. On a few occasions, we have had to ban some subscribers who were nothing less than would-be saboteurs. I believe that one of the worst images USMA could project is that of a monolithic insurgency bent upon squelching debate and acting with a kind of brute force. Given the sight of such a group, U.S. industry would run the other way. In the Australian government booklet Metrication In Australia, the point is rammed home that metrication is a complex event, requiring the assent of many different sectors of a society. Using this approach, Australia succeeded brilliantly in metricating itself at every level. I know, because I visited that country in 2007 and saw it for myself, right down to kilonewtons of force on a sewer cover and 700-gram portions of steak in a restaurant. To accomplish that change required the widest possible cooperation among indusry, academia, goverment, and the communications media. The booklet noted that no penalties were established to enforce metrication. Everybody measures things, so once the decision was made to go metric, there was little to impede the process, because the path had been well designed. But the path requires talk. If we are to do this thing, we have to talk to each other. The best
[USMA:47561] Re: UK Transport Minister banishes metric in all official communications
I've just sent off the following letter to Hammond, cc to David Cameron (prime minister), Nick Clegg (deputy PM) as well as my own MP (also anti-metric). You might notice a trace of sarcasm here and there... Philip Hammond: Secretary of State for Transport Houses of Parliament Dear Mr Hammond: I have just learned that you are proposing to ban all metric measurements from our road transporation system. What a simply brilliant move! We've had far too much of this metric nonsense. I must say, your proposal has already excited my friends and colleagues in Canada, Australia and South Africa, all of whom have emailed me and asked me to confirm that this is true. As you may know, all these three countries (and I believe about 189 other countries) use the metric system on their road signs. How silly is that? But then they're all foreigners, and as you and I both know, foreigners are ignorant. We should have made Canada, Australia and South Africa and all the countries we once owned stick to their imperial road signs - let them know that it is us Brits who know what's best for them. Cheeky upstarts, the lot of them. I will admit that my Canadian, Australian and South African friends and colleagues wondered whether this was a good thing, given Britain's precarious foreign trade situation and all that - one even suggested that this could hurt our exports! What rot! These people need to understand that the world NEEDS British imperial-designed things - far superior to all that metric designed foreign rubbish. Now, having decided that our entire road system will, quite rightly, remain in imperial units, we should do the same with the vehicles on those roads. I mean, it doesn't make sense to have metric cars, buses and lorries on imperial roads, does it? So I believe you should take the next logical step, and allow only imperial designed and manufactured vehicles on British roads. THAT would stop all those nasty foreign vehicles cluttering up our roads - and rejuvenate our car manufacturing industry at the same time. Now I admit this will be a bit of a challenge - every car manufactured anywhere today, including in the USA, is designed in metric. Even our British manufacturers of the day agreed to go metric - how unpatriotic is that? So there might be a few problems (all the bits that go in these cars - things like tyres, light bulbs, minor things like that - are all currently made to metric standards). But nothing that, I'm sure, a goold old bit of British knowhow and ingenuity can't overcome. Show johnny foreigner a thing or two, I'll wager. Of course, with our imperial-only roads and the imperial-only vehicles on them we will have to educate the rest of the world in imperial units - if they want to sell their nasty German, American, Japanese, Korean, French and Italian tin boxes here, that is. What a golden opportunity for our universities! Hundreds of thousands of foreign engineers, designers, professionals of every kind, who all now need to know how many inches in a mile and how many yards in a foot. We all know British education is the best in the world - this will REALLY prove it to all those ignorant foreigners who don't know the difference between a stone and a furlong. Did you know that there are 5.7 billion metric-only foreigners in the world, many of whom now might need to learn imperial measurements? I bet they can't wait to get started! Finally, as you are firmly convinced - and the entire rest of the world will agree with you - that we British should revert to the 19th century imperial measuring system for our entire transportation infrastructure, we should bring back some of the 19th century traffic laws as well. The worst thing we did was repeal the red flag act in 1896 - the one, you may recall, that required a man with a red flag to walk in front of every powered motor vehicle. Do you know what the repeal of that law did to the flag industry in this country? It decimated (sorry, wrong word) - it all but destroyed it! Factories up and down the country making red flags had to shut down. Now, if we brought back that law, all those foreign countries that never had a red flag act would see how wonderful it would be (especially in terms of traffic deaths - we all know that speed kills, don't we? I see signs everywhere telling me so). All those silly metric countries will now enact their own red flag laws, following our superior British imperial lead - and will be beating down our doors wanting to buy our superior, imperial red flags. What a golden day for British industry that will be. Mr Hammond, your proposal to revert to imperial-only represents a truly brilliant piece of strategic thinking - the kind of thinking that we British are noted for. It sends a clear message to the rest of that horrible metric world out there - and will certainly make the rest of the world sit up and take
[USMA:47694] RE: Are metric speed limit and/or distance signs permitted by US Federal law or regulation?
Paul: I can't believe what you said in your third sentence - it was tongue-in-cheek, right? This of course is the old argument that has been used over and over again by opponents of converting to metric speed limits - it will be too dangerous/confusing/hazardous, etc. All wrong, of course. I cannot speak for Australia or other countries that converted, but I was in Canada when it converted - and NOTHING HAPPENED. Over the 1977 Labour Day weekend, one night (Saturday night if I recall correctly) when we went to bed the speed limit signs were in mph. The next morning, they were all - and I mean ALL (bar some remote back roads) - in km/h. We all simply accepted it and adjusted accordingly and immediately - and back then our cars didn't have dual marked speedometers like today (well, one of mine did - a Saab 99, but that was very much the exception). Various solutions to that were devised - little stick-on numbers over your speedometer was the most popular solution, but I remember things like little gearboxes that you could insert between the speedometer cable and the speedometer head, so that when your speedometer read '60', it now meant 60 km/h, not its previous 60 mph. Screwed up the odometer reading though. The accident rate didn't budge - just continued on its steadily downward trend without a blip. The UK mess is because the road signs AREN'T in km/h - about the only aspect of British life that is stuck in a previous century (that and buying draft beer in a pub). John F-L - Original Message - From: Paul Trusten To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 6:13 AM Subject: [USMA:47690] RE: Are metric speed limit and/or distance signs permitted by US Federal law or regulation? Metric is legal(1866), and metric is the federally preferred standard (1988), but, for motor vehicle matters, we would still need one little thing to make it a reality---metrication. We would have to metricate signs, auto equipment, and also human minds, to make it work. The truth is that it is confusing to put up kilometer distance signs for people who are untrained in thinking metric, and may be downright hazardous to erect metric speed limit signs which would fool some people into thinking they can go 160 km/h when they see speed limit 100 and think that is miles per hour. It would be called a very American mess (tip of the hat to the UKMA report). Ireland metricated its speed limit signs in 2005 via a carefully coordinated national plan. Before '05, Ireland had metric distance signs but imperial speed limit signs. See story in attached copy of Metric Today. Paul - Original Message - From: br...@bjwhite.net To: U.S. Metric Association Cc: U.S. Metric Association Sent: 10 June, 2010 23:31 Subject: [USMA:47689] RE: Are metric speed limit and/or distance signs permitted by US Federal law or regulation? They are legal...but states have chosen not to use them...except in certain circumstances. Original Message Subject: [USMA:47688] Are metric speed limit and/or distance signs permitted by US Federal law or regulation? From: ezra.steinb...@comcast.net Date: Thu, June 10, 2010 9:18 pm To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu All: I just realized I am not clear about the legal status of metric distance and speed limit signs in the USA. Do Federal laws and regulations permit them in all circumstances? Only some? What role do state, county, and local laws and regulations play in all this? I ask because I'm wondering if turns out to be the case that the UK is the only country on the planet that has officially outlawed metric distance and road signs on officially maintained roadways. Even though such signs are virtually non-existent here in the USA, I'm presuming this is so simply because the states have chosen not to use them rather than because they have been made illegal either at the Federal or the state level. Thanks, Ezra
[USMA:47837] a turning point?
From the BBC website today, 2010 06 17: There was a time when many of Europe's leaders and Eurocrats trembled at the thought of David Cameron as prime minister. They imagined long painful negotiations with an administration determined to roll-back the EU's powers and block mission creep from Brussels. So many have been surprised by the Cameron administration's charm offensive. A good slice of the new cabinet has already passed through Brussels and have picked up good reviews. The British approach is to be pragmatic, active and constructive when they can be, whilst vigorously defending national interests. One British official said it made a big impression when the new environment secretary Caroline Spelman strode into a meeting speaking fluent French and German. ... What the British will argue for is an extension of the single market into the service sector, energy and the internet. They believe in trade liberalisation. They want greater labour market flexibility. But many of those ideas are in fashion anyway as a sluggish EU looks to grow itself out of its crisis. There will be arguments at some stage. There always are. But, for the time being, Britain is going out of its way to find allies and to avoid the old headline Britain isolated in Europe. With a very pro-EU Nick Clegg as Deputy prime Minister, perhaps the UK may just complete its metric conversion anyway, as part of its 'pragmatic' approach. Certainly, if Britain is indeed not wanting to appear isolated in Europe, then any retrenchment into imperial units would fly in the face of that. John F-L
[USMA:47889] Re: Type size
I checked some books and magazines (North American and UK). Most type size (upper case, as well as letters with upper extenders) is between 2.0 and 2.5 mm. Larger for headlines, etc. John F-L - Original Message - From: John M. Steele To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 11:28 AM Subject: [USMA:47888] Re: Type size Pat, Double-check those types sizes. I don't think I could read a book with 0.5 mm type. I measured text in the Wall Street Journal and a few books. Normal body text seems to be about 1.4 mm lower case letters, 2 mm capitals. To include larger fonts in headlines, I would probably stick with millimeters and one decimal, but micrometers would work too. From: Pat Naughtin pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com To: U.S. Metric Association usma@colostate.edu Sent: Mon, June 21, 2010 3:43:38 AM Subject: [USMA:47886] Type size On 2010/06/21, at 07:48 , Pierre Abbat wrote: The *type size* in centimeters? That's too big a unit for measuring letters. Pierre Dear Pierre, You're right, as a unit, centimetre is too big for type size – and so is millimetre. I think that the printing industry will eventually get over its dedication to old mediaeval names for type. Ciceros, didos, ems, ens, picas, and points (both the UK and USA versions) will eventually be replaced by a sane and simple metric system. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typographic_unit to get a taste of the mess the printing industry is in! To measure letters this sanely and simply you could start with measuring the height of each letter in micrometres. As the text in books or newspapers tends to be about 500 micrometres this would have the advantage that all letter height descriptions would be in whole numbers and most of these (except for headlines or headings) would be less than 1000 micrometres. See http://www.metricationmatters.com/docs/WholeNumberRule.pdf Lateral measures could also use the same idea with ems and ens specified in micrometres as well. I know that many will balk at the idea of a letter m as (say) 2600 micrometres wide because 'the number is too big'. However consider that you have just won 2600 in a lottery – is the number still too big? Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, see http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html Hear Pat speak at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lshRAPvPZY PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com/ to subscribe.
[USMA:47906] pre metric measurements
I was thinking about Pat's terminology for old, superseded non-metric measurements, and looked through all the various terms suggested - WOMBATs, FFUs, etc. I came up with SAMs - Stone Age Measurements. I've found it quite effective - just slightly derogatory without causing offence, often met with a chuckle, sometimes with an apology, occasionally with a question (not that often, surprisingly; it seems that a majority of people here in the UK know you are referring to their use of imperial rather than metric). It's also short and succinct. John F-L
