On Wed, 10 Apr 2002 15:39:52 Gene Mechtly wrote: >Marcus, > >The CCU has already rejected No. 2 wrt SI prefixes; considered *alone*. > Yes, I know. Unfortunately so...
>In my opinion, there is *no* prospect that the CCU would consider all five >of your suggestions in one package. > Perhaps you're right, of course. However, if we address this as an *overhaul* on frameworking/modeling we may have a chance to have them at least consider the *subject* itself. That something must be done to clean up the philosophical tenets supporting the SI system. We can remind them that their adopting coherence as a principle was a step in that direction, but that they now require to do a lot more in regards to that so that future developments take place in much less hap-hazard way. >As Jim Frysinger suggested, the proper channel for your proposals >(as a citizen of Brazil, Canada, or both) is through your own representative(s) >to the CCU; with all the arguments you can muster in support of each >proposal, preferably, one at a time. > When I have the time I'll hunt for that info. Now, as for submitting this 'one at a time', I don't know... I hesitate to do that because the subject IS philosophical in nature, it goes to the fabric of defining a system of units, and as such should be treated as a... "collective" package. In other words, that since it's time to define what makes a *system* of units of measurement what it is, then *everything* that has any bearing/impact on such tenets must be addressed. >May you enjoy more success than I am able to boast (zero). > Thanks, Gene, for your well wishes, and for your insight. We'll see. Marcus Is your boss reading your email? ....Probably Keep your messages private by using Lycos Mail. Sign up today at http://mail.lycos.com
