Tom Wade, sir(s):
>> The most suitable units for this are centimeters.
Insisting on the use of 'millimetre' as a base unit may defeat the purpose of
educating the YOUNG tots in schools. Milli- being a sub-multiple [10^-3 i.e.
one-thousandth]. This was the general argument when 'Metre, m, was taken to be
the acceptable unit' for length so as to become the bridge between *small &
large* measurement for length. METRE does need to be redefined in Le Systeme
Internationale d'Unites (SI) as: one-10^5th of arc-angle Pi/180 (one degree);
more so link this with Nautical Kilometre as a replacement to Nautical Mile -
please see: http://www.brijvij.com/bbv_shelving-NMile.pdf
Count of length in 'mm' is something like the difficulty of measuring distance
between town in millimetres, while the base unit is derived from dimensions of
Earth; also it is like measuring the passage of time in 'seconds (s) or decimal
seconds (sd)' for day-to-day work.
Thus it is the convinience (and its magnitude) that need be considered for
practicality!
Regards, Brij Bhushan Vij (MJD 2454540)/995+D-047W10-05 (G. Friday, 2008 March
14 H 20:05(decimal) IST Aa Nau Bhadra Kritvo Yantu Vishwatah -Rg Veda Jan:31;
Feb:29; Mar:31; Apr:30; May:31; Jun:30 Jul:30; Aug:31; Sep:30; Oct:31; Nov:30;
Dec:30 (365th day of Year is World Day) HOME PAGE:
http://www.brijvij.com/******As per Kali V-GRhymeCalendaar*****"Koi bhi
cheshtha vayarth nahin hoti, purshaarth karne mein hai"Contact # 011-9818775933
(M)001(201)962-3708(when in US)> Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:12:03 +0000> From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [USMA:40556] Re: usage of measures for body mass
and height> To: [email protected]> > > > For practical reference, it's easy to
remember that 1 m (meter) is > > equivalent to 1000 mm (millimeter). As a
result, one can practicably > > express height in terms of either meter or
millimeter.> > Except that millimeters are particularly unsuited to measuring
people's > height. They imply far too high a level of precision (people's >
effective height would vary according to stance, how many hours they > have
been standing upright, or even whether it has rained on their hair).> > The
most suitable units for this are centimeters.> > I realize that many people on
this list have a prejudice against > centimeters, and I fully acknowledge that
millimeters are the > appropriate unit to use in engineering, architecture,
machining, DIY > jobs - in fact the vast majority of industrial and mechanical
applications.> > But for people's height, millimeters are too precise, and also
the > typical height of adults would result in a four digit figure.> > You
might say, why not use meters to two decimal places ? I would be > quite happy
with this, but only because it is a form of "hidden > centimeters". I quote my
height as "one seventy three" which can be > equally understood as either 1.73
m or 173 cm. But one of the arguments > in favor of using millimeters in many
applications is that it provides > for whole numbers without the need to use
decimals (or even worse, > fractions). For this excellent reason engineering
dimensions are > normally quoted in integral millimeters rather than meters to
decimal > places. Applying the same logic, centimeters should be preferred over
> meters for height.> >
---------------------------------------------------------> Tom Wade | EMail:
tee dot wade at eurokom dot ie> EuroKom | Tel: +353 (1) 296-9696> A2, Nutgrove
Office Park | Fax: +353 (1) 296-9697> Rathfarnham | Disclaimer: This is not a
disclaimer> Dublin 14 | Tip: "Friends don't let friends do Unix !"> Ireland>
_________________________________________________________________
Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®-get your
"fix".
http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx
