On 2010/01/31, at 23:14 , John M. Steele wrote:
Pat will love this story:
http://www.newschief.com/article/20100131/NEWS/1315040/1009/LIVING?p=1&tc=pg
Wife measures in inches at home, and in centimeters in store. Great
line, "I just thought they were small inches."
It ends questioning why we use the ruler of the ruler we overthrew
in 1776 and advocates the US going metric.
Dear John,
Great story and well told.
However I would like to point out something about my attitude to
centimetres.
Some years ago I observed that metrication transitions using
centimetres went much more slowly than metrication transitions using
millimetres. Transitions using millimetres were smooth, rapid, and
complete while transitions using centimetres were (and are still)
slow, partial, and so riddled with bitter fighting that they seem to
be endless.
This puzzled me because I simply didn't understand why this should be
so, and in particular why the difference should be so dramatic. As
examples, the Australian building and construction industries chose to
use millimetres for their metrication transition and they were all
done with the process in about two years; the textile industries chose
to use centimetres and they are still struggling with their
metrication transition after 40 years with no clear end in sight.
These were personal observations as I worked in both of these
industries.
Sadly, very sadly, our primary (elementary) and high school teachers
in Australia also chose to use the centimetre based approach. We now
have the situation where children leave school to (say) begin a
construction job and they have to begin to learn about how to plan,
cut, fix, and estimate using millimetres. I overheard a discussion
between an old carpenter and his new trainee when the youngster
reported a measurement in centimetres; the old man scornfully
commented, 'What's that cm thing, we call cm a "curtain measure"
around here, and we don't ever use them.'
I have long been an admirer of the policy of the Australian building
industry for its simplicity and for its clarity. The Australian
Building and Construction Advisory Committee policy was:
The metric units for linear measurement in building and construction
will be the metre (m) and the millimetre (mm), with the kilometre (km)
being used where required. This will apply to all sectors of the
industry, and the centimetre (cm) shall not be used. … the centimetre
should not be used in any calculation and it should never be written
down.
*Standards Association of Australia 'Metric Handbook, Metric
Conversion in Building and Construction 1972
With these words the Australian Building and Construction Advisory
Committee effectively banished centimetres from the building trades in
Australia, with the result that metric conversion in these trades was
smooth, rapid, and completed in about two years. Most other trades
followed their example, and subsequently followed their successful
metrication program. Broadly speaking, about 85 % of Australians work
in millimetre based activities; about 10 % use centimetres; and the
remaining 5 % rarely measure at all.
About that time, I decided to investigate this issue and sought the
support of the knowledgeable people who subscribe to the USMA maillist
– the long paper in the form of a discussion at http://www.metricationmatters.com/docs/centimetresORmillimetres.pdf
is the result of this consultation process.
During the years that I have been watching the differences between
centimetre metrication transitions and millimetre metrication
transitions I have formed various views as to why there are such
notable differences. As an example, my first idea, which I have now
rejected, was that centimetres were chosen by occupations
traditionally taken by women and that millimetres were chosen in
traditional men's activities.
Currently I think that the choice of millimetres has profound
advantages over centimetres because it favors the almost exclusive use
of whole numbers within a work environment – there are no vulgar or
common fractions and there are no decimal fractions on any building
sites in Australia because all dimensions are in millimetres. This is
also true for building sites in India, New Zealand, and South Africa.
My goal at the present time is to try to inform people who have not
yet made their choice as to whether to use centimetres or millimetres
to choose the better approach of using millimetres. I believe that the
failure of the metrication process in the USA in the 1970s can largely
be traced to the choice of centimetres because the process worked so
slowly that the participants considered that, after a few years of
trying, the entire process had failed. The truth is that the
centimetre based metrication transition started in the 1970s will now
continue until metrication is completed – this is inevitable once the
process has begun – but it will be slow, it will be costly, and it
will be painful. So far, like centimetre based metrication in
Australia, it has taken 40 years and there is no clear end in sight.
It's hard to predict how long a centimetre based transition might
take, but it is probably reasonable, as a best guess, to suggest 200
years as a working figure. The alternative is to choose millimetres
and have done with the whole metrication transition process by about
2012. As a 'Rule of Thumb' you could think of 2 years for a
metrication transition using millimetres and 200 years for a
metrication transition using centimetres.
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.
