I'm going to act like metre for a minute, and post an "example" of the "misery" of the metric system.
A couple of years ago in a physics class we had to solve a problem involving sound intensity. I'm not sure how the intensity had to be calculated, but the question had to be answered in decibels. The surface in question had dimensions given in centimeters, so obviously had to be converted to an area in square meters. (Decibel formula involves watts per square meter.) I knew there were 100 cm in 1 m, so I had to square 100. There were too many zeroes floating around, and I somehow mentally missed one and ended up with 1,000. Of course, my intensity was off by a factor of 10.
If I had been working in the English system, I would have had to convert square inches to square feet. I know that 12 in. = 1 ft, and anyone who knows basic times tables knows that 12x12=144. No zeroes floating around that you have to keep track of. If that had been the case, I wouldn't have made this error.

Bud, in other words you made a mistake evaluating 2+2.

(10^2 * 10^2 = 10^(2+2) = 10^4).

The "point switch" error is very common, martin.

Most people have a "numourous dislexia" effect.

I'm bloody awful with long numbers, I still can't remember my other half's mobile number!

Bud: I'm going to act like metre for a minute, and post an "example" of the "misery" of the metric system.
A couple of years ago in a physics class we had to solve a problem involving sound intensity. I'm not sure how the intensity had to be calculated, but the question had to be answered in decibels. The surface in question had dimensions given in centimeters, so obviously had to be converted to an area in square meters. (Decibel formula involves watts per square meter.) I knew there were 100 cm in 1 m, so I had to square 100. There were too many zeroes floating around, and I somehow mentally missed one and ended up with 1,000. Of course, my intensity was off by a factor of 10.
If I had been working in the English system, I would have had to convert square inches to square feet. I know that 12 in. = 1 ft, and anyone who knows basic times tables knows that 12x12=144. No zeroes floating around that you have to keep track of. If that had been the case, I wouldn't have made this error.


metre: if that's all you can come up with from a yankee land persepective then i trully feel sorry for you

Metre is really becoming a myth, isn't he ?

Re: The harsh REALITY May 18 2004, 8:48 PM


Bryan:
Not only that, but I feel sad for you metre if you find basic fractions to be hard.

metre:
Don't waste your pity on me, commiserate with the millions and millions of children, who have to have a really bad life wasting time on this needless and stupid and HABITTY and obsolete exercise of sheer stupidity and women having their legs bound for a 1000 years in china. I know metric really well, by the way.
>>
Bud:
Metre, all children have to learn fractions no matter which system of measurement they use.

metre:
I refuse to argue properly! What I maintain is that Yankee children have to live a life of abject misery using a ruler with the words "inch" and "foot" on it. That is why America is a failing nation with no influence on the world. Its a third world country because it has miles and things. Yankee land imperialistic children spend inordinate time on fractions b/c of their fraction based measurements and the right to bear arms. Yet, they still have to learn decimals to make them work in certain situations! How can a brain learn fractions (that no-one ever uses) and decimals!?!? I have a survey right here that proves that you cannot learn more than one thing - its impossible! The survey is written by the same people who did that poll I told you about regarding how Australians hate imperial and my relatives are american so I cannot be charged with anti-americanism! The human brain cannot learn more than four things! Remember that! Which leads us to the basic question again, why does America need 2 measurement systems? And why do I keep getting an answer to this that I'm not happy with? Tell you what - I'll avoid answering your questions but still ask my questions over and over and over again.

Soon the pro-metric people will help me out.

People generally:
Look, metre - here is the answer! CAn't you accept it?

metre:
If language is the best you can come up with, you have no argument. But I *do* know metric really well - did I tell you that?

Actually you imperialists have no argument - at all. Only I do. Except when an answer is required.

MattS:
[insert any words you like here]


metre:
I'm going to insult you real good and proper! I'll call you names, I'll remind you that you are a useless Yank and say something about Iraq and witch hunting

SteveH:
In fact the truth is this.... (etc)

metre:
[waits for someone else to say something so as not to look like answering SteveH directly]

Bud:
[says something]

metre:
After playing with words and changing the goalposts I'll tell everyone that there is a resident dim wit. There! Won that argument fair and square!






Oops! Have I just done a "Euric"? I promise to stop now!

(unless anyone else wants to do an impersonation)

is that as opposed to a "hit" ?

What the hell???

"SteveH": I just imitated metre. Of course, a while ago when he was posting things under several names, I spoke up and made him stop. He reached an agreement with BWMA that he would only post under one name. But I never reached that agreement, so now I am posting under his name. People were also upset with him a while ago for changing the topic of threads. I just changed the topic of this thread. I, however, have the right to do this, because more people on this board agree with me than with metre. So there. If you can't post something that I think is intelligent, stop posting on my boards.

Back to the topic.

Martin, if you convert the number 100 to scientific notation then it does boil down to simple 2+2, as you said. However, I was not thinking in terms of powers of ten. Think of writing the number "100" and writing a zero to the right of it for every zero in the other number 100. This has to be done mentally. You think of placing the comma three zeroes from the right, as in 10,000, and you know that since you added two zeroes that one zero from the original number 100 has to be to the right of the comma, leaving "10" in the thousands/hundreds columns. This entire process has to be done instantly, as a sidetrack that is part of a larger problem.

All right, it is a side-track to the origianl problem, but a lot simpler than dividing by 144 (which few people can do mentally).

"So there. If you can't post something that I think is intelligent, stop posting on my boards."

Eh?

BTW - "euric" and "eric"(metre) are two different people. Euric has left these boards and posts regularly on metricsucks where "metre" sometimes posts as "kilo"

Well, I thought that should be fun. Alas it was only pathetic, considering the short shrift Martin made of your example. All I can add is that it proves what I always say, that you and most of your compatriots, have little knowledge of the metric system.

Well that makes you much more in common with Americans than you let on doesn't it?

How do you feel about that?

(...yeah, I know)

I hope you realise what you've done by imitating metre!

There is now more than one standard metre.
Oh, no, hang on, there is in real life.
So much for being scientific

There is? Where?