Thanks to devices like SATNAV, GPS, iPAQ, the news media and others the yard has been practically redefined to equal one metre. There are now 1000 yards in a kilometre. The previous definition of the yard will still be on the books but will not be used in the real world.

Those who get excited and goosepimply when they see yards in print or hear it from a machine will have to constantly remind themselves they are really experiencing metres in disguise. To the purists out there who refuse to accept the new usage, you will just have to either adjust or make a mental conversion back to old yards.

The term metre will still be the correct term. The term yard will only be used to satisfy those who have a nostagia for the old empire.

[puts helmet on and opens door for quick exit]

So can we have a 25 cm foot then?

Except of course the metre is not very god as a unit. I don't mind if we called yards "metres" and metres "yards", so long as our length unit is more-or-less exactly 36".


Interesting idea tho- twenty-five centimetre feet divided into ten inches. Altho I still prefer our present foot.

<<
[puts helmet on and opens door for quick exit]

So can we have a 25 cm foot then?
>>

No, you cannot - it is 1/3 m in length and is known as the pied metrique, introduced by Napoleaon when the metric system was suspended in France in 1810. (I twas re-introduced in 1840).

""""Except of course the metre is not very god as a unit. I don't mind if we called yards "metres" and metres "yards", so long as our length unit is more-or-less exactly 36"."""

Who says the metre is not very good as a unit? By what authority do you make such a pronouncement? The metre is perfect as a unit of length. The world is in full agreement on this point.

The unit length of the metre is defined by the world's renowned authority on Weights and Measures, the BIPM. You can sub-divide your newly defined yard any way you please, because it doesn't really matter. As long as everyone is aware that the metre is the foundation of all length units is all that matters. Even if they are not aware, or don't accept that reality, doesn't alter the basic fact that the metre is the base unit of all length measures.

Martin: either being facetious or totally missing the point.

Erin: also missing the point.

Above post by me.

Pleae visit http://longueur.masse.temps.free.fr/longueur.htm

The site is in French, but if you go to section 6.2, you will see the section on Napoleon's decree. If you are merely trying to verify what I wrote, you should be able to identify the relevant sections.

Given the GPS is an American system and that they still use the imperial system I am surprised to hear that GPS uses metric, can you confirm this to be the case?

Due to the accuracy of GPS the usage of metres or yards is a distraction as - within this accuracy - both are basically the same thing.

Some can pretend that the GPS system really are accurate to exactly one metre so as to pretend its pure metric but then that'd be as stupid as hitting yourself with a mallet.

So - with that I can announce:


KiloPascal --> Euric --> Carlyle --> Ametrica --> Eric Go Bragh.

Yes - I *have* put my shurlock hat on again!

By the way, his real name is John.

Say hello to John everyone.....

Erin, try to divide a metre accurately by 2, 3, 4 and 6 and then tell me it is a better measure than a yard.

David

It depends what you mean by accurately.

If we define them as accurately as possible,

1/2 metre = distance travelled by light in vacuum in 1/599584916 seconds
1/3 metre = distance travelled by light in vacuum in 1/899377374 seconds
1/4 metre = distance travelled by light in vacuum in 1/1199169832 seconds
1/6 metre = distance travelled by light in vacuum in 1/1798754748 seconds

I'm sure that this can be measured, as metrology labs appear to be able to work out the distance represented by 9144/10000ths of a metre. I know that it is not mathematically correct to mix decimals and fractions, but the value for the yard would be approximately

1 yard = distance travelled by light in vacuum in 1/327857018.81014873140857392825897 seconds

Obviously, if you are not talking about total accuracy, the answer to your question is

1/2 metre = 500mm
1/3 metre = 333.3 recurring mm
1/4 metre = 250mm
1/6 metre = 166.6 recurring mm

Round the decimal at whatever level of accuracy you require

BTW - welcome to the boards!

Erin, try to divide a metre accurately by 2, 3, 4 and 6 and then tell me it is a better measure than a yard.



Easy! 1/2 m = 0.5 m; 1/3 m = 0.333 m; 1/4 m = 0.25 m and 1/6 m = 0.167 m

This is not a problem for metric, as it would be for imperial.

Now, David, here is where you silly example fails. In SI, there is no law or rule that states what sizes or preferred number series are to be used. As an example, while you are running around looking for examples based on unrealistic situations, the construction industry long ago adopted the 100 mm module. That means that every product is now standardized to sizes in increments of 100 mm. Because of the ease at which factors of 12 can be divided into a greater number of eqaul parts, most of the products come in common sizes like 200, 300, 400, 600, 800, 1200, 2400, 4800, etc. mm. And guess what! They are all HARMONIZED to the 100 mm module.

Industry and Economy world-wide is convinced of the coherancy, consistancy and absolute perfection of SI. These are the areas where the test of what constitutes a real modern and functional measurement system versus what constitutes a remnant, has-been, never to be again collection of hodge-podge. So go ahead and search further for excuses why you won't move into the 21-st century and I'll keep my eye on the industries producing the newest technological devices in metric units. Metric is at the fore front of all of our progress.

"""Given the GPS is an American system and that they still use the imperial system I am surprised to hear that GPS uses metric, can you confirm this to be the case?"""


First of all, the US does not use imperial. They use what is known as USC. USC = US Customary units. Nowhere is it classified as a "system". It can't be, as it is just a random collection of units, all defined from a metric unit. Many units that comprise USC are different from the same named unit in imperial.

GPS was invented first for the US military (http://ask.yahoo.com/ask/20010918.html). Because the US military uses metric (a requirement of NATO) it made perfect sense for GPS to be metric too. It is foolish to believe that the US only works in non-metric units. 40 % of American industry is metric, which includes the auto industry, machine tool, heavy equipment (such as earth movers, excavators, etc.), gasoline and diesel engine producers, chemicals, phamaseuticals, etc. And don't forget, almost everything the US imports, which is a hell of a lot more then it exports. Hidden metric is everywhere.

Where it counts, you can be assured, it is metric

>>>>>>

Easy! 1/2 m = 0.5 m; 1/3 m = 0.333 m; 1/4 m = 0.25 m and 1/6 m = 0.167 m

This is not a problem for metric, as it would be for imperial
<<<<<<




erm, right. 1/2yd = 18", 1/3yd = 12", 1/4yd = 9", 1/6yd = 6"

Errr, no offence, but are you thick or something?



In other news, just so you all know, I am sick of this forum. Too much idiocy including from people who should know better. If you want to contact me, email me as I may not see a message left for me here.

<<<I am sick of this forum>>>

Me too, there is only so much sensible debate you can have on this subject. This forum is strangely addictive, but after a while you realise that its just the same people churning out the same stuff over and over again.

Can anyone spell out for me why it's so important that a unit of measurement be exactly divisible by 2, 3, 4, 6 etc?

It is quite useful to be able to manipulate units in sub/multiples which are useful for the task at hand. Thus, for astronomy and suchlike, where it is all very abstract but perhaps often exact, mutiples of the base are best, it is arguable. However, everyday stuff, where division into basic fractions and manipulation involving basic fractions is required, then units divisible into thirds etc are best.

1. Yes, the metre IS divisible into thirds. I understand this. But what thirds!!! (333.333333333 millimetres)

2. Yes, we can use 100ml/cm/g units and then divide those into (binary) fractions or make multiples thereof; however, the fact that we should need to do this exposes the uselessness of using hundred-something units and the decimal nature of metric for everyday.

""""Can anyone spell out for me why it's so important that a unit of measurement be exactly divisible by 2, 3, 4, 6 etc?""""

It is of absolutely no importance to anyone who uses the metric system. The metric system being a decimal measuring system is not limited or hampered by numbers that don't divide out evenly. In science and engineering, where the metric system is common, results of mathematical formula or equations almost never result in rounded numbers. Many fomulas utilize a variety of natural constants that themselves are not rounded numbers and the results too are not rounded.

Imperial evolved among illiterate and inummerate people. Mostly people who if they could count, could only count to twenty. The only division they could do were halves, quarters and if smart enough eights. They knew nothing of irrational numbers and could only function with rounded resulting values. To the people who fit this mold, divisibility of certain numbers is of utmost importance.

Thus if someone finds it important to have exact divisaiility of certain numbers, then you can rest assure which class of people they belong too. Be thankful you are not among them.

<<
Can anyone spell out for me why it's so important that a unit of measurement be exactly divisible by 2, 3, 4, 6 etc?
>>

It's not important, it's just a matter of convenience.


Yes, I agree these forums get quite repititious after a while. People forget what was said on old threads, and go through the same dialogues again. But they are quite addicting, especially if you have been posting a long time.

I totally agree, Bud.

But don't you agree that ending the discussions about learning inch rulers, talking about a "Mr Phelps" and going around witch burning has made the boards more addictive again as opposed to the boring stuff that had set in?

BTW - I'm sure I don't have to inform you that Erin go Bragh is not an Irishman but our old imposter "Carlyle/Amertica/etc". Real name John.

How do you know these things, Steve?

Steve/Bryan

Are you sure that there is no false posting going on? Some of Erin's earlier post's made sense, but I would agree that the tone has changed recently - especially the sudden economic arguments.......

Every time he changes names, he tries to change his tone of voice. It works for a while, but eventually he can't control himself and goes back to the same old thing.

Every time he changes names, he tries to change his tone of voice. It works for a while, but eventually he can't control himself and goes back to the same old thing.

I too am curious as to how you know his real name.

I know his first name "John" by going back thru old records on the USMA listserv.

I trawled through posts and noticed a similarity.

Add to that his "berserking" tendency after a period of 'normal' and then increasingly bizzare posts.

He'd eventually get onto stuff like the collapse of America, bizzare notions about the euro (including a 'fact' that the Brits have fixed their currency to it), then to oil, then to 'hegemony' and also the usual guff about claiming 12" records are metric, big ben being constructed in metric and certain sports being metric - we all know the stories.

I also noticed that he had picked up the habit of using "cox.net" as a supplier of his many email addresses. I believe he did this from noticing another poster using the email address provider. He then adopted the name 'kilopascal' and then 'euric' and then 'ametrica'. Each time he was banned from the USMA site he'd pop back again with a new 'cox.net' address (you have to have a valid email address to be able to post on the USMA listserv). Ironic that he's regularly banned from USMA but allowed to regurgitate nonsence over here!

Berenger - I'm not sure Erin etc etc was ever anyone but him - *HOWEVER* he did steal a pro-metric posters name on Metricsucks to which the pro-metric poster got fed up - swore at him a lot - and left.

You'll also not the mutual love affair between him and "eric" (who posts a metre on the inner boards but is now totally ignored).

Maybe I should have my own 'whodunnit' show on BBC1 but I believe my deductions are actually elementary.


(my dear watson)

Feel free to say "genious" and clap politely if you so wish :-D

BTW - I genuinely and honestly think there is something psycholigically wrong with him. I've been sort of involved with situations involving mania and delusion and - although I only have his text to read - I can sense that mental state through his delivery, style, self-belief, vast amounts of 'alter-egos', mimicary, etc.

Don't take this as a guarded insult to him or anything - I genuinely believe this to be the case and really think he should seek expert help.

We might generally take the mick - but none of us know the true extent of his "issues".

(P.S. Note the two different spellings of the apparently Gaelic post name)

Steve

Should I say that it means "Ireland forever" here or on the 6 Nations board? :-)

Sorry mate, but if Scotland can't win it, I know who my second favourite team are!

Doesn't mean I agree with anything else he says though!

"Sorry mate, but if Scotland can't win it, I know who my second favourite team are!"

Yeah, but you aint going to go far without Wilkinson.

LOL!!!! Nice jibe!

When they played the match between all 4 home nations back in the 70's (to celebrate 100 years of rugby(?)) it was an Irish/Scottish select versus who? Remind me!! :-)

Anyway, Ireland's only ever done the Slam once. Wales have lots of them. Go on Steve, support our Celtic Cousins!

There's a lot of 'Rugby Talk' here !

Is it because they use metres on the pitch?

No -it's because Berenger is a big follower of the England side and he's distraught to see them losing!

I suspect the "euric fool" has been ip blocked again - or gave the game away too quickly and thus is quietly planning to come back as another character in a while.

I shall be ready to predict his daftness, don't worry!

Hey, Scotland didn't lose this weekend! :-)

EXPLAIN!

Simple!

If Scotland don't play, they can't lose! :-)

Not so sure about Saturday coming though - facing the might of Italy......

"""Not so sure about Saturday coming though - facing the might of Italy......"""

Would that be the same Italy that is both metric and uses the mighty euro?

Berenger - I'm pretty sure that you'll be convinced that it *IS* old-loser nutbag after that magnificently scripted post above.


Know what I mean? ROTFL :-D

Ok back in the real world outside the nut-house:-
I'll be backing England on Sunday. I'm sure you'll know why ;-)

Can't see why Steve ;-)

Can only assume that you want the teams already on 4 points to lose or draw their remaining matches, in such a way they all end up with no more than 6 points each. Scotland's 100-0 victories over Italy, Wales & at Twickenham will then put them on top of the table on points differential.....















Well, it is mathematically possible!!!!



Anonymous
Euros are accepted in many Edinburgh shops & even some pubs, and we will welcome the Italian rugby fans. Murrayfield was designed and built in metric and the pitch and running track are marked in metric.

If Italy win, however, it will be by rugby skills - nothing to do with currency systems or units of measurement used

You should become a nurse Berenger!!!