Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=211.29.132.186; envelope-from=lendich@optusnet.com.au
Message-ID: <000801c711ed$536b49d0$fdafecdc@george>
From: "George Lendich" <lendich@optusnet.com.au>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-1605087@logan.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: metric system
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:28:49 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Well Steve- I got to tell you, I grew up with Imperial and now have to use 
metric OR Both.
There's nothing wrong with the Imperial system - I was always happy with 
Pounds Shillings and Pence as well - but you Yanks changed to metric money 
early on, so us Aussies had to change in 1966. Even the Poms have changed to 
metric money and metric measurements.

So what will be next after weights and measurements - TIME perhaps, buggered 
if I know how they will work that one out. Perhaps 100 sec to a minute and 
100 minutes to the hour etc, etc.

I know, if you really want to stick it to the rest of the world, change the 
TIME to metric system and of course degrees 100 degrees to a circle etc.and 
anything else you can think of - that should stuff things up good and 
proper.

Me I like things in 12's- it just seems more logical!?

Anonymous!

>I don't get it.  All measurement systems are arbitrary.  The  "English" 
>system certainly came from some odd roots.  But so did the  railroad track 
>gauge (it was the width of a horse drawn wagon  track.)  And guess what 
>else?  The Space Shuttle booster rockets were  designed around the same 
>gauge so it could be shipped to its final  destination.  The metric system 
>was designed around what they thought  was the circumference of the earth. 
>They got it wrong.  And, 1 cc is  not the same as 1 ml., though that was 
>the intent.  Now, all  measurements are based on a metal rod, or other 
>device, residing in a  refrigerator at a constant temperature in the 
>National Weights and  Measures office for the US and somewhere in France 
>for metric  measurements.
>
> OK, the SAE system may be a little convoluted, but once you learn it,  it 
> works just fine.  Oh, I forgot, we should change just because the 
> Europeans use it.  Should we also adopt soccer as our national  pastime 
> just because the "rest of the world" sees soccer as their  national 
> pastime?  I mean, almost no one adopts our version of  football.  Just 
> because "they" do it is not an a-priori reason do to so.
>
> Will we eventually migrate over to metric de-facto even though we  have 
> rejected a de-juris solution?  Maybe.   But in the interim, SAE  works 
> just fine, and in the absence of a compelling economic reason  to do so, 
> if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Steve
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
>
>
> On Nov 25, 2006, at 5:40 PM, Bulent Aliev wrote:
>
>>> I just think it is embarrassing that the US cant seem to adopt the 
>>> international system...
>
>
> --
> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/