NavList:

   

Reply

The British have been using the metric system ("French measure") for 
scientific purposes for a very long time. Possibly a century or more.

It was only in engineering (particularly automotive engineering) that Imperial 
measurements persisted, and probably only in that sphere of influence due to 
the very close connections to America and importing/exporting there.   I 
remember being taught SI units for science subjects from the beginning of 
secondary school in the early 1960s, and Imperial measure was in decline even 
then for engineering as 'foreign' continental cars and goods were being 
imported here in large numbers by the mid 1960s.

This illustrates the whole argument about measurement is: it depends on what 
people actually USE regularly for their measurement and the reasons behind 
that use.

The argument as to which is "better" has been going on for decades and is 
quite sterile as an argument as both systems have advantages and 
disadvantages and either can be used when familiarity with use is there.  
Having been taught both systems I find it quite easy to use my Imperial lathe 
but do all work in metric simply because I always used metric. One gets used 
to applying 40 'thou'(actually 39.37) for every 1mm if you have to use an 
Imperial divided machine. It is no big deal.

There are good reasons for using SI for scientific purposes;  which is why it 
has probably taken over as the international measurement system - as all work 
scientifically is international by nature, and a universal system is 
obviously necessary.

For practical measurement in every day life such as carpentry, or building, 
the Imperial system was probably superior for intuitive use, as it is based 
on the yard, foot, and inch which were 'natural' measurements closely related 
to human anatomy; and the duodecimal system based on twelve has more factors 
for division.  The practical units used are more convenient with smaller 
values too. I still find it mildly annoying to measure 'home' lengths such as 
say carpets as 12.650 Metres instead of simple feet and inches, but it 
doesn't matter either way if you use one system only as you get used to it.

It might be a surprise to some that one of the great engineers of all time who 
gave his name to a screw thread, - and promoted the universal use of fixed 
and standardised screw threads - Joseph Whitworth - also tried unsuccessfully 
to promote at the same time the general use of metric measurements in 
engineering.  he was successful in the promotino of standardisation for screw 
threads but not metrication !

I also find it very amusing that the French hate with a passion the use of 
Greenwich as the accepted International Prime Meridian, yet are responsible 
for and successfully promoted the SI units system which is the international 
accepted system for measurement.  The argument is the same for both - it 
doesn't actually matter very much one way or the other, except that is,  to 
national xenophobia and pride,  which is worthless in scientific terms and 
actual use of either system.  What counts is the international recognition of 
a standardised system that all can use.

Douglas Denny.
Chichester.  England. 

=========================

Original post:

 I think the English speaking part of the world could take an example
    from that regarding the SI units.


Getting back to the thrust of Maarten's observation, Australia and New Zealand 
went pretty-well entirely metric during the 1960s/1970s.  Over more recent 
years even the ever-recalcitrant Brits have largely achieved as much, despite 
enormous angst, moanings/groanings and the gnashing of teeth which I 
understand have far from subsided, although the advantages of using a 
European-wide common system, never mind about world-wide, has apparently 
proved an unstoppable force.  So significant parts of the "English speaking 
part of the world" have effectively taken Maarten's example to heart.

"According to the US CIA World Factbook in 2006, the International System of 
Units is the official system of measurement for all nations except for Burma, 
Liberia, and the United States.[1] (Some sources identify Burma and/or 
Liberia as metric, however.[2][3][4])"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_system

Which leaves that little place in North America as the major feet-dragging 
nation, or insular wilful ignorer of these advantages.  The irony is that in 
1790 Thomas Jefferson proposed a decimal-based measurement system for the 
USA, and a subsequent vote in the US congress to replace the still-current 
imperial (!) system by a metric system was lost by just one vote.

Jefferson's enthusiasm, apart from being a chappie of scientific bent, may not 
have been entirely unrelated to a close relationship between the 
revolutionary American newly ex-colony and revolutionary France.  Then in 
1866 Congress legalised the use of the metric system in the United States.

And that is about where the metrification process halted, although in 1957 the 
US Army and Marine Corps adopted the metric system for use with their 
weapons, and in 1988 Congress passed the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness 
Act, calling for all federal government agencies to use the metric system by 
the end of 1992.  Has this Act achieved much change in the USA, I wonder?

A little more time may be required.  There is no point in rushing into these things ...

Actually, what I really think is that the USA is instinctively, and despite 
all current evidence to the contrary, a deeply insular nation which would 
really prefer to withdraw from the world into itself.  This has always been 
the broad brush of US foreign policy, even throughout much of the 20th 
century, as is witnessed by the US reluctance to become involved in either 
great world-wide conflict of that century.  If only it had (even more) fossil 
oil.  Sigh ...


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
NavList message boards: www.navlist.net
Or post by email to: NavList@navlist.net
To , email NavList+@navlist.net
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply