What is a Milimeter?

Must we do as Brussels dictates?

The pro-metric lobby have real problems with the concept of democracy - whatever arguments they put forward in favor of their bizarre system, they will not ever allow the population to have a choice - this metrication nonsense is being forced upon us without the consent of the population. If the politicians want us to go metric, let's have a referendum - or at the very least a debate in Parliament. Does anyone remember a political party putting anything in their manifesto about destroying this part of our culture and heritage?

Funny how so many politicians keep banging on about 'choice', but don't actually let us have one...

The British Weights and Measures Association is the main organization concerned with saving this part of our heritage - do support it.

Illogical and confusing units
Why is it that so many people get confused about 'metric' units? Is it because people in England haven't had sufficient exposure to them, or is it because they (the 'metric' units) are a hopeless muddle of similarly named and illogically sized units? One thing that the 'pro-metric' folk keep banging on about is that 'metric' has been taught in school since the mid-1960's, so Imperial isn't understood by anyone anyway. They say that anyone can understand 'metric' if they try. Spot the flaw in their argument? With no education in Imperial, most people want to use Imperial, whilst with all their school (and further) education being in 'metric', people still are uncomfortable with 'metric'. The reason is obvious - Imperial (and US customary) measurements are a codified way of measuring in the sort of scales that humans can easily grasp, but 'metric' measurements are an artificial system, designed from the outset to destroy culture, and create an elite. If you want to measure something unimaginably small (like an atom) or unbelievably big (like a galaxy) then by all means use a 'metric' measurement. But you want to measure an area of land? You could be 'metric' and measure in 'ares', or SI and measure in square metres. In practice, the 'metric' types use the 'hectare', which is neither one thing or the other. I'll stick to using acres, which have been with us for over 1300 years.

Are 'metric' units 'scientific' ?
The units that the scientific community use are SI, not the vague muddle of 'metric' measures that some people try to use. SI units are nice and simple: the metre, the kilogramme (how can a fundamental unit be a kilo-anything?), and the second, to start with (not that there is anything remotely 'metric' about the second - it's been around a long time!). Don't confuse this with the so-called MKS system! SI units also include the newton (anyone who weighs themselves in kg is living in the past!), the joule (slimmers - abandon your calories, which are really kilocalories anyway!), and the radian. SI will have you measure all lengths in metres, whether it's the distance between two atoms, or the distance between two stars. Express the answers in standard form, and you get the idea.

Incidentally, I've never understood why the 'metric' brigade think that speed should be measured in kph, or 'metres per 3 point 6 seconds'. We'll know that they've got the hang of their own system when they measure speeds in ms-1

Now here I must declare an interest - I'm a scientist by training. I'm OK with SI units - I'm very comfortable with temperatures in kelvin (no, not degrees Kelvin), and angles in radians, and all times measured in seconds, rather than useful units like months etc. 'metric' is fine for measuring the unimaginable (like carbon-hydrogen bond lengths, although I've never understood why I'm no longer allowed to use Angstroms for that). But let's face it - they aren't suitable for everyday use. Linking 'metric' with 'science' is just another facet of the 'elite' aspect of enforced metrication (most of the 'elite' are of course politicians, who in general are failed lawyers).

Why Imperial is superior
If you were starting from scratch, you would design a system of weights and measures that was useful, rather than one that was complicated for its own sake. You might decide to measure things by comparing them to things you see around you. Weights, for example, could be expressed in pebbles for small weights (say for baking ingredients), bricks for somewhat larger weights (buying groceries), the weight of a man for weighing coal etc., and the weight of a car for bigger things. You would not worry about how much an atom or a galaxy weighs. This is the approach taken by the Imperial/Customary systems - ounces for flour, pounds for bananas, stones for potatoes, tons and hundredweights for cars. And this process is constantly being followed by the media, as it invents new measurements that people can understand - lengths in London-buses, heights in Nelson's-columns, areas in football-pitches etc. How much of this is because Brussels stops the media (especially the Quisling BBC) from using the well-understood Imperial measures I can't say.

The only reason 12 is so useful is because once you had your "base 12", you built everything around it, so DUH it's going to be easier, if you built it around base 78.33 you'd have the same brilliant argument.

Quincy wrote:

The only reason 12 is so useful is because once you had your "base 12", you built everything around it, so DUH it's going to be easier, if you built it around base 78.33 you'd have the same brilliant argument.

Nope!

Look at 12: you can get 2, 4, 6, by simple even division! Even better the numbers 2, 4, 6 are all dividable by 2 evenly with no lame-ass fractions!

Look at 10: all you can get is 5 and after that zilch!

Look at your silly"78.33" you can't get bupkis!

Obviously you are confused and brainwashed and not in the trades!

I totally disagree with using base 12 as a starting point for a new system.

Here is why.
You state that it is often easy to divide by 2, 3 or even 4. As in street-racing, where 1/4 of a mile is raced.
If we change the system to base 12... a mile will suddenly yield a different number of base-12 meter/yard like equivalents. Suddenly, we will need to go to 0.27 times a base-12 km/mile.
(This numbers are not correct, as you state that a mile is already 'compatible' with base-12.)

Now, the problem is, that for every situation where you come-up with a nice clean solution, anybody could come up with 2 situations where it does not give any benefit. (If we took more time than to simply put our disagreements on paper/on-line, not taking the time to actually convert base-12 into anything useful. Which would require me to use pen/paper/calculator, as base-12 is NOT easy to calculate with.)

Also, dividing and multiplying by 12 are not easy (*3 *2 *2... is quite ok, /2 /2 /3 is NOT ok). Whereas some people (me amongst them) are totally comfortable with multiplying by 2, everybody with even the most basic knowledge of calculation is comfortable with multiplying/dividing by 10 (I wouldn't even call it mathematics, as the word is already more complex).

In short, there is no single advantage to base-12 that is not negated by the fact that there are more disadvantages.
By using the (also standardized) notations on milli, micro, centi, kilo, mega, etc, all of those 'extreme units' can be used for anything. Making it useful and comparable to many other fiels or applications.
Example: Comparing inches to feet to yards to miles. Comparing centimeters to decimeters to meters to kilometers. See the simplicity.

In terms of multiplying and dividing - metrics are simpler for sure- you just either add or delete zeros.

Chumley

As an American engineer, who cares as long as it's consistent and apparent. Granted inconsistencies between the two measurement systems can lead to expensive consequences.. BTW some of the people who advocated the metric system were Franklin, Adams and Jefferson.. I realize that they aren't honored among Canadians---but they were revolutionary.

Rap

Chumly -You are obviously biaised at this issue.

Consider that you have lived all your life with this Imperial system.

Now think that you are a right-handed person.

How hard is it to learn how to write with your left hand?

But what if you are an ambidextrous person?

I'm a pretty good ambidextrous person. I use the mouse with my left hand and type with both hands.

I use both Imperial and metric systems on a daily basis.

Chumly - I agree with you on the tape measure and linear measurement in general - as I said- it's easier to read the standard units and measure with (in my opinion-and that's from my own experience and trying to teach children to do both- even I have trouble counting the millimeters).

But in terms of any other sort of multiplying or dividing with metrics versus imperial - think about it- meters to kilometers divide by 1000-move your decimal three spaces to the left- whereas feet to miles you have to divide by 5,280. Kilograms to grams, multiply by 1000- move your decimal three spaces to the right where as pounds to ounces, multiply by l6. You see what I'm saying?

I think Francis is right, it's fairly easy to just learn to convert and adjust. And there are advantages to both. I think it depends on what you're used to or where you are and what you're doing.

But just as you'll always use an imperial tape measurerer to construct things, I will always cook and bake using imperial measurements - no matter where I am - it IS easier - you can cut out one whole time consuming step for every measurement.

But for the Canadian government to criminalize the use of Imperial measurments.........then in 2005 to start teaching it in schools again because kids are getting all messed up, what kind of freak-show is that?