From: Bill Graham on

"Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message
news:0aWdndpkrMXpBGDXnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>
> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:Y-qdnVjXHOA4V2HXnZ2dnUVZ_hadnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>
>
>>>
>> What makes me wonder is why we don't have 13 months of exactly 4 weeks
>> each?
>
> Actually, the twelve-month calendar Julius Caesar gave us was a huge
> improvement on the ten-month Roman calendar on which it was based, and
> served pretty well for many centuries. I think it was Pope Gregory who
> made the last adjustments including the leap year arrangement.
>
>> Any bridge player can tell you that 13 times 4 is 52. This would be a
>> much better system than the stupid 12 months in a year system we have
>> now. We would still need a leap year day once every 4 years, but
>> otherwise, all months would be the same.
>
> A leap year every 4 years wouldn't quite do it, though. Thirteen four-week
> months only gives you 364 days, which is about 1.24 days short of an
> actual year.
>
Well, there are 4 X 13 weeks (52) in a year right now, so there wouldn't be
any difference between the correction we have right now and the one we would
have with a 13 month year. We would still need a leap year day (February
29th) once every four years just as we have now. The only difference is the
number of days per month wouldn't jump up and down from month to month as it
does now......We wouldn't have to memorize the, "30 days hath September,
April, June, and November....." poem that every schoolchild does now. All
months would have exactly 28 days 3 years out of every 4. So, if the first
of the month is on a Saturday this month, then you would know that the first
of every month will also be on a Saturday for the rest of the year, and this
would go on until the next leap year's February......This would be very
convenient when trying to plan your future appointments.

From: Bill Graham on

"Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message
news:Ba-dnXxPaOA3AmDXnZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>
> "Chris H" <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote in message
> news:Y$7wpfVEOY$KFAb8(a)phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <W8-dnQ16jqYTl2fXnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Neil
>> Harrington <secret(a)illumnati.net> writes
>>>> Even though the Yanks left the Empire they still won't join the rest of
>>>> the world.
>>>
>>>And go metric, you mean? There'd be no point to it.
>>
>> You may have no choice... In many places I see Global standards that are
>> used the whole world over except in the USA. Eventually the US is going
>> to have to fit in with the rest of the world.
>
> The two systems co-exist perfectly well in virtually all everyday
> applications. If you're expecting to see American mileage signs on the
> highways change to kilometers, neither you nor your great-grandchildren
> will see that happen in your entire lifetimes. And we'll still be buying
> our milk in quarts and our meat by the pound. There is simply no reason to
> change.
>
> The metric system seems to have started because Europeans squabbled over
> measurements, as Europeans always do over one thing or another. The
> English mile was different from the Italian mile, and neither would accept
> the standard of the other. English barrels came in different sizes for
> different liquids, confusing units of measure based on the barrel. And so
> on. Such problems neither had then nor have now nothing to do with us
> here.
>
It's just like the drive on the left/right side of the road
controversy.....What could be more stupid than that? All the auto
manufacturers in the world have to make their cars mirror-imaged for export
to England and Australia, and they even have to change lanes in the middle
of the tunnel under the English channel......Ridiculous! Especially when it
takes anyone with half a brain about 10 minutes to learn to drive on the
other side of the road! And these are countries who aren't even at war with
one another.....Go figure.....

From: Bill Graham on

"J�rgen Exner" <jurgenex(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1r9rf5plsbhn8i37chvbmpqbegv5rb7tol(a)4ax.com...
> "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote:
>>"R. Mark Clayton" <nospamclayton(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message
>>> http://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter%23The_metric.2Fimperial_mix-up&usg=AFQjCNHBbstCpB4S2gxZe2bJ9jJJGEClxw&ei=WH39SrDYMoWNjAeqmKWUCw&sa=X&oi=section_link&resnum=2&ct=legacy&ved=0CAwQygQ
>>>
>>> "The metric/imperial mix-up
>>> The metric/imperial mix-up that destroyed the craft
>>
>>I understand, and I repeat the question: What does that have to do with
>>English vs. metric? (In terms of one being preferable to the other.)
>>
>>The problem was that they mixed up two different measurement systems, not
>>that one of them was better than the other. So you can say that it was
>>just
>>as much the fault of using the metric system as of anything else.
>
> So, are you suggesting that in order to avoid future incidents like this
> the world should standardizes on the measurement system that is used by
> a small minority?
>
> Why doesn't that surprise me?
>
> jue

No. The world should standardize on JUST ONE SYSTEM. It doesn't really
matter which one, although anyone with half a brain would realize that the
metric system is the best one. It would be as easy as teaching your grammar
school students some other system for the first 4 or 5 years of their
education.....How hard is that?

From: Bill Graham on

"J�rgen Exner" <jurgenex(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:22arf59j6iijjgfi585t3ps0vv5q2ceiij(a)4ax.com...

> Naa, no chance. They are way to convinced about their own unfailable
> superiority and not using ISO is a matter of national security and
> pride. Anyting _inter_national is by definition suspicious, evil, and to
> be fought at all cost because it will destroy the American Way of Life.
> Miles and pounds and gallons are a matter of national identity and no
> rational argument can fight irrational superstition.

You haven't had to deal with very many US housewives, have you, jue? As an
engineer, I have been dealing with them all of my life, and I can tell you
that it hasn't been nearly as easy as you seem to assume.....:^)

From: J�rgen Exner on
"Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>No. The world should standardize on JUST ONE SYSTEM. It doesn't really
>matter which one, although anyone with half a brain would realize that the
>metric system is the best one. It would be as easy as teaching your grammar
>school students some other system for the first 4 or 5 years of their
>education.....How hard is that?

In that country: impossible. People are so afraid, that on sightseeing
signs they would even scratch off the metric value whenever it is
mentioned in addition to miles or feet.

jue