> Those aren't really what the units are based on.
>The only units I'm familiar with the origins of
>offhand are distance units - inch, foot, mile.
>The inch is the width of three barleycorns placed
>end to end - and, yes, the barleycorn *is*
>uniform in size. Any three barleycorns will give
>you more or less and inch. The foot is thirty-six
>barleycorns. The mile, on the other hand, was
>arrived at more arbitrarily. The mile is the
>Roman mile (five thousand feet) plus the British
>furlong (280 feet).

Wow, that sounds about as convenient for everyday folks as "one ten-millionth the distance from the North Pole to the Equator". ;-)

About the only thing I wish the metric system included is a convenient unit of measurement in between the centimeter and the meter. A centimeter is too small and a meter is too big for most "everyday" measurements--imagine only having the inch and the yard to make measurements in. I don't know if the foot seems "convenient" because I"m used to it, or if it really is more convenient. But I still wish there was one. I remember being tought something about a 'decimeter' or something like that, which was, I think, ten centimeters. That's a little better, but the fact that nobody seems to use it doesn't help.

>
> > I was at the DMV last week getting my Colorado
>>license, and this hispanic girl next to me was
>>having problems figuring out how tall she was.
>>She knew exactly how many meters/centimeters
>>tall she was, but had no idea how that equated
>>to feet/inches (I guessed in my head that she
>>was 5'2", and when she and the teller finally
>>got it figured out, she was 5'3" -- familiarity
>>strikes again ;-) Same thing with her weight.
>>She knew what it was in kilograms, but had no
>>clue how that equated to pounds.
>
> Erm... your argument seems to be about the same
>as the argument for putting road signs up in
>Spanish and English - namely, that foreign
>immigrants can't manage under our system. Well,
>that's their problem, really. They have two
>choices - learn the system being used in this
>country (be it the English language or the
>imperial measurement system) or don't exepct to
>be able to get along in this country. It sounds
>harsh, but it makes zero sense to do anything
>else.

That wasn't really my point. I agree with what you say, in principle. My point was basically to refute the implied point that eric brought up, which was "even in those metric countries nobody actually *thinks* in metric". This woman obviously did, and was obviously pretty comfortable thinking in metric units. So there's no mystical reason why most of us feel 'comfortable' with Imperial units--it's just what you know.

>
> > I guess I sort of agree with both sides of the
>>argument. It's silly to say that it's "better"
>>to measure your weight in kilos rather than
>>pounds.
>
> Except that kilos aren't a measure of weight.
>;-}

Yeah yeah yeah. Go mass something in slugs.

>
> > And this whole "taking away my Heritage and my
>>Culture" argument is so bogus. Cultures change.
>>It's *right* that they change. It's *good* that
>>they change. It's *neccesary* that they change.
>
> You're right, cultures do change. But it's an
>evolutionary process that happens *slowly.* If
>the government steps in and demands that the
>culture change *immediately,* more often than
>not, that leads to revolution. Not that I'm
>saying it's necessarily right or wrong - just
>that people don't like having cultural changes
>dictated to them and will probably respond
>unpleasantly to any such attempt. This has to be
>thought about in terms of public relations - the
>government can't force the people to change their
>culture, simply because culture is a stronger
>force than government, and will likely prevail.

But the government is our friend....

-- Dave