Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[paus]

In article <3gbs98$47f@network.ucsd.edu> mbk@inls1.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel) writes:
> David Weller (dweller@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM) wrote:

> All science (which demands international collaboration),
> and most higher-tech engineering is metric.

That's complete nonsense! As you can see in my signature at the bottom
I am in the aerospace business. In almost all american scientific
publications you will find all sorts of stupid units. Mixtures of
nautical miles, feet, inches ... sometimes to be used in a single
formula.

Sorry but I could not resist because I have to fight with these units
almost every day.

--
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|Dipl.-Ing. Michael Paus   (Member: Team Ada)                          |
|University of Stuttgart, Inst. of Flight Mechanics and Flight Control |
|Forststrasse 86, 70176 Stuttgart, Germany                             |
|Phone: (+49) 711-121-1434  FAX: (+49) 711-634856                      |
|Email: Michael.Paus@ifr.luftfahrt.uni-stuttgart.de (NeXT-Mail welcome)|

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[David Weller]

In article <3gdhj5$1gbk@info4.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>,
 <paus@ifr.luftfahrt.uni-stuttgart.de> wrote:
>In article <3gbs98$47f@network.ucsd.edu> mbk@inls1.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel) writes:
>> David Weller (dweller@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM) wrote:
>> All science (which demands international collaboration),
>> and most higher-tech engineering is metric.
>
>That's complete nonsense! As you can see in my signature at the bottom
>I am in the aerospace business. In almost all american scientific
>publications you will find all sorts of stupid units. Mixtures of
>nautical miles, feet, inches ... sometimes to be used in a single
>formula.
>
I can certainly second Michael's comments, also being in the
aerospace biz.  In fact, in the NASA community, I'd say we have an
AWFUL mishmash of different units.

Finally, I'd also like to point out that Michaael misattributed the
quoted sentence to me -- I was not responsible for it (especially
considering I hold the near-opposite opinion! :-)


>Sorry but I could not resist because I have to fight with these units
>almost every day.
>
Ditto!


-- 
      Frustrated with C, C++, Pascal, Fortran?  Ada95 _might_ be for you!
	  For all sorts of interesting Ada95 tidbits, run the command:
"finger dweller@starbase.neosoft.com | more" (or e-mail with "finger" as subj.)
	

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[paus]

In article <3gh4v3$eq2@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> dweller@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (David Weller)  
writes:
> 
> Finally, I'd also like to point out that Michaael misattributed the
> quoted sentence to me -- I was not responsible for it (especially
> considering I hold the near-opposite opinion! :-)
> 
Sorry, I beg your pardon. I must have deleted the wrong line in my
news reader.

Michael

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Robert Dewar]

Matt, if you find it such a fight to deal with non-metric units, maybe it's
just that they don't teach how in schools in Germany :-)

My favorite units story comes from my uncle who used to work for the
marine warfare department of Plessey's. THey were showing an admiral
around a mockup of a new submarine control center.

There was a large meter, calibrated in knots per hour. The admiral noticed
it, and reacted amused "I am surprised that Plessey's would make a mistake
like that, knots is a unit of speed already"

The answer: "but it's an acceleration meter" :-)

And Mats, if metric units are so wonderful, how come there are still
60 minutes in an hour, even in Germany? I guess it's pretty hard to
really bury those Babalonians!

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[celier]

Robert Dewar wrote:
>And Mats, if metric units are so wonderful, how come there are still
>60 minutes in an hour, even in Germany? I guess it's pretty hard to
>really bury those Babalonians!

Actually Robert, the sexagesimal stuff (60 minutes in an hour, 6 x 60
degrees
in one revolution, 60" in one degree) comes from the Sumerians. The
Babylonians inherited it from them, but they invented the digit zero.

The grade (100 grade in one right angle instead of 90 degrees) was an
attempt to be more "decimal" in angles but it failed miserably. It had
the advantage that one centigrade of latitude was exactly oe kilometre
(well, on the average).

Trying to get rid of the values of the degree, the hour or the minute
is as difficult as to get rid of the base 10, which in fact is not a
"rational" base.

The "rational" base should be 11 or 12: 11 if you want to minimize the
divisors of the base, 12 if you want to maximize them. 8 is too small
and 16 is too high. Of course, we will never change the number base 10.

Peter Hermann wrote:
> Serious question: how to convert miles <=> feet <=> inches ?

One inch = 25.4 mm (exactly)
One foot = 0.3048 m = 12 inches (exactly)
One yard = 0.9144 m = 3 feet (exactly)
One mile = 1609.344 m = 1760 yards (exactly)
One Nautical Mile = 1852 m (exactly) = 2025.3718285 yards

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Michel Gauthier]

In article <3gk7tl$d7h@infomatch.com>, celier@infomatch.com (celier) wrote:

> [...]
> 
> The "rational" base should be 11 or 12: 11 if you want to minimize the
> divisors of the base, 12 if you want to maximize them. 8 is too small
> and 16 is too high. Of course, we will never change the number base 10.

So that year 2000 becomes something else that has no mystical contents.
Please broadcast widely this idea. I am fed up with year 2000 and 21st
century.

-- 
Michel Gauthier - Laboratoire d'informatique - 123 avenue Albert Thomas
F-87060 Limoges - fax +33()55457315
----- Are the messages that objects exchange also objects ? -----

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Norman H. Cohen]

In article <3gk7tl$d7h@infomatch.com>, celier@infomatch.com (celier) writes: 

|> The grade (100 grade in one right angle instead of 90 degrees) was an
|> attempt to be more "decimal" in angles but it failed miserably. It had
|> the advantage that one centigrade of latitude was exactly oe kilometre
|> (well, on the average).
|>
|> Trying to get rid of the values of the degree, the hour or the minute
|> is as difficult as to get rid of the base 10, which in fact is not a
|> "rational" base.

Shortly after the French Revolution, France did try to decimalize time: 
20 "decimal hours" in a day (ten a.m. hours and ten p.m. hours, each
equal to 1.2 conventional hours), 100 "decimal minutes" (each equal to
0.72 conventional minutes, or 43.2 seconds) in a decimal hour, 100 parts
(each equal to 0.432 seconds) in a decimal minute.  There were even
clocks built for this system.

|> The "rational" base should be 11 or 12: 11 if you want to minimize the
|> divisors of the base, 12 if you want to maximize them. 8 is too small
|> and 16 is too high. Of course, we will never change the number base 10.

The English system of liquid measures is based on powers of two:  Eight
ounces in a cup, two cups in a pint, two pints in a quart, four quarts in
a gallon.

(I guess this was so that the Brewer Royal could implement conversion
between units as left and right shifts. :-) )

--
Norman H. Cohen    ncohen@watson.ibm.com

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Matt Kennel]

Norman H. Cohen (ncohen@watson.ibm.com) wrote:

: The English system of liquid measures is based on powers of two:  Eight
: ounces in a cup, two cups in a pint, two pints in a quart, four quarts in
: a gallon.

: (I guess this was so that the Brewer Royal could implement conversion
: between units as left and right shifts. :-) )

Actually this sounds pretty smart.  It means you could measure out an
arbitrary amount of liquid for mixing with a minimum number of full
measuring cups in the same way that a binary search is smart.

: --
: Norman H. Cohen    ncohen@watson.ibm.com

--
-Matt Kennel  		mbk@inls1.ucsd.edu
-Institute for Nonlinear Science, University of California, San Diego
-*** AD: Archive for nonlinear dynamics papers & programs: FTP to
-***     lyapunov.ucsd.edu, username "anonymous".

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[R_Tim_Coslet]

>And Mats, if metric units are so wonderful, how come there are still
>60 minutes in an hour, even in Germany? I guess it's pretty hard to
>really bury those Babalonians!

Maybe we should be using Kilo-seconds... lets see, 86.4 Ks per day...

Or would milli-days be an easier unit :-)

                                        R. Tim Coslet

Usenet: R_Tim_Coslet@cup.portal.com
        technology, n.  domesticated natural phenomena

Decimal time - a correct proposal (Was Ada Doc .... )

[David Moore]

R_Tim_Coslet@cup.portal.com writes:

>>And Mats, if metric units are so wonderful, how come there are still
>>60 minutes in an hour, even in Germany? I guess it's pretty hard to
>>really bury those Babalonians!

>Maybe we should be using Kilo-seconds... lets see, 86.4 Ks per day...

>Or would milli-days be an easier unit :-)

>                                        R. Tim Coslet

Lets get real here. A rational system of measurement of time would be
planet independent.

1 New Sec = 0.126 old sec (approx)
1 New Day = 1 Megasecond  =  1.46 old days (approx)
1 New Year= 1 Gigasecond. =  4 old years (ie 1461 old days)

Look at the advantages of this new system:

i) No need for time zones. Once the anachronism of relating time to
the position of the sun is eliminated, there is no need for different
times in different places. Modern watches are much better time-keepers
than the solar position in any case, so this relationship is obsolete.

No more missing someone on the East coast because they have left already
or being woken up in the middle of the night because they are at work
and their compiler won't run.

No more jet lag. (although turbines will now need around 48 sec to spool up)

ii) No need for leap years.  

iii) We can all feel a lot younger. 40 will be really really old.
     Drinking, driving and smoking will vanish almost over-(new)-night.

Given the huge number of old programs that cannot handle the century
roll-over, we should start working to get this introduced now - we can
then relax as we will have another 75 or so new years (300 old years)
before we have to fix our software.

Many of the un-enlightened, whose intellect has never been sharpened
by writing software, although they may be able to get sentences to 
agree in number, will undoubtably oppose this fine new initiative,
despite its clearcut advantages over the archaic system currently
in use, so the sooner we start lobbying the better. 

Politicians, I am sure, will immediately grasp the advantages of 
this new system, especially at a time when term limits have become 
so popular.

Re: Decimal time - a correct proposal (Was Ada Doc .... )

[Peter Hermann]

David Moore (davidm@rational.com) wrote:

: Lets get real here. A rational system of measurement of time would be
: planet independent.

: 1 New Sec = 0.126 old sec (approx)
[snip]
... all numbers be based on the octal system   :-|
--
Peter Hermann  Tel:+49-711-685-3611 Fax:3758 ph@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de
Pfaffenwaldring 27, 70569 Stuttgart Uni Computeranwendungen
Team Ada: "C'mon people let the world begin" (Paul McCartney)

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Peter Hermann]

paus@ifr.luftfahrt.uni-stuttgart.de wrote:
: nautical miles, feet, inches ... sometimes to be used in a single
: formula.

Serious question: how to convert miles <=> feet <=> inches ?

--
Peter Hermann  Tel:+49-711-685-3611 Fax:3758 ph@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de
Pfaffenwaldring 27, 70569 Stuttgart Uni Computeranwendungen
Team Ada: "C'mon people let the world begin" (Paul McCartney)

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Michael Feldman]

In article <3gj91d$10g2@info4.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>,
Peter Hermann <ucaa2385@iris2.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> wrote:

>Serious question: how to convert miles <=> feet <=> inches ?

Serious answer: 1 foot = 12 inches. 1 mile = 5280 feet.
(I forget how many feet in a nautical mile.)

Mike Feldman

PS - in undergraduate engineering school, we used to kid around, both
students and professors, by expressing velocities in furlongs/fortnight.

Those are _really_ English units. Robert, do the English ever still
(informally) express their body weight in stones?

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Peter Hermann]

Michael Feldman (mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu) wrote:
: Those are _really_ English units. Robert, do the English ever still
: (informally) express their body weight in stones?
               ... and their brain weight in straw   :-)
thank you, too, Mike.

ps.: Nichts fuer ungut!  (<= another indication of the
                             internationality of comp.lang.ada  ;-)

--
Peter Hermann  Tel:+49-711-685-3611 Fax:3758 ph@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de
Pfaffenwaldring 27, 70569 Stuttgart Uni Computeranwendungen
a proud member of the international
Team Ada: "C'mon people let the world begin" (Paul McCartney)

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Robert Firth]

In article <3gmv5r$mba@felix.seas.gwu.edu> mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) writes:

>Those are _really_ English units. Robert, do the English ever still
>(informally) express their body weight in stones?

Yes, we do - though in my case perhaps with a certain
amount of embarassment that the number is about 2 bigger
than I'd like.

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[paus]

In article <3gmv5r$mba@felix.seas.gwu.edu> mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman)  
writes:
> In article <3gj91d$10g2@info4.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>,
> Peter Hermann <ucaa2385@iris2.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> wrote:
> 
> >Serious question: how to convert miles <=> feet <=> inches ?
> 
> Serious answer: 1 foot = 12 inches. 1 mile = 5280 feet.
> (I forget how many feet in a nautical mile.)

Maybe I can help with this: 1 nm = 6076.1 ft. (Sorry, no more decimal
places available :-)

--
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|Dipl.-Ing. Michael Paus   (Member: Team Ada)                          |
|University of Stuttgart, Inst. of Flight Mechanics and Flight Control |
|Forststrasse 86, 70176 Stuttgart, Germany                             |
|Phone: (+49) 711-121-1434  FAX: (+49) 711-634856                      |
|Email: Michael.Paus@ifr.luftfahrt.uni-stuttgart.de (NeXT-Mail welcome)|

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Richard A. O'Keefe]

mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) writes:
>Those are _really_ English units. Robert, do the English ever still
>(informally) express their body weight in stones?

Can't speak for the British, but I was in hospital here in Melbourne last
month and the scales provided for the use of patients were calibrated
both in kilos and in stones.  The stone is actually a very good unit of
measurement for human beings; an adult woman is typically about 10 stone,
so it's easy to comprehend how big a stone is and not too hard to make a
good estimate of a weight to the nearest stone.

-- 
"The complex-type shall be a simple-type."  ISO 10206:1991 (Extended Pascal)
Richard A. O'Keefe; http://www.cs.rmit.edu.au/~ok; RMIT Comp.Sci.

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[CONDIC]

From: Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93
Subject: Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99
Original_To:  PROFS%"SMTP@PWAGPDB"
Original_cc:  CONDIC



Keith Thompson <kst@ALSYS.COM> writes:
>
>For anyone who wants to verify my results:
>    1 mile = 1609.344 meters
>    1 furlong = 1/8 mile
>    1 day = 86400 seconds
>    1 fortnight = 14 days
>
Your results may be correct, but may not be accurate. Are you
sure that 1 day = 86400 seconds? Isn't there some fractional part
which is why the cesium clocks have to have a leap-second every 3
months or so? (Could be wrong - someone with more science
background can correct me on this.)

And besides - the Earth's rotation around the Sun is continually
slowing down, so the definition of a year (and hence, a day,
etc.) is continually changing.

>
>Relevance to this newsgroup: the machine on which I ran "bc -l" also
>has several Ada compilers installed on it.
>
If you ever want to get a bunch of computer geeks started on an
irrelavency, throw out the speed-of-light v furlongs-per-fortnight
bit. There's some sort of irresistable pull for those in the
computing business. ;-)
>
>There must be some significance to the fact that there are 42 digits in
>the repeating sequence.
>
The meaning of life, the universe and everything. But what was
the question? :-)

Pax,
Marin

Marin David Condic, Senior Computer Engineer    ATT:        407.796.8997
M/S 731-93                                      Technet:    796.8997
Pratt & Whitney, GESP                           Internet:   CONDICMA@PWFL.COM
P.O. Box 109600                                 Internet:   MDCONDIC@AOL.COM
West Palm Beach, FL 33410-9600
===============================================================================
    "I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked
    with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is
    a fad that won't last out the year."

        --  The editor in charge of business books for Prentice
            Hall, 1957.
===============================================================================

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Robert I. Eachus]

In article <INFO-ADA%95020710274779@VM1.NODAK.EDU> CONDIC@PSAVAX.PWFL.COM writes:

  > And besides - the Earth's rotation around the Sun is continually
  > slowing down, so the definition of a year (and hence, a day,
  > etc.) is continually changing.

    No, the definition of a second has been decoupled from the earth
for some time now.  "Leap seconds" and the converse are scheduled from
time to time to keep UTC (Coordinated Universal Time) syncronized with
the rotation of the earth.  The definition of the second, and atomic
time, don't change.

--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[CONDIC]

From: Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93
Subject: Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99
Original_To:  PROFS%"SMTP@PWAGPDB"
Original_cc:  CONDIC



Michael Feldman <mfeldman@SEAS.GWU.EDU> Writes:
>
>PS - in undergraduate engineering school, we used to kid around, both
>students and professors, by expressing velocities in furlongs/fortnight.
>
I believe there was a Murphy's Law which clearly stated: "All
measurements will invariably be expressed in the least usable
units. i.e. Velocity will be expressed in Furlongs/Fortnight."

Anectdotal evidence tends to indicate that this law holds up
well.

BTW: Wasn't there a discussion here a while back in which the
participants were attempting to correctly express the speed of
light in terms of Furlongs/Fortnight? Or was that somewhere else?
(Entering the springtime of my senility again!)

Anyway: 186,000 miles/second - It's not just a good idea. It's
the law!

Pax,
Marin

Marin David Condic, Senior Computer Engineer    ATT:        407.796.8997
M/S 731-93                                      Technet:    796.8997
Pratt & Whitney, GESP                           Internet:   CONDICMA@PWFL.COM
P.O. Box 109600                                 Internet:   MDCONDIC@AOL.COM
West Palm Beach, FL 33410-9600
===============================================================================
    "I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked
    with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is
    a fad that won't last out the year."

        --  The editor in charge of business books for Prentice
            Hall, 1957.
===============================================================================

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Jim Rogers]

According to the "units" program on my workstation 

186000 miles / second is

1.799885e+12 Furlongs / Fortnight.

Notice that "units" has absolutely no concept of significant figures
(especially at that speed).

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Jim Rogers                    | Dead Reckoning:                            |
| Hewlett-Packard Company       | Traditional form of rough-estimate         |
| Colorado Springs Division     | navigation used for hundreds of years by   |
|                               | sailors, almost all of whom are dead.      |
| jimr@col.hp.com               |                                            |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Robert Dewar]

THat is a truly REMARKABLE result (that the speed of light expressed
in furlongs per fortnight is an exact rational number).

This surely means that God measures in such units :-)

Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Garlington KE]

ajpo.sei.cmu.edu has a new directory:

   /public/ada9x/mrtcomments/rm9x/v5.99

that appear to have updates of the Ada95 ARM and AARM. Does anyone know
if the Rationale is also expected to be added to this directory, or if
another version (6.0?) of the ARM/AARM is expected soon? I thought a new
Rationale was going to be produced,but I haven't seen it...


--------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Garlington                  GarlingtonKE@lfwc.lockheed.com
F-22 Computer Resources         Lockheed Fort Worth Co.

If LFWC or the F-22 program has any opinions, they aren't telling me.

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Keith Thompson]

In <3fmvuk$5mb@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com> l107353@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com (Garlington KE) writes:
> ajpo.sei.cmu.edu has a new directory:
> 
>    /public/ada9x/mrtcomments/rm9x/v5.99
> 
> that appear to have updates of the Ada95 ARM and AARM.

See /public/ada9x/mrtcomments/rm9x/v6.0 and v6.0.compressed.  It includes
ASCII and PostScript versions of the RM, AARM, Rationale, and chg83
(the latter documents the changes from Ada83 to Ada95).

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Tucker Taft]

In article <3fmvuk$5mb@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com>,
Garlington KE <l107353@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com> wrote:

>ajpo.sei.cmu.edu has a new directory:
>
>   /public/ada9x/mrtcomments/rm9x/v5.99
>
>that appear to have updates of the Ada95 ARM and AARM. Does anyone know
>if the Rationale is also expected to be added to this directory, or if
>another version (6.0?) of the ARM/AARM is expected soon? I thought a new
>Rationale was going to be produced,but I haven't seen it...

The "final" reference manual and rationale are in:
   /public/ada9x/rm9x/v6.0

>Ken Garlington                  GarlingtonKE@lfwc.lockheed.com

-Tucker Taft stt@inmet.com
Intermetrics, Inc.

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Garlington KE]

ISO.PS on AJPO.SEI.CMU.EDU appears to have a distribution statement that only
gives ANSI permission to make copies. Should I use RM.PS instead of ISO.PS
if I want to distribute the manuals around my organization?

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Garlington                  GarlingtonKE@lfwc.lockheed.com
F-22 Computer Resources         Lockheed Fort Worth Co.

If LFWC or the F-22 program has any opinions, they aren't telling me.

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Robert A Duff]

In article <3g0iep$6hj@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com>,
Garlington KE <l107353@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com> wrote:
>ISO.PS on AJPO.SEI.CMU.EDU appears to have a distribution statement that only
>gives ANSI permission to make copies. Should I use RM.PS instead of ISO.PS
>if I want to distribute the manuals around my organization?

I have no idea what the legal issues are, but you definitely want to use
RM.PS, because it has paragraph numbers, which the ISO version does not.
The index refers to paragraph numbers, and everybody is in the habit of
referring to paragraph numbers when referencing a rule, so the ISO
version of the document is nearly useless.

Also, the ISO version is formatted for A4 paper, whereas RM.PS is
formatted for 8.5 x 11 paper.

Other than these kinds of formatting things, the two documents are
identical.

- Bob

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Michel Gauthier]

In article <D2xBI2.BKy@world.std.com>, bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A
Duff) wrote:

> [...] Also, the ISO version is formatted for A4 paper, whereas RM.PS is
> formatted for 8.5 x 11 paper.

When will the USA change to the Metric System,
the only one which should be used for the definition of an
international standard ?

-- 
Michel Gauthier - Laboratoire d'informatique - 123 avenue Albert Thomas
F-87060 Limoges - fax +33()55457315

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Matt Kennel]

Michel Gauthier (gauthier@unilim.fr) wrote:
: In article <D2xBI2.BKy@world.std.com>, bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A
: Duff) wrote:

: > [...] Also, the ISO version is formatted for A4 paper, whereas RM.PS is
: > formatted for 8.5 x 11 paper.

: When will the USA change to the Metric System,
: the only one which should be used for the definition of an
: international standard ?

How silly. 

An inch is now a derived metric quantity, exactly 2.54000000 cm.

: -- 
: Michel Gauthier - Laboratoire d'informatique - 123 avenue Albert Thomas
: F-87060 Limoges - fax +33()55457315

--
-Matt Kennel  		mbk@inls1.ucsd.edu
-Institute for Nonlinear Science, University of California, San Diego
-*** AD: Archive for nonlinear dynamics papers & programs: FTP to
-***     lyapunov.ucsd.edu, username "anonymous".

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[David Moore]

mbk@inls1.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel) writes:

>Michel Gauthier (gauthier@unilim.fr) wrote:
>: In article <D2xBI2.BKy@world.std.com>, bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A
>: Duff) wrote:

>: > [...] Also, the ISO version is formatted for A4 paper, whereas RM.PS is
>: > formatted for 8.5 x 11 paper.

>: When will the USA change to the Metric System,
>: the only one which should be used for the definition of an
>: international standard ?

>How silly. 

>An inch is now a derived metric quantity, exactly 2.54000000 cm.

Does this mean it can only be used for clothing?

(Explanation for US readers.  The centimetre is not an SI unit. It is
only used for industries where an SI unit would prove inconvenient,
such as the clothing industry. Perhaps the inch was defined in terms
of centimetres to emphasise its bogosity!)

[Anyway, I have never understood why the founding fathers did not throw off
the Imperial system of measure when they threw off the Imperial yoke. The
French found the need to replace their system of measure along with their
system of government]

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Robb Nebbe]

In article <3g8v5r$467@rational.rational.com>, davidm@rational.com (David Moore) writes:

|> 
|> [Anyway, I have never understood why the founding fathers did not throw off
|> the Imperial system of measure when they threw off the Imperial yoke. The
|> French found the need to replace their system of measure along with their
|> system of government]

The US adopted the French system of naming large numbers (million = 10^6,
billion = 10^9, trillion = 10^12 ...) only to have the French abandon
it later to adopt the system used by Germany and England (million = 10^6,
billion = 10^12, trillion = 10^18 ...).

This leads one to ask the question: if the US had adopted the metric
system would the French latter have changed to the English system? :-)

Robb Nebbe

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Michel Gauthier]

In article <1995Jan27.145656@lglsun.epfl.ch>, nebbe@lglsun.epfl.ch (Robb
Nebbe) wrote:

> [...]
> 
> The US adopted the French system of naming large numbers (million = 10^6,
> billion = 10^9, trillion = 10^12 ...) only to have the French abandon
> it later to adopt the system used by Germany and England (million = 10^6,
> billion = 10^12, trillion = 10^18 ...).

In fact, we (the French) no longer use any such words, but often Mega and Giga
with their official meaning, and greater similar multipliers whenever
applicable,
which is not very frequent. And 10^9 is generally 'milliard', not
'billion', which 
I have never encountered.
 
> This leads one to ask the question: if the US had adopted the metric
> system would the French latter have changed to the English system? :-)

No idea, but we have yet to abandon the comma we use instead of
the decimal point. Almost as impossible to justify as the US position
about the Metric System.

-- 
Michel Gauthier - Laboratoire d'informatique - 123 avenue Albert Thomas
F-87060 Limoges - fax +33()55457315
----- Are the messages that objects exchange also objects ? -----

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Michael Feldman]

In article <gauthier-2701951857340001@164.81.60.62>,
Michel Gauthier <gauthier@unilim.fr> wrote:

>No idea, but we have yet to abandon the comma we use instead of
>the decimal point. Almost as impossible to justify as the US position
>about the Metric System.

But the comma/period convention is at least standard in Europe.
One can argue endlessly about the virtues of comma vs. period,
but somehow the Europeans have managed to get agreement on _that_,
which is quite rare for Europe.:-)

Mike Feldman

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Jules]

In article <3gggqj$b95@felix.seas.gwu.edu>,
	mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) writes:
>In article <gauthier-2701951857340001@164.81.60.62>,
>Michel Gauthier <gauthier@unilim.fr> wrote:
>
>>No idea, but we have yet to abandon the comma we use instead of
>>the decimal point. Almost as impossible to justify as the US position
>>about the Metric System.
>
>But the comma/period convention is at least standard in Europe.
>One can argue endlessly about the virtues of comma vs. period,
>but somehow the Europeans have managed to get agreement on _that_,
>which is quite rare for Europe.:-)
>
>Mike Feldman

Yes, but us British have opted out again ;-)

No, seriously, I think we really DO have a problem that depending on where
you are in the world 1,301 could have to completely different meanings...

-- 
/* Julian R Hall				csusb@csv.warwick.ac.uk
   
   Flames should be redirected to /dev/null - I don't know what
   I'm saying myself so don't expect it to make sense all the time!         */

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Christopher Costello]

Michael Feldman (mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu) wrote:

[SNIP]

: But the comma/period convention is at least standard in Europe.
: One can argue endlessly about the virtues of comma vs. period,
: but somehow the Europeans have managed to get agreement on _that_,
: which is quite rare for Europe.:-)

The British would be surprised to learn that either they use
the comma/period convention in the same way as the French,
Germans etc, or that they are not in Europe. Or, on second
thoughts, perhaps not so surprised.

: Mike Feldman

--
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Christopher Costello                                                  |
| SNI ASW BA OS 7          SIEMENS        Tel:    +49 89 636 40367      |
| Carl Wery Str. 22        =======        Fax:    +49 89 636 45860      |
| 81739 Muenchen           NIXDORF        E-mail: C.Costello@mch.sni.de |
| Germany                                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Robert Dewar]

"I have never understood why the founding fathers did not throw off the
imperial system of measures"

Oh but they did, at least in part, no US motorist can buy an imperial
gallon of petrol, only a puny gallon of gas, some 4/5's of the true
imperial measure.

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Michael Feldman]

In article <3gcmu2$rb@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>, Robert Dewar <dewar@cs.nyu.edu> wrote:

>Oh but they did, at least in part, no US motorist can buy an imperial
>gallon of petrol, only a puny gallon of gas, some 4/5's of the true
>imperial measure.

Not even in Canada, where until recently gas (petrol?) was still sold
by the "big" gallon. They do liters now. :-)

Mike Feldman

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Michael Feldman]

In article <gauthier-2501951603300001@164.81.60.62>,
Michel Gauthier <gauthier@unilim.fr> wrote:

>When will the USA change to the Metric System,
>the only one which should be used for the definition of an
>international standard ?

When pigs fly. :-)

Mike Feldman

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Michael Feldman]

In article <3g94oi$sro@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>,
David Weller <dweller@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> wrote:

>A popular rumor was a US congressman in the 70's said, "We'll start
>using the metric system the same time we all start speaking French!"

>Alas, there is a nontrivial amount of resistance to the metric
>system, primarily founded on fear, but there are some genuine
>economic reasons.  In any case, the problem should correct itseelf
>in, say, 20 years. :-)

Well, maybe. There was a big push in the 70s. The Commerce Department
tried to "metricate". Congress sorta got on the bandwagon, and we saw
some really hilarious implementations. I can remember seeing a sign on
the Baltimore-Washington Parkway (which is owned by the National Park
Service) saying 

Baltimore 
40 miles 
64.374 km

Naturally this sort of stupidity (sabotage?) drove people up the wall.
Three decimal places? Gimmea break!

Much of US industry is metric now in any case, especially the auto
industry. What is not yet metric is mostly stuff that doesn't matter
all that much, like those highway road signs. It also doesn;t ruin
international trade if Americans prefer to buy their fresh vegetables 
by the pound.

Speedometers in the US are marked both ways, miles in big numerals,
km in smaller ones. Canadian cars have it the other way. And cars with
digital instruments let you hit a button to switch.

IMHO, A4 paper is in a gray area. The US gobbles up so much paper
that we can probably get away with having our own size. Docs formatted
for 8.5 x 11 paper, printed on A4, just have slightly skinnier side 
margins and a fat bottom margin. If I am not mistaken, even though Canada
is generally metric, they use the US paper sizes. Am I right?

Paper is another funny story. Who's old enough to remember when DoD
used 8 x 10.5 paper? Talk about MIL SPECS! The story I heard at the time
they switched to "commercial standards" was that they discovered that
paper suppliers were manufacturing truckloads of 8.5 x 11 paper, then
_cutting it down_ to meet DoD contract terms (and charging DoD for the
extra work, of course)! This must have been less than 20 years ago, 
because I moved to GW in 1975 and I think I was here when it happened.

Is this a great world, or what? :-)

Mike Feldman

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Robert Dewar]

Regarding the idiotic sign on the highway (km to three decimal places):

Clive Cussler in his latest novel (Inca Gold) has DIrk Pitt use metric for
all his measurements ("he looked ahead and about three meters away ...")

Every reference is followed by in parentheses the equivalent US measure
often with excessive decimal places in the same irritating manner
(so for example the above three meters becomes .. three meters (9.7 feet))

The worst case is a reference to square meters which gets translated to
square feet without bothering to notice that the conversion factor needs
to be squared in this case.

I assume it was some idiot copy editor who insisted on this annoying
nonsense.

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Michael Feldman]

In article <EACHUS.95Jan27144621@spectre.mitre.org>,
Robert I. Eachus <eachus@spectre.mitre.org> wrote:
>
>     The United States has (officially) been on the metric system for
>centuries.  However the government has little or no ability to force
>people to change the way they think.  Shell tried to switch to pumps
>that sold gas in liters many years ago.  They survived the experiment.

But soft drinks are typically sold in liter bottles now, even in the
backward U.S. Liquid refreshment may in fact be sold formally by the
metric system in Europe, but the actual bottle sizes certainly are
not in round numbers. Soft drinks In Europe tend to come in strange
(though metric) sizes, like 33 cl. Beer too, I think. And one definitely
runs into 750 ml wine bottles. Marketing, no doubt, just like here.

Mike Feldman

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Tarjei Jensen]

These days soft drinks in Norway tend to be sold in .5, 1.0 and 1.5 liter
bottles (1.0 liter bottles might be dissapearing as well). .33 is still with
us, but is slowly disappearing. Due to environmental concerns cans have been
taxed to death.

Beer in pubs used to be sold in .5 liter glasses, but now they are down to .4
liter (4 deciliters). It is still called halvliter (half liter) though.


Greetings,
 
--
// Tarjei T. Jensen 
//    tarjeij@ulrik.uio.no       || +47 51 563411
//   Support you local rescue centre: GET LOST!
// Working, but not speaking for the Norwegian Hydrographic Service.

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Jules]

In article <3ggh6q$bpd@felix.seas.gwu.edu>,
	mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) writes:

>But soft drinks are typically sold in liter bottles now, even in the
>backward U.S. Liquid refreshment may in fact be sold formally by the
>metric system in Europe, but the actual bottle sizes certainly are
>not in round numbers. Soft drinks In Europe tend to come in strange
>(though metric) sizes, like 33 cl. Beer too, I think. And one definitely
>runs into 750 ml wine bottles. Marketing, no doubt, just like here.
>
>Mike Feldman

It's to do with standardisation. When we all metricated (?) we decided on
various capacities that were standard. For any particular type of product,
there are only certain sizes that the vendors are allowed to sell them in.

For example, drinks may be (for example), 250ml or 330ml. You could not
sell a can of drink containing 300ml in Europe. I believe 330ml originated
because it was quite close to a common imperial unit (could be half a pint,
but I'm not sure), whilst still being a relatively round number in the decimal
system.

Oh and 750ml is absolutely standard for a 'bottle' of wine. Has been for ages.
I don't know when this tradition started, but something to do with the French,
at a guess.


-- 
/* Julian R Hall				csusb@csv.warwick.ac.uk
   
   Flames should be redirected to /dev/null - I don't know what
   I'm saying myself so don't expect it to make sense all the time!         */

Re: Ada 9X Doc v5.99

[Olaf Weber]

In article <D2xBI2.BKy@world.std.com>, bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) writes:

> Also, the ISO version is formatted for A4 paper, whereas RM.PS is
> formatted for 8.5 x 11 paper.

Would it not be a good idea to provide versions of `rm.ps' and
`aarm.ps' that have been formatted for A4 paper?

-- Olaf Weber