Re: [NTLK] [OT] Exact Measurement of Newton 2000 Screen

~~~ On 2008/05/01 02:40, Simon Jensen-Fellows at sjf@myfanwy.com wrote ~~~

>
> On Apr 30, 2008, at 7:12 AM, matthiasm wrote:
>
>>
>> On 30.04.2008, at 12:23, Steve Scotten wrote:
>>> I'm not saying it's right, but it's hardly news. The 1.5" x 3.5" has
>>> been the standard for almost fifty years and the 1.75" x 3.75" for
>>> over a decade before that. At this point in the game, no one should
>>> be
>>> alarmed by this discovery. If they are alarmed, like Matthias was,
>>> they should be assured that it's all right. The sky is not falling,
>>> the sky fell a long time ago.
>>>
>>> That's all I intended.
>>
>>
>> But, but, but..., but I am German, and while this fact is hardly
>> puzzeling for an American, for a young immigrating German, the world
>> almost stops rotating and the universe collapses, if something that is
>> called "53mm by 106mm", we *will* have planned our project to that
>> precission and expect acuracy ;-).
>
> This Englishman finds it utterly bizarre also. And I am sadly old
> enough to remember buying lumber in Britain sized in imperial units.
> If we could match the reported size and the actual size, I don't
> understand why the US can't either.
>
> I'm sure you can imagine the frustration I felt after carefully
> designing an elaborate octagonal treehouse for my daughter, only to
> discover that I'd spent hundreds of dollars on wood that was not the
> size I had expected it to be. It was exactly as Matthias wrote. I
> first assumed I had bought the wrong size, then seeing that I hadn't,
> begun to doubt my sanity...
>
> And why on earth are these called English units ? The US units of
> volume are certainly not English, and to my knowledge they never have
> been !
>
> Bah.
>
>
>

I'm sensing a certain amount of unreality here. Imperial measurements don't
have to be less precise: it depends upon your tools and your job. My Pop's
job required him to measure to the nearest thousandth of an inch. People
using Imperial measurements don't have to be less accurate: it's a question
of working out the necessary degree of precision for the job and adhering to
it, and learning good habits of using measurement tools correctly.

As it happens I prefer the metric system for most things but feel
comfortable with both, apart from the British thing of weighing people in
"stones" -- I mean, come on! Stones? You want to talk about a lack of
precision, weighing in stones and pounds tends to be minus ounces: useless!

Yeah, the difference in US and UK volumes is really annoying at times. It
took me awhile to get used to it when I first came to the UK. AFAIK the
difference between, say, the US and UK gallons, and the measures that derive
from them, goes back to the days when North America was being colonized (and
exploited for the benefit of the British Empire, but that's another story).
They must have been the same once, no?

 
Shalom.
Christian

~~~ ~~~ ~~~

³Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from a Newton.²
            -- what Arthur C. Clarke meant

http://youtube.com/watch?v=1ZzpdPJ7Zr4
(With thanks to Chod Lang)
http://tinyurl.com/29y2dl

~~~ ~~~ ~~~
Fight Spam. Join EuroCAUCE: http://www.euro.cauce.org/
Get MUGged and love it: http://www.oxmug.org/
Join today: http://www.newtontalk.net/

====================================================================
The NewtonTalk Mailing List - http://www.newtontalk.net/
The Official Newton FAQ - http://www.splorp.com/newton/faq/
The Newton Glossary - http://www.splorp.com/newton/glossary/
WikiWikiNewt - http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/
====================================================================
Received on Thu May 1 08:20:25 2008