triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Imperial vs Metric

To: "Michael D. Porter" <mporter@zianet.com>
Subject: Re: Imperial vs Metric
From: David Massey <105671.471@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 09:51:45 -0500
Cc: "[unknown]" <triumphs@autox.team.net>, jonmac <jonmac@ndirect.co.uk> charset=ISO-8859-1
Message text written by "Michael D. Porter"
>Most people in the US miss the real point of units of measurement. It is
not about our culture, but about our educational system. Anyone who has
taken a college-level chemistry course in this country must adopt IU
measurements. Yet, only the people majoring in chemistry do take such
courses. The rest are not required to do so, these days. In 1971, even
though I was an English major, I was required to take twelve hours of
science and math courses (I took eighteen). One of those was a chemistry
course for chemistry majors. I learned the IU system just as well as I
know the English measurement system, in the same way, less efficiently,
that I learned German... by being educated in it.
<

The world of electrical engineering is somewhat dichodic in that the
rotating maching group uses "English" units (kilolines/sq-in) and the
electric fields folks use the IU system (Webers/sq-meter).  And, as I
recall, my thermodynamics course was taught in BTU's and PSI's.

Michael,

I have said before that learning a new measurement system is like learning
a foriegn language;  you have to use it (frequently) to become fluent. 
And, like using a foriegn language, using the IU system in the US is like
swiming upstream.  Some days I like to swim upstream - just for the
exercize. ;-)

Dave

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>