Re-Jim
Agreed, but why would you want to metricate imperial quantities?It obliterates metric simplicity.
Agreed, but why would you want to metricate imperial quantities?It obliterates metric simplicity.
a (metric) unit
>>Looking at the net one could be forgiven to think weightlifting is only done in lb and inches?<<
Not really. There are plenty of sites that come up with plates in kgs.
>> Only one company (German) listed proper metric equipment and I presume these are Olympic standards. I doubt that anyone, but Yanks and Brits work with antiquated pounds? <<
That's why I alluded to the 44~45 lb plate, apparently based on the 20 kg plate. It is the most commonly used largest plate. If it weren't based on the metric standard one would see 40 lb or 50 lb plates more often but they're quite rare.
Not really. There are plenty of sites that come up with plates in kgs.
>> Only one company (German) listed proper metric equipment and I presume these are Olympic standards. I doubt that anyone, but Yanks and Brits work with antiquated pounds? <<
That's why I alluded to the 44~45 lb plate, apparently based on the 20 kg plate. It is the most commonly used largest plate. If it weren't based on the metric standard one would see 40 lb or 50 lb plates more often but they're quite rare.
Over all I'm pro-metric (as opposed to Imperial or any other traditional system) however I do conceed that the anti-metric movement have a few half decent points.
People like tradition. There had to be some connexion with language. People like using such words as "inch" and "pint". It's just habit and easy enough to get out of, sure, but habits are part of culture and people will cling to them.
Sometimes the traditional units are useful sizes. A fluid ounce is a nice size for a swig of scotch. A pint is a good size for a swig of beer ... not that a litre ain't.
Certainly if you go about haphazardly metricating imperial measures you end up with a mess which obliterates metric simplicity. However, suppose you went the right way about it and properly metricated the imperial system.
You'd have to metricate it to the point where you'd probably not still call it "imperial". For example, you could redefine the pint to be 500 ml. This would no longer be an imperial pint. It'd be closer to a US pint but not one of those either.
Take that pint and split it into four gills of 125 mills each. Split the gill into five fluid ounces and you have your 25 ml nip. Perhaps you might want ten pints to the gallon.
You certainly wouldn't bother with having five and a half yards to the rod ... five would do. Fourteen pounds to the stone ... make it ten i.e. 5 kg.
What I'm suggesting here is a full metrication of the entire system. You'd no longer have an imperial system and a US system but a metricated traditional system of measurement which is compatable with the metric system.
The idea is certainly not without its drawbacks (it certainly would add unnecessary complexity) and I realise that it's a little late and a little pointless but it does have its up side.
You mention, Eric, that things should come in simple standardised quantities. I agree absolutely. A 341 ml bottle of beer should never appear ... gimme 375 ml.
A properly metricated traditional system might even help promote this standardisation. If we had a 25 ml fliud ounce; a ten ounce, fifteen ounce, twenty ounce, thirty ounce, forty ounce ... bottle or can would be a perfect size.
Of course, this is not likely ever to happen and I not so sure that it would be such a great idea but it is an interesting one. All things considered, though, perhaps full metrication would be best ... hay it works in Australia ... almost.
People like tradition. There had to be some connexion with language. People like using such words as "inch" and "pint". It's just habit and easy enough to get out of, sure, but habits are part of culture and people will cling to them.
Sometimes the traditional units are useful sizes. A fluid ounce is a nice size for a swig of scotch. A pint is a good size for a swig of beer ... not that a litre ain't.
Certainly if you go about haphazardly metricating imperial measures you end up with a mess which obliterates metric simplicity. However, suppose you went the right way about it and properly metricated the imperial system.
You'd have to metricate it to the point where you'd probably not still call it "imperial". For example, you could redefine the pint to be 500 ml. This would no longer be an imperial pint. It'd be closer to a US pint but not one of those either.
Take that pint and split it into four gills of 125 mills each. Split the gill into five fluid ounces and you have your 25 ml nip. Perhaps you might want ten pints to the gallon.
You certainly wouldn't bother with having five and a half yards to the rod ... five would do. Fourteen pounds to the stone ... make it ten i.e. 5 kg.
What I'm suggesting here is a full metrication of the entire system. You'd no longer have an imperial system and a US system but a metricated traditional system of measurement which is compatable with the metric system.
The idea is certainly not without its drawbacks (it certainly would add unnecessary complexity) and I realise that it's a little late and a little pointless but it does have its up side.
You mention, Eric, that things should come in simple standardised quantities. I agree absolutely. A 341 ml bottle of beer should never appear ... gimme 375 ml.
A properly metricated traditional system might even help promote this standardisation. If we had a 25 ml fliud ounce; a ten ounce, fifteen ounce, twenty ounce, thirty ounce, forty ounce ... bottle or can would be a perfect size.
Of course, this is not likely ever to happen and I not so sure that it would be such a great idea but it is an interesting one. All things considered, though, perhaps full metrication would be best ... hay it works in Australia ... almost.
" All things considered, though, perhaps full metrication would be best ... hay it works in Australia ... almost. "
So get rid of those stupid French measurements - Australia was never ruled by Napoleon - and revert back to the good old Anglo-Saxon measurements that won't just almost work, but will completely work.
Metric is for pro-EU, anti-democratic Socialists who want to wipe away all traces of a country's (in this case Britain's) ancient traditons and replace them with anything that Napoleonic and undemocratic.
It's not just British (Imperial) measurements that are going thanks to the EUSSR. Next to go is our legal system. On September 22, 2006, Britain is expected to hand over control of its judiciary to the EU This spells the end of legal protections for which the English people have fought for some 600 years. They include: trial by jury, the assumption of innocence and habeas corpus. What will all this be replaced by? Napoleonic (and Metric measurements are also Napoleonic) French system of law, where there is no trial by jury, an assumption of guilt and no habeas corpus.
So get rid of those stupid French measurements - Australia was never ruled by Napoleon - and revert back to the good old Anglo-Saxon measurements that won't just almost work, but will completely work.
Metric is for pro-EU, anti-democratic Socialists who want to wipe away all traces of a country's (in this case Britain's) ancient traditons and replace them with anything that Napoleonic and undemocratic.
It's not just British (Imperial) measurements that are going thanks to the EUSSR. Next to go is our legal system. On September 22, 2006, Britain is expected to hand over control of its judiciary to the EU This spells the end of legal protections for which the English people have fought for some 600 years. They include: trial by jury, the assumption of innocence and habeas corpus. What will all this be replaced by? Napoleonic (and Metric measurements are also Napoleonic) French system of law, where there is no trial by jury, an assumption of guilt and no habeas corpus.
"Metrication is the standard norm in the UK when it comes to measuring the height and weight of people "
What part of the UK do you live? Because everywhere I've been in Britain it's Imperial measurements that are the norm for measuring height and weight, NOT Metric.
Whenever I tell people, I say I am around 5 feet 8 inches tall and weight around 12 stones.
I never say I'm......metres tall or ...... kilograms in weight because...
1) No-one in Britain uses Metric measurements to measure their height and weight and..
2) Me - and most other British - don't know their height and weight in metres and kilograms.
What part of the UK do you live? Because everywhere I've been in Britain it's Imperial measurements that are the norm for measuring height and weight, NOT Metric.
Whenever I tell people, I say I am around 5 feet 8 inches tall and weight around 12 stones.
I never say I'm......metres tall or ...... kilograms in weight because...
1) No-one in Britain uses Metric measurements to measure their height and weight and..
2) Me - and most other British - don't know their height and weight in metres and kilograms.
Jim : « People like tradition. There had to be some connexion with language. People like using such words as "inch" and "pint". It's just habit and easy enough to get out of, sure, but habits are part of culture and people will cling to them. »
C'est vrai. En français on a gardé des expressions qui font référence aux anciennes mesures :
—> ne pas bouger d'un *POUCE* {inch}
—> être à des *LIEUES* {leagues} de s'imaginer quelque chose
—> être sans le *SOU* {~penny}.
Mais on dit aussi une *LIVRE* {pound} pour désigner ½ kg = 500 g.
C'est vrai. En français on a gardé des expressions qui font référence aux anciennes mesures :
—> ne pas bouger d'un *POUCE* {inch}
—> être à des *LIEUES* {leagues} de s'imaginer quelque chose
—> être sans le *SOU* {~penny}.
Mais on dit aussi une *LIVRE* {pound} pour désigner ½ kg = 500 g.
<< I never say I'm......metres tall or ...... kilograms in weight because... >>
In the metric system, newtons measure weight and force, while kilograms
measure mass. The terms kilograms force can also describe weight and force. Weight is a sepecfic form of force.
one newton = one kilogram * one metre/(second *second)
one kilogram force = one kilogram * 9.8 metres/(second *second)
Weight = m*g
Where g is is acceleration due to gravity.
So to be accurate, one should say that their weight is XYZ kilograms force rather than XYZ kilograms.
In the metric system, newtons measure weight and force, while kilograms
measure mass. The terms kilograms force can also describe weight and force. Weight is a sepecfic form of force.
one newton = one kilogram * one metre/(second *second)
one kilogram force = one kilogram * 9.8 metres/(second *second)
Weight = m*g
Where g is is acceleration due to gravity.
So to be accurate, one should say that their weight is XYZ kilograms force rather than XYZ kilograms.
Yeah but in the everyday vernacular, people use kilograms for "weight" even though most don't realise it's a measure of mass. It won't change as it doesn't create any confusion.
***What part of the UK do you live? Because everywhere I've been in Britain it's Imperial measurements that are the norm for measuring height and weight, NOT Metric***
Adam is as stupit as ever! In answer to your ? I'm from Scotland, and I can guarantee that all measurements in places like gyms, sports centres, hospitals, doctors' surgeries etc etc are in METRIC. In Scotland, and down the gym where I go in Hampstead, North London.
Maybe where you live...the (in)famous Bolton, England...you are still in some sort of wee isolated time warp cocoon and stuck with outdated, mediaevally quaint imperials. OK people go to the gym, get measured in centimetres and kilos then probably tell their mates they're such and such feet and inches tall and such and such stones and pounds in weight.
Adam, no doubt you'll be telling us that you buy your petrol by the gallon! If you do that's one big porky pie because fuel is sold by the litre EVERYWHERE in the UK.
I don't know how old you are, but I was taught only metric measurements throughout.....we never did anything imperial in all of our curriculum at school, which is why I find this dual crap so confusing.
That's why it's such and such a.....
.....A VERY BRITISH MESS (quote from website UK Metric Society)
Have you ever wondered why Britain's weights and measures are in such a mess? 40 years after Britain decided to adopt the metric system, it still lives with a hodgepodge of metric and imperial.
Have you ever tried to work out petrol consumption when fuel is sold in litres but signposts give distances in miles? How do you compare prices when big supermarkets price per kilo but market traders price per pound? Why are houses designed with metres but listed in estate agents with feet and inches? Why do the media report heights and distances in imperial when our maps are made with metres and kilometres? Why are children educated in metric but given little opportunity to use it?
Why are we in this mess? and whose fault is it? Is it the Brussels Bureaucrats? Or does the blame belong nearer home - with successive British Governments? Above all, what can be done about it?
These questions matter for:
Consumer protection
Education
Health and safety
Industry and trade
Transport
Adam is as stupit as ever! In answer to your ? I'm from Scotland, and I can guarantee that all measurements in places like gyms, sports centres, hospitals, doctors' surgeries etc etc are in METRIC. In Scotland, and down the gym where I go in Hampstead, North London.
Maybe where you live...the (in)famous Bolton, England...you are still in some sort of wee isolated time warp cocoon and stuck with outdated, mediaevally quaint imperials. OK people go to the gym, get measured in centimetres and kilos then probably tell their mates they're such and such feet and inches tall and such and such stones and pounds in weight.
Adam, no doubt you'll be telling us that you buy your petrol by the gallon! If you do that's one big porky pie because fuel is sold by the litre EVERYWHERE in the UK.
I don't know how old you are, but I was taught only metric measurements throughout.....we never did anything imperial in all of our curriculum at school, which is why I find this dual crap so confusing.
That's why it's such and such a.....
.....A VERY BRITISH MESS (quote from website UK Metric Society)
Have you ever wondered why Britain's weights and measures are in such a mess? 40 years after Britain decided to adopt the metric system, it still lives with a hodgepodge of metric and imperial.
Have you ever tried to work out petrol consumption when fuel is sold in litres but signposts give distances in miles? How do you compare prices when big supermarkets price per kilo but market traders price per pound? Why are houses designed with metres but listed in estate agents with feet and inches? Why do the media report heights and distances in imperial when our maps are made with metres and kilometres? Why are children educated in metric but given little opportunity to use it?
Why are we in this mess? and whose fault is it? Is it the Brussels Bureaucrats? Or does the blame belong nearer home - with successive British Governments? Above all, what can be done about it?
These questions matter for:
Consumer protection
Education
Health and safety
Industry and trade
Transport
The Britons are ain't alone. It's a problem with all English speaking countries.
<<<Jim>>>
Yes, imperial does have some good points, but on balance it's not worth keeping it.
Nothing wrong with tradition, but people did not stick to horses and carts either, did they? Measurements have only one purpose, to measure! Tradition does not come into the equation if you talk about units passed down from the Babylonians. You are on firm ground when you talk about language. Yes, it is harder to get your tongue around cm and km. but in time English speaking people will come up with more user-friendly descriptions for metric units. Australians show how it’s done with k’s for km.
Why would you bother with a metricated imperial system in a 97% metric world. By the way there was an Enfglish guy in the 18th century propagating such a system, but it never took off.
Yes, imperial does have some good points, but on balance it's not worth keeping it.
Nothing wrong with tradition, but people did not stick to horses and carts either, did they? Measurements have only one purpose, to measure! Tradition does not come into the equation if you talk about units passed down from the Babylonians. You are on firm ground when you talk about language. Yes, it is harder to get your tongue around cm and km. but in time English speaking people will come up with more user-friendly descriptions for metric units. Australians show how it’s done with k’s for km.
Why would you bother with a metricated imperial system in a 97% metric world. By the way there was an Enfglish guy in the 18th century propagating such a system, but it never took off.
<<<Guest >>>
On what should it be based? Metric is the Olympic and world standard.
On what should it be based? Metric is the Olympic and world standard.
<<<Adam>>>>"
All things considered, though, perhaps full metrication would be best ... hay it works in Australia ... almost. " So get rid of those stupid French measurements - Australia was never ruled by Napoleon - and revert back to the good old Anglo-Saxon measurements that won't just almost work, but will completely work. Metric is for pro-EU, anti-democratic Socialists who want to wipe away all traces of a country's (in this case Britain's) ancient traditons and replace them with anything that Napoleonic and undemocratic. It's not just British (Imperial) measurements that are going thanks to the EUSSR. Next to go is our legal system. On September 22, 2006, Britain is expected to hand over control of its judiciary to the EU This spells the end of legal protections for which the English people have fought for some 600 years. They include: trial by jury, the assumption of innocence and habeas corpus. What will all this be replaced by? Napoleonic (and Metric measurements are also Napoleonic) French system of law, where there is no trial by jury, an assumption of guilt and no habeas corpus.>>>>>>>>
Chances are that ice freezes in hell before Australia, or any other nation reverts to cumbersome medieval measurements. Metric, my friend is child’s play compared to the antiquated hodgepodge of units called imperial. Did it ever enter your mind why there is not one site on the Internet that clamours for return to yesteryears measurement, but plenty arguing for change to metric?
My, my stupid French measurements? This in my opinion is a standard phrase people use, who know nothing about the metric system nor want to know anything about it. Shows a very closed mind.
<<<<good old Anglo-Saxon measurements that won't just almost work, but will completely work.>>>>
So what imperial units do you use to measure electricity with, what are the equivalents of mg and all other health related units? You are defending a woefully inadequate medieval system that should have been discarded 200 years ago. Mind you, it is good enough for weighing potatoes.
Aside that, your problems are not with measurements per se, but anything to do with the EU. There is a name for this condition its called EUphobia.
You would do well to read what you write, maybe you learn something?
>>>Metric is for pro-EU, anti-democratic Socialists who want to wipe away all traces of a country's (in this case Britain's) ancient traditons and replace them with anything that Napoleonic and undemocratic. <<<<
So you are telling us that Greece, Italy, Norway and all other metric nations have lost their traditions because they went metric? Do you know something nobody else knows?
>>>>>It's not just British (Imperial) measurements that are going thanks to the EUSSR. Next to go is our legal system. On September 22, 2006, Britain is expected to hand over control of its judiciary to the EU This spells the end of legal protections for which the English people have fought for some 600 years. They include: trial by jury, the assumption of innocence and habeas corpus. What will all this be replaced by? Napoleonic (and Metric measurements are also Napoleonic) French system of law, where there is no trial by jury, an assumption of guilt and no habeas corpus. <<<<
You do have a problem and it has to do with not knowing how the EU works. No country can be forced to join it. No joined country has to adopt EU laws it does not want. Only the British parliament decides what is and is not adopted. Why haven’t you got the Euro? Hasn’t the EU forced Britain to adopt it? Why not, if it forces metrication on it?
Metricating Britain was decided in 1965 long before it joined the EU, so stick to reality not wishful thinking.
All things considered, though, perhaps full metrication would be best ... hay it works in Australia ... almost. " So get rid of those stupid French measurements - Australia was never ruled by Napoleon - and revert back to the good old Anglo-Saxon measurements that won't just almost work, but will completely work. Metric is for pro-EU, anti-democratic Socialists who want to wipe away all traces of a country's (in this case Britain's) ancient traditons and replace them with anything that Napoleonic and undemocratic. It's not just British (Imperial) measurements that are going thanks to the EUSSR. Next to go is our legal system. On September 22, 2006, Britain is expected to hand over control of its judiciary to the EU This spells the end of legal protections for which the English people have fought for some 600 years. They include: trial by jury, the assumption of innocence and habeas corpus. What will all this be replaced by? Napoleonic (and Metric measurements are also Napoleonic) French system of law, where there is no trial by jury, an assumption of guilt and no habeas corpus.>>>>>>>>
Chances are that ice freezes in hell before Australia, or any other nation reverts to cumbersome medieval measurements. Metric, my friend is child’s play compared to the antiquated hodgepodge of units called imperial. Did it ever enter your mind why there is not one site on the Internet that clamours for return to yesteryears measurement, but plenty arguing for change to metric?
My, my stupid French measurements? This in my opinion is a standard phrase people use, who know nothing about the metric system nor want to know anything about it. Shows a very closed mind.
<<<<good old Anglo-Saxon measurements that won't just almost work, but will completely work.>>>>
So what imperial units do you use to measure electricity with, what are the equivalents of mg and all other health related units? You are defending a woefully inadequate medieval system that should have been discarded 200 years ago. Mind you, it is good enough for weighing potatoes.
Aside that, your problems are not with measurements per se, but anything to do with the EU. There is a name for this condition its called EUphobia.
You would do well to read what you write, maybe you learn something?
>>>Metric is for pro-EU, anti-democratic Socialists who want to wipe away all traces of a country's (in this case Britain's) ancient traditons and replace them with anything that Napoleonic and undemocratic. <<<<
So you are telling us that Greece, Italy, Norway and all other metric nations have lost their traditions because they went metric? Do you know something nobody else knows?
>>>>>It's not just British (Imperial) measurements that are going thanks to the EUSSR. Next to go is our legal system. On September 22, 2006, Britain is expected to hand over control of its judiciary to the EU This spells the end of legal protections for which the English people have fought for some 600 years. They include: trial by jury, the assumption of innocence and habeas corpus. What will all this be replaced by? Napoleonic (and Metric measurements are also Napoleonic) French system of law, where there is no trial by jury, an assumption of guilt and no habeas corpus. <<<<
You do have a problem and it has to do with not knowing how the EU works. No country can be forced to join it. No joined country has to adopt EU laws it does not want. Only the British parliament decides what is and is not adopted. Why haven’t you got the Euro? Hasn’t the EU forced Britain to adopt it? Why not, if it forces metrication on it?
Metricating Britain was decided in 1965 long before it joined the EU, so stick to reality not wishful thinking.
Guest
<<<<The Britons are ain't alone. It's a problem with all English speaking countries.>>>>
The only reason why Britain, Canada and America have problems with metricating is their politicians cowardice. They are frightened to lose votes and office if they do it properly like New Zealand S. Africa and Australia. As UKMA rightly points out, everybody is a loser with piecemeal metrication.
<<<<The Britons are ain't alone. It's a problem with all English speaking countries.>>>>
The only reason why Britain, Canada and America have problems with metricating is their politicians cowardice. They are frightened to lose votes and office if they do it properly like New Zealand S. Africa and Australia. As UKMA rightly points out, everybody is a loser with piecemeal metrication.