On Sat, 24 May 2008 17:26:36 +0200, andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom>
wrote:

>Stephen wrote:
>> On Sat, 24 May 2008 16:36:07 +0200, andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> You might. Probably my mistake, I should also have mentioned that we 
>>> almost always abbreviate kilogram to kilo.
>> 
>> As do we in the UK
>So, how would you call a device to measure kilos?

Scales, kitchen scales for up to 1.5 kilos, bathroom scales for
people. Vehicles are weighed on a weighbridge. Sometime scales are
called a balance if they are very accurate.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 24 May 2008 17:43:53 +0200, andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom>
wrote:

>Stephen wrote:
>> On 24 May 2008 05:09:04 -0400, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>> 
>>>  However, what are inches divided into? How would you express 7mm in
>>> inches?
>> 
>> Inches are divided into halves, quarters, eights, sixteenths and
>> thirtyseconds (1/32). We use thous (1/1000) in engineering. OK the
>> metric system is more logical but the imperial system is more
>> intuitive if you have taken the trouble to learn it so that you can
>> work in it without thinking. 
>I think the point is that warp and me and everybody else raised in 
>metric disagrees. The metric system is just as intuitive and more logical.

Darren and I understand that but we both work in both systems and feel
that the imperial system is more homely (British usage not American
usage)

>> I use both. It is similar to using
>> fractions and decimals. You can also have fun with vulgar fractions
>> such as: the length is one and nine eights. ;)
>a tiny bit more than 1/3 meter?

It would be 53.975 millimetres as only inches are talked about in
eights. If it were feet we would say 2 ft one and a half (inches are
understood). 
The joke is that nine eights is a vulgar fraction and should not be
used in polite society.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 24 May 2008 12:03:06 -0400, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:

>Stephen <mcavoysAT@aoldotcom> wrote:
>> On 24 May 2008 05:09:04 -0400, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>
>> >  However, what are inches divided into? How would you express 7mm in
>> >inches?
>
>> Inches are divided into halves, quarters, eights, sixteenths and
>> thirtyseconds (1/32).
>
>  So how exactly do you express 7/10 inches? (Compare to 7mm being 7/10 cm.)
>How do you measure that with a ruler?

Sorry I forgot to mention in that last post that our rulers have
eighths and sixteenths on one side, tenths on the other and metric on
the reverse. So we would say seven tenths. 
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 24 May 2008 10:03:16 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>
wrote:

>
>You don't measure 7/10ths of an inch here any more than you measure a 
>sixteenth of a meter where you are.
>
>All the rulers are marked in half-inch, quarter-inch, eight-inch, etc.

I did not mean to contradict you Darren.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> On Sat, 24 May 2008 17:26:36 +0200, andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom>
> wrote:
> 
>> Stephen wrote:
>>> On Sat, 24 May 2008 16:36:07 +0200, andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You might. Probably my mistake, I should also have mentioned that we 
>>>> almost always abbreviate kilogram to kilo.
>>> As do we in the UK
>> So, how would you call a device to measure kilos?
> 
> Scales, kitchen scales for up to 1.5 kilos, bathroom scales for
> people. Vehicles are weighed on a weighbridge. Sometime scales are
> called a balance if they are very accurate.

Well, IMHO they should be called kilometers. ;)

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> Sorry I forgot to mention in that last post that our rulers have
> eighths and sixteenths on one side, tenths on the other and metric on
> the reverse. 

I never saw one that was that complex, except an architectural ruler. 
Maybe I don't do the sort of work that sort of ruler helps with.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architect's_scale

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 24 May 2008 14:41:06 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On Fri, 23 May 2008 23:45:29 +0200, andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom>
> wrote:
> 
> 
>>We don't have that distinction. That is one of the reasons that I try to
>>convince people that the scales they use to measure their weight should
>>be called kilometers. Up till now with very minor success.
> 
> I'm not surprised using length to measure mass, or am I missing
> something?

Kilo = abbreviation of kilogram (as Andrel said), but the funnier part is 
if you read "meter" not as a distance, but rather a device for measuring 
something (think water meter or gas meter).

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> 
> Doors here are, I think, seven feet, so that's even easier. :-)

Yess, the "easy" -part comes from the usage of same units on same-kind 
scales in this matter. It's when the measures come overseas - then the 
distraction happens.

> And we say "He's five nine", and everyone knows that means "five feet 
> nine inches tall".

And by quick thinking I have absolutely no idea if 5'9" is long, normal 
or short person.

> I think you, like Warp, are used to much colder weather. 

Probably yes ;).

> I want to know 
> whether it's t-shirt, long sleeve, or sweater weather. :-)

If it's <0, it's pretty much no-t-shirt -weather ;).

But actually for knowing that you don't want to know the temperature, 
you'll want to know the wind index (which is what the air feels like and 
is calculated from temperature and wind speed). +15C is warm for 
t-shirt, if the sun shines and there's no wind, +20C is freaking cold, 
if the sun doesn't shine on you and there's one hell of a wind.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sat, 24 May 2008 14:41:06 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 23 May 2008 23:45:29 +0200, andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> We don't have that distinction. That is one of the reasons that I try to
>>> convince people that the scales they use to measure their weight should
>>> be called kilometers. Up till now with very minor success.
>> I'm not surprised using length to measure mass, or am I missing
>> something?
> 
> Kilo = abbreviation of kilogram (as Andrel said), but the funnier part is 
> if you read "meter" not as a distance, but rather a device for measuring 
> something (think water meter or gas meter).
> 

I still am not sure if Stephen really did not understand that, that he 
pretended not to, or that it was just a very bad joke.

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> On Sat, 24 May 2008 17:43:53 +0200, andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom>
> wrote:
> 
>> Stephen wrote:
>>> On 24 May 2008 05:09:04 -0400, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  However, what are inches divided into? How would you express 7mm in
>>>> inches?
>>> Inches are divided into halves, quarters, eights, sixteenths and
>>> thirtyseconds (1/32). We use thous (1/1000) in engineering. OK the
>>> metric system is more logical but the imperial system is more
>>> intuitive if you have taken the trouble to learn it so that you can
>>> work in it without thinking. 
>> I think the point is that warp and me and everybody else raised in 
>> metric disagrees. The metric system is just as intuitive and more logical.
> 
> Darren and I understand that but we both work in both systems and feel
> that the imperial system is more homely (British usage not American
> usage)
> 
>>> I use both. It is similar to using
>>> fractions and decimals. You can also have fun with vulgar fractions
>>> such as: the length is one and nine eights. ;)
>> a tiny bit more than 1/3 meter?
> 
> It would be 53.975 millimetres as only inches are talked about in
> eights. If it were feet we would say 2 ft one and a half (inches are
> understood). 

My interpretation was that analogous to a height of "five four' the 
"one" referred to feet and the "nine eights" was in inches.

> The joke is that nine eights is a vulgar fraction and should not be
> used in polite society.

I am afraid I got that one. BTW I had never seen the expression vulgar 
fraction before. If I look at wikipedia I would assume from the context 
that improper fraction may be what you intended.

Post a reply to this message