<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Give him 2.54 centimeters and he&#8217;ll take 1.609344 kilometers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/</link>
	<description>I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I likes reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way. My real name is Phil Plait, and I run the Bad Astronomy blog.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 07:33:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shirley Payson</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-471724</link>
		<dc:creator>Shirley Payson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 14:34:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-471724</guid>
		<description>Hi there! This post couldn&#039;t be written any better! Reading through this post reminds me of my good old room mate! He always kept chatting about this. I will forward this page to him. Pretty sure he will have a good read. Thank you for sharing!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi there! This post couldn&#8217;t be written any better! Reading through this post reminds me of my good old room mate! He always kept chatting about this. I will forward this page to him. Pretty sure he will have a good read. Thank you for sharing!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel Depledge</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-388242</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Depledge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 12:11:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-388242</guid>
		<description>Barrie Redfern (254) said:
&lt;blockquote&gt;What ever anyone’s preference I do wish Britain would stick to one way or the other. In the UK we have road signs in miles yet the BBC refers to road distances in kilometres. It is totally ridiculous. Even the car speedos are in mph not kph..&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Yeah, as I understand such things, the UK officially uses SI units.  The main reason the roadsigns are all still in miles is almost certainly down to cost.

And car speedometers display both mph and km/h (unless you have one of those new digital speedometers, in the which case it&#039;ll display one or the other but not both together).

&lt;blockquote&gt; but no, BBC executives insist their presenters use the metric. To add insult to injury they then use the American pronunciation kilomm-eter instead of the way fellow Europeans say it – kilo-meter as in kilo-gram, kilo-watt, kilo-joule, etc.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Eh?

Where I grew up, everyone called it a kill-OM-ittuh, and there was nothing American about this.

At least most of us Brits spell &quot;metre&quot; correctly (so it is distinguishable from a measuring device).  Although you seem to have chosen to use the American spelling of kilometre.  Why is that?

&lt;blockquote&gt; Which is a bit rich considering the metric system is not even used in the US!&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I daresay there are plenty of scientists and engineers in the US who use the SI (calling it &quot;metric&quot; is &lt;i&gt;so&lt;/i&gt; 1972!).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Barrie Redfern (254) said:</p>
<blockquote><p>What ever anyone’s preference I do wish Britain would stick to one way or the other. In the UK we have road signs in miles yet the BBC refers to road distances in kilometres. It is totally ridiculous. Even the car speedos are in mph not kph..</p></blockquote>
<p>Yeah, as I understand such things, the UK officially uses SI units.  The main reason the roadsigns are all still in miles is almost certainly down to cost.</p>
<p>And car speedometers display both mph and km/h (unless you have one of those new digital speedometers, in the which case it&#8217;ll display one or the other but not both together).</p>
<blockquote><p> but no, BBC executives insist their presenters use the metric. To add insult to injury they then use the American pronunciation kilomm-eter instead of the way fellow Europeans say it – kilo-meter as in kilo-gram, kilo-watt, kilo-joule, etc.</p></blockquote>
<p>Eh?</p>
<p>Where I grew up, everyone called it a kill-OM-ittuh, and there was nothing American about this.</p>
<p>At least most of us Brits spell &#8220;metre&#8221; correctly (so it is distinguishable from a measuring device).  Although you seem to have chosen to use the American spelling of kilometre.  Why is that?</p>
<blockquote><p> Which is a bit rich considering the metric system is not even used in the US!</p></blockquote>
<p>I daresay there are plenty of scientists and engineers in the US who use the SI (calling it &#8220;metric&#8221; is <i>so</i> 1972!).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel Depledge</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-386378</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Depledge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 14:05:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-386378</guid>
		<description>LarryOldTimer (256) said:
&lt;blockquote&gt;For me, as a professional engineer, the decimal foot and stations (100 foot lengths) worked extremely well. As a physics major, I learned the MKS (meter/kilogram/second), the cgs (centimeter/gram/second) and the English (foot/pound/second) systems.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

And the ironic thing about what you USAians call the &quot;English&quot; system is that it hasn&#039;t been in widespread use here for decades.  And when it was we called it Imperial.

&lt;blockquote&gt; It was extremely stupid and wasteful when our idiot at the time, Dole, required all state highway departments to “go metric”. Our 12 foot lane widths worked nicely, a whole and easy number to memorize.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

And what&#039;s so difficult about 3.7 metres?

&lt;blockquote&gt; Metric conversions result in long strings of digits.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

As always, it depends on the level of precision you choose to use, not the system in which you choose to work.

You could equally have 12.000 feet (and why do you use 12 feet and not 4 yards or 2 fathoms? Or 1/55 furlong?  Or 144 inches?)

&lt;blockquote&gt; Now it was the inches and fractions thereof which caused many problems. Once again, the decimalization of the inch worked well, and a thousandth of an inch was a very useful measurement. Millimeters are just too large.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

So?  The SI has more order-of-magnitde variations for each unit than you can shake a stick at.  If mm are too large, use micrometres (microns) instead.

BTW, the thousandth of an inch is way to large for some measurements, where µm, nm or pm might be more appropriate.

&lt;blockquote&gt;Whole metric measurements are either too large or too small to be useful for practical purposes.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Eh?

This makes no sense at all, except for the Farad (and, BTW, the system you call &quot;metric&quot; is officially the SI, so why not give it its proper name?).

The metre and kilogram are both useful measures, and the second is the same in the SI as it was in preceding systems.  Is it, for instance, more sensible to say someone weighs 220 lbs or 100 kg?  Quite obviously, neither system is &quot;better&quot; for a simple measurement such as mass.

However, when it comes to performing calculations relating mass, time and distance to such properties as velocity, acceleration, force, momentum and energy, then the SI wins hands down.

That&#039;s not to say that some older units are not still used for the sake of familiarity (or economy).  In the UK, all of our road signs show distances in miles and speed limits in miles per hour.  I shudder to think how much it might cost to replace them all, but I can imagine a future in which road signs display both miles and km as a transition towards eventually displaying just km.

&lt;blockquote&gt;I don’t care much care what something is measured in.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Your preceding paragraph suggests otherwise.

&lt;blockquote&gt; I can make the conversions, and with the Internet, conversions are easy. It is transposing figures in long strings of numerical characters where most errors are made, and failure to have one person’s calculations checked by another person.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

So?  Use an appropriate level of precision.

How precise, for example, are your &quot;12-foot&quot; lane widths?  Are they exactly 12 feet to the nearest thousandth of an inch?  I suspect not.  And neither do they need to be.  So you don&#039;t need them to be 3.6576 metres, do you?  So, call &#039;em 3.7 m and have done with it.

By the same token, calling a mile 1.6 km is perfectly adequate for most purposes, even though an exact mile is closer to 1.609 km.

&lt;blockquote&gt; Since I learned scientific notation, and grew up with a slide rule, I don’t make errors that are off by a factor of 10, a common problem in our calculator/computer world.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Good for you, but I don&#039;t see what relevance this has to the units of measure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LarryOldTimer (256) said:</p>
<blockquote><p>For me, as a professional engineer, the decimal foot and stations (100 foot lengths) worked extremely well. As a physics major, I learned the MKS (meter/kilogram/second), the cgs (centimeter/gram/second) and the English (foot/pound/second) systems.</p></blockquote>
<p>And the ironic thing about what you USAians call the &#8220;English&#8221; system is that it hasn&#8217;t been in widespread use here for decades.  And when it was we called it Imperial.</p>
<blockquote><p> It was extremely stupid and wasteful when our idiot at the time, Dole, required all state highway departments to “go metric”. Our 12 foot lane widths worked nicely, a whole and easy number to memorize.</p></blockquote>
<p>And what&#8217;s so difficult about 3.7 metres?</p>
<blockquote><p> Metric conversions result in long strings of digits.</p></blockquote>
<p>As always, it depends on the level of precision you choose to use, not the system in which you choose to work.</p>
<p>You could equally have 12.000 feet (and why do you use 12 feet and not 4 yards or 2 fathoms? Or 1/55 furlong?  Or 144 inches?)</p>
<blockquote><p> Now it was the inches and fractions thereof which caused many problems. Once again, the decimalization of the inch worked well, and a thousandth of an inch was a very useful measurement. Millimeters are just too large.</p></blockquote>
<p>So?  The SI has more order-of-magnitde variations for each unit than you can shake a stick at.  If mm are too large, use micrometres (microns) instead.</p>
<p>BTW, the thousandth of an inch is way to large for some measurements, where µm, nm or pm might be more appropriate.</p>
<blockquote><p>Whole metric measurements are either too large or too small to be useful for practical purposes.</p></blockquote>
<p>Eh?</p>
<p>This makes no sense at all, except for the Farad (and, BTW, the system you call &#8220;metric&#8221; is officially the SI, so why not give it its proper name?).</p>
<p>The metre and kilogram are both useful measures, and the second is the same in the SI as it was in preceding systems.  Is it, for instance, more sensible to say someone weighs 220 lbs or 100 kg?  Quite obviously, neither system is &#8220;better&#8221; for a simple measurement such as mass.</p>
<p>However, when it comes to performing calculations relating mass, time and distance to such properties as velocity, acceleration, force, momentum and energy, then the SI wins hands down.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s not to say that some older units are not still used for the sake of familiarity (or economy).  In the UK, all of our road signs show distances in miles and speed limits in miles per hour.  I shudder to think how much it might cost to replace them all, but I can imagine a future in which road signs display both miles and km as a transition towards eventually displaying just km.</p>
<blockquote><p>I don’t care much care what something is measured in.</p></blockquote>
<p>Your preceding paragraph suggests otherwise.</p>
<blockquote><p> I can make the conversions, and with the Internet, conversions are easy. It is transposing figures in long strings of numerical characters where most errors are made, and failure to have one person’s calculations checked by another person.</p></blockquote>
<p>So?  Use an appropriate level of precision.</p>
<p>How precise, for example, are your &#8220;12-foot&#8221; lane widths?  Are they exactly 12 feet to the nearest thousandth of an inch?  I suspect not.  And neither do they need to be.  So you don&#8217;t need them to be 3.6576 metres, do you?  So, call &#8216;em 3.7 m and have done with it.</p>
<p>By the same token, calling a mile 1.6 km is perfectly adequate for most purposes, even though an exact mile is closer to 1.609 km.</p>
<blockquote><p> Since I learned scientific notation, and grew up with a slide rule, I don’t make errors that are off by a factor of 10, a common problem in our calculator/computer world.</p></blockquote>
<p>Good for you, but I don&#8217;t see what relevance this has to the units of measure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel Depledge</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-385339</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Depledge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 14:33:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-385339</guid>
		<description>Jake Featherstone (260) said:
&lt;blockquote&gt;Easier to compute wrenches in inches than in cm/dm/m.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

If by &quot;wrenches&quot; you mean spanners, then I disagree.  Having a whole number of mm (yes, mm, not cm, dm or m) A/F (across faces) is far easier than trying to work out if the next size up from 9/16&quot; is 17/32&quot; or 19/32&quot;!*

* Yes, I know the answer, but it&#039;s not immediately obvious the way &quot;metric&quot; spanner sizing is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jake Featherstone (260) said:</p>
<blockquote><p>Easier to compute wrenches in inches than in cm/dm/m.</p></blockquote>
<p>If by &#8220;wrenches&#8221; you mean spanners, then I disagree.  Having a whole number of mm (yes, mm, not cm, dm or m) A/F (across faces) is far easier than trying to work out if the next size up from 9/16&#8243; is 17/32&#8243; or 19/32&#8243;!*</p>
<p>* Yes, I know the answer, but it&#8217;s not immediately obvious the way &#8220;metric&#8221; spanner sizing is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel Depledge</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-385335</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Depledge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 14:26:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-385335</guid>
		<description>B-Ste (262) said:
&lt;blockquote&gt;For me, it’s the rounding argument that wins. 1″ is always 1″, and 1′ is always 1′. It is never the case that it is rounded up or down; it’s not a matter of choice, it simply cannot be! However, when is 1cm actually 1cm? Well, it may be, or it may not. It may be 9.95mm or 10.o4mm.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

WTF?

1&quot; could as easily be 7/8&quot; or 1 1/8&quot; as 1&quot; exactly.  It all depends on what level of precision you choose to work to.  By the same token, 1 cm can equally well be 0.96, 1.00 or 1.04 cm, depending on how precise you are being.

Neither system is intrinsically more precise than the other.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>B-Ste (262) said:</p>
<blockquote><p>For me, it’s the rounding argument that wins. 1″ is always 1″, and 1′ is always 1′. It is never the case that it is rounded up or down; it’s not a matter of choice, it simply cannot be! However, when is 1cm actually 1cm? Well, it may be, or it may not. It may be 9.95mm or 10.o4mm.</p></blockquote>
<p>WTF?</p>
<p>1&#8243; could as easily be 7/8&#8243; or 1 1/8&#8243; as 1&#8243; exactly.  It all depends on what level of precision you choose to work to.  By the same token, 1 cm can equally well be 0.96, 1.00 or 1.04 cm, depending on how precise you are being.</p>
<p>Neither system is intrinsically more precise than the other.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel Depledge</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-385333</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Depledge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 14:16:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-385333</guid>
		<description>Dominic Hamon (3) said:
&lt;blockquote&gt; But then [Britain] ha[s]n’t fully converted as most food is sold by the pound&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Not so.  UK law requires food to be sold in &quot;metric&quot; units.  But there&#039;s nothing to say you cannot also publicise the old Imperial quantity at the same time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dominic Hamon (3) said:</p>
<blockquote><p> But then [Britain] ha[s]n’t fully converted as most food is sold by the pound</p></blockquote>
<p>Not so.  UK law requires food to be sold in &#8220;metric&#8221; units.  But there&#8217;s nothing to say you cannot also publicise the old Imperial quantity at the same time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel Depledge</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-385312</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Depledge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 12:28:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-385312</guid>
		<description>Way too slow, BA.

In about 1980, the Baron Knights released a single on which the B-side was called &lt;i&gt;Remember Decimalisation&lt;/i&gt;.

Its introduction was a voice-over that commented on such strangenesses as the song 2.54-centimetres-worm, Scotland 91.44 Centimetres and Michael 30.48 Centimetres.

About 4 or 5 years ago, a British beer was advertised on telly - tongue in cheek - as &quot;a great 0.57 of a litre&quot;.  I can&#039;t remember the beer though, so the advert didn&#039;t do a great job.

In the UK, it is a requirement of law that goods are sold in &quot;metric&quot; quantities.  So we have, on our supermarket shelves, meat by the 454 g.  This morning I bought 2.27 L (4 pints) of milk.  And we still judge the speed of a car in mph and its fuel economy in miles per gallon (that&#039;s an Imperial gallon of 4.5 L, not a US gallon of 3.8 L).

Which kind of brings me on to the point.

Quantities have traditionally differed from one place to another, even when they have the same name.  Thus, a gallon is a different quantity depending on which side of the Atlantic you happen to be, and the same goes for tons (the Imperial ton is 20 cwt or 2240 lb, and thus is slightly heavier than the &quot;long ton&quot; of 2200 lb - which incidentally is pretty close to being a &quot;metric&quot; tonne also - and substantially more than the &quot;short ton&quot; of 2000 lb) and probably several other measures too.  The SI transcends this confusion, providing a unified system.  Not only that, but all SI units can be defined in terms of four fundamental quantities (the metre, kilogram, second and Coulomb), so calculations become heaps easier.

Outdated colloquialisms are all very well, but new colloquiallisms will arise over time.  And the older ones will still retain their meaning, or not, according to their use.  After all, why should a country mile be different from any other kind of mile in the first place?

No-one would dream of suggesting that Coleridge&#039;s &lt;i&gt;Rime of the Ancient Mariner&lt;/i&gt; be re-worded thus:

And some, in dreams, assurèd were of the spirit that plagued us so;
4.938 metres* deep he had followed us from the land of mist and snow.

* &quot;Nine fathom&quot; in the original, and who still uses fathoms as a measure of depth?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Way too slow, BA.</p>
<p>In about 1980, the Baron Knights released a single on which the B-side was called <i>Remember Decimalisation</i>.</p>
<p>Its introduction was a voice-over that commented on such strangenesses as the song 2.54-centimetres-worm, Scotland 91.44 Centimetres and Michael 30.48 Centimetres.</p>
<p>About 4 or 5 years ago, a British beer was advertised on telly &#8211; tongue in cheek &#8211; as &#8220;a great 0.57 of a litre&#8221;.  I can&#8217;t remember the beer though, so the advert didn&#8217;t do a great job.</p>
<p>In the UK, it is a requirement of law that goods are sold in &#8220;metric&#8221; quantities.  So we have, on our supermarket shelves, meat by the 454 g.  This morning I bought 2.27 L (4 pints) of milk.  And we still judge the speed of a car in mph and its fuel economy in miles per gallon (that&#8217;s an Imperial gallon of 4.5 L, not a US gallon of 3.8 L).</p>
<p>Which kind of brings me on to the point.</p>
<p>Quantities have traditionally differed from one place to another, even when they have the same name.  Thus, a gallon is a different quantity depending on which side of the Atlantic you happen to be, and the same goes for tons (the Imperial ton is 20 cwt or 2240 lb, and thus is slightly heavier than the &#8220;long ton&#8221; of 2200 lb &#8211; which incidentally is pretty close to being a &#8220;metric&#8221; tonne also &#8211; and substantially more than the &#8220;short ton&#8221; of 2000 lb) and probably several other measures too.  The SI transcends this confusion, providing a unified system.  Not only that, but all SI units can be defined in terms of four fundamental quantities (the metre, kilogram, second and Coulomb), so calculations become heaps easier.</p>
<p>Outdated colloquialisms are all very well, but new colloquiallisms will arise over time.  And the older ones will still retain their meaning, or not, according to their use.  After all, why should a country mile be different from any other kind of mile in the first place?</p>
<p>No-one would dream of suggesting that Coleridge&#8217;s <i>Rime of the Ancient Mariner</i> be re-worded thus:</p>
<p>And some, in dreams, assurèd were of the spirit that plagued us so;<br />
4.938 metres* deep he had followed us from the land of mist and snow.</p>
<p>* &#8220;Nine fathom&#8221; in the original, and who still uses fathoms as a measure of depth?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sebastian</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383681</link>
		<dc:creator>Sebastian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2011 01:29:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383681</guid>
		<description>Jinnah has the answer. It will take at least two generations.

There are people 80+ years old in France who go shopping and convert the price two times. First from Euro to Franc, and then from Franc to &quot;old Franc&quot;

I grew up with the Deutsche Mark (1 Euro = 1.95583 Deutsche Mark) and since I spent way too much money after we got the Euro in 2002 I started calculating in DM again just to have money left at the end of the month ^^;

Kids growing up today don&#039;t even remember the Deutsche Mark so it all really depends on sticking with it and waiting 50 years and you&#039;re set.

So the answer would be: not in your lifetime phil :-)

(by the way: we still use &quot;Siebenmeilenstiefel&quot; for &quot;Seven League Boots&quot; and the fun thing about that is that we use &quot;Meilen&quot; in our word for it, which is &quot;Miles&quot; directly translated. Not &quot;leagues&quot; - so it&#039;s really REALLY not about the distance you try to represent, it&#039;s a pretty rough estimate)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jinnah has the answer. It will take at least two generations.</p>
<p>There are people 80+ years old in France who go shopping and convert the price two times. First from Euro to Franc, and then from Franc to &#8220;old Franc&#8221;</p>
<p>I grew up with the Deutsche Mark (1 Euro = 1.95583 Deutsche Mark) and since I spent way too much money after we got the Euro in 2002 I started calculating in DM again just to have money left at the end of the month ^^;</p>
<p>Kids growing up today don&#8217;t even remember the Deutsche Mark so it all really depends on sticking with it and waiting 50 years and you&#8217;re set.</p>
<p>So the answer would be: not in your lifetime phil <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>(by the way: we still use &#8220;Siebenmeilenstiefel&#8221; for &#8220;Seven League Boots&#8221; and the fun thing about that is that we use &#8220;Meilen&#8221; in our word for it, which is &#8220;Miles&#8221; directly translated. Not &#8220;leagues&#8221; &#8211; so it&#8217;s really REALLY not about the distance you try to represent, it&#8217;s a pretty rough estimate)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: andy</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383669</link>
		<dc:creator>andy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2011 00:03:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383669</guid>
		<description>Didn&#039;t you mean to finish with &quot;It&#039;s hard to 1.8288 meters those phrases catching on&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Didn&#8217;t you mean to finish with &#8220;It&#8217;s hard to 1.8288 meters those phrases catching on&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jinnah</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383656</link>
		<dc:creator>jinnah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 May 2011 21:54:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383656</guid>
		<description>Like Laura above, I&#039;m one of the persons who was just at the right school age when our country converted from imperial to metric systems. So my generation has grown up with vehicles mileage measured in kilometres per gallon, small volumes measured in litres and large ones in gallons, using kg for purchasing food from supermarkets but lbs for purchasing farmers&#039; vegetables, using feet and inches for human scale measurements and metres / kilometres for longer distances.

My favourite measurement though is using Celsius to measure temperature from about 35 degrees down to about 20 degrees, then switching to Fahrenheit for temperatures from 60 degrees down to about 40 degrees, then switching back to Celsius for temperatures from about 10 degrees to below zero.  Makes sense, right?

The most confusing measurement - is that a US gallon or an Imperial gallon you got there?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Like Laura above, I&#8217;m one of the persons who was just at the right school age when our country converted from imperial to metric systems. So my generation has grown up with vehicles mileage measured in kilometres per gallon, small volumes measured in litres and large ones in gallons, using kg for purchasing food from supermarkets but lbs for purchasing farmers&#8217; vegetables, using feet and inches for human scale measurements and metres / kilometres for longer distances.</p>
<p>My favourite measurement though is using Celsius to measure temperature from about 35 degrees down to about 20 degrees, then switching to Fahrenheit for temperatures from 60 degrees down to about 40 degrees, then switching back to Celsius for temperatures from about 10 degrees to below zero.  Makes sense, right?</p>
<p>The most confusing measurement &#8211; is that a US gallon or an Imperial gallon you got there?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383651</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 May 2011 21:21:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383651</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know of anybody who says: &quot;kil-O-gram&quot;. Everybody I&#039;ve ever heard says it &quot;KILLogram&quot;, like you&#039;re saying &quot;KILLometer&quot;. So I agree with you.

Here&#039;s another: is it &quot;GIGawatt&quot; or &quot;JIGawatt&quot;? &quot;GIGabyte&quot; or &quot;JIGabyte&quot;?

Consistency, please!!!!!!

:-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know of anybody who says: &#8220;kil-O-gram&#8221;. Everybody I&#8217;ve ever heard says it &#8220;KILLogram&#8221;, like you&#8217;re saying &#8220;KILLometer&#8221;. So I agree with you.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s another: is it &#8220;GIGawatt&#8221; or &#8220;JIGawatt&#8221;? &#8220;GIGabyte&#8221; or &#8220;JIGabyte&#8221;?</p>
<p>Consistency, please!!!!!!<br />
 <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laura S</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383439</link>
		<dc:creator>Laura S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 17:09:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383439</guid>
		<description>Being a Canadian of a certain age, I totally got screwed up during the first attempts to teach kids the metric system in the 70s. So though I&#039;m perfectly conversant with kilometres for driving, I waffle sadly between inches and centimetres for short distances, using both, but equally badly. I can work fine with temperature, only using Farenheit in the kitchen and Celsius everywhere else--but don&#039;t ask me to swap scales or convert one to the other!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Being a Canadian of a certain age, I totally got screwed up during the first attempts to teach kids the metric system in the 70s. So though I&#8217;m perfectly conversant with kilometres for driving, I waffle sadly between inches and centimetres for short distances, using both, but equally badly. I can work fine with temperature, only using Farenheit in the kitchen and Celsius everywhere else&#8211;but don&#8217;t ask me to swap scales or convert one to the other!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383429</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 16:29:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383429</guid>
		<description>Does anybody realize that a &quot;meter&quot; is a device to measure with, while a &quot;metre&quot; is a length? After all, we (you) don&#039;t say or write &quot;meteric&quot; when we mean &quot;metric,&quot; or &quot;concenteric,&quot; when we mean &quot;concentric.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does anybody realize that a &#8220;meter&#8221; is a device to measure with, while a &#8220;metre&#8221; is a length? After all, we (you) don&#8217;t say or write &#8220;meteric&#8221; when we mean &#8220;metric,&#8221; or &#8220;concenteric,&#8221; when we mean &#8220;concentric.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sarah</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383426</link>
		<dc:creator>Sarah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 16:20:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383426</guid>
		<description>I grew up with the metric system and I have indeed used the phrase, &quot;I wouldn&#039;t touch that with a 10 meter pole&quot;. I thought it would be annoying in the US with imperial (or whatever you folks like to call it here, I don&#039;t think it&#039;s imperial), but I find metric pretty much everywhere, along with the imperial. The only place the measurement differences get me in in temperatures (F vs. C).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I grew up with the metric system and I have indeed used the phrase, &#8220;I wouldn&#8217;t touch that with a 10 meter pole&#8221;. I thought it would be annoying in the US with imperial (or whatever you folks like to call it here, I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s imperial), but I find metric pretty much everywhere, along with the imperial. The only place the measurement differences get me in in temperatures (F vs. C).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Owen Roberts</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383425</link>
		<dc:creator>Owen Roberts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 16:19:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383425</guid>
		<description>What gets me is you yanks can&#039;t even use proper pints quarts and gallons, but your own &quot;SPECIAL&quot; variety
If my 8 year old can work in metric why can&#039;t a yank</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What gets me is you yanks can&#8217;t even use proper pints quarts and gallons, but your own &#8220;SPECIAL&#8221; variety<br />
If my 8 year old can work in metric why can&#8217;t a yank</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ira</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383423</link>
		<dc:creator>Ira</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 16:16:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383423</guid>
		<description>I hate the Imperial system as well, but I understand your literary problem. For that same reason I keep one measurement, when i go to the pub I still order a pint. The Israeli waiters here have no idea what I&#039;m talking about, so I sigh and explain that Guiness cannot be drunk metrically. At which point they nod and back away slowly.

I also fondly remember a letter to the editor in the National Geographic, after the magazine switched from listing measurements in the text as &quot;Imperial (metric)&quot; to &quot;Metric (imperial)&quot;. The angry reader wrote the editor to say the change is a horrible idea in that it PROMOTES COMMUNISM. Yup.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hate the Imperial system as well, but I understand your literary problem. For that same reason I keep one measurement, when i go to the pub I still order a pint. The Israeli waiters here have no idea what I&#8217;m talking about, so I sigh and explain that Guiness cannot be drunk metrically. At which point they nod and back away slowly.</p>
<p>I also fondly remember a letter to the editor in the National Geographic, after the magazine switched from listing measurements in the text as &#8220;Imperial (metric)&#8221; to &#8220;Metric (imperial)&#8221;. The angry reader wrote the editor to say the change is a horrible idea in that it PROMOTES COMMUNISM. Yup.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kill-O-Meter</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383422</link>
		<dc:creator>Kill-O-Meter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 16:09:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383422</guid>
		<description>Dumb american egocentrism. Nothing more than that. Always.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dumb american egocentrism. Nothing more than that. Always.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William R. Dickson</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383421</link>
		<dc:creator>William R. Dickson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 16:09:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383421</guid>
		<description>‘&#039;E could &#039;a drawed me off a pint,’ grumbled the old man as he settled down behind a glass. ‘A &#039;alf litre ain&#039;t enough. It don&#039;t satisfy. And a &#039;ole litre&#039;s too much. It starts my bladder running. Let alone the price.’</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>‘&#8217;E could &#8216;a drawed me off a pint,’ grumbled the old man as he settled down behind a glass. ‘A &#8216;alf litre ain&#8217;t enough. It don&#8217;t satisfy. And a &#8216;ole litre&#8217;s too much. It starts my bladder running. Let alone the price.’</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cody</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383419</link>
		<dc:creator>Cody</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 16:05:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383419</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s not forget this great quote from Ghostbusters:
&quot;This is a major disgrace. Forget MIT or Stanford now. They wouldn&#039;t touch us with a 10 meter cattle prod.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s not forget this great quote from Ghostbusters:<br />
&#8220;This is a major disgrace. Forget MIT or Stanford now. They wouldn&#8217;t touch us with a 10 meter cattle prod.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave, England</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383374</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave, England</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 11:29:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383374</guid>
		<description>@Reply : A hand is a unit of measure for a horse&#039;s height...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Reply : A hand is a unit of measure for a horse&#8217;s height&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lorena</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383307</link>
		<dc:creator>Lorena</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 01:30:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383307</guid>
		<description>metric system FTW! I always have trouble converting to kilometers, meters and kilos when I read about a 5&quot;8 woman, a quarter of a mile race or a diet to lose 50 pounds :S :S
When I traveled to the US a few years ago I had to learn a formula to convert from fahrenheit to celsius :S :S

BTW, people are buried 2 meters deep right? 
someone said &quot;I wouldn&#039;t touch you with a 3 meters pole&quot; Here in Argentina we just say &quot; I woldnt even touch you with a stick&quot; :D :D

“Drop by the pub to grab a half liter” not aplicable in argentina. I really dont know if beer is sold by half a liter, I guess it is, but people would say something like &quot;meet  you at the bar for a beer&quot; or any slang word for beer</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>metric system FTW! I always have trouble converting to kilometers, meters and kilos when I read about a 5&#8243;8 woman, a quarter of a mile race or a diet to lose 50 pounds :S :S<br />
When I traveled to the US a few years ago I had to learn a formula to convert from fahrenheit to celsius :S :S</p>
<p>BTW, people are buried 2 meters deep right?<br />
someone said &#8220;I wouldn&#8217;t touch you with a 3 meters pole&#8221; Here in Argentina we just say &#8221; I woldnt even touch you with a stick&#8221; <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' />  <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>“Drop by the pub to grab a half liter” not aplicable in argentina. I really dont know if beer is sold by half a liter, I guess it is, but people would say something like &#8220;meet  you at the bar for a beer&#8221; or any slang word for beer</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: B-Ste</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383290</link>
		<dc:creator>B-Ste</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2011 21:50:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383290</guid>
		<description>@Jake Featherston - I know many people who use that principle, even in the UK.

For me, it&#039;s the rounding argument that wins.  1&quot; is always 1&quot;, and 1&#039; is always 1&#039;.  It is never the case that it is rounded up or down; it&#039;s not a matter of choice, it simply cannot be!  However, when is 1cm actually 1cm?  Well, it may be, or it may not.  It may be 9.95mm or 10.o4mm.

Whilst I&#039;ll agree with everyone over libra, solidi, denari; lsd: £sd requiring some mental gymnastics, I promise you one thing; I was MUCH better at maths before I stopped needing to use it.

For me, for certainty and for keeping my grey matter working, it&#039;s Imperial. :D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Jake Featherston &#8211; I know many people who use that principle, even in the UK.</p>
<p>For me, it&#8217;s the rounding argument that wins.  1&#8243; is always 1&#8243;, and 1&#8242; is always 1&#8242;.  It is never the case that it is rounded up or down; it&#8217;s not a matter of choice, it simply cannot be!  However, when is 1cm actually 1cm?  Well, it may be, or it may not.  It may be 9.95mm or 10.o4mm.</p>
<p>Whilst I&#8217;ll agree with everyone over libra, solidi, denari; lsd: £sd requiring some mental gymnastics, I promise you one thing; I was MUCH better at maths before I stopped needing to use it.</p>
<p>For me, for certainty and for keeping my grey matter working, it&#8217;s Imperial. <img src='http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jackie Hazel</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383230</link>
		<dc:creator>Jackie Hazel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2011 13:58:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383230</guid>
		<description>The original meaning of some words,or phrases, have inevitably become lost with time, but I was shocked recently to see how quickly that can happen.  At a UK holiday resort shortly before christmas I spotted a festive display which incorporated part of the old rhyme &quot;Christmas is Coming&quot;:
Christmas is coming, the geese are getting fat 
Please put a penny in the old man&#039;s hat 
If you haven&#039;t got a penny, a ha&#039;penny will do 
If you haven&#039;t got a ha&#039;penny, then God bless you!
Those responsible for the display obviously had no idea that &quot;ha&#039;penny&quot; was short for &quot;Half Penny&quot; and so had written it as HAYPENNY.
British Pre-Decimal Half Pennies were abandoned in 1969, and the British Decimal Half Pennies were withdrawn in 1984. One generation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The original meaning of some words,or phrases, have inevitably become lost with time, but I was shocked recently to see how quickly that can happen.  At a UK holiday resort shortly before christmas I spotted a festive display which incorporated part of the old rhyme &#8220;Christmas is Coming&#8221;:<br />
Christmas is coming, the geese are getting fat<br />
Please put a penny in the old man&#8217;s hat<br />
If you haven&#8217;t got a penny, a ha&#8217;penny will do<br />
If you haven&#8217;t got a ha&#8217;penny, then God bless you!<br />
Those responsible for the display obviously had no idea that &#8220;ha&#8217;penny&#8221; was short for &#8220;Half Penny&#8221; and so had written it as HAYPENNY.<br />
British Pre-Decimal Half Pennies were abandoned in 1969, and the British Decimal Half Pennies were withdrawn in 1984. One generation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jake Featherston</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383165</link>
		<dc:creator>Jake Featherston</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 May 2011 19:19:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383165</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know, I&#039;m use to both the metric and Imperial system simply because America borders Canada...

I still prefer using imperial for doing simple do-it-yourself tinkering around the house.
Easier to compute wrenches in inches than in cm/dm/m.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know, I&#8217;m use to both the metric and Imperial system simply because America borders Canada&#8230;</p>
<p>I still prefer using imperial for doing simple do-it-yourself tinkering around the house.<br />
Easier to compute wrenches in inches than in cm/dm/m.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tint</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/05/10/give-him-2-54-centimeters-and-hell-take-1-609344-kilometers/comment-page-6/#comment-383137</link>
		<dc:creator>Tint</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 May 2011 13:14:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=31749#comment-383137</guid>
		<description>Thanks for making my Sunday! A delightful read! Loved your video too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for making my Sunday! A delightful read! Loved your video too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk

Served from: blogs.discovermagazine.com @ 2012-05-25 07:57:01 -->
