Re: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: N/A

["Problah" <problah@zonenet.net>]

Wow cool. Didn't know I was on a high horse, but whatever.
So if it was made off of a misshaped platinum bar, why is nanocalculating 
used in metric and not in standard? I'm not looking for a fight, but although 
your history of it is interesting, you still lean toward the patriotic side 
of why use standard over metric.

Support your local zonenet


---------- Original Message -----------
From: rjune@fuse.net
To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Sent: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 15:35:31 -0400
Subject: Re: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: N/A

> OK TIME FOR YOU TO GET OF YOUR HIGH HORSE
> 
> Unbelievably, the silly dispute over the metric system still exists. 
> Given the particulars of the development and spread of the French 
> system of measurement, any individual easily realizes the total 
> absurdity of the metric system. 
> 
>     Consider how the French of the 1700's were so intent on making 
> an exact, standard measurement that could be replicated. They 
> insisted on finding a standard in nature that would be unchanging 
> for the base of the metric system. So the brilliant French 
> scientists decided on measuring the length of an arc of a meridian 
> that reaches from the North Pole to the Equator to determine the 
> base of the new measuring system. The meter supposedly equals one 
> ten-millionth the length of this quadrant. Yeah well, that is just 
> plain bogus. The French scientists made two huge mistakes: first,
>  the meridian is neither uniform nor unchanging and second, they 
> screwed up with their complicated measurements and were actually 30 
> meters off. Consequently, the French's beloved metric system is 
> actually solely based on a platinum bar made to the incorrect 
> specifications of their measurements of a changing item of nature. 
> Regardless of these glaring errors, the French made the metric 
> system law on Apri! l 7, 1795. Apparently, they were desperate to 
> adopt a system of weights and measures. French politicians and 
> scientists had been working for at least 500 years by this time to 
> organize a uniform system of measurement. The French General 
> Assembly of 1302 first articulated their desired measuring 
> conspiracy with their distasteful motto: "One King, one Law, one 
> Weight, one Measure." In 1790, Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand, a 
> member of France's Constituent Assembly, succeeded in persuading the 
> French Academy of Sciences which claimed representatives from Spain, 
> Italy, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Switzerland to accept the 
> metric system. Talleyrand wanted to do this because he believed if 
> other countries helped to establish the metric system, then they 
> would be more likely to adopt it themselves. Luckily, England 
> declined the invitation and saved us from total measuring conformity 
> directed by the French. 
> 
>     Although the metric system is slowly creeping into US culture, 
> we have stood up to the French more than most other nations. Even 
> though our monetary system is decimal and many stuffy old scientists 
> may prefer the grams and meters, the US luckily retains her 
> independence from the invasive French metric system. 
> > 
> > From: "Problah" <problah@zonenet.net>
> > Date: 2002/09/04 Wed PM 10:57:03 EDT
> > To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
> > Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: N/A
> > 
> > Well it's not figuring out the fraction that's the problem, I just divide 
to 
> > give me a decimal value (still in inches thoe) It's the standard system. 
It 
> > started because American wanted to be so different from the country they 
> > declared independance from that they even came up with a new form of 
> > calculations. It sucks. Metric is so much easier, everything really 
should be 
> > metric, everyone I've spoken to pretty much agrees except the hardcore 
> > patriots. I just don't care for measuring something in fractions, 
converting 
> > it to decimal, and then converting it to metric. It's pointless when the 
> > whole world uses metric, and we are the only country who doesn't. It 
really 
> > makes us and our equipment "Incompatible" in a sense. While I was 
building my 
> > ROV I used standard, and now that most of the equipment I want to buy 
fits up 
> > with metric, I now know what I'm going to use for my sub. It just makes 
it 
> > that much more easier, you know?
> > 
> > 
> > Support your local zonenet
> > 
> > 
> > ---------- Original Message -----------
> > From: Coalbunny <coalbunny@vcn.com>
> > To: personal_submersibles@psubs.org
> > Sent: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 10:33:08 -0600
> > Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: N/A
> > 
> > > Did you know that five out of four people usually have problems with
> > > fraction?  So welcome to the club, man!
> > > Carl
> > > 
> > > Problah wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > I hate fractions. Metric blows away all other scales!!!!
> > > > Okay lessee. I'll give you my best estimate, but you're still going 
to 
> > want
> > > > to dunk it. I'll just give you a max depth you can dunk it to if it 
hold 
> > at
> > > > 165ft
> > > > .3125 inches.
> > > > doing it for .28125 to account for corrosion.
> > > > 18.75inches radius.
> > > > 120 inches long (hopefully that is between weld points.
> > > > .3 steel with a flexibility of 3E7
> > > > gives you:
> > > > 239 to 266 ft. Dramatic difference, don't you agree?
> > > > I think I may have not removed the ten percent from the original 
calc. I
> > > > never said I was a genius. heh, but regardless the original spec I 
gave 
> > you
> > > > tells a different story now that you've sent me all the info. I always
> > > > recommend take half off of that for max operating depth. It's good to 
be
> > > > safe, and 110 feet is where you start really losing light in some 
waters
> > > > anyways.
> > > > Good luck with your project, and definately make sure to get the 
saturated
> > > > propane out of there, Temper it out if you have to, but that will 
change 
> > your
> > > > flexibility, and 75 ft might be all you can really go.
> > > > 
> > > > Support your local zonenet
> > > > 
> > > > ---------- Original Message -----------
> > > > From: majerus@iowatelecom.net
> > > > To: <Personal_Submersibles@psubs.org>
> > > > Sent: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 17:44:38 -0500
> > > > Subject: N/A
> > > > 
> > > > > The body is 37.5 inches round, 10 feet long, 5/16 thickness and
> > > > > mild steel
> > > > ------- End of Original Message -------
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > You're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly
> > > on our own point of view."
> > > -Obi-Wan Kenobi, ROTJ
> > ------- End of Original Message -------
> > 
> > 
> 
> Roger June
> REJ and Company
> rjune@fuse.net
> 513-300-1189
------- End of Original Message -------