NationStates Jolt Archive

This can only mean that the last real pro has left NASA. Now, mission control is undoubtedly staffed by a call-center in Bangalore and launch control is run by a bunch of H1-B visa holders.

What could cause this kind of turmoil in our national space agency? Measuring (http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20070108/sc_space/nasafinallygoesmetric), that's what. Now, NASA thinks it needs to keep track of how far it is to the moon and back in kilograms or something. Miles, not even nautical miles are good enough for them any more. They need to use metrics. How unAmerican.


When
NASA returns astronauts to the Moon, the mission will be measured kilometers, not miles.

The agency has decided to use metric units for all operations on the lunar surface, according to a statement released today.

Damn. Just Damn.

So its unamerican to use a more efficient system?

I seem to recall a certain multimillion dollar Mars orbiter falling out of the sky because of a metric-to-standard conversion error...

Just a question that has been bothering me lately...conspiracy theories about the first manned lunar landing aside...why haven't there been oodles of further lunar landings? I mean...they study space dust and just float around doing boring things anyway...why NOT go to the moon more often?

Just a question that has been bothering me lately...conspiracy theories about the first manned lunar landing aside...why haven't there been oodles of further lunar landings? I mean...they study space dust and just float around doing boring things anyway...why NOT go to the moon more often?

Because, the moon is like Earth's pet rock. Nice to have, but really, it's just worthless. Now if they found oil on the moon.

Just a question that has been bothering me lately...conspiracy theories about the first manned lunar landing aside...why haven't there been oodles of further lunar landings? I mean...they study space dust and just float around doing boring things anyway...why NOT go to the moon more often?

Because of money. Going to the moon is rather expensive.

So its unamerican to use a more efficient system?

Inefficiency and being contrary is the American way.

I seem to recall a certain multimillion dollar Mars orbiter falling out of the sky because of a metric-to-standard conversion error...

Exactly my point. If there were no need to convert back from metric, there would be no problems. Look at the Mercury and Gemini programs. Apollo, even. The number of mishaps that were attributable to conversion errors were zero.

Inefficiency and being contrary is the American way.

Damned right. You understand precisely.

So its unamerican to use a more efficient system?

Yep, that's why the US military uses the metric system.

Just a question that has been bothering me lately...conspiracy theories about the first manned lunar landing aside...why haven't there been oodles of further lunar landings? I mean...they study space dust and just float around doing boring things anyway...why NOT go to the moon more often?
I've been keeping them busy with dust and rocks from my farm. I guess they were too busy in the big transition to metricism to even notice.

METRIC!?

AGH!!11!!LIBERALMEDIA!11!!!!!!one1!!!BLAMECANADA!!eleven!!!BENEDICTARNOLD!!!1n00b!1!

Just a question that has been bothering me lately...conspiracy theories about the first manned lunar landing aside...why haven't there been oodles of further lunar landings? I mean...they study space dust and just float around doing boring things anyway...why NOT go to the moon more often?

It's veeeeeeeeeeery expensive.

The US got very lucky when Britain changed to the Gregorian calendar some 20 years before the independence. Otherwise they'd still be using Julian and bitching about the expense to change to the Gregorian calendar and the unamericaness of having solstices actually falling on the date they should fall.

Very expensive is the lame excuse? Like THAT's stopped anyone...just declare war on the moon, rouse the war machine...it's great for business and it just kind of pays for itself somehow!

Exactly my point. If there were no need to convert back from metric, there would be no problems. Look at the Mercury and Gemini programs. Apollo, even. The number of mishaps that were attributable to conversion errors were zero.
Or if we, you know, used ONLY the metric system, we wouldn't have to worry about conversion at all.

And the conversion error in question was caused by an American team using one system and a European team using another, not the American team using both. Our insistence on the old system makes it more difficult to do international work.

Very expensive is the lame excuse? Like THAT's stopped anyone...just declare war on the moon, rouse the war machine...it's great for business and it just kind of pays for itself somehow!

Considering that people back then were actually concerned about spending...

Plus, people thought there were better uses for the billions being spent for every launch. Simple politics. Remember that some members of Congress tried to get NASA shut down after the Apollo 1 fire.

Or if we, you know, used ONLY the metric system, we wouldn't have to worry about conversion at all.

And the conversion error in question was caused by an American team using one system and a European team using another, not the American team using both. Our insistence on the old system makes it more difficult to do international work.

And if the Europeans had used standard measurements, again, no problem. Metric is just an excuse for not being able to hold a tolerance.

i agree with you fool-heartedly. why be like everyone else? I mean why can't they convert to American? that might sound rather impracticle, but hey, who's at the head of the game? we didnt get there in metric units.:headbang:

i agree with you fool-heartedly. why be like everyone else? I mean why can't they convert to American? that might sound rather impracticle, but hey, who's at the head of the game? we didnt get there in metric units.:headbang:

I just can't fall in love with a measurement system that doesn't use terms like slug and hogshead and not refer to anything living.

Metric is just too plain and boring ... pica nano micro, milli ... who cares? Each of those should have a unique name that has no relation to the base unit being measured.

I seem to recall a certain multimillion dollar Mars orbiter falling out of the sky because of a metric-to-standard conversion error...

Exactly, once you realize you can't do math, just make all the numbers wrong and they will be de facto correct.

And if the Europeans had used standard measurements, again, no problem. Metric is just an excuse for not being able to hold a tolerance.

And that's why nothing that requires great precision, like microchips, is built using the metric system. Oh, wait...

And that's why nothing that requires great precision, like microchips, is built using the metric system. Oh, wait...

On a serious note, the system that is used to measure, has absolutely nothing to do with the precision to which a measurement is taken. Because I can measure something to be 0.001 M, doesn't mean that I can't also measure it to be 0.0039 in. Or some equivalent measurement in AUs, even.

Good. I thought they used metric already though...

Good. I thought they used metric already though...

They pretty much do. I think this just makes it inescapable. Now, those lousy Russian machinists that can't cut a 7/16" nut, will be able to use their metric wrenches on a metric nut.

Oh please - only the U.S., Liberia, and Myanmar still use "standard". So the metric system really is the world-wide standard, no matter what you say.

I believe the only reason the U.S. is so against the switch is because the metric system dates back to revolutionary France.

I just can't fall in love with a measurement system that doesn't use terms like slug and hogshead and not refer to anything living.

Metric is just too plain and boring ... pica nano micro, milli ... who cares? Each of those should have a unique name that has no relation to the base unit being measured.It being easier to use is irrelevant. It's just too boring.

I find it funny what some people find to whine about. Metric is a major improvement.

Just a question that has been bothering me lately...conspiracy theories about the first manned lunar landing aside...why haven't there been oodles of further lunar landings? I mean...they study space dust and just float around doing boring things anyway...why NOT go to the moon more often?
Because the world wouldn't accept the moon being used as a weapons base against earth.
But AMerica can lie about the TV sattelite that is to be a weapons base...

Oh please - only the U.S., Liberia, and Myanmar still use "standard". So the metric system really is the world-wide standard, no matter what you say.

I believe the only reason the U.S. is so against the switch is because the metric system dates back to revolutionary France.
Liberia being Americas Freed-Slave Puppet, Myanmar being a Nut bar Dictatorship and America bein America:rolleyes: .

Metric is a lot better. I doubt this will effect anything major, but it will make things a bit easier and more convenient, thus possibly helping to incourage NASA to rope in human resources.

As for going to the moon again, I'm for it! But we mainly did it the first time so we could come off as superior in the great cold war USSR/USA egofest. Now that's done, and there's not a lot of things an astronaut can do on the moon that robots can't. When we go there again we'll be setting up moon bases and whatnot, and that'll require manned landings for sure. But until we're ready to take that step there's not much point in landing astronauts on the moon these days.

This can only mean that the last real pro has left NASA. Now, mission control is undoubtedly staffed by a call-center in Bangalore and launch control is run by a bunch of H1-B visa holders.

What could cause this kind of turmoil in our national space agency? Measuring (http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20070108/sc_space/nasafinallygoesmetric), that's what. Now, NASA thinks it needs to keep track of how far it is to the moon and back in kilograms or something. Miles, not even nautical miles are good enough for them any more. They need to use metrics. How unAmerican.


Damn. Just Damn.
Actually, considering that this is a scientific endevor, this makes perfect sense.

Wouldn't it make more sense to use a standard system for all space programs, to facilitate efficient communications and more cooperation between them? It seems kind of pointless to waste time and money converting between the two systems, especially when there are a number of major programs besides NASA.

Oh please - only the U.S., Liberia, and Myanmar still use "standard". So the metric system really is the world-wide standard, no matter what you say.

And the metric system is what the U.S. government uses officially. It's just the populace that don't use it.

On a serious note, the system that is used to measure, has absolutely nothing to do with the precision to which a measurement is taken. Because I can measure something to be 0.001 M, doesn't mean that I can't also measure it to be 0.0039 in. Or some equivalent measurement in AUs, even.

There's a bit more precision in metric units than in the name I can't spell units. Avourdupois, or something.

And the metric system is what the U.S. government uses officially. It's just the populace that don't use it.

It would be cool if we used metric measurements with Imperial names. Those names are pretty cool, even if the system is as screwed up as all hell.

Very expensive is the lame excuse? Like THAT's stopped anyone...just declare war on the moon, rouse the war machine...it's great for business and it just kind of pays for itself somehow!

Just tell Bush there are terrists on the moon and he'll have a foce there in no time.

Sure, he'll probably kill another 3,000 people somehow, but doesn't everyone these days?

What's really funny is that in Star Trek, Original Series, they use standard but by The Next Generation they use metric. So this is more a Kirk vs Picard thing.

On a serious note, the system that is used to measure, has absolutely nothing to do with the precision to which a measurement is taken. Because I can measure something to be 0.001 M, doesn't mean that I can't also measure it to be 0.0039 in. Or some equivalent measurement in AUs, even.

Actually, until the "standard" was based on metric system it could not be used for accurate measurements because the units were not defined accurately enough. Nowadays you use metric too, you just add another conversion on top of everything and rename the units: Remeber that the US standard is based on metric.

Why not just drop the conversion and move completely to metric already?

So its unamerican to use a more efficient system?

Efficiency is not our way! If we wanted a more effecient number system, we would have the private sector design one! And it would be American!

Oh please - only the U.S., Liberia, and Myanmar still use "standard". So the metric system really is the world-wide standard, no matter what you say.

My opinion of Myanmar just fell further...

|\/|3tr1K syzt3m 4 lyph3!1!11nigga111rleleven221

|\/|3tr1K syzt3m 4 lyph3!1!11nigga111rleleven221

I don't know how you managed it, but somehow you just violated every single rule of 1337. And it's practically impossible to violate any of them.

Exactly my point. If there were no need to convert back from metric, there would be no problems. Look at the Mercury and Gemini programs. Apollo, even. The number of mishaps that were attributable to conversion errors were zero.
BS science has been using metrics for ages ... ever take a physics course(college level)?
They were converting ... they just managed to have not screwed it up on that scale

Now if we move to the more efficient system ... there would be no need to convert would there?

BS science has been using metrics for ages ... ever take a physics course(collage level)?
They were converting ... they just managed to have not screwed it up on that scale

Now if we move to the more efficient system ... there would be no need to convert would there?

Plus, there's the fact that just using the U.S. system requires conversion, since all the units are defined in terms of metric units.

Or if we, you know, used ONLY the metric system, we wouldn't have to worry about conversion at all.

And the conversion error in question was caused by an American team using one system and a European team using another, not the American team using both. Our insistence on the old system makes it more difficult to do international work.

And is a pain in the arse to write programs for ... base 10 to 2 conversion is relitivly simple in comparison to the constant changes between units for us computer people.

Just a question that has been bothering me lately...conspiracy theories about the first manned lunar landing aside...why haven't there been oodles of further lunar landings? I mean...they study space dust and just float around doing boring things anyway...why NOT go to the moon more often?

The original moon landing was just a uriniating contest with the Russians. Who could get the fartherst first. The Russians won with the first man in space, the Americans won first man on the moon.

This can only mean that the last real pro has left NASA. Now, mission control is undoubtedly staffed by a call-center in Bangalore and launch control is run by a bunch of H1-B visa holders.

What could cause this kind of turmoil in our national space agency? Measuring (http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20070108/sc_space/nasafinallygoesmetric), that's what. Now, NASA thinks it needs to keep track of how far it is to the moon and back in kilograms or something. Miles, not even nautical miles are good enough for them any more. They need to use metrics. How unAmerican.


Damn. Just Damn.
I'm sure having a more efficient system is more impirtant then being american.

And if the Europeans had used standard measurements, again, no problem. Metric is just an excuse for not being able to hold a tolerance.

it's highly unlikely for a country to switch from one impractical measurement system to another. (before we had the metric systm, all european countries were using different system, all just as stupid as american units. also, since Europe is not america, we won't take the "being american" thing as a reason.

Pretty much every scientist in the universe, then ones here in the UK, use metric (because it makes sense) as do most under the age of 20 or so. I'd go metric tomorrow and wouldn't complain one bit.

I mean, I was making gravy yesterday, and the book said to make five fluid ounces or so. The gravy granules said one teaspoon in 1 pint. I mean, WTF?

So, I went and found the metric measurements.

This can only mean that the last real pro has left NASA. Now, mission control is undoubtedly staffed by a call-center in Bangalore and launch control is run by a bunch of H1-B visa holders.

What could cause this kind of turmoil in our national space agency? Measuring (http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20070108/sc_space/nasafinallygoesmetric), that's what. Now, NASA thinks it needs to keep track of how far it is to the moon and back in kilograms or something. Miles, not even nautical miles are good enough for them any more. They need to use metrics. How unAmerican.


Damn. Just Damn.

Oh shut up with this "unAmerican" bullshit. Yeah we all like our English units, but whatever, England changed and so should we. Yeah I always measure an "inch" in my mind, and not a centimeter. But if the whole world all used one system, it sure as would make everything, especially learning, more efficient. I will not go as far as to say the metric system is more efficient itself, but everyone using one system is.

Pretty much every scientist in the universe, then ones here in the UK, use metric (because it makes sense) as do most under the age of 20 or so. I'd go metric tomorrow and wouldn't complain one bit.

I mean, I was making gravy yesterday, and the book said to make five fluid ounces or so. The gravy granules said one teaspoon in 1 pint. I mean, WTF?

So, I went and found the metric measurements.

In my kitchen, you wouldn't have needed to do that. I can't imagine measuring spoons in ??liter sizes. It's bad enough that we have to see the number of ?L on our measuring cups. It's one or two cups, not a bunch of mL.

Of all the pointless things to whine about...

Of all the pointless things to whine about...

It had been a couple of months without this topic coming up, so I guess we were due.

Metric might make sense, but it's FRENCH!

This is so wrong, it makes me want to burn my American flag!




;)

It had been a couple of months without this topic coming up, so I guess we were due.

Everything runs in cycles.

By the way, why haven't we adopted metric time in the name of efficiency?

Everything runs in cycles.

By the way, why haven't we adopted metric time in the name of efficiency?

You.

Is this a serious thread?

I have my doubts.

Pretending it is, I have this to say: I'm glad I'm in Quebec where everyone uses both systems all the time, so it doesn't matter what you use, because I can use it too.

I also think I was part of the last generation to do schoolwork in both systems, including sciences.

Kips or Newtons, inches or millimeters, cups or litres, doesn't matter to me. I can convert them in my head.

Is this a serious thread?


No

This has been another edition of simple answers to simple questions. :D

You.

Good. At least I've done something constructive with my life.

Is this a serious thread?

I have my doubts.

Pretending it is, I have this to say: I'm glad I'm in Quebec where everyone uses both systems all the time, so it doesn't matter what you use, because I can use it too.

I also think I was part of the last generation to do schoolwork in both systems, including sciences.

Kips or Newtons, inches or millimeters, cups or litres, doesn't matter to me. I can convert them in my head.

Of course not. But I seem to be the only one that laments the passing of a colorful and expressive system of measurements for one that varies only in the Greek prefix that is applied.

Metric might make sense, but it's FRENCH!

This is so wrong, it makes me want to burn my American flag!




;)

Clearly a French plot to ruin the world, now that English has become the language of diplomacy.

Everything runs in cycles.

By the way, why haven't we adopted metric time in the name of efficiency?

I was a little kid when Australia went metric. We went metric with a vengence, fines for using the old system in shops, horrible ongoing quibbling about legacies in the language, and the 600ml bottle. (Most people still say "milage" for how many kilometres a car will go on a litre of petrol.) It was onerous at the time, but it worked. Imperial measurements have been banished to old recipe books.

As a kid, I of course asked why we couldn't reform the measurement of time. Hundred minute hours. Ten hour days, ten days to a week ... er, ok. Even as a kid, I could see that a ten-week year or hundred-week year would get out of synch with the seasons pretty quickly.

I wrapping this up, really. I'm not going to bang on forever. Here you are: unlike distance or force, time has naturally occurring distinctions which we are bound by. We can only redefine a 'day' by avoiding sunlight, redefine a 'year' by ignoring the weather, and redefine a 'month' by avoiding women.

Bugger efficiency I say.

|\/|3tr1K syzt3m 4 lyph3!1!11nigga111rleleven221

I have read your signature several times in different threads. It is far superior to the post above it in every instance. Please attribute the text in your signature (ie put the name of the author at the end of it.)

By the way, why haven't we adopted metric time in the name of efficiency?

Time is metric. Minutes and hours are informal uses.

Time is metric. Minutes and hours are informal uses.
How so? We have all sorts of mixed number bases in our customary measurements for time, once we get below the millenia, century, decade stuff. I mean there are fortnights, weekends, workweeks and so on, let alone the stuff like hours, days, and months that we normally discuss.

How so? We have all sorts of mixed number bases in our customary measurements for time, once we get below the millenia, century, decade stuff. I mean there are fortnights, weekends, workweeks and so on, let alone the stuff like hours, days, and months that we normally discuss.

Time is measured with seconds. The rest are informal uses, but days and years are used in science for convienence.

How so? We have all sorts of mixed number bases in our customary measurements for time, once we get below the millenia, century, decade stuff. I mean there are fortnights, weekends, workweeks and so on, let alone the stuff like hours, days, and months that we normally discuss.
Who the fuck uses fortnight? And workweek isn't a formal definition of a period of time.

Actually, I was wrong about days and years being informal units. They are formal. Doesn't make time any less metric, since they are not defined by seconds. Other metric systems use multiple base units, like length, which uses meters, light years, and parsecs.

I just can't fall in love with a measurement system that doesn't use terms like slug and hogshead and not refer to anything living.

Metric is just too plain and boring ... pica nano micro, milli ... who cares? Each of those should have a unique name that has no relation to the base unit being measured.

just as I can't fall in love with a system that picks its bases out of thin air. iit's like, impossible to convert between american units.

serously, lets say that we have some other system, forget naming the units, for the sake of the demostration the will be called unit A, unit B, and unit C. now lets say that there are 16 of unit A in a Unit B, and 8 of unit B in a unit C. It would be really difficult to convert between unit A and unit C, especially if your measurement is not a whole number.

But take a look at your system. except for not having stupid unit names, this made up system just explained above is so much like the US measurement system.

But if you really need to use weird measurements, go ahead. In fact, maybe you could try measuring time in Fortnights.

This can only mean that the last real pro has left NASA. Now, mission control is undoubtedly staffed by a call-center in Bangalore and launch control is run by a bunch of H1-B visa holders.

What could cause this kind of turmoil in our national space agency? Measuring (http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20070108/sc_space/nasafinallygoesmetric), that's what. Now, NASA thinks it needs to keep track of how far it is to the moon and back in kilograms or something. Miles, not even nautical miles are good enough for them any more. They need to use metrics. How unAmerican.


Damn. Just Damn.

Yawn. That's a silly, ignorant rant. try again.

I seem to recall a certain multimillion dollar Mars orbiter falling out of the sky because of a metric-to-standard conversion error...

Almost. It wasn't a conversionm failure but a failure to communicate error. The NASA navagation team expected it's thruster data in the metric units they've used for a long time - Newton/seconds, but Lockheed-Martin gave it to them in pound/seconds.
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/launches/orbiter_errorupd_093099.htm

Exactly my point. If there were no need to convert back from metric, there would be no problems. Look at the Mercury and Gemini programs. Apollo, even. The number of mishaps that were attributable to conversion errors were zero.

There was no need to convert, just report the data in the proper system or at leasgt tell NASA if you don't.

I believe the only reason the U.S. is so against the switch is because the metric system dates back to revolutionary France.

Actually the US was one of the original signatories to the metric treaty. I'll look up the link later if you want. Generally speaking, science and other important functions are done in metric already. For common ordinary day-to-day usage, English/Imperial is kept for a few reasons. More later.

Actually, considering that this is a scientific endevor, this makes perfect sense.

And NASA has been doing most of it's measurements in metric for quite some time.

In my kitchen, you wouldn't have needed to do that. I can't imagine measuring spoons in ??liter sizes. It's bad enough that we have to see the number of ?L on our measuring cups. It's one or two cups, not a bunch of mL.

More silly ignorance.

By the way, why haven't we adopted metric time in the name of efficiency?

Because it really didn't occur to them to create one. Perhaps because back then there was not that much concern about time and its relationship to the other dimensions was unknown.

Later the SI simply adopted the second, defined it in absolute terms and based the larger units, like the minute and the day, on it. However I'd bet good money that you come across milliseconds and microseconds all the time, even hertz.

Perhaps when a good part of humanity lives without relation to the surface of the earth a decimal system for large units of time can be considered.

This can only mean that the last real pro has left NASA. Now, mission control is undoubtedly staffed by a call-center in Bangalore and launch control is run by a bunch of H1-B visa holders.

What could cause this kind of turmoil in our national space agency? Measuring (http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20070108/sc_space/nasafinallygoesmetric), that's what. Now, NASA thinks it needs to keep track of how far it is to the moon and back in kilograms or something. Miles, not even nautical miles are good enough for them any more. They need to use metrics. How unAmerican.


Damn. Just Damn.

It's probably because metric is more scientific than miles and stuff. Like everything going on with powers of 10. Kilo = 1000, KM = 1000M, MM=(10 minus cubed)M etc...And kilogram is the measure for mass, not distance...

I have read your signature several times in different threads. It is far superior to the post above it in every instance. Please attribute the text in your signature (ie put the name of the author at the end of it.)

I would need to attribute it to myself then (and to be honest, my cat Cowey is actually still alive).

The original moon landing was just a uriniating contest with the Russians. Who could get the fartherst first. The Russians won with the first man in space, the Americans won first man on the moon.

So that means the Soviets probably suffered from premature ejaculation too, right? ;)