NASA is still using feet and pounds
Lee Gold
built using the English system of measurements. And much of the Ares
launch vehicle and Kennedy Space Center ground systems are legacy
hardware built in the English system, too."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/23/nasa_metric/
Back when the Mars Climate Orbit crashed I wrote a filksong about this
named "Isaac Pound" (because Lockheed Martin had used pounds instead of
newtons).
This in spite of "a 2004 agreement by NASA to "conform with US
legislation enacted in 1988 that ordered all government departments to
move towards the exclusive use of SI [International Standard] units".
--Lee
Joe Kesselman
promising up.
Let's REALLY hope they're consistent about it.
Lee Gold
> Let's hope they fix this in the new generation of hardware they're
> promising up.
The Ares rockets *are* the new generation of hardware they're promising
us. They're the rockets that are supposed to be used on the new lunar
habitat and the Mars mission.
--Lee
Joe Kesselman
> The Ares rockets *are* the new generation of hardware
Whups; didn't notice the reference to Ares.
Well... Grump. Deliberate attempt to ensure that everything is
Domestically Contracted in the hope that nobody else wants to deal with
Imperial measurements?
Or maybe it's just another case of American Imperialism.
Wes Struebing
wrote:
If so, (and I have absolutely no reason to doubt you or th3e article,
Lee), howinheck do the 'Merican pieces of the ISS fit with everyone
else's?
(hoping against hope they "fix" it, too)
Wes Struebing
Indeed. We're just giving measure for measure...
Lee Gold
Umm, I assume if you use measurements in inches or centimeters to enough
decimal places you can get stuff that fits. The challenge is making
sure that everyone knows who's using which units.
--Lee, starting to proofread FILKER UP #6, which I hope to have printed
for ConChord
Joe Kesselman
> howinheck do the 'Merican pieces of the ISS fit with everyone
> else's?
Too many nonzero digits after the decimal point, or a design which can
accept a certain amount of slop, or both.
Joe Kesselman
furlongs, and fortnights.
(There may not have been such a rumor a moment ago, but there is now...)
Mark Horning
> If so, (and I have absolutely no reason to doubt you or th3e article,
> Lee), howinheck do the 'Merican pieces of the ISS fit with everyone
> else's?
>
> (hoping against hope they "fix" it, too)
The parts fit because US Customary Units (not to be confused with
Imperial units which are different) have exact conversions to SI
units.
The problem is you have to specify what units you are using. Period.
Just sticking to metric is not a panacea, I can think of at least 4
different "metric" systems, all of which are incompatible with each
other. (Quick how much torque do you need, is it in Newton-meters or
Newton-centemetres, is work measured in Watts or ergs, is the allowed
static charge in Coulombs, Statcoulombs, ESU, e, or some other unit?)
Rafe Culpin
keshlam.c...@verizon.net (Joe Kesselman) wrote:
> There's a rumor that they're planning to change next year -- to
> stones, furlongs, and fortnights.
I think you mean the Furlong/Firkin/Fortnight system.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FFF_system
--
To reply email rafe, at the address filk co uk
Information on filk in the UK: http://filk.co.uk/
Joe Kesselman
It really is a bit easier if everyone _agrees_ on what units are being
used, to remove the risk of error. Similarly, metric does avoid some odd
multipliers. (So would measuring everything in inches and ounces,
admittedly.)
Yes, the machines can handle all the conversions. Humans, alas, do not
always remember to instruct the machines properly.
Hubble.
Joe Kesselman
> I think you mean the Furlong/Firkin/Fortnight system.
Great. Another incompatability. <grin/>
David G. Bell
<h1tq1q$co5$1...@news.eternal-september.org> lee....@ca.rr.com
"Lee Gold" wrote:
This problem has been around since before WW2, converting drawings from
Metric to Imperial standards. And in some cases there was major extra
work to improve the production engineering. The original 40mm Bofors had
a lot of "file-to-fit".
--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
On the horizon, a carrier task force of the Salvation Navy was
turning into the wind, preparing to launch Zeppelins.
David G. Bell
<h1uj7k$g2p$1...@news.eternal-september.org> lee....@ca.rr.com
"Lee Gold" wrote:
Which can mean using special tools.
It's not the measurements, it's the whole system. And it can be the
difference between specifying "half-inch Whitworth" and the detailed
measurements of the thread in metric units.
Wes Struebing
Thanks! We'll be sure to spread it, then...
;-)
Kip Williams
Fortunately, metric considerations are always on topic.
Kip W
Joe Kesselman
> Fortunately, metric considerations are always on topic.
I don't think I want to try to write a polyrhythm which beats inches
against centimeters... 2.54:1 might be amusing but isn't human playable.
Joe Kesselman
> I don't think I want to try to write a polyrhythm which beats inches
> against centimeters... 2.54:1 might be amusing but isn't human playable.
Though actually, 5:2 isn't bad
Thump, Thud-dum-thump, thump, BANG...
Kip Williams
Well, it's just 127 against 50. Learn the hands separately, and combine
them. If it's too hard, throw in some rubato to fuzz the issue.
Kip W
thnidu
wrote:
> Though actually, 5:2 isn't bad
> Thump, Thud-dum-thump, thump, BANG...
Don't you mean
Thump, Thud-dum-thump, thump, CRASH!!
Mark A. Mandel
The Filker With No Nickname
http://filk.cracksandshards.com/
Joe Kesselman
Joe Kesselman
>> Though actually, 5:2 isn't bad
>> Thump, Thud-dum-thump, thump, BANG...
>
> Don't you mean
> Thump, Thud-dum-thump, thump, CRASH!!
Only when it it's really 5.08:2. Or on alternate Tuesdays from 9AM to 5PM.
Lee Gold
I would've thought 5:2 was more likely to be something along the lines of
RUMP tit-ty TUM tah
(with apologies to Fritz Leiber
for mangling his immortal rhythm)
but maybe I'm wrong. Joe or Mark, please tell me in your rhythm above,
which are the five beats and which are the two beats.
Up till now, my main acaquaintance with a five beat tune is with
Brubeck's "Take Five."
--Lee
Karen Rodgers
wrote:
>Up till now, my main acaquaintance with a five beat tune is with
>Brubeck's "Take Five."
>
Which is an outstanding example of 5/4. The break up in rhythm is
usually 123 12 in 5/4. Next time you listen to "Take Five" clap it
out, and you'll hear it very well.
Karen R.
Joe Kesselman
> Joe or Mark, please tell me in your rhythm above,
> which are the five beats and which are the two beats.
That's a transcription of my beating five on one hand against two on the
other, with the T's being left hand (5), the "dum" being right hand
alone (first 2), and BANG being both hands together (last 5, last 2).
Obviously this can be rotated forward and backward, or accent shifted,
to produce somewhat different effects while staying within the same synch.
> Up till now, my main acaquaintance with a five beat tune is with
> Brubeck's "Take Five."
5-against-2 is probably better thought of as 5/10 time, since every
other "2" beat comes on a half-note.
Joe Kesselman
... or maybe 5/8? That's getting beyond my knowledge of the conventions.
Oh, re shifting accents: The balkan tune I keep promising myself I'll
learn to play properly plays with that -- it's 13/16 all the way
through, but the accents are not always in the same places.
(I don't try to count it; I try to feel it. It all makes sense if you
think of it as a series of dance patterns with some slower and some
faster steps. For example, the first melody is accented as
12,12,12,123,12,12, which I think of as right, left, right, left behind
(grapevine), right, left.)
Karen Rodgers
<garym@_MYLASTNAME_.com> wrote:
>In article <uulf45h334iq9ln52...@4ax.com>,
>A possibly better-known example, at least to science fiction fans, is
>Mars from Holst's "The Planets." The 5/4 march rhythm is part of what
>makes it so disturbing. Clearly Martians have five legs!
My first thought was "wait, no it isn't" then I started "listening" to
it in memory, and promptly slapped myself in the head. Duh, of
course. Another one is the original theme to "Mission Impossible" by
Lalo Shifren (sp?).
>I just tried playing a simple riff on the keyboard with 5 to a bar in
>the left hand and 2 to a bar in the right. It requires split-brained
>thinking, and it's very hard to keep the right-hand part even.
Playing quintuplets against two? Interesting. Hmm....
Should try writing something for that sometime.
Karen R.
Paul Ciszek
In article <4c016d59-472d-4d27...@d2g2000pra.googlegroups.com>,
Mark Horning <mhor...@eskimo.com> wrote:
>
>The problem is you have to specify what units you are using. Period.
>Just sticking to metric is not a panacea, I can think of at least 4
>different "metric" systems, all of which are incompatible with each
>other. (Quick how much torque do you need, is it in Newton-meters or
>Newton-centemetres,
At least converting between those two is a snap.
>is work measured in Watts or ergs, is the allowed
*Power* is measured in Watts.
>static charge in Coulombs, Statcoulombs, ESU, e, or some other unit?)
For anything you intend to build and throw thow the switch on, you'd
better use Coulombs. Those other unit systems may be cute ways of
making some of the constants go away, but I find that when you work
in them you can't derive practical answers like "How big does the coil
need to be?".
--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |
Scott Dorsey
>In article <4c016d59-472d-4d27...@d2g2000pra.googlegroups.com>,
>Mark Horning <mhor...@eskimo.com> wrote:
>>The problem is you have to specify what units you are using. Period.
>>Just sticking to metric is not a panacea, I can think of at least 4
>>different "metric" systems, all of which are incompatible with each
>>other. (Quick how much torque do you need, is it in Newton-meters or
>>Newton-centemetres,
>
>At least converting between those two is a snap.
We have a single facility in which you can see various things measured in
inches of water, inches of mercury, millimeters of mercury, bars, torr,
pascals, pounds per square inch, pounds per square foot, and atmospheres.
All in the same control room.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Daniel R. Reitman
Ciszek) wrote:
>
>In article <4c016d59-472d-4d27...@d2g2000pra.googlegroups.com>,
>Mark Horning <mhor...@eskimo.com> wrote:
>>
>>. . . .
>. . . .
>>is work measured in Watts or ergs, is the allowed
>
>*Power* is measured in Watts.
>>. . . .
>. . . .
Yes, but the question is whether it's measured the same way in
Hollywood. :-,)
Dan, ad nauseam
Joe Kesselman
> We have a single facility in which you can see various things measured in
> inches of water, inches of mercury, millimeters of mercury, bars, torr,
> pascals, pounds per square inch, pounds per square foot, and atmospheres.
> All in the same control room.
Sometimes that isn't an entirely bad thing, if those are the units that
operators are used to for that particular measurement and you've got a
changing personnel base. "Yeah, that looks right" is hard to replace
without some retraining time.
... Sorry, still isn't turning into lyrics. Trying.
Scott Dorsey
That's why it's that way, yes. But it still can turn into a nightmare of
conversion factors now and then.
>... Sorry, still isn't turning into lyrics. Trying.
"Stopped at Gimli, nearly missed them,
Blamed it on the Metric System?"