Five foot, two
Five foot two -- eyes of blue. This song 'had to go' with metrification. It is however being re-released as, &'A
Centimeter Shorter Than a Meter and a Quarter.'
This new/old song was played on CBC Radio one Sunday recently. It made me chuckle a little to myself. For one thing, it
was really funny. Secondly, it points out one of the things that I argued was wrong with metrification. 'People will
fractionalize it, just as we did with inches.'
I was never a big fan of metrification; especially in regard to manufacturing processes. When I voiced my opinions on the
subject I was always quickly put down as being a dinosaur.
"It's Natural" they say.
"It's no more natural than anything else devised by man," says I, "it simply has a different basis of development."
"The dollar is divided naturally into 100 units" is argued.
"Loan me a quarter 'till pay day will you?" I ask.
"It eliminates stupid fractions" they say. ";Bull," says I. "Look at a metric rule, it divides the millimeter into
halves because you cannot disseminate tenths of a mm."
"Most of the world uses metric," they say.
"Maybe, but -- most of the goods in this world are manufactured using the decimal inch system," I counter.
"Your non-progressive." they say.
"Your mother wears Army boots: says I. (As my old boss said, "Matt, do you always have to have the last word?"
"Yes, I guess I do," I admit. "I knew it!" he says. "Hey, when your right, your right." I hopefully conclude.)
Before metrification was shoved down our throats back in the 70s, we actually had a metric system that was used in
manufacturing. It was called the metric inch.
The metric inch was the same length as the one that had been around for centuries. It was simply divided into decimals
rather than fractions.
When the European conglomerate decided to build the AirBus they chose to use the metric inch system in the manufacturing.
I have been unable to establish why. It was probably because the metric-inch system is far superior for fine discrimination
of measurement over the metric system.
Since I spent many years in industry in a variety of assignments, I have seen the metric-inch advantages in all
manufacturing processes. Design, fabrication, quality control -- all were easier, in my view, using metric-inch measurement.
I am not so dull as to realize the advantages of metrification. In scientific computations metric is far superior; in
chemistry it is superior. In domestic situations Imperial is better since it is devised on more common items. Feet, thumbs
(inches), teaspoons, cups-full, ½ cups -- these I can understand without a reference.
The following may be boring to some, but intriguing to others.
4000 BC: The cubit is established as the length of a Pharaoh's forearm, just in time to start construction of the Ark.
500 BC: The first inch is established by Rome. It is the width of a man's thumb.
BC: The fathom is established at about 6 feet. (Coincidentally, this is approximately the distance of a drowning man's
utstretched arms.)
1130 AD: The yard is the distance between the end of King Henry's nose to the tip of his thumb, when his arm was extended.
This was made into a steel standard called the iron ulna.
16th Century: A rod is concluded to be the average length of the combined total length of the left feet of the
first 16 men to leave the church on a specific Sunday. (I could not establish if they removed their shoes or not)
1798: The meter was defined as one ten-millionths part of the distance from the North Pole to the Equator along a line
running through Paris. (The French developed it, as you may have guessed.)
1927: The meter is reestablished as being equal to 1,553,164.13 wave lengths of cadmium red light. (Be prepared, there
will be a quiz following this lecture.)
1930: Ford Motor Co. adopts the metric-inch system, which was first established in 1856.
1951: Canada leads the world in establishing the relationship between Metric and Imperial measure. The inch is defined as
25.4 mm. exactly.
1959: The rest of the world accepts Canada's International Inch as a standard.
1984: Mulroney and the Conservatives relax the rules on metrification, just as Napoleon did back in 1812 before he met
his Waterloo.
Much of the inspiration for this article came from one of my old Industrial Engineering textbooks called Fundamentals of
Dimensional Metrology.
In conclusion -- like most things, there is no 'best way' that suits all situations. Best depends on what you are trying
to accomplish.
For small measurements the inch system is better. Metric-Inches get things onto and off the drawing boards and onto the
street, and into the air.
For science the metric system is clearly better. Metrification keeps the scientists on track and free from confusion.
For farmers, mechanics and homemakers the lofty metric system is stiff, with no relationship to the real world. English
inch/pounds measure still makes great pies and cakes and gets the cows fed.
Aren't you glad that I kept this interesting book for 30 years?
Think Proportional Representative government.
|
