Ireland's Lower Speed Limits

Graeme

"Lance Armstrong" <rufty_tufty_hoolythug@nospam.says_I.ko> wrote in
news:BuydnfjV05ZmSnHcRVnysA@pipex.net:

> And not one of you will speed in this group when in charge of a proper
> mode of transport, eh?

No, there's certainly at least one -
http://tinyurl.com/4nxka
and
http://tinyurl.com/6boxg

So which of your speeding vehicles (actual or desired), the Micra or the
scooter do you class as a "proper mode of transport"?

Graeme

Peter Clinch

njf>badger< wrote:

> Do I detect an old alliance connection here?

No, I (who am English, btw) just wish we'd stop faffing about with two
measurement systems when it would ultimately be much easier if we all
used 1. Well done the Irish government for taking them a step closer.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

David Martin

On 19/1/05 8:39 am, in article 356kkhF4jdaslU1@individual.net, "Peter
Clinch" <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:

> njf>badger< wrote:
>
>> Do I detect an old alliance connection here?
>
> No, I (who am English, btw) just wish we'd stop faffing about with two
> measurement systems when it would ultimately be much easier if we all
> used 1. Well done the Irish government for taking them a step closer.

Seconded (and yes I am English too[1])

...d

[1] Well, mostly, with bits of Scot, Welsh and Irish added for good measure,
and possibly a few more far flung bits too[2].

[2] They obviously didn't throuw them far enough.

Richard Bates

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 08:39:36 +0000, Peter Clinch
<p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:

>njf>badger< wrote:
>
>> Do I detect an old alliance connection here?
>
>No, I (who am English, btw) just wish we'd stop faffing about with two
>measurement systems when it would ultimately be much easier if we all
>used 1. Well done the Irish government for taking them a step closer.


I'm generally a metric user and am perfectly capable of performing
calculations on them; but I still mix units when trying to visualise
in my head how big/heavy/fast something is. I even use both metric and
imperial units for the same purpose e.g. length.

For example:

Short lengths such as height of body, height of house, length of back
garden I use metric.

For longer distances such as the distance to the shops, distance
between towns, and distances between countries I use imperial miles.

For mass I think I always use kilograms, which is a stupid SI unit
since it contains the prefix "kilo".

For speed I use miles per hour.

--
Amazon: "If you are interested in 'Asimov's I-Robot',
you may also be interested in 'Garfield - The Movie'.
... erm, how do they figure that one out?

Richard

Peter Clinch wrote:
> njf>badger< wrote:
>
>> Do I detect an old alliance connection here?
>
>
> No, I (who am English, btw) just wish we'd stop faffing about with two
> measurement systems when it would ultimately be much easier if we all
> used 1.

Why? It might be *slightly* easier, but I'd dispute "much" easier. I'm
a scientist, and happily switch between SI (mostly at work), cgs (since
some dinosaurs in the scientific community still use it ;-), imperial
(what I lurned at skool), and certain bits of American measurement
(since Mrs R is American). Horses for courses. And it's easy to
remember the various basic conversion rules for the most common
conversions (deg C/F, miles/km, lbs/kg, litres/gallons).

R.

Peter Clinch

Richard Bates wrote:

> I'm generally a metric user and am perfectly capable of performing
> calculations on them; but I still mix units when trying to visualise
> in my head how big/heavy/fast something is. I even use both metric and
> imperial units for the same purpose e.g. length.

So do I. But there shouldn't be any /need/ to do this, and the sooner
we get rid of the part we don't need the sooner everyone will know what
is meant when I say it's 20 degrees today, and so on.

I have no trouble using either myself, and am pretty good at converting
the two as needed, but the whole activity is pointless and it would be
better, ultimately, if /nobody/ had to do it. So if we get rid of one,
given we know both work, do we keep the one that is used for all serious
science and the great majority of engineering, and also domestic use by
most of the world, or the other one? Looks like a no-brainer to me!

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch

Richard wrote:

> Why? It might be *slightly* easier, but I'd dispute "much" easier. I'm
> a scientist, and happily switch between SI (mostly at work), cgs (since
> some dinosaurs in the scientific community still use it ;-), imperial
> (what I lurned at skool), and certain bits of American measurement
> (since Mrs R is American). Horses for courses. And it's easy to
> remember the various basic conversion rules for the most common
> conversions (deg C/F, miles/km, lbs/kg, litres/gallons).

You're a scientist. Most people aren't, and many can't easily move
between the two.

I don't have much trouble, but that isn't the same as saying it's no
trouble. It certainly isn't /helpful/.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Richard

Peter Clinch wrote:

> So do I. But there shouldn't be any /need/ to do this, and the sooner
> we get rid of the part we don't need the sooner everyone will know what
> is meant when I say it's 20 degrees today, and so on.
>
> I have no trouble using either myself, and am pretty good at converting
> the two as needed, but the whole activity is pointless and it would be
> better, ultimately, if /nobody/ had to do it. So if we get rid of one,
> given we know both work, do we keep the one that is used for all serious
> science and the great majority of engineering, and also domestic use by
> most of the world, or the other one? Looks like a no-brainer to me!

Drifting off-topic, but I think that on a psychological level, it's
better to have a variety of measurements simply to keep people on their
toes and actively thinking about what they're doing. The trouble with
trying to unify everything is that there's always a group who don't or
won't unify (for whatever reason, and some of those reasons are very
good ones). The more unified you get, the more people the unified
system fails to satisfy the requirements of. SI, for example, is really
awkward when dealing with astronomical distances, is marginally awkward
dealing with atomic distances, is really awkward when dealing with
geological timescales...etc.

R.

Peter Clinch

Richard wrote:

> Drifting off-topic, but I think that on a psychological level, it's
> better to have a variety of measurements simply to keep people on their
> toes and actively thinking about what they're doing. The trouble with
> trying to unify everything is that there's always a group who don't or
> won't unify (for whatever reason, and some of those reasons are very
> good ones). The more unified you get, the more people the unified
> system fails to satisfy the requirements of. SI, for example, is really
> awkward when dealing with astronomical distances, is marginally awkward
> dealing with atomic distances, is really awkward when dealing with
> geological timescales...etc.

A fair point, but since MA works better for the geologists talking about
the Palaeozioc, that's what they /all/ use, so there's no unifying to be
done there. But miles and km fulfill basically the same function, so
why have both in routine use?

I certainly don't want all times to be quoted in seconds, but since
everyone already uses minutes, hours and days there's no point in trying
to replace them. OTOH, 5+ billion people use metric routinely which is
hugely more than use imperial, and the same measurement system can be
applied to their day to day cooking recipes as their day to day
mechanical engineering needs. This isn't so much working on an ideology
of unification for its own sake, it's just consolidating so that one
system that provably works for general use is used by everyone for those
general uses.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

JLB

Peter Clinch wrote:
> njf>badger< wrote:
>
>> Do I detect an old alliance connection here?
>
>
> No, I (who am English, btw) just wish we'd stop faffing about with two
> measurement systems when it would ultimately be much easier if we all
> used 1. Well done the Irish government for taking them a step closer.
>

I wonder how close the Irish really are to one system. When I've cycled
around Ireland, I've seen signs with at least two systems of road
numbering and three units of distance (kilometre, imperial mile, Irish
mile). Not to mention the big number of finger-post signs that have been
rotated by playful locals. You need to keep your wits working when
navigating there.

--
Joe * If I cannot be free I'll be cheap

Peter Clinch

JLB wrote:

> I wonder how close the Irish really are to one system.

Note I said "closer", which is a relative term! ;-)

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Badger

Richard wrote:
> Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>> njf>badger< wrote:
>>
>>> Do I detect an old alliance connection here?
>>
>> No, I (who am English, btw) just wish we'd stop faffing about with two
>> measurement systems when it would ultimately be much easier if we all
>> used 1.
>
> Why? It might be *slightly* easier, but I'd dispute "much" easier. I'm
> a scientist, and happily switch between SI (mostly at work), cgs (since
> some dinosaurs in the scientific community still use it ;-), imperial
> (what I lurned at skool), and certain bits of American measurement
> (since Mrs R is American). Horses for courses. And it's easy to
> remember the various basic conversion rules for the most common
> conversions (deg C/F, miles/km, lbs/kg, litres/gallons).
>
> R.
Well having written on the subject, for the benefit of the 'merkans who
keep complaining about metric bolts and the like (WTF is a #5/32?), I
would like a system thats easier too!

Jon Senior

Richard wrote:
> Why? It might be *slightly* easier, but I'd dispute "much" easier. I'm
> a scientist, and happily switch between SI (mostly at work), cgs (since
> some dinosaurs in the scientific community still use it ;-), imperial
> (what I lurned at skool), and certain bits of American measurement
> (since Mrs R is American). Horses for courses. And it's easy to
> remember the various basic conversion rules for the most common
> conversions (deg C/F, miles/km, lbs/kg, litres/gallons).

You'd dispute "much" easier in part because of your background. For the
duration of my schooling, we worked in metric measures. Then we were let
loose into Britain, where a few dinosaurs were complaining that they
couldn't sell in pounds and ounces. I had to learn what a "pound" was in
order to shop at the market in Sheffield, and used to get horribly
confused for some time.

I can easily convert inches > mm for small figures, mainly because I'm
currently playing with steel tubing which is still described in imperial
(1 3/4" x 19g for example). My life would be considerably easier if I
didn't have to; if all my drill bits and holesaws could be in mm; if I
didn't have to think about a 400mm length of 1 1/2" tubing etc.

Km -> Miles I can do (roughly). I have more problems going the other
way. I have never seen / see / will never see any use for fahrenheit,
and have carefully avoided learning how to convert (I ask for
temperatures to be repeated in a real scale!). Gallon? Which one? Why
would I want to?

The only worthwhile justification I ever heard for imperial measurements
was that of easy division. Since there are a number of "imperial"
systems with varying numerical bases this is a non-starter. Give up! Let
it go! We have *evolved*!

<rant over>

Jon

David Martin

On 20/1/05 12:04 am, in article 1106179030.88069.0@iris.uk.clara.net, "Jon
Senior" <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOT_co_DOT_uk> wrote:

> The only worthwhile justification I ever heard for imperial measurements
> was that of easy division. Since there are a number of "imperial"
> systems with varying numerical bases this is a non-starter. Give up! Let
> it go! We have *evolved*!

The imperial system uses pretty natural bases.

dozen is the number of finger carpal bones on one hand
score is the total number of fingers and toes.
gross is the maximum that can be counted on two hands.

inch is the length of a thumb joint.
Yard is the distance from one shoulder to the tip of the fingers on the
opposite side.

A hand is the width of a hand. Perches, poles, links and so on are all based
on easy to standardise measures.

Or we could use the meter which is one millionth the length of the great
circle from the equator to the pole. Handy unit for standardising.

...d