first metric century :)

"James Hodson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 14:46:25 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you

know? said:

Absolutely impossible, As was the fact that I grew nearly
two inches in height after the age of 21.

I was 6'00" at 13 and still am the same height. My weight,
however, may have altered up and down over the years.

You're lucky it's been going down, mine won't whatever I do.

Alan
--
Reply to alan(at)windsor-berks(dot)freeserve(dot)co(dot)uk

Alan Holmes said:

I also cycled to a town called Carnforth in Lancaster
about 260 miles in about 10 hours, just to go to a
folk dance.

Now we know you're mad. Nobody in their right mind goes to a
folk dance.

Tony ;-)

Alan Holmes [email hidden] opined the
following...

Quoted message said:

I never have any problems with LSD even without the use of
computers, in fact some people have problems with metric,
some time ago I bought some fish and chips, the bill came
to =A32.20 I presented a =A310 note an=

d a

Quoted message said:

20 pence piece, the operator could not work out the
difference without a computer!

That's not a problem with metric... that's a problem with
maths. Anyone=20 who needs assistance for 10 - 2 is going to
struggle whatever the=20 numerical base.

Quoted message said:

I do wonder how many people today would cope with 960
farthings to the pound.

Fewer than cope with 100 pence. Given the whole "10 digits
on two=20 hands" thing, base 10 does tend to be a simple
one for us.

Jon

Alan Holmes [email hidden] opined the
following...

Quoted message said:

And we buy plywood in metric thicknesses but in 8 X 4
foot sheets!

No. We buy it in 2440mm x 1220mm sheets. This may happen to
coincide with 8' x 4' but it still sold in mm.

Jon

Alan Holmes [email hidden] opined the
following...

Quoted message said:

Today I was travelling along the A4 when I paced one or
two cyclists, the first two were travelling at about 30mph
the third was doing 35 mph, when I got up close to the
third cyclist I saw it was a GIRL, can you imagine a
FEMALE cycling at that speed?

The first two were men and I came to the conclusion that
the speedometer had detected the third was a female and
got all hot and othered, (as I do), and registered a speed
about 20mph faster than she was actually travelling!

Come on. Whoever's alter-ego this is should probably
own up. :-)

Jon

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:13:52 +0100, Jon Senior
<jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

Alan Holmes [email hidden] opined the
following...

Quoted message said:

And we buy plywood in metric thicknesses but in 8 X 4
foot sheets!

No. We buy it in 2440mm x 1220mm sheets. This may happen to
coincide with 8' x 4' but it still sold in mm.

Depends where you buy your sheets. Some sell 2444mm x 1222mm
sheets, labelled as " 8' x 4' "

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: gawnsoft.co.srgawnsoft.co.srOpen ↗
Symbian/Epoc wiki: html.dnsalias.nethtml.dnsalias.netOpen ↗ Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
html.dnsalias.netsmalltalkOpen ↗

Gawnsoft [email hidden]
opined the following...

Quoted message said:

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:13:52 +0100, Jon Senior
<jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

Alan Holmes [email hidden] opined the
following...

Quoted message said:

And we buy plywood in metric thicknesses but in 8 X 4
foot sheets!

No. We buy it in 2440mm x 1220mm sheets. This may happen
to coincide with 8' x 4' but it still sold in mm.

Depends where you buy your sheets. Some sell 2444mm x
1222mm sheets, labelled as " 8' x 4' "

Then if you don't like them, you can report them. ;-) The
place that they source the board from may label them as
such, but they are technically sold in mm not feet. Just as
it is possible to buy goods (usually from markets) by the
pound, they are sold in kilos. In a few years all the die-
hard imperial lovers will have passed on, and those of us
who think that multiples of 10 are sensible will happily buy
our sheets of wood in mm.

Jon (A child of the metric age!)

On 21/6/04 12:13 am, in article [email hidden],

Jon Senior' jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk said:

Fewer than cope with 100 pence. Given the whole "10
digits on two hands" thing, base 10 does tend to be a
simple one for us.

Two dozen on two hands surely? Far easier to keep tabs on as
you can use the thumbs to point to the relevant number?

Dozens make perfect sense, far more than tens..

1 gross (+12) is the largest number you can count to on two
hands in base
12.

..d

in message <[email hidden]>, Alan Holmes

(') said:

"Roger Hughes" <roger@hughes-MYSPAMFILTERSWORKPRETTYWELLANYWAY-
translations.com> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

James Hodson said:

Horses for courses, IMO. Some things are more sensibly
measured in imperial units whereas others make more
sense when metric is used.

Imperial works well for human measurements of height
and weight. In my case, 12.5 stones and 6'00" makes
more sense than ~=80 kg and
1.83m.

Stuff deleted:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The attitudes of keeping the mile at all costs and we
must convert completely to metric are simply opposite
sides of the same coin. (Not the Euro, obviously! :-)

I feel that to do the job properly you should be
insisting on a return to pounds, shillings and pence.
Shouldn't cause much difficulty in the computer age,
anyway.

I never have any problems with LSD even without the use of
computers, in fact some people have problems with metric,
some time ago I bought some fish and chips, the bill came
to £2.20 I presented a £10 note and a 20 pence piece, the
operator could not work out the difference without a
computer!

I do wonder how many people today would cope with 960
farthings to the pound.

Or thirteen shillings and fourpence to the Merk Scots.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke)
jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗

;; All in all you're just another hick in the mall
-- Drink C'lloid

Alan Holmes said:

You're lucky it's been going down, mine won't
whatever I do.

uk.rec.cycling.liposuction or uk.rec.cycling.body-part-sales
?

Mine goes up when I slob and down when I don't. However,
most of the time, Alan, I do carry around some spare
capacity so losing weight isn't necessarily too hard. It
just takes a bit of effort on my part.

James

In "]news:[email hidden],
Alan Holmes <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

"James Hodson" <[email hidden]>
wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 14:46:25 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you

know? said:

Absolutely impossible, As was the fact that I grew
nearly two inches in height after the age of 21.

I was 6'00" at 13 and still am the same height. My
weight, however, may have altered up and down over
the years.

You're lucky it's been going down, mine won't
whatever I do.

Why not pop out to do a century ride for an hour or three?

A

On 21/6/04 1:05 pm, in article
[email hidden], "Simon Brooke"

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>,
David Martin ([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

On 21/6/04 12:13 am, in article
[email hidden], "Jon Senior"
<jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Fewer than cope with 100 pence. Given the whole "10
digits on two hands" thing, base 10 does tend to be a
simple one for us.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Two dozen on two hands surely? Far easier to keep tabs on
as you can use the thumbs to point to the relevant
number?

Quoted message said:

Oh, come on. You can easily count to 32 on the fingers of
one hand, or 1024 on the fingers of two.

Given that 24 units is possible, you could in theory do 16
million on two hands...

<marvin>Brain the size of a planet and I'm counting with my
fingers</marvin>

..d

Jon Senior wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Some sell 2444mm x 1222mm sheets, labelled as " 8' x 4' "

The place that they source the board from may label them as
such, but they are technically sold in mm not feet.

No. Trading Standards explain the law as follows:
*****************************************
cambridgeshire.gov.ukcarpets.htmOpen ↗
You can use imperial measurements to describe the size of
[an item] so long as you indicate the selling price of the
item and do not calculate the price from the measurements.

If the price is calculated from the measurements then you
must indicate the unit price in metric units.
*****************************************

Units used in price rates must be metric. Descriptions do
not have to be. The word 'per' usually indicates a price
rate. Thus they can say: "8 ft by 4 ft sheets. £32 per
sheet". There is no measurement unit in the price rate. You
have to buy the whole item. The length and width units are
descriptive and not a price rate.

If you can buy it any length you want, they need to say:
"plank 1 ft wide. 50p per metre". The length unit is a price
rate and must be metric. The width unit is descriptive, not
a price rate, so it can be metric or imperial.

In "]news:[email hidden],
Simon Brooke <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Ambrose

Nankivell (') said:

In "]news:[email hidden], ***Alan Holmes
<[email hidden]> typed:***

Quoted message said:

"James Hodson" <[email hidden]>
wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 14:46:25 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you
> know?" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>> Absolutely impossible, As was the fact that I grew
>> nearly two inches in height after the age of 21.
>
> I was 6'00" at 13 and still am the same height. My
> weight, however, may have altered up and down over the
> years.

You're lucky it's been going down, mine won't
whatever I do.

Why not pop out to do a century ride for an hour or
three?

A century in three hours is 33mph, which seems to me
indecently quick.

The PP seems to think it's about average.

I'm not saying it's impossible. After all, I was accosted
(when I was) on a (classic) tandem once by someone who'd
done London to Brighton and back in an hour back in the day.

A

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Just zis Guy,

you know? (') said:

Alan Holmes said:

travelled 84 miles in 2 hours 50 minutes, which was an
average of (if my arithmetic is up to date) 29.5 mph.
Bearing in mind that the bike was loaded for a
fortnights holiday, self catering and clothing for that
time, primus stove, paraffin, meths, water container,
milk and etc, that wasn't a bad average, especially as
the trip was across the Cotswolds.

See what happens when you get the decimal point in the
wrong place? You look like an eejit!

Many years ago I did Kirkcudbright to home - thirteen and
a half miles - in a time I believed to be exactly thirty
minutes. Or, I believed, 27 miles per hour. Which is over
two hundred metre ridges, at sea level at both ends and at
only about 20m above sea level in the middle.

Quite good for that journey.

And I see nothing wrong with that sort of time, there used
to be a very large number of cyclists in Scotland, and they
managed good times.

Quoted message said:

And I look at the journey now (it normally takes me an
hour, even on my road bike, even when I'm going well and
feeling good) and I just don't believe it. I think the
heroic trips of our youth are remembered through a fog of
golden self-delusion. OK, so I was a lot fitter then and
covered a lot more miles and I was certainly faster. But
that fast? I find it hard to believe.

Why do you find it hard to believe, you knew how far it was
and how long it took.

Alan
--
Reply to alan(at)windsor-berks(dot)freeserve(dot)co(dot)uk

Quoted message said:

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗

Hobbit ringleader gives Sauron One in the Eye.

"Tony Raven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Alan Holmes said:

I also cycled to a town called Carnforth in Lancaster
about 260 miles in about 10 hours, just to go to a folk
dance.

Now we know you're mad. Nobody in their right mind goes to
a folk dance.

I'm begining to realise that now, but 50 years too late!(:-)

Alan
--
Reply to alan(at)windsor-berks(dot)freeserve(dot)co(dot)uk

"Michael MacClancy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 14:47:36 +0100, Just zis Guy, you

know? said:

Peter Clinch said:

Sorry James, but I fail to see why "12.5" is
intrinsically easier to get to grips with than "80".
And how is 5'8 1/4" easier intrinsically easier to work
with than 1.73m?

And anyway, shouldn't weight be expressed in Newtons?

.... in contrast to Oldtons?

Or Oldkilos!

Alan
--
Reply to alan(at)windsor-berks(dot)freeserve(dot)co(dot)uk

Quoted message said:

--
Michael MacClancy
Random putdown - "A modest little person, with much to be modest about."-
Winston Churchill
www.macclancy.demon.co.uk
www.macclancy.co.uk

"Ambrose Nankivell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In "]news:[email hidden], Alan Holmes <alan@holmes-
g4crw.freeserve.co.uk> typed:

Quoted message said:

"Alan Holmes" <[email hidden]> wrote
in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Dave Kahn" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 09:01:44 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you
> know?" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>> Alan Holmes wrote:
>>
>>> travelled 84 miles in 2 hours 50 minutes, which was
>>> an average of (if my arithmetic is up to date) 29.5
>>> mph. Bearing in mind that the bike was loaded for a
>>> fortnights holiday, self catering and clothing for
>>> that time, primus stove, paraffin, meths, water
>>> container, milk and etc, that wasn't a bad average,
>>> especially as the trip was across the Cotswolds.
>>
>> See what happens when you get the decimal point in
>> the wrong place? You look like an eejit!

I must have missed this, but if you try pacing a few
cyclists when out in you car, you will be surprised at
the speeds they do travel at.

25 is often a speed that some travel at and I have
followed one or two at 30.

Today I was travelling along the A4 when I paced one or
two cyclists, the first two were travelling at about
30mph the third was doing 35 mph, when I got up close to
the third cyclist I saw it was a GIRL, can you imagine a
FEMALE cycling at that speed?

The first two were men and I came to the conclusion that
the speedometer had detected the third was a female and
got all hot and othered, (as I do), and registered a
speed about 20mph faster than she was actually
travelling!

BUYBT

That's a new one on me!

What does it mean?

Alan
--
Reply to alan(at)windsor-berks(dot)freeserve(dot)co(dot)uk

"Martin Törnsten" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Captain's log. On StarDate Fri, 18 Jun 2004 13:00:12 +0200
received comm

from

Quoted message said:

"Mark South" <[email hidden]> on channel
uk.rec.cycling:

: The trouble with this advice is that it seems a little
: dated. Most of

Europe is

Quoted message said:

: becoming far more anti-America than it has been for
: several decades.

Unfortunately. Personally I'm almost the other way around
and becoming far

more

Quoted message said:

anti-french and anti-German than ever before (but only on
a general

level -- I

Quoted message said:

try to see individuals as the individuals they are and
judge them first

after

Quoted message said:

knowing more about them).

The french as individuals are lovely, it's when they act as
a race they become objectionable!

Alan
--
Reply to alan(at)windsor-berks(dot)freeserve(dot)co(dot)uk

Alan Holmes said:

Quoted message said:

Now we know you're mad. Nobody in their right mind goes
to a folk dance.

Quoted message said:

I'm begining to realise that now, but 50 years too
late!(:-)

You should make a point of trying every experience once,
excepting incest and folk-dancing. (Sir Arnold Bax,
apparently; I always thought it was Wilde or Beecham or
some such wit)

--
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗