Heaven and Hell--European Style

That is entertaining. Thank you, Frank. That piece of prose is well known, and understood, by very many people in Europe.

Frank, I love it. Don't remember coming across that before.

I will stick to heaven though, LOL

An oldie, but goodie :-))

cute!

:)

I heard a similar one about Canada (sorry Canucks, just a joke):

Canada had a chance to be the perfect country, British culture, French cuisine and American know-how. But they got it mixed up and have American culture, British cuisine and French know-how.

Hi Brad. That is a good one. And, most of the world is afflicted by American popular culture.

For Brad: Actually in the Province of Quebec, here in Canada, we have French culture, French cuisine and French know-how. And it works.

Too funny! You guys kill me. Thanks, Monte

Norma: sorry to tell you this but you're just as messed up as the rest of us Canadians :)

Pete: Do ya think?

As a Euro myself I am for ever thankful for the fact that the French came up with the metric system. I wouldn't put down the French! I have always wondered how the Americans could stick to such a primitive system as the "customary units". After 18 years in here I still hate it! :)

And since Canada switched to the metric system, more than 18 years ago, I hate it. Still measure distance in miles, temperature in degrees "F", and sheets of plywood in inches and feet. D... those EU folk.....

Kaarina...we stick to it because it works. Most of my British friends still hate the fact they had to switch to metric.

Tell me how it works? Why is mile what ever it is? How can you even remember it! I do not remember the temperature of the boiling point but in metric system it is 100 degrees. How come that doesn't make sence? Why is freezing point 32? I will never get it and it is worse when you mesure something. I will just forget about it and use what I know because IT WORKS!!!!! ;)

It's an age thing K; when you've used a system for 40+ years it's hard to change. But you come up with other systems:

-for KmPH on road signs, multiply by 6 and remove the last digit. 100KmPH X 6 = 60mph.

Temperature in Celsius, double the temp, add 30 and you're close. 20degrees celsius X 2 = 40, add 30 and it's 70 degrees F.

Now when my old, addled brain can't multiply any more I don't know what I'll do. You're right though, if metric is learned early, makes a lot more sense.

At least here in the USA we are unique. It's only us, Liberia and Burma (or Myanmar) in the whole world who still didn't implement metric system. Let's hope that we won't be last.

K...you can use the Kelvin scale if you want...but when you go to your local store in Mt. Shasta...you'll need to buy in pounds, ounces, quarts, pints, etc....and not in metric.

And unlike the rest of the world, Americans hate to play "follow the leader."

But you'll find, because we realize so many non-Americans can't figure it out, most of our products also have amounts in metric, most major highway signs are in both miles/kilometers.

And by the way...we got it from the British, who before being forced by some EU committee to change to metric, used the same system we use without any problems.

I think it should be part of the citizenship test...:)

K,

Like the effort to introduce a dollar coin and get rid of the dollar bill, major efforts were made to introduce the metric system here. When I was a student we had to learn both because, "very soon the US will go metric."

In both cases, people just weren't buying so we still have miles, ounces, and dollar bills.

And think of how it would change the language of our football: "First down and 9.1 m to go".

I was in my teens when we went metric. Never had a problem understanding or using it.

Which brings me to my main point; why would you not want to learn a system that all but two countries in the world use?

I've only ever known metric -- except for temperature inside the house for some reason...

But Canada's fine--well here in Toronto anyway, and we're really the centre of the universe, haha.

Edit: Tom, the CFL uses yards too...and (ducking) it's a more fun game to watch.
Just kidding all...it's just the stereotype that makes the rest of Canada hate Toronto/Ontario...

I had the hardest time ever with inches, yards and the like when I came to America! In the beginning it was maddening: I carried cheat sheets and little conversion tables around with me everywhere, and since I studied a lot of science in the US, always found it a reprieve when my ''homework'' or studies involved metrics.

But it wasn't all bad: eventually I managed okay. Once I even got out of a speeding ticket during my struggle: I then drove an old Buick Somerset, 5 speed, which had a LCD dash display that could be toggled back and forth between km and miles. When the officer stopped me, I pleaded for understanding because I hadn't quite conquered the American system yet, and the officer had mercy on me.

If you open your eyes, though: America is already using the metric system, not only in science, manufacturing and hospitals, but also with stuff that you export into the EU and the world. Your Coca Cola bottles are in liters, for example ;-))

In the first place, "metric system" means a system of measurement, so ours is a "metric" system also. We shouldn't call ours the English system, since the English don't use it anymore; let's call it the American system. And that other one, it was invented by the French, let's call it the French system. And, although we're one of only a few countries to use the American system, we are also the biggest economy in the world - something like 1/3 of the world's economy - don't forget that.

I had a science/engineering education, and for the first two years it was pure science. The "scientists" used the French system and tried to teach us intelligent life couldn't exist outside of it. Then I got into engineering courses, and they were all in the American system, and, guess what, it worked too.

I wouldn't mind going to one world-wide system, but it shouldn't be the French system. The French system has too many flaws. We need to create a more logical system.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would rate the American system, maybe, 7. Then the French system would be 7.5. The French system eliminates a few conversions, like inches to feet or pounds to ounces, but everything else in nature requires conversion "factors". Avogadro's number doesn't come out even in the French system.

What's the most common measurement we make everyday? Even if we aren't measuring the length of something, or it's weight, we are constantly using time. Time is our most common measurement, and it isn't decimalized! Let's start our new world system by having ten hours a day, 100 minutes an hour, 100 seconds a minute, 100,000 second per day instead of 86,400.

But, of course, someone will argue that going to a new world measuring system will require all those countries to invest in new instrument, and we couldn't do that. But that is the same arguement used for not going to the French system.

But wait. Why is our numbering system even based on 10; because we have 10 fingers and people originally counted on their fingers. A system based on 8 or 16 makes much more sense since it converts directly into binary, which is what computers use. If we used a base 8 or base 16 system, computers wouldn't have to spend so much overhead converting everything into a system that people can understand.

Lee,

I say, whatever floats your boat ;-))

Of course you are right to say that the French came up with the metric system (is that why you guys are so resistant to adapt to it?? ;-)) and that time is not measured in metrics. Touche!

But at least the metric system is based on science, not the girth of the English king, or how much ale he could swig down before he fell off the throne ;-))

And you are already using the metric system in a lot of ways, including your currency - so how hard can it be? ;-))

as always,
you guys are 907.18 kg of fun!

Heck! Avogadro's number is a constant anyway, isn't it? If you ever feel the urge to measure the amount of a substance, just use Moles ;-))

The foot was the length of the king's foot; the meter was 1/100,000,000th of what they thought was the distance between the north pole and equator on a meridian through Paris.

I think it would be easier to find the king (or President), and measure his foot, than to go out and measure the distance for the north pole to the equator (over mountains and seas, through buildings), and then divide it into 100,100,100 parts. BTW, is that at high tide of low tide?

Of course both systems now use a number (which isn't even integral) of wave lengths of a certain kind of light. How many people can do that at home?

I'm reminded that the W. Virginia legislature once passed a resolution that Pi should be taught in the schools as being 3, exactly, because 3.14159_ contradicted the Bible.

If you ever feel the urge to measure the amount of a substance, just use Moles.

It's harder to catch a mole than to find the President.

It's harder to catch a mole than to find the President

But how the heck do you get into the White House to do it??

So sorry to have gotten off topic, but I couldn't resist ;-))

Of course you are right to say that the French came up with the metric system (is that why you guys are so resistant to adapt to it??

Isn't that reason enough? :)

Of course, the French came up with the "metric" system because Napolean didn't want to do things like the British (at least I've heard that). Same thing with driving (wagons) on the right.

This metric debate parallels the "Why don't Americans like soccer?" debate. The simple answer for both- "Because we don't. End of story."

OK, before I get flamed, I realize that many Americans do like soccer... but as a national population, we just regard it with mild passing interest, not the passionate obsession shared by other parts of the world. And why doesn't the same question get leveled against Canada?

Sorry, saying "Because we don't. End of story." doesn't cut-it for me :) There are reasons for everything in life and history. The popularity of soccer around the world is directly related to British firms and their British/Colonial workers building most of this planets railways at the turn of last century. As US railways were all built by US firms and constructed by mostly Asian and Italian immigrants the sport never had the opportunity to spread here. As for the metric system, there was an attempt by Federal Government in the mid-seventies to switch over, but the program was voluntary, and underfunded. Although as a kid I do remember a couple of years when a lot of the road signs in New York State were replaced with metric measurements... a couple years later they were all switched back:)

DEEEAREST Michael ;-))

The British might have codified soccer fairly recently, as in laying down the rules of the game as we know it now, but the game of soccer has been around for a lot, lot, lot longer than that! Some claim that it was played already in ancient China, about 3 BC - who knows . .
Fact is: it was wildly popular in Europe as far back as the early middle ages!

Even Native Americans played a version of soccer. I was specifically referring to the spread of the modern game outside of Europe via railway construction. It's no coincidence that many professional teams in South America still retain the "English" names their British founders gave them. Also, if it makes you feel any better I'm a season ticket holder for the New York Red Bulls soccer team (2008 Western Conference Champs!), and we love our Austrian owners and their Austrian sports drink:)

Dear Michael,
I hardly ever watch soccer, (my dirty little secret ;-),
except for the World - or European Championships, or the neighborhood kids in action, as in
Krems:St.Pölten, say.
Truly horrible, considering that I played Forward (Stürmer) in a coed soccer team for almost five years, back in the Stone Ages ;-))

But soccer is very, very important in Europe, even though we Austrians fairly suck at it, for lack of a better expression.

When it comes to world dominion, we only have a few claims to fame:
Alpine skiing and Air Racing.
Go Red Bull ;-))

Ok, I have waited to chime in. I have to tell you, I love the metric system. When I moved over here, it took me a little while to get used to it and I would convert in my head while shopping, but after awhile, I just stopped converting. I am awful at math and trying to remember ounces and how many of them are in a cup or pint or a quart, and so on is a struggle to me. When I was in the states at the grocery store and pricing stuff, it just hit me. All the cans for example had an ounce price on them and there was no way I was going to be able to easily see which one was the bargain, with the big cans, etc. unless I used my calculator. It is so easy with the metric system. I also like that the weight is the same with liquids. A liter is the same as a kilo. How nice is that? One will never learn the new system as long as the old one is there too. Total immersion is the key! It is sort of the same with money. When people over here earn dollars (like the military) they will constantly convert euro to dollar in their heads, as do most travellers. Once you earn euro and only are using that, you eventually stop converting. Well, not so much anyway. I still occasionally convert prices to Deutsch Marks! and its been 8 years since we got our "new" money.

I do feel the US not switching to the metric has cost them a ton of money. They have to make two different items - one for export, one for at home. People did not want to buy American cars for a long time as they didn't have the tools to fix them since they weren't metric. Factories have to have 2 different size machines to make everything. This all costs money when you think about it.

I also like that the weight is the same with liquids. A liter is the same as a kilo.

That only applies exactly to pure H2O at a certain temperature, about 2°C, I believe.

All I know, is that a 50 liter beer keg weighed 50 kilos back when I owned a bar and had to schlepp those things around!

I am just talking about normal measurements like to bake a cake or some cookies, not sitting in a laboratory doing experiments. Please no technical stuff Lee, I am only on my 2nd cup of coffee this morning.

In the first place, "metric system" means a system of measurement, so ours is a "metric" system also. We shouldn't call ours the English system, since the English don't use it anymore; let's call it the American system.

We still use the Imperial system along side metric. Road signs are in MPH for speed limits and miles and yards for distance, food is sold in both systems (although metric must be the primary measure on labels,) beer is sold in pints...

Interestingly there is another reason why the American system shouldn't be called "English", even though you use the same unit names as the Imperial system you units are a different size. American fluid ounces are slightly larger than real ones; plus an American pint only has 16 (American) fl.oz. as opposed to an Imperial pint which has 20 (Imperial) fl. oz.

The day the EU forces me to walk into a pub in the UK and say "I'll have a .56 liter of....." instead of "I'll have a pint of......" is the day I start reading "Asia Through The Back Door."

or head to Bavaria to order a 'Mass', a liter mug of beer ;-))

In Austria we order wine like this:

A Vierterl ( 1/4 l of wine)
A Achterl ( 1/8 l of wine)

It's not about amounts...it's about changing "tradition." It's a comment about some EU plans to homogenize Europe.

Forcing the British to a certain "EU" standard would be like forcing the French to pasteurize their cheese, or making the Italians run an efficient train sytstem.

It's just not done....it ruins the local culture.

You didn't have to explain it to me, Frank!
I simply offered an alternative, should the horror actually happen one day . . you never know, stranger things have happened in Europe! ;-))

Frank said "Forcing the British to a certain EU standard would be like ... making the Italians run an efficient train system". That is amusing. I understand : when I was planning my trip to Italy, even the internet website for the Italian trains system was defective and unusable.