Hi,
Once again you demonstrate your lack of reading comprehension. First note the "a metric system of units", not "the". It is your incorrect equating of "metric" with "SI" that is at the root of this problem. SI is indeed a metric system of units. But, just like all dogs are animals but not all animals are dogs, not all metric systems are SI.
Second note the "earlier c.g.s. units". So, when I claim that the original definition of the gram was one cubic centimeter of water, that the gram is the basic unit of mass (the kilogram is the basic *standard* of mass in the SI system), that no metric system has ever been based directly on the meter-gram-second, and that you're full of crap, which one are you disputing?
Actually, my fields of experience were material science, radiation effects, weapon technology, space based surveying, and a few others. In commerce, a scientist doesn't have the luxury of being one dimensional. And I've used just about every unit there is as needed. Whether it be bar for pressure, kilotons of TNT for energy, acre for area, pounds per square inch for pressure, amagats (you figure it out), km/s, mile per hour, orbital period in minutes, fuzing time in microseconds, sensor detection distance in feet, or shock velocity in mm/µs, or a bunch of others, what was convenient, I used. When all I was interested in was functional forms, I even used 'supernatural' units, where all constants, even pi, were set to one. I've never used cgs, but I know them well enough to have read older texts that use them. It is my contention that an intelligent person will use whatever units are the most convenient for the task at hand, and that only an ignorant or stupid person would demand that utility be discarded for some abstract notion of simplicity so that everything be measured on the same scale.
--Pete
(09-15-2010, 06:59 PM)Zenda Wrote:Quote:Giorgi units, rationalized MKSA
A metric system of units devised by A. Giorgi (and sometimes known as Giorgi units) in 1901. It is based on the metre, kilogram, and second and grew from the earlier c.g.s. units.
. . .
This system, with some modifications, formed the basis of SI units, now used in most scientific work.
Once again you demonstrate your lack of reading comprehension. First note the "a metric system of units", not "the". It is your incorrect equating of "metric" with "SI" that is at the root of this problem. SI is indeed a metric system of units. But, just like all dogs are animals but not all animals are dogs, not all metric systems are SI.
Second note the "earlier c.g.s. units". So, when I claim that the original definition of the gram was one cubic centimeter of water, that the gram is the basic unit of mass (the kilogram is the basic *standard* of mass in the SI system), that no metric system has ever been based directly on the meter-gram-second, and that you're full of crap, which one are you disputing?
Quote:Btw, you seem rather obsessed with CGS. Did your old field of experience happen to be material science or theoretical physics, perhaps, where you were forced to work with this outdated system? If that's the case, I certainly don't envy you
Actually, my fields of experience were material science, radiation effects, weapon technology, space based surveying, and a few others. In commerce, a scientist doesn't have the luxury of being one dimensional. And I've used just about every unit there is as needed. Whether it be bar for pressure, kilotons of TNT for energy, acre for area, pounds per square inch for pressure, amagats (you figure it out), km/s, mile per hour, orbital period in minutes, fuzing time in microseconds, sensor detection distance in feet, or shock velocity in mm/µs, or a bunch of others, what was convenient, I used. When all I was interested in was functional forms, I even used 'supernatural' units, where all constants, even pi, were set to one. I've never used cgs, but I know them well enough to have read older texts that use them. It is my contention that an intelligent person will use whatever units are the most convenient for the task at hand, and that only an ignorant or stupid person would demand that utility be discarded for some abstract notion of simplicity so that everything be measured on the same scale.
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?