CAD CAM EDM DRO - Yahoo Group Archive

Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant

Posted by Jon Elson
on 2008-04-06 09:47:27 UTC
stan wrote:
> Anyone else think the inch could be adjusted a bit? I mean 25.4, what kind of
> a figure is that? Some sod in history must have said '25.6? bugger that lets
> make it 25.4, that will really mess them up when they start messing around
> with binary'. Will anyone notice if the inch grows a little bit? Its based on
> the average thumb after all, we could just say the average thumb has got a
> bit bigger. Could have a go at the mm either. There's a bit of bar in Paris
> that says what a meter looks like, a quick rub with a file on the end of it
> and life would be a whole lot simpler. Or how about calling it a metric inch?
> Blame the Japanese for it and make a 16 inch metric foot so it looks
> convincing....anyone?....please?...pretty please?...
You're 6 days late with this one. Why not make Pi 3.0 while
you're at it? Also adjust the second so there are exactly a
million in 2 weeks. How about make 2 Lbs per Kg instead of that
messy 2.2?

Jon

Discussion Thread

Peter Reilley 2008-04-06 07:02:46 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant stan 2008-04-06 07:51:17 UTC Ref: rant Peter Reilley 2008-04-06 08:03:07 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant Tony Jeffree 2008-04-06 09:23:56 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant stan 2008-04-06 09:36:38 UTC Ref: rant Jon Elson 2008-04-06 09:47:27 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant stan 2008-04-06 10:27:13 UTC Ref: rant Peter Reilley 2008-04-06 10:46:01 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant R.L. Wurdack 2008-04-06 10:51:29 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant stan 2008-04-06 10:52:38 UTC Alternatives to ballscrews stan 2008-04-06 11:02:02 UTC Ref: rant turbulatordude 2008-04-06 11:09:26 UTC Re: rant R.L. Wurdack 2008-04-06 11:33:07 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: rant stan 2008-04-06 11:34:51 UTC Ref: rant stan 2008-04-06 12:05:36 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: rant Jim Peck Stamping 2008-04-06 12:32:54 UTC rant Jim Peck Stamping 2008-04-06 13:00:51 UTC rant R.L. Wurdack 2008-04-06 13:34:40 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant Peter Reilley 2008-04-06 15:13:21 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: rant Steve Blackmore 2008-04-06 16:59:36 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant stan 2008-04-06 17:08:12 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant Matthew Tinker 2008-04-06 17:16:38 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant Jon Elson 2008-04-06 17:35:54 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant stan 2008-04-06 17:44:04 UTC Ref: rant wanliker@a... 2008-04-06 17:53:03 UTC Ref: rant Jim Register 2008-04-06 17:57:55 UTC Laser Metrology (was Re: rant) stan 2008-04-06 18:31:33 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Laser Metrology (was Re: rant) stan 2008-04-06 18:55:02 UTC Ref: Laser Metrology Brian Foley 2008-04-06 20:52:42 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant Jim Peck Stamping 2008-04-07 04:00:27 UTC rant caudlet 2008-04-07 06:47:18 UTC Re: Ref: rant [Off Topic] Matthew Tinker 2008-04-07 06:49:42 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: rant Tony Smith 2008-04-07 07:45:14 UTC RE: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] rant dickw@n... 2008-04-07 13:16:10 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: Laser Metrology stan 2008-04-07 14:16:07 UTC Ref: Laser Metrology Graham Stabler 2008-04-07 15:28:14 UTC Re: Ref: Laser Metrology R.L. Wurdack 2008-04-07 19:40:34 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: Ref: Laser Metrology vrsculptor 2008-04-07 20:20:05 UTC Re: Ref: Laser Metrology Peter Reilley 2008-04-07 20:21:26 UTC Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Ref: Laser Metrology