Cheap but decent Mini Tape Measure

[John FlackParticipant @johnflack59079]

Russell…….. If radians are that good why the need to use degrees and seconds?????????

[Tim StevensParticipant @timstevens64731]

Oh, yes, and bring back barleycorns and pennyweights, too. And points, and lines, and ells and ems and nails and paces and picas and points, different ones. None of them a decent multiple of anything.

And by the way, the idea that God did not intend us to count in tens is not supported by the way we learn to count. Ten fingers came thousands of years before anyone had a disciple, or even a commandment.

Further, we use Arabic numbers so what is difficult about dividing a circle the Arabic way – in six chunks of 60 degrees? Neither metric nor decimal nor imperial, so no reason to change, surely?

And a ps: if you want to slag off a historical figure, do us all the favour of spelling his name correctly. Thanks.

Happy new astronomical nonsense, everyone

Tim

Edited By Tim Stevens on 07/01/2017 17:59:30

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Tim Stevens on 07/01/2017 17:58:44:

And by the way, the idea that God did not intend us to count in tens is not supported by the way we learn to count. Ten fingers came thousands of years before anyone had a disciple, or even a commandment.

.

I've always found this to be a 'difficult' argument to follow, Tim

Counting in tens [as we currently understand it] only needs nine fingers.

[there must have been a conceptual change when zero was introduced]

MichaelG.

[richardandtracyParticipant @richardandtracy]

Posted by Mike Poole on 06/01/2017 13:01:45:

Posted by richardandtracy on 06/01/2017 11:58:53:

Let's do away with beer instead. Always tastes as if it's second hand anyway. And hops, whether applied internally or externally, give me a rash.

I can't agree with that proposition Richard, I would regard a hop allergy as a total disaster, just hope you are ok with tea.

Mike

Drink a few gallons daily.. The mug is quite a lot smaller now the black tea lining's getting thick enough to flake off.

Regards

Richard

[john carruthersParticipant @johncarruthers46255]

As a glazier I was the cutter on the bench one day when a customer came in for a small piece of glass. I served him and he went on his way. 30 minutes later he returned saying "this bit of glass is too small, it fell through the hole". I checked it and could see nothing awry.
He eventually went home and brought in his rule. A fine 30" folding brass capped boxwood rule.
BUT it was stamped "shrinkage of clay" and read oversize.
He'd been using it in his shop for decades without a problem.

PS, I'd go with the Lufkin rule for best, or a Stanley for rough use.

[SpurryParticipant @spurry]

Posted by Mike on 07/01/2017 11:40:24:

….. buying petrol in gallons? I suppose a man can dream…

That will never happen. Imagine the outcry if people actually twigged that they were paying £5.72 per gallon, 125.91p per litre is not quite so bad, (from last Nov when I filled up).

The scam with heating oil is just as bad. Advertised in great big letters at 45.87ppl (pence per litre) with a fantastic price of 44.86ppl with Group savings. Your price for 500L £235.52 i.e. 47.104ppl. They do have the good grace to put in small letters exc vat and inc vat. I'm sure petrol stations would advertise petrol at the 'basic' price if they thought they could get away with it.

Pete

[John FlackParticipant @johnflack59079]

Interesting how a simple(?) topic as measurement causes such a reaction. I have read that there is no such thing as as exact! Eventually a positive number appears after a quantity of noughts. As hinted previously measurement of metal is dependant on the ambient temperature when measured, something manufactured on the equator to close tolerances may not work at all in the Antarctic !!!!!!!! That's before considering the fact the Universe is expanding at a significant rate, hopefully everything at the same time, or we will be in trouble!!!!

Never trust an atom, they make up everything!!!!!!!!!

[AjohnwParticipant @ajohnw51620]

Posted by Neil Wyatt on 06/01/2017 20:23:19:

Posted by Ajohnw on 06/01/2017 16:55:42:

For engineering use KIng Henry's body parts will always make more sense to me. I sometimes feel like measuring the ratio of the width of my thumb to the length of my feet etc.

…..

For us Brits it weighs 1 1/4 so just change the lb and have 100 ozs in it to upset ISO. Then change the inch to suit.

Didn't you work for NASA once apon a time?

Neil

That's a load of crap Neil. The probably correct rumour in the software world was that it was caused by a bug in the compiler they used which was so old they thought it must be ok and couldn't possibly have any problems at all Then they started worrying about just how bug free the ada compiler was given all of the changes that had been made. One thing for sure the loss was caused by a compiler bug.

John

–

[Danny M2ZParticipant @dannym2z]

Posted by Michael Gilligan on 07/01/2017 18:10:36:

Counting in tens [as we currently understand it] only needs nine fingers.

[there must have been a conceptual change when zero was introduced]

MichaelG.

I once heard it said of a certain bloke that he could not count to 21 if he was naked!

* Danny M *

[AjohnwParticipant @ajohnw51620]

Posted by Spurry on 08/01/2017 10:57:07:

Posted by Mike on 07/01/2017 11:40:24:

….. buying petrol in gallons? I suppose a man can dream…

That will never happen. Imagine the outcry if people actually twigged that they were paying £5.72 per gallon, 125.91p per litre is not quite so bad, (from last Nov when I filled up).

The scam with heating oil is just as bad. Advertised in great big letters at 45.87ppl (pence per litre) with a fantastic price of 44.86ppl with Group savings. Your price for 500L £235.52 i.e. 47.104ppl. They do have the good grace to put in small letters exc vat and inc vat. I'm sure petrol stations would advertise petrol at the 'basic' price if they thought they could get away with it.

Pete

The move to L came about because of the ever increasing price per gallon. They thought we wouldn't notice and be less likely to complain as the smaller incremental increases seem to be negligible.

I can't honestly recollect when the change came but vaguely remember that it was down to it exceeding £1 per gallon or maybe getting nearer 2.

Changes in the coins that are available seem to work in a similar way.

John

–

[MikeParticipant @mike89748]

I must confess I made my posting totally tongue in cheek, and in reality we could never go back to gallons. Yet the fuel consumption of cars is always quoted in miles per gallon – in spite of the fact that many younger motorists won't have a clue as to what a gallon is. Consumption should be quoted in miles per litre – and that is a serious suggestion.

[brickyParticipant @bricky]

The building trade changed to metric and used mm no cm but years later when employing apprentices I had a job to get them to forget cm. But we still bought timber as 4"*2" 3mt long.It"s hrd to accept change as I still rember when picking up a 20Kg bag of coal that an original bag of cement weighed nearly 3 times as much,but then I was able to unload 7 tons on my own they were the days or were they.Malt to the Isle of Juro from our malting in Grantham went in 18st bags try that if you can.

Frank

[AjohnwParticipant @ajohnw51620]

Posted by Mike on 08/01/2017 12:24:03:

I must confess I made my posting totally tongue in cheek, and in reality we could never go back to gallons. Yet the fuel consumption of cars is always quoted in miles per gallon – in spite of the fact that many younger motorists won't have a clue as to what a gallon is. Consumption should be quoted in miles per litre – and that is a serious suggestion.

Not sure about previous cars really but I think they have given both figures for some time now. I'd have to look to check but miles per L might need 2 decimal places to be as accurate.

I suspect that both are there because many people compare a car with what they had previously and have been doing so for a long long time.

Clothes are more interesting. The post metrication inch seems to be smaller to me or maybe I have put on more weight. Round my neck though – I don't think so.

Timber had an interesting time at one point as well. Still feet and inches etc but for some reason smaller. That was long ago.

John

–

[Nick WheelerParticipant @nickwheeler]

Posted by Mike on 08/01/2017 12:24:03:

I must confess I made my posting totally tongue in cheek, and in reality we could never go back to gallons. Yet the fuel consumption of cars is always quoted in miles per gallon – in spite of the fact that many younger motorists won't have a clue as to what a gallon is. Consumption should be quoted in miles per litre – and that is a serious suggestion.

Metric fuel consumption reverses the units – litres per 100km – so that you get a sensible number.

Anyone who has 'explained' imperial measurements to someone who has only ever used metric will know that they will soon stop you once you get past the basic inch/ounce/ fluid ounce measurements because you are clearly crazy to insist on using them.

[Tim StevensParticipant @timstevens64731]

My guess is that when the change to metrication was imposed in the UK, there was Treasury resistance to changing the mile as it would mean lots of expense in road signs, and in lots of laws with speed limits etc. So, as we decided to stick with miles, the change to litres {and the corresponding 'litres per hundred Km'} would be a nonsense. So we stayed with MPG.

And in my experience, many of those who 'cannot see any sense' in pounds and ounces, have no difficulty understanding their horoscopes. But then, they tend to be the same people as think that 20 degrees is twice as hot as 10 degrees. Funny ole worl, ennit?

Tim

Edited By Tim Stevens on 08/01/2017 13:47:23

And again to rid my text once more of an offensive silly little picture.

Edited By Tim Stevens on 08/01/2017 13:48:41

Edited By Tim Stevens on 08/01/2017 13:49:05

[Martin WParticipant @martinw]

Without defining the type/scale then 20 degrees may well be twice as hot as 10 degrees or might mean the door is opened wider letting in more heat .

Frank how about 2cwt 28lbs.

Martin

Edited By Martin W on 08/01/2017 15:15:06

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Nicholas Wheeler 1 on 08/01/2017 13:30:47:

Posted by Mike on 08/01/2017 12:24:03:

…

…

Anyone who has 'explained' imperial measurements to someone who has only ever used metric will know that they will soon stop you once you get past the basic inch/ounce/ fluid ounce measurements because you are clearly crazy to insist on using them.

This is very true, and I suspect that most fans of the imperial system have never explored it's inner complexities. Although fractions and Imperial measure make simple calculations simple, they also make complicated calculations horrible. Often, really horrible.

Here's some examples from a 1965 text book aimed at 14/15 year old students studying at Technical School (remember those?). Notice that they are expected to know how to work entirely in fractions, and to have memorised the conversion factors between the various imperial units. I wonder how many of us know the weight of a cubic foot of water, and do calculations with paper and pencil only.

No cheating, have a go at these. Question number 3 is the most challenging!

Boys who do not get all the answers right will report to the headmaster for six of the best. Pointing out that Imperial is obsolete and that the equivalent sums in decimal and metric are much easier will not save you.

Enjoy…

Dave

[VicParticipant @vic]

Posted by Neil Wyatt on 05/01/2017 17:51:01:

Last year I bought a mid-price tape measure from Wickes that had such a confusing numbering system I kept making errors and threw it in the bin!

I went in to get a cheap shelf, and looked at the FatMax ones, but decided not to invest as they were all a bit too chunky.

Lo and behold! At the checkout was a sweet jars full of FatMax keyring tape measures reduced to 99p. Very compact, 2M and only marked in centimetres (remember those?) but at least marked in a totally unconfusing way (every cm unambiguous with no clever change in the number format at metres or 10-cm intervals) just the 10 cm intervals larger and red.

Best of all they appear to be decent quality mechanisms with a full width tape rather than the usual typical keyring 'thin as string' tape.

So a very well spent 99p and I think I will get a couple more!

Neil

I want to know who Max is, and if he's really that fat!?

[MWParticipant @mw27036]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 09/01/2017 17:31:59:

Here's some examples from a 1965 text book aimed at 14/15 year old students studying at Technical School (remember those?). Notice that they are expected to know how to work entirely in fractions, and to have memorised the conversion factors between the various imperial units. I wonder how many of us know the weight of a cubic foot of water, and do calculations with paper and pencil only

Boys who do not get all the answers right will report to the headmaster for six of the best. Pointing out that Imperial is obsolete and that the equivalent sums in decimal and metric are much easier will not save you.

Enjoy…

Dave

Damn, If I was at school then i'd be like, the biggest dropout ever. Theres no way I could do that, flunking is just so much easier, I'll be the guy mopping the floors with questions like that.

Michael W

[Martin 100Participant @martin100]

Question 3 admirably demonstrates that the metric system is, by some considerable margin, easier to understand and use.

[AjohnwParticipant @ajohnw51620]

Posted by Martin 100 on 09/01/2017 19:47:16:

Question 3 admirably demonstrates that the metric system is, by some considerable margin, easier to understand and use.

You would get the weight of the water wrong unless you remembered to correct for the actual weight of water.

Actually I think some aspects of maths at that time were good at training people mind. It's rather like a muscle. Deteriorates with lack of use and can be improved to a huge degree by use / exercise.

John

–

[Steven VineParticipant @stevenvine79904]

Please sir, is there a mistake in question number 1?

Steve

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Michael-w on 09/01/2017 19:08:48:

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 09/01/2017 17:31:59:

…

Damn, If I was at school then i'd be like, the biggest dropout ever. Theres no way I could do that, flunking is just so much easier, I'll be the guy mopping the floors with questions like that.

Michael W

Probably not so at all Michael. Back then the 11+ exam allocated kids to different types of school allegedly based on their aptitudes. If you went to a Technical School then this type of maths would have been a big part of your life.

In the sixties the 11+ system was dumped in favour of Comprehensive Schooling, which adopted a broader curriculum. Over time the Comprehensive system has adapted to perceived needs, so today's kids are taught different things and old things with different emphasis. That means it's difficult to compare past educational achievements with today's.

My granny thought that anyone who couldn't name the Bays, Capes, Rivers and Ports round the coast of Britain in order was a total thicko. My mum thinks that anyone who doesn't understand English Grammar is Educationally Sub-Normal. I'm convinced that O and A Levels were much harder than GSCEs.

Actually I don't think intelligence or learning varies across generations at all. Thinking it does misses the point that we've been taught different things.

Dave

[Nick WheelerParticipant @nickwheeler]

Posted by Steven Vine on 09/01/2017 20:05:44:

Please sir, is there a mistake in question number 1?

Steve

I wondered that: where did 14 come from?

And I agree with Martin, Q3 is such an excellent example of why imperial measurements are a pain for calculations that I'm not even going to think of looking up the necessary conversions.

I attended a Technical High School for one year; at the end of year assembly, they changed the name to Chatham Grammar School

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Steven Vine on 09/01/2017 20:05:44:

Please sir, is there a mistake in question number 1?

Steve

Go to the top of the class!

Should be 9/14 not 9/16

I get a "Must do better – see me", in red ink.

What I find most annoying about being me is only seeing the obvious AFTER someone else has pointed it out. Just as well. If I was clever I'd be dangerous.

Dave

[Author]

Posts