"Is not the adoption of a universal [metric] system of measurement one facet of the move to ultimate centralized political power throughout the Western World and, perhaps worldwide
¾this being similar to the attempts to adopt one monetary system (SDRS) throughout the same political spectrum? "asks reader R.G.W. of Lakeside, Montana.First, just to get it out of the way, something else: political, ideological or religious labels will not stick to science. The Nazis condemned the Theory of Relativity not on its merits, but on the grounds that its author was a Jew, and the Soviets, under Stalin, condemned it on the grounds that it contradicted the official philosophy, dialectical materialism. (Fortunately for them, dialectical materialism is made of rubberized muck which can be twisted every which way, so that under Stalin's successors Einstein's theory became further proof of the validity of Marxism-Leninism.) Scientific truth is what agrees with measurement of natural phenomena, and if that truth offends a political, ideological or religious viewpoint, that's tough on the viewpoint, not on the truth.
But that, of course, is not what our reader asked, for a system of units is not a natural phenomenon, but a man-made tool. Its use is not a case of truth, but of convenience. And it is self-punishing to attach political or ideological labels to this convenience, as has happened several times in history:
Our present calendar was not adopted by the British until the 17th century, and by the Russians until the 20th, because it was decreed by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582, and the anti-Catholic powers "would rather disagree with the sun than agree with the Pope." Quite similarly, the metric system was introduced by the Committee on Weights and Measures in the French Revolution, and was therefore rejected by the British with the same logic that made the Nazis reject Einstein, though the Committee comprised three of the great mathematicians of all times
¾ Laplace, Lagrange and Legendre. After 1815, all of the Old World remained metric except for the two powers that Napoleon had not conquered: Russia and Britain. Had the committee been established 15 years earlier (a historical absurdity), Benjamin Franklin would surely have enthusiastically embraced it¾not because he was opposed to the British, but because he was a scientist.And while we look at history, let us remember that the US has been using the metric system longer than most of the world, at least in its currency. An American dollar always did have 100 cents; the British had 20 shillings to the pound and 12 pence to the shilling, not to mention farthings, half-crowns, florins and guineas, until 1971.
|
Vol. 11, No. 2
Newsletter: Access to Energy Newsletter Archive Volume: Issues Issue/No.: Vol. 11, No. 2 Date: November 29, 2004 11:08 AM Title: Surprised?
Copyright © 2004 - Access to Energy Newsletter Archive
|