Re: We Went to the Moon on Feet and Inches
From: Jud McCranie (youknowwhat.mccranie_at_adelphia.net)
Date: 10/06/04
- Next message: vthokie: "Re: Spaceship 1"
- Previous message: Peter Stickney: "Re: KSC - what if"
- In reply to: Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer: "We Went to the Moon on Feet and Inches"
- Next in thread: Herb Schaltegger: "Re: We Went to the Moon on Feet and Inches"
- Reply: Herb Schaltegger: "Re: We Went to the Moon on Feet and Inches"
- Reply: Anthony Frost: "Re: We Went to the Moon on Feet and Inches"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 17:21:23 -0400
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 23:07:38 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous via the
Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer <nobody@cypherpunks.to> wrote:
>Some think the inch is irrational because it originally was the width of the
>King's thumb. Well, the meter is 1/10,000,000 of the distance from the
>North Pole to the Equator as it passes through the longitude of Paris.
>Both are "arbitrary."
Really? Which king? An arbitrary king? The distance from the pole
to the equator is fixed, the width of people's thumbs varies.
--- Replace you know what by j to email
- Next message: vthokie: "Re: Spaceship 1"
- Previous message: Peter Stickney: "Re: KSC - what if"
- In reply to: Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer: "We Went to the Moon on Feet and Inches"
- Next in thread: Herb Schaltegger: "Re: We Went to the Moon on Feet and Inches"
- Reply: Herb Schaltegger: "Re: We Went to the Moon on Feet and Inches"
- Reply: Anthony Frost: "Re: We Went to the Moon on Feet and Inches"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|