2012/6/3 NoOp > On 06/02/2012 11:54 AM, Niall Martin wrote: > > 2.54 cm to the inch, it certainly is by law. It follows from > > legislation in the 80s, I think, which defined the UK yard as 0.9144 > > metres exactly. If you do your arithmetic that leads to 2.54 cm to > > the inch, exactly. > > Well not *exactly* - it depends upon how many decimal places you'd care > to use, which country (most do abide by SI Units - BIPM, NIST ect), and > which law & which reference. > > > > 1 ft = (1200/3937) m > > 1200/3937 = 0.3048006096 > > =(1200/3937)/12 > = 0.0254000508 > > And of course there is the infamous '0.02540005'... > > For legal and practical purposes, in most cases, 1 inch = 2.54 > centimeters. And yes, I've already responded to Mike regarding this. > However, please keep in mind that your response is country centric, and > most likely refers to: > > But that "legislation" is (again) country specific and goes back to my > original comments: > You see the problem? You call it tamatoe, I call it tomato... > > [OT] Btw I pronounce 'River Thames' as th-ames (same as James) insead of > 'tems/tĕmz/temmz'. I suppose there are several explainations for this > (none in law that I know of), but I quite like this one: > > Any yes, all of this has been discussed/debated/departed on the old OOo > lists. So my recommendation is to let it be. > :-) > If I've calculated aright, one *inch* in the Imperial system should be approximately 1.5715917903674 x 10^33 *Planck lengths*. Apologies for any rounding errors.... Henri