Light Sphere, is that the new name to replace light bulb?

[FrodoOne]

For what it's worth,the top one of the three measuring tapes I showed in my phot (sic) was bought only a few days ago - because I went out to do some work and forgot to take any measuring device with me! I think all the ones I looked at in the shop were 'dual scale (metric + Imperial), with the metric markings in cm), none of which seems 'acceptable' to Frodo.

Although it might appear that a lot of 'arguing' has been going on here recently, I think all that we are really seeing are the is differences between Australia and UK (but with attempts to assert that only the Australian situation is 'correct', or even acceptable, anywhere! !

For what it is worth, your dual-scale measuring tapes are harder to read than the all millimetre tapes which I pictured.

Australia is not alone.

All your (UK) building materials are specified in millimeters, even if they add an Imperial approximation - 45 years after the supposed "metrication" in the UK - Apart from the roads !?!?!?!
(e.g. https://www.buildingmaterials.co.uk/catalogsearch/result/?q=timber )

Would you believe that the "US Metric Design Guide"
(https://www.gsa.gov/system/files/Metric_Design_Guide_PQ_-_260.pdf )
states - on Page 10 -

"Millimeters (mm)
SI specifications have used mm for almost all measurements, even large ones. Use of mm is consistent with dimensions in major codes, such as the National Building Code (Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Inc.) and the National Electric Code (National Fire Protection Association).
Use of mm leads to integers for all building dimensions and nearly all building product dimensions, so use of the decimal point is almost completely eliminated. Even if some large dimensions seem to have many digits there still will usually be fewer pencil or CAD strokes than conventional English Dimensioning."
AND
"Centimeters (cm)
Centimeters are typically not used in U.S. specifications. This is consistent with the recommendations of AIA (American Institute of Architects) and the American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM). Centimeters are not used in major codes.
Use of centimeters leads to extensive usage of decimal points and confusion to new readers. Whole millimeters are being used for specification measurements, unless extreme precision is being indicated. "

US "standards" are now specified in SI dimensions, with the addition of an approximate "US Conventional" dimension.
"US Conventional" measures are what they now call the British measures that they were using in 1776
and
the US never adopted the Imperial measures of 1826.
However, the did re-define their "inch" as 25.4 mm in 1933, three years after the UK.)

As we all know "Dual Scale" is evil, so (almost) no one in the USA looks at the (base) SI dimension !!!

 

[ebee]

Yes we do tend to use the traditional "English" measures as well by dual marking so we never completely get rid of it and therefore feet and inches are used a lot.
Thing that got me were the so called "Metric Martyrs" idiots in my humble opinion.
Nobody said we MUST not use our old measures, in fact it can be helpful for many folk, what they did insist one though thinks must be marked in those "new fangled units" but if dual marked then the new fangled may be no less prominent than the old stuff.
What the heck was wrong with that? sounds reasonable to me ad therefore nowt to be a martyr about.

 

[ericmark]

My pet hate, is equivalent watts. One buys an electronic switch, or switch mode power supply, that states clearly it needs a load or 5 to 50 watts to work, so one then buys a 40 watt bulb, clearly marked in large writing, which I need without my glasses, one gets it home and fits it, only to find not really 40 watt, but 6 watt, and it will not work.

I even at one point found a replacement for a fluorescent tube marked with equivalent watts, which were completely wrong, as LED's produce very little extra light if any to the old fluorescent, so the equivalent watts were wrong anyway.

Lumen is at least some indication, not very good, as it does not take into account direction, the old pearl 60 watt bulb shined in nearly all directions, small shadow at the base, even the filament LED does not have a pearl glass, so there is no equivalent to a tungsten lamp. So why pretend there is?

 

[JohnW2]

For what it is worth, your dual-scale measuring tapes are harder to read than the all millimetre tapes which I pictured.

That, again, is your opinion.

As we all know "Dual Scale" is evil, so (almost) no one in the USA looks at the (base) SI dimension !!!

... and that certainly is you opinion, and, to my mind, a rather silly statement

Australia is not alone.

I never said it was. I don't doubt that other countries probably take the same approach.

All your (UK) building materials are specified in millimeters, even if they add an Imperial approximation -

That is generally true, but in some cases I suspect that it is the metric (mm) figures which is the "approximation". For example ...

"1220 mm" would be a very odd no-round figure to choose for the length of the product, but that figure is approximately the metric equivalent of 48 inches (1,219.2 mm). What I don't know is whether is is manufactured as 1,220 mm or 1,219.2 mm.

I don't really underrated why you clearly have such strong feelings about this. Just as I say in relation to the frequent arguments here about words/language, all that matters to me is that the words/language provide for clear and unambiguous communication. Similarly, any of what we have been discussing here (units and measuring devices) represent a perfectly adequate way of measuring and specifying lengths - and, again, that's all that matters to me.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I don't really underrated why you clearly have such strong feelings about this. Just as I say in relation to the frequent arguments here about words/language, all that matters to me is that the words/language provide for clear and unambiguous communication. Similarly, any of what we have been discussing here (units and measuring devices) represent a perfectly adequate way of measuring and specifying lengths - and, again, that's all that matters to me.

You seem to be confusing what you think with clear and unambiguous.

 

[JohnW2]

You seem to be confusing what you think with clear and unambiguous.

I don't think so. If I only "think" I understand something, then it is not 'clear and unambiguous'.

I'm sure you could scrape the barrel and suggest situations in which something which seemed to be 'clear and unambiguous' actually wasn't - but little, if anything, in life is'perfect'!

When it comes to measurements of distances, measurements in mm, cm and inches are all 'clear and unambiguous'.

 

[ebee]

A lot of English things in industry and the change to metric meant the sizes were mere converts as was obvious from the sizes quoted, that was prevalent in the 70s and 80s, maybe some has changed but I doubt much as, just do the conversions to compare, in light engineering it was rife. So effectively yards feet inches still rule, to a certain degree, as per John`s example of plasterboard.
Oh the "Metric 13" quoted by the Timber Warehouse Manager .

3/8" and 10mm are good examples to bear

 

[JohnW2]

A lot of English things in industry and the change to metric meant the sizes were mere converts as was obvious from the sizes quoted, that was prevalent in the 70s and 80s, maybe some has changed but I doubt much as, just do the conversions to compare, in light engineering it was rife. So effectively yards feet inches still rule, to a certain degree, as per John`s example of plasterboard.

Even today, a good few food and drinks items (and some other things) are sold with weight/volumes such as 454 g (1 pound) or 568 mL 1 pint) (rather than, say, 500 g / 500 mL). I presume that those marked sizes do truly reflect they actual target manufacturing size, but they clearly are 'Imperial sizes', even if marked in (accurate to whole numbers) metric weights/modules. I believe that the EU disapproved of this practice (and quite possibly attempted to 'ban' it)!

Interestingly, given that a lot of this discussion has related to Australia, although it is most commonly sold in the UK in 440 mL cans, one can also get ...

 

[ebee]

what identical looking cans of Fosters do they sell in Oz? That might give us a sort of clue. Frodo could be in a good position to answer this one I reckon. The answer of comparisons could be most interesting.

 

[JohnW2]

what identical looking cans of Fosters do they sell in Oz? That might give us a sort of clue. Frodo could be in a good position to answer this one I reckon. The answer of comparisons could be most interesting.

Indeed. I imagine that the "568 mL" marking appears somewhere 'on the back' but, as you can see, it says "Pint Can" on the front!

 

[ebee]

I must admit that it reminds me of that Stan Boardman joke about going into a pub and asking for a pint and a half of Litre cos none of us understands how to use these "New" measurements

 

[ericmark]

Interesting, since I tend to go for real beer, not the French stuff invented by Pasture, I went to have a look at sizes, 330, 440, and 500 seems to be the norm. Some odd ones 300, 350, 375, 650, and 660.

I tend to use pint glasses, so a pint bottle would make sense, but to brew my beer, the longest job is to bottle it, so the bigger the bottle, the easier to bottle, and having a screw cap means I can re-seal and just drink what I want, so I mainly use old pop bottles, as do as it says on the bottle and recycle them as beer bottles for my home brew.

Anyway, time I went to blow the froth of a couple. If I don't tell people I use 2 litre bottles, it does not sound so bad.

 

[FrodoOne]

Even today, a good few food and drinks items (and some other things) are sold with weight/volumes such as 454 g (1 pound) or 568 mL 1 pint) (rather than, say, 500 g / 500 mL). I presume that those marked sizes do truly reflect they actual target manufacturing size, but they clearly are 'Imperial sizes', even if marked in (accurate to whole numbers) metric weights/modules. I believe that the EU disapproved of this practice (and quite possibly attempted to 'ban' it)!

Interestingly, given that a lot of this discussion has related to Australia, although it is most commonly sold in the UK in 440 mL cans, one can also get ...

There are no non-metric indications on pre-packaged goods sold in Australia - except on some US Imported products where the metric quantities have been included in the US packaging or have been added.

what identical looking cans of Fosters do they sell in Oz? That might give us a sort of clue. Frodo could be in a good position to answer this one I reckon. The answer of comparisons could be most interesting.

Hardly anyone in Australia drinks Fosters beer. (Made by Carlton, Melbourne)
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foster's_Lager )
( I can't find it on the site of the largest liquor store in Australia - https://www.danmurphys.com.au/beer/all
However, https://www.danmurphys.com.au/product/DM_800717/foster-s-classic-lager-cans-375ml indicates "Unavailable" although it is "available" in some other outlets - https://www.thebottle-o.com.au/sm/d...uct/fosters-classic-lager-can-375ml-id-505115 )
Apart from "Craft Beers", Crown Larger probably would be the Premium Beer of choice in Australia.

Australian beer is (generally) sold in 750 ml bottles or 375 ml Cans - or bottles.
Imported Beer is often in 330 ml cans/bottles and "Craft" Beers tend follow this "trend".
Guinness comes in 440 ml cans.

Regulations require that the stated size of all pre-packaged goods be rounded down to the nearest 5 ml (or 5 g) - to avoid "confusing numbers".
Hence "454 g (1 pound) or 568 mL (1 pint) " would not be permitted.
It would have to be 450 g or 565 ml - unless there was actually more, to make it 455 g or 570 ml.
Apart from South Australia, any Hotel Beer Quantity called a "Pint" must be 570 ml (rounded UP) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_in_Australia

"In the Northern Territory, the once-common "Darwin Stubby", a large two litre bottle, is now sold largely as a tourist gimmick, albeit very successfully."

Of course, decilitres and centilitres/dekagrams and hectograms must not be used - The Metric System Is Better By A Thousand.

 

[FrodoOne]

In the 1970s, when Foster's Larger was being "pushed", there was Peters Ice Cream Company (now owned by Nestles), which had this "Jingle" : -
"Come along and have a Peters Ice Cream,
Don't you think it's a jolly good idea.
You can't go wrong as long as it's Peter's Ice Cream
Watch the kiddies make it disappear.
Without exaggeration, it's the health food of a nation.
You can get it in a bucket, brick or cone.
So come along and have a Peters Ice Cream,
for Peters simply stands alone."
(

https://soundcloud.com/alex-hehr%2Fpeters-ice-cream-kids

)

At that time, there was an "underground" parody - related to Foster's Larger.
It went something like this : -
"Come along and have a Foster's Larger,
Don't you think it's a jolly good idea.
You can't go wrong as long as it's Foster's Larger
Just watch them make it disappear.
Without exaggeration, it's the health drink of a nation.
You can get it by a bottle or a glass.
So, come along and have a Foster's Larger
And stick your Peters Ice Cream up your a***.

Will you ever think of Foster's Larger in the same way again?

 

[ericmark]

Australian beer is (generally) sold in 750 ml bottles or 375 ml Cans - or bottles.

Clearly they have not embraced the metric system, or would be 500 and 1000 ml cans or bottles. In the imperial system, we had a pint of milk, or 1/3 pint in schools, today we have such a mixture of quantity, you can no longer look at a bottle, and say that's a pint, or quart one has to read the labels.

Most pop sold as 2 litres, with some 3 litres, only specials come in different sizes, but the dual pricing labels would not have been required before metric, now we have it priced per unit and per kilogram in supermarkets so we can compare prices. One sweet I buy, has the same size package with 160g and 75g, (Jakemans throat lozenges) seems a bit sneaky to me.

But even our voltage, there were labels when I started 440 volt, I never remember it at 250 single and 440 three-phase, but later we started to get 415 volt labels, now 400 volt, it seems Ulster was 10,000 volt, but mainland 11,000 volt, why?

But we would in the old days buy a bag of sugar, now you have to look to how much in a bag. 1cwt was considered as the maximum weight which could be man handled on a regular basis. Not today, since we have gone metric, 25 kg, nearly ½ what we could handle. Seems the metric system has made us weaker?

However, what I was talking about was names, and the confusion, so is ES bulb 27 mm or 28 mm, seems the bases shrink and expand as they cross the Atlantic. What is the difference between a choke and a ballast? And can one have an isolation transformer, when it does not transform anything?