People! Who cares what the true conversion was. The point was
they couldn't figure it out and I couldn't get a mental picture of
size, using metric. I ended up buying a large piece bigger than I
needed from a different package. If the manufacturer did their
job for the consumer, they should have put both on the package,
anyway the people in the store still think .2 meters = 12" and who
cares? It just shows that metric (for some people) is like listening to
latin.



"Philip®" wrote:
>
> Liam Devlin wrote:
> > Philip® wrote:
> >> Liam Devlin wrote:
> >>
> >>> Philip® wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "Scott M" <smorris_12@delete_this.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:3F0EEC39.72324AA0@delete_this.yahoo.com...
> >>>
> >>>>> Wooduuuward wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I was in a store the other day to buy some fiberglass cloth,
> >>>>>> The package stated the cloth was .2 x .2 meters. That meant
> >>>>>> nothing to me. So I took the package to the clerk who gave me
> >>>>>> as quizzical look and took the package to the store manager who
> >>>>>> guessed it might be 12" square. That was after 5 minutes playing
> >>>>>
> >>>> with his calculator.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Funny, I can get a picture in my mind of 12" square but not
> >>>>>> of .2 meters square.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Except that 0.2m (20cm) = 8".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What I'm struggling to understand is why the store manager simply
> >>>>
> >>>> didn't
> >>>>
> >>>>> open the packet and measure it if he couldn't do the maths.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Scott
> >>>>
> >>>> Hmmmm. I have one of those handy Radio Shack multi converters
> >>>> here. 12" = 0.30 meter = 30.48 cm = 12 inches.
> >>>
> >>> Must be time to dump your Radio Shack stock, it's 0.2 m, not 0.3 m,
> >>> and
> >>> 0.30 m = 30.0cm, not 30.48, which is the no. of cm/foot or 12").
> >>>
> >>> Using 2.54 cm/inch, .2 m = 7.87"
> >>
> >> Misunderstandings. In linear measurements:
> >>
> >> 0.2 meters figures to 7.87 inches (agreed)
> >> 30.0 centimeters figures to 11.811 inches (not 1 foot)
> >> (double check this at
> >> http://www.sciencemadesimple.net/EASYlength.html )
> >
> > No need to verify anything, I posted the conversion factor I was using
> > and you agree that 0.2 meters = 7.87" plus 12" = 30.48 cm.
>
> So now, 7.87" -plus- 12" should equal 19.87, right? (0.504698 meter)
> ;^)
>
> >> 30.48 centimeters equals 12 inches.
> >
> > I understand all that, but you posted:
> >
> > 12" = 0.30 meter = 30.48 cm = 12 inches.
>
> Loop verification. Try it.
>
> > The way I read that is 12" equals 0.30 meters (which is false) equals
> > 30.48 cm (also false) = 12". It's a given that 12" = 12 inches, but
> > the middle stuff is not right.
>
> 12" DOES equal 0.3048"meter (or 30.48cm if you prefer). You may not
> dispute this further.
>
> >
> >> Radio Shack stock intact. ;^)
> >
> > Still time to reconsider
>
> Not.
> --*
>
> Philip
>
> "If a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending
> the same way, make the design visible to the people . tis not to be
> wondered that they should then rouse themselves."
> - John Locke (1632-1704)