The meter is an French fascist measurement made by the court jester.

"Since 2019 the metre has been defined as the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of
1/299792458 of a second ..." [Wikipedia]

What is wrong with this definition?

The metre claims to be a 'non-imperial' basis of measurement.

But the basis of the metre is the imperial or ephemeral second, which is the ultimate imperial measurement. Seconds are an imperial unit. The measurement of time is fundamental to the ruler ... get it?

So the arbitrarily devised metre is founded upon the imperial second. Oops. Now why again did you say the metric system is 'superior' to the imperial system?

Metric supremacists are fascist rubes who don't realize they were pwnd by the empire before their rebellion even had a name or gang sign. They wanted to overthrow the king and based their coup on the king's fundamental unit of regal measurement: time. Oops. This is a case of killing the baby in the cradle.

Imperial units of measurement are based upon things found in nature. The second is a division of the solar and astronomical day. A second is 1/86400th of a day, and is based again on sexigesimal math, which is found EVERYWHERE in nature.

Every good programmer should already know where this is going.

Day: 86400 seconds.
Day: 24 hours.
Hour: 3600 seconds.
Hour: minute squared.
Minute: 60 seconds.
3600 seconds * 24 hours = 86400 seconds.
60 seconds * 60 minutes = 3600 seconds = 1 hour

There is nothing arbitrary about this. The imperial measurement is neatly aligned to solar and astronomical cycles and to the latitudes and longitudes of the earth. In short, the imperial system of measurement had already measured the equatorial and tropical circuits of the earth and the sun's path over 3000 years ago, and based measurements upon that.

Then along came the metric aristocrats, who pretended this had never been done before, speculated a _false_ circumference of the earth, and came up with a flawed metre based on that false measurement, then changed it decades later to the distance traveled by light in an imperial second, unaware that no constant speed of light has yet been proved conclusively, but only assumed.

Whereas the imperial system is based upon measurements which have been observed unchanged, verifiable, and reproducible, FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS.

Tell me again why the metric system is, 'superior'?

The metre is merely a speculation and the so-called speed of light has NOT been conclusively proven, considering special relativity and all that other aristocratic bollocks. Also complicating the matter is the specific definition of, "light traveling in a vacuum." OK, sparky, how are you going to locate a laboratory in a vacuum at least 1 light second in length to conduct this experimental measurement and prove it?

This fallacy is called an 'unfalsifiable' claim. Yup, The metric system is based upon a pseudo-scientific conjecture and fallacy. Whereas the imperial system is based upon thousands of years of repeatable observation. And yet 'scientists' somehow are confused about the reality of the situation.

As I've said elsewhere, worldwide science and academia have been growing progressively more delusional for the past couple of centuries.

In the end the aristocrats will bow to the king they hate. Thank God Americans have refused to bow to this dumb idol. Stay strong Murrikanz.

Here's a shout out to the limeys who still weigh in stones! Long live the king's foot!

academicchatter@a.gup.pe