One rod. I like a one rod tape measure. Anything larger than about 3 rod, or smaller than 1/64, and I would agree with proponents of the metric system. Yet, I don’t care much, or perhaps I don’t know much, about astronomy quantification without earthen latitude and longitude, and my understanding of stoichiometry is elementary.

Relative to home shops, therefore, Imperial mathematics is superior. I would use an imperial reel tape and an Imperial Biltmore Scribner DBH stick for cruising if I had a wife. And, I must add that even latitudinal and longitudinal quantification is Imperial in that both are a function of the euclidean 360° off of Greenwich England.

I now need to see if I can find anything about Pythagoras’s Golden Rule of 1.161. Because, I was recently at Woodcraft in Manchester, Connecticut, having just visited Parkerville Lumber just behind Manchester Glass, and I had a conversation with a cabinetry instructor about a pentagonal mahogany high boy table. So, remember that 360°/4 = the 90° quadrants of GIS, and that 360°/5 = cinquants of 72° which mitre as 2 cuts at 36°. It is, seemingly, a puzzle regarding pentagonal form as a sort of Rosetta Stone decryptor of the ever present anomaly in mathematics which exists between Imperial and metric quantification.

So, to reiterate; my world is around a 64th to a few rod. And, you may have noted; I haven’t much use for Newtonian Scholiums yet for a desire to decipher rhumb, especially with trammel points for arcs and segments, and, in fact, today my epiphany was in fact that square is certainly more Euclidean than Pythagorean.

## Leave a ReplyCancel reply