| Author |
Message |
    
Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce
Post Number: 11938
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.101.115
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - 09:16 pm: | 
|
This popped up on the BA's daily news headlines e-mail, and I thought it was worthy of mention. A beer blog has a link to a graphic showing the legal drinking age throughout the world (http://www.columnfivemedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/ss-drinking-age.png). From the link you can see that the US is rather lonely in setting the age at 21. It would appear that only India, Indonesia, Micronesia, Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates share this as the legal age, and actually I discovered elsewhere that in India it varies from state to state, with some as low as 18 and at least one (Delhi) at 25. The map is also misleading regarding Canada, where three provinces (Alberta, Manitoba and Quebec) set the age at 18, while in the rest of them it is 19.
It should be noted as well that at least nine countries (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Iran, Kuwait, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Somalia, Kuwait) officially ban alcohol entirely. And of course there are various local jurisdictions that prohibit it in others. |
Nephalist
Intermediate Member
Username: Nephi
Post Number: 374
Registered: 12-2005
Posted From: 162.116.29.69
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - 09:35 pm: |
|
Lower the drinking age to 18 and raise the driving age to 21. |
Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann
Post Number: 7401
Registered: 03-2004
Posted From: 72.49.200.252
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - 09:40 pm: |
|
Yes, we teach our children to drive before they are supposed to learn to drink. I was fortunate to go to a college where the students were not usually allowed to have cars and the drinking age was at that time 18 for 3.2 beer. |
Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce
Post Number: 11940
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.101.115
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 31, 2010 - 10:35 pm: |
|
They're moving in that direction here in Ontario. MADD is a strong political force in terms of changing the laws. Just this past month a new law carries a mandatory licence (Canadian spelling) suspension for any blood alcohol whatsoever if the driver is under 22. And while the official DWI blood alcohol limit for others is still 0.08 percent, since 2009 you will lose your licence for three days (and have a very hefty insurance premium increase) if your blood alcohol is greater than 0.05 percent. I'm now at the point where I ride my bicycle or walk if I have more than two beers at one sitting. Bar and restaurant owners report their business is down. |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1878
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 01, 2010 - 03:02 pm: |
|
I question whether Greenland doesn't have a limit? It is a part of Denmark and should reasonably have the same limit. |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1879
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 01, 2010 - 03:04 pm: |
|
Also, if Tunisia has a ban on alcohol, then every hotel owner and restauranteer in the country faces charges :o) |
Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce
Post Number: 11941
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.101.115
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 01, 2010 - 03:18 pm: |
|
According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_drinking_age), the map is in error regarding Tunisia, where the legal drinking age is 18. Of course many (but not all) devout Muslims do not consume alcohol. |
Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce
Post Number: 11942
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.101.115
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 01, 2010 - 03:36 pm: |
|
Also, Greenland is considered an autonomous country, with Denmark responsible for foreign affairs (Greenlanders carry Danish passposts, for example), security and financial administration. The remaining governmental functions are under local control. The agreement between Denmark and Greenland gives Greenlanders the legal right to "self-determination," including complete independence if they wished. While Denmark is a member of the European Union, Greenland is not.
(Message edited by BillPierce on September 01, 2010) |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1880
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 01, 2010 - 04:35 pm: |
|
Huh! You learn something every day  |
The Jolly Brewer
Senior Member
Username: Matfink
Post Number: 2364
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 77.100.116.116
| | Posted on Sunday, September 05, 2010 - 07:43 pm: |
|
When I visited the US about 5 years ago I never got used to being clothlined by the bouncers as I ignorantly strode into any bar without flashing my ID. I was 30 at the time and completely un-used to having to prove my age, I mean I'd been legally drinking for over 12 years. |
Magnus
New Member
Username: Magnus
Post Number: 1
Registered: 09-2010
Posted From: 88.106.196.170
| | Posted on Monday, September 06, 2010 - 12:54 am: |
|
Watch out Bill
You could lose your licence under the influence and on a bike (over here at least).
Mag |
Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce
Post Number: 11951
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.101.115
| | Posted on Monday, September 06, 2010 - 02:29 am: |
|
There's not a strict alcohol limit for bicycle riders, Magnus, but you can be fined for being a hazard to traffic or for public drunkenness. At least they can't suspend your driver's licence. |
Bob D
Member
Username: Fl_bob
Post Number: 112
Registered: 07-2007
Posted From: 69.246.174.241
| | Posted on Monday, September 06, 2010 - 02:48 am: |
|
It is different in Florida. I was in traffic school(for a speeding ticket) with a guy who got pulled over and ticketed for running a stop sign on his bike. This happened in an empty parking lot on the UCF campus. It cost him points on his drivers license, so he went to traffic school. I have been told you can get a DUI for biking drunk. |
Tony Legge
Advanced Member
Username: Boo_boo
Post Number: 503
Registered: 05-2005
Posted From: 174.118.73.14
| | Posted on Monday, September 06, 2010 - 09:26 pm: |
|
Makes you wonder when you can die for your country as part of the military, but you can't legally drink alcohol. |
Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce
Post Number: 11953
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.101.115
| | Posted on Monday, September 06, 2010 - 10:10 pm: |
|
A friend who is a longtime teacher tells me the legal drinking age was raised from 18 to 19 here in Ontario in 1979. He claims it was moderately effective in reducing drinking among high school students. I asked my 18-year-old stepdaughters about this. They said they know more people who smoke pot than who regularly drink, but I wouldn't call them typical kids. |
Bob D
Member
Username: Fl_bob
Post Number: 114
Registered: 07-2007
Posted From: 69.246.174.241
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 07, 2010 - 02:09 am: |
|
It's a lot easier for high school kids to get pot than alcohol. |
ChriSto
Advanced Member
Username: Christo
Post Number: 714
Registered: 02-2006
Posted From: 216.176.226.154
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 07, 2010 - 11:47 am: |
|
Tony - our local Representative here in GA is sponsoring a bill in the House to allow military members to be able to drink at 18 on base. |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1887
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 07, 2010 - 03:56 pm: |
|
Why limit it to members of the military? |
Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce
Post Number: 11955
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.101.115
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 07, 2010 - 04:58 pm: |
|
Joakim, I suspect I will be criticized for saying this, but as an American who now lives elsewhere, the only answer I can give is because it's the United States. The more people in other countries point out the inconsistencies the more the US seems determined to ignore logic and go its own way. In my mind the same answer applies to why it has taken the US more than 50 years to catch up with the rest of the developed world on providing for universal health care. |
Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann
Post Number: 7419
Registered: 03-2004
Posted From: 74.83.191.159
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 07, 2010 - 05:53 pm: |
|
Simple-minded self-rightousness. |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1892
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 07, 2010 - 06:12 pm: |
|
...not to mention the metric system! |
Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce
Post Number: 11956
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.101.115
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 07, 2010 - 07:16 pm: |
|
Well, I'm not sure what a metric year is. Perahps the same goes for other Americans. 
(Message edited by BillPierce on September 07, 2010) |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1893
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 07, 2010 - 07:43 pm: |
|
A metric year is 400 days; 10 days per week, 40 days per month, 10 months. Of course the day is divided into 10 hours of 100 minutes each. |
Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann
Post Number: 7420
Registered: 03-2004
Posted From: 74.83.191.159
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 07, 2010 - 08:54 pm: |
|
I had a roommate who thought that 365.25 or so days per year was really dumb. He thought that if we placed enough rocket power on or near the equator we could both speed/slow the planets rotation and or the orbital period to get a more reasonable number of days per year.
Me, I think that before we do that, we need to reconsider base ten. Octal or hexadecimal would be so much better. Octal 555 = 365 or hexadecimal 16D = 365.
It looks like 500 octal days per year would be practical. We would have to loose 45 days by slowing the planet's rotation and / or speeding the orbit around the Sun. I am no astrophysist, but you would fire these huge rockets horizontally once a day to do both. That or we could cause a large object like the Moon to crash into the Earth at just the right angle. I doubt that a mere astriode would do it.
Base 36 - A0 would only need the loss of five days . . .
(Message edited by listermann on September 07, 2010) |
Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce
Post Number: 11957
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.101.115
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 12:53 am: |
|
The author of Genesis must have been using the metric system (or perhaps base 10^64) when he wrote that God created the heavens and the earth in six days. 
(Message edited by BillPierce on September 08, 2010) |
Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce
Post Number: 11958
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.101.115
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 01:23 am: |
|
In a somewhat more serious (or at least factual) vein, the French actually did try to "metrify" the calendar, and even adopted it from 1793 to 1805 (and again very briefly in 1871). The year began on the fall equinox. There were twelve 30-day months, and either five or six national holidays (depending on whether it was a leap year) between certain months. Each month had three 10-day weeks. Each day was further divided into ten hours of 100 minutes and 100 seconds.
Although it might have made time arithmetic easier, the concept was too much of a stretch for people and never caught on elsewhere. Napoleon, who otherwise favored the metric system, was one of the chief reasons it was abandoned. |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1894
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 09:06 am: |
|
Wow! But ... that period was during Napoleon's reign. Did he not introduce it, or did he just find it infeasible to implement? On the face of it, it seems precisely like the kind of measure Napoleon _would_ introduce.
As an aside, I am a great admirer of Napoleon; in my view he had two great problems: His megalomania (I've listened to Napoleonic apologists trying to defend his invasion of Russia, and it is really embarrassing) and the fact that he was born out of his time. A hundred years later it might have gone differently. But at that time, the fact that he was on the regicidal side in the French revolution, made it impossible for the great monarchies (esp. Great Britain) to ever come to terms with him. |
Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce
Post Number: 11959
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 24.141.101.115
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 12:03 pm: |
|
The calendar and time reforms were proposed early in the French Revolution during the heady thinking that they were remaking a new world. Later when Napoleon came to power he dismissed it as impractical, although as I said he embraced the rest of the metric system.
Some years ago I wondered why the meter is the particular length it is (actually I was curious why the circumference of the earth is just over 40,000 km). The meter turns out to be one-ten millionth (10^-7) of the distance from the equator to the north pole, measured on a line running through Paris. Of course all meridians are the same length, but leave it to the French to choose the one that includes Paris. Their argument was that the prime meridian (0 degrees longitude) runs through the Greenwich Observatory in south London.
The commission that calculated the earth's circumference was quite accurate for the time (1808, long before the GPS system). The actual circumference is almost exactly 40008 km at the poles and just over 40075 km at the equator. |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1895
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 12:32 pm: |
|
Yep. Of course, now we have a more robust definition of the metre:
The metre is the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.
Edited for formatting.
(Message edited by joques on September 08, 2010) |
Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann
Post Number: 7421
Registered: 03-2004
Posted From: 74.83.191.159
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 01:44 pm: |
|
I wish the meter had been designed around the acceleration due to gravity. |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1896
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 02:36 pm: |
|
I ... don't see how. Acceleration is a squared number, right? Distance per time squared. Wouldn't that needlessly complicate things? Also, gravity is not a constant, not even within our own planet and certainly not off of it. |
Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann
Post Number: 7423
Registered: 03-2004
Posted From: 74.83.191.159
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 02:58 pm: |
|
The meter would derived from time and gravity. I believe that, for all practical purposes, it would unify weight, mass and force. But I could be wrong about this.
(Message edited by listermann on September 08, 2010) |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1897
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 08:07 pm: |
|
What you want seems to be another unit of measurement entirely. Metre is a simple unit of distance. We need those too, you know |
Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann
Post Number: 7425
Registered: 03-2004
Posted From: 72.49.200.252
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 08:57 pm: |
|
9.81 newtons to a kilogram. What is that all about? |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1898
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 09:21 pm: |
|
Newton is a measurement of force. Kilograms is a measurement of weight. 9.81 N to 1 kg is only applicable in our particular planet's gravity well. |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1899
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 09:41 pm: |
|
Sorry - relying too much on my high school-level science knowledge there and muddling it up.
Kilograms is a measurement of mass - and as such is independent of current force of gravity. My mass is 85 kg whether it is on Earth, the Moon or in freefall in space.
In vernacular speech, kilograms is used as _weight_, as in: I weigh 85 kg on Earth and 14 kg on the Moon and 0 kg in freefall. It is useful shorthand in everyday life, but useless in science.
In science-speech my _weight_ is 833 N on Earth and 137 N on the Moon and 0 N in freefall, while my _mass_ is 85 kg in all three instances.
The newton is simply the same value as the value for gravitational acceleration on Earth, in a vacuum: 9,8 meters per seconds squared, or, "my falling speed increases by 9,8 m/s every second". |
Magnus
New Member
Username: Magnus
Post Number: 4
Registered: 09-2010
Posted From: 88.106.229.198
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2010 - 09:47 pm: |
|
My pint is about 660ml whereas the US pint is about 495ml meaning that a half litre glass has just enough room for a small head (quite sensible). The beer is 5% generally to account for the volume reduction (instead of about 4%).
Maybe the drinking age follows a similar proportional correction.
I sense a global conspiracy by a shadowy non government organisation based on the some other unit of beer and I will have to change all of my recipes. |
Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann
Post Number: 7426
Registered: 03-2004
Posted From: 72.49.200.252
| | Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2010 - 12:41 am: |
|
If mass was not coupled to water, but rather to gravity, albeit Earth's, a lot of calculations would be easier. |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1900
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2010 - 07:18 am: |
|
The point isn't that every constant should be a round number (though I am very happy that (metric) volume and weight are), but that with a base 10 measuring system, every calculation in our messy, disordered, organic existence becomes as easy as possible.
You could perhaps increase the Newton to 10, and shorten the metre slightly, but that would have huge consequences for the measurement of volume. |
Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann
Post Number: 7427
Registered: 03-2004
Posted From: 72.49.200.252
| | Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2010 - 07:49 am: |
|
You are catching on. 9.81 is so close to 10 and makes much more sense than a fraction on the distance from the north pole to the equator passing through Paris.
It obviously can't happen, but it would have been nice. |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1901
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2010 - 08:12 am: |
|
But very short-sighted on the galactic scale. Tying the measurement of force to the particular gravity well of a single planet, it would not correspond to any other planet our species might visit |
Joakim Ruud
Senior Member
Username: Joques
Post Number: 1902
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 91.135.32.50
| | Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2010 - 08:30 am: |
|
(I'm sorry, we seem to have hijacked the thread)
This got me thinking. Obviously the gravitational acceleration constant was determined long before the metric system was introduced, 100-150 years or so earlier. Not sure if it was actually Newton who did it, but it had to be in that same period of scientific bloom in the mid-17th century. You have to wonder why Newton, Boyle, Hooke (extremely pedantic personalities all, by any standard) and the rest of them didn't see the need for a better system of measurement, and made one that was consistent with their observations.
Sorry, just rambling.
(Message edited by joques on September 09, 2010) |
Dan Listermann
Senior Member
Username: Listermann
Post Number: 7428
Registered: 03-2004
Posted From: 74.83.191.159
| | Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2010 - 02:41 pm: |
|
If it is an arbitrary constant, it might as well be based where it is most useful, at least for the forseeable future - Earth. |
PalerThanAle
Senior Member
Username: Palerthanale
Post Number: 1757
Registered: 04-2002
Posted From: 24.223.211.182
| | Posted on Friday, September 10, 2010 - 03:18 am: |
|
yawn. look at the time...it's 30/100th after 9
PTA |
Brews and Views Archive 2010 
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page