A New, Conscientious, All-Inclusive Universal Standard for Tooling and Measurement

Two short 13mm sockets can be slightly different lengths, which can be maddening as you acquire mix-matched length sockets that are about the same length, but aren’t, so drop out of the case as you try to close it.  If we standardized lengths for sockets, say short, med & long, it would save a lot of headaches, perhaps more than having two different standards, because at least your 13mm and ½” sockets would all fit in the same case nooks perfectly.  Deep down I don’t believe karma will escort us to a new universal standard until we re-imagine the standardization process and how it affects us.  For instance, standardizations of all the dimensions of a tool, container, or otherwise, compels better operation elsewhere.  Engineers designing automobiles have more concrete tables to look at when designing parts of an engine, knowing that a short, med, or long socket is now a set length, down to variance under 1mm instead of a variance of perhaps a cm in some cases, angles of nuts and bolts can be more precisely arranged inside of a vehicle, with the mfg more certain of compatibility.  Over time, other systems built around these organizational processes end up working better, which should be clue to the intellect, that by not going all the way, we could be creating nightmares in making things work worse.  I’ve just noticed to much disarray from poor standardization, which causes a lot of waste as things which don’t fit quite right but are still usable are still used but cause alot of grief, which clogs up people’s time, making progress suffer, which ultimately CAN cause a whole society to crimple from inside, due to poor internal structuring, debasing over time, with a final spiraling out of control, like we are beginning to notice.  The swappable battery is a good example, with tool mfgs being unaccountable to any standardization laws, consumers lost, then product quality overall suffered…the same can be seen in the auto industry, leading to stagnant old tech still being used, but yet on top of newer systems which are not thoughtfully designed either, encouraging recession and collapse.  At any rate, it might be easier to usher a new universal standard in, in order to abate the tides of disorganization, to afford the leg up needed to organize elsewhere more thoroughly, such as with interoperation standards, but those would never come if more parent and infinitely more pressing issues such as systemic fraud (such as The Fed) in government systems, which would mandate consumer code such as new standardization laws, are not addressed firstly, much in the way a person who expects to buy tools would acquire the funds to do so first. 

Anyway, the metric system is a great system, yet could use some refinement.  Some of the old-world measurements are more difficult to do calculations within, but yet in many ways just feel better, more natural...like a smoothed stone from an icy river.  For instance, a pint of beer (16floz) is precisely the capacity of the male bladder.  And a mile just feels better than a klick...sure enough, the world is about 24,000 miles in diameter, which fits in nicely to 24hrs in a day.  And that reminds me, would it be better to go to a 10-base system for time, too?  Of course yes empirically, but not for all the clocks and old watches if we went to 10 hours in a day, but we still could put 100 seconds in a minute and 100 minutes in an hour, to sacrifice, comprise and meet at both ends, keeping our clocks and saving our engineers’ brains—partly for less of a computer reprogramming job, but perhaps mostly to keep their old watches.  Most technical calculations don’t involve days yet, anyway; and keeping on proper schedule should encourage forwards compatibility when we get there.  But we have to do something quick because in space even the time lost to calculating for poor standards could be fatal. 

Granted, the proclivity for early races to choose different based standards besides 10 might well have been based upon the need for people to become adept enough at math to even ascend into space to begin with.  Now that we are at space's threshold, it might do well for a little refresher course in people prematurely spoiled by the metric system and for high tolerance upper engineering long decimal math, which a 2.5cm per inch system would lend towards, being just .04 cm shorter than an inch or about 0.015748”.  A new grand universal system should incorporate the basic backbone of the metric system's idea, yet also expound upon it through the lessons of the past.  A new universal standard could retain the more natural feeling unit, and perhaps be based elsewhere upon study into further synchronicities (the metric system does a nice job though of making the weight 1L of water equal to 1Kg...because everything metric is 10-base, 1 cc also equals 1 g, saving time, though perhaps not feeling just perfectly right, and that may be because nature wants to show us how to use both sides in coming together, which means that other aspects could keep bases other than 10 to encourage some long math sometimes, which likely was the goal back when there was not much better to do.

New standards should be backwards compatible with both systems, though perhaps more majorly with metric sizes.  An inch is 2.54cm, so the corresponding universal length in the future could be set at 2.5cm, that way tool sizes would be about the same for either.  A half of such a universal unit would be only about .0007874 inches shorter than a ½,” and right at 1.750cm.  Granted, some standard tools might fit a little better in some cases, but overall the math would be in favor of the more modern metric system...a 3/8” nut would be about .953cm, a 9/16 about 1.43cm, and a 5/8” bolt about 1.6cm...if we were on the 10-base of the new system, each 10th would by course equal 2.5mm...in that manner, one could see how a #4 universal (being .4 Units) would be able to handle a 1cm sized nut spot on (.4x25mm=10mm), and a 1/2” nut would fit a #5 almost just as well...as for the other standard (ASE) sizes, 3/8” would come in at 3.812 Universals, which a #4 would be able to handle, being only about .5mm larger (as well as a 1cm nut)...9/16 would be at 5.72 universals, and 5/8 comes in at about 6.4 (you just have to divide cm by .25 to get universals),  One can see how some of the standard sizes might be a little on the loose side, then a few might be an even tighter fit in some cases than with metric, but on the whole, most metric sizes would work just fine, with general tolerances and gaps already designed in sockets and tools to prevent things sticking picking up the slack (a 10mm socket is not exactly 10mm, whereas the nut would be…all sockets have a tooling gap, if the socket were the exact same size, it would stick).  At the end of the day though, I would just carry around a simple metal file and resize the nuts and bolts that were just a little too loose down to the Universal number below, a very simple thing to do, which once done is done for the rest of the life of the nut or bolt, with that size never to be mass produced again.  Likely specialty replacement bolts would be reproduced with the same standard ASE thread specs to replace old standard high torque bolts, but likely their heads will be Universal sized, or at least machined/filed down to that size.  I wouldn’t risk it with a high torque thread, but might would even go so far as to say that such a new Universal thread sizing standard would be able to come close to exact for the majority of standard thread sizes, though all of metric’s.  Furthermore, the 100th inch could be introduced, which would equal 0.25mm, and would serve as what the mm does now, except able to be 4 times as accurate, which means that sizing specialty sizes and tools to fit old standard sizes more precisely would be a cinch.  I bet that there will be certain known sizes highlighted on future charts for standard equivalents, such as a #5&3/4 for an old 9/16…good enough for the girls I go with, lets just put it that way.

A more ultimate goal for a modern Texit would be for infinitely adjustable meta-materials to begin to be researched so that the perfect fit could be found for anything, metric, standard, or perhaps even alien...one step in these directions would be the next.  I for one just don't want to find myself working on a Vegan starship without the right tools.  For all we know, the advanced tooling of space faring races might have been weaponized, so that special tools operate special hardware using specially tuned, advanced electronics complete with alien tool and hardware encryption (only an authorized tool will work with advanced nuts and bolts).  The bolts of the future might not even have threads or nuts or standard sizes for that matter, just a single that can adjust them into anything and also install or remove them, or even sprout electronic nano screw threads or flanges to auto-compress into a hole, where another jolt expands to stick it in solid, or even nano-welds it into place.  That's all doable stuff that labs are already doing here, it's just expensive and hard to get to when your average scientist can't even get to work on time from all the traffic, or even on his own car with much ease from general disorganization of tooling...hitting targets 50 or 100 years away with a cannon is difficult when your ship is sinking, let's just put it that way.  Little things like Texit would help to coax out good, snappy politics for advancements to come on time and not rain on our parades.  At any rate, better consumer controls over product is a main concern of the Texit.pro Citizens’ Organizational Relief Effort and could only come in a timely manner with things like an eGov system, such system being able to provide an informational platform fast and up to date enough to properly compliment endeavor into how to set the proper policies for the best reactions from the economy towards advancement.