[OPE-L:2032] Re: the money supply

From: Gerald Levy (glevy@pratt.edu)
Date: Wed Jan 05 2000 - 08:28:57 EST

[ show plain text ]

Re Claus's [OPE-L:2024]:

> I'm sorry to have failed to go on in the debate. It's not that I haven't
> received the posts.

Sorry about that. Listproc mislead me into thinking you weren't
receiving posts.

> >Indeed, there
> >are many examples of measures where the unit of measure is not composed of
> >the same substance as what is being measured.
> I'm curious about this. Could you provide some examples?

Thanks for asking that question. I've been thinking about it for a while
and now recognize that coming-up with examples for this is harder than I
thought it would be.

How do you measure the power of an engine? Horse-power, right? Yet, an
engine is by no means composed of the same substance as a horse.

Yeah, I know, that's probably not a good example.

The unit of measure for direction has been historically the magnetic
compass. Yet, a magnetic needle is composed of a a different "substance"
than what it is used as a proxy to measure (relative direction).

That's probably not a good example either.

I'm still thinking about light, speed, and sound.

Perhaps more to your point is time.

        "What, without the clock, would be a period in which the value of
         a commodity, and therefore the labour time necessary for its
         production, are the decisive factors? (_CW_, Vol. 33, p. 403)

Does this mean that time can not be measured in some other way than a
clock? I don't think that is the case (there is the sun and the moon,
after all). Nor was the development of the clock a pre-requisite for
capitalism (although, on the other hand, ....)

In solidarity, Jerry

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 31 2000 - 07:00:06 EST