Yep, a pretty pathetic scale. Surely there must be something better...

OFF TOPIC BUT HILARIOUS: Here is a quote from Wiki's hardness page: "For the mathematical concept of the difficulty of proving a conjecture, solving an equation, etc., see computational complexity theory. For water hardness, see hard water. For human hardness, see sex."

This thread is fun.

did i read queen in there? majesty the queen??

_what_ does the queen have to do in there? what about an eventual king? the queen of sweden? miss canada? the prime minister?

Good find, and glad to have been of service

I'm also glad that the Queen can use studs of any hardness. So to speak...

thanks. now i understand.

The Queen is a special characters in many Canadian legal documents. I suppose they'll have to rewrite many laws once the queen is succeded by the eventual king. A standard phrase I ran across when looking through messenger companies terms and conditions: "The carrier shall not be liable for any loss, damage or destruction or unreasonable delays arising from ... Acts of God, the Queen, or public enemies". What a cast of characters! I am not sure if her majestic royal highness appreciates being lumped together with the public enemies... but then the God association is somewhat appealing...

Her Majesty is our head of state, represented by the Governer General. "The Queen" and "The Crown" are legal ways of saying "the Government". For example, in Ontario law "the Queen in right of Ontario" means "the Government of Ontario", since the government's authority legally exists because the Queen permits it, via our history as a former British colony and a Commonwealth nation. Similarly in criminal law it is "The Crown" that presses charges and prosecutes.

Since 1982 this has become largely symbolic, but our legal system and precedent still derive from the UK's. You can quote the Magna Carta in a Canadian court case if you want, it's valid. Amusingly the Privy Council of Canada also gets a say in Royal weddings! There are have a few case when the Governer General, as vice-regent, exercised Royal authority. I can't remember the date, but the example that comes to mind was a GG refusing to dissolve Parliament after a non-confidence vote, and instead handing power over to the opposition (dissolving Parliament would require a federal election).

BTW (more useless trivia) the Queen of England is NOT the Queen of Canada. They are separate titles, that just happen to be held by the same individual. "Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith."

To start you could go with Rockwell, Vickers or Brinnel. Pretty much any scale is better.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brinell_hardness_test

Not the same thing as Mohs hardness. The other two you mention measure the same thing as Brinell. Different "kind" of hardness.

Yes, I realize that much.

"The Crown" I get, but "Queen"? Next thing we know her son will take over and all those documents will have to change! I'm not sure Charlie would be so pleased to be known as "The Queen".

Well, since they are always by default happen to be held by the same individual, that makes them basically the same, no? This King/Queen of [long list of states, territories, colonies etc.] seems to be a fairly standard thing not just for the British monarchs but for the royals of every country big enough to have had various territories and colonies.

Mohs hardness scale is for minerologists and people who use things made out of minerals. That is all of you road users, as roads are mostly rock (asphalt) or sand (concrete). Having bits harder then the road materials such as quartz (Moh 7) and feldspars (7) would cause for more rapid road wear. So steel (7) bits on heavy vehicles. For bikes go for the carbide. For a real show stopper use Topaz (8), Ruby ( 9 ), or Diamond (10).

Legaly a very different concept, even if it is the same person by tradition. In theory we could refuse to recognise Chuck as the next regent, if we wanted to.

Anyway, back to the point, a great many Canadian laws give specific rights to the Queen or Crown, in addition to the "Queen in right of Ontario" or "the Queen in right of Canada." I doubt very much these laws would become void if we had a king tomorrow, "King" would be read into the laws the way much else is read into our "living tree" concept of law.

This is probably boring all the Americans reading, and maybe surprising a few. We have some vastly different legal concepts.

I doubt very much that bike studded tires are illegal. The reason why they are banned for cars is the damage they do to payment because of their weight. Also, I saw a selection of studded tires in the Mountain Co-op store in Toronto and the Ministry of Transportation hadn't raided the place yet.

I'm just amazed that a single thread has managed to cover the Queen, Canadian law, mineralogy, and bikes all in one! I love this place...

Yet! Yet!!!

Yep. I'm almost afraid to talk about my bike for fear of going of topic.

If you can link it back to quartz somehow, we should be ok . I'd also like to expand on my previous comment: I can't believe one thread covered all those topics in less than two full pages

Kind of like my wifes conversations - she can jam six subjects into one paragraph.

Come on, the law has been quoted. Unless I misread something, they clearly are. Of course, it's also one of those laws that are never enforced, but that's a different matter.

Well - it is not illegal to sell studded bike tires, it's only illegal to take them on public roads. They may be bought by people who want to use them on trails, or in their own driveway, or out of the province....