Imperial units are dumb. We, in the US, would be much better off if we just bit the bullet. I am sure if an effort were made, however, it would become another insane political squawk point about American superiority.
Except Celsius, both scales are arbitrary (and no, there is no advantage to freezing and boiling point of water being 0 and 100).
Well, there are different levels of arbitrariness. :-)
The situation in Europe in the late 1700s and into the 1800s was that most countries had their own measures of inch, gallon and pound etc. The foot could easily vary more than 10% between countries. The naming of units was not consistent. And even seemingly specific measures differed, even inside one country, like a beer barrel being a different number of gallons than an ale barrel, or a barrel of fish being being of a different size than a barrel of grain.Just in Norway we had the Norwegian foot around 31,4 cm, being a variation of the Danish foot, that was a misreading of the Rheinish foot - but they were at least fairly similar. However, for shipping purposes, the English foot was used for the measurement of ships (important for customs and taxes), while also a bigger-than-English foot was used for measuring timber to be exported, accounting for a shrinking/drying of the timber during transport. The Swedish foot was 29.7 cm, and it was curiously divided into only 10 inches - making the Swedish inch very long and the Swedish foot fairly short. And I don’t think Scandinavia was particularly chaotic in this respect.
The whole thing was a mess, of course. So the idea of using the meter invented by the French was attractive (even though it was the French who invented it). No country’s definition of foot would be able to gain universal acceptance. The meter was originally aimed at being one ten-millionth of the distance from equator to the north pole of the earth. Nobody got ‘their’ foot or inch (or according to some legends: the foot-length or thumb-width of some famous, historical king) as the standard, so it was generally more acceptable.
Looking back, I predict that no metric-based country will ever go from the current strict ten-based increments of measures back to the imperial system with mainly two-based increments, with the occational factor of 12 (inch/feet), 11 and 5 and 3 (a mile is 8 furloughs, each of which is 10 chains of 22 yards, the yard being 3 feet.
It is SO not going to be the next measuring system of a country were the metric system have gained foothold.
Yeah, I know they managed to standardize the imperial measures after everyone but UK and US stopped using them. But it is still not going to happen.
I won’t think anyone was trying to say that any metric unit nation would convert to imperial (unless I missed something). It’s just unfortunate that it is so difficult to get imperial nations to convert to metric since it would make life easier for the very people who refuse to change (in the long term of course, short term would be chaos).
Quite true, and I certainly hope we are.moving further away fro the imperial system.
I am sorry I slid into a rant about the imperial system, but my initial motive was to show that for historical reasons, there is a lot more arbitrary choices in the imperial system then the metric system.
Human comfort is an intrinsically subjective thing. People who know celsius has absolutely no problem gauging the weather using celsius scale. The purported advantage of F in that regard is purely imaginative by F users who are unfamiliar with other systems.
Yeah, I agree, it’s a human scale made by humans for humans. 100°F will be hot for me whether I’m on Earth or Mars, but 0°C/100°C is only the freezing/boiling point of water on Earth.
I think the optimal solution is to use Kelvin for scientific purposes and Fahrenheit for everyday use, but that’s just the American speaking in me.
The only temperature scale that isn’t arbitrary is Kelvin, because it has an actual absolute zero. So 0 in Farenheit is freezing point of water and salt solution, which does have scientific application. What difference does it make? The compression of the Celsius scale forces you to use decimal points for any kind of reasonable daily use which sucks. I am not saying Fahrenheit is better, I am saying neither is better. They are both arbitrary. It doesn’t matter which one you prefer, it’s just what you are used to. The other metric units are objectively superior and given to greater precision.
What do you mean by decimal use? I live in a country who has always used C°, and never in our life we had to use decimal points for everyday usage. All boilers and ovens and kettles and thermostats and lab equipment is used with whole numbers.
That sounds strange. All digital celsius thermometers I have encountered in my celsius using country, whether for measuring air, food or body temperatures have decimals.
However it also seems to be a specifically US thing to be afraid of decimals, they really aren’t that big of a deal and it seems the only reason to not like them is if you are unfamiliar with them.
I would say Kelvin is arbitrary too. It has the temperature of 0K at a natural, non-atbitrairy point, but each increment of 1K is the same as 1°C and thus just as arbitrary as the Celcius scale.
There are multiple temperature scales that set zero at absolute zero. The “width” of their degrees vary arbitrarily. Because of this, Kelvin is still an arbitrary scale.
The other metric units are objectively superior and given to greater precision.
Eh, I think you need to rethink that. Show me a measurement in metric, and I can show you a smaller measurement in US Customary. (The reverse is also true, of course. Any measurement I give you in decimal inches, you can show me a smaller one in metric). Both systems are capable of an arbitrary degree of precision. Precision is certainly not one of the benefits of metric.
Metric is not “objectively” superior. Metric’s superiority is based on the subjective idea that base-10 scalability is a desirable quality. There are many, many reasons supporting that idea, but there are also certain circumstances for which base-10 is not particularly well suited. Scaling by a factor of 3, for example.
The idea of base-10 scalability effectively prohibits the metrification of angular measurements: geometry is extraordinarily ugly when you need to represent 1/6th of a circle comprised of 1, 10, 100, or 1000 Degrees, since no power of 10 is evenly divisible by 6. When you can’t even represent an equilateral triangle without repeating digits, your system won’t be adopted for that use.
Now, if we had evolved with 12 fingers, and developed a number system with 2 additional digits, 6 6 would equal 10. (6 6)^2 would be 100. We’d have an entirely different multiplication table, but a duodecimal metric system would be extraordinarily elegant. With 2 more fingers, we’d have metric clocks. Instead, we are stuck with some bastardized sexagesimal compatibility layer and everyone hates trigonometry.
I use both metric and imperial for work. But the issue is changing every single street sign, updating all of our school material, etc would cost the country billions of dollars and it just isn’t worth it at this point.
We’re replacing signs all the time. Start adding both, then eventually remove Imperial if it falls out of fashion. It doesn’t need to happen–and arguably shouldn’t!–overnight or otherwise short period of time.
That’s why metric should be added to the curriculum rather than replace imperial. Kids are still forced to learn standard and cursive writing. Learning Metric along with Imperial isn’t that damned hard.
I did learn metric in school, did you not? I’m in Ohio, not sure if it’s different elsewhere. Typically it was tied to physics and chemistry, but still learned it.
I’m in my early 30s and I learned metric pretty thoroughly as early as elementary school. Grew up in Massachusetts and went to public school, for what it’s worth.
We could start by having both on new signs. Over many years the majority of signs would eventually have both. Then, maybe 15 years from now, we could drop the imperial measurements from all new signs. I think that would help with cost.
(Adjust timeframe based on the average useful life of a sign plus an extra margin.)
Signs are the tip of the iceberg.
Every nut and bolt being made and all the tools for them.
Every tool that does any measurement.
Every scale.
Every gas pump.
etc. etc. etc.
I prefer whichever scale is more granular. So, for me, I’d prefer to keep Fahrenheit for temperature, but change to metric for linear/volume/speed measurements. I like knowing that I can look at the first number of the weather forecast and immediately determine what kind of clothes I should wear for the day. Celsius seems fine for everything with the exception of weather.
Pegging Celsius to freezing/boiling point of water makes it VERY easy to calibrate thermometers. That’s a huge advantage that makes it so anyone with a freezer and stove have a great reference point for calibration.
What’s the advantage to using 0 for freezing than 32 or 100 instead of 212? If anything there is a higher precision built into the whole numbers on the Fahrenheit scale for the sake of calibration. It would only be an advantage if you couldn’t wrap your head around a different number to represent those states.
Imperial units are dumb. We, in the US, would be much better off if we just bit the bullet. I am sure if an effort were made, however, it would become another insane political squawk point about American superiority.
Except Celsius, both scales are arbitrary (and no, there is no advantage to freezing and boiling point of water being 0 and 100).
deleted by creator
If the rest of the measuring methods are themselves based on something that is arbitrary, everything is arbitrary.
Well, there are different levels of arbitrariness. :-)
The situation in Europe in the late 1700s and into the 1800s was that most countries had their own measures of inch, gallon and pound etc. The foot could easily vary more than 10% between countries. The naming of units was not consistent. And even seemingly specific measures differed, even inside one country, like a beer barrel being a different number of gallons than an ale barrel, or a barrel of fish being being of a different size than a barrel of grain.Just in Norway we had the Norwegian foot around 31,4 cm, being a variation of the Danish foot, that was a misreading of the Rheinish foot - but they were at least fairly similar. However, for shipping purposes, the English foot was used for the measurement of ships (important for customs and taxes), while also a bigger-than-English foot was used for measuring timber to be exported, accounting for a shrinking/drying of the timber during transport. The Swedish foot was 29.7 cm, and it was curiously divided into only 10 inches - making the Swedish inch very long and the Swedish foot fairly short. And I don’t think Scandinavia was particularly chaotic in this respect.
The whole thing was a mess, of course. So the idea of using the meter invented by the French was attractive (even though it was the French who invented it). No country’s definition of foot would be able to gain universal acceptance. The meter was originally aimed at being one ten-millionth of the distance from equator to the north pole of the earth. Nobody got ‘their’ foot or inch (or according to some legends: the foot-length or thumb-width of some famous, historical king) as the standard, so it was generally more acceptable.
Looking back, I predict that no metric-based country will ever go from the current strict ten-based increments of measures back to the imperial system with mainly two-based increments, with the occational factor of 12 (inch/feet), 11 and 5 and 3 (a mile is 8 furloughs, each of which is 10 chains of 22 yards, the yard being 3 feet.
It is SO not going to be the next measuring system of a country were the metric system have gained foothold.
Yeah, I know they managed to standardize the imperial measures after everyone but UK and US stopped using them. But it is still not going to happen.
I won’t think anyone was trying to say that any metric unit nation would convert to imperial (unless I missed something). It’s just unfortunate that it is so difficult to get imperial nations to convert to metric since it would make life easier for the very people who refuse to change (in the long term of course, short term would be chaos).
Quite true, and I certainly hope we are.moving further away fro the imperial system.
I am sorry I slid into a rant about the imperial system, but my initial motive was to show that for historical reasons, there is a lot more arbitrary choices in the imperial system then the metric system.
The kg was redefined not long ago to Planks Constant. It is not arbitrary, but a measurement of a natural occurring phenomena.
[https://youtu.be/Oo0jm1PPRuo](Veritasium The New Kilogram)
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/Oo0jm1PPRuo
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
deleted by creator
Saying that ultimately the metric system is based on something arbitrary isn’t an attack on the system or a reason not to use it.
deleted by creator
How is 0°C for freezing and 100°C for boiling arbitrary? That seems to me like the most reasoned way to do it.
Human comfort is more generally relevant that the freezing and boiling points of water. In weather, 0F is f’ing cold and 100F is f’ing hot.
Human comfort is an intrinsically subjective thing. People who know celsius has absolutely no problem gauging the weather using celsius scale. The purported advantage of F in that regard is purely imaginative by F users who are unfamiliar with other systems.
same in celsius, 0 is damn cold and 100 is damn hot
LOL. REEEEEEALLY damned hot!
Not for a Finn. 🤣
I wouldnt describe 0 Celsius as “fucking cold” where im from cause it gets so much wors but ill give you 100 Celsius
That’s why they’ve invented negative numbers
Yeah, I agree, it’s a human scale made by humans for humans. 100°F will be hot for me whether I’m on Earth or Mars, but 0°C/100°C is only the freezing/boiling point of water on Earth.
I think the optimal solution is to use Kelvin for scientific purposes and Fahrenheit for everyday use, but that’s just the American speaking in me.
The only temperature scale that isn’t arbitrary is Kelvin, because it has an actual absolute zero. So 0 in Farenheit is freezing point of water and salt solution, which does have scientific application. What difference does it make? The compression of the Celsius scale forces you to use decimal points for any kind of reasonable daily use which sucks. I am not saying Fahrenheit is better, I am saying neither is better. They are both arbitrary. It doesn’t matter which one you prefer, it’s just what you are used to. The other metric units are objectively superior and given to greater precision.
What do you mean by decimal use? I live in a country who has always used C°, and never in our life we had to use decimal points for everyday usage. All boilers and ovens and kettles and thermostats and lab equipment is used with whole numbers.
Yeah, basically the only time we encounter decimal in celsius is when measuring body temperature.
That sounds strange. All digital celsius thermometers I have encountered in my celsius using country, whether for measuring air, food or body temperatures have decimals.
However it also seems to be a specifically US thing to be afraid of decimals, they really aren’t that big of a deal and it seems the only reason to not like them is if you are unfamiliar with them.
Oh and do you know how much is 1K in the scale?
Rankine scale slander
You got me there.
I would say Kelvin is arbitrary too. It has the temperature of 0K at a natural, non-atbitrairy point, but each increment of 1K is the same as 1°C and thus just as arbitrary as the Celcius scale.
There are multiple temperature scales that set zero at absolute zero. The “width” of their degrees vary arbitrarily. Because of this, Kelvin is still an arbitrary scale.
Eh, I think you need to rethink that. Show me a measurement in metric, and I can show you a smaller measurement in US Customary. (The reverse is also true, of course. Any measurement I give you in decimal inches, you can show me a smaller one in metric). Both systems are capable of an arbitrary degree of precision. Precision is certainly not one of the benefits of metric.
Metric is not “objectively” superior. Metric’s superiority is based on the subjective idea that base-10 scalability is a desirable quality. There are many, many reasons supporting that idea, but there are also certain circumstances for which base-10 is not particularly well suited. Scaling by a factor of 3, for example.
The idea of base-10 scalability effectively prohibits the metrification of angular measurements: geometry is extraordinarily ugly when you need to represent 1/6th of a circle comprised of 1, 10, 100, or 1000 Degrees, since no power of 10 is evenly divisible by 6. When you can’t even represent an equilateral triangle without repeating digits, your system won’t be adopted for that use.
Now, if we had evolved with 12 fingers, and developed a number system with 2 additional digits, 6 6 would equal 10. (6 6)^2 would be 100. We’d have an entirely different multiplication table, but a duodecimal metric system would be extraordinarily elegant. With 2 more fingers, we’d have metric clocks. Instead, we are stuck with some bastardized sexagesimal compatibility layer and everyone hates trigonometry.
Because it’s based on the average atmospheric pressure of one planet? (that and there being an actual physical zero point for temperature)
I use both metric and imperial for work. But the issue is changing every single street sign, updating all of our school material, etc would cost the country billions of dollars and it just isn’t worth it at this point.
We’re replacing signs all the time. Start adding both, then eventually remove Imperial if it falls out of fashion. It doesn’t need to happen–and arguably shouldn’t!–overnight or otherwise short period of time.
That’s why metric should be added to the curriculum rather than replace imperial. Kids are still forced to learn standard and cursive writing. Learning Metric along with Imperial isn’t that damned hard.
I did learn metric in school, did you not? I’m in Ohio, not sure if it’s different elsewhere. Typically it was tied to physics and chemistry, but still learned it.
I learned it in a very precursory way. Granted I’m pushing 40, so there’s been 21 years of curriculum advancement since I graduated high school.
I’m older than you and learned both of them in school.
Probably my shitty podunk schools then.
https://youtu.be/JQnwx10DT9o?t=9
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/JQnwx10DT9o?t=9
https://piped.video/JQnwx10DT9o?t=9
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
deleted by creator
We were taught metric in high school science and physics. However, it should start younger.
I’m in my early 30s and I learned metric pretty thoroughly as early as elementary school. Grew up in Massachusetts and went to public school, for what it’s worth.
Late 30s and from the mountainous south. Public school.
At least we had sex ed in 3rd, 5th, 8th and 9th grade. Learned about evolution in kindergarten as well.
We could start by having both on new signs. Over many years the majority of signs would eventually have both. Then, maybe 15 years from now, we could drop the imperial measurements from all new signs. I think that would help with cost.
(Adjust timeframe based on the average useful life of a sign plus an extra margin.)
That surely explains why no other countries have switched to metric. /s
Signs are the tip of the iceberg.
Every nut and bolt being made and all the tools for them.
Every tool that does any measurement.
Every scale.
Every gas pump.
etc. etc. etc.
Hey will you pass me that 3/16ths? No wait, make that a 3/8ths. No wait, let’s try one size up 7/16ths… [kill me]
Specifically came here to mention the “Celsius is dumb” exception to the “metric is better” argument!
Perhaps you’re not aware, but we don’t use Imperial units in the US; we use US customary units.
You’re just being pedantic for the sake of being pedantic. Everyone refers to the units used in the US as imperial units.
I prefer whichever scale is more granular. So, for me, I’d prefer to keep Fahrenheit for temperature, but change to metric for linear/volume/speed measurements. I like knowing that I can look at the first number of the weather forecast and immediately determine what kind of clothes I should wear for the day. Celsius seems fine for everything with the exception of weather.
Pegging Celsius to freezing/boiling point of water makes it VERY easy to calibrate thermometers. That’s a huge advantage that makes it so anyone with a freezer and stove have a great reference point for calibration.
What’s the advantage to using 0 for freezing than 32 or 100 instead of 212? If anything there is a higher precision built into the whole numbers on the Fahrenheit scale for the sake of calibration. It would only be an advantage if you couldn’t wrap your head around a different number to represent those states.
Decimals exists, and they are not terrifying or difficult to understand. The terror of using decimals is a strictly American phenomenon.
EDIT: nah it doesn’t matter. Have a good one.
An effort was made several decades ago, but it nevwr stuck.