• 'Pokémon Go' Is Forcing Americans to Learn the Metric System
    288 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;50725454]Whoever laid out the chart for Imperial did it specifically to be like "LOOK HOW CONFUSING IT IS OMG" 3 teaspoons to a tablespoon 2 cups to a pint, 2 pints to a quart, 4 quarts to a gallon. Isn't that easy? And why are the fractional sizes of cups even on the chart? Why is it a surprise that there are fractions of a cup? Why not have a bunch of asinine multiples of milliliters in the other column?[/QUOTE] Because fractional measurements are common in the imperial system (quart, fifth, "add 3/4 cup of flour"). In the metric system, there's literally one number you have to remember: 10. Everything else arises from a power of 10 and you can figure it out from there.
[QUOTE=V12US;50720628]Celsius makes more sense to me in daily life, but that just might be because I was raised with it. Fahrenheit in comparison seems kind of arbitrary. Sure, low values = really cold, but by what standard? Celsius' zero degrees "water starts freezing" is a great benchmark. The upper limit makes less sense, considering the boiling point of water at sea level really isn't something people deal with on a day by day basis, but in the Netherlands we have a standard called "tropical", which is 30°C. A day where the max. temperature reaches 30 degrees Celsius (at the main measuring site) is considered Tropical by the national weather institute. On the lower end, a minimum temperature of -10°C is considered "severe frost", and -15°C is "very severe frost". So really, Zero Degrees is more like the center of the scale, rather than the bottom end of it. Arguably "room temperature" is the center of the scale, but at that point you just start going into arbitrary values again, and the system really is no better for day to day life than Fahrenheit. What people consider a comfortable living temperature differs from person to person and from geographical area to geographical area. Take the Brits for instance, and how they start dying when temperatures reach tropical values. People around the Mediterranean laugh their asses off. But then when the temperatures start dropping, they curl up next to the radiator with a warm drink, while Brits are going for a walk in shorts and a t-shirt. There's nothing more subjective than the weather.[/QUOTE] Temperature scales don't make any sense regardless of whether it's Celsius or Fahrenheit. You can make arguments for Imperial and Metric collectively. Imperial = Everyday measurements easily visualized Metric = Measurements easily quantified as base10 But temperature? It's basically "Someone said this temperature here is this many of his special unit" 'Yeah well this guy said this temperature here is THIS many of HIS special unit' The only real useful temperature scale is Kelvin because it measures the energy level of atoms and uses that to determine relative levels of heat based on atomic agitation.
[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;50725462]Temperature scales don't make any sense regardless of whether it's Celsius or Fahrenheit. You can make arguments for Imperial and Metric collectively. Imperial = Everyday measurements easily visualized Metric = Measurements easily quantified as base10 But temperature? It's basically "Someone said this temperature here is this many of his special unit" 'Yeah well this guy said this temperature here is THIS many of HIS special unit' The only real useful temperature scale is Kelvin because it measures the energy level of atoms and uses that to determine relative levels of heat based on atomic agitation.[/QUOTE] Except the Kelvin scale is based on the Celsius scale, which inherently makes Celsius more useful.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50725461]Because fractional measurements are common in the imperial system (quart, fifth, "add 3/4 cup of flour"). In the metric system, there's literally one number you have to remember: 10. Everything else arises from a power of 10 and you can figure it out from there.[/QUOTE] So I'm expected to believe everything is in liters? You never need less than a liter? 750ml = 3/4 500ml = 1/2 liter 250ml = 1/4 liter 125ml = 1/8 liter 75ml = 1/16 liter Also "3/8 cup" and "1/16 cup" aren't measurements we use in America. Common measuring cup sets come in 1/8, 1/4, 1/2, and 1. You can also easily convert them into decimal for numbers sake and make the same counter argument. 1/8 = 0.125c 1/4 = 0.25c 1/2 = 0.5c so on and so forth. Admit it. The person the made the graph purposefully made imperial look as confusing as possible. It's NOT confusing. It's very intuitive, and it makes eyeballing measurements easy as hell especially if you do a lot of cooking. If you asked me to pour you a cup of liquid I could do it pretty accurately without measuring tools because I KNOW how much a cup is. It's based on a common measure of consumption. If I asked you to pour 236ml would you know how much to pour? [editline]17th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Headhumpy;50725473]Except the Kelvin scale is based on the Celsius scale, which inherently makes Celsius more useful.[/QUOTE] Uh, no. Kelvin is based on the absolute scale.
[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;50725476]So I'm expected to believe everything is in liters? You never need less than a liter? 750ml = 3/4 500ml = 1/2 liter 250ml = 1/4 liter 125ml = 1/8 liter 75ml = 1/16 liter Also "3/8 cup" and "1/16 cup" aren't measurements we use in America. Common measuring cup sets come in 1/8, 1/4, 1/2, and 1. You can also easily convert them into decimal for numbers sake and make the same counter argument. 1/8 = 0.125c 1/4 = 0.25c 1/2 = 0.5c so on and so forth. Admit it. The person the made the graph purposefully made imperial look as confusing as possible. It's NOT confusing. It's very intuitive, and it makes eyeballing measurements easy as hell especially if you do a lot of cooking. If you asked me to pour you a cup of liquid I could do it pretty accurately without measuring tools because I KNOW how much a cup is. It's based on a common measure of consumption. If I asked you to pour 236ml would you know how much to pour?[/QUOTE] Okay, I will admit the fractional measurements are not a valid point because fractions are used in conjunction with metric units as well (perfectly common to say 1/2 litre for example). Nevertheless, your argument for imperial units being easier to eyeball is irrelevant because that's an issue of familiarity. I'm familiar with the idea of a cup of liquid being about 250mL, so if you asked me to pour that much I will be able to estimate it with about as much precision and accuracy as you. [editline]17th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;50725476]Uh, no. Kelvin is based on the absolute scale.[/QUOTE] A change of 1°C corresponds to a change of 1K.
The only thing Celcius is fit to measure is the level of socialism in this thread. You can pry the Fahrenheit thermometer from my cold dead hands.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50725484] A change of 1°C corresponds to a change of 1K.[/QUOTE] You realize that's mostly a coincidence right? Absolute Zero just happens to be -273.15C and Kelvin just happens to correlate to Celsius with 1 degree changes because both are based on the absolute scale of temperature measurements and Fahrenheit is not. Saying Kelvin is based off Celsius because they share a common base scale is like saying Wine is based off Beer because they're both made with fermented plant mash.
[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;50725499]You realize that's mostly a coincidence right? Absolute Zero just happens to be -273.15C and Kelvin just happens to correlate to Celsius with 1 degree changes because both are based on the absolute scale of temperature measurements and Fahrenheit is not. Saying Kelvin is based off Celsius because they share a common base scale is like saying Wine is based off Beer because they're both made with fermented plant mash.[/QUOTE] No, you're just wrong. Celsius was first defined based on the freezing and boiling point of water (0°C and 100°C respectively). Lord Kelvin later came along and invented the Kelvin scale because he realised the need for an absolute zero point, which was initially determined to be -273°C. Both units were later redefined to more reliable reference points. The Kelvin is now defined as 1/273.16 of the thermodynamic temperature at the triple point of water, and the Celsius scale is now defined based on the Kelvin.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50725530]No, you're just wrong. Celsius was first defined based on the freezing and boiling point of water (0°C and 100°C respectively). Lord Kelvin later came along and invented the Kelvin scale because he realised the need for an absolute zero point, which was initially determined to be -273°C. Both units were later redefined to more reliable reference points. The Kelvin is now defined as 1/273.16 of the thermodynamic temperature at the triple point of water, and the Celsius scale is now defined based on the Kelvin.[/QUOTE] So what you're saying is Kelvin is based on a thermodynamic principle of water under 1 atmosphere of pressure and Celsius is based off Kelvin. I thought you said Kelvin was based off Celsius :q:
[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;50725537]So what you're saying is Kelvin is based on a thermodynamic principle of water under 1 atmosphere of pressure and Celsius is based off Kelvin. I thought you said Kelvin was based off Celsius :q:[/QUOTE] No, I said that the Kelvin was invented after the Celsius scale, which implies that the Kelvin scale was [i]initially[/i] based on the Celsius scale. It was later decided to use the Kelvin scale as the base, since that is the more scientifically meaningful unit, but because of the way they were historically defined, 1K is exactly 1°C. [editline]17th July 2016[/editline] Also the triple point of water is at 0.00603659 atm, not 1 atm.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50725547]No, I said that the Kelvin was invented after the Celsius scale, which implies that the Kelvin scale was [i]initially[/i] based on the Celsius scale. It was later decided to use the Kelvin scale as the base, since that is the more scientifically meaningful unit, but because of the way they were historically defined, 1K is exactly 1°C. [editline]17th July 2016[/editline] Also the triple point of water is at 0.00603659 atm, not 1 atm.[/QUOTE] ...how did we get on temperature it has nothing to do with metric.
[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;50725556]...how did we get on temperature it has nothing to do with metric.[/QUOTE] Because you started on why the Kelvin scale is the only useful scale, so I felt compelled to point out that the Celsius scale is similarly useful because a change of 1°C is exactly 1K. I'm inclined to agree that both Celsius and Fahrenheit were arbitrarily defined in the first place, although personally I feel that the freezing and boiling points of water are more meaningful quantities than the temperature of a bucket of salted ice water, and the temperature of the human body (which isn't even a fixed temperature). (edited for clarity)
I've always liked DD MMM YYYY (As in, today is 17 Jul 2016). There's literally no guess work, and don't get confused with dates like 10/10/2016.
I remember they started teaching us metric in early grade school, like 97 or 98, then it got dropped and never brought back up. Just like cursive writing.
Just one final comment on the date thing. I'm used to DD/MM/YYYY but honestly I can see why YYYY/MM/DD is the most logical system. It's like how the 'longhand' millions system is more-logical than the current shorthand system (millions, milliards, billions, billiards etc as opposed to millions, billions, trillions, quadrillions etc).
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50725304]Maybe I'm late but I use month/day/year because that's how you say it in conversation: July 16, 2016.[/QUOTE] This isn't a great argument, in the UK we say the 16th of July 2016. You say it in conversation as it is written on the page in your country. One personal bug-bear of mine are all the adverts that come over from the USA and say July, 16th - it sounds really odd to my British ears and it annoys me.
YYYY/MM/DD is definitely the best when it comes to a huge range of dates that span years but for everyday use, DD/MM/YYYY seems more useful because it goes in order of relevance. You're more likely to know what year and month it is already, it makes more sense to me to put the number most people care about first.
[QUOTE=Aetna;50707971]Yes please. As a home diy-er/mechanic, I'd much prefer if standard would fuck off already. Talk about the most convoluted system of measurement.[/QUOTE] millimeters are too big and micrometers are too small. I'll never use anything but thou
Speaking of infuriating units of measurement used by Americans, the time notation drives me up the fucking wall 00:00 - 12:00 AM 00:59 - 12:59 AM 01:00 - 01:00 AM 11:59 - 11:59 AM 12:00 - 12:00 PM 12:59 - 12:59 PM 13:00 - 01:00 PM 23:59 - 11:59 PM Yeah, I'm aware how analog clocks work. Yes, we routinely use stuff like "midday/noon", "5 in the morning", "4 in the afternoon", but if you write down the time, you write down either "five in the afternoon" or "17:00". One is used exclusively informally and one is used both formally (on documents as timestamps and whatnot) and informally. The only reason imperial was ever convenient or easier to anyone is if they're used to it. Sure it uses thirds and eights and whatnot which I acknowledge can be useful in certain contexts but honestly, if you've got something that's about 1/128 over 1/4 of an inch, you end up with 33/128 of an inch, which, acknowledging that those are pretty tiny measurements that are not used by most people, means you have to convert every non-full inch to x/128 to directly compare. I could go on for hours on standards that pretty much exclusively the US uses and honestly, there's too many to even bother writing them down.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;50722480]The benefit of using base 10 is you don't have to use fucking fractions to be precise. No one would say "a fifth of a metre" they'd say 20cm.[/QUOTE] Well, you wouldn't do that in base twelve either, you'd just use different units. The whole point is exactly that people don't want to say [I]"a fifth of"[/I] or[I] "a third of"[/I] or [I]"a quarter of"[/I], and having a good base lets you express those easily with units. Base twelve is better at expressing thirds and quarters [I](.4 and .3 in dozenal, .333... and .25 in decimal)[/I], while base ten is better at expressing fifths [I](.2497... in dozenal, .2 in decimal)[/I]. But I'm gonna pull back here, before I accidentally dump my base twelve obsession on the thread, so yeah...
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;50726162]Well, you wouldn't do that in base twelve either, you'd just use different units. But I'm gonna pull back here, before I accidentally dump my base twelve obsession on the thread, so yeah...[/QUOTE] I don't know how talking about base 10 came to be in this thread. Metric and Imperial today are both predominantly used in base 10, as are numbers in general. I think what people actually meant is that Metric is based on factors of 1,000 between different units for the same measurement (1,000mm = 1m, 1,000m = 1km etc), whereas Imperial uses all different kinds of factors (12 inches = 1ft, 3ft = 1 yard etc). Literally everything I just said was in base 10. But yes base 12 is unquestionably a far superior system to base 10. It is just that much more practical, and of course is just as compatible with Metric and Imperial as base 10, base 8, base 2 or any other base. But it's just never going to happen. A change from base 10 to base 12 is far more drastic than something like changing from Imperial to Metric, which is already pretty drastic. [editline]17th July 2016[/editline] Whoever first invented base 10 was an asshole. Sure, you can count in base 10 using each of your fingers and thumbs, but base 12 is just as easy by counting using your thumb to point at the phalanges of your fingers (three per finger for 12 per hand). And because you have two hands, you can use multiplication to count all the way up to 144 (or 100 as it's known in base 12).
[QUOTE=Murkrow;50726016]Speaking of infuriating units of measurement used by Americans, the time notation drives me up the fucking wall 00:00 - 12:00 AM 00:59 - 12:59 AM 01:00 - 01:00 AM 11:59 - 11:59 AM 12:00 - 12:00 PM 12:59 - 12:59 PM 13:00 - 01:00 PM 23:59 - 11:59 PM Yeah, I'm aware how analog clocks work. Yes, we routinely use stuff like "midday/noon", "5 in the morning", "4 in the afternoon", but if you write down the time, you write down either "five in the afternoon" or "17:00". One is used exclusively informally and one is used both formally (on documents as timestamps and whatnot) and informally. The only reason imperial was ever convenient or easier to anyone is if they're used to it. Sure it uses thirds and eights and whatnot which I acknowledge can be useful in certain contexts but honestly, if you've got something that's about 1/128 over 1/4 of an inch, you end up with 33/128 of an inch, which, acknowledging that those are pretty tiny measurements that are not used by most people, means you have to convert every non-full inch to x/128 to directly compare. I could go on for hours on standards that pretty much exclusively the US uses and honestly, there's too many to even bother writing them down.[/QUOTE] No one writes "five in the afternoon" you'll see 5p or 5:00pm or 5:00p Same goes for morning. It's a single additional letter. a or p. It's not weird or hard. That being said I use a 24 hour clock on everything. Not because I think it's better or easier or anything like that. It's a stayover from when I did scheduling for a company and their scheduling software was in 24hr clock not 12hr [editline]17th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;50726162]Well, you wouldn't do that in base twelve either, you'd just use different units. The whole point is exactly that people don't want to say [I]"a fifth of"[/I] or[I] "a third of"[/I] or [I]"a quarter of"[/I], and having a good base lets you express those easily with units. Base twelve is better at expressing thirds and quarters [I](.4 and .3 in dozenal, .333... and .25 in decimal)[/I], while base ten is better at expressing fifths [I](.2497... in dozenal, .2 in decimal)[/I]. But I'm gonna pull back here, before I accidentally dump my base twelve obsession on the thread, so yeah...[/QUOTE] What about base 11? :v:
As an engineering student in America, I can confirm that the british gravitational system (standard) is nuts. Having to know the difference between pounds mass, pounds force, and slugs on tests makes you want to rip your hair out and scream, "WHO THE FUCK STILL USES THIS"
[QUOTE=butre;50725872]millimeters are too big and micrometers are too small. I'll never use anything but thou[/QUOTE] Or you could use multiples of ten. It's why recipe books will call for 600ml of water for some dish in cooking, or why a pipette will hold up to a thousand microlitres of some substance
[QUOTE=sb27;50726216]I don't know how talking about base 10 came to be in this thread. Metric and Imperial today are both predominantly used in base 10, as are numbers in general.[/QUOTE] Yeah it's not exactly in line with the topic, but someone said that 12 inches = 1 foot was the best part of Imperial, and I agreed with that and mentioned dozenal because it feels like Imperial is sometimes painfully close to trying to be a dozenal system. Like how there's 1760 yards to a mile, while 1728 is a dozen gros [I](12 x 144)[/I], written as '1000' in dozenal. An inch could be the unit, with a dozen of them to a foot, and a gros inches (so a dozen feet) to a yard, and a dozen yards to a mile. Or something like that, anyway. It would be perfect... [QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;50727614]What about base 11? :v:[/QUOTE] Bases like that are hella impractical but hilarious for that reason. Here's some fractions: 1/2 is: 0.555... , 1/3 is: 0.3737... , 1/4 is: 0.2828... , 1/5 is: 0.222... So if you ever need a quarter of an undecimal meter, you'd simply say [I]"just take ~28.28cm"[/I] or if you need half it's just [I]"~55.5cm"[/I]. So yeah, undecimal is fantastic too! [QUOTE=Murkrow;50726016]Speaking of infuriating units of measurement used by Americans, the time notation drives me up the fucking wall[/QUOTE] I agree, but I feel like I'm the only one that has the specific complaint that I do... I don't get why the switching from AM to PM and vice versa isn't matched with the re-setting of the numbers. I get that AM and PM specifically note the turning points after 12, but it would [I]look[/I] less confusing if it denoted the turning point between each 00:00. Real time - My wishful version 09 AM - 09 AM 10 AM - 10 AM 11 AM - 11 AM 12 PM - 12 AM 01 PM - 01 PM 02 PM - 02 PM It's just confusing to me that the letters change after 11, but the resetting of the numbers comes an hour later, after 12. Wouldn't it be much easier if there was only one change? I know it would be a complete disregard to the actual meaning of AM and PM, but wouldn't it just... Look neater? Alternatively, go from 11:59 to 00:00 both times, that would fix it as well.
When I grew up I was taught metric. When I started my first job I was taught imperial. Where I work now they use both metric and imperial. I Prefer metric but I can read both with no problems, it really doesn't matter.
[QUOTE=UziXxX;50727685]As an engineering student in America, I can confirm that the british gravitational system (standard) is nuts. Having to know the difference between pounds mass, pounds force, and slugs on tests makes you want to rip your hair out and scream, "WHO THE FUCK STILL USES THIS"[/QUOTE] Nevermind all the other fun variants. Standard thermodynamics questions were an absolute pain.
[QUOTE=Ogopogo;50729612]Nevermind all the other fun variants. Standard thermodynamics questions were an absolute pain.[/QUOTE] degrees Rankine :suicide: I've never had to deal with that myself but I can't imagine why one would think it's a better idea to adapt the Fahrenheit scale to account for absolute zero, rather than just switching to the already-existing Kelvin scale.
[QUOTE=Erfly;50708044]I'm still disappointed that the metric system uses tonnes rather than Megagrams[/QUOTE] I'm disappointed that "kg" is the baseunit, and not "gram". That's really the only cockup I can think of.
[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;50725462]Temperature scales don't make any sense regardless of whether it's Celsius or Fahrenheit. You can make arguments for Imperial and Metric collectively. Imperial = Everyday measurements easily visualized Metric = Measurements easily quantified as base10 But temperature? It's basically "Someone said this temperature here is this many of his special unit" 'Yeah well this guy said this temperature here is THIS many of HIS special unit' The only real useful temperature scale is Kelvin because it measures the energy level of atoms and uses that to determine relative levels of heat based on atomic agitation.[/QUOTE] Celsius measures from the point where water turns from a liquid into a gas state. (100 degrees) to the point where it freezes if stimulated (0 degrees) that's how clean Celsius is... Kelvin is still better for science, but for every day applications... Celsius wins hands down from Kelvin and Fahrenheit. [editline]18th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=DrDevil;50731255]I'm disappointed that "kg" is the baseunit, and not "gram". That's really the only cockup I can think of.[/QUOTE] kg is far more useful in day to day use, even though the guy that invented the system thought gram was more useful for weighing.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.