Planetarion Forums

Woof · 10 Mar 2003, 19:37

Arghhhhh!
At work we need to predict the strength of corrugated packaging material, which is a doddle in Metric units.
Today I had to use imperial units of measurements, and what a nightmare.
Trying to use inches, feet and pounds per square feet for an american customer, was just incomprehensible to metric boy here.

Next time you flame an american, just stop and remember that they use still use imperial units and pity them, and think how lucky you are to use the Metric system.

Sub · 10 Mar 2003, 19:39

I don't really understand why anything other than Metric exists now.

Bloomers III · 10 Mar 2003, 19:48

imperial has silly numbers and stupid things. americans

Marilyn Manson · 10 Mar 2003, 19:48

I like Ike and his itty-bitty A-Bomb.

Sandsnake · 10 Mar 2003, 19:52

convincing 280million people to change over is rather difficult. They're trying but there just aren't enough practical applications in effect. We learn it in school, but only the ones who go into the military or something similar actually use it.

The first trick was to force them to sell alcoholic beverages in metric units...oh yeah, like we pay attention to how much we're actually drinking.

Woof · 10 Mar 2003, 19:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Sandsnake
The first trick was to force them to sell alcoholic beverages in metric units...oh yeah, like we pay attention to how much we're actually drinking.

The irony, when we still buy ours in pints!

Proteus · 10 Mar 2003, 19:57

The problem is that in many everyday situations, the Imperial system is better. For instance, it is a lot easier to say that you are 6ft tall than to say 183cm (or whatever 6ft is in cm), and its similar with weights. 100 or 1000 little units to a big unit may be useful in science or commerce, but for normal usage having 12 or 14 little units to a big unit is much easier.

Bunga · 10 Mar 2003, 20:14

I disagree. Saying that I am "one-eighty-three" is just as easy as saying "six feet". And saying that I am "one ninety" is just as easy as saying "six foot three" or whatever. I would hate to have to explain any measurement (like U-values for walls in houses) in non-SI units.

LHC · 10 Mar 2003, 20:17

Well it'll be good when we buy our beers in litres.

Proteus · 10 Mar 2003, 20:17

It must be easier, otherwise people would never have started to use it.

Or was the Imperial system invented by someone with a very twisted sense of humour?

acropolis · 10 Mar 2003, 20:21

i'd rather change over from our silly base-10 number system.

you know there's a problem when you cannot divide 1 by 3 without an infinite number of digits in your answer.

PS: and for temperatures! in minnesota by centigrade the temperature would be negative for four month periods at a time. how useless is that?

Proteus · 10 Mar 2003, 20:24

Quote:

Originally posted by acropolis
i'd rather change over from our silly base-10 number system.

you know there's a problem when you cannot divide 1 by 3 without an infinite number of digits in your answer.

Tada!

MrL_JaKiri · 10 Mar 2003, 20:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Proteus
Tada!

In which case, what about 5?

Quote:

Originally posted by acropolis
and for temperatures! in minnesota by centigrade the temperature would be negative for four month periods at a time. how useless is that?

Use Kelvin then!

Bunga · 10 Mar 2003, 20:29

Quote:

Originally posted by acropolis
and for temperatures! in minnesota by centigrade the temperature would be negative for four month periods at a time. how useless is that?

No country actually uses the "metric" (I assume you mean the SI) temperature system. That would be the Kelvin system, and I for one would love to see that adopted around the globe too.

Proteus · 10 Mar 2003, 20:33

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
In which case, what about 5?

12 divided by 5 is 2.4

Which answers his complaint about infinite numbers of decimal places.

(No comedy "what about 7?" replies please

)

MrL_JaKiri · 10 Mar 2003, 20:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Proteus
12 divided by 5 is 2.4

Which answers his complaint about infinite numbers of decimal places.

(No comedy "what about 7?" replies please )

What about 11?

Cyp · 10 Mar 2003, 20:42

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
In which case, what about 5?

Simple. Just use base 6469693230.

Quote:

Originally posted by Proteus
12 divided by 5 is 2.4

Which answers his complaint about infinite numbers of decimal places.

(No comedy "what about 7?" replies please )

In base 12:

10 (12) divided by 5 (5) is 2.497249724972497... (2.4).

Bunga · 10 Mar 2003, 20:45

Ahh.. but do we really want a base where 13 divided by 5 is three?

Well?

Proteus · 10 Mar 2003, 20:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Cyp
In base 12:

10 (12) divided by 5 (5) is 2.497249724972497... (2.4).

I'm a Classicist! I can't be expected to know numbery stuff!

(Its not like I'm President of the Dozenal Society or anything)

What about base 60?

(You can think up all the new symbols, because I'm not going to)

MrL_JaKiri · 10 Mar 2003, 20:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Proteus
I'm a Classicist! I can't be expected to know numbery stuff!

(Its not like I'm President of the Dozenal Society or anything)

What about base 60?

(You can think up all the new symbols, because I'm not going to)

50?

Bunga · 10 Mar 2003, 20:55

no... 30 if anything.

divisible by 2, 3, 5, 6, 10 evenly
and 4, 8, 12 without too many decimals
and 11 and 9 with simple recurring.

11 and 7 are a bit annoying though.

Sub · 10 Mar 2003, 20:57

Here's a crazy idea. How about base 10?

Cyp · 10 Mar 2003, 20:59

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
50?

60=2²*3*5
50=2*5²

As 50 has no unique prime factors to 60, 1/50 is not an infinite decimal in base 60.

MrL_JaKiri · 10 Mar 2003, 21:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Sub
Here's a crazy idea. How about base 10?

It'll never work, we only have 60 fingers

at0mic.c0w · 10 Mar 2003, 21:12

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
It'll never work, we only have 60 fingers

when using fingers counting with base 2 is far easier and lets u count further then base 10

Tactitus · 10 Mar 2003, 21:16

Quote:

Originally posted by acropolis
PS: and for temperatures! in minnesota by centigrade the temperature would be negative for four month periods at a time. how useless is that?

Yeah, but -40 degrees is the same temperature in both Fahrenheit and Celsius! *

* Minnesota Fun Fact #2349.

Rinoa · 10 Mar 2003, 21:40

I live in The uk and friad i still think in Miles rather than Km

Proteus · 10 Mar 2003, 21:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Rinoa
I live in The uk and friad i still think in Miles rather than Km

Thats hardly surprising, seeing as we still use Miles.

wu_trax · 10 Mar 2003, 22:07

we measure some things in inch here

Dante Hicks · 10 Mar 2003, 22:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Proteus
The problem is that in many everyday situations, the Imperial system is better.

I sort of agree. For a lot of things a centimeter is too small, a meter too big - feet and inches just work better.

Cyp · 10 Mar 2003, 22:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
I sort of agree. For a lot of things a centimeter is too small, a meter too big - feet and inches just work better.

That's what decimetres are for.

Bunga · 10 Mar 2003, 22:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
I sort of agree. For a lot of things a centimeter is too small, a meter too big - feet and inches just work better.

Just use "two centimetres" or "half a metre" if you want something bigger os smaller.

Texan · 10 Mar 2003, 22:43

I use both systems. Not that I have much choice since my world is half American (or Texan to be completely honest) and half European.

In Texas back in 1979, every 13-year old had to learn metric. We were already expected to know standard (imperial) measurements.

Chrism · 10 Mar 2003, 22:47

Despite being taught in metric, I think of pretty much everything in Imperial. I don't saay I'm 183cm tall, I say I'm 6ft. I estimate distances in inches. It's just the way I've been brought up, and I see no practical disadvantage to the way I do it.

Proteus · 10 Mar 2003, 22:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Bunga
Just use "two centimetres" or "half a metre" if you want something bigger os smaller.

The best units for measurement in everyday situations are the ones that have the most useful base units.

A foot is useful because you can measure the height of people with a few (but not too few) feet. If a foot was half the size it is, people would be 12 feet tall, which is too high a number. If it was twice the size, they would be 3 feet tall, which is too small a number.

As it is, you can differentiate easily between different heights. 6 feet is sufficiently different to 5 feet 11 inches and 6 feet 1 inch. 183cm is not sufficiently different to 182cm, or 184cm. Thus, you can pretty accurately judge heights to the nearest unit.

queball · 10 Mar 2003, 22:52

If you want neat and exact representations of the results of integer divisions, use the rationals. So one divided by three is... a third. No infinite recursion there.

Cyp · 10 Mar 2003, 22:54

Quote:

Originally posted by queball
If you want neat and exact representations of the results of integer divisions, use the rationals. So one divided by three is... a third. No infinite recursion there.

That's too easy...

Dante Hicks · 10 Mar 2003, 22:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Bunga
Just use "two centimetres" or "half a metre" if you want something bigger os smaller.

Saying 15 centimetres or 33 centimetres is just rubbish compared to half a foot or a foot.

Nusselt · 10 Mar 2003, 23:02

speaking from the perspective of a design engineer, the uk has an advantage, the 'real' world uses a both systems, learning one is a disadvantage, because british people tend to use both systems for different things, it makes it easier for engineering students to learn to easily swap between them. The metric system has one major draw back tho, its so so easy to misplace a decimal point and totally fck everything up, this is much more difficult in imperial, as any such mistake is easily noticed as silly numbers pop up in calculations. But in metric you have to be watchful since you can more easily have a mistake in the order of magnitude whilst the 'figures' themselves remain the same. Also there are differences between some british imperial and american imperial, for example gallons. And i wouldnt worry if you make the occasional mistake in swapping between them, after all nasa made the mother of all fck ups because of it...

Texan · 10 Mar 2003, 23:21

At least the Mars landers landed as opposed to the moon landings.

Tactitus · 10 Mar 2003, 23:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Texan
At least the Mars landers landed as opposed to the moon landings.

Yeah, but the Mars Climate Orbiter wasn't so fortunate.

acropolis · 11 Mar 2003, 01:40

Quote:

Originally posted by queball
If you want neat and exact representations of the results of integer divisions, use the rationals. So one divided by three is... a third. No infinite recursion there.

i tend to just switch bases even if i don't have a problem like that anyway. even if i'm just adding numbers together, sometimes it's neat to see what happens in base 36.

so for 1/3 i'd probably just hit base 3 for the question anyway and I wouldn't care. people checking my work tend to have aneurysms, but i figure that its good experience for em.

Judge · 11 Mar 2003, 06:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Woof
Arghhhhh!
At work we need to predict the strength of corrugated packaging material, which is a doddle in Metric units.
Today I had to use imperial units of measurements, and what a nightmare.
Trying to use inches, feet and pounds per square feet for an american customer, was just incomprehensible to metric boy here.

Next time you flame an american, just stop and remember that they use still use imperial units and pity them, and think how lucky you are to use the Metric system.

Work the problem in the units you are most comfortable with, when you have the final solution convert it into the desired units using the appropriate conversion factors.

It is not like the customer is going to ask for the "working out"?

Onliine converter

Cyp · 11 Mar 2003, 09:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Judge
...
Onliine converter

3 terrahertz = 3,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,352 fresnel

No wonder I've never heard of a fresnel before...

djbass · 11 Mar 2003, 10:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Bunga
No country actually uses the "metric" (I assume you mean the SI) temperature system. That would be the Kelvin system, and I for one would love to see that adopted around the globe too.

Umm.. hate to burst your bubble but we've always used the metric system for temperature in Australia.

Regarding the use of metric for measurements, I actually find the opposite case to what many of the people have said here. To me, say using height again as an example, I've always found it difficult to picture how high say 1 foot is yet alone several feet.

I find measuring height in centremetres very convenient, because 100cm = 1M. Since the height of most people on average ranges from .5 metres to 1.5 metres +/- a few centremetres it allows me to picture very quickly approximately how heigh someone is.

Where accuracy is needed then we use millimetres, which allows pinpoint accuracy for any for of lenght, width or height.

I also prefer it because it is an easily divisible system, eg:

1Km = 1000M = 100,000cm = 1,000,000mm

=[DJ Bass]=

Rinoa · 11 Mar 2003, 10:42

All themodern kids love metric..
Now buy one get one free too.

Mong · 11 Mar 2003, 12:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
Saying 15 centimetres or 33 centimetres is just rubbish compared to half a foot or a foot.

Saying 0.621 miles is just rubbish compared to 1km.

M.

alastair18 · 11 Mar 2003, 12:31

Quote:

Originally posted by djbass
Umm.. hate to burst your bubble but we've always used the metric system for temperature in Australia.

Regarding the use of metric for measurements, I actually find the opposite case to what many of the people have said here. To me, say using height again as an example, I've always found it difficult to picture how high say 1 foot is yet alone several feet.

I find measuring height in centremetres very convenient, because 100cm = 1M. Since the height of most people on average ranges from .5 metres to 1.5 metres +/- a few centremetres it allows me to picture very quickly approximately how heigh someone is.

The SI unit for temperature is Kelvin although this is the same size as a Celsius they have the 0 at different points.

1 foot is approximately the length of your foot (assuming you are a normal height adult male). Most imperial units are based on some reasonably common size and are thus quiet easy to visualise.

The height of most adults ranges from about 1.4M to 1.9M with 1.8M being roughly 6 foot and 1.5M being roughly 5 foot

Dante Hicks · 11 Mar 2003, 12:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Mong
Saying 0.621 miles is just rubbish compared to 1km.

Say 2/3rds of a mile then.

The point is that needing a measurement between 1cm and 1 metre is really common. Penises, monitor sizes, box sizes, cupboards, door widths, window panes, etc are all things which regularly need approximation. Feet and inches are things more convenient for these daily usage type terms. Obviously I use the metric system generally, but imperial still have their uses.

The difference between KM and miles is relatively minor, and I can't think why 2/3rds of a mile would be inherently more common than 1 and a 1/3rd kilometre (or whatever).

Dante Hicks · 11 Mar 2003, 12:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Flavius
as Cyp said, decimetres

Decimetres aren't in common use. Although a reasonably intelligent person would know what I was on about, that's useless for most conversations I have.

For instance, I have to take details of repairs for a housing association in my job. If I asked someone how big they thought their broken window was in decimetres, they would think I was taking the piss.

And I don't use anything between feet and inches. There's only 12 sub-units, why would I need something smaller? If I meet a girl in a nightclub who says that her ex-boyfriend had an 11 inch c*ck I don't need it any more exact - I know to cry now.

I'm not advocating using the imperial system for any detailed work - but for conversational uses it's just better (atm).