Should the USA go metric?

[PakledHostage]

However you label the can, ounces are the basis for the amount that's in it, because that's what makes sense.

No, pop and beer cans are typically 12 ounces in the US (and places where they use American canning equipment) because that is the American standard. There isn't anything magical about that quantity. Beverage cans in the rest of the world aren't 355 ml cans.

[Megan]

Eh? Are you exactly one "personal height" high? Is your foot exactly one foot long?

No, I'm 5'7. And people know what that means because 5 and 6 and 7 and 8 are easy numbers to visualize. Try to visualize 173 of anything.

That's not how the brain works.

[PakledHostage]

That's not how the brain works.

That's not how YOUR brain works. I am 188 cm tall. I couldn't tell you how tall I am in feet, or cubits, or whatever.

[Megan]

That's not how YOUR brain works. I am 188 cm tall. I couldn't tell you how tall I am in feet, or cubits, or whatever.

Uh-huh. Do you know that because you can eyeball 188 cm or because you stood next to a tape measure and someone told you that's how high you reached?

[Kryten]

Sure there are. What do you think "foot" refers to? It's roughly the size of an average human foot. Imperial units are based on need; that's why units differ between liquor and pork bellies, as in the example cited earlier.

Nobody naturally thinks of anything in terms of the length of a human foot except actual human feet, which ironically aren't measured in feet. In practice it's just a name.

I didn't accuse anyone of thinking in any particular way. I simply observed that 355 ml is not a natural measurement. 12 oz is. However you label the can, ounces are the basis for the amount that's in it, because that's what makes sense.

How are fluid ounces any more natural than ml? Do you even know where the word 'ounce' comes from, never mind think about it when using measures?

[PakledHostage]

Uh-huh. Do you know that because you can eyeball 188 cm or because you stood next to a tape measure and someone told you that's how high you reached?

How is that different than standing beside a measuring stick that indicates you're 4 cubits tall and then stating that is how tall you are? The only reason that the imperial system is intuitive to you is because you (presumably) were raised using it.

And while all measuring systems are ultimately arbitrary, the metric system at least has base 10 going for it. This makes conversions between units entirely intuitive because most cultures count in base 10.

Edited June 9, 2015 by PakledHostage

[Robotengineer]

Switching to metric might also help 'Merica get back on top of STEM education.

[Eric S]

Uh-huh. Do you know that because you can eyeball 188 cm or because you stood next to a tape measure and someone told you that's how high you reached?

Do you know you're 5' 7" because someone measured you, or can you eyeball it that close? Eyeballing tends to be off by percentages, not by units, so it's as likely that your eyeball guess will be off by about an inch as theirs will be off by two and a half centimeters. The same goes for just about any measurement that isn't based on something in the environment where the estimate is being made, be it distance, speed, mass, etc.

Nobody naturally thinks of anything in terms of the length of a human foot except actual human feet, which ironically aren't measured in feet. In practice it's just a name.

And as someone who's feet are right at the upper range of what most shoe stores carry but still a hair shy of a foot long, I can tell you that it's kind of off on its approximation unless the US shoe industry is ignoring about half a bell curve worth of customers.

[Fel]

Here's a map showing metrication of countries by year (Ref: Wikipedia - The Metric system):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/Metrication_by_year_map.svg/940px-Metrication_by_year_map.svg.png

Note 1: Black denotes countries that still don't officially use metric.

Note 2: White identifies countries that already used the metric system at the time they gained their independence.

The thing is, a nation can tell the U.N. whatever they want but the people of the nation are a different matter.

My ignorance of Africa has me in the perspective that Africa still is "contested" territory in terms of the "reality of its inhabitants" rather than the "reality Europe chooses to believe." There are the cities, and there are the rurals, and there still are the tribals. When speaking of the nation, we look at the cities, but the inhabitants of the land are not always those who live in the cities.

Saying "I only recognize civilisations based on European civilisation" is what makes your argument appear "valid." The elitism that we've used throughout history to oppress those who do not fit our "idea" of what others should look like, the elitism we STILL use to insult those who do not conform to our ideals. Even if we go so far as to say "Well, the tribals are too small a part of the nation to represent" we can say "Well, AMERICA is too small a part of England to represent."

Elitism isn't an argument, it's a problem that we've continually had throughout history; a problem we go so far as to use to squelch others for fear of not wanting to examine our interior motives for an action.

*You know, I give up. It is impossible to really do this without spending hours reading the conditions in which each nation declares themselves as well as the cultural aspects of the individual nations as well as go into explaining psychology with more references to written work... of which I'll still just have people nitpicking at the work rather than address the interior problems within themselves. This isn't an argument, just a point in that I don't care enough to do the work you all aren't doing in the first place.

I'm not the one SCREAMING in ALL-CAPS about it.

Emphasis is NOT THE SAME AS SCREAMING!!!!!!!one

^ That is screaming, THIS is emphasis.

Edited June 9, 2015 by Fel

[kurja]

If your live is made easier by using the metric system, doesn't that make you a better person?

No, it just makes my life easier. Why would you think that experiencing convenience improves the person? The opposite is more commonly suggested... Not that I'd really support that notion but still.

If you spend more time building rockets than baking cakes, good for you. Use the metric system if it makes your life easier. I ain't stopping you, and American society will join you when enough Americans are also making more rockets than cakes. What I object to are politicians telling me it'll simultaneously simplify my life and save the planet and don't forget the children! Think of the children! - if I forget every frame of reference I ever learned.

I don't build rockets, I build stuff for process industry, I'm an electrician of sorts (automation & instrumentation). Going from one measure to another is incredibly easy in metric!

When I (try to) bake I put in 1 dl of flour or 50 grams of sugar or whatever amount the recipe wants me to put in there and it works because I know how much that is and I have a scale and a measuring container for that... but when I come across a recipe that wants me to 'add one cup' of something I'm at a loss because I have cups in twenty different sizes in my kitchen. And then no edible thing happens which is no good. Similarly, by looking at a person I can tell if they're 160, 170 or 180cm tall because these are the measures I'm used to, I don't know why you'd think the imperial units would be somehow better in this regard. In daily use they're just words for 'this much' or 'that much' and it doesn't make a difference either way.

[peadar1987]

Anybody who says that Imperial makes sense has never tried to do engineering.

Most common engineering units are defined in terms of each other in the metric system. F=ma. The newton is defined as the force that will give a mass of 1kg an acceleration of 1 m/s. A Joule is defined as the amount of work done when a force of 1 Newton acts for a distance of 1 metre.

I work a lot with enthalpies. Enthalpy is given in J/kg. 1 J/kg means there is enough energy in that one kg to cause a force of 1 Newton to act for a distance of 1 metre. Everything works nicely.

Now let's try in Imperial.

Force is given in Pounds-force. One lbf is the force due to gravity on the earth's surface on a mass of 1 lb.

Work done is given in any number of units, but most commonly foot-pounds, the work done when a force of 1lbf acts over a distance of 1 foot.

Now let's go to my enthalpy problem. In Imperial, enthalpy is given in BTU/ton. One BTU is the amount of energy needed to heat 1lb of water by 1 Fahrenheit. One ton is 2000lb. What does 1 BTU/ton mean in terms of the capacity of this fluid to do work? I honestly have no idea, and it would take me a good couple of minutes to work out.

Imperial systems are completely full of stupidities like this. It makes everything so much harder.

For a more complete list of everyday benefits, these guys have done a pretty good job: http://www.metric4us.com/why.html

[PakledHostage]

Elitism isn't an argument, it's a problem that we've continually had throughout history; a problem we go so far as to use to squelch others for fear of not wanting to examine our interior motives for an action.

Right, and assuming that rural Africans all live in mud huts, or wear bones through their noses, or measure in units of ouagadougous, or whatever, isn't elitist? What makes you think that they are any more "backward" than rural people anywhere? Many countries' education systems may not be up to first world standards, but one could argue that that is also true for plenty of places in the US. If a country is officially metric, then you can bet that the majority of its population has been educated to use that system and is familiar with it.

Edited June 9, 2015 by PakledHostage
spelling

[Woopert]

A second is 1/(60*60*24) day, During the french revolution they also tried to change the clock to 10.100.100 it failed, my guess clocks was expensive to replace and 10 hours is too little.

Actually, a second was redefined carefully and precisely by SI a while ago. It doesn't have anything to do with lengths of days.

Talking about seconds made me realise something. I never noticed that we have the same word for second (time) and second (after first). Weird.

Edited June 9, 2015 by Woopert

[frizzank]

First step would be to put metric units on everything as well as imperial to get people use to how much is what. Everyone knows what a liter is because thats what soda comes in. Just need to start doing it with other things, but thats more on businesses than the fed.

[peadar1987]

When I (try to) bake I put in 1 dl of flour or 50 grams of sugar or whatever amount the recipe wants me to put in there and it works because I know how much that is and I have a scale and a measuring container for that... but when I come across a recipe that wants me to 'add one cup' of something I'm at a loss because I have cups in twenty different sizes in my kitchen. And then no edible thing happens which is no good. Similarly, by looking at a person I can tell if they're 160, 170 or 180cm tall because these are the measures I'm used to, I don't know why you'd think the imperial units would be somehow better in this regard. In daily use they're just words for 'this much' or 'that much' and it doesn't make a difference either way.

Weeelllll, the whole "cups" thing is actually something where I can see the sense in the American system. The logic behind it is that the recipe will essentially give you a ratio, instead of an absolute measurement. So long as you use the same cup to measure your flour, sugar, milk, etc, the ratio is preserved, and the recipe should stay the same. Of course, eggs complicate this, and they go and ruin the whole thing by measuring butter in "sticks" instead of by volume, but the basic principle is reasonably sound, especially as I believe it was developed before kitchen scales were particularly widespread or easy to use.

[Robotengineer]

First step would be to put metric units on everything as well as imperial to get people use to how much is what. Everyone knows what a liter is because thats what soda comes in. Just need to start doing it with other things, but thats more on businesses than the fed.

AFAIK, measuring cups have had dual measurements for a while now and it hasn't made much of a difference.

[magnemoe]

Actually, a second was redefined carefully and precisely by SI a while ago. It doesn't have anything to do with lengths of days.

Talking about seconds made me realise something. I never noticed that we have the same word for second (time) and second (after first). Weird.

True, this is because the day is not constant. Critical for stuff like GPS, not very relevant for everyday stuff.

- - - Updated - - -

Weeelllll, the whole "cups" thing is actually something where I can see the sense in the American system. The logic behind it is that the recipe will essentially give you a ratio, instead of an absolute measurement. So long as you use the same cup to measure your flour, sugar, milk, etc, the ratio is preserved, and the recipe should stay the same. Of course, eggs complicate this, and they go and ruin the whole thing by measuring butter in "sticks" instead of by volume, but the basic principle is reasonably sound, especially as I believe it was developed before kitchen scales were particularly widespread or easy to use.

teaspoon and tablespoon as an measurement in cooking make lots of sense as its easy to measure up, using other units and you need an measuring cup who probably has be be cleaned afterward before the next measurement and accuracy in +-5% usually does not matter. If you are an cook making an meal for an battalion you know the conversion into mL anyway.

In this case you probably measure eggs in Kg, large kitchens and industry prefer to use small eggs from young hens as they are cheaper.

Yes its fail then they serve baby fried eggs

Cooking is special, lots of stuff is. We still use horsepower for cars, not only is the unit pointless. had an dragrace with an scooter and an horse as teen and the horse won even if scooter was 2.5 times more powerful. different engines also has different performance.

[LordFerret]

The United States of America doesn't care what you think.

/thread

Yea that ^

I can use either, and without complaining.

Time? Which? Whose?

[DuoDex]

Every. Single. Thread.

[Camacha]

This thread is hilarious.

Weeelllll, the whole "cups" thing is actually something where I can see the sense in the American system. The logic behind it is that the recipe will essentially give you a ratio, instead of an absolute measurement. So long as you use the same cup to measure your flour, sugar, milk, etc, the ratio is preserved, and the recipe should stay the same. Of course, eggs complicate this, and they go and ruin the whole thing by measuring butter in "sticks" instead of by volume, but the basic principle is reasonably sound, especially as I believe it was developed before kitchen scales were particularly widespread or easy to use.

It is just a lazy way of doing things. Cups for cups might work, but as soon as a tablespoon, teaspoon and pinch are added, a recipe could be any of the almost infinite possible permutations possible. Recipes are written that way by and for cooks that know what they are doing. Instead of being overly precise, they know what they are doing by experience and feel. However, when someone less initiated tries the same thing, it all falls apart pretty quickly.

[wumpus]

@Shpaget

The US imperial system of measurement is a lot less arbitrary than you think. Yes, it is a mess of strange units and odd conversion factors, but there's unique units of measurement for everything from crops to liquor. Even an absolute temperature scale (Rankine). In my opinion, imperial units make far prettier and easier to understand numbers than metric.

Also, just because most of the world measures their roads in km doesn't mean they've fully embraced the metric system. For example, aircraft the world over (except China AFAIK) measure speed and altitude in knots and feet.

Are you seriously suggesting the use of furlongs/fortnight is an advantage?

Quick, which weighs more: a pound of feathers or a pound of gold?

And why should there be a difference?

[hint: there is one. There is only a difference between 2 1kg weights if they are in a different gravitational field.]

Thomas Jefferson *told* us back in the day to get with the metric program. But did we listen?

[PB666]

Of course.

Yeah, some may argue that all units and systems are arbitrary, but some are more arbitrary than others.

Planck's units are not arbitrary. Planck's length is a bit uncertain because of uncertainty in the gravitational constant.

L_P = 1.61620 × 10^{−35} m

M_P = 2.1765 × 10^{−8} kg

T_P = 5.3911 × 10^{−44} sec

Q_P = 1.875 545 96 × 10^{−18} coulomb

T_P = 1.416 834 × 10³² Kelvin (that's a little bit hotter than a Large LF booster after having run through 100000L of fuel)

G = 1 L³/MT² = 6.6738E-11 m³/s²kg

c = 1 L/T = 2.99792458×10⁸ m/s

reduced plank's constant = 1 L²M/T = P/2pi

k_B = 1

For example a celestials Gravitational constant would be is mass. equation: [mu] = M

Its gravitational acceleration at any point in above its surface would be a_g = MR (r = radius in L)

The amount of energy in a mass E = m

The system is flawless except the gravitational constant is still not known to the 7th decimal place.

Edited June 10, 2015 by DuoDex
off-topic removed

[DuoDex]

Some posts have been removed from this thread, please try to keep it on topic...as on-topic as a thread of this nature can be, at any rate.

[YNM]

I'm not an American, but I have to say that metric is convenient. Although, for things like pipe sizes, seems like it will never changes. You don't need to know how much metric in imperial ; you only need to know how much metric in terms of your body. Say, one span of my hand covers about 25 cm. Everyone's different, but it's better than trying to get precise amount.

[MunGazer]

I'd say yes, the USA should go to metric. As a side note, I'm an American and most of my fellow countrymen that I consider to be relatively good at math also agree that the metric system is excellent (admittedly a very subjective statement).

Here is a quick list I put together just for this thread featuring the imperial units I've grown accustomed to as an American:

Yards - used often to communicate the range to targets in marksmanship and hunting applications, and also the unit of measurement on a football (American football) field, which I'd bet is a major contributor to many Americans' sense of distance, their spacial frame of reference for ranging things.

Miles - much different than a kilometer, my father told me "hey son, you see grandpa's shop up the road there?" "yeah" "that's 1 mile from us." From then on I'd look down that stretch of road, and think "that's about a mile".

Mph or miles per hour - the speed limit signs everywhere. Put me in a moving vehicle, and by now I can make a great guess as to my speed in mph.

Feet, and inches - we have these "yard sticks" laying around in school, often made of wood. And then we have a lot of 12 inch rulers, usually wood or plastic. From there a sense of scale is developed using those units. Especially in American carpentry and home building, these units are used, and the tape measure is central.

Acres - typical US unit for measuring real estate. I'm actually buying a house right now that is on a half acre of land.

Again, I love the metric system, and wonder so much why it hasn't completely overtaken things. At the same time, I don't think Megan is wrong or any less intelligent for continuing to bake her cakes using units of measure like cups, tablespoons and ounces. It could be considered American culture rather than "American stupidity".