Metric/imperial

[B787_300]

Please keep it on the topic of Metric/Imperial

As an engineering student Metric is much much easier to use and makes more sense because everything is interrelated and the unit conversions are just factors of 10.  I feel that I am a bit behind because when someone says 20 m/s i dont have an idea of oh that is a standard road speed of about 45 mph. 

[p1t1o]

6 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Many times, but not many and distant places... that is why locally it might be true.

Since you are desperate to be spoonfed: it is possible for people to do this without actually going there by using lots of other science. This is extremely common.

[Darnok]

4 minutes ago, Temstar said:

One of the most fundamental assumption of physics is that the same physics apply everywhere throughout the universe. If it's proven repeatedly that speed of light in vacuum is invariant, that means it's been proven at many different point in Earth's orbit. But even then that's not the point - we always assuming that if a result is repeatable (in this case extremely repeatable), then it's repeatable everywhere in the universe given the same conditions.

If the assumption is that physical laws and facts can be different in different places we wouldn't have physics. Physicists can all quite now and something else more productive because physics no longer have predictive power.

Still no evidence, just hypothesis with sample of size one (near Earth only measurements). How that even became popular hypothesis after geocentric model fallen? Because this is exact same thing that was wrong with geocentric model... we calculate things locally and assume that entire universe works like that!

4 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

Since you are desperate to be spoonfed: it is possible for people to do this without actually going there by using lots of other science. This is extremely common.

Sure, but those are not evidences that come from observations... while that kind of evidence is basic for science. Then this is not science... it is more like belief based on things you like and accept.

[B787_300]

@Darnok and @p1t1o, and others,

Please keep it on the topic of Metric / Imperial.  If you would like to discuss what science is please make your own thread.

[p1t1o]

5 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Sure, but those are not evidences that come from observations... while that kind of evidence is basic for science. Then this is not science... it is more like belief based on things you like and accept.

I'll let Mr. Hawking know. I suggest we get back on-topic.

**edit**

ninja'd, sorry 787

Edited February 17, 2016 by p1t1o

[PB666]

Watching this debate is somewhat hilarious. I must say that what I like about the English measures is that I have the king's dimension (throwing in my boost with the swirl of egos dominating this discussion)

My foot is exactly a foot, my index finger is exactly an inch, the span from my nose to my finger tip is exactly a yard.

When I want to measure off a room fast, its a matter of taking off my shoes and walking heal to toe.

In most places however the floor tiles are exactly a foot in square, which I can verify with my foot, and I can simply count tiles. Of course being a foot means I wear size 12 shoes.

A mile as stated here before is 60 MPH covered in 60seconds, which in checking the speedometer on a car is very convenient, and twice I have recalibrated the speedometer based on mile post and my digital watch, your driving your watching post past the passenger side side view mirror and looking at your watch, so its a convenient and simple calculation.

However for physics, chemistry, medicine, and else I use metric. BTW the british have not completely abandoned the old system, they still have the pound.

[Temstar]

2 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Still no evidence, just hypothesis with sample of size one (near Earth only measurements). How that even became popular hypothesis after geocentric model fallen? Because this is exact same thing that was wrong with geocentric model... we calculate things locally and assume that entire universe works like that!

Let me put it this way, we think apples fall from trees because matter has this property that attract each other (oh okay fine, matter has this property that it bends space time around it). But just because up to this point apples has always fall down from trees, is it safe to assume that tomorrow apple will also fall down from trees and not upwards into the sky? What about an apple tree on the other side of the observable universe? Does its apple fall down?

If you answer no, it's not safe to assume, then physics as a science cannot exist.

 

[Temstar]

Just now, PB666 said:

My foot is exactly a foot, my index finger is exactly an inch, the span from my nose to my finger tip is exactly a yard.

Surely, you wouldn't say... buy real estate to do house development and rely on your feet to see if the deed is accurate? A requirement for accurate measurement is not some estranged concept that only shows up in theoretical physics, it's a very practical matter.

Of course, imperial measurements can be done to just as much accuracy and precision as measurements in SI units, but saying imperial units are good because they can be approximated to very crude size is hardly an argument for it. I can just as easily visualise the number of meters across my living room or number of cm across my monitor.

[YNM]

Surprised to see the candle flame being fed by massive LH2/LOX here. Must be really lethal.

[lugge]

I'm somewhat confused.

Some people here claim that being a base-10-system is an advantage for the metric system. What?! Imperial system also is 10-based. What else? Octal? Are you counting like "6 yards, 7 yards, 10 yards..."? Guess no.

A real advantage of metric system are the SI units. You only have a few base units which can be easily converted. You have meters for measuring distances, instead of inches, feets, miles.

Then you have the  unit-prefixes like k(ilo), M(ega), m(ili), they allow you to easily handle big numbers. I guess this is the point where people think of 10-based...

Don't know, are there k" (kilo-inch) out there? How do you handle big numbers? Converting them to feet, then if they grow bigger, to miles?

Edited February 17, 2016 by lugge

[Darnok]

31 minutes ago, Temstar said:

Let me put it this way, we think apples fall from trees because matter has this property that attract each other (oh okay fine, matter has this property that it bends space time around it). But just because up to this point apples has always fall down from trees, is it safe to assume that tomorrow apple will also fall down from trees and not upwards into the sky? What about an apple tree on the other side of the observable universe? Does its apple fall down?

If you answer no, it's not safe to assume, then physics as a science cannot exist.

 

I can observe that apple does fall from tree, but that doesn't mean it is property of apple and Earth that creates force between them

Of course that is model that fits 10-based system and with change of numerical system we should/could also change this model. Because maybe there is different source of that force... attraction (it is wrong word it assumes that force is created because of properties of apple and Earth). For imperial units I would change lots of equations, so it would be more practical.

Let me put it this way... but does apple falls down on Earth's orbit or outside of Sun SOI?
Just because you measured something happens ON Earth doesn't mean it happens on entire universe in same way... that is why force that causes apple to fall on Earth has different value on Pluto and same thing maybe with speed of light, because speed is just value

 

Short version: just because apple falls in same speed on every spot on Earth doesn't mean it will fall with exact same speed on Mercury or on Pluto... so how insane were people who assumed that light will travel in same speed on other planets just because they measured it has exact same speed on few spots on Earth?

Edited February 17, 2016 by Darnok

[PB666]

6 minutes ago, Temstar said:

Surely, you wouldn't say... buy real estate to do house development and rely on your feet to see if the deed is accurate? A requirement for accurate measurement is not some estranged concept that only shows up in theoretical physics, it's a very practical matter.

Of course, imperial measurements can be done to just as much accuracy and precision as measurements in SI units, but saying imperial units are good because they can be approximated to very crude size is hardly an argument for it. I can just as easily visualise the number of meters across my living room or number of cm across my monitor.

I'm just saying, it has it conveniences. Monitors are measured on the diagonal, from the top left to the bottom right, very difficult to estimate accurately.

I forgot to add, that my full stride is exactly 6 feet per cycle (not 2 meters). Yeah I have walked off construction, we had a contractor move a wall once, he placed it in the wrong place, by walking off I new that he has mismeasured the corner, and his crew dig it up and move the forms. You know if you walk onto a construction site with a tape measure the contractor will likely toss you out but you can casually walk off a length. You'de be surprised at some of the dumb stuff I have seen contractors do, this is after all a right-to-work state, they don't have any real certification for some of these guys and they often hire illegals to do the actual work. The measures of fluids cup, quarts and gallons versus liters, I think metric is clearly bettter, but for lengths there are advantages to both systems.

[adsii1970]

I rated this discussion four stars because it has been a hoot reading how far this thread goes off topic and how both sides - those for the Metric system and those for the Imperial system are essentially using the same arguments against one another...

[Kerbart]

23 hours ago, p1t1o said:

And I agree with those saying the differences barely matter day-to-day, but it still makes sense for there to be a global shift to a harmonised, science-based system.

...and in science the SI system is what is used globally, even in the US.

For day-to-day the challenge is that shifting to an SI (metric) system is not without cost, both financial and in the form of stress/anguish, and it's 0pen for debate if the benefits outweigh the cost. For smaller countries the benefits, especially when your neighbors are metric, are obvious.

 

21 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

What does matter is that SI units are based off of a unit of mass. Traditional English units were based off of a unit of force. That does make a difference.

Of course you can either use slugs or lb-m units for mass calculations with English units, but it does get confusing.

Wow. Even NIST (the US bureau of standards) seems to get this wrong. Are you sure you're not confusing pound (mass) with the pound force (lbf), often just shorthanded to "pound?" Because the Brits were awfully aware of the distinction between mass and force, and choosing a unit that would be different all over the British Empire would seem to be an incredible awkward choice. One of the things the metric system has going for it is that such confusion is far less likely, as mass and force are using different units.

[Tex_NL]

8 minutes ago, adsii1970 said:

I rated this discussion four stars because it has been a hoot reading how far this thread goes off topic and how both sides - those for the Metric system and those for the Imperial system are essentially using the same arguments against one another...

That's why I have decided to delete a long post I was writing. I am fed up butting heads with people with too thick a skull to see reason.

[GDJ]

Complaining about Imperial and Metric? Be thankful that's the two we have to complain about.

Here's a WIKI on Antiquated units of measure. I honestly had no idea we had this many standards over the last few thousand years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Obsolete_units_of_measurement

I can use Imperial and Metric with ease. I'm good with that.

[p1t1o]

4 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

...and in science the SI system is what is used globally, even in the US.

I didn't mean *in science*, I meant *science-based*, which is why I typed it that way.

I was never bothered that people use Imperial, only bothered by the assertion that Imperial was THE way to go, "especially for science".

[Kertech]

Here's a better list of units to fight over, I'm still pushing the "Sagan"

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

Edited February 17, 2016 by Kertech

[p1t1o]

1 minute ago, Kertech said:

Here's a better list of units to fight over, I'm still pushing the "Sagan"

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

[/thread]

[Just Jim]

16 minutes ago, adsii1970 said:

I rated this discussion four stars because it has been a hoot reading how far this thread goes off topic and how both sides - those for the Metric system and those for the Imperial system are essentially using the same arguments against one another...

It is kind of funny.

Myself, I've used, and lived in areas that use, both.  I was born in America, and live here now, which is Imperial.  But I also spent 3 years in Germany, in the Army, where everything is metric.  I was a medic, but I mostly drove an armored personnel carrier, so I had to adjust to Km per hour, and measuring fuel in liters, like it or not.  It wasn't so hard, and I got the hang of it quick.

I really didn't use metric much after I got home, until I started playing KSP. 
In the game I definitely prefer metric... the math is hard enough as it is without converting to miles and such....

Edited February 17, 2016 by Just Jim

[Kerbart]

30 minutes ago, lugge said:

I'm somewhat confused.

Some people here claim that being a base-10-system is an advantage for the metric system. What?! Imperial system also is 10-based. What else? Octal? Are you counting like "6 yards, 7 yards, 10 yards..."? Guess no.

Someone's length is say, 186 cm or 1.86m. It doesn't work like that in Imperial. Your length would be a little over 73 inches. And that is 6'1". Wait; I said "a little over," the remaining .2283 inches would not be expressed as such, but as 6'1" 29/128

There's nothing decimal about that, except for the digits being used. Now, looking at 6'1" 29/128, can you tell me what fifteen times this length is? Quickly? That is the decimal advantage. The same with weights that are cut up in stones, pounds and ounces. Surely you can use a decimal notation and claim that something weighs 3.75 pounds. But that's not how Imperial works; its 3 pounds 12 ounces.

 

[GDJ]

3 minutes ago, Just Jim said:

Myself, I've used, and lived in areas that use, both.  I was born in America, and live here now, which is Imperial.  But I also spent 3 years in Germany, in the Army, where everything is metric.  I was a medic, but I mostly drove an armored personnel carrier, so I had to adjust to Km per hour, and measuring fuel in liters, like it or not.  It wasn't so hard, and I got the hang of it quick.

Up here I started with Imperial, but in mid-elementary school we switched to Metric. I do recall that using Metric was easier due to the factors of 10 when converting from one unit to another, but Imperial is still used in Canada, just not officially.

[Kerbart]

8 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

I didn't mean *in science*, I meant *science-based*, which is why I typed it that way.

I was never bothered that people use Imperial, only bothered by the assertion that Imperial was THE way to go, "especially for science".

We're on the same track then

Scientifically the SI system also has the advantage that everything is based on reproducable experiments, not on the length of the thumb of some king or some other arbitratily chosen amount. That makes one meter the same everywhere. Of course, the imperial system has very well defined units as well, these days. The inch, for instance, is defined as 2.54 cm

[Kertech]

Yeah in UK we have a weird mix, so we're taught metric in school (and if you're in state that is all you will get taught) which is fine because it's the same numbering system as maths, but then yougo to the real world and beer/milk is pints and your relatives will talk about it being in the 30s and meaning cold and roads being in miles, but you get used to it. Guess we're still getting rid of imperial. I do find it ironic that the country that fought against being under the monarchy still wants to measure stuff in relation to an old kings foot... (Don't get defensive at that comment, it's just taking the liquid)

hang on does liquid 

[adsii1970]

11 minutes ago, Just Jim said:

It is kind of funny.

Myself, I've used, and lived in areas that use, both.  I was born in America, and live here now, which is Imperial.  But I also spent 3 years in Germany, in the Army, where everything is metric.  I was a medic, but I mostly drove an armored personnel carrier, so I had to adjust to Km per hour, and measuring fuel in liters, like it or not.  It wasn't so hard, and I got the hang of it quick.

I really didn't use metric much after I got home, until I started playing KSP. 
In the game I definitely prefer metric... the math is hard enough as it is without converting to miles and such....

Same here, but I spent most of my youth in Europe, came back to the U.S., then was stationed in Germany from 1989-1992 - Legal NCO