Imperial/Metric Discussion

[J Paul]

What I wonder is why does it even matter what units of measurement the game uses?

I mean height could be measured in a made-up fake unit like Keters instead of Meters, what difference would it make? Hell they could just call them 'height units'.

The planet isn\'t earth, the inhabitants aren\'t earthlings, and nothing in the game is at all real or even slightly realistic, so why does it matter whether or not it uses a certain earth standard of measurement?

Standards of measurement are meant for comparison and communication, but you shouldn\'t be comparing anything in this game to real life, meaning there\'s absolutely no reason to use any kind of real life units.

[SchildConstruct]

What I wonder is why does it even matter what units of measurement the game uses?

I mean height could be measured in a made-up fake unit like Keters instead of Meters, what difference would it make? Hell they could just call them 'height units'.

The planet isn\'t earth, the inhabitants aren\'t earthlings, and nothing in the game is at all real or even slightly realistic, so why does it matter whether or not it uses a certain earth standard of measurement?

*ahem*

[J Paul]

*ahem*

Yeah but if you\'ll go ahead and re-read what I typed, you\'ll realize that the game is the game and reality is a totally different thing.

The orbital data tables will still exist and make just as much sense when you\'re using different units.

What I\'m saying is, it doesn\'t matter what the names of the units are, because you\'re only going to be using them to talk about things that occur in-game. Like the orbital data table applies to the game and only to the game. That means it could be written in kilokerbals, bum-dingers, hoop-whingers, it doesn\'t matter.

This thread is about imperial vs metric, but what I\'m saying is that whole argument misses the point that it doesn\'t matter how the units relate to real life because you shouldn\'t be relating a GAME to REAL LIFE.

[SchildConstruct]

Yeah but if you\'ll go ahead and re-read what I typed, you\'ll realize that the game is the game and reality is a totally different thing.

The point being: The forumlas used to calculate orbits, escape velocity, &c. work in the game. Meaning that your assertion that in KSP nothing is even slightly realistic doesn\'t hold.

And if it\'s that realistic, you might as well use what NASA, ESA, and Virgin use: Metric. It makes it much easier to apply what you learn by causally watching a documentary about space flight to the game, making playing KSP that much easier and fun.

When I play something like Falcon 4.0, or Plane X, I use the units used in aeroplanes, as well (Imp. Gallon (US), and feet (US)).

Of course, the game isn\'t a total simulation, and will likely never be, but a modicum of realism helps (when flavoured with a good helping of game play). At the moment, KSP shapes up to be just the right mix of 'simulation' and 'arcade', and m * s^-2 is part of that.

\'course, if someone wants the option to switch to Imperial units, sure, why not?

Edification: BB markup. What do you mean, 'Preview it next time'?

[tntristan12]

*ahem*

I find it interesting that that page still measures time in meters per second.

[Monger]

Every measurement system has a valid historical background. A foot was quite a good measurement unit, because your inner side of your arm and your foot have pretty much the same length, and are not that different from other people. In times where no cheap measurement tools existed, this was a pretty good value.

The metric system is based on the number ten, because at some point it became impractical to invent new measurement units, but you needed a flexible system that scales well with decimal numbers. Therefore, a scaling mechanism that works with powers of ten.

Today, there are a lot of applications where actually other number systems are much more useful. A natural logarithmic scale is the best choice for everything that involves the human senses, like hearing, sight, smell etc.

A logarithmic scale with the power of 2 is the obvious choice for calculations on the computer.

It also seems that the logarithmic scale is hardwired in our mind, so we have a natural understanding of it.

[SchildConstruct]

A logarithmic scale with the power of 2 is the obvious choice for calculations on the computer.

That\'s a different base which is basically the point where a number system rolls over into tens, hundreds, &c. Forexample Binary (aka 'Base 2'): 0, 1, 10 (decimal: 2), 11 (decimal: 3), 100 (decimal: 4), 101 (decimal: 5), 110 (decimal: 6), 111 (decimal: 7).

It also seems that the logarithmic scale is hardwired in our mind, so we have a natural understanding of it.

So, which one is double as loud as 100 Db: 110 Db, or 200Db?

What a logarithmic scale helps with is the inverse square law (for every distance unit, the energy level of somethingorother drops by the square root), since that can be turned into a linear graph with relative ease.

But take it from me, you don\'t want to work with logarithmic scales. Been there, done that, ate the frikken tee shirt.

[Reflector]

I sadly know people that live in the Benelux area that cannot tell me how many millimeters there are in a meter but they can tell me about how many centimeters are in a meter unless they look it up on a table. I would assume the almighty, magical, inherently superior decimal move would automatically solve this problem but it seems this concept is beyond people of limited competence.

As much as it is convenient to move a zero, perhaps we should be focusing on the COMPETENCE of the users? This was completely missed by many of the hardcore fanboy like posts screaming about the superiority of the metric system.

And as for light, the original 'meter' was defined off two less accurate definitions. The current definition was back-redefined to light. So please, do not try to claim 'scientific importance' when it doesn\'t have as much (pain) as '1/1000th of the distance light travels per half life of Lithium 8.'

I do not argue for either system. Get this point through: Both systems are systems. You can claim one system is inherently superior but when in REALITY you see things that say otherwise, then you have a problem. A human problem.

I also don\'t see any discussions about the joys of hex or octal going on.

Did you know that noises exceeding 5A dB can cause you to go deaf?

[semininja]

/snip/

So, which one is double as loud as 100 Db: 110 Db, or 200Db?

/snip/

But take it from me, you don\'t want to work with logarithmic scales. Been there, done that, ate the frikken tee shirt.

Wait a minute...

Also, I\'m so glad I\'m not the only one who says that.

[foamyesque]

Man, the only place Imperial units have any use is defining stuff relative to a person, and only then in places that have to deal with backward nations like Iraq and the United States.

[feanor]

I sadly know people that live in the Benelux area that cannot tell me how many millimeters there are in a meter but they can tell me about how many centimeters are in a meter unless they look it up on a table. I would assume the almighty, magical, inherently superior decimal move would automatically solve this problem but it seems this concept is beyond people of limited competence.

As much as it is convenient to move a zero, perhaps we should be focusing on the COMPETENCE of the users? This was completely missed by many of the hardcore fanboy like posts screaming about the superiority of the metric system.

And as for light, the original 'meter' was defined off two less accurate definitions. The current definition was back-redefined to light. So please, do not try to claim 'scientific importance' when it doesn\'t have as much (pain) as '1/1000th of the distance light travels per half life of Lithium 8.'

I do not argue for either system. Get this point through: Both systems are systems. You can claim one system is inherently superior but when in REALITY you see things that say otherwise, then you have a problem. A human problem.

We consider that humans that use the system are equal, on the average. This removes the 'I know some stupid metric users ' and the ' I know some very smart imperial users ' - and vice versa - out of the equation; they no longer matter. Now you can talk about the systems.

One is consistent in it\'s steps, the other one is not. That\'s all there is to it.

The definition of a meter does not matter. That\'s preference. i have no idea how heavy 10 stone is; I might not have any idea how much 2 meters is; but once I know that 1 meter is 100 cm, 2 meters becomes 200 cm easier then 10 stone becomes pounds.

What we are doing here is removing the human problem, and argueing about the inherent superiority.

So please, do not try to claim 'scientific importance' when it doesn\'t have as much (pain) as '1/1000th of the distance light travels per half life of Lithium 8.'

Actually, the definition does not matter one bit; the superiority lies in the system, not in the values or definitions of the units therein. Powers of 10, that\'s what it\'s all about.

[Reflector]

Apparently the United States is not home to harddrive companies or any tech companies. Oh well, we should eradicate them from the face of the Earth with those passive aggressive Canadians just like the backwards Iraqis yes?

No idea why people need to bash on any country* really. It comes off with the same level of intolerance and ignorance as something like: Perhaps those communist Chinese should be suffering for their dirty capitalist economy or something.

*Exceptions are made for North Korea due to their comic value.

I do not consider humans as being created equal. Humans are very inequal and they furthermore become more inequal in life. What makes the difference is that there a select people that start with inferior mind and physical assets then push themselves in life to surpass others. Unless you imply that humans are biologically communist and we all 'suck just as hard.' If so I will assume that everyone is unable to do math and that just says both systems are just as bad then. Bonus: I see just as many people screw up on imperial liquid volume measurements as I see in metric length measurements. No idea why those Americans and Canadians (Oddly enough, for a metric country...) can tell me how many feet are in a mile while I have someone tell me there are '100,000' millimeters in a meter...

I never argued about inherent superiority. I just said both systems are systems that have values for numbers. They both lack any magical science fiction level of using natural phenomena to calibrate their values from. Additionally from many observations I have made, it seems that the metric side arguments of'ah ha, our system is fundamentally superior for humans as it only moves decimals' cannot show present to me a system free of people fudging conversions up WITHOUT tables.

Say, you wouldn\'t know how much 45 degrees is in radians, would you? What with these evil, non theoretically superior measurements that do not obey the power of 10.

To the dekameter gentleman: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/decameters

Dekameter is much more obsecure in usage, last time I checked with my Benelux friends they recognized deca and not deka.

[nivvydaskrl]

Except that a kilometer is 1000 meters but a kilobyte is 1024 bytes.

Teeeeechnically, 1024 bytes is a kibibyte. Kibi = binary prefix. Kilo = decimal prefix.

[Iskierka]

Technically, yes, but digital people have simply taken the approach of 'if it\'s a logarithmic base 2 system, kilo shifts up to 1024'. Which seems perfectly acceptable, since if you\'re not someone who can recognise when that\'s the case, you shouldn\'t be getting in that deep.

Additionally from many observations I have made, it seems that the metric side arguments of'ah ha, our system is fundamentally superior for humans as it only moves decimals' cannot show present to me a system free of people fudging conversions up WITHOUT tables.

There is only one system that can avoid people getting incorrect conversions, and that is to use only one unit for the entire range, with arbitrarily large or small numbers. If there is a conversion, someone will get it wrong. Guaranteed. The whole point here, is the metric conversion is much faster to do mentally, and much easier to memorise. Also much easier to correct if you -do- screw up a conversion. Like feanor said, ignore human variation: look at the average.

[foamyesque]

It\'s a bloody rarity for any Canadian born after the metric conversion in the seventies to have any idea at all how many feet are in a mile.

[Reflector]

Then somehow I must be experiencing the rejects of the metric system because they can\'t do any milimeter to meter as well as deca/deci conversions for a damn. I also must somehow experience the most competent dual system users on Earth or something. Ditto for association of mililiters to cubic centimeters.

I guess we should destroy the Americans for having such competent dual system users because they are a backwards people that are have individuals willing to use both systems? Since they are a backwards people like random middle eastern or African countries. Nothing about that implies regionalism or racism at all, nope, not at all.

Or maybe I am just seeing some intense system fanboyism here. No idea why people absolutely must push their system onto everyone screaming that it has historical superiority as well as even greater 'scientific accuracy.' Such are the chants of the people that go into an immediate rage about one system that is not their 'favored' system.

I\'m sure that defining meter as a fraction of the distance from one location of the Earth to another without precision equipment was not the smartest idea. Nor was it trying to derive it from a pendulum swing... Of arbitrary lengths.

Ah, right, better avoid using this scientific notation thing too since when I say '1E3 milimeters' I get people going 'you mean 10 meters?' 'no I think he ment 1.' 'Shut up, you obviously don\'t know your conversions, he want 100 mm of tape out.' Since that is part of SI which is a much, much more modern adaptation of the metric system. Something that is 'inferior' to 'purist metric.' Something about those 'vile' non SI units that are not base 10... Must be those damned radians! Or that vile non decimal time!

And please understand, I\'m not joking about the people I meet and their 'one system' mentality and 'competence.' I\'m just merely saying that saying that one system is inferior and refusing to do any conversions only furthers ignorance.

[SchildConstruct]

There is only one system that can avoid people getting incorrect conversions, and that is to use only one unit for the entire range, with arbitrarily large or small numbers. If there is a conversion, someone will get it wrong. Guaranteed. The whole point here, is the metric conversion is much faster to do mentally, and much easier to memorise.

That\'s why SI units and prefixes are used with the decimal system: Distance is always meters (except when it isn\'t: When talking about humongously large distances, like the distance between solar systems time becomes more interesting, hence the lightyear, or infinitesimally small values, like the distance between an electron and its proton, where Planck effects matter, so Planck units make more sense; that\'s why proton colliders use the electronvolt, eV, for the amount of energy they work with).

And the prefixes aren\'t conversions, they are shorthand. It\'s much easier to say 'ten thousand kilometers' than 'ten million meters'. And you know that 1 000 meters can be written as 1 kilometer. The decimal system then allows you to use scientific notation: 1 * 10³m = 1 000m = 1 km. Try that with 12 inches to the foot, 3 feet to the yard, 1760 yards to the mile!

Lastly, to make everything internally consistent the SI units introduce common prefixes: When I see '10 kN' I know it\'s 10 000 N. Same with distances, speed, Watt, Joule, and so on. It removes the mental overhead of having to deal with how many feet there are to the yard, and I don\'t have to deal with the error that creeps in when doing conversions (1\' = 0.3048m; So, pray tell, how many significant digits do we use? And when? How much is a Mars probe, anyway?).

[Iskierka]

Reflector, I have to ask one thing; I notice you keep referring to incompetent metric-only users, and competent dual-system users. At no point do you address those who use only imperial; are they any good?

I for one, will do my best to use metric in all instances, with exceptions only for where the local standard is imperial (mainly just road speeds/distances), so other than imperial volumes, I can use both fine.

Have you considered that perhaps, if you are intelligent enough to be competent with one system, you would manage to absorb the other through only minimal use? Would certainly explain why your metric-only users are incompetent, but the dual-users aren\'t. Doesn\'t say anything about either system, only about psychology.

And SchildConstruct, I know fully how metric works. The prefixes still require a conversion of the number itself however, which is where the system becomes less-than-foolproof. (There are some pretty determined fools out there.)

As a side note, parsec is preferred to lightyear. With lightyear, you have to ask, which calendar?

[SchildConstruct]

Reflector, I have to ask one thing; I notice you keep referring to incompetent metric-only users, and competent dual-system users. At no point do you address those who use only imperial; are they any good?

It still assumes that an individual\'s math skills are relevant. They aren\'t. If you cannot do simple maths (for reference: calculus is 'simple'), it doesn\'t matter what system you cannot do maths in.

Have you considered that perhaps, if you are intelligent enough to be competent with one system, you would manage to absorb the other through only minimal use? Would certainly explain why your metric-only users are incompetent, but the dual-users aren\'t. Doesn\'t say anything about either system, only about psychology.

Fun little anecdote about myself: I use Celsius for daily temperatures (SI unit is Kelvin, no degrees), and meters for distances. When I stayed in the US for a couple of weeks, it took me a couple of weeks before I had internalized Farenheit (which can go to die. Seriously. Look at how it\'s defined, FFS...) and miles and feet, without having to bother with conversions. And I\'m no math whiz.

I\'ve since adopted US customary units for cooking (a cup and a spoon are much easier to deal with, than grams and mililiters, and it is all about proportions, not exact amounts, anyway).

And SchildConstruct, I know fully how metric works. The prefixes still require a conversion of the number itself however, which is where the system becomes less-than-foolproof. (There are some pretty determined fools out there.)

Yes, but it was kinda implicit that you saw 'km' as a distinct unit (technically: dimension; don\'t ask) from 'm' and 'mm', which it isn\'t.

So, you gave me a good opportunity to clear up those misconceptions in general.

As a side note, parsec is preferred to lightyear.

The parallax second is useful (pretty much only) when you observe stars from Earth, to measure distance between the observed stars. By its very definition, the number of pc between two stars changes if your point of observation changes (fortunately, the change can be ignored when moving a telescope from the ground into orbit).

With lightyear, you have to ask, which calendar?

Actually: no calendar, but units of time: 60s per minute, 60 minutes per hour, 24 hours per day, 365 days per year.

The definition of 'lightyear' is 'the time light travels in 365 days'. Doesn\'t matter if you use a Mayan, Julian, or Gregorian calendar to track years and festivals and such.

[4 IN 1]

Wait untill you start fixing aircraft, switching between Boeing and Airbus rust buckets is not all fun fun and fun.

[SchildConstruct]

Wait untill you start fixing aircraft, switching between Boeing and Airbus rust buckets is not all fun fun and fun.

Why? Keep misplacing the No. 12 wrench?

[icefire]

I\'m an American and Imperial is a stupid system.

[4 IN 1]

Why? Keep misplacing the No. 12 wrench?

I only have Imperial standard tool set(from 7/32 to 1' that is), It will work on most stuff on an Airbus, but since Airbus have a mixture of imperial/metric stuff in it every time you came across 'wired' size bolt/nuts/whatever you have to go all the way back to tool room and get stuff, and sometime it takes a long walk as the closest proper tooling is 3 hanger away, and most of the vehicle are out doing Lines work(thank god I only work in Base) ???

BTW we only use actual size instead of No. whatevernumptyway

[Iskierka]

The parallax second is useful (pretty much only) when you observe stars from Earth, to measure distance between the observed stars. By its very definition, the number of pc between two stars changes if your point of observation changes (fortunately, the change can be ignored when moving a telescope from the ground into orbit).

Actually: no calendar, but units of time: 60s per minute, 60 minutes per hour, 24 hours per day, 365 days per year.

The definition of 'lightyear' is 'the time light travels in 365 days'. Doesn\'t matter if you use a Mayan, Julian, or Gregorian calendar to track years and festivals and such.

The light-year is the distance light travels in one year, and the length of one year can be argued over, dependent on calendar (365, 365.25, 365.245, and so on), thus the distance can. The parsec is defined as the (inverse) parallax arc when observed from two points 1 AU apart; else you\'d get error even with times of year. Thus, the parsec is a very precisely fixed distance, and is used over the full range when not addressing the general populace, who have no idea what a parsec is.

[4 IN 1]

A light-year, also light year or lightyear (symbol: ly) is a unit of length, equal to just under 10 trillion kilometres (1016 metres, 10 petametres or about 6 trillion miles). As defined by the International Astronomical Union (IAU), a light-year is the distance that light travels in a vacuum in one Julian year.[1]

The light-year is often used to measure distances to stars and other distances on a galactic scale, especially in non-specialist and popular science publications. The preferred unit in astrometry is the parsec, because it can be more easily derived from, and compared with, observational data. The parsec is defined as the distance at which an object will appear to move one arcsecond of parallax when the observer moves one astronomical unit perpendicular to the line of sight to the observer, and is equal to approximately 3.26 light-years.

Unless you want to argue with IAU, 1ly is a set number.

One light-year is equal to:

exactly 9,460,730,472,580.8 km (about 9.5 Pm)

about 5,878,625,373,183.608 miles (about 6 trillion miles (short scale))

about 63,241.1 astronomical units

about 0.306601 parsecs

exactly 31,557,600 light-seconds

The figures above are based on a Julian year (not Gregorian year) of exactly 365.25 days (each of exactly 86,400 SI seconds, totalling 31,557,600 seconds)[2] and a defined speed of light of 299,792,458 m/s, both included in the IAU (1976) System of Astronomical Constants, used since 1984.