Imperial/Metric Discussion

[SchildConstruct]

Except the metric system will be used everywhere by then. Imperial is just used by older generations and those 3 countries. You can\'t have a better system than 1 that everyone understands.

Considering that almost all of the world used feet once upon a time, I call BS on that argument. We switched to decimal measurements in most things because they simplify the math in engineering and the sciences. And the less math you do, the less mistakes you make.

SI units are the proverbial cherry on top by providing internationally agreed upon standards WTF a 'meter' or 'second' is, so that everyone is on the same page.

[JupiterII]

Considering that almost all of the world used feet once upon a time, I call BS on that argument. We switched to decimal measurements in most things because they simplify the math in engineering and the sciences. And the less math you do, the less mistakes you make.

SI units are the proverbial cherry on top by providing internationally agreed upon standards WTF a 'meter' or 'second' is, so that everyone is on the same page.

True, but that was like 100s of years ago. I know metric won\'t survive forever but I think it will for a long time, and like you said, metric is simpler so it should last longer than imperial.

[SchildConstruct]

True, but that was like 100s of years ago.

The picture I posted above? That\'s from a German textbook from 1848. And at that time, Germany started to become the powerhouse of the sciences, as well.

[Iskierka]

You -never- had almost all of the world working in feet. Or even nearly half the world. Everywhere had a unit similar to feet, due to it being convenient (walk one foot in front of the other, any walk-able surface is measured, viola), but they could vary by a significant percentage by locale, on a local, country-wide, continental, and intercontinental scale, as well as what point in history.

SI units have reasons for being their values, which relate to the fundamental equations of the universe, but are defined by other things simply due to being easier to measure precisely. There is no reason whatsoever for SI to go out of date, but there was plenty to move away from imperial; the world will eventually transition over, and settle in to SI.

And all the people shouting about radians and degrees, shush. If we wanted true simplicity for angles, we\'d use gradians. We don\'t. Wherever we want equations to work without conversion factors, we use radians, and usually include a pi term anyway; where we want them to be more straightforward, we use degrees, because it\'s hard to neatly split a circle into straightforward sections anyway, so 1/360th makes a nice second-best with cultural inertia behind it. This and the nautical mile are the only old units that should be kept, and the nautical mile only because it can be directly related to distance around the globe*.

*It\'s also very close to being a straight *2 conversion factor from km and m/s, so requires little thought to work with when approximating. Which you usually are with that unit.

[Reflector]

... I really can\'t comprehend why people do not understand sarcasm and need to argue this with more seriousness than two guys on forums looking at the original Starwars Trilogy going 'BUT THE TURBOLASER OBVIOUSLY DESTROYED THE ASTEROID 3 FRAME BEFORE THE BOLT STRUCK!' (Rotoscoping and timing synchronization! Completely ignored for no reason at all.) Radians were brought up to HUMOR this conversation but then this gradian thing is brought up but it became something so finely analyzing yet pointlessas the flavor of Minecraft Autism (Again, no offense to actual people diagnosed as autistic, you have every reason to feel offended that you\'re lumped into that merely by word assocation)

Just please, live in your world of decimal time 'only' while the rest of us are happy with one or more systems. We\'ll keep a table handy to accommodate you when you come by and tell us 'YOUR 60 SECOND, 60 MINUTE, 24 HOUR DAY SYSTEM IS ANTIQUATED AND USELESS, YOU OLD FASHIONED ADULT!' Then we will whip a piece of paper out or a calculator and convert whatever and be over with it instead of going around preaching about system superiority.

And I assume the world will settle on 220 volts and be done with 110 volts or any other voltage eh? How about one, unified world plug? Ignoring all the logistical problems of that.

[Iskierka]

[snip]

> Assuming that the metric supporters can\'t use imperial, rather that just not wanting to.

[JupiterII]

Let\'s vote: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=3472.0

[Key of door]

Imperial - if you multiply a foot by 10 you get 3 yards and 1 feetsies I mean how is a yard 3x12 in?

But if you use Metric this gets easier (Decameter / 10 = CM) / 10 = millameter ... ) It makes it so much easier to convert.

[foamyesque]

Imperial - if you multiply a foot by 10 you get 3 yards and 1 feetsies I mean how is a yard 3x12 in?

But if you use Metric this gets easier (Decameter / 10 = CM) / 10 = millameter ... ) It makes it so much easier to convert.

t\'be perfectly honest, the conversions within a unit (kilo/milli, etc) aren\'t metric\'s big point of superiority; it\'s when you start in on the derived units or chained dimensioned calculations that working with SI becomes so much easier.

Schild/Iskerkia, riddle me this: What cosmological constant is the kilogram defined by?

[Key of door]

t\'be perfectly honest, the conversions within a unit (kilo/milli, etc) aren\'t metric\'s big point of superiority; it\'s when you start in on the derived units or chained dimensioned calculations that working with SI becomes so much easier.

Schild/Iskerkia, riddle me this: What cosmological constant is the kilogram defined by?

Erm...... Waffles?

[4 IN 1]

Normally Cm is not used for most industrial purposes.

[Guest GroundHOG-2010]

Erm...... Waffles?

stop your going to kill yourself.

[nivvydaskrl]

Except the metric system will be used everywhere by then. Imperial is just used by older generations and those 3 countries. You can\'t have a better system than 1 that everyone understands.

After wading through some hate, I\'m gonna chip in here.

Computers are commonly used as one of the major tools in modern science. However, the decimal numeric system and decimal conversions are less than ideal for this platform. Many decimal numbers cannot be represented as a terminating sequence in binary. The decimal number 0.1, for example, is an infinitely long binary sequence (Like 1/3 is 0.333333333333... in decimal).

It seems to me that going forward, a system which more seamlessly integrates with the main tools used in science and engineering with less tendency for error upon conversion between the two numeric systems would be a more 'ideal' system of measures. As it stands, using a computer to convert from meters to centimeters by multiplying by 0.1 in the current system can introduce a small amount of error every time the conversion occurs.

In other words, base 10 is an antiquated number system arbitrarily defined by the number of fingers human beings have. As we have moved away from the use of fingers as calculating tools for scientific purposes then -- based on the arguments in this thread -- we should move away from base 10, not cling more tightly to it.

[Sordid]

Computers are commonly used as one of the major tools in modern science. However, the decimal numeric system and decimal conversions are less than ideal for this platform. Many decimal numbers cannot be represented as a terminating sequence in binary. The decimal number 0.1, for example, is an infinitely long binary sequence (Like 1/3 is 0.333333333333... in decimal).

I don\'t think that\'s a problem. Any system has numbers that can\'t be properly represented in it. Just write it into your equations as 1/3 and then have the computer calculate that to the required precision when doing an actual practical application.

In other words, base 10 is an antiquated number system arbitrarily defined by the number of fingers human beings have. As we have moved away from the use of fingers as calculating tools for scientific purposes then -- based on the arguments in this thread -- we should move away from base 10, not cling more tightly to it.

Okay, so what should we move to?

[nivvydaskrl]

I don\'t think that\'s a problem. Any system has numbers that can\'t be properly represented in it. Just write it into your equations as 1/3 and then have the computer calculate that to the required precision when doing an actual practical application.

True. I\'m just pointing out a weakness.

Okay, so what should we move to?

No clue. I haven\'t analyzed the problem. I\'m primarily trying to point out that it\'s not only our units of measure which can be arbitrary, it\'s also our number system in general. I think I came across as more petty than I\'d intended.

If I were to take a stab at it, however, I\'d point out the following: octal plays very well with binary prefixes (kibi, mebi, etc,) in that a kibibyte is 2000 bytes in octal, a mebibyte is 4,000,000 bytes in octal, etc. They\'re round numbers for the number system and, being directly related to powers of 2, can be precisely converted between by a binary computer.

(The benefits are vastly outweighed by the downsides, I realize.)

[foamyesque]

In the future, humans will have only eight fingers, making things easier for both animators and programmers.

[JupiterII]

t\'be perfectly honest, the conversions within a unit (kilo/milli, etc) aren\'t metric\'s big point of superiority; it\'s when you start in on the derived units or chained dimensioned calculations that working with SI becomes so much easier.

Schild/Iskerkia, riddle me this: What cosmological constant is the kilogram defined by?

Not a cosmalogical constant but you can\'t say the pounds definition is any better: The kilogram is defined as being equal to the mass of the International Prototype Kilogram(IPK), which is almost exactly equal to the mass of one litre of water.

It\'s kind of ironic that the definition of a pound is 0.45359237 kg.

[nivvydaskrl]

In the future, humans will have only eight fingers, making things easier for both animators and programmers.

Stupid children, discovering mathematics on their fingers before we can teach them a number system that\'s actually useful.

[foamyesque]

Not a cosmalogical constant but you can\'t say the pounds definition is any better: The kilogram is defined as being equal to the mass of the International Prototype Kilogram(IPK), which is almost exactly equal to the mass of one litre of water.

It\'s kind of ironic that the definition of a pound is 0.45359237 kg.

Pound\'s a force measure. You\'re missing the local gravitational acceleration in there.

[Eat Uranium]

Pounds are a unit of mass, Pounds-force is the unit of force.

[Key of door]

Pounds are a unit of mass, Pounds-force is the unit of force.

Pounds are a currency.

[Eat Uranium]

That too, and if you backtrack it, you find that £1 used to be the value of 1 lb of sterling silver (240 silver pennies). Not an avoirdupois pound though, I think it was a troy or tower pound.

[SchildConstruct]

Schild/Iskerkia, riddle me this: What cosmological constant is the kilogram defined by?

We\'ll find out next year, when it\'s been decided.

There\'s several proposals, which Wikipedia explains here: Proposed future definitions.

Fun fact: The kilogram prototype is loosing mass, and nobody knows why.

[JupiterII]

Vote today: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=3472.0