Originally posted by Zahlanzi I have to skip american recipes when i cook because how much is a cup? Flour is measured in cups, but butter is measured in sticks. Vanilla essence might be measured in teaspoons or table spoons.
A cup is legally defined in the US as 240ml - very precise and no need to worry about how to define it. Australia, Canada and New Zealand define it as 250ml which of course makes it a round fraction of a litre (the difference between these and the American volume being negligible).
British recipes too uses teaspoons and tablespoons, and shops sell measures containing a standard teaspoon and tablespoon quantity (and half or quarter measures); although using a real teaspoon or tablespoon in their place is rarely problematic.
Originally posted by Teinosuke A cup is legally defined in the US as 240ml - very precise and no need to worry about how to define it. Australia, Canada and New Zealand define it as 250ml which of course makes it a round fraction of a litre (the difference between these and the American volume being negligible).
British recipes too uses teaspoons and tablespoons, and shops sell measu ...[text shortened]... er measures); although using a real teaspoon or tablespoon in their place is rarely problematic.
yep, very precise (using mililitres)
and if i want 2.7 cups? that's what calculators are for
and if someone wants to make several helpings of that recipe and they need to buy flour? well they need to look up how many cups to a pound and do the math
and if someone uses a random cup they have in the house? tough luck they should have known cup doesn't mean any cup
and if someone mistakes tbls with tsp ? tough luck, they just OD on medicine
Originally posted by sh76 Then do it in your head, like most people age 12 and up.
I grew up with the metric system, spent 5 years in the US in an industry where measurements were taken and made all day everyday, I stuck with metric, converting where necessary it wasn't a problem.
...and it wasn't always necessary because there is a gradual move that way anyway. Guess zahlanzi is dreaming about a goobermint edict with fines and people being taken to court.
Originally posted by Zahlanzi oh, you can do for example 1.7 miles to meters conversion in your head? wow, you are so awesome.
or you're a liar. i wonder which is more likely
Of course I can. I know that a mile is a little more than 1.6 KM and a KM is a little more than .62 miles. That's a good enough estimate for any real life purposes in measuring distances.
Originally posted by sh76 Of course I can. I know that a mile is a little more than 1.6 KM and a KM is a little more than .62 miles. That's a good enough estimate for any real life purposes in measuring distances.
"Of course I can. I know that a mile is a little more than 1.6 KM and a KM is a little more than .62 miles. That's a good enough estimate for any real life purposes in measuring distances"
aaa, why didn't you say so. you only plan to move one mile at a time.
and what's a couple hundred meters more or less, i am sure people building a big ass bridge don't need the exact measurements, they have cement to spare.
Originally posted by Zahlanzi "Of course I can. I know that a mile is a little more than 1.6 KM and a KM is a little more than .62 miles. That's a good enough estimate for any real life purposes in measuring distances"
aaa, why didn't you say so. you only plan to move one mile at a time.
As opposed to you who moves one millimeter at a time 🙄
Originally posted by Zahlanzi https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d3gAZ-Te3Y
This is a lecture poking fun at the masochistic usage of the incredibly stupid imperial system.
If you ask a european how many millimeters are in 2 metres, he will imediately answer you. 2 thousands.
How many grams are in 2 kilograms? 2 thousand
How many milliliters are in 2 litres? 2 thousand
Now, how ...[text shortened]... ecause a doctor says 3.5 ml and the pharmacist labels 3.5 teaspoons or table spoons or whatever.
If I jump out of a Casa or a Grand Caravan from 13.5 k doing a 120 knots into a 50 mph headwind w/a lb. of gold, a kilo of cocaine, a lb. of feathers and my ex wife who is 20 stones and my canopy has a 1.5 wing loading who/what hits the ground first at a 3 thousand ft. elevation? Remember. I'm going out the back of the Casa w/the relative wind and the Caravan into the relative wind.
Originally posted by kquinn909 If I jump out of a Casa or a Grand Caravan from 13.5 k doing a 120 knots into a 50 mph headwind w/a lb. of gold, a kilo of cocaine, a lb. of feathers and my ex wife who is 20 stones and my canopy has a 1.5 wing loading who/what hits the ground first at a 3 thousand ft. elevation? Remember. I'm going out the back of the Casa w/the relative wind and the Caravan into the relative wind.
Comparing apples you have
1lb of gold
2.2 lbs of cocaine
1 lb of feathers
280 lbs of ex wife.
Terminal velocity tends to increase with weight, but decrease with drag, so given that your lb of gold would create a sphere of volume 1.44 cu inch or sphere of radius 0.77 of an inch, it would have negligible drag.
Because an object falling has a vertical component of velocity that is independent to any horizontal velocity it possesses, you can ignore it own initial velocity or the effect of the headwind on the terminal velocity an object can potentially develop. The object with least drag should be least affected therefore, and should reach the highest terminal velocity which makes the gold, the prime contender to reach 3,000 ft ground elevation first.
Imperial system fun
13 Jul '17 08:22
YouTube
Back to Top