Originally posted by @biffo-konkerBut petrol is in liters, right?
In Germany pipes for gas and plumbing are in inches.Loudspeakers,TV and computer screens still use inches.Car and cycle wheels are also measured in inches.
🙄
FWIW, although Celsius makes (slightly) more sense scientifically, I like Fahrenheit much better for measuring temps. First, the fact that the degrees are smaller makes the temperature measurement more precise. More importantly, I happen to live in a climate where 0 F is just about the lowest temp we ever reach (I remember a temp as low as -7, but temps below 0 are extremely rare) and 100 F is just about the highest temp we ever reach (I remember a 102 once but 100, again, is just about the maximum we reach). Having the 0-100 scale being right about the extremes of realistic air temperature is quite a logical way of doing things. Dealing with negative numbers as air temperatures is a little more clunky.
According to some sources I've seen, Fahrenheit himself had similar thoughts in mind when he developed his scale.
Originally posted by @sh76Both scales are completely arbitrary - when do you really need to know the freezing and boiling points of water? Remembering that negative temperatures correspond to freezing temperatures outside isn't significantly easier than remembering 32F.
FWIW, although Celsius makes (slightly) more sense scientifically, I like Fahrenheit much better for measuring temps. First, the fact that the degrees are smaller makes the temperature measurement more precise. More importantly, I happen to live in a climate where 0 F is just about the lowest temp we ever reach (I remember a temp as low as -7, but temps below ...[text shortened]... sources I've seen, Fahrenheit himself had similar thoughts in mind when he developed his scale.
This whole thread is silly. Ask a random American to draw a line of 4 inches and the average European to draw a line of 10cm and they'll not differ significantly in their error. Ask any of them to do an elementary unit conversion and most likely they'll screw it up.
1 edit
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraYes, they're both arbitrary. But if you're going to create an arbitrary system, creating one where 100 and 0 are roughly the maximum and minimum air temps in your climate is a pretty good idea.
Both scales are completely arbitrary - when do you really need to know the freezing and boiling points of water? Remembering that negative temperatures correspond to freezing temperatures outside isn't significantly easier than remembering 32F.
This whole thread is silly. Ask a random American to draw a line of 4 inches and the average European to d ...[text shortened]... error. Ask any of them to do an elementary unit conversion and most likely they'll screw it up.
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraIt makes sense if you live in the northern hemisphere to have farenheight, if 0 (-32°f) is as cold as it typically gets.
...This whole thread is silly. Ask a random American to draw a line of 4 inches and the average European to draw a line of 10cm and they'll not differ significantly in their error. Ask any of them to do an elementary unit conversion and most likely they'll screw it up.
But in the southern hemisphere, knowing that 0° Centigrade is the temperature above which ice melts makes for a good benchmark as to whether you want to go swimming. Or that at -4° C you'll be dead in the water within about 4 minutes. The number of days in any given year that the temp goes below zero I can usually count on a mangled left hand. (apart from the Australian Alps)
The funny things is because I grew up with SI units, and having held a 30cm rule for at least 10 yrs at school, small measurements always make sense in cm. Yet when you bend your thumb, from the tip to the joint, you get roughly an inch or 2.5 cm or 2.54 cm to be more precise. That was great to know, because back in the days before Google maps, if you wanted to gauge the distance between two suburbs/towns on a map, you held your thumb against the map scale and viola, you had a literal rule of thumb to estimate distance.
Yet, even though I did all my schooling using MKS, I still cant estimate height in anything but feet and inches. Dont tell me an actor a is 198 cm. I have to think about it, take away 183 cm (6ft) and divide the remainder by 2.5 to get the inches. But tell me she was 5'5", or he was 6'2", I get it instantly.
It's all just a little bit odd.
Originally posted by @sh76Makes no difference. People get used to associating numbers with how the temperature feels like.
Yes, they're both arbitrary. But if you're going to create an arbitrary system, creating one where 100 and 0 are roughly the maximum and minimum air temps in your climate is a pretty good idea.
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraExcept with Celsius, that feeling is connected to something absolute at sea level. 0°C water freezes, 100°C water boils. Boiling equals steam equals hazard is less arbitrary than a sense of the hottest or lowest air temperature you are likely to experience, which only really has an upper northern hemisphere application. Using Celsius, you are also immediately aware of snow/ice hazard as the temperature plummets towards and below zero into negative territory.
Makes no difference. People get used to associating numbers with how the temperature feels like.
Originally posted by @kmax87Base 12 for everything. Divides nicely by halves, thirds, quarters and sixths. We'd just need to come up with two new numerals and turn the world unside down.
Except with Celsius, that feeling is connected to something absolute at sea level. 0°C water freezes, 100°C water boils. Boiling equals steam equals hazard is less arbitrary than a sense of the hottest or lowest air temperature you are likely to experience, which only really has an upper northern hemisphere application. Using Celsius, you are also immediatel ...[text shortened]... e of snow/ice hazard as the temperature plummets towards and below zero into negative territory.
Originally posted by @wajoma@ and * have been the "new" numerals for base 12 since the stone age.
Base 12 for everything. Divides nicely by halves, thirds, quarters and sixths. We'd just need to come up with two new numerals and turn the world unside down.