Anything but metric
1d 23h ago by lemmy.world/u/FelixCress in comicstrips
Our official kilogram weight and meter stick got stolen by pirates, and Copenhagen hasn't sent a replacement.
"Why yes, can we order 1kg of kilogram and a 1m metre please?"
I don't know why the U.S. gets shit for using the system that our colonial overlords forced us to use in the first place.
The only reason we're still using it today is inertia. If we gradually tried phasing it out we'd have a lot more people on board with officially switching over to it versus the "ripping the band-aid" method of doing it all at once and causing culture shock to a bunch of ignorant Americans who haven't done math since 8th grade.
I don’t know why the U.S. gets shit for using the system that our colonial overlords forced us to use in the first place.
When America was colonized, the metric system did not exist. Saying that your "colonial overlords" forced it on you is silly - there were no better options at the time.
In fact, the metric system was created after US independence. So the US can only blame itself for not adapting it, unlike the UK which mostly adapted it.
"In 1793, Thomas Jefferson requested equipment from France that could be used to evaluate the metric system within the United States. Joseph Dombey returned from France with a standard kilogram. Before reaching the United States, Dombey's ship was blown off course by a storm and captured by pirates, or strictly (British) privateers in the Caribbean, he died in captivity on Montserrat."
The US has been close several times. Most recently in the late 1980s. But it was an uphill battle by then. We had layers of government and mature private industry that had decades of work in the old system.
Before that, the US had essentially the same issue. Retooling in industry. The US was an early adopter of industrialization. The only other country with a similar position was Britain. They only adopted it in the 60s. Most importantly, it was industry led and a hybrid system retained for the general public. It's funny to realize that many US agencies like the NIST.
The US was the first to adopt a decimal coin system which is part of metrificsrion. But because everyone does it, we don't think about it. On the flip side, no one adopted the metric calendar and there's never been an attempt to meaningfully move away from the mixed base time system.
I believe the USA had a vote in 1975 to switch to metric and failed.
Are you talking about the Metric Conversion Act of 1975? That passed.
Because nuance is useless when Europeans need to feel superior to us burgerlanders tm
Yeah I get it we suck but can we focus on what we actually suck about than nitpicking for bonus points?
Agreed
According to my elementary /middle school-aged kids, it seems they are in fact learning the metric system in school. And this is in a red state in the south. 🤷♂️
Check back in a couple of years and I can tell you what they’re doing in high school.
Wow, that's actually quite cool. Change will come from the ground up, imo. Good for them learning a better system. In another generation or two they will probably be the ones to spearhead the effort to do away with the old Imperial system entirely.
Metric has been a part of our science curriculum for a long time. There was even a push to change completely in the '70s until we figured out how much it would cost to do it. That's why there are two liter sodas and why there's one highway with kilometer markers instead of mile markers.
As for completely doing away with imperial, given that Europe hasn't even entirely done that, it seems unlikely.
One can hope! In the meantime, they’re happy to teach this old dog new tricks and that’s a start.
In another generation or two they will probably be the ones to spearhead the effort [improve conditions in the United States]
this was said of the hippie generation (ie boomers) as well
IIRC metric is used extensively in scientific research.
Not true.
We use it when dealing drugs or making bullets, too.
In the 1821, John Quincy Addams (at the time secretary of state) was told to give congress a report on the new metric system. He presented them a very detailed document, making comparisons between the two, but ultimately recommending the metric system.
...so detailed, in fact, that none of them bothered to read it and no decision was made. The treasury ended up taking the initiative on their own, and went with what everyone was already using.
This was barley 30 years after the constitution was ratified, and the report was made by a guy who's dad helped to draft the damn thing. We don't get to blame the Brits for this one. Our stubborn anachronistic measurements are entirely a Yankee phenomenon.
bc americans never changed but the overlords did
We almost were the first to go metric. But also, the problem is we tried switching at the same time as the other English speaking countries. The difference is their population didn't resist as hard. Had we committed we probably would've wound up about where canada is now
!anythingbutmetric@discuss.tchncs.de
A defense of the imperial measurement system.
https://youtu.be/iJymKowx8cY
I will not be arguing that the imperial measurement system is better than metric, because it isn't. metric is obviously better.
I stopped watching after this.
How many cubic inches are there in a gallon, without just looking it up?
Oh fuck I didn't even get to volume mesurments, I knew the imperial system was fucked but until I actualy did some Wikipedia. Well my God what the fuck. 
The video in question directly addresses that chart, correctly poining out that it's quite misleading in the implication that the measurements on it are ever converted between in any context ever. But no, there is no context where someone converts between feet and miles, or uses sticks or hands or fingers or palms or chains or all those other units I promise you haven't heard of. Imperial is bad, but it's not that bad.
Similarly, it is completely irrelevant to know that a gallon is an integer number of cubic inches at all, that is a conversion that is simply never done.
A spacecraft weighing two tons fires its engine in a straight line for five seconds. It uses up 100 pounds of fuel, and the engine is rated to exert 500 pounds of force. What is the delta V, in miles per hour?
I can do that calculation in metric easy peasy, because all the SI units convert at a 1:1 ratio, and I can easily convert between the different scales. Can you do the math in Imperial without looking up the conversion factors?
Nope, but nobody does calculations like that in imperial either. All science is done in metric, then converted to imperial at the end if that's needed.
And aerospace is in metric in the US ever since the Mars crash
Yeah, the US system is inconvenient with feet and inches and ounces and ounces and pounds. But for the most part it's fine right up until you start doing physics or engineering at which point you want to strangle your country folk until they start using metric. But noooooooo all the tradesfolk want their drawings in customary despite the fact that our products are in metric and it's just better.
Well you would also have to look up the conversion factor for tons, pounds, and miles, to SI units, so I dunno what you're on about.
My chevy uses SI displacements and all that. Roll back 70 years and, sure, they used imperial displacments and volumes.
So what? The time to do the math is a trivial portion of the investment, and only done to convert units for consumer volume and for publicity.
Most uses are more simple, like putting 1 oz of 2-4,D in a gallon with a nice glop of chemsurf.
And the history of math, counting, and measurement is endless and sublime, they got shit done with primitive tools and measures.
There are 3 countries that use the SAE (Imperial?) measuring system. Liberia, Myanmar and the USA. Exactly, WTF!?!?!
Yup blame America.
On the same page when will Africa stop letting people speak Dutch? Stupid Africa still using that useless language that they chose to accept.
Maybe this is the US's plan all along... to tariff the metric system into submission.
Both the meter and the second were created from a step length, just like the mile.
Second is a measure of time. You think its "the time it take for one step".. ?
A day is divided into hours. An hour is divided into smaller pisces, minute pieces. (See how it works as an adjective and a noun?) Then that measure is divided a second time, into secunda pars minuta
That's why they're minutes and seconds.
Metres don't exactly sound like step lengths either
The mètre was introduced – defined as one ten-millionth of the shortest distance from the North Pole to the equator passing through Paris, assuming an Earth flattening of 1/334.
Ever wondered where those magic numbers on that definition come from?
But no, I misremembered it, the relation between the step and a second is a coincidence. It's the size of the meter that was decided in function of time, in the division that best approximated a step.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0412078
I actually went through the entire pdf. Didn't read all of it, but browsed through and read the parts I though relate to this.
I can't find anything about the metre ever being from "natural measurements". Only that the people looking to make the metre debated the subject. But the metre itself was always based on the size of the Earth. But yeah, it's close to a yard and a yard is 3 feet.
Ofc originally all measurements somehow derive from our bodies, because that's the first thing we measured with. But like the pdf quite quickly says:
It is universally accepted that the first important stage in the development of metro- logical concepts related to measures of length is the anthropomorphic one, in which the main units of measurement are the parts of the human body [3, 4]. As the sociologist and historian of metrology Witold Kula puts it, “man measures the world with him- self” [4] — a variation of Protagoras’ “man is the measure of all things”. It is a very ancient and primitive approach. Certainly, even the first people who adopted such units must have been aware that the length of their own feet or fingers was different from their neighbor’s ones. But initially such personal differences did not seem important, given the low degree of accuracy required in measurements in that social context. Later the anthropomorphic approach reached a first level of abstraction, charac- terized by “the shift from concrete representations to abstract ones, from ‘my or your finger’ to ‘finger in general’ ” 4 [4]. Nevertheless, even when the stage was reached of conceiving measurement units as abstract concepts, differences in establishing the value of these units remained, depending on region or time [6, 7, 8, 9]. Only in the eighteenth century, with the consolidation of the experimental method on one hand, and the drive towards international co-operation and trading on the other, 3All English quotes not referring to English bibliography are translation by the authors. 4The earliest measurement standard we have evidence of is the Egyptian cubit, the length of the forearm from elbow to fingers, realized around 2500 B.C. in a piece of marble of about 50 centimeters [5]. 2 strong emphasis was placed for the first time on the need for standardized units
] one would still have to include an heterogeneous element, time, or what is here the same thing, the intensity of the gravitational force at the Earth’s surface. Now, if it is possible to have a unit of length that does not depend on any other quantity, it seems natural to prefer it.27 [. . . ] Actually, it is much more natural to refer the distance between two places to a quarter of one of the terrestrial circles than to refer it to the length of the pendulum. [. . . ] The quarter of the Earth meridian would become then the real unit of length; and the ten million-th part of this length would be its practical unit. (Ref [2], pp. 4-5)
Ugh I'm not gonna format all that. I'm not like trying to say you're wrong. I'm asking you what you're trying to say?
Remind me — what's the definition of a meter?
The length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299792458 of a second.
Why?
Just trying to wrap my feeble American brain around these extremely intuitive measurements.
As opposed to the foot, a body part notorious for its consistency in size across all people /s
It's good enough for an estimate of the size of a room, which is what it's commonly used for.
Oh, really? You use your foot or your girlfriend's? Because I wager those are somewhat different.
What body part is a quart based on? Because I don't think it's any of them, and you could probably still eyeball a quart of water. That's to say, just shy of a litre.
How about one yard? Think you can do that? Great, just add a bit and you have a metre.
It's crazy how Americans actually be complaining about how they're unable to estimate or perceive things if they're not actually measuring it against the bottom of their feet. Don't you believe you have the ability to learn? I can see why you wouldn't, but...
Americans actually be complaining
how are you attempting to disparage americans and talking like one at the same time. it's just the name of a unit, who cares, a yard's not the size of the boundary of their average house and barrels of oil don't come in individual barrels
Because if I don't assume their language, they won't understand me, as my native language is Finnish. When talking to or about Americans, I might add a bit of American flare. It's not grammatically correct, I know. Just double negatives.
Also criticism and disparagement are two different things.
international outreach is very important work so i'll leave you to your methods
The sheer ignorance in this comment really makes the condescension even funnier.
I have no clue how many feet My bedroom is
If only there was a simple way to find out.
It’s hard to realise the difference between what it’s origin is and definition. I think it’s wise to look into the definition of the foot instead of assuming you know.
Once finished, tell me why you still use the British unit?
Because they forced us to and it's too expensive to change it now relative to the benefits.
It just needed to be able to be reconstructed without having an object standard. What is the actual length of a meter based on? A size that's not only useful in scale, but that is both 1000x a useful measurement size and 1/1000th of a useful measurement size. It becomes intuitive when you start thinking in metric. It only took me like a month or two of mild effort to intuit a meter.
Since 2019, the metre has been defined as the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299792458 of a second, where the second is defined by a hyperfine transition frequency of caesium.
Of course. It's so obvious.
Nor obvious, but based on physical principals and highly reproducible. BTW, what's the official definition of an inch?
Roughly the length of the last segment of my thumb. Which is roughly 1/12th the length of my foot. Which is roughly 1/3 of my stride.
Things I don't need a vacuum and instruments that can measure the speed of light to reproduce.
A mole is a very useful unit of measurement in chemistry, but much less so in baking.
From John Bazell “In metric, one milliliter of water occupies one cubic centimeter, weighs one gram, and requires one calorie of energy to heat up by one degree centigrade—which is 1 percent of the difference between its freezing point and its boiling point. An amount of hydrogen weighing the same amount has exactly one mole of atoms in it. Whereas in the American system, the answer to ‘How much energy does it take to boil a room-temperature gallon of water?’ is ‘Go fuck yourself,’ because you can’t directly relate any of those quantities.”
You guys must boil water differently than I do. I put water in a kettle on the stove on high and take it off when it boils.
Well yeah, stove kettles are a century out of date, for a start.
I presume you use an electric kettle, then?
So you have it boil water by specifying the number of Joules to use? Or kilocalories?
What even is this line of reasoning? Outside of a lab, I don’t need to know the amount of energy used to boil water. That’s the point. It’s boiling when it boils.
And 100°C isn’t even the boiling point of water at altitude. It’s a totally arbitrary scale, not very useful in day-to-day situations.
If you're going camping with a solar battery and an electric kettle, you absolutely need to know a ballpark of how much energy it takes to boil a cup (250ml) of water, or you won't get your morning coffee.
It's also important information if you're living off grid, running a desalination plant, sending a mission to Mars, operating a nuclear reactor, building a jacuzzi, or studying the mantis shrimp.
You’ve got to almost admire the “well I don’t do anything that requires precision or collaborating with others, so eyeballing my own body parts should be fine for everyone” attitude there…
Read again. Slowly.
‘How much energy does it take to boil a room-temperature gallon of water?’
This is a question I've never once heard asked outside of a chemistry lab. Which is where metric units are useful.
These supposed facts are also not true except with distilled water, at sea level, etc. etc. Water doesn't freeze at 0°C, it requires activation energy. And any impurity will lower its freezing point. Plenty of ocean water at well below 0°C, as well as fresh water at very high pressures.
A bottle of wine is 750ml (or 75cl) and a pint (i.e. a normal glass) is 0.4731765L. Very intuitive.
What's the efficiency of an ICE motor in metric? L/100 km? Great that it can be converted into other units, but it's existence an admission that it's not a useful human-centric measurement. Just like air temperature. When I switch my car to metric, the thermostat has to add a digit and increment in half degrees to give you what Fahrenheit gives you without a third digit. The external air temperature requires a sign in metric.
Also, which US state did Dr. Fahrenheit hail from? I'll give you one guess.
But hey, decimalization is great, right? So why don't you use metric time? Come on, throw away a lifetime of knowledge and compatibility with others because it can be converted easier in your head.
L/100 km? Great that it can be converted into other units, but it's existence an admission that it's not a useful human-centric measurement.
This is stunningly arrogant and ridiculously incorrect at the same time.
Do you not understand? Or do you not want to understand?
If you really want to understand, I will explain everything and show you how deeply wrong you are. However I will not spend time explaining, if you will then still continue with this "I am used to this system so everyone else must be wrong." approach.
But if you like being wrong I recommend you at least not publicly announcing it.
"Roughly" - yep, that's the best way to measure everything. Especially in science and calculations.
Hey whats a space shuttle or two between friends
I conceded, in the post you responded to, that metric is better for science. It's the last sentence in my post.
Do you struggle with reading comprehension?
Uhm... No, you did not.
Are you okay?
A mole is a very useful unit of measurement in chemistry, but much less so in baking.
How many moles of flour are you putting into your bread dough?
Mole is one specific measurement and chemistry is only one scientific field.
I measure flour in grams or kilos, which are metric. If someone says you need 0.24 kilos of flour, I immediately know it's 240 grams.
How many feet of flour do you put in your bread? 🤣
Feet aren’t a measure of volume or weight.
But feel free to stick your feet in flour and let me know how it goes.
Also, what cookbook specifies fractions of kilograms of flour? Unless you’re running a bakery, the conversion isn’t useful.
LOL, can't even take a joke with a laughing smiley at the end to indicate that's a joke 🤣
"Unless it's useful, it's not useful". The best fucking argument I have heard in a while LMAO 🤣
Didn’t know you were a baker. 🙄
Fractions?
Fractions use a numerator and denominator (e.g., (3/4)). Decimals use a decimal point with place values based on powers of 10 (e.g., 0.75.)
So to answer which cookbooks use fractions; it's American ones.
Take 1/4th cup this 2 cups that 2&7/8ths of a fl oz this and 1/2 quart of water.
So yeah. American cookbooks use factions.
"the conversion isn't useful"
There no conversion going on. You can say 200g of flour or 0.2kg of flour. Both equally understandable to anyone who grew up with the metric system. Hell my grandpa even uses hecto- and deca- in everyday conversations.
The inch is defined using metric units. 1 in is defined to be exactly 25.4mm. So per definition inch is based on the speed of light. Nice that you have body parts which are roughly the size of an inch thoug
It's defined as 1/12 of a foot and your wife said my inch was the best she'd ever had.
Roughly the length of the last segment of my thumb
Real consistent there, Cletus
I mean, it is consistent, compared to itself. If I have a framed artwork held on the wall by two nails and want to raise it roughly an inch, my thumb is right there to measure with. No need to get a ruler.
The fact that there's no easy conversion between my thumb and the speed of light in a vacuum just isn't a problem I deal with on a daily basis.
So you think if I want to raise framed artwork by an approximate amount I would need a metric ruler? Why? I can use a thumb too, or literally any object.
So what if someone is standing back trying to communicate with you how much to raise it so it looks good?
"Raise it by the length of the last segment of your thumb!" You've just re-invented the inch. Congrats.
"Raise it by 2.54cm!" Wow, great units that are easy to eyeball without a ruler. Based on a subdivision of the great circle of the earth going through Paris (of all places). Definitiely not arbitrary and very useful in everyday situations.
I don't need to re-invent anything. I know my thumb is about 2cm. The person standing behind is not even using measurements at all, just telling me "a little bit higher, a little bit lower, a little bit to the left". So why the hell do I need inches again?
it is consistent, compared to itself
It is WHAT? 🤣🤣🤣
This a really stupid argument.
You're going "hmm, this is about and inch and I don't need to be precise." You know what the metric equivalent is? Going "hmm this is about 2.5cm and I don't need to be precise".
Be better.
You can do the same with cm... but lets say you've got something a yard wide and need it in quarters, have fun. But hey if its a meter that's 25cm. In fifths? 20cm. In tenths? 10cm. And decimals are super easy to deal with as well. It's so much easier to deal with Metric for day to day calculations.
And yes, I'm American. There is absolutely no sane reason to keep Imperial measurements besides aversion to change. None.
Convert me 528 miles to inches without using a calculator. I doubt you can.
And all I need to convert 528 kilometres to centimetres is just add a bunch of zeroes.
Tell me how much 2.3 pints of water weigh without looking up or using a calculator.
I can tell you exactly how much 2.3 liters of water weigh without any aid.
Bonus, if I have a litre of water I can use it to accurately measure weight!
Do you really need to know the number of inches from Los Angeles to Portland outside of a lab? Seems unlikely.
That's the point. In a lab, where conversions and formulas are frequently used, metric makes sense. I use it all the time. Even the US military uses metric for their specifications.
Outside the lab, it makes little sense.
My point is that the metric system is just as useful inside a lab as it is in the real world everyday scenarios. Why use two different systems, when one does the job and is generally a lot easier to work with?
Do you really think that measuring roughly (without a measurement tool) in inches is better than measuring roughly in centimeters or, meters vs. feet, etc? You learn to approximate in each system and make similar rough measurements, but when you need accuracy and actually do some number crunching, one system is superior.
And even in every day life, you often come across knowing you need e.g. 2.3 kilograms of something, but that something is sold in grams. I can instantly convert the numbers on the spot in the store without using a calculator.
I really cannot see a scenario where the imperial system is better.
Unless you give me a reason for converting miles to inches outside of a lab, you haven’t shown what you say you’ve shown.
I can demand you do a bunch of time conversions in your head and pretend your inability to do so means we should switch to metric time. But that would be silly.
I took an astronomy course in college (in America). Want to guess what system we used? It wasn’t inches.
Though even astronomy uses AU, which isn’t an even base-10 multiple of meters but a useful human-scale (or solar system-scale) measurement.
I gave you a perfect example of kilos to grams. Use a bit of your own imagination for a similar example for measuring distances.
E.g. You know you need 2.34 feet of wire, but the wire is sold by inches. Convert. Now!
Happy?
I’ll do the same if you can convert 2.34 days into seconds in your head. Now!
You use non-base 10 units all the time. You’re weirdly quiet on that point.
I’ll do the same if you can convert 2.34 days into seconds in your head. Now!
I will, if you give me a realistic scenario where I would need to do such a conversion. In your own words "give me a reason".
You use non-base 10 units all the time. You’re weirdly quiet on that point.
Just because other things are not as good, doesn't mean everything else has to. And we are discussing imperial vs metric systems, why are you trying to change the topic?
Glad we agree. 😄
It's not that bad once you accept that there is no correct answer for what should be considered "1 length" unless you want to use Planck units, which are absurdly uselessly large or small.
Who cares what the original reason for using that exact length is? What matters is the relation of that measurement compared to other measurements you want to use. Regardless of whether a length is in feet or meters, I'll need a ruler to measure it - the thing that influences convenience is how easy it is for me to convert it to other useful measurements like kilometers, miles, centimeters, or inches.
You don't need a ruler to measure a foot. It's right there in the name.
And if the variability of people's feet is too much for a particular situation, then yeah, use metric.
But I can visualize a room's dimension in feet. You may be able to visualize it given meters, but that's come from experience, not intuition.
And if your argument boils down to "who cares about arbitrary scales" then you're going to have to explain what's wrong with adding decimals to miles.
...what? I've spent my whole life in the US, and I've literally never heard of anyone legitimately using their own foot as a legitimate measurement tool. Who the hell uses their own foot to measure a foot? You'd have to be crazy lucky to have a foot that measures exactly 12 inches, otherwise you'd be off every single time.
If you care so little about a measurement that you'd take that much variability, you might as well just take a wild guess. Unless you already know what your own foot size is in feet, at which point you could just as easily memorize your own foot size in meters.
And no, I can't visualize a room in feet, I can take a wild guess and be wrong for any meaningful situation, or I can measure it, which I do with the miniature tape measure I have on my keychain for that exact scenario.
Done it plenty. Still prefer metric, but it is a convenient rough estimate that's slightly better than guessing
I don't believe you. Any time you're looking at an apartment or house and don't have a floorplan or a 10'+ tape measure, you walk the length of each side of a room side heel-and-toe to get a rough idea. The deviation of the length of your foot from 12 inches isn't material in this situation.
And if you're really struggling with this, a room with a 10' side would be about ten small steps across, a bit more than three strides.
I know intuitively how long my foot is and how long my stride is. I don't know intuitively what the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299792458 of a second, where the second is defined by a hyperfine transition frequency of caesium.
Any time I'm looking at my house I'm either in a situation where someone's just asking how big something is, at which point I say "I dunno, maybe 10 feet?" or, more likely, I need to actually know the size, so I say "lemme check!" and pull out my measuring tape. My desk is just barely smaller than the width of my room, and it's too big lengthwise by about 2 inches. The reason I know that is because I didn't rely on the general size of my own foot when I was deciding where to put my desk, and actually took legitimate measurements. Because it mattered. If it didn't matter, I would've guessed.
It would take me longer to take 10 steps and calculate how far off my own foot is from a foot than it would be for me to just measure 10 feet, even if I already knew my own foot size off the top of my head, which I clearly don't. The reason you know the length of your own stride and feet is because you use them for measurement; that's very strange, but regardless, I can't believe it would have been any more difficult for you to memorize the same measurements in another system.
Anything worth trying to measure is worth measuring accurately, and anything else isn't worth measuring. I agree that making things easy to measure improves day-to-day interactions with the things around us, but that's why I recommend getting a small tape measure you can carry everywhere, not just guessing by the approximate size of people's body parts that grow to completely different sizes.
The metre was originally defined in 1791 by the French National Assembly as one ten-millionth of the distance from the equator to the North Pole along a great circle through Paris, setting 10000 km as that quarter of the Earth's polar circumference.
There was the navigation rationale for setting the meter/metre at the length that it is, but the original and subsequent definitions proved to be inconsistent and difficult to measure precisely.
It's also not accurate because one of the people who measured that distance made a small mistake in their calculations.
Half of yo mama's waistline measurement.
In an apocalypse, the Imperial system of measurement is easier to reestablish than the metric system though that should be used with an eye to switching to metric. The USA uses both and it would be nice if things (like soda) didn't have to list two measurements or having to ask a doctor to convert from metric to Imperial.
For scientific purposes, any system would be kinda hard to reestablish, without a definition that everyone agrees upon and a way to measure it accurately. The imperial system does not provide that definition at all.
For everyday purposes... what kind of apocalypse would result in the complete destruction of all of the world's measuring tape?
what kind of apocalypse would result in the complete destruction of all of the world's measuring tape?
The Empire Strikes Back apocalypse 🤣
For example, I can tell someone that the length between their knuckles of their index finger is about an inch or that a foot is literally based on the length of the human foot without having to have a ruler present. The metric system has no easy references. The history of the Imperial system is messy but it works (mostly) as a way to do rough measurements until the accuracy needed for the metric system is present. After that, the metric system makes conversions really easy, including getting rid of lot of units, and makes more sense.
Once you have the needed accuracy, the Imperial system is inferior to the metric system and should be phased out.
Feet length varies a lot.
You can approximately measure one meter using three feet and it will be just as accurate as measuring three feet due to a variety of feet sizes.
Yup. One would start with that and then (hopefully) agree on a standard that is hopefully metric.
Yup. One would start with that
One would start measuring one meter using three feet, you mean? Until we can establish an exact measurement of one meter?
Whose feet would you measure? They vary wildly between genders and races.
You would have to do the initial measurement first and then tell everyone that's how long "1 length" is, whatever you call it feet or meters or bananas.
So why use feet, which are different in size between all people and no one can measure one foot more accurately than one meter without a measurement too? Using bananas is just as accurate as using feet.
So why not do it properly the first time?
If we're knocked back to reinventing measurements we'll probably reinvent the cubit along with the foot. If you're building something by yourself you don't need to be universally consistent, just internally so.
The USA uses both and it would be nice if things (like soda) didn't have to list two measurements
The solution is to fully switch to metric
I agree. My point was about if a population needed to do a measurement system from the ground up.
And it's a stupid point. A measurement system can't "get lost". There will always be artifacts left to reestablish it, like a piece of measuring tape or a cup with markings on it.
In an apocalypse, the Imperial system of measurement is easier to reestablish than the metric system
How would you measure one feet more accurately than one meter without any measurement tool? You might say that you could, but how can you prove that your "feet" measurement is more accurate than my "meter" measurement? Or one kilo vs one pound? You couldn't. You would have to start with a brand new system either way.
And establishing a "new metric" system would be much easier, because everything is pretty just multiples of 10.
It's not meant to be real accurate. It's meant to "do for now". There's a reason that the metric system took so long to come into existence. We have the advantage of hindsight. Any society starting over might not have access to that experience.
I prefer using bananas to feet though. Both are just as accurate measurement tools.
Metric would be easier to re-establish exactly because we have hindsight and prior knowledge of it. Everything is basically just multiples of 10, once you establish the base measurement.
The SI system is also based on the length of body parts though
The second is the length of a single heartbeat. During one heartbeat, the heart muscle consumes 1 J of energy, which makes 1 J per second, roughly, which is 1 W.
Also the 1 m is the length of the spinal chord. Some might not get the significance of the spinal cord and that's fine but it's the central canal in the body so there's that. Edit: yeah yeah i get it it's not the "official origin". However i remember reading a paper where they discussed that the meter should be the length of the spine, but they didn't outright wanna say it, so they searched for a natural circumstances that just so happened to approximate that.
Also i believe that 1 kg is what you can comfortably carry. Or about the amount of food (cereals) that a worker gets paid for a day of field work. Compare to japanese Masu.
I’m honestly astounded by the amount of misinformation in this comment.
Second derives from sexagesimal measurements of day and night cycles. Metre derives from early Earth measurements. One gram is the weight of one cubic centimeter of water.
yeah ikr but why is the second 1/60 of 1/60 of 1/24 of a day? early people in antiquity could have made it 1/60 of 1/60 of 1/60 instead, or just 1/60 of 1/60. What inspired people to divide the day that way?
It looks like you could do a quick search and find an answer yourself, instead of making stuff up.
first result (https://www.discovermagazine.com/why-1-second-is-1-second-227) does not explain it
nope does not seem like i can find it easily and quickly. so, what is the reason?
Didn’t say it would be easy.
But just to be clear here, why would I do your job? And is it the alternative that you make things up instead of educating yourself?
My heart doesn't beat 60bpm and I can comfortably carry more than 1kg. Pretty sure My heart isn't 1W either.
if your heartrate is a lot above 60 bpm you should do more exercise, then the pulse slows down. a fast pulse rate is often associated with not getting enough physical exercise.
healthy pulse is considered 60 bpm to 90 bpm. some argue 60 bpm to 75 bpm is the green range, while 75 bpm to 90 bpm is the yellow range, while above 90 bpm is red.
You do know that people used to be significantly shorter when they came up the meter, right?