|
Grex > Agora47 > #173: Why can't America do the "10" commandments? (not what you think) | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 93 responses total. |
other
|
|
response 25 of 93:
| 
Nov 15 15:09 UTC 2003 |
The tooling and hardware inustries would resent the eventual loss of
half of their tool sales resulting from a complete conversion.
|
remmers
|
|
response 26 of 93:
|
Nov 15 15:14 UTC 2003 |
Um, I don't follow that. Wouldn't people still need just as many
tools?
The sign industry would experience an unprecedented boom.
I seem to recall that Canada changed all its road signs from British
to metric very quickly and efficiently twenty-five years ago. With
our good ol' American know-how, we should be able to do the same.
|
vidar
|
|
response 27 of 93:
|
Nov 15 15:30 UTC 2003 |
Re 20: Our "months" are not months, as a month is one full cycle of the
moon. If we still based "months" on the cycle of the moon, they'd all
be exactly the same length. Unfortunately, we'd also have to update
our solar year a little, as we'd have a month that crosses the ending
and beginning of the solar cycle.
|
keesan
|
|
response 28 of 93:
|
Nov 15 15:34 UTC 2003 |
The traditional solution to months is to have an extra period at the end of
the year which does not belong to any month. 30 day months, 5 days of New
Year's Holiday.
Thirteen months of 28 days (four weeks each) comes to 364 days.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 29 of 93:
|
Nov 15 19:03 UTC 2003 |
I'm fairly certain I have some tools in inches and others in millimeters.
If we converted just to meters, I'd never need to replace the inch tools.
As it is, I have to maintain both.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 30 of 93:
|
Nov 15 20:22 UTC 2003 |
As it is, piecemeal conversion is taking place, and one encounters nuts
and bolts in various things where you don't know which they are - inch or
metric. I'd be happier if we'd gone metric when we said we did, and gotten
over the transition long ago.
|
willcome
|
|
response 31 of 93:
|
Nov 16 19:51 UTC 2003 |
I ha'e a strong tendency to measure speeds and 'elocities in metres per
second.
|
polygon
|
|
response 32 of 93:
|
Nov 16 22:05 UTC 2003 |
Fahrenheit is preferable to Celsius when discussing weather. Fahrenheit
reserves the high-definition 0-100 interval to temperatures within normal
human experience, so that negative numbers or numbers over 100 signify
extreme weather or extreme environments (the poles, the Moon). Admittedly
this means that things like boiling and melting points of water map to
awkward numbers like 212 and 32.
Celsius, on the other hand, is perfect for chemistry, but lousy for human
environments.
There is no reason why EVERYTHING has to be metric.
As to half-liter soft drink bottles, I remember when Pepsi or Coke was
widely ridiculed for coming up with the "half quart" (avoiding the
equivalent term "pint"). The reason was psychological: a half quart
sounded like a substantial amount, whereas "pint size" has all sorts of
smallness connotations. Since a liter is only a little bigger than a
quart, the cola companies simply switched to half liters.
Had it not been for the pint problem, I suspect that the soft drink
companies would still be selling in non-metric quantities.
|
slynne
|
|
response 33 of 93:
|
Nov 16 22:35 UTC 2003 |
FWIW, I havent seen a half liter bottle of pop in years.
|
twenex
|
|
response 34 of 93:
|
Nov 16 22:40 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 35 of 93:
|
Nov 16 23:12 UTC 2003 |
The rest of the world has no trouble discussing weather in Celsius. I
don't think the rationalization for using Fahrenheit is anything more
than that. I could take the opposite stance, and say it makes real sense
to use a scale where water freezes at zero and boils at 100, as these
are extremely important signature transitional experiences in our daily
lives. In fact - that strikes me as BETTER rationalization.
|
twenex
|
|
response 36 of 93:
|
Nov 16 23:28 UTC 2003 |
I agree. (I'm feeling very agreeable this weekend!)
|
willcome
|
|
response 37 of 93:
|
Nov 16 23:36 UTC 2003 |
32: that argument didn't jive when Orwell made it, and it's not going to jive
now. Celcius is fine for temperature; ask anyone but an American.
|
janc
|
|
response 38 of 93:
|
Nov 17 01:41 UTC 2003 |
Of course, any scale will work. You can set freezing at 0.012 and boiling
at 0.021, and have a perfectly good temperature scale. The only reason that
has ever been set forth for why Celsuis is better is that having water
freeze and boil at 0 and 100 "makes more sense". That's true, but lame.
Fahrenheit nicely defines the temperatures where you have a right to complain
about the weather. If it's below zero, you can moan. If it's above 100, you
can moan. Just fine. Yeah, I've seen -20 and 120, but I'd prefer not to.
The only thing I really want to do with temperatures above 100F is set the
oven temperature. When I complain about the weather, I like being able to
say it's 100, not it's 38. Yes, I know it's nothing much compared to the
boiling point of water, but it's still too danged hot.
"I'm hot blooded, check it and see, got a fever of 39.4444". There's one
song that would never have been written.
Does this make Fahrenheit better. No. But it makes Fahrenheit very nice.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 39 of 93:
|
Nov 17 01:51 UTC 2003 |
> "I'm hot blooded, check it and see, got a fever of 39.4444". There's
> one song that would never have been written.
I'm confused.. Up until this sentence I thought you were arguing in favor
of Fahrenheit.
|
other
|
|
response 40 of 93:
|
Nov 17 02:27 UTC 2003 |
Jan, I have to say, I never pegged you as a fan of Loverboy...
|
aruba
|
|
response 41 of 93:
|
Nov 17 03:30 UTC 2003 |
(I never pegged you as a fan of Foreigner, Eric. :))
|
other
|
|
response 42 of 93:
|
Nov 17 03:41 UTC 2003 |
Alas! have I misattributed? See how much attention I pay to music?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 43 of 93:
|
Nov 17 06:08 UTC 2003 |
Re #38: you realize, don't you, that the "standard" body temperature has
been set at 37 C, a nice round figure? That just converts to 98.6 F, a
really ridiculously over-precise figure.
|
tpryan
|
|
response 44 of 93:
|
Nov 17 07:22 UTC 2003 |
The king was running a fever the day they set the Farenheight
scale.
|
willcome
|
|
response 45 of 93:
|
Nov 17 07:30 UTC 2003 |
Lol.
|
gull
|
|
response 46 of 93:
|
Nov 17 15:42 UTC 2003 |
I don't think inch-based tools are going away any time soon. There will
still be plenty of things around that need them for years.
Perversely, my Volvo appears to have a mix of metric and inch-based
fasteners. I assumed it was metric until I had to replace a seat belt
and found that the bolts that secured it were 5/8".
|
twenex
|
|
response 47 of 93:
|
Nov 17 18:05 UTC 2003 |
Possibly the metric-marked parts are built to European standards, and the
inch-marked to US standards.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 48 of 93:
|
Nov 17 18:45 UTC 2003 |
I like to tell the story of Skylab, which was built entirely to metric
measurements. I had a brief assignment to review some of the plans, and
noticed that many tubes were specified to be 2.54 centimeters in diameter.
|
twenex
|
|
response 49 of 93:
|
Nov 17 18:55 UTC 2003 |
Heh. obviously, whatever measurement you choose, somehow you are going to get
parts which need decimals or fractions.
|