About
Community
Bad Ideas
Drugs
Ego
Erotica
Fringe
Society
Technology
register | bbs | search | rss | faq | about
meet up | add to del.icio.us | digg it
Go Back   Community > Science > Mad Scientists
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Mad Scientists Science and Mathematics discussion-- theories, arguments, citations, proofs and pudding.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 #1 
Old 2008-10-24, 22:35
WildSeven88 WildSeven88 is offline
Regular
 
Default Metric vs Imperial

Enough said!

I'm pro-Metric in every way so.............i don't know discuss or something:D
 #2 
Old 2008-10-25, 01:56
Mantikore Mantikore is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

yes ok.

i understand that metric is a much more "natural " way of measuring things and is the one that i use. however, im annoyed at a lot of people who like to bash people still using imperial.

the thing is, the metric system isnt exactly perfect. for example. take the temperature units for example.


a long time ago, when many countries swapped the farenheit for the centigrade, people thought it was a good option to make as a standard. however, in modern times, scientists prefer the kelvin for any serious work, as the kelvin is a better way of measuring temperature. the thing is, its increment is still the same as that of water, which is based on the old centigrade system. the centigrade system is minorly flawed in the sense that the freezing and melting temperatures of water can fluctuate with several variables like pressure and solute concentration.

if we measured temperature increments by something like the vibration of a proton (or something that doesnt change, like that. though i cant say for sure since im no physicist) it would be a much more natural way of representing the internal energy of matter.

and they metric system is mainly based on water isnt it?
 #3 
Old 2008-10-25, 02:17
Regular
 
the happy land of australia
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

Originally some units were defined on water (like the kilogram), but have been re-defined in terms of physical phenomena. There are only half a dozen or so true base units (length, time, weight, current etc), all the others (like voltage) are derived from this, and thats the beauty of the system. You can move easily between units in calculations.

the imperial system is useless for all sciences and the refusal of people to use decimals instead of fractions makes it look awkward and troublesome.

i personally consider the kelvin / celcius problem a non-issue, since the conversion is a simple subtraction (or addition).

but yes, go metric!
 #4 
Old 2008-10-26, 03:16
suicidejack suicidejack is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

I'm still waiting for the return of the old British monetary system. Go shillings!
 #5 
Old 2008-10-26, 07:37
Mantikore Mantikore is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

Quote:
Originally Posted by suicidejack
I'm still waiting for the return of the old British monetary system. Go shillings!


when the economy fucks over, we may go back to using the wampum
 #6 
Old 2008-10-27, 16:18
Zip Zip is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

however, in modern times, scientists prefer the kelvin for any serious work, as the kelvin is a better way of measuring temperature.

We still use the Rankine scale for thermodynamic temperature in petroleum engineering.

Arguing that the metric scale is universally better than the imperial scale is like saying Esperanto should be a major international language. It's not going to matter, you're going to use what's standard for your field so you'd do well to learn all the conversions.
 #7 
Old 2008-10-28, 11:15
Regular
 
the happy land of australia
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

engineering just borrows randomly from sciences, you can't blame them for being behind the times. i had a whinge at one of my lecturers for using calories in one of his slides (with all that big C and little c shit), he said it was the norm in his industry in his country of origin.

its just peer pressure on a global scale, but it doesn't make it right.
 #8 
Old 2008-10-29, 13:52
miceo miceo is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

I use metrics and unsuprisingly consider them superior.
But the sheer beauty of the metric system is that everything can be converted to practicaly everything and everything is related, unlike with the imperials.

A cubic meter is 1000liters and @NTP also 1000kg.

There is even differences between different countries imperial measurements (British gallon versus US gallon, etc...)

But the Metrics are the same everywhere.
 #9 
Old 2008-10-31, 05:38
lan_rogers_book lan_rogers_book is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

Well I'm probably going to be flamed for this but I'm an imperial sorta guy. While I realize that the metric system is easier for conversion between units the units themselves are flawed for use by the layman ie. the meter is to long to measure human height or event small spaces effectively and centimeters are far too small for the same, while feet and inches fit this bill much better, same goes for weight.

Also as someone with some experience in the architecture/construction business I can say a conversion in the US would be nearly impossible, think, a 2X4 would become bastardized practically irrational number
 #10 
Old 2008-10-31, 09:52
Mantikore Mantikore is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

Quote:
Originally Posted by lan_rogers_book
Well I'm probably going to be flamed for this but I'm an imperial sorta guy. While I realize that the metric system is easier for conversion between units the units themselves are flawed for use by the layman ie. the meter is to long to measure human height or event small spaces effectively and centimeters are far too small for the same, while feet and inches fit this bill much better, same goes for weight.

Also as someone with some experience in the architecture/construction business I can say a conversion in the US would be nearly impossible, think, a 2X4 would become bastardized practically irrational number


if everyone around you uses it and is not confused, theres no problem with using imperial.

btw, even in us metric countries, we still use some imperial measurements. for example, our TVs and monitors are still measured in inches where im from, things like DVD's are still named in the the metric sense.

...and we also get the quarter pounder with cheese
 #11 
Old 2008-11-01, 10:43
Cockney Weasel Cockney Weasel is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

I personally really prefer metric to imperial for pretty much everything, I got a few taunts about this from a friend who insists that this is because my politics are fairly left-wing, hearkening back to the "it's all a communist conspiracy" argument of yesteryear.

That said, there are certain things which work best in imperial. For example I nor any other self-respecting English person would dream of entering a pub and asking for "600 mililitres of cider please". You say a pint and be happy. There's a bit of Nineteen Eighty-Four where Winston is in a bar after an enforced change to metric measurements and one of the proles sums up the subject quite amazingly:

"I likes a pint... A half-litre doesn't satisfy, and a litre's too much."

So I suppose that I can't argue with both being used provided both are taught well in schools. I would personally prefer metric to take a dominant role in most fields, especially scientific usage due to the factors discussed in more detail in other posts... but then maybe that's because I'm a screaming red and I'm after your hard earned money. ;)
 #12 
Old 2008-11-01, 14:01
Mantikore Mantikore is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

yeah i know what you mean. though down here in australia, we just call it whatever the serving glass is called.

"a schooner of VB" for example. but i think they are based on quarts and pints anyway (edit:actually, wiki says its 14 fluid ounces or something).

btw in the UK, what units are things like bottles of coke and other commercial drinks measured in?
 #13 
Old 2008-11-02, 17:09
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

Yeah fuck the imperial system. Metrics the international standard. Everyone can agree on it. I'm not saying we should abolish all the imperial units though some of them are good to use. Kilo's and pounds for instance. I know a kilos 2.2 pounds but sometimes its easier to use pounds instead of saying 500 grams or whatever. Ounces too I'd rather say an ounce than 28 grams. In the bar I'd rather ask for a pint rather than 460 millilitres of beer.

In fact fuck it they both go together nicely. Metric system for precision and imperial system for practicality.
 #14 
Old 2008-11-03, 00:05
Dre Crabbe Dre Crabbe is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

You guys, nobody who uses the metric system has ever walked into a bar to order "460 millilitres of beer." We just order a pint as well, which is 250 millilitres. Or a "thirythreeër" (330 ml ). Or a "half litre." Anyways.
 #15 
Old 2008-11-05, 03:25
eesakiwi eesakiwi is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

Yeah, Metrics sweet, except for pressures, too many zero's...

Had a German once say "zero point five seconds later" instead of "Half a second".
That was weird.

& Whats with "Thousanths of a Inch?"

But at least all the Metric threads make sense.

Imperial is a jumble of different sizes.
Like 'Whitworth (BSW)' is similar to 'UNC (United National Coarse) execpt for 1/2 inch where UNC is 13 TPI & Whitworth is 12 TPI.
Also the thread profile is different, UNC is 60 deg while Whitworth is 55deg.

So some nuts may thread onto the other thread, while the other way, they won't.

I was born in between the 'changeover' of 'Imperial to Metric' in NZ.
I state my birthday as a mix of fractions & decimals, that fux up everybody.
Serve them right.
 #16 
Old 2008-11-08, 04:26
rtb91 rtb91 is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

I'm Canadian, and we only use imperial for measuring our bodies. Like I'm 6'2 and 162lbs

It just seems more natural, but we are hardcore metric on everything else
 #17 
Old 2008-11-09, 09:05
Child_molester Child_molester is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

It's difficult to change to the metric system as people are more comfortable with what they grew up with.

Also. LOL AMMERIKA GET WITH THE TIMES
 #18 
Old 2008-11-10, 10:29
Rem Rem is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

Quote:
Originally Posted by rtb91
I'm Canadian, and we only use imperial for measuring our bodies. Like I'm 6'2 and 162lbs

It just seems more natural, but we are hardcore metric on everything else

Government forms and shit are all in kgs, pisses me off because I can never convert it. Mad
 #19 
Old 2008-11-10, 10:40
moonmeister moonmeister is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

Quote:
Originally Posted by rtb91
I'm Canadian, and we only use imperial for measuring our bodies. Like I'm 6'2 and 162lbs

It just seems more natural, but we are hardcore metric on everything else


As a Canuck you must know that it's Emily Haines as makes Metric worthwhile.
 #20 
Old 2008-11-11, 03:22
eesakiwi eesakiwi is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

I was reading a newspaper article about jetboats.

Quote { It can work in a little as 50.8mm of water}

50.8mm equals 2 inches

& that is "A couple of inches!"

So a generalisation turns into a factor of 0.1mm
(40 thousanths of a inch! actually a little less than that... )

I was born on the cusp of Metric/Imperial on

1968.5 & 3/5ths.
 #21 
Old 2008-11-11, 04:19
Mantikore Mantikore is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

the two arent particularly difficult to convert. theres just a few things to remember

things like an inch is 25.4mm, theres about 300mm in a foot. just under 500g for a pound, and 32F being the freezing point and around 212 being boiling.


after that, its pretty easy to make approximations
 #22 
Old 2008-11-11, 22:19
Regular
 
Welland, Ontario, Canada
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

when doing math a prefer metric but if someone asks me how much i weigh or my height i answer in imperial. i think most Canadians are the same way
 #23 
Old 2008-11-12, 03:28
eesakiwi eesakiwi is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

An Ounce of Lead weighs 28.35 grams.

An Ounce of Gold weighs 31.1034768 grams.
 #24 
Old 2008-11-12, 05:10
Regular
 
the happy land of australia
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

is that real?
 #25 
Old 2008-11-12, 10:02
Mantikore Mantikore is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

is that real?

i didnt believe that as well, but i have time on my hands and dont want to look like an idiot if it is true

the closest thing i can find is on the wikipeda article for "ounce"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ounce

and yes. it is true in a sense. its just that there are several difference ounce definitions. the troy is only for precious metals

and the other one is the regular imperial ounce
 #26 
Old 2008-11-13, 03:59
eesakiwi eesakiwi is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

It gets even worse...

A 'Druggist' (chemist, physicians, scientists or whatever) uses (or did) the Apothecaries system.
That Ounce has got 31.1 gms in it.

Tell THAT to your drug dealer....!

But what you gain on the swings, you loose on the roundabouts.

The Apothecaries Pound has got 373gms in it..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apothecaries'_system

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ounce#International_avoirdupois_ounce
 #27 
Old 2008-11-21, 08:59
Moderator
 
dodging the rain and tractors
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

In the UK we've got a strange system....We buy our petrol in litres but measure distance in miles. We buy milk in litres but talk about pints of beer. We buy hash in imperial but coke and smack in metric. We weigh ingredients in metric but ourselves in "stones" (and without googling how many americans know what a 'stone' is?)

If I go to buy wood then I'll need to know the length in metric and 'old money'.

Which system is better? How the hell do you decide what 'better' is?

If I'm talking to the wife then I'll talk metric. If I'm talking to my old man then I'll use imperial (he still works out money in 'bob').

Horses for courses.
 #28 
Old 2008-11-27, 12:12
Fza Fza is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

Quote:
Originally Posted by eesakiwi
An Ounce of Lead weighs 28.35 grams.

An Ounce of Gold weighs 31.1034768 grams.


This.

Thank god all the bullshit from before the metric system have been completely wiped out of my language.
 #29 
Old 2008-11-27, 13:44
Moderator
 
dodging the rain and tractors
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

On the local news last night (aka Rabbit Breeders Bulletin) there was a report about a small local flood. The reporter announced that a nearby road , several metres away had been flooded to the depth of a foot or so for a 1/4 of a mile or soand that several hundred thousand litres of water had flooded out of the mains.

Best of both worlds, means i can be innumerate in two systems of measurement.
 #30 
Old 2008-12-04, 06:33
TEAMKILLER TEAMKILLER is offline
Regular
 
Default Re: Metric vs Imperial

In the UK we've got a strange system....We buy our petrol in litres but measure distance in miles. We buy milk in litres but talk about pints of beer. We buy hash in imperial but coke and smack in metric. We weigh ingredients in metric but ourselves in "stones" (and without googling how many americans know what a 'stone' is?)


Roughly 14 pounds. We're not all ignorant ;).
 
To the best of our knowledge, the text on this page may be freely reproduced and distributed.
 

totse.com certificate signatures
 
 
About | Community | Bad Ideas | Drugs | Ego | Erotica | Fringe | Society | Technology
Hot Topics