Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Make the Metric system the standard in the United States

petitions.whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 547 posts

Re: Make the Metric system the standard in the United States

#411

Post by simmons »

lancefisher wrote: post #352

There were still some kilometer markers on the roads in Alabama when I moved there in 1997. Apparently, the state spent $3.2 million to put up km markers and signs in addition to the mile markers and signs. This proved to be too confusing, and they were all taken down. Most the people I knew didn't miss them. http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1842&dat=19971128&...

I lived in Alabama for a while back in the metric days. The article you link to seems to confirm the general impression I had of how it went down. US: "We're switching to the metric system, everybody!" Alabama: "Yay! Switching to metric!" Alabama: "Okay guys, we've got all our new metric highway signs up, how's everyone else doing with theirs?" (crickets chirping)

I personally thought the kilometer signs were pretty cool. The person's comment about the metric initiative being hard to defend when none of the other states followed through seems to ring true -- it's easy to see how the public might have thought they had been talked into a boondoggle.

Re: Make the Metric system the standard in the United States

#412

Post by jacquesm »

brudgers wrote: post #390
jacquesm wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a bunch of fictions. Not really, those are all pretty practical examples. I've dealt with each and every one of those. > Americans with wrenches tend to have both SAE and metric sizes. The metric ones will be brand new if they have them, the imperial ones will be well worn. > The thread pitches of metric bolts differs from SAE standards Indeed they do. In the EU Ford vehicles are all metric unless they were…

The U.S. auto-industry typically uses metric fasteners. In my experience, that's pretty much been the case since the early 1980's - though that experience is mainly with GM products. Some of my older metric tools predate that. I owned a '64 Baja bug - thereby learning the art of static timing adjustment. Changing tape measures isn't going to change US construction practice. Lumber has to change. Cold formed steel man…

The baja bug is a VW beetle re-run (so German, hence metric).

Agreed with all the other points and that is exactly why I think this will not happen.

Re: Make the Metric system the standard in the United States

#413

Post by lhnn »

mserdarsanli wrote: post #407
lhnn wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

mm/dd/yy makes sense to those who use it, given our cultural adjustment. My father's argument for imperial is how easy it is to divide measurements. In woodworking, especially. 10 is divisible by 2 and 5. Powers of two are more flexible for division.

Does your father change units each time he needs to divide something?

Only between feet and inches, but usually, he's working solely in inches (and fractions of an inch) for his projects.

Re: Make the Metric system the standard in the United States

#414

Post by BashiBazouk »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #14

Before we start with the standard junk about "imperial measures are better because they are easier to understand / better suited to human scale / etc." can I say nope . The only advantage that imperial measures have (for some) is that they are familiar. That's the sum total of it. People where were raised metric find these apologies for imperial measures to be pure gibberish.

It's not really "standard junk" though. Imperial measures are standardized human units. I have a foot that is about a foot, a knuckle that is about an inch, a stride that is about a yard. One day carrying a gallon of water a decent distance I realized that this was about the max amount the average person could carry comfortably over distance.

That is what kills me about the metric system. It seems to intentionally ignore the human scale. Why is 10 centimeters not a standard unit of measurement, and this is the important part, that is marked on every ruler and tape measure? The same for 10 Milliliters, 10 grams and 100 grams. Over the entire metric system the base 10 increments that are human scale are always ignored. The liter is the only one that comes close. Why is this?

Until the human scale is taken in to account I'm perfectly happy using more than one measurement system...

Re: Make the Metric system the standard in the United States

#415

Post by tedunangst »

lutorm wrote: post #371
tolmasky wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, never understood the "problem" with Fahrenheit. When I ask people to tell me why Celsius is better, many will tell me because its "decimal", and then I point out to them it is no more decimal than Fahrenheit, there are no "kilodegrees". They will then point out the water freezing/boiling, as if they regularly have to set that temperature to accomplish that (you don't, you just put water in the freezer or a kett…

It's "better" because it's just an offset Kelvin scale. So when you're doing delta calculations, there's no difference. And really, most temperature calculations are relative.

Fahrenheit is just an offset Rankine scale.

Re: Make the Metric system the standard in the United States

#416

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

Gmo wrote: post #346
frogpelt wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a large contingency of people in the science and engineering world not using metric? Like a previous commenter said, all my science labs in high school and college used metric. I imagine legitimate research and engineering labs in America are also using metric.

Well, it seems that NASA, at least a few years ago, did not consistently use metric ...

NASA may have learned a hard lesson that time.

Re: Make the Metric system the standard in the United States

#417

Post by bcgraham »

astrodust wrote: post #349
xefer wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, although I know the obvious benefits of metric, I still prefer imperial simply because of its messiness. I realize the system is archaic, etc., but I still like that connection, as attenuated as it may be, to our ancient past. Use metric for all scientific purposes, etc., but keep that connection to the natural world. I suppose I like it in the same way I prefer natural languages to some artificial lang…

Have you seen the people on Mythbusters flail about while trying to convert using units like inch-pounds and miles per hour and fluid ounces to cubic feet? There's a reason science insists on using the metric system. The metric system is relatively ancient, dating from the late 1700s.

A system of measurements dating back 300 years is not ancient by any sane scale. It's still the newcomer to the set of systems of measurement.

Re: Make the Metric system the standard in the United States

#418

Post by fr0sty »

DannyBee wrote: post #379
lutorm wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like jaquesm says, I just bought plywood at home depot and it came in 6.45mm thickness, 24"x48". I don't know how you get 6.45mm either in metric or imperial, but it's clearly not "sized in metric".

Thickness wise, they are sized in metric. If you got 6.45mm, someone messed up :) No non-hardwood plywood, even 1/4" plywood, is oversized , and 6.45mm would be oversized at .2539 inches. If it was actual 1/4" (hardwood plywood), it would be 6.4mm per APA (american plywood association) standards. Outside of hardwood plywood, thicknesses are really done in metric. 1/4" nominal plywood nowadays is sized at "15/64" impe…

>The only plywood you will find that is "actual" size...

Actual thickness you mean...

All construction sheet goods available in the US come in 4x8 sheets (drywall excepted, which I believe can be as long as 12').

Just because you can express "4ft by 8ft" as "Xmm by Ymm" (and that very well may be the official spec) doesn't make it 'metric' lumber in any meaninful way.

Re: Make the Metric system the standard in the United States

#419

Post by lostlogin »

lhnn wrote: post #399
acangiano wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much better visual evidence: http://signword.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/423399_101506340...

mm/dd/yy makes sense to those who use it, given our cultural adjustment. My father's argument for imperial is how easy it is to divide measurements. In woodworking, especially. 10 is divisible by 2 and 5. Powers of two are more flexible for division.

Ease of use with imperial? I say no way. Trying to add 1/16 and 1/5 is somewhat harder than mm addition.

Re: Make the Metric system the standard in the United States

#420

Post by jlgreco »

tedunangst wrote: post #406
jlgreco wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When someone says "half a quart" who the fuck knows how much that is? I sure don't, and I'm American. Hell, even a regular quart throws me, all I have there is a vague notion that milk is sold in that amount. When someone says "half a liter" you can be sure they mean 500ml, and you can instantly know how much that is in any kitchen measuring device you have.

Half a quart = one cup.

Cool, now what is a third of a quart?

Suppose I am recounting a dish I made to someone over the phone in two realities, one with Imperial and the other with metric.

Imperial universe: "Okay, now add... say... a third of a gallon of milk" "...third of a gallon.. eehh.. half a pint of milk.

Metric universe: "Okay, now add... say... 2/3rds of a liter." "Two thirds of a liter... 666 ml it is then."

In the imperial universe poor conversations force two inaccurate estimations. In the metric universe only one of the parties is being dreadfully inaccurate.

Imperial is defined in terms of metric units, so it is possible to be as accurate in imperial. The difference between imperial and metric is that imperial adds mental overhead that in practice reduces accuracy.

Post reply on HN