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

421–430 of 547 posts

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

#421

Post by TomAnthony »

cicero wrote: post #268
SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the units allow for common use of integer multiples of simple fractions. What does that mean? Isn't "use of multiples of fractions" a property of numbers in general? > For some people, a simple fraction of a relatable unit really is easier to deal with than a base ten decimal What's easier is what you're used to. That's the whole point.

12 can be evenly divided into thirds and quarters, but 10 cannot. It is more likely that something will need to be divided 2 or 3 ways than 5 ways.

True, yet most of the rest of the world seem to be suffering any from this 'deficiency'.

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

#422

Post by krallja »

noselasd wrote: post #124

Might as well start now - these things take time. In Norway, we introduced the metric system in 1889, but there's still a lot of non-metric measurements still around, at least in common speak. * Length of a boat are measured in feet. * Lumber is measured in inches, two-by-four and so on. * Most engines are measured in horsepower(though nowadays the kw/h is usually given as well). * Firewood have different measures, m…

* Lumber is measured in inches, two-by-four and so on.

Q: How many inches wide is a two-by-four?

A: 1.5" x 3.5"

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

#423

Post by TomAnthony »

randomdata wrote: post #110
rohern wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't make any sense. 1ft is ~30cm. Just measure in units of 30cm. Doing the math in your head is trivial.

But why needlessly introduce the math, no matter how trivial it may actually be?

That's a good question, and one that arguably appears more often when using Imperial/Standard.

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

#424

Post by [deleted] »

scbrg wrote: post #363
Kylekramer wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty weak argument for Celsius. Why should people care that the boiling and freezing points are simple? That is almost irrelevant for the most common uses of temperature reporting. People care about the ambient outside temperature (which Fahrenheit seems optimized for), not the effect it has on the state of one particular compound.

Water's freezing point is easily the single most important temperature there is when it comes to (outdoor) temperature. Essentially, it tells you whether travelling is a deadly hazard or not. It tells you whether to expect snow or rain (which require quite different types of clothes). At least for those of us living in places with snow (as Celsius did), there's no more sensible thing to base the temperature scale on.…

[deleted]

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

#425

Post by ElliotH »

EdiX wrote: post #403
ElliotH wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to backup what you're saying, I'm the generation you're talking about. I have a vague idea of my height in feet and inches, I drink pints of beer and I drive miles in the car. That's about it. People may as well be talking to me in a foreign language if they give me imperial units outside of those contexts.

What do you measure body temperature with? Celsius or Fahrenheit?

Celsius, expecting a reading of 37 degrees. I never measure anything in Farenheit (I don't actually know how to convert to it, or what a body temperature reading in it ought to be). I do basically everything in Celsius apart from occasionally during my A-Levels (16-18) where I did some conversion to Kelvin.

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

#426

Post by TylerE »

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…

0.003" could easily be thermal expansion or humidity.

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

#427

Post by kibwen »

scbrg wrote: post #363
Kylekramer wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty weak argument for Celsius. Why should people care that the boiling and freezing points are simple? That is almost irrelevant for the most common uses of temperature reporting. People care about the ambient outside temperature (which Fahrenheit seems optimized for), not the effect it has on the state of one particular compound.

Water's freezing point is easily the single most important temperature there is when it comes to (outdoor) temperature. Essentially, it tells you whether travelling is a deadly hazard or not. It tells you whether to expect snow or rain (which require quite different types of clothes). At least for those of us living in places with snow (as Celsius did), there's no more sensible thing to base the temperature scale on.…

Even when I'm cooking I never care about the temperature of my water in Celsius, especially since 1) its exact boiling point will vary depending on the air pressure of my present location, and 2) impurities in my tap water (as well as my standard metric pinch of salt) will alter the boiling point of the solution.

So while I do really adore the metric system, the gp's argument still stands: Fahrenheit just so happens to coincidentally peg 100 somewhere near "too damn hot" and 0 to "too damn cold", and I don't see why civilians would benefit from mandating that weather reports be specified in Celsius (and I'd honestly rather prefer Kelvin than Celsius).

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

#428

Post by Locke1689 »

buster wrote: post #386
Kylekramer wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is the thing: Created for still positive for the coldest days in Denmark and under 100 for the warmest is optimizing for ambient outdoor temperature. And much more human readable than heating one liter of water etc. I am not saying it is perfect, but I don't see why it shouldn't continue to be used as it is currently: F for weather reports and such while using C/K for more scientific pursuits.

Yet, it's quite handy that Celsius is based on the freezing temperature of water in winter. You always now when you'll have ice on the streets, cars, etc. :)

Remembering that 32 is freezing is not taxing and gives you the same amount of information (i.e., almost none because temperature alone is a poor predictor of weather).

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

#429

Post by DannyBee »

jacquesm wrote: post #396
DannyBee wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point was exactly that the construction industry and others already deals in metric whether they know it or not. Yes, they spec 2x4's, and 3/4" CDX sheathng, but every piece of sheathing they use is actually made to millimeter specs, not imperial specs. This was my point about the collet, too. It's true they collets are not meant to be holding metric sized end mills/etc, but the collet itself is milled using metri…

Good. So that's the source of your confusion then. I'm glad we got that cleared up. Since the Inch is specified as 25.4 mm you can convert any measurement in Inches into an exact equivalent in metric. But that does not make it a metric size. Inches: 1/8, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, 1" etc and various measures in between (5/32nd for instance). Metric: 1mm, 2mm, 3mm, 4mm, 5mm, 6mm, etc. and various measures in between (5.5 mm for i…

Uh, if something is milled to a metric size and tolerances in metric, it is in fact, a metric size, regardless if it happens to match some imperial sizes. There is no requirement that metric sizes be only integer whole numbers, and if you are going to claim that, for example, all lumber purchases outside of the US are done to exact integer metric sizes, that's just false. It may be the construction industry purchases common sizes in MM, but that's not really the same.

If you want only integer or half integer metric sizes, that's something different than "metric sized"

That said, rough lumber outside of plywood/framing lumber is weird in both the US and Europe anyway. Nobody is trying to hit any exact sizes of anything, except that the lumber needs to be able plane down to certain thicknesses. Grading is based on percentage of clear cutting, not on thickness or width or length. If your lumber supplier doesn't give you lumber in thicknesses that can be planed down to the right size, you get a new supplier. Same in Europe.

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

#430

Post by hcarvalhoalves »

chiph wrote: post #278
eloisant wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, non-metric units are also use worldwide in some specific fields. In aeronautics, height is in feet. In a boat, distance are nautic miles (not even the same miles as Americans on the road). Quick quiz: what's the diagonal size of your laptop screen in centimeters? Your mobile phone? So it doesn't matter if you use completely unrelated metrics for different things. When you want to buy a laptop you know how…

Automobile tires are an interesting case of measurement system compromise - the mounting diameter is measured in inches, but the section width is measured in millimeters. Sidewall height is even stranger - it's represented as a percentage of the section width. Example: 195/60R15 - 15" diameter, 195 mm wide, and 117 mm sidewalls (60% of 195)

To my understanding, diameters are almost always measured in inches, even in countries that follow the metric system.
Post reply on HN