It's time for the US to use the metric system • Hacker News Board

Re: It's time for the US to use the metric system

#191

Post by gcb0 » Sat, May 31, 2014, 10:18 AM UTC

krschultz wrote: post #177

gcb0 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your point? I also try to only use metric in the us, and a m3 Tap and bolts is cheaper than whatever silly fraction equivalent even buying from.consumer stores here. So, yeah, the economics of all this is crazy.. But i think the point is to improve it even more by removing the odd ones entirely.

That if the only country on earth making things in imperial was the US, there would be a greater economic incentive for the US to switch. Since that is not the case, and many countries are producing imperial parts, a lot of the supposed benefits of switching listed in all of these articles are simply not real. If there really were high costs imposed by sticking with the imperial system, someone would be making a busi…

i doubt any of that is practicality issues. it is 100% politics shenanigans.

the first politic to even hint at that will have the ugliest political death in us history.

because america fuck yeah.

Re: It's time for the US to use the metric system

#192

Post by jacquesm » Sat, May 31, 2014, 10:36 AM UTC

Someone wrote: post #176

talideon wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We here in Ireland decided to move away from dual use of units (miles and km) to just km a few years back. Sure, we're not a big country, but we also have more road per capita than anywhere else in the EU at the very least. Given within a relatively short amount of time, the use of miles for non-trivial distances practically disappeared. Now it's only used in colloquialisms (e.g. "it's a few miles away") or for famil…

I think you can forget that "sooner" part. Colloquialisms are very, very, stubborn. For example, German and Dutch still have the word "ellenlang" ( http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ellenlang ), literally "ells long", but typically used to describe durations (a long boring talk can be 'ellenlang'), even though the meter has been the unit of length for almost two centuries. Similarly, "miles long" is still in use for long…

They still exist but fewer and fewer people even know the origins of those words.

Re: It's time for the US to use the metric system

#193

Post by jacquesm » Sat, May 31, 2014, 10:50 AM UTC

PythonicAlpha wrote: post #131

I think, even, when the US is changing to the metric system, the bigger problem will still linger around (and when I have hope for the the metric system, I don't have any for that): How on earth can we make the British driving on the "right" side of the street.

The list of jurisdictions that drives on the left hand side is quite a bit longer than 'the British'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-_and_left-hand_traffic#Ju...

Lists 76 jurisdictions and includes Japan, Pakistan, India, Australia and a host of other large countries.

Re: It's time for the US to use the metric system

#194

Post by sjwright » Sat, May 31, 2014, 2:16 PM UTC

Kroem3r wrote: post #153

sjwright wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

America is like the fat kid who's the last to jump into the swimming pool; everyone else is shouting the water is fine, it's warm, it's fun, but you're sitting there worried about the consequences of being wet. As if you were the first person to ever get wet. You don't need to be careful. Just look at everyone else who jumped in without injury and jump yourself.

Yep. Nope. You've outed yourself in an unfortunate way. Everyone wants to do business in the US and everyone is prepared to jump through the hoops to do that business. US regulation accomplishes a bunch of things, including adding friction to non-US companies doing business in the US.

With that hyperbole, I'm willing to bet you've never stepped a foot outside the USA. Don't you realise it also adds friction for US companies doing business in the everywhere else?

Re: It's time for the US to use the metric system

#195

Post by lispm » Sat, May 31, 2014, 4:26 PM UTC

pmontra wrote: post #168

lispm wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also see centimeter for TV screens here in Germany. Example: LED TV, 98 cm (39 Zoll), Full HD, 100 Hz, DVB-T2/-C/-S2, Piano-schwarz

Great, maybe it will spread to other countries :-) Actually I'd like to see the actual width of the screen (bezel included) rather than the diagonal, which is pretty useless. It's to the width that I've been looking at recently when I wanted to know which TV fits into the space I have for it.

I needed the height, recently.

Re: It's time for the US to use the metric system

#196

Post by talideon » Sat, May 31, 2014, 5:00 PM UTC

Turing_Machine wrote: post #188

talideon wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not part of the metric system, simply based on it. The 1:sqrt(2) ratio used is extremely convenient as it scales up and down nicely, and the other series are such that an Ax sheet fits nicely into a Cx envelope, and a Cx sheet fits nicely into a Bx envelope.

How are factors of 2 and sqrt(2) "based on metric"? At some level you could say that the U.S. measurements are "based on metric" since almost all of them are defined in terms of metric units. You just have to apply the proper factor (which is a decimal, but a terminating one --- unlike the sqrt(2) business).

I never wrote that the factors were based on metric. ISO paper sizes are based off of an A0 sheet having an area of 1m². That's it.

The 1:sqrt(2) ratio has to do with subdivision. An A0 sheet subdivides into two A1 sheets, which subdivides into two A2 sheets, and so on. 1:sqrt(2) width/height ratio used in ISO pages sizes allows this, which makes dealing with paper significantly easier when it comes to slicing up pages, folding, packing, &c.

Re: It's time for the US to use the metric system

#197

Post by talideon » Sat, May 31, 2014, 5:07 PM UTC

Turing_Machine wrote: post #190

Turing_Machine wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are factors of 2 and sqrt(2) "based on metric"? At some level you could say that the U.S. measurements are "based on metric" since almost all of them are defined in terms of metric units. You just have to apply the proper factor (which is a decimal, but a terminating one --- unlike the sqrt(2) business).

By that standard, the U.S. liquid measures could also be described as "metric". 2 cups->pint, 2 pints->quart, 2 quarts->pottle (rarely used, more commonly called a "half gallon"), 2 pottles->gallon.

You appear not to understand the actual utility behind the page width/height ratio used in ISO/DIN page sizes.

Also, the word "metric" has a very precise meaning: that of being part of the internationally agreed system of decimal measurements. The thing you've mentioned don't fit that definition, and US customary units are simply defined in _terms_ of metric units, but are not metric units themselves.

Re: It's time for the US to use the metric system

#198

Post by astrodust » Sat, May 31, 2014, 5:30 PM UTC

smackfu wrote: post #149

astrodust wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kelvin starts at 0°. There's a maximum temperature but it's really stupidly hot, where the particles are accelerated to nearly light speed because of thermal energy. The temperature of the sun would be 0.00000000000000002° in your crazy system.

I was joking, Fahrenheit is basically setting zero to the lowest temperature most people run into outside, and 100 to the highest temperature run into outside, in Europe.

So Spain's not part of Europe? They push up over 100°F there on a fairly regular basis.

0 through 100 is really just a part-time thing at best.

In °C the same thing plays out as somewhere between -40°C and 40°C where at the bottom of the scale it's really cold and at the top it's really hot.

Plus it follows the simple rule of "negative numbers mean ice outside" which is important from so many perspectives. That makes a lot more intuitive sense than "numbers under 32".

Re: It's time for the US to use the metric system

#199

Post by astrodust » Sat, May 31, 2014, 5:32 PM UTC

smackfu wrote: post #147

astrodust wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has benefits, like it works perfectly with Metric, where Fahrenheit is based on arbitrary numbers that have nothing to do with anything else. A 1x1x1 cm cube of water at 20°C weighs 1 gram and has a volume of 1mL. Temperature, weight, and volume are interlinked this way.

What is that 20°C? Why is that a better number than 68°F? I'm not arguing against metric in general, I'm arguing that the temperature part of it is just kind of thrown in there because they were both used in France.

It has nothing to do with France. Save your "Freedom Fries" outrage for something more deserving.

I think anyone, given a choice, would pick a simple, round number like 20 over something wacky like 68.

Re: It's time for the US to use the metric system

#200

Post by Gravityloss » Sat, May 31, 2014, 5:46 PM UTC

The article doesn't go far enough in showing the genius of the SI system (known as metric system most of the time).

The conversion factor between mechanical values in the SI system is 1.

Example:

  E = F * delta_x
  = m_1 * a * delta_x
  = 0.5 * m_2 * v^2


  Energy = 1 J 
  = 1 kg * m^2/s^2
  = 1 N * 1 m      // Force: 1 Newton applied for 1 meter distance
  = 1 kg * 1 m/s^2 * 1 m // Acceleration: 1 kg accelerated at 1 m/s for a distance of 1 m
  = 0.5 * 2 kg * (1 m/s)^2 // Velocity: 2 kg accelerated from stand still to 1 m/s velocity

So you can see that no magic factors popped up at any point. This is because the SI system describes the real world very well: for example mass and force are rigorously defined units and can not be used interchangeably.