I feel like the title should qualify that this is 16degF
Not 16 degrees Fahrenheit, but rather, 16 Fahrenheit degrees.
Is it cupfuls or cupsful?
Impossibly thin fabric could cool you down by 16-plus degrees
21–30 of 106 posts
Re: Impossibly thin fabric could cool you down by 16-plus degrees
#22I feel like the title should qualify that this is 16degF
The article was written for an American audience. I feel like if you went to a French article and it said "12 degrees" you would know to convert that to Fahrenheit, if you needed. And that's an even less common situation than second-language English speakers ending up on American articles.
How come specifically American, and how'd you reach that conclusion from glancing at the site? A huge number of people speak English as a second language. Usually the notation follows the number, so it's kind of lazy to just say it's written for americans specifically - moreso as a counter to someone saying it's Farenheit instead of Celcius since I also clicked immediately thinking how is that possible.
Re: Impossibly thin fabric could cool you down by 16-plus degrees
#23There have been a lot of such materials over the years, but for some strange reason, none of them ever gets commercialized. We could have been using them all over the place, on all surfaces that expose to sunlight, but they're nowhere to be found.
It said they compared it to “broadband emitter fabric” which sounds like it is commercialized? I don’t know what the common name for that is though.
Re: Impossibly thin fabric could cool you down by 16-plus degrees
#24If the difference between two numbers in Celsius is Kelvin, what unit is the difference between two numbers in Fahrenheit?
Re: Impossibly thin fabric could cool you down by 16-plus degrees
#25If the difference between two numbers in Celsius is Kelvin, what unit is the difference between two numbers in Fahrenheit?
Rankine.
Re: Impossibly thin fabric could cool you down by 16-plus degrees
#26I feel like the title should qualify that this is 16degF
Not 16 degrees Fahrenheit, but rather, 16 Fahrenheit degrees.
There is support for the OP's statement, in the case of Celsius at least [0], emphasis mine:
> Because of this dual usage, one must not rely upon the unit name or its symbol to denote that a quantity is a temperature interval; it must be unambiguous through context or explicit statement that the quantity is an interval. This is sometimes solved by using the symbol °C (pronounced "degrees Celsius") for a temperature, and C° (pronounced "Celsius degrees") for a temperature interval, although this usage is non-standard. Another way to express the same is "40 °C ± 3 K", which can be commonly found in literature.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celsius#Temperatures_and_inter...
Re: Impossibly thin fabric could cool you down by 16-plus degrees
#27I feel like the title should qualify that this is 16degF
I feel like the title should qualify th at this is 4⁰F. It gets up to 16 versus more insulating fabric. I'm sure it is even more "cooling" compared to my winter jacket.
It's 16F better than silk which is pretty breathable and not really all that insulating. It's probably better compared to cotton. It's 4F better than performance fabric for athletics which is probably a decent standin for best available cooling fabric for regular people.
Re: Impossibly thin fabric could cool you down by 16-plus degrees
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article was written for an American audience. I feel like if you went to a French article and it said "12 degrees" you would know to convert that to Fahrenheit, if you needed. And that's an even less common situation than second-language English speakers ending up on American articles.
How come specifically American, and how'd you reach that conclusion from glancing at the site? A huge number of people speak English as a second language. Usually the notation follows the number, so it's kind of lazy to just say it's written for americans specifically - moreso as a counter to someone saying it's Farenheit instead of Celcius since I also clicked immediately thinking how is that possible.
> how'd you reach that conclusion from glancing at the site?
The first clue is the date, which is mm—dd-yyyy, only really used in the US.
Also, while not “from glancing”, the article speaks in the context of heat in US cities.
But yes, the author is likely taking for granted that non-US residents would read the article.
Re: Impossibly thin fabric could cool you down by 16-plus degrees
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article was written for an American audience. I feel like if you went to a French article and it said "12 degrees" you would know to convert that to Fahrenheit, if you needed. And that's an even less common situation than second-language English speakers ending up on American articles.
How come specifically American, and how'd you reach that conclusion from glancing at the site? A huge number of people speak English as a second language. Usually the notation follows the number, so it's kind of lazy to just say it's written for americans specifically - moreso as a counter to someone saying it's Farenheit instead of Celcius since I also clicked immediately thinking how is that possible.
> with particularly dangerous temperatures forecasted for cities such as Chicago, New York, and Boston
> A heat dome that descended on Portland, Oregon,
> FastCompany is an American company
American companies tend to write for American audiences, especially when the article leads off with a bunch of American anecdotes.
If it was fastcompany.co.uk and it started off writing about how dangerous temperatures were going to be in London, and Liverpool, I would have assumed it was British.
The "intended audience" isn't just "people who can speak this language", and there are plenty of other context clues other than just "it's in English"
Re: Impossibly thin fabric could cool you down by 16-plus degrees
#30"impossibly thin" sounds a lot like "very fragile and therefore completely impractical for things that you want fabrics for". Or maybe we now want to fill the world and coat our bodies in nanoscale plastic and silver dust?
> very fragile
Thin can always be made thicker by adding layers, but thick cannot similarly be made thinner. Thin is a feature.