Centrigrade Versus Fahrenheit - Which Is Better?

[bob.dino 1]

ryoder

I think he was referring to the fact that a degree in C is only 5/9 the range of a degree in F.

Wrong way 'round.

40 F = 4.44 C
41 F = 5 C
21 F = 5.56 C

4 C = 39.2 F
5 C = 41 F
6 C = 42.8 F

For every degree F, you move ~0.6 C. For every degree C, you move 1 C. Therefore a integer F scale is more precise than an integer C scale.


For a 3 digit display, here are the max and mins:

Celcius: -99 C to 999 C
Fahrenheit: -99 F to 999 F, which is -72.78 C to 537.22 C

So, a 3-digit celcius LCD has a greater range of temperatures than a 3-digit fahrenheit LCD.

[quade 4]

Remster

Quote

It's LESS accurate if using integers.

Paul, if you're going to have a discussion with engineers, at least try and use the correct terminology.

It's less precise. Not less accurate.

Whoa, whoa, whoa... I was just following his lead on this and didn't want to confuse anyone by changing the word. Here's what HE said, "(And a three digit C display gives you MUCH better accuracy than a three digit F display.)"

Bold and italics mine.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[lawrocket 3]

quade

***The only measurement that makes any sense at all is absolute zero. But then it's also arbitrary since, according to the laws of thermodynamics, absolute zero cannot be reached.

How you go up from there is going to be arbitrary.

Negative. That's like saying the speed of light is arbitrary. No. It's a universal constant.

Kallend covered my point. It's not how high you can go but the graduations one wants to use.

Also: speed of light is a different measurement. That one is easy. One can go from zero relative motion to speed of light relative motion. How one wishes to graduate that difference is going to be arbitrary. We actually have had warp scale used in science fiction for a long time. And we use "light year" as a measurement of distance. I think as a measurement it's about as sensible as one gets, so long as one considers "year" to be reasonable.

But warp scale for anybody today is lilke Mach scale 70 years ago. It's useless to anybody in terms of practical application.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,113]

It's an interesting question of how to communicate the temperature, of say, a human body to an extra-galactic intelligence with whom we have established communication but about whose biochemistry we know nothing - maybe not carbon/water based (assuming we had mastered sub-space (TM) superluminal communication).

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[quade 4]

Mmmm... No.

Kallend was talking about the redefinition of Kelvin. I'm not. Kelvin's unit is not based on the triple point of water; it's loosely based on Celsius and only used the triple point of water (or his understanding of it at the time) as a point along the scale, but not the unit itself.

It's kind of like how the meter is fucked up.

The meter was supposed to be 1/10,000,000th the distance from the equator to the north pole. Well, obviously that's fucked up for a whole lot of reasons, but chiefly because the French Academy of Sciences didn't exactly know how far that was to begin with. Beyond that it's arbitrary in multiple ways; why 10,000,000? Why base something on the size of the planet? Why further base it on 1/4th the distance around it? It's completely arbitrary and pretty much only so it comes vaguely close to the more familiar yet equally arbitrary yard.

SO, when talking about Kelvin . . . again . . . it was fucked up from the very beginning and is now defined as having zero at absolute zero and 273.16 the triple point of water. Well, obviously that's just fucking stupid.

So, while I appreciate what Kallend was attempting to say, I dismissed it out of hand until you brought it up as simply side-show nonsense, but since you've pushed the matter I thought I'd clarify how close yet utterly fail I think Kelvin is as well.

My example (not proposal, simply an example) having the triple point of water is, in fact, an absolute. It should be the same for all civilizations across the entire known universe. Where my example fails is there is no guarantee anyone else in the universe values (places an importance upon) water the same way we do.

As for speed, relative motion, and the speed of light. The speed of light will be undeniably recognized as a universal constant throughout the known universe. Traveling at 0.001% of the speed of light will also be the same anywhere.

As for "warp speed" please...

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[lawrocket 3]

Come on, Paul. Warp speed is generally recognized as a handle for the speed of light in our culture. It's why I put it out there. Like speed of sound is "mach." Or the maximum level of nausea is listed a 1 Garn unit (which actually isn't as arbitrary as one may think).

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[ryoder 1,590]

lawrocket

Or the maximum level of nausea is listed a 1 Garn unit (which actually isn't as arbitrary as one may think).

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[muff528 3]

kallend

It's an interesting question of how to communicate the temperature, of say, a human body to an extra-galactic intelligence with whom we have established communication but about whose biochemistry we know nothing - maybe not carbon/water based (assuming we had mastered sub-space (TM) superluminal communication).

Maybe define a scale with absolute zero at the lower end. We could try to establish a higher end by describing the resulting temperature of a closed, specifically defined system caused by some "universally" known quantum process acting within that system over a certain period of time. Then we could express human body temperature as a fraction of the difference between those points.

[turtlespeed 226]

kallend

It's an interesting question of how to communicate the temperature, of say, a human body to an extra-galactic intelligence with whom we have established communication but about whose biochemistry we know nothing - maybe not carbon/water based (assuming we had mastered sub-space (TM) superluminal communication).

Maybe they don't care and will eat us like sashimi.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[muff528 3]

They're prolly way too far away to actually meet the meat.

[rehmwa 2]

quade

Where my example fails is there is no guarantee anyone else in the universe values (places an importance upon) water the same way we do....

I like this,,,,,for this planet. Or use a triple point or phase change of something more universally common.




Or.....0-1 (absolute cold, to absolute hot (Planck))
since absolute hot is WAY THE HELL (see what I did there?) out there, maybe do it on a log scale or something though....

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

turtlespeed

***
It's an interesting question of how to communicate the temperature, of say, a human body to an extra-galactic intelligence with whom we have established communication but about whose biochemistry we know nothing - maybe not carbon/water based (assuming we had mastered sub-space (TM) superluminal communication).

Maybe they don't care and will eat us like sashimi.

We Have a lot of contaminants. It's likely best to only eat use once a month or so. You know, like treat or night out kinda thing.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[turtlespeed 226]

rehmwa

******
It's an interesting question of how to communicate the temperature, of say, a human body to an extra-galactic intelligence with whom we have established communication but about whose biochemistry we know nothing - maybe not carbon/water based (assuming we had mastered sub-space (TM) superluminal communication).

Maybe they don't care and will eat us like sashimi.

We Have a lot of contaminants. It's likely best to only eat use once a month or so. You know, like treat or night out kinda thing.

Plus - you wouldn't want to run out.

We are a delicacy, you know.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[ryoder 1,590]

turtlespeed

*********
It's an interesting question of how to communicate the temperature, of say, a human body to an extra-galactic intelligence with whom we have established communication but about whose biochemistry we know nothing - maybe not carbon/water based (assuming we had mastered sub-space (TM) superluminal communication).

Maybe they don't care and will eat us like sashimi.

We Have a lot of contaminants. It's likely best to only eat use once a month or so. You know, like treat or night out kinda thing.

Plus - you wouldn't want to run out.

We are a delicacy, you know.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[Arvoitus 1]

quade

Mmmm... No.

Kallend was talking about the redefinition of Kelvin. I'm not. Kelvin's unit is not based on the triple point of water; it's loosely based on Celsius and only used the triple point of water (or his understanding of it at the time) as a point along the scale, but not the unit itself.

It's kind of like how the meter is fucked up.

The meter was supposed to be 1/10,000,000th the distance from the equator to the north pole. Well, obviously that's fucked up for a whole lot of reasons, but chiefly because the French Academy of Sciences didn't exactly know how far that was to begin with. Beyond that it's arbitrary in multiple ways; why 10,000,000? Why base something on the size of the planet? Why further base it on 1/4th the distance around it? It's completely arbitrary and pretty much only so it comes vaguely close to the more familiar yet equally arbitrary yard.

Because at that time the world was filled with completely arbitrary measuring systems, like the yard, which is/was based on the current ruling King/Queen of Englands body measurements. So the French decided that they'd need a system that was based on something non-political and unchanging that all countries could accept. So they chose to use the earth as the reference.

The reason they used 1/4th distance is because the Paris meridian passes through two towns/cities in Europe of which they could measure the distance in between and then calculate the total distance of the meridian. So basically for practical reasons. And I think there was some sort of war going on so they had to ensure the surveyors had safe access for their work.

The reason for the 10 million is that one of person involved in the project had a huge hard on for decimation and was pushing the decimation of time to become a standard. So he basically wanted to replace the base-60 system with a base-100 system.

Your rights end where my feelings begin.

[kallend 2,113]

Arvoitus

The reason for the 10 million is that one of person involved in the project had a huge hard on for decimation and was pushing the decimation of time to become a standard. So he basically wanted to replace the base-60 system with a base-100 system.

I don't think "decimation" is the word you are looking for.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,080]

>Wut?

Let's say you are displaying temperatures that people generally work with - say between -30F and +120F. Which provides more accuracy in three available digits:

102F
38.9C

(I've dealt with this because I've designed a few controllers for homebrewing applications - and degrees C often makes more sense than F, simply because you can get more accuracy out of 2 or 3 available digits.)

[rehmwa 2]

kallend

***

The reason for the 10 million is that one of person involved in the project had a huge hard on for decimation and was pushing the decimation of time to become a standard. So he basically wanted to replace the base-60 system with a base-100 system.

I don't think "decimation" is the word you are looking for.

well, it is NOW.

much more exciting to have our thermal units based on destruction standards

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[quade 4]

billvon

>Wut?

Let's say you are displaying temperatures that people generally work with - say between -30F and +120F. Which provides more accuracy in three available digits:

102F
38.9C

(I've dealt with this because I've designed a few controllers for homebrewing applications - and degrees C often makes more sense than F, simply because you can get more accuracy out of 2 or 3 available digits.)

Mmmm...let me see if this is actually a true statement. I bet it's not. Let's see how we do!

From -30°F to -10°F both scales would require three digits; the sign, tens, units, tenths. (I'm tossing the decimal point for free since a lot of displays do.) However, Fahrenheit is more precise since it has finer gradations. So score 20 points in favor of F.

From -9.99°F to 9.99°F the Fahrenheit scale has the ability to show an entire order of magnitude better precision compared to Centigrade. So let's score that at +19.8 to the F scale for a total of 39.8 points.

From 10°F to 14°F it's back to being a wash digit wise, but those points go to F, so score 4 more points to F for a total of 43.8

From 15°F to 50°F Centigrade wins. So let's score that as a whopping 35 to C. So the score is 43.8 F to 35 C.

From 50.1°F to 99.9°F Fahrenheit is more precise. F scores 49.8 more points for a total of 93.6 to C's 35.

And in the range from 100 to 120 C wins 20 points.

Final score 93.6 Fahrenheit to 55 Centigrade.

Fahrenheit wins the temperature precision race in the range of -30 to +120.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Guest]

Is this for real? I started a thread four years ago and it's like a zombie! Hahaha!
.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[quade 4]

markharju

Is this for real? I started a thread four years ago and it's like a zombie! Hahaha!
.

Hey, man. I'm not the one who necroed it.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[ControlFreak 0]

Ah, I see what you mean but let's be careful of the distinction between accuracy and resolution.

Alcohol never really solved any problems. But then again, neither did milk.

[rehmwa 2]

quade

Mmmm...let me see if this is actually a true statement. I bet it's not. Let's see how we do!
.
.
.
.
.
Fahrenheit wins the temperature precision race in the range of -30 to +120.

normally I'd mock you for that and suggest an extra girlfriend and some hobbies....or even use that extra energy and time to fight crime.

But I clearly can't because that was just plain cool.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 2,113]

quade

***>Wut?

Let's say you are displaying temperatures that people generally work with - say between -30F and +120F. Which provides more accuracy in three available digits:

102F
38.9C

(I've dealt with this because I've designed a few controllers for homebrewing applications - and degrees C often makes more sense than F, simply because you can get more accuracy out of 2 or 3 available digits.)

Mmmm...let me see if this is actually a true statement. I bet it's not. Let's see how we do!

From -30°F to -10°F both scales would require three digits; the sign, tens, units, tenths. (I'm tossing the decimal point for free since a lot of displays do.) However, Fahrenheit is more precise since it has finer gradations. So score 20 points in favor of F.

From -9.99°F to 9.99°F the Fahrenheit scale has the ability to show an entire order of magnitude better precision compared to Centigrade. So let's score that at +19.8 to the F scale for a total of 39.8 points.

From 10°F to 14°F it's back to being a wash digit wise, but those points go to F, so score 4 more points to F for a total of 43.8

From 15°F to 50°F Centigrade wins. So let's score that as a whopping 35 to C. So the score is 43.8 F to 35 C.

From 50.1°F to 99.9°F Fahrenheit is more precise. F scores 49.8 more points for a total of 93.6 to C's 35.

And in the range from 100 to 120 C wins 20 points.

Final score 93.6 Fahrenheit to 55 Centigrade.

Fahrenheit wins the temperature precision race in the range of -30 to +120.

But what if you want a furnace controller that goes to 1,000C? (we have a bunch in our labs).

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[quade 4]

What if it goes to 11?

A person might be able to pick and choose specific numbers (break points) where Centigrade may be the winner, but overall I think you'll find that's not the case.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver