kallend 2,146 #76 June 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhy would you need to know this? Spend a lot of time comparing a few millimeters to thousands of kilometers? ...which is why I rather like dB... ...although it too is a screwed up unit of measurement. decibel. One tenth of a bel. Who the heck uses bels? Quasimodo... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #77 June 18, 2007 Quote"6 of one and half a dozen of the other" That saying has always bothered me. (I bother easy). And now I know who to blame. I think it is supposed to be a way of saying 2 things are the same. But with "other" tacked on the end, it really is not saying that. For example, if I have six of one (let's say 6 chickens), and I have half dozen of the other (let's say 6 cows - but anything "other" than chickens will do), then I DO NOT have the same thing in both counts. The saying should be more like 6 of 1 or a half dozen of the SAME. And THAT is what's wrong with metric." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #78 June 18, 2007 Quotewell first of all... this article is flawed.... mass cannot depends on number of atoms.... there is already a unit of measure for that.... its called a mole....abbreviated mol. and since different atoms of different elements have different weights.... there would be no constant....... secondly the conventional unit of measure is inferior to metric.... especially in a 3 dimensional environment.... when you are dealing with mils and meters converting angles into lengths... arcs.... radii... circles.... complex shapes... it's hard to explain but metric makes many things much easier I think they were saying they would establish a standard for the kilo as measured in atoms of silicon, which should all have the same mass - measured in electron volts. Right? So it makes many things much easier, except for the explaining how it makes things easier?" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #79 June 18, 2007 Quote Quote Who the heck uses bels? Quasimodo WIN!!! Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #80 June 18, 2007 Quote Quote If you want to make these arguments, go after cooking conversions. Milliliters kick the shit out of having to deal with dashes, teaspoons, tablespoons, ounces and fractions of a cup, esp if you don't have a measure for the precise one. And I can never remember which one tspn is - is that a teaspoon or tablespoon? Excellent example. If the recipe calls for 12 ounces of water and all you have are a set of measuring spoons you best know how many spoons of either size to an ounce...or to a cup if you know the conversion factor for that. Of course there is always Grandma who would SHOOT anyone who dared use a measuring device for cooking! How would that be different than working with a recipe that called for 500ml of water and all you had was a 2ml eyedropper? Either way, you are going to toss the measuring spoon or eyedropper aside and eyeball it. And maybe become a better cook for it." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #81 June 18, 2007 QuoteFor example, if I have six of one (let's say 6 chickens), and I have half dozen of the other (let's say 6 cows - but anything "other" than chickens will do), then I DO NOT have the same thing in both counts. The saying should be more like 6 of 1 or a half dozen of the SAME. And THAT is what's wrong with metric. Remind me again, what are the SI units of colloquialism? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #82 June 18, 2007 Quote Quote How many millimeters in 7536 kilometers? Why would you need to know this? For a math test. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #83 June 18, 2007 QuoteQuote Other than math busy work, why would one ask the number of inches in a mile? 5280X12 = 52800 + 10560 = 63360. Not so trivial as 100x1000, but who cares? If you want to make these arguments, go after cooking conversions. Milliliters kick the shit out of having to deal with dashes, teaspoons, tablespoons, ounces and fractions of a cup, esp if you don't have a measure for the precise one. And I can never remember which one tspn is - is that a teaspoon or tablespoon? Real cooks may do it by feel, but for those of us who follow recipes literally, the English system does fail us in everyday life. In most others of measurement (weight/mass, distances), it's nearly irrelevent. Quick - what is Planck's constant in English units? What is the charge on the electron in English units? How is a mole defined in English units? Does it change Avogadro's number? In E=mc^2 what are the correct English units to make the equation work? What is the English unit of magnetic field strength and how is it defined in terms of other English units? As I suggested prior, most people live without doing this sort of math, and the rest have computers. You'll never succeed in getting people to go metric with that argument. I've used none of the constants or equations you list since my second (and last) semester of college physics. FTR, Cal was entirely metric. But they could easily have been Mayan for the relevence now in my life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #84 June 18, 2007 I would just like to point out that all of this could have been avoided if they simply invented the metric system so that a kilogram weighed the same as a pound in the old system. But, noooooo...they had to invent a new weight, and now the master for that weight is decaying....going bye-bye... Then, the transition to metrics could've been easy. Make a kilometer equal a mile, a liter equal a half-gallon and do the division/multiplication from there. So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #85 June 18, 2007 QuoteQuotewell first of all... this article is flawed.... mass cannot depends on number of atoms.... there is already a unit of measure for that.... its called a mole....abbreviated mol. and since different atoms of different elements have different weights.... there would be no constant....... secondly the conventional unit of measure is inferior to metric.... especially in a 3 dimensional environment.... when you are dealing with mils and meters converting angles into lengths... arcs.... radii... circles.... complex shapes... it's hard to explain but metric makes many things much easier I think they were saying they would establish a standard for the kilo as measured in atoms of silicon, which should all have the same mass - measured in electron volts. Right? Nope, not right. Si has three naturally occurring isotopes, with 14 protons, 14, 15 or 16 neutrons, atomic masses and abundances (and variation thereof) as shown. 28Si 14 14 27.9769265325(19) STABLE 92.223%(19) 0.92205-0.92241 29Si 14 15 28.976494700(22) STABLE 4.685%(8) 0.04678-0.04692 30Si 14 16 29.97377017(3) STABLE 3.092(11) 0.03082-0.03102 ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #86 June 19, 2007 I got it! I got it! And I didn't even have to Google it! Quote Quick - what is Planck's constant in English units? 3 board-feet What is the charge on the electron in English units? $1.99/lb How is a mole defined in English units? As a rat. Does it change Avogadro's number? Only when you splash it with lemon and dip it in yor favorite mayo-based sauce. In E=mc^2 what are the correct English units to make the equation work? Ok..you got me there. What is the English unit of magnetic field strength and how is it defined in terms of other English units? 1 mag = the strength needed to close 1 riser cover How'd I do? My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #87 June 19, 2007 QuoteQuick - what is Planck's constant in English units? Planks constant is ugly whether you remember it as ~4.136e-15 eV s or as ~4.134e-27 stone furlong^2 millenia^-1. The only advantage of the former over the latter is that if you're using Plank's constant then you are probably also already using eV and seconds. This is not an advantage of using SI, just an advantage of SI's common usage in certain fields. And we all know how proponents of a more wide-spread use of the metric system feel about using that as an argument in favor of a particular system. I know the Boltzmann constant as -228.6 dBJ/K and while that isn't technically in SI units, it works very nicely with what I use it for without any added conversions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
willard 0 #88 June 19, 2007 Quote Quote Quote If you want to make these arguments, go after cooking conversions. Milliliters kick the shit out of having to deal with dashes, teaspoons, tablespoons, ounces and fractions of a cup, esp if you don't have a measure for the precise one. And I can never remember which one tspn is - is that a teaspoon or tablespoon? Excellent example. If the recipe calls for 12 ounces of water and all you have are a set of measuring spoons you best know how many spoons of either size to an ounce...or to a cup if you know the conversion factor for that. Of course there is always Grandma who would SHOOT anyone who dared use a measuring device for cooking! How would that be different than working with a recipe that called for 500ml of water and all you had was a 2ml eyedropper? Either way, you are going to toss the measuring spoon or eyedropper aside and eyeball it. And maybe become a better cook for it. Aye! One thing is for sure-I can't cook any worse than I already do. If I needed 500 ml of water and all I had was a 2 ml eyedropper I would grab a coffee mug, measure the volume, and use that. 1 ml = 1 mm^3. Try that with teaspoons-tablespoons-ounces-cups-pints-quarts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhys 0 #89 June 19, 2007 Quote But, noooooo...they had to invent a new weight, and now the master for that weight is decaying....going bye-bye... Are you trying to say that there will be no WATER/H2O soon? Water is used for the basis of weights and volume in the metric system. All life depends on water so what better substance to base the calculations on. What is a pound based on? what is a mile comprised of? and don't tell me the unit of feet? oh and feet....isn't that guy dead by now. "When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #90 June 19, 2007 Quote Then, the transition to metrics could've been easy. Make a kilometer equal a mile, a liter equal a half-gallon and do the division/multiplication from there. So would 1m^3 still=1Kl=1^6g of water at standard conditions? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #91 June 19, 2007 Quote1 ml = 1 mm^3 Actually, 1 ml = 1 cm^3 "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #92 June 19, 2007 Quote Water is used for the basis of weights and volume in the metric system. All life depends on water so what better substance to base the calculations on. You mean water of a specific volume at a specific temperature under a specific pressure. In other words . . . something that is completely arbitrary because it is a circular dependancy. SOooooo...they had to change it...which only points out how arbitrary it was to begin with yet again. See; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogramquade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
willard 0 #93 June 19, 2007 QuoteQuote1 ml = 1 mm^3 Actually, 1 ml = 1 cm^3 Actually, your right. My bad. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
willard 0 #94 June 19, 2007 QuoteQuote Water is used for the basis of weights and volume in the metric system. All life depends on water so what better substance to base the calculations on. You mean water of a specific volume at a specific temperature under a specific pressure. In other words . . . something that is completely arbitrary because it is a circular dependancy. SOooooo...they had to change it...which only points out how arbitrary it was to begin with yet again. See; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram Yep. Kilogram is based on H2O at standard atmosphere. Why? Because it is easily duplicated in virtually any lab around the world, thus allowing any competent scientist to establish a standard in his/her lab that is consistent with other labs around the world. From reading some posts it seems any unit of measure that is based on anything is "arbitrary". Units have to be based on something, what better than something found everywhere? Better than a unit of length based on a dead guys thumb. Units based on nothing are, well, ...nothing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #95 June 19, 2007 QuoteIn other words . . . something that is completely arbitrary because it is a circular dependancy. SOooooo...they had to change it...which only points out how arbitrary it was to begin with yet again. So fucking what? If the best objection you have to the SI system is that "it's arbitrary" then you really don't have much of a case, do you?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #96 June 19, 2007 Quote Quote But, noooooo...they had to invent a new weight, and now the master for that weight is decaying....going bye-bye... Are you trying to say that there will be no WATER/H2O soon? Water is used for the basis of weights and volume in the metric system. All life depends on water so what better substance to base the calculations on. What is a pound based on? what is a mile comprised of? and don't tell me the unit of feet? oh and feet....isn't that guy dead by now. I was referring to the article..."...an international hunt to find a new global standard kilogram. Ever since scientists discovered that the current standard -- a bar of platinum and iridium held in a French vault since 1889 -- was slowly deteriorating, the search has been on for a replacement." And I was just ribbing all the pro-metric folks as to redefining the whole system.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #97 June 24, 2007 Quote But building a house, measuring something and breaking it evenly to smaller units. I don't think I understand it. No matter what system you use it's just calculation. A 150ft wood chunk consist of five 30 feet chunks; a 30 meters wood chunk consists of five 6 meters chunks. As long as you use the same unit system consistently, you have no problem. There could be issues if you import something aboard, but the problem here is that there is more than one system, not that imperial system is worse. And it only affects a small percentage of country population. Quote the Imperial system is old and stupid, what is the point of keeping it?............................It costs too much money to change. I would rephrase it differently: it would cost a lot of money with very little (if any) benefits to the country population. Not to mention I cannot imagine a reason for that change, which would sound reasonable - and I came from the metric system country. At least I'm definitely sure that gas prices will not go down just because you measure them in liters.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #98 June 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteIn other words . . . something that is completely arbitrary because it is a circular dependancy. SOooooo...they had to change it...which only points out how arbitrary it was to begin with yet again. So fucking what? If the best objection you have to the SI system is that "it's arbitrary" then you really don't have much of a case, do you? There are just 7 base units (arbitrary quantities, if you will) in the SI system. There are dozens of arbitrary quantities in the Imperial system. How many fathoms in a rod, pole or perch? How many minims in a drachm? How many troy ounces in a hundredweight? How many short tons in a long ton? How many square chains in an acre?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #99 June 25, 2007 Quote There are dozens of arbitrary quantities in the Imperial system. How many fathoms in a rod, pole or perch? How many minims in a drachm? How many troy ounces in a hundredweight? How many short tons in a long ton? How many square chains in an acre? jakee, please don't dodge Kallend's questions in your next post. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #100 June 25, 2007 Quote Quote There are dozens of arbitrary quantities in the Imperial system. How many fathoms in a rod, pole or perch? How many minims in a drachm? How many troy ounces in a hundredweight? How many short tons in a long ton? How many square chains in an acre? jakee, please don't dodge Kallend's questions in your next post. Um, I actually agree with Kallend, the SI system is superior. But, [url http://www.digitaldutch.com/unitconverter/]since you asked...[url]Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
