Once again proving the inadequacy of the metric system!

[quade 4]

Quote

...but that some people have simply too much slothful intolerance of change to convert to the world standard.

Oh dear. It's not a "world" standard any more than driving on the right side of the road is or HDTV is.

Metric is simply "a" standard.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Calvin19 0]

Quote

Quote

...but that some people have simply too much slothful intolerance of change to convert to the world standard.

Oh dear. It's not a "world" standard" any more than driving on the right side of the road is or HDTV is.

Metric is simply "a" standard.

Standard:adj-commonly used or supplied.
adj-established or well-known or widely recognized as a model of authority.

in a world view, by definition, the standard would be metric.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

I have pretty much ignored this thread, but I live in a mixture of the metric world and the imperial world. Metric makes a lot of sense when you think of temperatures. Water freezes at 0C and boils at 100C. What's with this nonsense that water freezes at 32F and boils at 212F. Who came up with that utter nonsense? I have no problems with the base 10 metric system when it comes to temperatures, distances, speeds, etc, etc etc ... but one place where I have to admit I do not pay much attention to is weight. I have no idea how many kilograms I weigh. But I do know my semi-fat ass's weight in pounds. Oh and a football field is 100 yards long, unless of course you are talking about a Canadian Football field, which is 110 yards long (WTF who decided we needed the extra 10 yards except I guess a 110 yard field fits better into a 100 meters ... haha).

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[billvon 3,107]

>in a world view, by definition, the standard would be metric.

Well, the world standard for altitude is height in feet (all pilots, worldwide, use feet.) The world standard for pressure is inches of mercury (pilots again.) Knot is the worldwide measure of speed for nautical applications, and nautical mile is the accepted measure of distance.

So if you want to use a true world standard, those would be your units for speed, distance and altitude.

[Calvin19 0]

Quote

It's not a "world" standard any more than driving on the right side of the road is or HDTV is.

Metric is simply "a" standard.

not standard: adj-varying from or not adhering to a standard.

Based on current calculations, research shows that more people in the world read or understand the Harry Potter book series' fictional currency "Galleons" and "Sickles", than there is people in the world using the US imperial system.

[Calvin19 0]

Quote

>in a world view, by definition, the standard would be metric.

Well, the world standard for altitude is height in feet (all pilots, worldwide, use feet.) The world standard for pressure is inches of mercury (pilots again.) Knot is the worldwide measure of speed for nautical applications, and nautical mile is the accepted measure of distance.

So if you want to use a true world standard, those would be your units for speed, distance and altitude.

WRONG. This is the AVIATION standard units. NOT the world standard units.

Metrication is also taking in the measurements of fuel and cargo loading. I bet that feet (for altitude) will be used in aviation for a long time.

Distance, used in arc seconds of earth for nautical miles, is outdated, but has a firm grasp in navigation of almost all types.

[billvon 3,107]

>WRONG. This is the AVIATION standard units. NOT the world standard units.

Aviation and maritime navigation. And unless you are referring to, say, Pathfinder or Spirit, those are indeed world standards, approved by world aviation and navigation authorities. Try flying anywhere in the world and reporting your altitude in meters; you'll likely get a reminder to use standard units.

[Calvin19 0]

Quote

>WRONG. This is the AVIATION standard units. NOT the world standard units.

Aviation and maritime navigation. And unless you are referring to, say, Pathfinder or Spirit, those are indeed world standards, approved by world aviation and navigation authorities. Try flying anywhere in the world and reporting your altitude in meters; you'll likely get a reminder to use standard units.

I am a commercial pilot, of course I use feet. Better speak english as well.

[Calvin19 0]

The Gimli Glider is a pretty famous plane crash, on the same note as this thread.

-SPACE-

[billvon 3,107]

>The Gimli Glider is a pretty famous plane crash, on the same note as this thread.

Yep. And had they stuck to Imperial units, it would never have happened.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Anyone who thinks Imperial units are more convenient is just ignorant of the realities of 21st Century technology.

The corollary of which is, anyone that thinks the metric system is superior because several of its units are base 10 or hold some universal truth about the universe is naive.

Inches to feet....1/12
Inches to yards...1/36
Inches to miles...1/63360
Feet to yards...1/3
Feet to miles...1/5280
Yards to miles...1/1760

OR

mm to cm...move the decimal one place
mm to meters...move it three places
mm to km...move it six places

Yep, imperial is SOOOOOOO much easier. No advantage at all to using metric.
Fact is, metric IS superior because it is base ten.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[quade 4]

Quote

Fact is, metric IS superior because it is base ten.

Then why are only SOME of the units base 10? Where is your base 10 watch? Where is your base 10 calendar? Where is your base 10 compass?

What -exactly- makes base 10 so special? Why not binary?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Calvin19 0]

Quote

Quote

Fact is, metric IS superior because it is base ten.

Then why are only SOME of the units base 10? Where is your base 10 watch? Where is your base 10 calendar? Where is your base 10 compass?

What -exactly- makes base 10 so special? Why not binary?

Time is based on the mathematic properties of physics and geometry. As is direction. Calendars are based on solar cycles and other astronomical observable properties.

NEITHER of these are metric or imperial.

It seems you are trying try distract from your leaking theory by citing an irrelevant conclusion. (red herring argument).

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Fact is, metric IS superior because it is base ten.

Then why are only SOME of the units base 10? Where is your base 10 watch? Where is your base 10 calendar? Where is your base 10 compass?

What -exactly- makes base 10 so special? Why not binary?

What makes base 10 so special? Nothing except it enables conversions merely by moving a decimal.
Not everything has to be metric. Where is your imperial watch or calendar? Where is your imperial compass?
But the one thing that makes metric so much better than imperial is that it actually uses a base, and a consistent one at that. Imperial? Inches are base 12...unless you convert to miles then its a base 63360. Ounces are base 16 only if converting to pints or pounds. Then pints are base 8 in gallons.....
Binary is a method of expressing a quantity. It can only be used to keep track of the quantity of units.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Fact is, metric IS superior because it is base ten.

Then why are only SOME of the units base 10? Where is your base 10 watch? Where is your base 10 calendar? Where is your base 10 compass?

What -exactly- makes base 10 so special? Why not binary?

Time is based on the mathematic properties of physics and geometry. As is direction. Calendars are based on solar cycles and other astronomical observable properties.

NEITHER of these are metric or imperial.

It seems you are trying try distract from your leaking theory by citing an irrelevant conclusion. (red herring argument).

No. You are completely wrong.

Time is a completely arbitrary construct. It doesn't matter one whit whether or not there are 24 or 10 hours in a day. Metric time is 100% possible, but there is no way in hell that's going to gain any traction soon. (Nor has it been suggested as part of SI.)

Likewise, direction is also an arbitrary construct. If you wanted to divide it up into 100 units, that too would be perfectly fine, but again, that's not gaining traction any time soon. (Nor has it been suggested as part of SI.)

We could absolutely have 10 day weeks. There is nothing that would prevent that on a calendar except religious outcries. We'd end up with an annual 1/2 week, but so what? As it is we have months of various lengths that are completely arbitrary in their allocation.

No. There's nothing particularly special about any of this except a traditional view of what works in everyday life, but that's the exact point where claiming SI has some superiority fails miserably. The base units were arbitrarily chosen to approximate units already considered standard.

That's simply change for change sake and not "better."

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Fact is, metric IS superior because it is base ten.

Then why are only SOME of the units base 10? Where is your base 10 watch? Where is your base 10 calendar? Where is your base 10 compass?

What -exactly- makes base 10 so special? Why not binary?

What makes base 10 so special? Nothing except it enables conversions merely by moving a decimal.

Guess what happens if you use any other base numbering system; the exact same thing.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Calvin19 0]

Dude, time is not measured in US imperial units or metric.

It is irrelevent.

However, it would help our (the metrication supporters) in that it is the World standard in time measurement, and arguably everyone uses it.

[quade 4]

Quote

However, it would help our (the metrication supporters) in that it is the World standard in time measurement, and arguably everyone uses it.

Oh dear, dear no. "The World" uses any one of a number of different calendars and time standards. Hell, some of them can't even agree on when "Daylight Saving Time" begins or ends let alone what to even call it. Some entire countries are 1/2 hour out of sync with UTC. A couple are 15 minutes fast or slow! Hell, we have one state in the US that isn't even in sync with half of itself some of the time.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Calvin19 0]

Quote

but that's the exact point where claiming SI has some superiority fails miserably.

Do I have to quote your original accusation?

The only evidence of superiority for either unit of measurement is the expanse and prevalence of it's use.

And yes, you're right. Time and direction are based on nothing. I had gone backwards in my mind through my schooling and arrived at a backwards assumption.
I was thinking arcsecond-NM/blah.

trying to sound smart is taxing me. I admit the only superior quality in Si is that it is called Si and everyone else on the GOD DAMNED planet uses it.

you metrication naysayers are just mad the french came up with it.

[Calvin19 0]

Quote

Hell, we have one state in the US that isn't even in sync with half of itself some of the time.

I bet we could agree on getting rid of time zones then huh

GMT worldwide. done.

[Calvin19 0]

Quote

Quote

However, it would help our (the metrication supporters) in that it is the World standard in time measurement, and arguably everyone uses it.

Oh dear, dear no. "The World" uses any one of a number of different calendars and time standards. Hell, some of them can't even agree on when "Daylight Saving Time" begins or ends let alone what to even call it. Some entire countries are 1/2 hour out of sync with UTC. A couple are 15 minutes fast or slow! Hell, we have one state in the US that isn't even in sync with half of itself some of the time.

you are not talking about time measurement here, but a base time. Local time. All the measurements are the same. A meter is a meter is a thousandth of a kilometer no matter where it starts. (just like an hour is an hour, in Hawaii or Greenwich.)

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Fact is, metric IS superior because it is base ten.

Then why are only SOME of the units base 10? Where is your base 10 watch? Where is your base 10 calendar? Where is your base 10 compass?

What -exactly- makes base 10 so special? Why not binary?

What makes base 10 so special? Nothing except it enables conversions merely by moving a decimal.

Guess what happens if you use any other base numbering system; the exact same thing.

You missed the point, which was that the metric system uses the same base all the way through...base ten, the same sytem used by almost everybody in their everyday lives to quantify.
Imperial system, on the other hand, uses an at times complex mix of bases and units. (An ounce? Ok...Volume or force?)

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[billvon 3,107]

>Yep, imperial is SOOOOOOO much easier.

In some ways it certainly is!

Let's say you have that hated yard of material - cloth, paper, whatever. Let's say you want to divide it into equal strips.

Divide it in half? 18 inches each.
In three pieces? 12 inches.
Four pieces? 9 inches.
Five pieces? That one's a bit awkward. 7.2 inches.
Six pieces? 6 inches.


Now let's try it with a meter of material.

Divide it in half? 50 centimeters
In three pieces? Awkward. 33.33333 centimeters. Where's the .3333 gradation on that tape measure?
Four pieces? 25 centimeters.
Five pieces? 20 centimeters.
Six pieces? Awkward! 16.66666 centimeters.

There are advantages of using numbers that are easily divisible to people with standard measuring tools.

That's the reason there are 360 degrees in a compass instead of ten (or 100.) You can divide 360 by 2,3,4,5,6,8,9,10,12,15 or 18 and get a whole number. If you're designing a lighthouse and want 10 panes of glass along the circumference (or 12, or 15) it makes the process much easier.

Compare that to 100, which only has 2, 4, 5, 10 and 20 as whole number divisors.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

>Yep, imperial is SOOOOOOO much easier.

In some ways it certainly is!

Let's say you have that hated yard of material - cloth, paper, whatever. Let's say you want to divide it into equal strips.

Divide it in half? 18 inches each.
In three pieces? 12 inches.
Four pieces? 9 inches.
Five pieces? That one's a bit awkward. 7.2 inches.
Six pieces? 6 inches.


Now let's try it with a meter of material.

Divide it in half? 50 centimeters
In three pieces? Awkward. 33.33333 centimeters. Where's the .3333 gradation on that tape measure?
Four pieces? 25 centimeters.
Five pieces? 20 centimeters.
Six pieces? Awkward! 16.66666 centimeters.

There are advantages of using numbers that are easily divisible to people with standard measuring tools.

That's the reason there are 360 degrees in a compass instead of ten (or 100.) You can divide 360 by 2,3,4,5,6,8,9,10,12,15 or 18 and get a whole number. If you're designing a lighthouse and want 10 panes of glass along the circumference (or 12, or 15) it makes the process much easier.

Compare that to 100, which only has 2, 4, 5, 10 and 20 as whole number divisors.

But what if i wanted 3/5 of a meter? That's easy...60 cm. 3/5 of a yard? Uh, wait...lemme get that calculator. What about 70% of a yard? 73%?

A compass is neither metric nor imperial so that aspect of your argument is moot. But it is interesting to point out that a yard is legally defined as exactly 0.9144 metre.

Sure the imperial system can be easier in a few select instances, but the times the metric system is easier and more convenient far surpasses those for imperial.
(How many square furlongs in an acre again? oh yeah, 1/10. There's that pesky ten again...lol!)

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[virgin-burner 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Fact is, metric IS superior because it is base ten.

Then why are only SOME of the units base 10? Where is your base 10 watch? Where is your base 10 calendar? Where is your base 10 compass?

What -exactly- makes base 10 so special? Why not binary?

Time is based on the mathematic properties of physics and geometry. As is direction. Calendars are based on solar cycles and other astronomical observable properties.

NEITHER of these are metric or imperial.

It seems you are trying try distract from your leaking theory by citing an irrelevant conclusion. (red herring argument).

@quade: further up i gave you perfect examples of calendar and time in METRICS. you just ignored them. other than that, calvin is right..

“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda