virgin-burner 1 #226 March 4, 2011 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. what about 50!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #227 March 4, 2011 QuoteQuoteWhat about the guys building space vehicles? We lost a 125mil mars orbiter to the "traditionalist" people who can't spend the time to learn the standard (again, 95% of the world) measurement system. Do you honestly believe the scientists and engineers working on that project didn't "learn the standard"? Don't be ridiculous. Anybody working at that level absolutely knows both. As someone who "works at that level" I will confirm that I encounter just about every unit in use today in my work depending on what discipline I'm dealing with. Sure you have to sweat the details to make that work, but you have to do that even if you're not mixing systems. Is this number dBm or dBW? Is it mA or uA? Is it m or km? is it ns or ps? There are scale conventions for a lot of things, but you always label your units anyway. And if it makes people cringe that I've used inches, kilometers, fahrenheit, kelvins, pounds, and miliwatts all in the same document well then too fucking bad. As an aside for all you decimal-point-moving people, we don't do pounds/ounces or inches/feet/yards or any of that nonsense. You say 160.3 inches or 4.5 pounds. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #228 March 4, 2011 Is that 4.5 pounds mass..or force? If that substance had a specific gravity of 1.00, how many quarts would it be?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. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #229 March 4, 2011 QuoteIs that 4.5 pounds mass..or force? If that substance had a specific gravity of 1.00, how many quarts would it be? shutup. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #230 March 4, 2011 Quote Quote Is that 4.5 pounds mass..or force? If that substance had a specific gravity of 1.00, how many quarts would it be? shutup. 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. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 140 #231 March 4, 2011 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? because most of us are born with 10 fingers, makes it easier to count... plus all them fractions in the imperial system don't sound logical to me... And as you know the world should have ME as a reference scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 140 #232 March 4, 2011 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. reply]well if you want to divide your meter in 3 parts.. just fold in 3 and cut... Why measure ?? scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #233 March 4, 2011 Blame the hipsters ..."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #234 March 4, 2011 >Sure the imperial system can be easier in a few select instances . . . In a great many instances, actually. Even divisors help in a lot of fields. Which was my point. For each unit of measure/system of counting there are ideal applications. Want to build a house? Imperial units work really well. Want to design electron microscopes? Metric is probably your best bet. Want to program computers? You'll find that you'll be using lots of systems of counting that go up to 256 or 65536, instead of 100 or 1000. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #235 March 4, 2011 The thread title is "proving the inadequacy of the metric system". My intent is to show it is not inadequate, not to prove imperial is inadequate. I still carry a 12' tape marked on inches but not meters. But in a lab I MUCH prefer metric.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. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Calvin19 0 #236 March 4, 2011 A few months ago I went into the local Home Depot, and asked the overweight plaid shirt wearing "tool guy" if they had any metric tapes. "why da hell would ya want that?" in a half laugh, half sneer tone. ..."school project". I replied. Amazed by the ignorance. "I don think I seen one here, might want to try mcguckins" I went to the tape measures and found one (only one) that had lightly colored metric units on one side. It was also hard to find a square that had metric. super lame. I imagine most of the anti-metric people as that fat, ignorant little man. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
virgin-burner 1 #237 March 4, 2011 Quote A few months ago I went into the local Home Depot, and asked the overweight plaid shirt wearing "tool guy" if they had any metric tapes. "why da hell would ya want that?" in a half laugh, half sneer tone. ..."school project". I replied. Amazed by the ignorance. "I don think I seen one here, might want to try mcguckins" I went to the tape measures and found one (only one) that had lightly colored metric units on one side. It was also hard to find a square that had metric. super lame. I imagine most of the anti-metric people as that fat, ignorant little man. “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #238 March 4, 2011 QuoteIt was also hard to find a square that had metric. It appears you still haven't learned who our founding fathers were. Hint: look on the back of a one dollar bill. The left side. And you wanted a metric square . . . (chuckle).quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #239 March 4, 2011 Quotesuper lame. About as lame as expecting to find inch tapes in Europe. Do you order pork in kosher delis, too? QuoteI imagine most of the anti-metric people as that fat, ignorant little man What a coincidence... anti-metric people see most of the pro-metric people as arrogant pricks.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #240 March 4, 2011 QuoteQuoteYou don't know the answer, why can't you admit it? If you keep playing with that thing you'll go blind. AH - so now we have the Kallend version of Amazon't dripping chin remarks.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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Calvin19 0 #241 March 4, 2011 Quote It appears you still haven't learned who our founding fathers were. . this is awesome. Our founding fathers were english. And the english now use metric units. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #242 March 4, 2011 QuoteQuote It appears you still haven't learned who our founding fathers were. . this is awesome. Our founding fathers were english. And the english now use metric units. It appears you didn't take the hint to look on the back of the dollar bill. Seriously, take a gander at the left side of it.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Calvin19 0 #243 March 4, 2011 Quote What a coincidence... anti-metric people see most of the pro-metric people as arrogant pricks. well... yeah. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
virgin-burner 1 #244 March 4, 2011 Quote Quote super lame. About as lame as expecting to find inch tapes in Europe. Do you order pork in kosher delis, too? Quote I imagine most of the anti-metric people as that fat, ignorant little man What a coincidence... anti-metric people see most of the pro-metric people as arrogant pricks. that's so funny mate, you yankees really dont like the rest of the world, do you!? “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Calvin19 0 #245 March 5, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote It appears you still haven't learned who our founding fathers were. . this is awesome. Our founding fathers were english. And the english now use metric units. It appears you didn't take the hint to look on the back of the dollar bill. Seriously, take a gander at the left side of it. The great seal? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #246 March 5, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote It appears you still haven't learned who our founding fathers were. . this is awesome. Our founding fathers were english. And the english now use metric units. It appears you didn't take the hint to look on the back of the dollar bill. Seriously, take a gander at the left side of it. The great seal? Yes. Take a close look at it. Notice any symbology? Suggest anything about a few of our founding fathers? Well, not really suggest, come right out and says it actually. Does that suggest to you anything about why the metric system wasn't adopted by our founding fathers when it was first proposed in 1791? Remember, by that time, the founding fathers were no longer English, so why did they hold so tightly to that "old" system? And why specifically a metric square might actually be sort of ironic?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #247 March 5, 2011 Quote Quote super lame. About as lame as expecting to find inch tapes in Europe. Do you order pork in kosher delis, too? Quote I imagine most of the anti-metric people as that fat, ignorant little man What a coincidence... anti-metric people see most of the pro-metric people as arrogant pricks. What a coincidence...I am an arrogant prick! I used to be an arrogant bastard, but got too good and got promoted. 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. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #248 March 5, 2011 Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Calvin19 0 #249 March 6, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote It appears you still haven't learned who our founding fathers were. . this is awesome. Our founding fathers were english. And the english now use metric units. It appears you didn't take the hint to look on the back of the dollar bill. Seriously, take a gander at the left side of it. The great seal? Yes. Take a close look at it. Notice any symbology? Suggest anything about a few of our founding fathers? Well, not really suggest, come right out and says it actually. Does that suggest to you anything about why the metric system wasn't adopted by our founding fathers when it was first proposed in 1791? Remember, by that time, the founding fathers were no longer English, so why did they hold so tightly to that "old" system? And why specifically a metric square might actually be sort of ironic? Nothing I can find on the seal has anything to do with measurement. Please elaborate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #250 March 6, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote It appears you still haven't learned who our founding fathers were. . this is awesome. Our founding fathers were english. And the english now use metric units. It appears you didn't take the hint to look on the back of the dollar bill. Seriously, take a gander at the left side of it. The great seal? Yes. Take a close look at it. Notice any symbology? Suggest anything about a few of our founding fathers? Well, not really suggest, come right out and says it actually. Does that suggest to you anything about why the metric system wasn't adopted by our founding fathers when it was first proposed in 1791? Remember, by that time, the founding fathers were no longer English, so why did they hold so tightly to that "old" system? And why specifically a metric square might actually be sort of ironic? Nothing I can find on the seal has anything to do with measurement. Please elaborate. A fairly significant number of our founding fathers were Masons. Masons claim a history going back to the stone cutters of Egypt and the Temple of Solomon. One of the most significant symbols for a Mason is "The Square." To create a square, it's exceptionally handy to have your measuring tools evenly divisible by the numbers; 3, 4 and 5. 12 works quite nicely. Draw a triangle with the length of the sides being 3, 4 and 5 and one of the angles is 90 degrees which makes checking your square simple.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
