They are right, no one ever does that. Their reasoning for the imperial system being practical is stupid though. The reason it can be practical is that its useful to have a unit the size of a foot sometimes. Metric is better in general, but there are aspects of the imperial system I would miss if I switched entirely. I just use imperial in casual conversation and metric for anything important.
edit: To be clear Iām not saying conversion from feet to miles isnāt a problem because no one does that, its the opposite. No one does it because its a problem.
Thatās the great thing about being a metric user in the US. Itās not the common system here, and the only people who really use it consistently are those who do so for work, and those who just enjoy it the same way one might enjoy learning a new language. Itās sort of a grassroots thing here.
And because itās not the standard system, thereās no one here telling us what measures are socially acceptable to use and which arenāt. Use the decimeter. Hell, if you like it, use it in Europe, you might get a weird look, but it wonāt be like asking for the distance to the deli in leagues. Theyāll still understand. In the US, use the decimeter if you want.
Iāve used the metric system exclusively for so long, started as a sort of personal test, that I tend to think in metric now. I look at something and think ā30cmā more than I think āa foot,ā occasionally Iāll think ābout a 1/3 of a meter.ā
Have fun with it. Also, hot tip. If you ever struggle with temps, itās percentage of boiling. 0% of boiling is frozen. 100% of boiling is boiling. 20% of boiling is nice.
Everybody in Europe can and does so. Thereās nothing arcane or mysterious about the metric system. I have no issues telling you how many litres of water go into a 50 x 50 x 200 cm aquarium, or a pool with a 3.5 m diameter and 80 cm height. Good luck doing that with your inches and feet and quarts and gallons.
Thereās nothing āmore usefulā about either a foot or a meter. Either you know how much it is or you donāt. Everybody knows what a meter is. For me itās a large step. My arm from elbow to fingertips is 50 cm. Or 1/2 mā¦ A sheet of paper is 30 cm (actually itās 297 mm, but thatās another story), and so are rulers. Which, btw, is very close to a āfootā.
Your foot btw most likely is not as long as a āfootā, and a small womanās size is easily 20% off. And no, thatās not āin the ballparkā.
I wonāt argue that, its a flawed measurement system. My goal isnāt to show you why imperial is so much better than metric, because its obviously not. That doesnāt mean imperial is never useful though.
Thereās nothing āmore usefulā about either a foot or a meter.
They can both do the same job, but its more convenient to have smaller units depending on what youāre measuring. I find the size of a foot to be convenient for measuring things in casual situations where accuracy and precision arenāt priorities.
Your foot btw most likely is not as long as a āfootā, and a small womanās size is easily 20% off. And no, thatās not āin the ballparkā.
We donāt literally measure it with our feet, thatās just what its called.
but its more convenient to have smaller units depending on what youāre measuring.
See, thatās what apparently many people donāt understand: with metric you donāt have ālarger or smaller unitsā. You have one unit and you scale it to your needs. Itās not like we have āthe meterā and āthe centimeterā and have no clue whatās in between. Thereās absolutely nothing more convenient about having multiple units for the same physical property.
I find the size of a foot to be convenient for measuring things in casual situations where accuracy and precision arenāt priorities.
Again: Thereās nothing more or less precise about metric or imperial. You have a mental image of a āfootā the same way I have a mental image of a ruler or a sheet of paper, i.e. 30 cm.
I donāt really know what a litre is. I know what a beer bottle looks like, or a milk carton, the same way you know what a quart of milk looks like. Pour a quart on the floor and ask someone how much that is, they probably donāt know.
We donāt literally measure it with our feet, thatās just what its called.
Oh, I definitely had other people tell me imperial is āmore humanā because a foot is the size of your foot and an inch is the size of the tip of your thumb.
with metric you donāt have ālarger or smaller unitsā. You have one unit and you scale it to your needs.
Thatās the same thing, the units are just proportional.
Itās not like we have āthe meterā and āthe centimeterā and have no clue whatās in between.
I know, its just easier to say a foot than 30 centimeters. Thatās why I use it in casual conversation, and not in anything important.
Thereās absolutely nothing more convenient about having multiple units for the same physical property.
Thatās not the part Iām saying is convenient.
Again: Thereās nothing more or less precise about metric or imperial.
They can both be used to measure things precisely, but metric is more convenient in those situations usually. If I need to accurately measure something, I would use metric because the advantages of imperial are probably not applicable. If Iām just estimating and it doesnāt matter much, Iāll probably use imperial because I wonāt have to do any conversions with that number, or anything else imperial struggles with.
Oh, I definitely had other people tell me imperial is āmore humanā because a foot is the size of your foot and an inch is the size of the tip of your thumb.
Thatās the same thing, the units are just proportional
Sure, if you put it like that. But I do have the feeling many US people treat imperial units like completely different things and have absolutely no mental concept of a relation between them, especially between length and volume.
I know, its just easier to say a foot than 30 centimeters.
Thatās just a completely arbitrary thing. Itās easier to answer āhow tall are youā with āone eightyā instead of āfive foot elevenā š¤·āāļø
It doesnāt seem to be an issue for āmetric peopleā at all, nobody is missing the foot in Europe.
Because if it were convenient we would have that, the same way we have a ton, or a pound (500 g), which are in common use. You have the decimeter (10 cm), but nobody uses it. There used to be a unit called āElleā, which is 50 cm, and itās just the name for the stick, nobody says āgive me 3 Ellen of canvasā.
I would use metric because the advantages of imperial are probably not applicable.
I still fail to see those advantages.
If Iām just estimating and it doesnāt matter much, Iāll probably use imperial
Yes, because youāre used doing so, not because itās more practical or convenient. Metric people do estimate things as well.
But I do have the feeling many US people treat imperial units like completely different things and have absolutely no mental concept of a relation between them, especially between length and volume.
There is certainly no shortage of Americans that donāt understand the metric system, or hate it for nonsensical reasons. I was once asked to measure a piece of wood and I said it in centimeters because it was exactly x cm long, and they said something to the effect of ānot that commie shitā. They seriously wanted to work with fractions of an inch instead of touching that evil foreign system.
Thatās just a completely arbitrary thing. Itās easier to answer āhow tall are youā with āone eightyā instead of āfive foot elevenā š¤·āāļø
Its arbitrary if its not something you care about. Also thatās not a great example for height. Usually its just two syllables. 5ā 4", 5ā 5" etc. You only have to say foot if you are an exact number of feet tall. That way you donāt tell anyone āIām 6ā. Most peopleās height in cm will not be a multiple of ten, so it will be longer than 180ās three syllables.
It doesnāt seem to be an issue for āmetric peopleā at all, nobody is missing the foot in Europe.
Itās just an inconvenience, itās not worth learning imperial to save a little time. Especially when no one around you would understand what youāre talking about.
I still fail to see those advantages.
The units are usually sized intuitively for everyday use. Just look at Fahrenheit vs Celsius. The only thing I use Fahrenheit for is the weather. 0 is too cold, 100 is too hot. Thatās subjective of course, but it seems more intuitive to me than Celsius. The boiling point of water doesnāt matter to me when Iām deciding what clothes to wear for the weather. Celsius works fine but it makes less sense for that application in my opinion.
Yes, because youāre used doing so, not because itās more practical or convenient.
Or, Europeans only use metric for those things because they donāt know imperial. Iām not saying thatās a bad thing either, if you donāt know imperial then its not worth learning. The advantages are small enough that its not worth the effort, but that doesnāt mean they donāt exist.
I have no issues understanding what 20 Ā°C or 30 Ā°C outside means.
Of course you donāt, Iām not saying Celsius is incomprehensible.
100 Ā°F is hot when I go outside, itās cold when I need to cook, which is also an āeveryday activityā.
Iām not arguing Fahrenheit is better for that, use Celsius.
It doesnāt make āmore senseā, every point of reference is arbitrary,
I disagree, reference points are extremely important. Thatās one of the reasons Celsius is so useful. Maybe its a weird example but one thing I use it for is brewing temperatures for coffee. I know the closer it is to 100, the closer it is to boiling. Thatās very useful information to me. I could do the same thing with Fahrenheit but the number is so weird that I donāt even remember what it is.
It also affects how small the units are which is pretty important. Farenheit has smaller units, so it can be more precise without having to use decimals. If I tell someone what temperature it is outside, I will be more exact than you most of the time.
Fahrenheit is not āmore intuitiveā, youāre just used to it.
Me just being used to it isnāt a good argument. I barely remember many aspects of the imperial system because Iāve replaced it with metric. The aspects of imperial I still use were chosen intentionally.
I could also say that youāre ājust used to itā. I could say the reason youāre so resistant to any advantages of imperial is just because you learned how to do things with metric even when it wasnāt optimal. The reason Iām not saying that, is because Iām giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming you are here to have a real conversation. Do me the same favor.
Sometimes I think there was a missed opportunity in defining an easy conversion between inches and cm. It is 2.54 cm to 1". Why couldnāt it simply be 2.5? Then a 2x4 from the building supplier could simply be renamed a 5x10. 5.8x11.6 doesnāt quite roll off the tongue as well.
My understanding is that the metre was inspired by nautical measures? So the distance from pole to equator along sea level is supposedly 10000 km. But thatās pretty approximate, and there is a more rigorous definition that involves the wavelength of a certain type of radiation. But that number is quite arbitrary-sounding. Couldnāt they have chosen it to line up with the imperial system at some level to aid migration? Anyway, that train has left the station and Iāll stop ranting nowā¦
At the time when the metric system was created, imperial units werenāt standardized at all, so if centimeters lined up with one definition of inch, they wouldnāt line up with the many other definitions anyway.
Point taken. Reading up on it on wikipedia, I love the the legal definition from 1814, wherein one inch = āthree grains of sound ripe barley being taken out the middle of the ear, well dried, and laid end to end in a rowā.
They are right, no one ever does that. Their reasoning for the imperial system being practical is stupid though. The reason it can be practical is that its useful to have a unit the size of a foot sometimes. Metric is better in general, but there are aspects of the imperial system I would miss if I switched entirely. I just use imperial in casual conversation and metric for anything important.
edit: To be clear Iām not saying conversion from feet to miles isnāt a problem because no one does that, its the opposite. No one does it because its a problem.
I wish decimeter was used more commonly. It kinda takes up the place of the imperial foot.
Thatās the great thing about being a metric user in the US. Itās not the common system here, and the only people who really use it consistently are those who do so for work, and those who just enjoy it the same way one might enjoy learning a new language. Itās sort of a grassroots thing here. And because itās not the standard system, thereās no one here telling us what measures are socially acceptable to use and which arenāt. Use the decimeter. Hell, if you like it, use it in Europe, you might get a weird look, but it wonāt be like asking for the distance to the deli in leagues. Theyāll still understand. In the US, use the decimeter if you want. Iāve used the metric system exclusively for so long, started as a sort of personal test, that I tend to think in metric now. I look at something and think ā30cmā more than I think āa foot,ā occasionally Iāll think ābout a 1/3 of a meter.ā
Have fun with it. Also, hot tip. If you ever struggle with temps, itās percentage of boiling. 0% of boiling is frozen. 100% of boiling is boiling. 20% of boiling is nice.
Sigh, here we go againā¦
Yes YOU donāt do that. Because you canāt.
Everybody in Europe can and does so. Thereās nothing arcane or mysterious about the metric system. I have no issues telling you how many litres of water go into a 50 x 50 x 200 cm aquarium, or a pool with a 3.5 m diameter and 80 cm height. Good luck doing that with your inches and feet and quarts and gallons.
Thereās nothing āmore usefulā about either a foot or a meter. Either you know how much it is or you donāt. Everybody knows what a meter is. For me itās a large step. My arm from elbow to fingertips is 50 cm. Or 1/2 mā¦ A sheet of paper is 30 cm (actually itās 297 mm, but thatās another story), and so are rulers. Which, btw, is very close to a āfootā.
Your foot btw most likely is not as long as a āfootā, and a small womanās size is easily 20% off. And no, thatās not āin the ballparkā.
I wonāt argue that, its a flawed measurement system. My goal isnāt to show you why imperial is so much better than metric, because its obviously not. That doesnāt mean imperial is never useful though.
They can both do the same job, but its more convenient to have smaller units depending on what youāre measuring. I find the size of a foot to be convenient for measuring things in casual situations where accuracy and precision arenāt priorities.
We donāt literally measure it with our feet, thatās just what its called.
See, thatās what apparently many people donāt understand: with metric you donāt have ālarger or smaller unitsā. You have one unit and you scale it to your needs. Itās not like we have āthe meterā and āthe centimeterā and have no clue whatās in between. Thereās absolutely nothing more convenient about having multiple units for the same physical property.
Again: Thereās nothing more or less precise about metric or imperial. You have a mental image of a āfootā the same way I have a mental image of a ruler or a sheet of paper, i.e. 30 cm.
I donāt really know what a litre is. I know what a beer bottle looks like, or a milk carton, the same way you know what a quart of milk looks like. Pour a quart on the floor and ask someone how much that is, they probably donāt know.
Oh, I definitely had other people tell me imperial is āmore humanā because a foot is the size of your foot and an inch is the size of the tip of your thumb.
Thatās the same thing, the units are just proportional.
I know, its just easier to say a foot than 30 centimeters. Thatās why I use it in casual conversation, and not in anything important.
Thatās not the part Iām saying is convenient.
They can both be used to measure things precisely, but metric is more convenient in those situations usually. If I need to accurately measure something, I would use metric because the advantages of imperial are probably not applicable. If Iām just estimating and it doesnāt matter much, Iāll probably use imperial because I wonāt have to do any conversions with that number, or anything else imperial struggles with.
Those people are wrong.
Sure, if you put it like that. But I do have the feeling many US people treat imperial units like completely different things and have absolutely no mental concept of a relation between them, especially between length and volume.
Thatās just a completely arbitrary thing. Itās easier to answer āhow tall are youā with āone eightyā instead of āfive foot elevenā š¤·āāļø
It doesnāt seem to be an issue for āmetric peopleā at all, nobody is missing the foot in Europe.
Because if it were convenient we would have that, the same way we have a ton, or a pound (500 g), which are in common use. You have the decimeter (10 cm), but nobody uses it. There used to be a unit called āElleā, which is 50 cm, and itās just the name for the stick, nobody says āgive me 3 Ellen of canvasā.
I still fail to see those advantages.
Yes, because youāre used doing so, not because itās more practical or convenient. Metric people do estimate things as well.
There is certainly no shortage of Americans that donāt understand the metric system, or hate it for nonsensical reasons. I was once asked to measure a piece of wood and I said it in centimeters because it was exactly x cm long, and they said something to the effect of ānot that commie shitā. They seriously wanted to work with fractions of an inch instead of touching that evil foreign system.
Its arbitrary if its not something you care about. Also thatās not a great example for height. Usually its just two syllables. 5ā 4", 5ā 5" etc. You only have to say foot if you are an exact number of feet tall. That way you donāt tell anyone āIām 6ā. Most peopleās height in cm will not be a multiple of ten, so it will be longer than 180ās three syllables.
Itās just an inconvenience, itās not worth learning imperial to save a little time. Especially when no one around you would understand what youāre talking about.
The units are usually sized intuitively for everyday use. Just look at Fahrenheit vs Celsius. The only thing I use Fahrenheit for is the weather. 0 is too cold, 100 is too hot. Thatās subjective of course, but it seems more intuitive to me than Celsius. The boiling point of water doesnāt matter to me when Iām deciding what clothes to wear for the weather. Celsius works fine but it makes less sense for that application in my opinion.
Or, Europeans only use metric for those things because they donāt know imperial. Iām not saying thatās a bad thing either, if you donāt know imperial then its not worth learning. The advantages are small enough that its not worth the effort, but that doesnāt mean they donāt exist.
deleted by creator
Of course you donāt, Iām not saying Celsius is incomprehensible.
Iām not arguing Fahrenheit is better for that, use Celsius.
I disagree, reference points are extremely important. Thatās one of the reasons Celsius is so useful. Maybe its a weird example but one thing I use it for is brewing temperatures for coffee. I know the closer it is to 100, the closer it is to boiling. Thatās very useful information to me. I could do the same thing with Fahrenheit but the number is so weird that I donāt even remember what it is.
It also affects how small the units are which is pretty important. Farenheit has smaller units, so it can be more precise without having to use decimals. If I tell someone what temperature it is outside, I will be more exact than you most of the time.
Me just being used to it isnāt a good argument. I barely remember many aspects of the imperial system because Iāve replaced it with metric. The aspects of imperial I still use were chosen intentionally.
I could also say that youāre ājust used to itā. I could say the reason youāre so resistant to any advantages of imperial is just because you learned how to do things with metric even when it wasnāt optimal. The reason Iām not saying that, is because Iām giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming you are here to have a real conversation. Do me the same favor.
Sometimes I think there was a missed opportunity in defining an easy conversion between inches and cm. It is 2.54 cm to 1". Why couldnāt it simply be 2.5? Then a 2x4 from the building supplier could simply be renamed a 5x10. 5.8x11.6 doesnāt quite roll off the tongue as well.
My understanding is that the metre was inspired by nautical measures? So the distance from pole to equator along sea level is supposedly 10000 km. But thatās pretty approximate, and there is a more rigorous definition that involves the wavelength of a certain type of radiation. But that number is quite arbitrary-sounding. Couldnāt they have chosen it to line up with the imperial system at some level to aid migration? Anyway, that train has left the station and Iāll stop ranting nowā¦
At the time when the metric system was created, imperial units werenāt standardized at all, so if centimeters lined up with one definition of inch, they wouldnāt line up with the many other definitions anyway.
Point taken. Reading up on it on wikipedia, I love the the legal definition from 1814, wherein one inch = āthree grains of sound ripe barley being taken out the middle of the ear, well dried, and laid end to end in a rowā.