Guest Manny Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 It's not necessarily more accurate. It's just easier for you to conceptualize. Correct about the accuracy, however the fact is, our bodies can sense a temperature change proportional to one degree fahrenheit, or approximately 0.5 degrees celsius. Therefore it is easier to relate to a change of one degree fahrenheit. In practical terms this means that my digital thermostat on my furnace is more accurate when in fahrenheit mode, because it responds to a swing of one digit in the displayed value. When in celsius mode, this means a temperature change of two degrees F, which means it gets a bit too cold in remote areas of the house. SO the unit should be left in fahrenheit mode. This is recommended by the manufacturer. That is why I said fahrenheit is more precise, at least in terms of the "granularity" of the scale. Although the normalization of celsius to water makes sense, and is easier to "conceptualize" from a scientific perspective, it is not, from a human body perspective. We can sense a change of one degree fahrenheit. Scientifically, the fahrenheit scale also goes through a transition of exactly 180 degrees from boiling point of water to freezing. This is also appropriate in describing a change in "phase". Anyway both scales have certain problems but that is the best we can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Manny, you're just explaining ways in which Fahrenheit is conceptually easier for you to understand than Celsius. It really has nothing to do with precision or accuracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Time to wear my philosophers hat. In some ways the imperial system reflects more humanist values, in terms of the quantities of its measurements. A "foot" is one example. Tell me how long something is in feet, and I will have a pretty good sense of that distance. There is no metric equivalent. ... In a sense, the shift from imperial to metric is a metaphor for a shift in our fundamental values. Where the old system held the human being as central to our measure of all things, those things relating primarily to human senses and experience, with metric we move away from that to a purely scientific method. The basis for the length of a metre is completely abstract from everyday human experience. In doing so we have removed man from the centre, glorified science, but made man a mere cog in the machine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Your thermostat could just as well be graded in 0.5 C increments and then would be slightly more "precise" than one done in F. Anyway, most every digital thermostat I've seen goes in increments of 0.1 C. And analog thermostats use the expansion of a metal strip, the precision of which is independent of the measuring system that is displayed to the user. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Tell me how long something is in feet, and I will have a pretty good sense of that distance. There is no metric equivalent. That's only because you are used to feet. Many people have no concept of how long something is if told in feet, but are very familiar with meters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 That's only because you are used to feet. Many people have no concept of how long something is if told in feet, but are very familiar with meters. "Historically the human body has been used to provide the basis for units of length.[32] The foot of a Caucasian male is about 15.3% of his height,[33] giving a person of 160 cm (5 ft 3 in) a foot of 245 mm and one of 180 cm (5 ft 10 in) a foot of 275 mm. These figures are less than the foot used in most cities over time, suggesting that the "foot" was actually a synonym for a "shoe". In 790 AD Charlemagne attempted to reform the units of measure in his domains by placing them on a sound basis. His units of length were based on the toise and in particular the toise de l'Écritoire, the distance between the fingertips of the outstretched arms of a man.[35] The toise has 6 pied (feet) each of 326.6 mm (12.86 in). The verification of the foot as described in the 16th century by Jacob Koebel in his book Geometrei. Von künstlichem Feldmessen und absehen is:[37] Stand at the door of a church on a Sunday and bid 16 men to stop, tall ones and small ones, as they happen to pass out when the service is finished; then make them put their left feet one behind the other, and the length thus obtained shall be a right and lawful rood to measure and survey the land with, and the 16th part of it shall be the right and lawful foot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_(length)#Definition Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Your thermostat could just as well be graded in 0.5 C increments and then would be slightly more "precise" than one done in F. Anyway, most every digital thermostat I've seen goes in increments of 0.1 C. And analog thermostats use the expansion of a metal strip, the precision of which is independent of the measuring system that is displayed to the user. Yes of course it could, but that would require more complex programming in the use of a floating point number and a decimal point in the display. It's largely the same problem as why many of our food bags are sized at 454 grams. In the end it comes down to simple practicality, ie. economics trumps virtue... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Yes of course it could, but that would require more complex programming in the use of a floating point number and a decimal point in the display. Yeah... that's real complex in the year 2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Yeah... that's real complex in the year 2012 As stated, it costs more to re-engineer these things than the manufacturer is willing to invest. The solution you propose needs a different memory chip and a different LCD display. This for only a Canadian market as well, since the US still prefers fahrenheit. So quite frankly, it will not happen. You are scientifically minded but you are not being practical minded. Your idealism clashes with certain realities. Business, my friend. So we are stuck with this problem, and with our pseudo-metrification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 ...I find this thread interesting because of the "stupid" claims regarding the use of F/non-metric measurements in the U.S.; of course anything the rest of the world doesn't do is "stupid." Quite frankly I couldn't care less what y'all choose to do in your countries - and evidently, along with Canadians, there are more than a few British who also resist the metric system. Wonder if they blame the U.S. too? That's OK...the US has crashed more interplanetary space probes using imperial units than Canada has ever launched in metric units. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 That's only because you are used to feet. Many people have no concept of how long something is if told in feet, but are very familiar with meters. I would propose that people in Canada know very well how long something is if told in inches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Customary shoe sizes in Canada: The traditional system is similar to English sizes but start counting at one rather than zero, so equivalent sizes are one greater. (This is similar to the way that floors in buildings are numbered from one rather than from zero (ground) in these regions). So the calculation for a male shoe size in the USA or Canada is: \mbox{male shoe size} = 3\times\mbox{last length in inches}-24 Women's sizes are almost always determined with the "common" scale, in which women's sizes are equal to men's sizes plus 1.5 (for example, a men's 10.5 is a women's 12). In other words: \mbox{female shoe size (common)} = 3\times\mbox{last length in inches}-22.5 In the less popular scale, known as the "standard" or "FIA" (Footwear Industries of America) scale, women's sizes are men's sizes plus 1 (so a men's 10.5 is a women's 11.5). \mbox{female shoe size (FIA)} = 3\times\mbox{last length in inches}-23 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 It's not necessarily more accurate. It's just easier for you to conceptualize. OK...Try this... Take two tape measures,one Imperial and one Metric... Put them side by side,and take a look at 1 inch and the mteric equivalent and tell me if the millimetre's are slightly more precise over that 1 inch than the 1/8 of inch marks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Customary shoe sizes in Canada: and while Canada's conversion continues, partially completed, 3 countries remain somewhat entrenched in... 400 years ago: United States, Myanmar & Liberia - oh, wait... this just in, Myanmar is switching! CIA Factbook : At this time, only three countries - Burma, Liberia, and the US - have not adopted the International System of Units (SI, or metric system) as their official system of weights and measures. The US is the only industrialized nation that does not mainly use the metric system in its commercial and standards activities, but there is increasing acceptance in science, medicine, government, and many sectors of industry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Sturgeon fishing in British Columbia just can't seem to get hooked on metric: Although our sturgeon can exceed lengths of 12 ft and can weigh more than 1,000lbs, the average size of our sturgeon is 2-6 feet in length, with many bigger fish up to 8+ feet available. Trophy 10+foot sturgeon are not as common but they aren't a rarity either, and they do get hooked each year. http://www.riversportfishing.com/i_sturgeon.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Natural Resources Canada is a rich hunting ground for imperial units still used in Canada: In Canada, natural gas resources, production, and demand volumes are commonly measured in Trillion Cubic Feet (Tcf), an imperial measure, where 1 Tcf equals 1,000,000,000,000 cubic feet (cf). http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/sources/natural-gas/1233 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 and while Canada's conversion continues, partially completed, 3 countries remain somewhat entrenched in... 400 years ago: United States, Myanmar & Liberia - oh, wait... this just in, Myanmar is switching!The US is the only industrialized nation that does not mainly use the metric system..... The US is the only... Hmmmm ... let's see how else we can fill that in .... right off the top of my head .... "the U.S. is the only Super Power." So, how's that "partially completed" conversion to the metric system working out for you? Seriously. Your comment is the type of comment that really entertains me. Why do you think the U.S. "is the only nation to [fill in the blank]?" Because it's what we choose. We don't care if "we are the only nation." We're not trying to be like y'all. We don't need to be like everyone else to feel validated the way some of you apparently do. So do keep up the references/comparisons to the U.S. - as we go merrily along - not caring in the least what you choose to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olpfan1 Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Used to be a super power.. you're no longer super Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) The Industry Canada web site informs us about Fischer Canada Stainless Steel Tubing of Waterloo, Ontario: Product Name: STAINLESS STEEL TUBING Welded stainless steel tubing (either TIG or LASER). Product primarily supplied to the ornamental as well as the automotive exhaust industry. Current size range is 1/2 in. to 6-1/4 in. in rounds. Products are also available in a variety of shapes, from squares, rectangles to ovals. Wall thicknesses range from 0.028" to 0.250". http://www.ic.gc.ca/app/ccc/srch/nvgt.do?lang=eng&prtl=1&sbPrtl=&estblmntNo=123456168817&profile=cmpltPrfl&profileId=2052&app=sold Edited February 26, 2012 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Used to be a super power.. you're no longer super Better to have been, than never at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 The Industry Canada web site informs us about Fischer Canada Stainless Steel Tubing of Waterloo, Ontario: Product Name: STAINLESS STEEL TUBING Welded stainless steel tubing (either TIG or LASER). Product primarily supplied to the ornamental as well as the automotive exhaust industry. Current size range is 1/2 in. to 6-1/4 in. in rounds. Products are also available in a variety of shapes, from squares, rectangles to ovals. Wall thicknesses range from 0.028" to 0.250". http://www.ic.gc.ca/app/ccc/srch/nvgt.do?lang=eng&prtl=1&sbPrtl=&estblmntNo=123456168817&profile=cmpltPrfl&profileId=2052&app=sold Yup, we know. Practically anything industry made is still imperial. All plumbing, electrical boxes. Bottle sizes. The whole metrification thing was just a facade, created to appease the administrators. Another stupid pet project for them that need something to do. We're just glad they've gone away and left us alone, for now. Meanwhile I need to sort out my Allen Keys... got the metrics painted yellow, the imperials are red... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olpfan1 Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Better to have been, than never at all. I doubt any Canadian wants to be a super power.. maybe Harper, but we're best at being a middle power you're just lucky we were friendly to you during the cold war Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Meanwhile I need to sort out my Allen Keys... got the metrics painted yellow, the imperials are red... Hell, I need another 1.87 litre can of paint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 OK...Try this... Take two tape measures,one Imperial and one Metric... Where can I get an metric only tape measure? Ive bein looking for a long time but can't get one here. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 I understand that Quebec has always been metric, obvious reasons really, but how has the rest of Canada coped? Surely, if someone asks you how tall you are you don't say 180 cms or so but feet and inches. Surely, if someone asks how much you weigh, you don't think in kg's, or do you, but in pounds. We use pounds and feet/inches for a person's weight/height. Everything else is basically metric, except maybe American sports like baseball/football. It's done fine, and metric is far easier to use and makes more logical sense. 12 inches in a foot, who was the brainiac who thought that up lol? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.