Is it time for the US to adopt the metric system?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

So that raises the questions - what would the benefits be? Not nearly enough, since we all understand our current system fine. We don't need to switch.

---

I know you're being silly, but I'll play along for a bit. If there are no benefits to using the same system of measurement the rest of the world uses, why have the military and scientists converted? What benefit do they see?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

The metric system is inescapably superior to anything the irrational anglo mind has come up with.

For four reasons:
1 Clear, well defined standards of measurement
2 Decimal
3 Uniform
4 International, codified

1 Horsepower, feet, teaspoons, stones. These standards of measurement worked well in the worldview of the Stone Age. When the largest distances that needed measurement could be covered by counting steps. When the largest objects weighed could be covered by lumping more stones on the other end of a scale. When a horse was the largest generator of power. Or, when the smallest objects that needed accurate measurement didn't exceed the width of a thumb.
In the modern world, these standards have lost their relevance. Rational, scientific standards of measurements are needed.

2 The most compelling argument: we count in a decimal system. Hence, measurements need to be decimal too. It is in the end not that important whether a centimeter or an inch is a base unit. What matters, is that ten centimeters is a decimeter. One hundred a meter. Etcetera.
This works much simpler than 12 inch to a foot. 3 feet to a yard. 5280 yard to a mile. For example: how many inch are there in 12.278 miles*? The simplest of questions, yet one can't work it out without pen and paper or a calculator. Unlike the metric system: in 12.278 kilometer there are 12278000 meters, or 1.227.800.000 centimeters.
*See point four. Meant here are Imperial miles. Not nautical, British or your aunt Polly's miles.

3 Likewise for all othe bases of measurement. If a thousand gram is a kilogram, then one thousand meter is a kilometer. Etcetera. Nothing could be more rational.
(The obvious exeption is time. The real units of time are not a second, but a day and a year. For this, the old system, including counting in 12 and sixty, has been retained.)

4 Currently, even while sharing a related language, Britons and Americans don't understand each other's units. Never mind when one considers Arabs, Chinese, Russians, Greeks. So there needs to be an international system for communication.
Because France won't accept any foreign system, this international system logically will have to be French. This is the Système International d'Unités, currently adopted by all countries save the three culprits mentioned earlier.

---

Do you use the qwerty keyboard?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

I know you're being silly, but I'll play along for a bit. If there are no benefits to using the same system of measurement the rest of the world uses, why have the military and scientists converted? What benefit do they see?

---

Precision. Something that most ppl only need when counting money, and our monetary system is base 10 just like all the other ones. The rest doesn't matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

Do you use the qwerty keyboard?

---

Nope. :beam:


Well sometimes. Mainly AZERTY. :sweatdrop:

To be fair, I know what you're saying. Custom can beat logicallity. However, the difference between ABCDE and QWERTY isn't that great. Even on an alphebetical keyboard one would have to get used to the layout, to typing blindly.
Nothing beats a decimal system though. Again, the difference between the units in themselves - yards or meters - is not the real difference in practicality. The use of a decimal system is. This ought to be the death blow to all other systems.

I'm going to ask this once more. Is there anyone who doesn't know how to use both? Drop me off in France right now and I know exactly how far Paris is and how much bread, cheese and wine I need to buy when I get there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

Precision. Something that most ppl only need when counting money, and our monetary system is base 10 just like all the other ones. .

---

But this wasn't the case until Britain adopted a decimal system for currency in 1971. 9Don't know about the US :shame:).

All the arguments that we've seen in this thread for or against were considered back then. In the end, the UK adopted the decimal system. :beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Nope. :beam:


Well sometimes. Mainly AZERTY. :sweatdrop:

To be fair, I know what you're saying. Custom can beat logicallity. However, the difference between ABCDE and QWERTY isn't that great. Even on an alphebetical keyboard one would have to get used to the layout, to typing blindly.
Nothing beats a decimal system though. Again, the difference between the units in themselves - yards or meters - is not the real difference in practicality. The use of a decimal system is. This ought to be the death blow to all other systems.

---

QWERTY is designed to make you type slow so that the old typewriters wouldn't get jammed. There are other keyboard layouts designed for speed and for reducing repetitive stress injuries. AZERTY is a stone age system :tongue3: (but it's not worthwhile switching).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

If drug users can handle grams and kilos I'm sure the rest of the population can figure it out...

:smoking:

---

:laugh4:

Now I've got to clean my monitor...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Thats wrong since they din't use horses they had ponies and as a pony is 25 pounds that makes a pony a quarter of a ton but since a ton is 2240 pounds not 100 pounds its a good reason to turn metric .

---

Speaking of tons, I was recently doing some calculations and kept coming up dreadfully wrong. It turned out the weight of the incoming product was measured in tons (2,000 lbs) and the waste was being measured in metric tons. :dizzy2:

I would be ok with standardizing just to have had eliminated that headache.

It is ridiculous! It is just a bother no one needs, as well as costly…and no one really wants it.

Gosh! England and Ireland converted 40 years ago…but they still drink pints. When you ask directions more than not they tell you in miles. The average guy still thinks in °F not °C… who cares if you need a 10mm or a 9/16th. Only the people on TV and radio talk in kms and °C. Ask some one on the street how much snow they had…if they had any they will tell you in inches. It is pretty much the same in Canada too, from the people I know…

Besides it is 24,000 miles around the earth and 24 hours in the day. There are 180 °F between freezing and boiling while 0°F is the freezing point of seawater.



My wife’s (a German) counter argument:
Besides there are all these people in Continental Europe who would just LOvE it….

Big deal!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

The metric system is inescapably superior to anything the irrational anglo mind has come up with.

---

Being called irrational by a French man, that is a complement no? :smoking:

Anyhow one might want to mention the idea of a metric system if not the implementation was from John Wilkens... an Englishman. And that Benjamin Franklin who was also responsible for the decimal currency was possible a key player in getting the Louis XVI interested in the decimal/metric system. So the American Dollar can be seen as one of the first practical uses of a metric system. It is with great irony that American clings to the British system for everything else, yet rejects the very system they helped inspired their allies to sort out.

America is the great capitalist country, so one would think that there system of measurements would be in alignment with their currency system. Otherwise why not adopt the penny & pound?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

For four reasons:
1 Clear, well defined standards of measurement
2 Decimal
3 Uniform
4 International, codified

1 Horsepower, feet, teaspoons, stones. These standards of measurement worked well in the worldview of the Stone Age. When the largest distances that needed measurement could be covered by counting steps. When the largest objects weighed could be covered by lumping more stones on the other end of a scale. When a horse was the largest generator of power. Or, when the smallest objects that needed accurate measurement didn't exceed the width of a thumb.
In the modern world, these standards have lost their relevance. Rational, scientific standards of measurements are needed.

---

The counter argument is that these are very accessible day to day human measurements. Of course the tools used can limit ones thinking. If all your tools are hammers, then all your methods are to treat problems as nails. So the counter-counter argument is that metric allows us to expand our world view from the infinitesimal to the infinite. It isn't so much that metric is important it is that it functions off orders of magnitude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

2 The most compelling argument: we count in a decimal system. Hence, measurements need to be decimal too. It is in the end not that important whether a centimeter or an inch is a base unit. What matters, is that ten centimeters is a decimeter. One hundred a meter. Etcetera.
This works much simpler than 12 inch to a foot. 3 feet to a yard. 5280 yard to a mile. For example: how many inch are there in 12.278 miles*? The simplest of questions, yet one can't work it out without pen and paper or a calculator. Unlike the metric system: in 12.278 kilometer there are 12278000 meters, or 1.227.800.000 centimeters.
*See point four. Meant here are Imperial miles. Not nautical, British or your aunt Polly's miles.

---

We do not always count in decimal. As noted later we use base 12/60 for time. And for computing we use base 2 & 16 a lot. We use base 16 a lot for the same reason we use base 10, both are a function of how many digits are available... 16 bits in a computer as the base, while most people have ten fingers... one wonders why base 20 wasn't more common?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

3 Likewise for all othe bases of measurement. If a thousand gram is a kilogram, then one thousand meter is a kilometer. Etcetera. Nothing could be more rational.
(The obvious exeption is time. The real units of time are not a second, but a day and a year. For this, the old system, including counting in 12 and sixty, has been retained.)

---

The real units of time are in seconds. We do not talk about milli-days or years. We do refer to MA and GA (million and billion years). Minutes and hours is used for the same reason pints and feet are still remembered... because they are measurements that the users are used to. The first meme on the scene stays king of the castle unless a huge amount of effort is put in, even if it is wrong, it takes a huge amount of effort to remove the first one.

Anyhow point 4 disproves the 'real units of time are not a second'. For SI the unit of time is seconds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

4 Currently, even while sharing a related language, Britons and Americans don't understand each other's units. Never mind when one considers Arabs, Chinese, Russians, Greeks. So there needs to be an international system for communication.
Because France won't accept any foreign system, this international system logically will have to be French. This is the Système International d'Unités, currently adopted by all countries save the three culprits mentioned earlier.

---

The irony being that after all the cultural creations of France the only one that has been taken overseas with relish other then French Cuisine Sauces is a measurement system. :laugh4:

Gosh! England and Ireland converted 40 years ago…but they still drink pints. When you ask directions more than not they tell you in miles. The average guy still thinks in °F not °C… who cares if you need a 10mm or a 9/16th. Only the people on TV and radio talk in kms and °C. Ask some one on the street how much snow they had…if they had any they will tell you in inches. It is pretty much the same in Canada too, from the people I know…

Maybe its different for the youth, or it is in my experience anyway, (in Britian, Wales btw) the group of friends varies from about 18-24, we pretty much all use Celsuis for temperature, when it comes to drinks (bar pints obviously, i dont drink hardly ever so maybe im different) i think of the measurements in mililitrers and litres for my drinks, often when we looking at deals on mutlipacks of drinks ill convert the price into xx pounts per litre..

Though when it comes to heights it depends what we are talking about... people's hieght is in feet and inches, but most other things are in meters.... so we use a little of the old system but mostly the new...

I wouldn't actually object to converting time into some easier system!

The English Imperial system has no real unit of mass (slugs). You can barely do Newtonian physics with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mangudai

The English Imperial system has no real unit of mass (slugs). You can barely do Newtonian physics with it.

---

NObody does science with anything other than metric system. English system is better for everyday use though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Um, no.

The thing is, converting to metric would cause a lot of problems - we are a huge country and you better believe there'd be all sorts of problems from this.

So that raises the questions - what would the benefits be? Not nearly enough, since we all understand our current system fine. We don't need to switch.

Really, all this fuss comes from Europeans and other insecure types who need the US to change so they finally feel vindicated. All this talk about how great the metric system would be is just to hide those rampant insecurities because the greatest nation on earth hasn't changed. And we are doing fine so they worry that maybe listening to a dead French kind wasn't such a hot idea.

CR

---

I think all the fuss stems more from wanting to feel some degree of confidence that the gas jockey at LAX will put the right amount of go-juice in the Air Canada Airbus A380 I'm riding in when I stop for a top-up.

Just sayin'...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

I wouldn't actually object to converting time into some easier system!

---

Zulu time is pretty straight forward. But it would be interesting to see a system based on 10.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yesdachi

Zulu time is pretty straight forward. But it would be interesting to see a system based on 10.

---

Interesting. So a second now is longer than a second was 200 years ago.

That must be why the metric system second is defined as:

"the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom"

What a clear and easy to understand measurement! Why, it would only take one 4 096 315 885 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom to see how superior the metric system is! :jumping:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

"the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom"

---

A definition such as this poses no problems to the superior French rational, Cartesian mind and....


...hang on...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Anyhow one might want to mention the idea of a metric system if not the implementation was from John Wilkens... an Englishman. And that Benjamin Franklin who was also responsible for the decimal currency

---

Ugh, crud. Google confirms that the anglosaxons really came up with it all.


Uh...the mathematical precision of the metric system shows the barren rationality of the anglosaxon mind, far inferior to the splendour of French cultivated irrationality and creativity. What artistry could possibly flower on the cold wastelands of the utilitarian anglosaxon mind? :no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

Interesting. So a second now is longer than a second was 200 years ago.

That must be why the metric system second is defined as:

"the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom"

What a clear and easy to understand measurement! Why, it would only take one 4 096 315 885 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom to see how superior the metric system is! :jumping:

---

Its not realevent, no one cares english system got its measurement of the foot from the anatomy of some king or that a meter was determined by some fraction of the distance between the poles. As long as you know that Kilogram is about 2 and half pounds your good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

4 Currently, even while sharing a related language, Britons and Americans don't understand each other's units. Never mind when one considers Arabs, Chinese, Russians, Greeks. So there needs to be an international system for communication.
Because France won't accept any foreign system, this international system logically will have to be French. This is the Système International d'Unités, currently adopted by all countries save the three culprits mentioned earlier.

---

So... you don't use Celcius (nor Kelvin) in France? :mellow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

Besides it is 24,000 miles around the earth and 24 hours in the day. There are 180 °F between freezing and boiling while 0°F is the freezing point of seawater.

---

No, 0F is not the freezing point of seawater. The only place, called sea, where the water is saturated with salt, aka the thing needed for this to be true, is the Dead Sea. :juggle:

Quote:

---

Besides it is 24,000 miles around the earth and 24 hours in the day.

---

It isn't 24000 miles and the 24 hour day isn't an accurate measure which is obvious in leap years .

Quote:

---

No, 0F is not the freezing point of seawater.

---

Is that why oceaographers use Celcius ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yesdachi

Speaking of tons, I was recently doing some calculations and kept coming up dreadfully wrong. It turned out the weight of the incoming product was measured in tons (2,000 lbs) and the waste was being measured in metric tons. :dizzy2:

I would be ok with standardizing just to have had eliminated that headache.

---

I know your feeling... In the oil business when we deal with US, Canada and UK, you need to keep your tongue straight.

The US ton is as you say 2000 lb from 20 hundredweights (100lb) which is 907.185 kg metric.
This is true as long as you deal with US and Canada.
But if you get stuff by the ton from the UK, you need to change the parameters.
A hundredweight in the UK is 112 lb and a ton is therefore 2240 lb or 1016.047 kg.
I guess you guys call them short ton (US, CA) and long ton (UK).

But the Imperials decided to make a new unit, and you need therefore to check the spelling of the unit provided.
If it says tonne, you know they are using metric ton and therefore a tonne is 2205 lb or 1000 kg metric.
:brood:

I wonder why Jesus didn't choose 10 disciples though :thinking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigurd Fafnesbane

I wonder why Jesus didn't choose 10 disciples though :thinking:

---

I learned that's some kind of symbolism in the bible, 3 is a symbol for the godly (trinity), 4 stands for humanity (4 human virtues), 3*4 = 12 etc. apparently you find all sorts of combinations of the two (well, 3, 4, 7 and 12) throughout the bible and in jewish religion.

Which sort of shows that a godless, secular atheist country should go with metric. ~;)

Wasn't there 13 disciples ?

I thought Judas was the 13th disciple (thats why 13 is unlucky) no theologian so i could be off here...

There's 2 different kinds of tons... now thats just crazy!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

Wasn't there 13 disciples ?

I thought Judas was the 13th disciple (thats why 13 is unlucky) no theologian so i could be off here...

There's 2 different kinds of tons... now thats just crazy!!

---

There are 12 disciples in the bible.....

along with JC that made it 13 people at the table in the last supper...that´s why it´s a supposedly unlucky number.

ahh... so judas could be classed as the 13th (of the group) ?

either that or my imagination has been inventing imaginary facts again...

Does the definition of disciple include betraying the one you "follow" for money? ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Does the definition of disciple include betraying the one you "follow" for money? ~;)

---

Doing good business supersedes religious beliefs. Judas was in fact a capitalist before capitalism. We should switch to him and consider him our saviour...

HAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!

It was a trick question.
Jesus had thousands of disciples but only twelve Apostles.

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

Full points to Sigurd!