Latest News Article

[KEK Inc.]

OriginOFPain, on 01 February 2013 - 05:29 PM, said:

As for temperature, who else thinks Kelvins would be the best for standardization?

I think Kelvin would be terrible.  Celsius is the same as Kelvin except translated 273.15º.  For weather, it's rare to see temperatures beyond -10ºC - 35ºC.  It's much harder to imagine that to be 263K to 308K.  Kelvin is good for what it's currently used for, chemistry.  

[OriginOFPain]

KEK Inc., on 01 February 2013 - 06:06 PM, said:

I think Kelvin would be terrible.  Celsius is the same as Kelvin except translated 273.15º.  For weather, it's rare to see temperatures beyond -10ºC - 35ºC.  It's much harder to imagine that to be 263K to 308K.  Kelvin is good for what it's currently used for, chemistry.  

I don't see switching over from Celsius to Kelvin any more difficult than imperial to metric, though. I figured we might as well be consistent.

[KEK Inc.]

OriginOFPain, on 01 February 2013 - 06:09 PM, said:

I don't see switching over from Celsius to Kelvin any more difficult than imperial to metric, though. I figured we might as well be consistent.

It simply doesn't make sense to switch over from Celsius to Kelvin.  Celsius is based off of water, which is what we usually care about -- weather, temperature, etc.

[Shpaget]

Nerevar, on 01 February 2013 - 09:49 AM, said:

It's easy to say this desk about 5 feet wide rather than 1 meter and 2/3rds long, or 150 centimeters roughly.

I can honestly say I have never heard anybody say "1 meter and 2/3rds" while trying to give a measure of something. It would most certainly be either "1 m and 66,6 cm", "166,6 cm" or "1666 mm" depending on the context. Fractions are not used in metric.

[TheEvanCat]

I use metric for important things ("the heat the reaction produced was 50 degrees Celsius"), like everyone else. But I use standard for casual stuff ("Oh, my house is a mile up the road") because it's more familiar to me and everyone who lives around me.

[Nerevar]

Shpaget, on 01 February 2013 - 06:37 PM, said:

I can honestly say I have never heard anybody say "1 meter and 2/3rds" while trying to give a measure of something. It would most certainly be either "1 m and 66,6 cm", "166,6 cm" or "1666 mm" depending on the context. Fractions are not used in metric.

I hear/see people use fractions in metric all the time. I've done it myself. A meter is usually too long for daily things and centimeters are too short. Seriously, who says, "This is 166.6cm" (which is, surprise, a fraction, but whatever) in every day speech? 1.6 meters or a meter and 2/3rds is much more natural. Or just 5 feet.

[Lapis111]

Here we measure distances and weight of objects in KM and KG, but use feet and stone for human height and weight. I'm taller than usual for my age, so when I tell people I'm 180(cm), they say "No... what height?" since most people here are used to measuring height in feet. Hopefully, in another 50 years or so, we'll be using metric to talk about humans. Nothing against the imperial system, but honestly the metric system is much more... practical. Maybe though, I'm just biased since I grew up with metric (and still am).

[Shpaget]

Nerevar, on 02 February 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

"This is 166.6cm" (which is, surprise, a fraction, but whatever)

Actually no. It's decimal notation.
A fraction would look like "166 and 3/5 cm".

[Travis]

Metric is the superior system. Hopefully the last countries using the imperial system will switch soon.

[Nerevar]

Shpaget, on 02 February 2013 - 09:14 AM, said:

Actually no. It's decimal notation.
A fraction would look like "166 and 3/5 cm".

Decimal notation represents a fraction. They're literally the same value, and both tie back to my intial point.

[KEK Inc.]

Nerevar, on 02 February 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

Decimal notation represents a fraction. They're literally the same value. I really have to wonder why you cared to bring any of this up anyways.

They're the same value; however, they're completely different notation.  Metric tends to favor decimals.   English favors fractions or mixed-scale (i.e., 5'11").

You did mix them up in your post.

[Nerevar]

KEK Inc., on 02 February 2013 - 02:11 PM, said:

They're the same value; however, they're completely different notation.  Metric tends to favor decimals.   English favors fractions or mixed-scale (i.e., 5'11").

You did mix them up in your post.

I did call a decimal notation a fraction, yes. I was under the guise that both were fractions but there were simply different ways to represent that fraction, since both are the same value. My mistake, and I'm  happy I learned the clarification there, as I was never a fan of math. But somehow I get the impression this is pushing my intended point aside entirely.

[KEK Inc.]

Nerevar, on 02 February 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:

I did call a decimal notation a fraction, yes. I was under the guise that both were fractions but there were simply different ways to represent that fraction, since both are the same value. My mistake, and I'm  happy I learned the clarification there, as I was never a fan of math. But somehow I get the impression this is pushing my intended point aside entirely.

I know in physics and chemistry, my professors always push decimals, but in math, they rather see improper fractions (i.e., 43/7) -- presumably to show that you didn't rely on a calculator.  Most scientific calculators allow you to switch between fractions and decimals, though, so I don't see the point.  

Converting fractions in metric would be easy if it was used, so I agree that this side-discussion is rather pointless.  :U  1 meter and 2/3 would be exactly 1.¯66 meters or 166.¯66 cm.  

[KirbyMaster555]

Kelvins? I think I'd pee my pants if my mom told me it was 749 degrees out.

When I went to school, I didn't learn the metric system very well until I was about 10. Kids probably learn it earlier, but it seems I was about in the middle of schooling when the US started the change over to metric. I know how long short things like millimeters, centimeters, and meters are, but kilometers confuse me. I almost never use the metric system outside of science class, though.

[KEK Inc.]

KirbyMaster555, on 02 March 2013 - 03:37 AM, said:

Kelvins? I think I'd pee my pants if my mom told me it was 749 degrees out.

Your pee would immediately evaporate at that temperature -- as well as your body.

Anywho, here's an existing road sign mockup I made in San Jose, California.



Following the 2003 MUTCD and the 2009 California MUTCD, here's what a metric sign may look like.



If in Metric, California and Texas would also be the only states that has a 4 digit exit number.

[sosladms]

I think metric is better. Also, I think practical part is depends on how used to that system.

[Schmoople]

To_Make, on 01 February 2013 - 02:26 AM, said:

The metric system, being based on base-10, is fairly good. However, maybe we would be better served by a base-12 system?



Not saying that I support the customary nor the imperial systems of measurement. Those are just horrible.

>Maybe we should have a base twelve measurement system
>Hates the closest thing to it

Makes sense.

[Yourself]

Schmoople, on 02 March 2013 - 05:01 AM, said:

>Maybe we should have a base twelve measurement system
>Hates the closest thing to it

Makes sense.

I'm not sure imperial counts as the closest thing to a base 12 system.  The only time the number 12 appears is inches to feet.  And then we don't have a name for 12 feet, or 1/12 of an inch, so it's not really a base, it's a relationship between two different units of length.

[MaGicBush]

AramilTheElf, on 01 February 2013 - 03:01 AM, said:

Well, um, no. The standard system came before metric.



Really? That's interesting. I can't envision myself forgetting the metric system, but I guess I may be mistaken.

Same for me as well. I had to learn the metric system in high school but had forgotten it by the time I started college, and still do not remember it other than a few basics. I prefer the imperial system as it comes naturally to me(like most Americans), and I see no real reason to change that as it's already used in science anyways.

[Shpaget]

MaGicBush, on 02 March 2013 - 08:40 PM, said:

I see no real reason to change that as it's already used in science anyways.

An example of why there should be one universal system is Mars Climate Orbiter, more specifically the cause of its crash.