Imperial vs Metric

Cognisant

Prolific Member
Let me give you a simple choice, renounce imperial measurement.

Or die

Metric is divisible by ten, it works, it's simple, the rest of the goddamn world is using it you american bastards!!!

No.

The Gopher

President
Let's just say we'd like to avoid any Imperial entanglements.

Pyropyro

Magos Biologis
I believe the Imperium will not listen to the demands of the Necrons.

think again losers
It's funny because people here sort of use both.

Everything is measured in metric except...
- a person's height is measured in feet
- butter is measured in pounds
- fighters are always measured in pounds
- many food products still use calories
- dicks are always measured in inches

Kuu

You can revolt against the empire, but you can never win.

Metric scum, your worth is so low it's not even measurable.

TheScornedReflex

(Per) Version of a truth.
Metric for life! Come at me you imperialist dogs!!

Happy

ENTP
Metric for sure! I can't get my head around imperial measurements. Don't even get me started on scales. 3"=1'0". What the hell is that? I'll stick with 1:100, 1:50, etc thank you.

Absurdity

Prolific Member
Imperial? And here I thought it was called 'Merican.

Cognisant

Prolific Member
It's called stupid because that's what it is.

Another advantage of metric is the ease of calculating volume by weight.

Kuu

Imperial? And here I thought it was called 'Merican.
Same thing, ain't it?

Happy

ENTP
False. 12" = 1'0"
Scales, sir. Architectural drawing scales, etc.

Unless this is sarcasm. I can never tell.

Kuu

You must mean 3'-12". Hyphen, not equal. (That would actually be 4', so.. Yeah)

Seriously the continual usage of imperial units is beyond my comprehension. Science and engineering already use metric anyway... This absurd imperialism must come to swift and permanent end.

Etheri

Prolific Member
You must mean 3'-12". Hyphen, not equal. (That would actually be 4', so.. Yeah)

Seriously the continual usage of imperial units is beyond my comprehension. Science and engineering already use metric anyway... This absurd imperialism must come to swift and permanent end.
Seriously the continual usage of imperial units is beyond my comprehension. All the sane parts of the world already use metric anyway... This absurd imperialism must come to swift and permanent end.

I didn't come into contact with the imperial system until I started playing pokemon, but I don't think the weight and height of my pokemons was very relevant .

I get that it's not really much of a hassle when you use simple units, such as for length. And I've honestly used atleast 5 diffrent units for pressure... but psi is not one of them.

To aid this rebellion, I've sworn to never read nor make any examples or exercises that do not use SI units. All hail the metric system!

Also screw celcius, we should move on to kelvin.

Brontosaurie

Banned
i get the same feeling from "imperial" measurements that i get from wine snobs.

SpaceYeti

Prolific Member
Scales, sir. Architectural drawing scales, etc.

Unless this is sarcasm. I can never tell.

Kuu

In restrospect, I even got confused here on the scales comment.

Fetch the pitchforks!

Magus

Active Member
Ultimately its all relative, someone had to say it guys

However we should use a base 12 number system instead of 10: "Duodecimal (or dozenal) is a counting system based on the number 12, and it has some advantages over the base-10 decimal method of counting. One of them is a lower abundance of repeating decimals for simpler fractions; another is the high divisibility of 12. Larger numbers would also take up less space, and duodecimal is easier to convert into binary, octal, and hexadecimal should the need arise. The benefits of decimal are only that we have ten fingers and its widespread use - two benefits that would be rendered moot only with a bit of effort and some genetic engineering." Damn Fibonacci, he hath doomed us all.

Etheri

Prolific Member
One of them is a lower abundance of repeating decimals for simpler fractions; another is the high divisibility of 12.
How is that two diffrent things?

Magus

Active Member
Haha um well I guess the former does follow necessarily from the latter.

I quoted the paragraph off a webpage; it reminded me of my math teacher in high school who riled against the base 10 system, I always found it funny. I thought it was half relevant in a discussion of measuring systems :P

walfin

Democrazy
But the imperial system is so quaint and charming...

(I only say that because I've never had the chance to use it)

Cognisant

Prolific Member
Huh, a base 12 system is interesting, but we would need to invent two new symbols, or a completely new set of twelve, new words too.

Or if we want to be utter trolls we could invent a base thirteen system that works on multiples of Pi
It would be a bitch to use, however any complex technology built with it would be twice the bitch to reverse engineer.

Etheri

Prolific Member
Or if we want to be utter trolls we could invent a base thirteen system that works on multiples of Pi
So technically a 13 base radial system? May be a bitch as far as the 13 base goes, but I'd say it's pretty neat whenever you're using anything involving sine and his little brothers. Might not be so bad, really

Cognisant

Prolific Member
Maybe not with the tools and software set up for it, but just try guesstimating anything.

Etheri

Prolific Member
You have a point, but I think we'd eventually get used to it?

I'd say the imperial system proves that we can easily get used to various units, and once we get a feel for them make proper guestimates. A thirteen-based radial system would still seem less arbitrairy than inches, feet and miles if you ask me

Duxwing

I've Overcome Existential Despair
Bah, you people aren't even scratching the surface of needlessly complicated!

How about a system of measure whose base length unit is equal to the same number of hydrogen ions laid end to end as there are attoseconds since the Big Bang, and whose whose base unit of weight (mass is for chumps who aren't from Earth) is equal to the weight of all the Astatine atoms currently in the crust of the earth at an altitude equal to their number?

Reverse engineer that!

-Duxwing

TimeAsylums

Prolific Member
i would be much obliged to tell people my wank is 2.54cm as opposed to 1"

Nezaros

Highly Irregular
I propose we switch to a base 8 counting system, and fuck both imperial and metric.

Prolific Member
Ultimately its all relative, someone had to say it guys

However we should use a base 12 number system instead of 10: "Duodecimal (or dozenal) is a counting system based on the number 12, and it has some advantages over the base-10 decimal method of counting. One of them is a lower abundance of repeating decimals for simpler fractions; another is the high divisibility of 12. Larger numbers would also take up less space, and duodecimal is easier to convert into binary, octal, and hexadecimal should the need arise. The benefits of decimal are only that we have ten fingers and its widespread use - two benefits that would be rendered moot only with a bit of effort and some genetic engineering." Damn Fibonacci, he hath doomed us all.
This may very well be true. However, all these methods are better then Imperial measurements based solely on consistency. The Imperial Measurement system like the English language was made way more complected then it need to be. primarily because it was made over time for every purpose as it arises, The metric system simplified everything by making one method that fits all measurement types.

The fact that Metric chose base 1o is simply because that is the most prevalent system known to man. However it would work with any base system as long as you kept it consistent. That is the point.

walfin

Democrazy
Bah, you people aren't even scratching the surface of needlessly complicated!

How about a system of measure whose base length unit is equal to the same number of hydrogen ions laid end to end as there are attoseconds since the Big Bang, and whose whose base unit of weight (mass is for chumps who aren't from Earth) is equal to the weight of all the Astatine atoms currently in the crust of the earth at an altitude equal to their number?

Reverse engineer that!

-Duxwing
Wait, we forgot Planck units too.

Montresor

Banned
An argument for imperial:

- powers of 2 vs. powers of 10 (well, inverse powers...)
- roof pitch is incredibly easy to represent without ever needing trigonometric functions
- the blueprint scale I am familiar with is 3/16" = 1'0
- magic tricks
- building construction is strongly based around the 8'0 mark, because it is a multiple of 6", 12", 16", 19.2", 24"...... and happens to be the size of a sheet of plywood.

Look at it this way: there are millions of sensors (who build your ideas) who prefer it. Why on earth would you deny them??

Duxwing

I've Overcome Existential Despair
An argument for imperial:

- powers of 2 vs. powers of 10 (well, inverse powers...)
- roof pitch is incredibly easy to represent without ever needing trigonometric functions
- the blueprint scale I am familiar with is 3/16" = 1'0
- magic tricks
- building construction is strongly based around the 8'0 mark, because it is a multiple of 6", 12", 16", 19.2", 24"...... and happens to be the size of a sheet of plywood.

Look at it this way: there are millions of sensors (who build your ideas) who prefer it. Why on earth would you deny them??
A counterargument for the System International Units:

- Powers of 10 are easier than powers of 2: just move the decimal point. 10^8 is 10 with 8-1 zeroes tacked on, or 100,000,000 ; 2^8 is 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256. Which calculation is faster?
- Interesting. Could you tell me more?
- You can become familiar with a different blueprint scale, perhaps 1cm = 1m, surprisingly quickly.
- Interesting. Could you tell me more?
- Just add another foot and a few inches and all rooms will have 3m ceilings. While three is prime, the factors of 300cm are: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, 60, 75, 100, 150, and 300. And consider that the size of a sheet of plywood directly depends upon construction needs, not the other way around.

Retraining said Sensors on the metric system would not be denying them. Yes, there would be grumbling about having to learn a new system all over again, but think of the bigger picture. Millions of other Sensors elsewhere in the world switched from their traditional system of measure to S.I. somewhere in the 19th Century, yet buildings rise to foreign skies. And millions more iNtuitives, who invent what said Sensors build, can't readily share their ideas with other iNtuitives in the United States and make manifest their ideas therein because of a simple difference in measurement system. The temporary annoyance, frustration, and nostalgia of United States Sensors, while real and something that I'd rather avoid, pales in comparison to the loss of opportunities for foreign interaction that will continue to occur until this system changes.

And also, remember that all "Imperial" units are defined in terms of metric ones, so the metric system is easier to implement than you'd think. Building plans would simply be redrawn with the appropriate conversions, and new buildings would be built according to metric standards (e.g., 3m ceilings, 1m wide doors, 25cm floor tiles).

-Duxwing

Etheri

Prolific Member
Bah, you people aren't even scratching the surface of needlessly complicated!

How about a system of measure whose base length unit is equal to the same number of hydrogen ions laid end to end as there are attoseconds since the Big Bang, and whose whose base unit of weight (mass is for chumps who aren't from Earth) is equal to the weight of all the Astatine atoms currently in the crust of the earth at an altitude equal to their number?

Reverse engineer that!

-Duxwing
I think that's all pretty accurately defined. If you think that's super random,this is the definition of a second :

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.
this is one meter :
The meter is the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.
The true definition doesn't matter. What matters is that it's universal, easy to use and preferably well-defined. Unlike gallons, which seem to differ in every other country by a little bit. Or feet, which aren't actually as long as your foot, cause everyone's foot is diffrent.

Look at it this way: there are millions of sensors (who build your ideas) who prefer it. Why on earth would you deny them??
Nope, my sensors work in metric. They seem to be building just fine.

Cognisant

Prolific Member
Look at it this way: there are millions of sensors (who build your ideas) who prefer it. Why on earth would you deny them??

Okay I'm done now.

Montresor

Banned
A counterargument for the System International Units:

- Powers of 10 are easier than powers of 2: just move the decimal point. 10^8 is 10 with 8-1 zeroes tacked on, or 100,000,000 ; 2^8 is 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256. Which calculation is faster?
- Interesting. Could you tell me more?
- You can become familiar with a different blueprint scale, perhaps 1cm = 1m, surprisingly quickly.
- Interesting. Could you tell me more?
- Just add another foot and a few inches and all rooms will have 3m ceilings. While three is prime, the factors of 300cm are: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, 60, 75, 100, 150, and 300. And consider that the size of a sheet of plywood directly depends upon construction needs, not the other way around.

Retraining said Sensors on the metric system would not be denying them. Yes, there would be grumbling about having to learn a new system all over again, but think of the bigger picture. Millions of other Sensors elsewhere in the world switched from their traditional system of measure to S.I. somewhere in the 19th Century, yet buildings rise to foreign skies. And millions more iNtuitives, who invent what said Sensors build, can't readily share their ideas with other iNtuitives in the United States and make manifest their ideas therein because of a simple difference in measurement system. The temporary annoyance, frustration, and nostalgia of United States Sensors, while real and something that I'd rather avoid, pales in comparison to the loss of opportunities for foreign interaction that will continue to occur until this system changes.

And also, remember that all "Imperial" units are defined in terms of metric ones, so the metric system is easier to implement than you'd think. Building plans would simply be redrawn with the appropriate conversions, and new buildings would be built according to metric standards (e.g., 3m ceilings, 1m wide doors, 25cm floor tiles).

-Duxwing

Unfortunately I have to pick and choose because I only have my phone.

Re: roof pitch

Represented (in Canada) as inches of rise per foot of run. The Wiki article has an error last I checked: they say minimum slope is a 6-12, roughly 30 degrees ... which is not even wrong as 30 degrees is a 7 and I regularly assemble roofs that are 5, occasionally 4. But I digress...

We use the concept of similar triangles to scale up rafter lengths. We use the same idea to precisely triangulate a Pythagorean triangle (well at least the pros do) for the first floor, never having the need to calculate C or cot. Concrete foundations are regularly out of square and it must be corrected first thing. But I digress...

Building roofs becomes a matter of rigorous geometry and nothing more. Le simple.

Anyways, we think of a 7-12 as 7" rise per 1'0 run or 30°.

Re: magic tricks

The imperial measurement system immerses the metric trained individual into a whole new realm of reasoning, which provides ample opportunity for mental math. It's magic to sensors kk??

Other than that I found your post quite agreeable and generally correct. You have analyzed the topic on many levels in a short period of time and I am forced to say you are right.

scorpiomover

The little professor
Seriously the continual usage of imperial units is beyond my comprehension. All the sane parts of the world already use metric anyway...
There are reasons for the Imperial system. Us Brits made it. But it was based on an older system, that evolved over millennia. They are useful, because they divide into many easy fractions that make calculations much, much easier, unless you are doing it all with a calculator. But if you are, then you're rounding off after 8 decimal places, or more, which means you are carrying an error, an errors multiply, which means that you'll multiply your errors until they are so large, they'll destroy the planet.

SAVE THE PLANET!

GIVE UP CALCULATORS!

Anyway, we ought to reject the SI system. It requires constants for science, which means that the dimensions have not been normalised, and so are the wrong units for science, and thus for everything.

Also screw celcius, we should move on to kelvin.

Duxwing

I've Overcome Existential Despair
Unfortunately I have to pick and choose because I only have my phone.

Re: roof pitch

Represented (in Canada) as inches of rise per foot of run. The Wiki article has an error last I checked: they say minimum slope is a 6-12, roughly 30 degrees ... which is not even wrong as 30 degrees is a 7 and I regularly assemble roofs that are 5, occasionally 4. But I digress...

We use the concept of similar triangles to scale up rafter lengths. We use the same idea to precisely triangulate a Pythagorean triangle (well at least the pros do) for the first floor, never having the need to calculate C or cot. Concrete foundations are regularly out of square and it must be corrected first thing. But I digress...

Building roofs becomes a matter of rigorous geometry and nothing more. Le simple.

Anyways, we think of a 7-12 as 7" rise per 1'0 run or 30°.
I think that you could do that with meters, too.

Re: magic tricks

The imperial measurement system immerses the metric trained individual into a whole new realm of reasoning, which provides ample opportunity for mental math. It's magic to sensors kk??

Other than that I found your post quite agreeable and generally correct. You have analyzed the topic on many levels in a short period of time and I am forced to say you are right.
Thanks! You argued well, too.

-Duxwing

Etheri

Prolific Member
Anyway, we ought to reject the SI system. It requires constants for science, which means that the dimensions have not been normalised, and so are the wrong units for science, and thus for everything.
I'll give you 5$if you can make up a universal system/ method that does not require the use of any constant and is more convenient than actually simply using a constant. As far as rounding goes, evaluating your expressions numerically as little as possible solves most of the problem. I never really got why in highschool, they do this : Q : Find the area of 17 circles, knowing that the smallest square one circle fits in has an area of 2. The radius of one circle : sqrt(2)/2 = 0.707 The area of one circle : (0.707)²*Pi = 1.570 The area of 17 circles : (1.570) * 17 = 26.69 I mean, who the fuck does that. That requires you to use your calculator all day, rechecking all day, and just makes your answers shitty. No honestly, a lazy person would and should just do : The radius of one circle : sqrt(2)/2 The area of one circle : [sqrt(2)/2)]² * Pi = Pi/2 The area of 17 circles : 17* Pi/2 = 17 Pi /2 And honestly, I consider that last a number. I wouldn't evaluate that, but if you had to : 26.70 I assure you, the second was less work to write out. Point is, don't evaluate your expressions and there's honestly no problem, plus it's faster and lazier. Duxwing I've Overcome Existential Despair There are reasons for the Imperial system. Us Brits made it. But it was based on an older system, that evolved over millennia. They are useful, because they divide into many easy fractions that make calculations much, much easier, unless you are doing it all with a calculator. But if you are, then you're rounding off after 8 decimal places, or more, which means you are carrying an error, an errors multiply, which means that you'll multiply your errors until they are so large, they'll destroy the planet. Powers of ten are easier than powers of two, and eight decimal places is an extreme degree of precision: the LHC--the place where we determine the funadmental nature of ultimate reality--only goes to six places. SAVE THE PLANET! GIVE UP CALCULATORS! Unless you're being sarcastic. Anyway, we ought to reject the SI system. It requires constants for science, which means that the dimensions have not been normalised, and so are the wrong units for science, and thus for everything. Basing a system of measure on fundamental constants removes the need for a physical standard and thereby ensures eternally consistent measurement: a constant-based system is perfect for science. -Duxwing walfin Democrazy I'll give you 5$ if you can make up a universal system/ method that does not require the use of any constant and is more convenient than actually simply using a constant.
Basing a system of measure on fundamental constants removes the need for a physical standard and thereby ensures eternally consistent measurement: a constant-based system is perfect for science.
Planck units, darn it!

Though convenience is debatable.

Duxwing

I've Overcome Existential Despair
Planck units, darn it!

Though convenience is debatable.
Just use prefixes!

-Duxwing

Montresor

Banned
Dux we will have to revisit some of the replies to this thread when I have time and a keyboard. In the meantime, please reassess some of your responses like "abra cadaver kilometer" because I feel it does not capture the essence of what I was trying to say. This time, think of the concept of powers of 2 a little more in depth, then try and understand how it opens more doors for mental math.

Also, I challenge you to defend your swift dismissal of the working "roof slope" system that I presented in favour of a metric system which is at least as simple and effortless to use. I demand you actually create a chart so I can see it visually.