Tyre pressures

[anotherkiwi]

Likewise but opposite, the gram is far to small in daily use, too often having to be expressed in hundreds and rarely useful singly or in tens. And how many would want to order a litre at a bar?
.

So you don't do much cooking then?

And at the bar you ask for a "demi" which everyone knows is really a quarter of a litre . And a glass of wine is 16cl (hundredths of a litre). Of course in Germany, home of the modern e-bike (notice how I am on topic ), you would be ordering your beer by the litre.



Tony

 

[flecc]

So you don't do much cooking then?

Actually I do and always have done, and it's precisely in cooking where the inconvenience of metric merasures is exposed, ingredients expressed in hundreds of grams rather than the far more convenient ounces and lbs.
.

 

[JohnCade]

In my youth I always found grams to be a poor measurement in smaller quantities. Ounces and half ounces and quarters were much better.

 

[flecc]

...but the metric system is anything but arbitrary, and that's the problem.

A system where the physical measure has been adjusted to 1 unit (pint) in order to make life easier for the inebriated may well be described as arbitrary.

And then, imperial spirit measures are far more complex. 1/4 gill? Can anyone honestly say they they have used Gill to measure anything other than spirits in a pub?

Even in places where the Gill may be of use it is shunned for the Cup.

Likewise the Cup for the Mug, then the Jug, Bucket, Gallon....Don't get me started on the friggin Gallon!

Mike, but you really need to start by accepting the metric system was based on an arbitrary measure as I've already said, that is a historical fact.

Then you also once again try to change the terminology, after previously arguing it's consistency, now you bring in adjustment and complexity, none of which I've mentioned or challenged. These in no way change an arbitrary nature, the words are unrelated and have no common meaning.

Then you bring in discarded measures like the gill etc, repeating what I've already noted as the imperial systems superiority, it's ability to change according to need. It drops that which is no longer useful or relevant, rather than sticking blindly to a fixed set of measures, regardless of how inconvenient they are.

So to get you back on course, please don't argue about the logic, consistency or advantages of metric, I'm aware of them all, acknowledge and appreciate them, which is why I use them as much as anyone else where appropriate.

From the beginning I've argued one thing only, that the lack of human scale relative to needs in the the metric system makes it more inconvenient in day to day life, that's all.

Here's some proof:

First, the metric system was first introduced for universal use in France in 1799, but just 13 years later it's unpopularity forced it's withdrawal and return to their old system. The public in their daily life just didn't think it useful and rebelled. It was eventually reintroduced after pressure from the scientific community in particular, thus demonstrating my argument that it's most useful in specialised fields outside of day to day life.

Secondly, the younger half of our population who have only been taught in metric nonetheless rake up imperial and use it for it's convenience. They drink pints and half pints and wouldn't dream of ordering in metric, they buy their milk in pints and never express the wish that it should be in centilitres. They frequently use lbs per square inch in tyre pressures rather than the inconveniently large BAR measure. Even with cars whose manufacturers use Km per Litre etc, the way that younger half have been taught, they prefer to use instead MPG and MPH. They use imperial bike tyre sizes and often express puzzlement about metric measures of those as their questions in here show. I'm satisfied on this evidence that if in weight the lb and ounce hadn't been ruthlessly exterminated by law, they'd use those as well for their greater convenience.

Logic and consistency don't come into this, illogical and inconsistent humans do, for that is their nature in daily life, wanting the most convenience rather than the most logical.
.

 

[Alan Quay]

Mike, but you really need to start by accepting the metric system was based on an arbitrary measure as I've already said, that is a historical fact...

If you google "arbitrary definition" you get:

"Arbitrary: based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system."

Sounds just like the imperial system to me.

 

[flecc]

That perfectly describes the choice of the earth's circumference choice as a metric basis Mike, arbitrary! From there a logical system was developed which very much suits the specialised fields like science, but as I've again pointed out, I'm not arguing otherwise.

I don't know how many times I have to repeat this to get it understood, the imperial system is not now in any way arbitrary precisely because it adjusts to suit actual factual needs, not random or on the basis of personal whim. Like metric, it's measures started from arbitrary points, but each then shifted to match real needs, thus removing the arbitrary elements.
.

 

[anotherkiwi]

Recipie for e-bike: add 1 3/4 cups of battery... Oh how precise...

So what is 4 cl of milk in oz (fluid oz of course) or in cups? And 2 grams of baking powder? My metric kitchen scale goes from 1 gram to 2 Kg in 1 gram increments, how can oz and lbs be more precise than that?

Remember that NASA put a Mars lander 20 metres bellow the surface of the planet because of an error in converting from the highly scientific feet to metric...

If you work in metric it is precise enough. If imperial rocks your boat do it but it makes calculation much harder in my poor old head.

Tony

 

[flecc]

So what is 4 cl of milk in oz (fluid oz of course) or in cups? And 2 grams of baking powder? My metric kitchen scale goes from 1 gram to 2 Kg in 1 gram increments, how can oz and lbs be more precise than that?

Proving my point Tony!

cl and kg are divisions and multiples of the basic measures, proving beyond any argument that the basic measures fail to match most human day to day needs.

Imperial measures do match most daily needs, which is why they persist as I've shown above with the facts from daily life.

And that's another reason why imperial persists, the terminology of metric divisions and multiples, multiple syllables often awkward to say are inconvenient in speech and so inconvenient when written that they are invariably abbreviated.

Ounce, pound, inch, foot, mile, pint, almost all of imperial measures are single syllables which roll easily off the tongue, precisely because they developed to match what ordinary humans want, rather than what the French scientists demanded.
.

 

[JohnCade]

Actually the only unit of terrestrial measurement which directly relates to the planet is the nautical mile. So one mile is one minute of one degree of longitude at the equator and about the same, one minute of arch for any meridian line. Easy to transpose to charts and maps.

The French idea was to try to measure the distance between poles on a line of longitude going through Paris and divide it by a convenient unit similar in size to the old yard. But they got it wrong, and anyway that is an arbitrary measure driven more by French grandiosity than practicality. French mariners still use the nautical mile or course.

 

[anotherkiwi]

It was Napoleon not the French, when French get blamed for anything it is usually his fault. Even if it wasn't him he'll get blamed anyway...

 

[Sherman]

It's not really about which system is better but what you are used to. I've been using metric system whole my life. Imperial system makes no sense to me, instead of just scaling things you jump from unit to unit. From miles to yards to feet to inches. Actually is there a smaller unit than inch in everyday use, other than fractions of an inch? I guess there's a reason bicycle parts are measured in millimeters :-D

And the distances are the easy part. How do measure mass? I know pounds and ounces (which is pretty uncommon for a Finn). Again, an ounce is not that little, what's the next smallest unit?

And don't start with volumes and cooking..argh. Fl.Oz I see on soda cans? Is it roughly the same as an ounce? I always thought a cup is not that much, like coffee cup, but it's more like a mug (0.25 l or 2.5dl or 25cl or 250 ml, again easy - just scale to your liking).

We do use imperial units for some things, mostly inches for measuring some things (tires and TVs), but even that is changing now.

We do not order 'half a litre of beer', instead we order just 'a beer' or a 'stein' (=0.5 litres) or small beer/small stein (0,33 l). I don't know if stein is a correct or common word, I had to use Google to translate the Finnish word 'tuoppi'.

 

[mfj197]

Actually is there a smaller unit than inch in everyday use, other than fractions of an inch?

There is, it's the thou (thousandth of an inch). I think I remember feeler gauges for spark plugs being measured in thous!

Michael

 

[JohnCade]

Mix and match. I use millimetres because they are more precise. I think in feet and miles for longer measurements, but don’t mix the two if I’m measuring something, and I use kilos and pounds and litres and pints interchangeably as I feel like it. I’ve even almost got used to bloody Celsius and can at least relate to 20 degrees being the point it starts to be a nice day. But I still prefer to think of eighty as getting warm and ninety as getting too bloody hot.

 

[flecc]

I mix and match very much like John, freely using whichever is best for a purpose, even to the extent of using both at the same time since I'm so familiar!

I joined a trade using both in my mid teens, long before UK metrication. In my twenties I was working in France for an engineering company for a while before returning to the UK and working in a mixed measure environment again.

Since then my career during the long period of piecemeal adoption of metric in the UK has moved between sectors already metricated and those still using solely imperial, all of these experiences contributing to my convertible skills in both.

So I'm impartial, I know what suits me best in each circumstance and am familiar with what suits the public at large through what they commonly use most.

The problem in my position here is that it's the wrong forum for this discussion. By it's nature the regular members will mainly be at least interested in engineering and science and often have a lot of skills in one or both. Therefore they have a pro metric bias, and that has shown in the way they've argued their case, avoiding my contention and emphasising the metric advantages instead, which were not in question. In a wide spectrum forum environment the position would be very different.
.

 

[Croxden]

I'm with flecc on this, give or take an inch.

 

[Sherman]

The problem in my position here is that it's the wrong forum for this discussion. By it's nature the regular members will mainly be at least interested in engineering and science and often have a lot of skills in one or both. Therefore they have a pro metric bias, and that has shown in the way they've argued their case, avoiding my contention and emphasising the metric advantages instead, which were not in question. In a wide spectrum forum environment the position would be very different.
.

This is very much off topic, but I find this discussion interesting. And in my previous post I tried to give you an example how ordinary people are used to metric system in their daily lives in countries where it has been established long time ago. It's all about in which system you are used to visualize your world. I have hard time visualizing 12", but no problem for 30cm.

 

[SRS]

There is, it's the thou (thousandth of an inch). I think I remember feeler gauges for spark plugs being measured in thous!

Michael

When I was an apprentice we had the even smaller measurement.
It was called a "Nats Cock" Very useful when making small adjustments.

 

[D8ve]

And the Barn, as in barn door is which system?

 

[flecc]

This is very much off topic, but I find this discussion interesting. And in my previous post I tried to give you an example how ordinary people are used to metric system in their daily lives in countries where it has been established long time ago. It's all about in which system you are used to visualize your world. I have hard time visualizing 12", but no problem for 30cm.

Of course there is truth in this Sherman, but I know that, partly for evolutionary reasons, people have a preference for smaller numbers over larger ones. Some years ago I conducted two small experiments which clearly showed greater accuracy of visualisation is achieved when using the smaller numbers of imperial over the larger ones of metric.

The metric users taking part were Australians who had been brought up entirely with metric, the English taking part were those educated with Imperial, though having almost twenty years of living with metric.

I add that to the fact, as I showed previously, that even those educated entirely in metric in England often revert to the imperial when it's available. Though they've never been taught imperial, that happens when it's numbers are more convenient. For me the evidence is clear, people often prefer convenience over mathematical, technical or scientific advantages. That's understandable, the latter three are not continuously part of most daily lives and taking the easiest option makes sense.

 

[flecc]

And the Barn, as in barn door is which system?

Imperial, the French would say grange.
.