[Serkevan]

^ Don't forget the Delisle, Newton, Réaumur and Rømer temperature scales.

I don't, I don't (but Rankine is at least related to Fahrenheit, so I mentioned it )
On another note, my Applied Thermodynamics professor had a penchant for using both the International and unit systems in a given problem during the exams, because "engineers ought to manage confusing documentation*". Using BTU, PSI, centimetres and grams in the same equation was interesting to say the least.

*For those unaware, there is a lot of engineering literature in the Imperial system so being a native speaker of both SI and Imperial is more or less mandatory.

---------- Post added 01-08-20 at 03:29 AM ----------

Of course you are right about 65K vs 65°K, but I assumed it is easier to read for others.
I dont think its a whack for everyday life, you get used to pretty much any scale. The idea of "negative" temperatur on the otherhand is kind of bs. Thinking of the static definition by Boltzman shows that pretty directly.
If you go a step back and just think of it as a decription for "amount of Braun movement" it is the very same. Negative temp is just a strange concept.

I was introduced by one of my physicist friends to the concept of negative temperature that happens because of quantum shenanigans and weird systems. My head blanked out, said "that's a lot of nonsense" and refused to even try to comprehend the idea, because you cannot be BEYOND STILL. Okay, I know that it's because of formal thermodynamic definitions and Bose-Einstein condensates are super interesting but it's so far away from my limited understanding of reality that I think I'm content with my blissful ignorance for these topics

---

Last edited by Serkevan; 01-08-2020 at 03:33 AM.

[Rondec]

That is a gigantic can of worms. It *was* relatively sensible for everyday use because 100ºF is at the whereabouts human body temperature. The problem was using a completely ridiculous point for 0ºF (brine and ice, seriously?). Celsius is sensible because the freezing and boiling points of water are just so important and most things in everyday life are around that range anyway. Kelvin (by the way, never "ºK" as it's an IS unit, so 65 K) makes sense in absolute terms of physics, but is completely whack for real life. Also Rankine degree is the one true scale.

For the rest of units, the Imperial System is absolutely and irredeeemably nonsensical, though. Who could even think that eight eights of an inch - twelve inches - three feet - 1760(!!!!) yards to a mile was logical??

Clearly the English system is a very old system that is not logical, but it far pre-dates the metric system. It is based on a variety of things, but obviously a foot, for instance, was supposed to be the length of an average man's foot. A mile was supposed to be a thousand paces and dated back to Roman days. Obviously all of this was pretty arbitrary but there was some standardization that happened in the 1400s.

What makes the metric system better is the mathematical relationship between units.

That said, it is clear that most of us think in terms of units we grew up with. While I might use metric units in a lab setting, when I think of my personal weight, I think of it in terms of pounds (and pounds I would like to lose). When I think of the temperature outside, I think of it terms of Fahrenheit. I will say too, that for every day temperatures, Fahrenheit seems spread over them nicely. Here in Virginia, our coldest days get down to around zero while our hottest days are right around one hundred. On the other hand, for Celsius, the spread of temperature would be -18 to 38. But of course the issue is mostly how you are used to thinking of it.

[nocturnal]

Survival rates are exactly the same at -40°F and -40°C

Even at absolute zero 0 Kelvin all atoms have an energy level

[WorksAsIntended]

I don't, I don't (but Rankine is at least related to Fahrenheit, so I mentioned it )
On another note, my Applied Thermodynamics professor had a penchant for using both the International and unit systems in a given problem during the exams, because "engineers ought to manage confusing documentation*". Using BTU, PSI, centimetres and grams in the same equation was interesting to say the least.

*For those unaware, there is a lot of engineering literature in the Imperial system so being a native speaker of both SI and Imperial is more or less mandatory.

---------- Post added 01-08-20 at 03:29 AM ----------



I was introduced by one of my physicist friends to the concept of negative temperature that happens because of quantum shenanigans and weird systems. My head blanked out, said "that's a lot of nonsense" and refused to even try to comprehend the idea, because you cannot be BEYOND STILL. Okay, I know that it's because of formal thermodynamic definitions and Bose-Einstein condensates are super interesting but it's so far away from my limited understanding of reality that I think I'm content with my blissful ignorance for these topics

I happen to made my phd in quantum physics.
I know what you are refering to, a temporarily (very important) negativ temperature equvivalent can happen, yes. Still not by the Boltzmann definition.

Yes, there is energy at 0K in the systems , naturaly. That is not of importance though when it comes to temperatur by the two definitions I gave. It all starts with how you define temperature.



In all my years working in science I never came to any relevant paper or literature using imperial system though. Si and chs cover most of what I read.

---

Last edited by WorksAsIntended; 01-08-2020 at 05:42 AM.

[biz-engineer]

That said, it is clear that most of us think in terms of units we grew up with.

Sure. Fortunately, lenses have their focus distance marked in m and ft. Except I am always confused by DPI and PPI, there is no equivalent DPC (Dot Per cm) or PPC (Pixel Per cm), which leads me to use the calculator app on my phone. For 100 PPC, it is so easy to know how large I can print in cm: Pentax K3, 6000 pixels / 100 => 60 cm wide, no need of calculator.

[Serkevan]

Sure. Fortunately, lenses have their focus distance marked in m and ft. Except I am always confused by DPI and PPI, there is no equivalent DPC (Dot Per cm) or PPC (Pixel Per cm), which leads me to use the calculator app on my phone. For 100 PPC, it is so easy to know how large I can print in cm: Pentax K3, 6000 pixels / 100 => 60 cm wide, no need of calculator.

It's probably related to screen sizes always using inches for their diagonal, but it would be great to have it in SI.

---------- Post added 01-08-20 at 06:12 AM ----------

In all my years working in science I never came to any relevant paper or literature using imperial system though. Si and chs cover most of what I read.

Yeah, in science I have had the same experience; I was talking mostly about (typically oil & gas related) design handbooks and technical documentation.

[WorksAsIntended]

There is a typo ( thick fingers on small phone). I ment to say cgs instead of chs of course.

[reh321]

In all my years working in science I never came to any relevant paper or literature using imperial system though. Si and chs cover most of what I read.

In all my years working in science I never came to any relevant paper or literature using imperial system though. Si and chs cover most of what I read.

Yes metric is more rational and easier to do calculations in. I remember when the US tried to "go metric"; it almost became a joke here - we just are not ready for it right now {you know that a large mass has lots of inertia}

[WorksAsIntended]

Yeah, change anything, no matter what, and society keeps moaning and being stubborn.
On the lther hand though, there is no need to go SI, it it not perfect in any way. Just look at all the vec(H) and vec(B)B confusion.

[bertwert]

Even at absolute zero 0 Kelvin all atoms have an energy level

I'll have to do some more searching, but I remember reading an article wherein some scientists had discovered a (theoretical) way to achieve lower temperatures than 0K.

[bertwert]

That said, it is clear that most of us think in terms of units we grew up with. While I might use metric units in a lab setting, when I think of my personal weight, I think of it in terms of pounds (and pounds I would like to lose). When I think of the temperature outside, I think of it terms of Fahrenheit. I will say too, that for every day temperatures, Fahrenheit seems spread over them nicely. Here in Virginia, our coldest days get down to around zero while our hottest days are right around one hundred. On the other hand, for Celsius, the spread of temperature would be -18 to 38. But of course the issue is mostly how you are used to thinking of it.

It's weird here in Canada.
Lumber is imperial, so is height and weight (of a person).
Distances are in KM, and temperature in °C.
Gas is in litres.
Everyday speech will use often feet for short distance, eg "It's just 4 feet to you're right!"
Elevation is often in feet for mountaineering, or metres if not.
And so on with the randomness.

[reh321]

It's weird here in Canada.
Lumber is imperial, so is height and weight (of a person).
Distances are in KM, and temperature in °C.
Gas is in litres.
Everyday speech will use often feet for short distance, eg "It's just 4 feet to you're right!"
Elevation is often in feet for mountaineering, or metres if not.
And so on with the randomness.

Yes, Canada is weird.

My main experience with them is in speed limits, which are of course, in KM/hr. Cars in the US have both MPH and KPM on the speedometers, but the KPH scale is hard to read, especially at night, so driving up there always turns out to be an adventure.

[clickclick]

Reading through the temperature discussion makes me think Ricoh/Pentax really needs to release something soon!

[aslyfox]

It's weird here in Canada.
Lumber is imperial, so is height and weight (of a person).
Distances are in KM, and temperature in °C.
Gas is in litres.
Everyday speech will use often feet for short distance, eg "It's just 4 feet to you're right!"
Elevation is often in feet for mountaineering, or metres if not.
And so on with the randomness.

the US can't even agree with the spelling

SPELLING
Meter vs. metre
For the unit of measurement equaling approximately 1.094 yards, meter is the American spelling, and metre is preferred everywhere else. . . . .

- https://grammarist.com/spelling/meter-metre/

the major differences are between metric and imperial systems throughout the world

but yet there are still differences between the "imperial " system in the US and Canada

Imperial and U.S. Systems of Measurement

Canada used the U.S. and imperial systems of measurement until 1971 when the S.I. or metric system was declared the official measuring system for Canada, which is now in use in most of the world, with the United States being the major exception. However, “declaring” and “truly adopting” are not always the same. . . .

The only difference between the imperial system and the U.S. system is in volume measurements. Not only are the number of ounces in pints, quarts, and gallons all larger in the imperial system, the size of one fluid ounce is also different, as shown in the table in Table 7.. . .

Imperial and U.S. Systems of Measurement – Basic Kitchen and Food Service Management

don't try to put an imperial gallon of fuel in a container designed to hold a US gallon

160 (fluid) oz. 4.546 L vs 128 (fluid) oz. 3.785 L

[bertwert]

eight eights of an inch

While I prefer using metric and millimetres, it's much easier to keep halving in inches rather than cm, for example:
1 inch, 1/2 inch, 1/4 inch, 1/8 inch, 1/16 inch, 1/32 inch, 1/64 inch, etc.
1 cm, 5mm, 2.5mm, 1.25mm, 0.625mm, 0.3125mm, 0.15625mm, etc.

Mentally, it's much easier working with little fractions rather than little decimals.