3 ms·
Nothing stops you taking the advantage of both. I think the main question is why we feel a need to impose a single one-size-fits-all universal unit set onto di
by ubernostrum 11y ago
Nothing stops you taking the advantage of both.
I think the main question is why we feel a need to impose a single one-size-fits-all universal unit set onto disparate domains with different ideas of what properties make a unit desirable. There are domains where base-10 units are a good fit, and other domains where base-12 units are a good fit, and I don't see why we need to try to force one set of units to serve both.
- Symbiote 11y agoBecause mistakes happen when people use systems they aren't familiar with, and the mistakes can be expensive, dangerous, and sometimes even fatal. Here's one example: https://psnet.ahrq.gov/webmm/case/293 https://psnet.ahrq.gov/webmm/case/293 If the nurse had been used to working in kilograms, she would have realised 25kg was a huge sack of coal / much bigger child / whatever. (She would have known that her own weight as a child was 40kg or whatever.) Or, if the country had been properly metric, the scale wouldn't have had the option of pounds. (Hopefully, you see no reason to divide a child into 3, 4 or 6 equally massed parts.)
- ubernostrum 11y agoSo... the metric system magically prevents data-entry errors? Or somehow you can't believe that there actually are common everyday tasks involving splitting something into halves, thirds, quarters, etc. and so feel a need to engage with a hyperbolic child-dissecting strawman instead? You're really not doing a great job of presenting your case here.