4 ms·

OK, I'll concede that on length measures between one inch and one fathom, customary measurements might have an intuition advantage (and indeed, I've been known

by taejo 9y ago

OK, I'll concede that on length measures between one inch and one fathom, customary measurements might have an intuition advantage (and indeed, I've been known to measure things with my own feet before converting to metres). Once we get to miles, I don't think that those have any advantage over kilometres (of course, we could have a hybrid system with kiloyards, to get the advantages of both). And what about fahrenheit and pounds?

mseebach 9y ago
Fahrenheit is "tighter" and has a better resolution in the "human" range -- ie. 0-100 degrees fahrenheit is roughly the range of temperatures that humans can exist in, and one degree celcius is a bit too coarse for human comfort, thermostats generally give you at least half degrees celcius precision, but can get by with only whole degrees fahrenheit.
- Moru 9y ago
  We can discuss all sorts of reasons why one system is better than the other one but the worst situation is to have more than one system to measure the same thing. Measuring longer distances by foot instead of meters makes the error bigger. Many small feet adds small amounts of errors on each foot. One meter is an average step so less errors that adds up. Choose one and stick to it :-) Customary xkcd: https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/
oldcynic 9y ago
Miles/KM and the rest? Don't think it matters at all, except cost to replace or move all those mile/yard road markings and signs. The UK ruled out a switch of roads once cost became apparent even as everything else has metricated and gained metric only legislation. After 50 years of only metric in UK schools? We've mostly switched most of the time, and I'm amazed we're not there yet! You still often hear people referring to temperatures by Fahrenheit decade (50s, 80s etc) though I can't remember the last time I saw a forecast ever use F. Everyone still seems to think of their height or weight in imperial. Beer comes in pints. There's a few other strange holdouts.

by taejo 9y ago

mseebach 9y ago

Fahrenheit is "tighter" and has a better resolution in the "human" range -- ie. 0-100 degrees fahrenheit is roughly the range of temperatures that humans can exist in, and one degree celcius is a bit too coarse for human comfort, thermostats generally give you at least half degrees celcius precision, but can get by with only whole degrees fahrenheit.

Moru 9y ago
We can discuss all sorts of reasons why one system is better than the other one but the worst situation is to have more than one system to measure the same thing. Measuring longer distances by foot instead of meters makes the error bigger. Many small feet adds small amounts of errors on each foot. One meter is an average step so less errors that adds up. Choose one and stick to it :-) Customary xkcd: https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/

oldcynic 9y ago

Miles/KM and the rest? Don't think it matters at all, except cost to replace or move all those mile/yard road markings and signs. The UK ruled out a switch of roads once cost became apparent even as everything else has metricated and gained metric only legislation. After 50 years of only metric in UK schools? We've mostly switched most of the time, and I'm amazed we're not there yet! You still often hear people referring to temperatures by Fahrenheit decade (50s, 80s etc) though I can't remember the last time I saw a forecast ever use F. Everyone still seems to think of their height or weight in imperial. Beer comes in pints. There's a few other strange holdouts.