3 ms·
>>The insistence of the US on using archaic systems of measurement [...] resulting in the occasional loss of space probes and the like >what does it have to do
by Arnavion 8y ago
>>The insistence of the US on using archaic systems of measurement [...] resulting in the occasional loss of space probes and the like
>what does it have to do with space probes?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter#Cause_of_failure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter#Cause_of_...
Note to downvoters: This is an objective answer to an objective question. It is not an opinion on the US's use of imperial units.
- baddox 8y agoIt has absolutely nothing to do with everyday temperature scales, none of which have any of the advantages that metric units for distance/mass/etc. have. You might as well be deriding the US for using a different shoe size scale than Europe.
- hoorayimhelping 8y ago>Note to downvoters: This is an objective answer to an objective question. It is not an opinion on the US's use of imperial units. It's an answer to a question that no one asked. The question was: >How is Fahrenheit more difficult to calculate with than Celsius, and what does it have to do with space probes? From the link you provided: >Specifically, software that calculated the total impulse produced by thruster firings produced results in pound-force seconds. The trajectory calculation software then used these results – expected to be in newton seconds – to update the predicted position of the spacecraft. It has nothing to do with Farenheit or Celsius. The error was with the representation of force, not temperature.
- Arnavion 8y agoIndeed it has nothing to do with temperature scales, which is why I made sure to quote the original sentence from kragen which was also not specifically about temperature scales but general "archaic systems of measurement".