6 ms·
The US doesn't use imperial. It uses US customary. US customary uses imperial "prefixes" but is (mostly) base-2. The idea (from the 1790s) was that there'd be a
by thechao 4y ago
The US doesn't use imperial. It uses US customary. US customary uses imperial "prefixes" but is (mostly) base-2. The idea (from the 1790s) was that there'd be a "scientific" system in base-10, suitable for high-precision instrument makers; and, a "human-scale" base-2 suitable for people with limited manufacturing capability: dividing by 2 being far easier than by 10.
Jefferson was responsible for US customary and got a lot of it working; the French were responsible for metric, but were interrupted by The Reign Of Terror.
- achenet 4y agocould you please explain how US customary is base 2? For example, how is "12 inches to a foot, 3 foot to a yard, and 1760 yards to a mile" base 2? My understanding, before reading your post was that US customary was basically adapted from imperial which was in turn just an adaptation of folk measurements - a foot was about the length of a foot, etc.
- thechao 4y agoLengths aren't as important to farmers as volumes — those are base-2. Remember: 1790, not 1990.
- achenet 4y agoa quart is a quarter of a gallon, an oz is a 32nd of a quart... eh I guess that makes sense.
- gs17 4y agoSadly, teaspoons to tablespoons has a jump of 3x, but other than that it's mostly binary with a few skips (e.g. there's not a real half gallon unit AFAIK, it's just "a half gallon", same for 2 fl oz). For some reason a barrel is 31.5 gallons instead of 32, with a hogshead being twice that at 63, but those are pretty rarely used.
- shawnz 4y agoI guess they are referring to how inches for example are commonly subdivided into halves, quarters, eighths, sixteenths, etc.
- janci 4y ago> dividing by 2 being far easier than by 10 How is dividing by 2 easier than moving the decimal point by 1 place?
- mega_dingus 4y agoFold a piece of paper in half perfectly. Easy Fold a piece of paper into 10 equal parts perfectly. Easy?
- jeff-davis 4y agoI think they meant literally dividing, as in "divide this loaf of bread into two equal parts".
- richrichardsson 4y ago> dividing by 2 being far easier than by 10 Really? I struggle to see how dividing any number by two is easier than dividing it by ten, but would like to be enlightened. Divide by ten I just need to mentally move the decimal point, dividing numbers such as 35 or 123 by two requires a lot more mental arithmetic.
- thechao 4y agoIt's 1795, and you're a farmer asked to build a ruler based on divide-by-10, or divide-by-2. Anyone with a compass can do the latter; the former is nearly impossible.
- mattkrause 4y agoNot the number, but the "thing" itself. It's a snap to fold a piece of paper in half, thirds[0], quarters, sixths, eighths, (etc), but I'm not aware of a trick that lets you divide a sheet into tenths. [0] Higher powers of three seem tricky too.