5 ms·

What's with the obsession for meters?

Doxin 4y ago
It fits neatly with a bunch of other measurements, avoiding the need for awkward conversion factors. E.g. a cubic meter is 1000 liters exactly. A cubic yard is 168.18 gallons approximately. But that's neither here nor there. Using football fields as unit of measurement is odd. You don't see metric countries resorting to using soccer pitches as unit of measurement.
- lgeorget 4y ago
  I've actually seen it quite regularly in vulgarised science pieces. Areas of 1ha (10000m squared) are often compared to a soccer pitch.
  - Doxin 4y ago
    Might be a regional thing then. You see square meters and square kilometers used here a lot.
- fomine3 4y ago
  Football fields unit is fine compared to worse unit here. "Tokyo Dome" is quite common unit in Japan TV. I believe majority of people don't know how is it big.
  - m000 4y ago
    No they're not. Tokyo Dome may not be well known outside of Japan, but at least it's unambiguous: It is the Tokyo Dome vs. a football field. Even football itself is ambiguous.
    - dudeinjapan 4y ago
      Assuming we resolve whether "football" is referring to the US, European, or Australian rules variety, each of those sports does have a standard, unambiguous playing field size.
- LeonidasXIV 4y ago
  > You don't see metric countries resorting to using soccer pitches as unit of measurement. Unfortunately Germany does.
- dudeinjapan 4y ago
  > a cubic meter is 1000 liters exactly This is not a argument for the size of a meter itself, it's simply noting that we've made a system of related measurements using base 10. We could get the same result using "football field" as the base unit of length and make 1 cubic football field equal to 1000 "swimming pools" (volume).
  - Doxin 4y ago
    Well yes obviously. Measuring systems are largely arbitrary. The nice thing about metric is that is has been (arbitrarily) designed so you basically only ever run into conversions by multiples of 10. You could most definitely redefine imperial measurements to work like that no problem. But they haven't been in the real world and that makes it a rather annoying system to work with since you run into weird fractions all the time when using it.
defrost 4y ago
Quickly, what's the exact definition of the US foot again? You know, the precise definition in use for 129 years since 1893 .. the one used to ensure one measured "foot" matched another . . .
- ncmncm 4y ago
  12 x 2.54 cm. Exactly. More interesting, maybe, is the length of the Dynastic Egyptian cubit: pi/6 meters, 52.36cm. So, measure the Great Pyramid's King's Chamber: 10x10x20 cubits, exactly. Or, as exactly as the Egyptians could manage, somewhere between 3 and 4 significant digits. Very precise, for masonry. That is thus 5.236x etc. meters. But 5.236 is also, by divine coincidence, 2phi² = 2(phi+1), and also, by even more blessed coincidence, 5pi/3, to five significant places, closer than the Egyptians could measure. (Recall, phi = (sqrt(5)+1)/2 ~ 1.61803... pi ~ 3.14149265...) So the King's Chamber, measured in meters, but only in meters, is both 2phi² meters and 5pi/3 meters wide. (Or 5tau/6, if you prefer.) And, of course, twice that long. Some people are bold enough to suggest that when the meter's length was chosen, the guff about Earth's circumference was a shuck. By another divine coincidence, the Royal cubit of France was also 0.5236 m, equal to the Dynastic cubit, and the corresponding "span" (equal to 1/phi² cubits) was exactly 20 cm. At the time the meter was defined, the French had not yet invaded Egypt. Could a masonic tradition preserve ancient measure through two millennia after the last dynasty? Some people insist the diagonal, from one corner of the chamber to its opposite is special. But it is just 10sqrt(6) cubits, or 10.00+2sqrt(2) meters... to three places. Another coincidence. Numerology is all fun and games today, but to the ancients it was all deadly serious business.
  - adrianN 4y ago
    <insert ancient aliens guy> I feel like this might be slightly retconned to fit nicely. From what I've read the Egyptian cubit sticks actually varied in length by a couple of centimeters.
    - ncmncm 4y ago
      Medieval cubits also varied. You do have to calibrate to the King's Chamber cubit, which seems defensible. But the numbers do check out: 2phi²/(5pi/3) = 1.000015 is pretty trippy, no matter how you slice it. Likewise 5sqrt(6)pi/3-2sqrt(2) = 9.997. There's no denying the ancients would be impressed with that sort of thing. Maybe even Newton, too. Of course, none of this proves the Egyptians knew about any of it. Probably the lesson for us is that numerical coincidences are way more common and less significant than we are inclined to think. [Also: pi ~ 3.14159265...]
mastersummoner 4y ago
Science.
- neutronicus 4y ago
  I spent 7 years in physics, and physicists often (most of the time, even, in my sub-field) spoke in field-specific lengths. "The pulse is 1.6 plasma wavelengths long", "the shock front is on the order of 2 laser wavelengths thick", etc SI dimensions (again, in my sub-field) were treated more as a manufacturing spec for experimental equipment than as a convenient way to discuss phenomena or a good way to communicate the size of something with someone else in the field.

It fits neatly with a bunch of other measurements, avoiding the need for awkward conversion factors. E.g. a cubic meter is 1000 liters exactly. A cubic yard is 168.18 gallons approximately. But that's neither here nor there. Using football fields as unit of measurement is odd. You don't see metric countries resorting to using soccer pitches as unit of measurement.

lgeorget 4y ago
I've actually seen it quite regularly in vulgarised science pieces. Areas of 1ha (10000m squared) are often compared to a soccer pitch.
- Doxin 4y ago
  Might be a regional thing then. You see square meters and square kilometers used here a lot.
fomine3 4y ago
Football fields unit is fine compared to worse unit here. "Tokyo Dome" is quite common unit in Japan TV. I believe majority of people don't know how is it big.
- m000 4y ago
  No they're not. Tokyo Dome may not be well known outside of Japan, but at least it's unambiguous: It is the Tokyo Dome vs. a football field. Even football itself is ambiguous.
  - dudeinjapan 4y ago
    Assuming we resolve whether "football" is referring to the US, European, or Australian rules variety, each of those sports does have a standard, unambiguous playing field size.
LeonidasXIV 4y ago
> You don't see metric countries resorting to using soccer pitches as unit of measurement. Unfortunately Germany does.
dudeinjapan 4y ago
> a cubic meter is 1000 liters exactly This is not a argument for the size of a meter itself, it's simply noting that we've made a system of related measurements using base 10. We could get the same result using "football field" as the base unit of length and make 1 cubic football field equal to 1000 "swimming pools" (volume).
- Doxin 4y ago
  Well yes obviously. Measuring systems are largely arbitrary. The nice thing about metric is that is has been (arbitrarily) designed so you basically only ever run into conversions by multiples of 10. You could most definitely redefine imperial measurements to work like that no problem. But they haven't been in the real world and that makes it a rather annoying system to work with since you run into weird fractions all the time when using it.

defrost 4y ago

Quickly, what's the exact definition of the US foot again? You know, the precise definition in use for 129 years since 1893 .. the one used to ensure one measured "foot" matched another . . .

ncmncm 4y ago
12 x 2.54 cm. Exactly. More interesting, maybe, is the length of the Dynastic Egyptian cubit: pi/6 meters, 52.36cm. So, measure the Great Pyramid's King's Chamber: 10x10x20 cubits, exactly. Or, as exactly as the Egyptians could manage, somewhere between 3 and 4 significant digits. Very precise, for masonry. That is thus 5.236x etc. meters. But 5.236 is also, by divine coincidence, 2phi² = 2(phi+1), and also, by even more blessed coincidence, 5pi/3, to five significant places, closer than the Egyptians could measure. (Recall, phi = (sqrt(5)+1)/2 ~ 1.61803... pi ~ 3.14149265...) So the King's Chamber, measured in meters, but only in meters, is both 2phi² meters and 5pi/3 meters wide. (Or 5tau/6, if you prefer.) And, of course, twice that long. Some people are bold enough to suggest that when the meter's length was chosen, the guff about Earth's circumference was a shuck. By another divine coincidence, the Royal cubit of France was also 0.5236 m, equal to the Dynastic cubit, and the corresponding "span" (equal to 1/phi² cubits) was exactly 20 cm. At the time the meter was defined, the French had not yet invaded Egypt. Could a masonic tradition preserve ancient measure through two millennia after the last dynasty? Some people insist the diagonal, from one corner of the chamber to its opposite is special. But it is just 10sqrt(6) cubits, or 10.00+2sqrt(2) meters... to three places. Another coincidence. Numerology is all fun and games today, but to the ancients it was all deadly serious business.
- adrianN 4y ago
  <insert ancient aliens guy> I feel like this might be slightly retconned to fit nicely. From what I've read the Egyptian cubit sticks actually varied in length by a couple of centimeters.
  - ncmncm 4y ago
    Medieval cubits also varied. You do have to calibrate to the King's Chamber cubit, which seems defensible. But the numbers do check out: 2phi²/(5pi/3) = 1.000015 is pretty trippy, no matter how you slice it. Likewise 5sqrt(6)pi/3-2sqrt(2) = 9.997. There's no denying the ancients would be impressed with that sort of thing. Maybe even Newton, too. Of course, none of this proves the Egyptians knew about any of it. Probably the lesson for us is that numerical coincidences are way more common and less significant than we are inclined to think. [Also: pi ~ 3.14159265...]

mastersummoner 4y ago

Science.

neutronicus 4y ago
I spent 7 years in physics, and physicists often (most of the time, even, in my sub-field) spoke in field-specific lengths. "The pulse is 1.6 plasma wavelengths long", "the shock front is on the order of 2 laser wavelengths thick", etc SI dimensions (again, in my sub-field) were treated more as a manufacturing spec for experimental equipment than as a convenient way to discuss phenomena or a good way to communicate the size of something with someone else in the field.