3 ms·

How many ounces are in a pound?

• tzs 4y ago
  That's not so much an argument for using metric units as it is an argument for fixing naming in the Imperial system. What makes Imperial units harder to remember than metric units is not that they are related by factors of 2^n 3^m instead of factors of 10^n. It is that the names of different units of the same kind are not predictable based on their ratios. If you had a system with the same relationships as Imperial, but say all the weight units were of the form <prefix>pound, where <prefix> indicates the multiplier or divider to go from pounds to that derived unit, and the same prefixes were used also used with length units so lengths were all <prefix>yard, Imperial units would be a lot easier than they are now. The metric vs Imperial debate would then simply be whether factors of 10^n are better or worse than factors of 2^n 3^m.
  • wirrbel 4y ago
    > If you had a system with the same relationships as Imperial, but say all the weight units were of the form <prefix>pound, where <prefix> indicates the multiplier or divider to go from pounds to that derived unit, and the same prefixes were used also used with length units so lengths were all <prefix>yard, Imperial units would be a lot easier than they are now. > The metric vs Imperial debate would then simply be whether factors of 10^n are better or worse than factors of 2^n 3^m. I find the idea interesting, but it isn't about imperial vs metric, but about a base-(2^n) fantasy metric system vs metric. There is an appeal but of course it will never happen, neither will the imperial-unit world migrate to that nor will the metric world.
• brg 4y ago
  A pints a pound the world around.