4 ms·

Things that annoy me about the metric system: base-10 numbering system, a liter is not a cubic meter, and 'kilogram' is the base unit, not 'gram'. That last on

Things that annoy me about the metric system: base-10 numbering system, a liter is not a cubic meter, and 'kilogram' is the base unit, not 'gram'. That last one is what I have the biggest problem with. When you are doing anything with derived units, 'kilo' suddenly disappears.

kergonath 1y ago
> base-10 numbering system Having decimal numbers, it’s the best solution. Otherwise you’re bound to make mistakes scaling things up or down. > a liter is not a cubic meter Well, it’s a dm^3, close enough ;) Conversion is trivial, 1 m^3 is 1000 l. A cubic metre is a bit large for everyday use, but it makes sense e.g. when measuring water consumption or larger volumes. The litre also had the advantage of being close to 2 pints, so it already made sense as a unit when it was introduced. Contrary to hours with 100s. > 'kilogram' is the base unit, not 'gram' Yeah, this one is perplexing. It’s an annoying inconsistency on an otherwise beautifully regular system.
- GlobalFrog 1y ago
  I don't understand your issue between gram and kilo gram: gram is the base unit and the prefix kilo, meaning one thousand just says that 1 kg = 1000 grams. It is exactly the same as meters and kilometers: meters is the base unit and 1 km = 1000 meters.
  - tokai 1y ago
    I think they mean that the gram is defined as 1/1000 of a kilogram. With a kilogram having a definition based on physical constants.
    - jabl 1y ago
      The kilogram is no longer defined by a physical artifact, fwiw. Anyway, the point is the inconsistency in the system due to the kilogram being the base unit. So derived units are defined in terms of kilogram rather than gram. Say, the unit of force, Newton (N), is defined as kgm/s^2 and not gm/s^2). Or pressure, Pascal (Pa) which is N/m^2 which inherits N being defined in terms of the kilogram). And so on. Anyway, an annoying inconsistency maybe but doesn't really affect usage of the system once you get used to it.
  - DavidSJ 1y ago
    In SI, kg is the base unit, and g is a derived unit.
    - selkin 1y ago
      It’s an historical artifact, as it was easier to manufacture a reference kilogram than a reference gram. Considering today we set the kilogram by fixing the Planck constant and deriving it from there, we can just divide each side of the definition by 1000 and use that as a base unit. Using kg as the base unit is completely arbitrary, as we can derive each unit of weight directly from the meter and the second, not from the base unit.
      - mmooss 1y ago
        Why not call the thing that weighs ~2.2 pounds a 'gram'?
        selkin 1y ago
        For the same reason it was not renamed "Wug".
        mmooss 1y ago
        It's not the same reason. Gram is already part of the nomenclature, wug is not. The change I asked about would shift the relation of the prefixes to the masses: kilogram would represent a mass 1,000 times larger than it does now.
        selkin 1y ago
        It's exactly the same reason: gram referenced a known quantity. Changing it by a few insignificant digits because of the kilogram update wouldn't force people to realign their perception of it. Changing it to ~1,000 times what it used to be, or giving it a new name, would force people to realign. There's reason many people still prefer customary and imperial units, and it's not just bigotry and nationalism (even if they play a part in that preference).
- ahartmetz 1y ago
  Reportedly, the kg was going to be called "grav", but it sounded too similar to "Graf", a German feudal rank, and these guys really hated feudalism.
jl6 1y ago
Why is base 10 annoying?
- nancyminusone 1y ago
  Too few divisors of place values. The idea you would pick something that isn't evenly divisible by at least 3 or 4 was a mistake. This one isn't metric's fault to be fair. That's just what you get for inventing numbers before inventing math. Makes me wonder what would have happened if 'French numbers' in base 12, 36 or 60 were introduced at the same time. People got used to working in octal.or hexadecimal in the past for computers, doesn't seem like it would have been as big of a change as you think.
  - tokai 1y ago
    >evenly divisible by at least 3 or 4 Irrelevant with a decimal system.
    - chungy 1y ago
      It's not irrelevant, you can choose something like 12 to make all your factors out of. It's a particular strength of working in feet and yards.
      - henrikschroder 1y ago
        Except now you can't divide accurately by 5. Or 10. You're making an argument from familiarity. Yes, a 12-base system using fractions works very neatly in a small human-sized domain, but it disintegrates into complete uselessness outside that domain. That's why you get ridiculousness as things being 13/64th of an inch, or that there's 63360 inches in a mile. It's unworkable for very large distances and very small distances. With a metre and standard prefixes, you don't need any conversion factors, and you can represent any distance at any scale with a single unit. Quick, what's 11/64" + 3/8"? Quick, which weight is bigger: 0.6lbs or 10oz?
        1y ago
cryptonector 1y ago
Er, `gram` most definitely is the base unit. Kilogram is what's handy for humans given how light a gram is. EDIT: Yes, yes, SI defines the kg and then the g by reference to kg, but so what, notionally it's still the gram that's the base unit.
Ekaros 1y ago
Not adopting grav is my biggest hate with SI system...

kergonath 1y ago

> base-10 numbering system Having decimal numbers, it’s the best solution. Otherwise you’re bound to make mistakes scaling things up or down. > a liter is not a cubic meter Well, it’s a dm^3, close enough ;) Conversion is trivial, 1 m^3 is 1000 l. A cubic metre is a bit large for everyday use, but it makes sense e.g. when measuring water consumption or larger volumes. The litre also had the advantage of being close to 2 pints, so it already made sense as a unit when it was introduced. Contrary to hours with 100s. > 'kilogram' is the base unit, not 'gram' Yeah, this one is perplexing. It’s an annoying inconsistency on an otherwise beautifully regular system.

GlobalFrog 1y ago
I don't understand your issue between gram and kilo gram: gram is the base unit and the prefix kilo, meaning one thousand just says that 1 kg = 1000 grams. It is exactly the same as meters and kilometers: meters is the base unit and 1 km = 1000 meters.
- tokai 1y ago
  I think they mean that the gram is defined as 1/1000 of a kilogram. With a kilogram having a definition based on physical constants.
  - jabl 1y ago
    The kilogram is no longer defined by a physical artifact, fwiw. Anyway, the point is the inconsistency in the system due to the kilogram being the base unit. So derived units are defined in terms of kilogram rather than gram. Say, the unit of force, Newton (N), is defined as kgm/s^2 and not gm/s^2). Or pressure, Pascal (Pa) which is N/m^2 which inherits N being defined in terms of the kilogram). And so on. Anyway, an annoying inconsistency maybe but doesn't really affect usage of the system once you get used to it.
- DavidSJ 1y ago
  In SI, kg is the base unit, and g is a derived unit.
  - selkin 1y ago
    It’s an historical artifact, as it was easier to manufacture a reference kilogram than a reference gram. Considering today we set the kilogram by fixing the Planck constant and deriving it from there, we can just divide each side of the definition by 1000 and use that as a base unit. Using kg as the base unit is completely arbitrary, as we can derive each unit of weight directly from the meter and the second, not from the base unit.
    - mmooss 1y ago
      Why not call the thing that weighs ~2.2 pounds a 'gram'?
      - selkin 1y ago
        For the same reason it was not renamed "Wug".
        mmooss 1y ago
        It's not the same reason. Gram is already part of the nomenclature, wug is not. The change I asked about would shift the relation of the prefixes to the masses: kilogram would represent a mass 1,000 times larger than it does now.
        selkin 1y ago
        It's exactly the same reason: gram referenced a known quantity. Changing it by a few insignificant digits because of the kilogram update wouldn't force people to realign their perception of it. Changing it to ~1,000 times what it used to be, or giving it a new name, would force people to realign. There's reason many people still prefer customary and imperial units, and it's not just bigotry and nationalism (even if they play a part in that preference).
ahartmetz 1y ago
Reportedly, the kg was going to be called "grav", but it sounded too similar to "Graf", a German feudal rank, and these guys really hated feudalism.

jl6 1y ago

Why is base 10 annoying?

nancyminusone 1y ago
Too few divisors of place values. The idea you would pick something that isn't evenly divisible by at least 3 or 4 was a mistake. This one isn't metric's fault to be fair. That's just what you get for inventing numbers before inventing math. Makes me wonder what would have happened if 'French numbers' in base 12, 36 or 60 were introduced at the same time. People got used to working in octal.or hexadecimal in the past for computers, doesn't seem like it would have been as big of a change as you think.
- tokai 1y ago
  >evenly divisible by at least 3 or 4 Irrelevant with a decimal system.
  - chungy 1y ago
    It's not irrelevant, you can choose something like 12 to make all your factors out of. It's a particular strength of working in feet and yards.
    - henrikschroder 1y ago
      Except now you can't divide accurately by 5. Or 10. You're making an argument from familiarity. Yes, a 12-base system using fractions works very neatly in a small human-sized domain, but it disintegrates into complete uselessness outside that domain. That's why you get ridiculousness as things being 13/64th of an inch, or that there's 63360 inches in a mile. It's unworkable for very large distances and very small distances. With a metre and standard prefixes, you don't need any conversion factors, and you can represent any distance at any scale with a single unit. Quick, what's 11/64" + 3/8"? Quick, which weight is bigger: 0.6lbs or 10oz?
      - 1y ago

cryptonector 1y ago

Er, `gram` most definitely is the base unit. Kilogram is what's handy for humans given how light a gram is. EDIT: Yes, yes, SI defines the kg and then the g by reference to kg, but so what, notionally it's still the gram that's the base unit.

Ekaros 1y ago

Not adopting grav is my biggest hate with SI system...