4 ms·

I think there are some rather poor arguments in the post. The primary one seems to be that imperial units are easier to eyeball, but I'd say that's only because

by mixmax 14y ago

I think there are some rather poor arguments in the post. The primary one seems to be that imperial units are easier to eyeball, but I'd say that's only because the author is used to the imperial system. If you're used to meters and not feet I don't see why it would be harder to judge the length of a room in meters than in feet. The author mentions cups as a good measure, because it's inherently easy to judge since you know how big a cup is. In my kitchen the largest cup can hold around 3 times as much as the smallest cup though... When actually doing calculations with imperial units it becomes obvious that it's an absolute mess. If you don't believe me try to calculate which holds more volume without converting to the metric system; a box with the dimensions 2 feet 3 5/8 inches by 3 feet 1 1/4 inches by 2 feet 7/16 inches or a sphere with a diameter of 3 feet 2 17/32 inches.

bunderbunder 14y ago
I suspect some of these examples also come down to making much hay of the lack of decimalization in Imperial units, combined with the way a name has been assigned to just about every possible subdivision of each unit. 250mL isn't really any harder than a cup, nor is 500mL harder than a pint. And we could make them sound just as cuddly by assigning them special names. But I think a lot is lost in that, by way of usability. Here's a quiz: You're planning a party. How many pint servings of beer can you get out of a 15 gallon keg? Now let's do it in Metric. How many half-liter servings of beer can you get out of a 50 liter keg? I think most anyone will instantly recognize that in the latter case you just need to multiply 50 by 2 to get the answer. But most people will probably have to stop and think through a couple layers of unit conversion (four quarts in a gallon, two pints in a quart) before realizing that you can multiply 15*8 to get the first figure. Heck, I suspect that even among people who grew up with Imperial units a lot might get stuck without a hint.

by mixmax 14y ago

bunderbunder 14y ago

I suspect some of these examples also come down to making much hay of the lack of decimalization in Imperial units, combined with the way a name has been assigned to just about every possible subdivision of each unit. 250mL isn't really any harder than a cup, nor is 500mL harder than a pint. And we could make them sound just as cuddly by assigning them special names. But I think a lot is lost in that, by way of usability. Here's a quiz: You're planning a party. How many pint servings of beer can you get out of a 15 gallon keg? Now let's do it in Metric. How many half-liter servings of beer can you get out of a 50 liter keg? I think most anyone will instantly recognize that in the latter case you just need to multiply 50 by 2 to get the answer. But most people will probably have to stop and think through a couple layers of unit conversion (four quarts in a gallon, two pints in a quart) before realizing that you can multiply 15*8 to get the first figure. Heck, I suspect that even among people who grew up with Imperial units a lot might get stuck without a hint.