2.2lbs per kg...

It's all relative, and we are generally, almost exclusively (except maybe a tiny subset of the world that deals with space flight) dealing with stuff on the planet that's acted on by gravity (9.81m/s/s or 32ft/sec/sec). So, while it's not technically correct, for most work, it works.

I wonder how rocket scientists deal with it.

lol

Was that in air or fiber optics?

it doesnt work though.

because F=mA.

Here is my 5 meter tape measure. Note the dimension as noted on the side of the case from front to back as 3 inches. :D

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1674836644.jpg


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1674836644.jpg

You left out 14 pounds to a stone. We were getting set to ride in the UK in 2010 when the stable owner asked me what I weighed. I told her, "195 pounds". She said, "I don't know what that would be."
I did a rough calculation in my head and offered,"Just under 90 kilograms. "
She said, "I need it in stones."
"Oh. 14."

Best
Les

I know the formulas.

But mass and weight are proportional, and essentially consistent around the planet, so the terms can be used and for practical application, it works.

Yes, there is some difference in g between different spots on earth, but the difference is pretty small even at the extremes.

How do you propose to determine mass of an object? Or would you instead prefer to use newtons instead of kilograms? How often do you end up weighing something at the North pole, Death Valley, top of Everest, and sea level in Peru where you need to compare the weights that you have from the other locations?

That's fantastic!

I believe there are dual scale tape measures. I want one. I don't need one, but I want one. Starrett, very cool! I've never seen anything by them but things like micrometers, calipers, etc... I may have to look for a Starrett dual scale tape measure so I can be the envy (they're even green) of all of the other geeks! LOL!

BAM! It doesn't get any cooler and nerdy than that!
https://smile.amazon.com/Starrett-Retractable-Imperial-Measure-Anodized/dp/B00ELMSX0C/
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Fn7NafhbKf0/maxresdefault.jpg

FWIW - all calculations for orbital mechanics, space flight etc... use metric. All of the gauges and references in the fighters flown were all in feet for altitude, rate of descent and climb etc..

Personally, I think of anything mechanical, fasterners and tools in metric. Measuring around the house, gauging distance etc... I think in feet and inches. Same thing with weight - don't routinely use it, so have little frame of reference. I do mentally equate a quart to a liter of oil...and have made the leap to meters for watching the Olympics, but not so much on lumber etc... Speed as well. Think of the time and cost to change every speed sign to kms. I suspect that is the real speedbump, $$$.

Knowing him .... probably in a vacuum :). He was a great prof too! A computer architecture or switching theory class as I recall.... fiber optics.... what was that?

If God had wanted us to use the metric system .... we wouldn't have inchworms :D!

you seem to not understand why F=mA is important to the issue of using Kg for weight, and pounds for mass. i selected my capitalization on purpose.

its ok, its a common issue from poeple who should know better, that needs to be corrected most of the time. you will find out when your answer is wrong by about 9.81, or 32.2.

Nice, good catch. How many rocks to a stone and pebbles to a rock. How many stones to a boulder? Those folks over there really missed out on that one. Sounds like a Monty Python skit.
"What, that's just an ordinary stone, that's not a stone as certified by the Queen!"
"What would a bejeweled tart know about measuring the weight of manure? And why do we have to take her word for it? What would you call this?"
"That's a stone."
"Right, brilliant. I'm glad we were able to agree."

Good one!:D
Les

Funny, coming from the grammar-challenged cp their.

btw, wrt mass weight proportionality we go with F_g=mg.

You're not nerdy until your tape measure is scaled in Rack Units.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1674842055.jpg

That's AWESOME! I, fortunately, haven't had to work in a DC that much (or a long time), but that's fantastic! Damn, now I've got to go find another tape measure!

you also not understanding why i picked F=mA, specifically, does not bode well for you understanding the point at had.

Nope, I aced physics in HS and Physics 1, Physics 2, Statics, and Dynamics in college. I've got a decent understanding of this sort of thing. I also understand that because they are proportional and that 99.9% of the time they are interchangeable enough.

Interesting, a scale that reads in Netwons.
https://www.arborsci.com/products/newton-scale

You'll really love this one.
https://www.physics.wisc.edu/ingersollmuseum/exhibits/mechanics/newtonscale/

they are never interchangeable. there is no physics, dynamics, or mathematical equation that mass and weight can be interchanged.

scales should always read in newtons. because newtons is the unit of weight in the SI system.

If you are using a mass balance scale you are massing an object if you are using a spring or compliant element you are weighing an object.

Kg or Lbm or slug or whatever mass unit is correct for a doctors office scale with counter weights.


Or we can remember pragmatisim and save the argument until we are buying kilos of apples on mars