Isn't it time we just went metric?

[masraum]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

this is how it still is.

its not confusing. what is confusing is when people who know better use there own systems wrong. like not using slugs for mass, or thinking the kilogram is a measure of weight ... you know, dumb **** stuff.

but by and large, everything that crosses my desk now a days is metric.

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.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by kc911

i gots a 9mm and 7 grams of coke in one pocket .... A .45 and an ounce of pot in the other ... Just pick a system dammit.... Maf is hard :d!

lol

[masraum]

Originally Posted by KC911

A professor held up his hands 12 inches apart and said that's how far light travelled in a nanosecond.... he was sooo FOS.

I knew it was only 30 centimeters .

Was that in air or fiber optics?

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by masraum

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.

it doesnt work though.

because F=mA.

[SCadaddle]

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.

[oldE]

Originally Posted by masraum

it might not be bad if it was just base-10 vs base-16. But we've got inches to feet (12), feet to yards(3), yards to miles(1760), mins/second (60), hours (24), ounces to pounds and pints (16) but 2 cups to a pint, 2 pints to a quart and 4 quarts to a gallon.

I did get metric to imperial conversion pounded into me. 2.2lbs to a kg, 25.4 mm to an inch, 1.609 km to a mile, 39.37" to a meter, etc.... But then I'm generally really good with numbers.

the nice thing about metric is the prefixes to indicate big vs small
milli, centi, deci, deca, hecto, kilo (most common, but there are lots more).

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

[masraum]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

it doesnt work though.

because F=mA.

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?

[masraum]

Originally Posted by SCadaddle

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.

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/

[FA-18C]

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, $$$.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by masraum

Was that in air or fiber optics?

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 !

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by masraum

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 newton-meters 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?

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.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by oldE

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

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."

[oldE]

Originally Posted by masraum

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!
Les

[island911]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

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.

Funny, coming from the grammar-challenged cp their.

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

[rockfan4]

Originally Posted by masraum

BAM! It doesn't get any cooler and nerdy than that!

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

[masraum]

Originally Posted by rockfan4

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

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!

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by island911

Funny, coming from the grammar-challenged cp their.

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

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

[masraum]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

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.

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/

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by masraum

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.

[aschen]

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