NationStates Jolt Archive

One of the things that puzzles me the most is that fondness the British show for the Imperial System... miles, feet, yards, pounds, gallons and the like. Since they're EU fellows, why don't they switch to the bloody International System (metre, kilogramme, second, ampere)? It is a lot easier. No more mind-blasting things like "12 inches=1 foot, 3 feet=1 yard..." . Just powers of ten. Also, it is "The International" System: most countries have adopted it, and, if you write a scientifical text, you must use it (ok you might choose Gauss system in theoretical physics, but that's an offspring of the International System).

Also I find ridiculous that the US use the very same metric system of the country they seceded from two centuries ago... yes, in the US republics, the unit of measure is the lenght of the arm of an english king (the yard).

D'Oh!

The reason we don't go metric is because the Daily Mail/Eurosceptic lobby would go completely bat fuck insane.

So, like every policy that makes sense, it simply won't happen.

Bah. If God had intended us to use the Metric System, we would have been born with 10 fingers....:)

Bah. If God had intended us to use the Metric System, we would have been born with 10 fingers....:)

Indeed. We have 20, if you count the toes...;)

Bah. If God had intended us to use the Metric System, we would have been born with 10 fingers....:)

Or 1E3 milliFingers.

Indeed. We have 20, if you count the toes...;)

Do you really want people exposing their feet in, say, the supermarket ?

Do you really want people exposing their feet in, say, the supermarket ?

On an interesting note, my chemistry teacher tried to do just that at an open evening on Tuesday.

I was under the impression that the UK used metric...

Actually, I still use meters & kilometers when reckoning distance (started doing that in the Army). It's rather akward (sic?) when I'm giving directions to someone and I say 'about two klicks down the road'. :confused:

We Americans will NEVER give in to the obvious Communist conspiracy known as the metric system !!! :cool:

Or 1E3 milliFingers.What, just a middle one?
I have 1E4 millifingers

It turns out that a "billion" also has different interpretations in US and Europe, someone mixed up the two causing one of the Mars exploration satellites to enter the atmosphere and burn up - all because someone didn't check it was right 'billion'.

Do you really want people exposing their feet in, say, the supermarket ?

Yes, provided that they wash them very often and don't wear nylon stockings.

It turns out that a "billion" also has different interpretations in US and Europe, someone mixed up the two causing one of the Mars exploration satellites to enter the atmosphere and burn up - all because someone didn't check it was right 'billion'.No, they mixed up feet and meters in that case..

A (proper) european billion is a thousand times a US billion. But generally we avoid the issue by just using 1000 million.

It turns out that a "billion" also has different interpretations in US and Europe, someone mixed up the two causing one of the Mars exploration satellites to enter the atmosphere and burn up - all because someone didn't check it was right 'billion'.

I don't know if there's a difference between English and US-english about that.

In Italy 10^6 is called "milione", 10^9 "miliardo" and 10^12 "triliardo" (but most people prefer "milione di milioni"). Germans use about the same rule, 10^6 is a "Million" (abbr. Mio) and 10^9 is a "Milliard" (abbr. Mia).
With the metric system prefixes, 10^6 is M (mega), 10^9 is G (giga), 10^12 is T (tera). So no problems here with translations!

The metric system is way too orderly and structured. Boring. *nod*

The reason we don't go metric is because the Daily Mail/Eurosceptic lobby would go completely bat fuck insane.


Wait. The "Daily Mail" is the newspaper who's published that thing about the former British Minister of Defence claiming that an alien invasion might happen any time now, isn't it? It was in another thread...

Oh my, the Daily Mail ruling Britain...:(

The metric system is way too orderly and structured. Boring. *nod*
In other words its perfectly suited for things that require application of math ;)

In other words its perfectly suited for things that require application of math ;)

Exactly. Which is fine for scientists and mathematicians, but it simply won't do in the real world.

But then again, I'm still trying to convince people to use the smoot as a measurement of distance.

Exactly. Which is fine for scientists and mathematicians, but it simply won't do in the real world.

But then again, I'm still trying to convince people to use the smoot as a measurement of distance.

Interesting. How does smoot relate to the metre?

Interesting. How does smoot relate to the metre?

1 meter = .5876 smoots.

1 smoot =1.7018 meters.

According to Google(Yes, Google converts to smoots. :) )

1 meter = .5876 smoots.

1 smoot =1.7018 meters.

According to Google(Yes, google Gonverts to smoots. :) )

That's great, I must ask my elec lecturer about this, he went to MIT.

That's great, I must ask my elec lecturer about this, he went to MIT.

I was actually accepted by MIT, but I decided I wasn't weird enough to go there. :p

I was actually accepted by MIT, but I decided I wasn't weird enough to go there. :p

You should have gone, you might have met Scotty 2 Hotty(best lecturer ever, he played "White And Nerdy" and told how it all applied to him, almost).

The US measurement system is actually quite different from the Imperial one. A proper Imperial pint is 20 fluid ounces (568ml), wheras a wussy Yankee pint is only 16 (473ml)*. Gallons are also different, but are the same number of pints in both cases (well, for normal liquid gallons, which are most common).
I've never heard an American use the Stone (14lbs) as a unit of weight, and there are at least three different types of ton (Imperial ton, short ton and metric tonne).
Let's not even get started on the Cup...

*There is a saying "A pint's a pound the world around". I leave working that one out as an exercise for the reader.

A proper Imperial pint is 20 fluid ounces (568ml), wheras a wussy Yankee pint is only 16 (473ml)*

(well, for normal liquid gallons, which are most common).


So I guess it is better to get a pint of ale in Britain than in America:D

Normal liquid gallons? Are you saying that the "gallon" unit depends on what kind of liquid you're measuring? AIEEEE!!! Athena, goddess of reason, help me!:headbang:

metric good.

1-it makes ense, easier to multiply, add, ect.

2-the majority use it. scientists from all around the world got together to pick out a system. so it would be easier to transfere notes.

ireland recently change our road signs from miles to kilometres. why cant others?

i grew up in the UK and we were only ever tought the metric system.

Although when we were asked our height, we always used englsi system

You should have gone, you might have met Scotty 2 Hotty(best lecturer ever, he played "White And Nerdy" and told how it all applied to him, almost).

Well, to be honest, I wanted to. I couldn't afford it. :(

I could and did afford UCONN, however. *nod*

So I guess it is better to get a pint of ale in Britain than in America:D
Yep :D

Normal liquid gallons? Are you saying that the "gallon" unit depends on what kind of liquid you're measuring? AIEEEE!!! Athena, goddess of reason, help me!:headbang:

A gallon used to be entirely arbitrary. Then there were, I think, Ale, Wine and Grain gallons, and the current ones are derived from them. See Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallon).

Edit: I just noticed that not even Fluid Ounces are the same between the US and Imperial systems!

K___H___Da___U___d___c___m
___(g, L, m)

:eek:

um... we (Britain) HAVE gone metric... at least in the case of metres, litres (and milliletres), grams, and kilograms. even in weights and heights of humans mostly (though i still stick to feet and inches and stones and pounds). miles are still miles though.

I was under the impression that the UK used metric...

I'm pretty sure they use miles for cars, road signs, etc.

Beer is sold in pints.

Also, if you buy a packet of something in the supermarket, it will be an odd measurement (like 372g), because it has been converted from an original imperial measurement. It was like that last time I was there anyway.

um... we (Britain) HAVE gone metric... at least in the case of metres, litres (and milliletres), grams, and kilograms. even in weights and heights of humans mostly (though i still stick to feet and inches and stones and pounds). miles are still miles though.

Why miles? Are they just used for road distances?

I'm pretty sure they use miles for cars, road signs, etc.

Beer is sold in pints.

Also, if you buy a packet of something in the supermarket, it will be an odd measurement (like 372g), because it has been converted from an original imperial measurement. It was like that last time I was there anyway.

Yep. Almost everything (beer in pubs, for instance, is exempt - who's going to order 568ml from the hand pumps? And half a litre would be a RRPITA because all the glasses are a pint) is sold in Metric measurements and it's illegal to sell in purely Imperial measurements (see: Metric Martyr), which is why you get milk in 568ml and 1.136L bottles and so forth :)

Yes, miles are just for road distances. Not much point in changing them, to be honest.

Britain has gone metric, all goods MUST be sold in metric measurements, but may be have the imperial measurement along side the metric.

Road signs are still in miles, because the government doesn't want to waste money when everyone in the country still understands miles. It also makes gauging the time you have left on your journey very easy. Since the speed limit on a motorway/highway/autobahn/whatever is 70mph you know that whatever the distance is, that's roughly how long it will take you to get there in minutes.

And like the old guy in 1984 states, half a litre of beer is just too little, one whole litre and you're probably about to piss yourself by the time you get to end, whereas a pint is just right. Which is what the imperial measurement system is about. It's not about ease of conversion, that fractions or decimals rarely need to be used.

It can also argue that imperial measurements are easier to use because of the bases they use. For instance there are 12 inches in a foot. 12 is a special number in that it is 'abundant' ie. it has shit loads of factors, so many, that the sum of the factors is greater than the number itself. Which can make construction easier eg. 1/3 of a foot is 4 inches. Whereas 1/3 of a metre is 33.3 recuring cm. Now, if you had a ruler with with both imperial and metric, which would be easier to measure out 4 inches, or 33.3 recurring cm? We're working along the same lines as why there are 24hours in a day, 60 minutes in an hour, 360 degrees in a full rotation. It does make arithmetic easier in that fractions or decimals are hardly ever needed.

*There is a saying "A pint's a pound the world around". I leave working that one out as an exercise for the reader.
A container holding a pint of water will hold almost exactly a pound of...is it corn? Or barley? Something like that.

Either that or every country has suddenly adopted sterling as their unit of currency, and everybody is charging £1 for a pint of anything.

I'll have a pint of molten gold, please, barkeep.

...the government doesn't want to waste money...

stop lying :)

It turns out that a "billion" also has different interpretations in US and Europe, someone mixed up the two causing one of the Mars exploration satellites to enter the atmosphere and burn up - all because someone didn't check it was right 'billion'.
No, that wasn't because of misunderstanding what a billion meant. That was because someone did the calculations in metric and someone else took them to be imperial.

I use metric for most things, partly from studying physics at school, and partly the ease of use in most cases, but I still use miles for distances (unless < 1/4 mile, then use 500 metres or whatever it is), and refer to my height in feet and inches, and my mass in stone and pounds (I never did understand why some Americans use pounds but not stone). Not sure you could ever get rid of a pint though, its just the right amount.

Wow, that's a rather clear poll result.

One of the things that puzzles me the most is that fondness the British show for the Imperial System... miles, feet, yards, pounds, gallons and the like. Since they're EU fellows, why don't they switch to the bloody International System (metre, kilogramme, second, ampere)? It is a lot easier. No more mind-blasting things like "12 inches=1 foot, 3 feet=1 yard..." . Just powers of ten. Also, it is "The International" System: most countries have adopted it, and, if you write a scientifical text, you must use it (ok you might choose Gauss system in theoretical physics, but that's an offspring of the International System).

Also I find ridiculous that the US use the very same metric system of the country they seceded from two centuries ago... yes, in the US republics, the unit of measure is the lenght of the arm of an english king (the yard).

D'Oh!

we do use metric. officially.
for most things, at least. distances are sill measured in miles, and a persons' weight in stone.

other than that we're all about metric over here :)

The only thing I prefer to use imperial for is height; I'd rather be 5'5" than 166 centimeters.

The only thing I prefer to use imperial for is height; I'd rather be 5'5" than 166 centimeters.

I'd rather not be such a short-arse! :p

Metric is fine, but as I've pointed out before, metric users should use the correct units. The main incorrect use: weight. You. Do. Not. Weigh. In. Kilograms. You. Weigh. In. Newtons.

Kilogram = MASS (kg)

Newton = FORCE (of which weight is a subset) (kg*m / s^2)

I swear I will go postal on the next metric user who doesn't know the difference.

Bah. If God had intended us to use the Metric System, we would have been born with 10 fingers....:)

there is no god.

Metric is fine, but as I've pointed out before, metric users should use the correct units. The main incorrect use: weight. You. Do. Not. Weigh. In. Kilograms. You. Weigh. In. Newtons.

Kilogram = MASS (kg)

Newton = FORCE (of which weight is a subset) (kg*m / s^2)

I swear I will go postal on the next metric user who doesn't know the difference.

Is that the same for imperial too? Are pounds weight or mass?

I find the debate totally irrelevant, and I shall use whatever the is the dominant system amongst the people I know, so as to avoid confusion.

Metric is fine, but as I've pointed out before, metric users should use the correct units. The main incorrect use: weight. You. Do. Not. Weigh. In. Kilograms. You. Weigh. In. Newtons.

Kilogram = MASS (kg)

Newton = FORCE (of which weight is a subset) (kg*m / s^2)

I swear I will go postal on the next metric user who doesn't know the difference.

Thats just a common ussage thing, to use newtons in ordinary conversation comes across a a bit twatish and its alot easier and much more understood to just give the value in Kgs.

Is that the same for imperial too? Are pounds weight or mass?
Weight. Mass is the slug.

Thats just a common ussage thing,
But it's demonstrably WRONG, no matter what the common usage is. The (short) definition of weight is the force of mass in a gravitational field. That is mass * gravitational acceleration. Period. Not open for discussion.

But it's demonstrably WRONG, no matter what the common usage is. The (short) definition of weight is the force of mass in a gravitational field. That is mass * gravitational acceleration. Period. Not open for discussion.

Doesn't matter what you can demonstrate, language is a fluid medium with it's parameters being set by the common usage of a word of phrase. Example; volatile, it's original definition was a purely scientific one used to describe the propensity for liquids to vapourise, now it is used to descibe any fluid or fast moving situation.

we do use metric. officially.
for most things, at least. distances are sill measured in miles, and a persons' weight in stone.

other than that we're all about metric over here :)

:D

Hooray!

But it's demonstrably WRONG, no matter what the common usage is. The (short) definition of weight is the force of mass in a gravitational field. That is mass * gravitational acceleration. Period. Not open for discussion.Weight has many definitions. In fact, most words in the English do. Indeed, it was something that many people, such as Hobbes, have strived to alter, so that each word can only have one meaning. And therefore each sentence can only have one meaning, and leaving no room for ambiguity.

According to - http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/weight
...
3 a : a unit of weight or mass -- see METRIC SYSTEM table b : a piece of material (as metal) of known specified weight for use in weighing articles c : a system of related units of weight
...
6 a : relative heaviness : MASS b : the force with which a body is attracted toward the earth or a celestial body by gravitation and which is equal to the product of the mass and the local gravitational acceleration3a is Fartsniffages, and 6a is yours.

Metric is fine, but as I've pointed out before, metric users should use the correct units. The main incorrect use: weight. You. Do. Not. Weigh. In. Kilograms. You. Weigh. In. Newtons.

Kilogram = MASS (kg)

Newton = FORCE (of which weight is a subset) (kg*m / s^2)

I swear I will go postal on the next metric user who doesn't know the difference.

Yea. But you're forgetting 2 things.
1.The scales you use are meant to be used on the Earth's surface. So g is about 9.81 m/s^2 (more or less, not constant everywhere). Let's say your mass is 70 kg. When you step on the plate, it receives a force of 70*9.81 N. Since we know we're on the Earth's surface, the device simply translates that 70*9.81 N to 70 kg.
2.Also the International Convention on Weights and Measures defines a "technical" unit of force, known as the kgf (kilogramme-force), equal to 1 kg * 9,81 m/s^2. The kilogramme-force can be used, and can also be referred to as "kilogramme", in contexts that aren't ambiguous and that don't require great accuracy, like selling food in a supermarket for example.

So:
If your MASS is 100 kg, your WEIGHT on the Earth's surface is 981 N or, if you like it, 100 kgf.

:D

Hooray!
yup, us Brits do use the international system for the most part, its just mainly our roadsigns and unofficial measurements (like a persons' height) that are imperial still. the roadsigns are largely because it'd be ridiculously expensive to change them all and they'd all have to be done pretty much at the same time to avoid confusion... not really worth it

Metric is fine, but as I've pointed out before, metric users should use the correct units. The main incorrect use: weight. You. Do. Not. Weigh. In. Kilograms. You. Weigh. In. Newtons.

Kilogram = MASS (kg)

Newton = FORCE (of which weight is a subset) (kg*m / s^2)


*doesn't care (for everyday use)*

But it's demonstrably WRONG, no matter what the common usage is. The (short) definition of weight is the force of mass in a gravitational field. That is mass * gravitational acceleration. Period. Not open for discussion.
Ok, quick question for you. What are you measuring when you step onto a bathroom scales?

About the definition of MASS:

Actually, you can define two "mass" observable quantities in physics:

"Inertial" mass is that thing that appears in Newton's laws of motion (force=mass*acceleration, or more precisely, sum of external force vectors = time derivative of momentum vector, where momentum is defined as mass*speed vector).

"Gravitational" mass is that thing that appears in Newton's universal gravitation law (gravity force intensity = mass1*mass2*G/r^2, where G is the universal gravitation constant and r is the distance of the bodies).

The fact that these two "mass" quantities are equal is a riddle. We don't know WHY. It has something to do with the Higgs boson and quantum gravitation, assuming that the standard model is correct - and that is quite a risky guess; superstrings anyone?

Ok, quick question for you. What are you measuring when you step onto a bathroom scales?

See my post above.

About the definition of MASS:

Actually, you can define two "mass" observable quantities in physics:

"Inertial" mass is that thing that appears in Newton's laws of motion (force=mass*acceleration, or more precisely, sum of external force vectors = time derivative of momentum vector, where momentum is defined as mass*speed vector).

"Gravitational" mass is that thing that appears in Newton's universal gravitation law (gravity force intensity = mass1*mass2*G/r^2, where G is the universal gravitation constant and r is the distance of the bodies).

The fact that these two "mass" quantities are equal is a riddle. We don't know WHY. It has something to do with the Higgs boson and quantum gravitation, assuming that the standard model is correct - and that is quite a risky guess; superstrings anyone?

I'd forgotten why I gave up physics after A level and was actually begining to feel a little nostalgic for those afternoons in the lab. Thanks for the reminder, now I need to lie down because my head hurts.

I prefer the SI (metric) system, because I just hate dealing with fractions, and I find it uncivilised to use a measurement system based on some random guy's body parts.

Is that the same for imperial too? Are pounds weight or mass?


Confusingly enough, pounds are both.

Mind you, I'm probably one of the few people who can easily and fluently use both systems, so I voted for both in the poll.

The next question is why does everybody use the 24 hour clock?

I can learn metric, but it's still like learning a foreign language - everything I understand about measurement is in pounds, miles, feet, gallons, and tablespoons. I don't add 5 mL of salt to my fried chicken batter; I add a teaspoon. I don't measure how far my car goes in kilometers per liter, and I don't buy gas by the liter. I suppose I could, but it's far easier to do everything in gallons.

It's the same as me trying to learn Spanish or Japanese - I know "uchi wa doko desu ka" as well as "Donde esta la casa?" (apologies for lack of accent marks) But if I don't know that it means "Where is the house?" it's of no use to me. English is how I think, just as Imperial units are how I think. That's probably why it's so hard for Americans to switch over - they're a nation of stubborn mules.

The UK uses both systems...

Also I find ridiculous that the US use the very same metric system of the country they seceded from two centuries ago... yes, in the US republics, the unit of measure is the lenght of the arm of an english king (the yard).
But they did screw up the units of volume for no reason.

As a Canadian, I tend to use metric to measure things in the world (it's 1000 km from here to my parents' house; this road is 6m wide), but imperial units to measure people (I'm 5'11" tall; when I first reached that height I weighed only 9 st).

The UK uses both systems...
Which is why we need to shelve one. I've gone through 13 years of education, using only metric, whether it be maths, biology, chemistry or physics, and know completely nothing of the Imperial system. Never studied it, never had to, since pretty much everything I do is in metric. Then, suddenly I'm going to be expected to convert to this alien system, as well as keep the metric system for studying medicine at Uni.

I'd ditch the Imperial system no question. Two systems is wasteful duplication, and we need metric for trade, science and the generation of metric-ers coming out of school.

Pretty much everything is in metric already, I've noticed, apart from milk, beer and driving. I say go metric, and get the EU to (secretly) pay for it.

The UK uses both systems...
Indeed, and there's more usage of metric nowadays.

The only things you get in pints any more are goods like beer and milk. Both of which are important, I suppose. But other liquids usually come in litres.

For weights, we still often use stones and pounds for the weight of people, but never really anything else. We use grams and kilograms for most stuff (although for pots of jam etc. we often just change a pound to grams, i.e. 454g pots).

Distances - we mostly use imperial for relatively long distances, and also for how high people are, but for short to medium distances we use metres, really (as an example - about a mile away, you'll find a man of about 5' 2", who'll be about 300 metres from the pub. Have a good one.)

Indeed, and there's more usage of metric nowadays.

The only things you get in pints any more are goods like beer and milk. Both of which are important, I suppose. But other liquids usually come in litres.

For weights, we still often use stones and pounds for the weight of people, but never really anything else. We use grams and kilograms for most stuff (although for pots of jam etc. we often just change a pound to grams, i.e. 454g pots).

Distances - we mostly use imperial for relatively long distances, and also for how high people are, but for short to medium distances we use metres, really (as an example - about a mile away, you'll find a man of about 5' 2", who'll be about 300 metres from the pub. Have a good one.)
I also use imperial for lengths, particularly when guesstimating, "oh it's about 2 and a half feet" or "it's about 10 inches" I just can't estimate using cm,- they're too small to imagine properly. Also you wouldn't order a 22.9 cm pizza or brag about having a 30 cm penis.

I also use imperial for lengths, particularly when guesstimating, "oh it's about 2 and a half feet" or "it's about 10 inches" I just can't estimate using cm,- they're too small to imagine properly. Also you wouldn't order a 22.9 cm pizza or brag about having a 30 cm penis.

I'm sure the Frenchies have no problem bragging about 30cm penii.

I am Canadian, and our road signs are in kilometers, and normal highway speed is 100 km/h (or 120 km/h if you know there's no cops around). Even though the switchover happened when my mom was still a kid, I still prefer to bake in imperial, my height is always in feet and inches. However, since I have no concept of long distances in either kilometers or miles, I measure my distance in time it takes to get there. But then again, that's pretty common in my province.

I am Canadian, and our road signs are in kilometers, and normal highway speed is 100 km/h (or 120 km/h if you know there's no cops around). Even though the switchover happened when my mom was still a kid, I still prefer to bake in imperial, my height is always in feet and inches. However, since I have no concept of long distances in either kilometers or miles, I measure my distance in time it takes to get there. But then again, that's pretty common in my province.

Which province is that?

Pretty much everything is in metric already, I've noticed, apart from milk, beer and driving.
In Canada all foodstuffs are measured in metric (it's the law - there's a lot of things packaged in multiples of 454 grams) except draught beer. That's always measured in pints or ounces.

And the oil industry still uses imperial units. They produce oil by the barrel, and they use a 48" pipe wrench to open that gas well.

The one metric unit I still can't wrap my head around is fuel economy. Miles/gallon works fine for me, and I'm sure I could convert to kilometres/litre just fine, but for some reason the metric measurement is litres/100 kilometres, and that's needlessly complicated.

Which province is that?
In my experience, the measuring distances based on how long it takes to drive it (oh, he's just 2 hours away) is a prairie thing.

In Canada all foodstuffs are measured in metric (it's the law - there's a lot of things packaged in multiples of 454 grams) except draught beer. That's always measured in pints or ounces.

And the oil industry still uses imperial units. They produce oil by the barrel, and they use a 48" pipe wrench to open that gas well.

The one metric unit I still can't wrap my head around is fuel economy. Miles/gallon works fine for me, and I'm sure I could convert to kilometres/litre just fine, but for some reason the metric measurement is litres/100 kilometres, and that's needlessly complicated.

That's funny, here in the UK we fuel our cars in litres (it's the law) and nobody noticed, yet we still talk in miles/gallon. But I think that people who learned to drive after the changeover will still use litres/100km.

I guess we can be needlessly complex and indecisive together. *Waves Canadian/Union flag*

Another question is what units are used to purchase common materials.

In Canada, cloth is sold by the yard, most construction materials are sold in imperial units, bulk food is sold by the pound and kilo, honey by the gram, etc.

Marijuana, oddly enough, uses a corruption of both, where an ounce is equal to 28 grams.

In my experience, the measuring distances based on how long it takes to drive it (oh, he's just 2 hours away) is a prairie thing.

Well, I have family in Toronto (who moved from Vancouver, who moved from Liverpool) so I was vaguely curious. We generally do that in the UK too, except for shorter distances which are generally measured in "X miles down the road".

In my experience, the measuring distances based on how long it takes to drive it (oh, he's just 2 hours away) is a prairie thing.

I agree. 3 hours from Calgary to Edmonton. 3 from Saskatoon to Regina. 8 hour drives include Winnipeg to Regina, Edmonton to Regina, Calgary to Regina and Saskatoon to Calgary.

I think it has to do with the uniformity of landscape imposing a uniformity of travel time.

To be perfectly honest, I've been outside the US so long I doubt I could function in Obsolescent System anymore. I just wish my countrymen would get with the program and start using SI.

I agree. 3 hours from Calgary to Edmonton. 3 from Saskatoon to Regina. 8 hour drives include Winnipeg to Regina, Edmonton to Regina, Calgary to Regina and Saskatoon to Calgary.

I think it has to do with the uniformity of landscape imposing a uniformity of travel time.

Trust me - you hear this ALL THE TIME in Oz ouside of the cities.

Doesn't matter what you can demonstrate,
Wanna bet? You cannot equate mass with weight; they are two separate concepts. One is the physical quantity of matter, the other requires a gravity field, and thus the weight can change based on the strength of the field.

You cannot win; physics trumps you. That's just the way things are.

Ok, quick question for you. What are you measuring when you step onto a bathroom scales?
Weight.

Weight has many definitions. In fact, most words in the English do. Indeed, it was something that many people, such as Hobbes, have strived to alter, so that each word can only have one meaning. And therefore each sentence can only have one meaning, and leaving no room for ambiguity.

According to - http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/weight
3a is Fartsniffages, and 6a is yours.
Not really. In the context of 3a, a "weight" is just the thing you're using to do the measurement with, and it has a specific weight. Since we are speaking about the metric system in this discussion, we must use the proper physical/physics concepts. And in physics, mass and weight are two distinct concepts. In the SI system, mass and weight are two distinct concepts. Confusing them is abandoning the SI system, which a lot of people hold dear and like to rip on the US for not being on said system. But when people say something weighs such-and-such kilos, they are doing exactly what they rip on the US for doing: not using the SI system.

Yea. But you're forgetting 2 things.
1.The scales you use are meant to be used on the Earth's surface. So g is about 9.81 m/s^2 (more or less, not constant everywhere). Let's say your mass is 70 kg. When you step on the plate, it receives a force of 70*9.81 N. Since we know we're on the Earth's surface, the device simply translates that 70*9.81 N to 70 kg.
I'm not forgetting that at all. However, to say that something weighs kilograms is, by SI, wrong.


2.Also the International Convention on Weights and Measures defines a "technical" unit of force, known as the kgf (kilogramme-force), equal to 1 kg * 9,81 m/s^2.
AKA 9.81 Newtons.


The kilogramme-force can be used, and can also be referred to as "kilogramme", in contexts that aren't ambiguous and that don't require great accuracy, like selling food in a supermarket for example.

So:
If your MASS is 100 kg, your WEIGHT on the Earth's surface is 981 N or, if you like it, 100 kgf.
Yes, I know that.

Confusingly enough, pounds are both.

Mind you, I'm probably one of the few people who can easily and fluently use both systems, so I voted for both in the poll.

The next question is why does everybody use the 24 hour clock?
Because of the nature of the Earth being an oblate spheroid. A 24-hour clock works better with the rotation of this object, being easily able to divide up the hours/minutes/seconds.

Not really. In the context of 3a, a "weight" is just the thing you're using to do the measurement with, and it has a specific weight. Since we are speaking about the metric system in this discussion, we must use the proper physical/physics concepts. And in physics, mass and weight are two distinct concepts. In the SI system, mass and weight are two distinct concepts. Confusing them is abandoning the SI system, which a lot of people hold dear and like to rip on the US for not being on said system. But when people say something weighs such-and-such kilos, they are doing exactly what they rip on the US for doing: not using the SI system.

I don't think that's what's going on when people use "weigh" and kilogrammes. They aren't confusing the force with the mass; they aren't concerned with the force they exert except as a means of working out their mass.
The only issue is that the english word "weigh" has always contained both meanings, and even the quest for scientific precision can't take that away. Clearly in a classroom to use weigh with SI is wrong, but outside a classroom to use te word phrase "I weigh" you are including in that phrase the correct "I mass" or whatever. Good point there - if you are trying to phase a meaning out of the english language it helps to have something to replace it with - mass works better as a noun than a transitive verb.

I don't think that's what's going on when people use "weigh" and kilogrammes. They aren't confusing the force with the mass; they aren't concerned with the force they exert except as a means of working out their mass.
When they say it weighs such-and-such, they are using it in the context of the mass multiplied by gravity, i.e. he weighs 200 pounds.


The only issue is that the english word "weigh" has always contained both meanings, and even the quest for scientific precision can't take that away. Clearly in a classroom to use weigh with SI is wrong, but outside a classroom to use te word phrase "I weigh" you are including in that phrase the correct "I mass" or whatever. Good point there - if you are trying to phase a meaning out of the english language it helps to have something to replace it with - mass works better as a noun than a transitive verb.
They should just use the correct units. If you weigh something, then you provide the weight in the unit of weight, not the unit of mass. Quite simple, I should think.

They should just use the correct units. If you weigh something, then you provide the weight in the unit of weight, not the unit of mass. Quite simple, I should think.

Simply getting people to change the unit(s) they use is hard enough, let alone the word with which they use it, especially when there's only a difference in a scientific contest.

In my experience, the measuring distances based on how long it takes to drive it (oh, he's just 2 hours away) is a prairie thing.

We do that in Australia too. I'm more likely to say "it's about 3 hours from here", rather than "it's about 300km from here".

Wait. The "Daily Mail" is the newspaper who's published that thing about the former British Minister of Defence claiming that an alien invasion might happen any time now, isn't it? It was in another thread...

Oh my, the Daily Mail ruling Britain...:(

Nick Pope != "former British Minister of Defence".

Thank you.

I swear I will go postal on the next metric user who doesn't know the difference.
So, you say pounds-force and not just pounds for your weight, right?

Yes, I know that.
Actually, you don't. A mass on 100 kg on Earth's surface will exert a force of 100 N. A Newton is the force exerted by 1 kg of mass on the Earth's surface.

So, conceptually it's wrong to use kg for N, just as it's wrong to use lb for lbf, but unless you're off the Earth's surface the end result is the same.

It turns out that a "billion" also has different interpretations in US and Europe, someone mixed up the two causing one of the Mars exploration satellites to enter the atmosphere and burn up - all because someone didn't check it was right 'billion'.

They should have just written 10^9 or 10^12 (depending which it was) .

They should have just written 10^9 or 10^12 (depending which it was) .

I thought it was because someone mixed up miles/kilometres, but because of the long/short billion.

The next question is why does everybody use the 24 hour clock?

Custom. The original commission that came up with the metric system also proposed a decimal division of time based on the second, but people wouldn't have it. The 24 hour system is based on our Earth's rotation so it's very practical. So, the hour was defined as 3600 seconds and that was it, this had the effect of making the day not 24 hours long, but everybody is drunk when they make the adjustments so no one cares.