Why the US is not metric and why it won't be any time soon

Post Reply New Topic

The first manned landing was in 1969. It's been 55 years of progress and scientific advancement that also contributes to the CERN achievement.

And a grand achievement it is...55 years later. I don't think it compares.

What I'm trying to say is that while you can accomplish great things using metrics but I believe people exercising their brains is more important than a perceived gain in efficiency.

The first manned landing was in 1969. It's been 55 years of progress and scientific advancement that also contributes to the CERN achievement.

And a grand achievement it is...55 years later. I don't think it compares.

What I'm trying to say is that while you can accomplish great things using metrics but I believe people exercising their brains is more important than a perceived gain in efficiency.

It's about uniformity in science and industry. Metrics does not do away with mathematics or any other brain exercises.

As a Canadian I pretty much use a mixture of both and I think that's pretty common here, or at least in the area I live. I do live in a border city, which probably plays a role in that. If I'm talking about height and weight I use feet and inches and pounds, and I'll use inches for measuring as well. (If someone told me my weight in kg it would mean absolutely nothing to me) When it comes to temperature I actually use Celsius for cold winter temperatures, but in the summer I use the temperature in Fahrenheit more often and I'm not too sure why or how that happened. If it's below freezing I would say it's -10 C because it makes more sense to me somehow. If someone were to tell me it's 14 F I don't automatically have an idea in my head about how cold that is without trying to convert it or looking it up. lol In summer I would sooner tell someone it's 100 F outside than tell them that it is 38 C because the 100 F I'm more used to and makes more sense to me. I grew up watching the American networks and so some of my weather forecasts were from the local American News, usually in Detroit.

I was actually told off (quite rudely) by a nurse at the Emergency department at our local hospital once because I told her my fever was 101, even though the nurse was in her 50's and therefore learned the old system when she was in school and knew perfectly well what 101 meant in regards to body temperature.

Of course I couldn't tell her off the top of my head what 101 was in Celsius, being as sick as I was at that moment and also being caught off guard by her suddenly rude tone, so she was forced to swivel her chair 180 degrees to look at the conversion chart on the wall directly behind her that I couldn't see from where I was sitting and didn't even know was there. She probably would have conserved more energy if she'd just done that instead of being rude to me first. lol

As a 39 yr old Englishman I use both. I tend to use mm, cm and metres for measuring but miles for distance

I use ml and litres for volume

I use stones and lb* for weighing myself but g and kg for weighing other stuff.

*remember even if we still used imperial there are many measurements different in the UK than in the US such as Gallons etc.

Temperature I use C but we do talk about temperature hitting 100 in the summer i.e. 100F

I'd disagree on that one. WE came from Europe. We didn't invent our own system of measurements. We used what we knew.

Granted, you have some odd ducks. For example, the boosters for the space shuttle were based on the width of a horse's ass. Why? The boosters were transported via rail. Rails were based on common roads when the railroad was invented. Roads were determined by the width of carts pulled by two horses. Some things are just carryovers for long-past practices. Doing something completely new requires reworking a lot of stuff influenced by those old standards.

Found this. Hope it hasn't been posted here before.

The use of imperial instead of the standard SI units caused the
Mars Climate Orbiter to dissintegrate in the upper-Martian atomsphere

You're right but I contend the unique characteristics of our fractional system, although comprised of basic mathematical operations, when taught at a younger age tend to promote a different type of mathematical thinking as opposed to metric or digital thought/thinking.

This is a thought I've pursued lightly at various times but never to a conclusion, so please "fire away" to help me clarify or reject. Thanks.

A "cup" is simple. it's 8 ounces, or 1/2 of a pint.

That is contradictory. Is it a weight or is it a volume? 1/2 pint of flour will not weigh the same as 1/2 pint of water. Which recipe ingredient are they referring to that is both 8 ounces and is 1/2 pint?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_ounce

All right....1/2 pint of dry or liquid volume YIELDS 8 ounces of weight, and is called a "cup" in the US.

In everyday life, I have never encountered a case where a "cup" is NOT 8 ounces. It is de facto accurate, if not de jure accurate.

The marathon is a different story. It's usually 26 miles, 385 yards--but it has varied considerably over the years. In the US, sanctioned marathons are always 26 miles, 385 yards. However, in sanctioned marathons events outside the US, the exact distance is 42.195 kilometres, which is 4.7 inches longer than the 26 miles, 385 yard distance.

Historically, the marathon distance has varied considerably.

If 1/2 pint is equal to 8 ounces of weight and that is calibrated for water (I assume), then it won't work for yoghurt for example. In metric 100ml of water is equal to 100g of water. It won't work for substances with a different density.
I often see it on packaging, it says for example 750ml / 800g.

A fluid ounce is a measure of volume. No connection to an ounce of weight. There used to be a measure of time called an ounce as well.

An "ounce" was originally a twelfth of something. The same root can be seen in "inch" and "quincunx".

I was responding to kraftiekortie who claimed that 1 cup was 8 ounces of weight.

No swearing on the forum please.