Slashdot Mirror
NASA Will Go Metric On the Moon
An anonymous reader writes "Space.com is reporting that NASA has decided to use the metric system for its new lunar missions. NASA hopes that metrication will allow easier international participation and safer missions. The loss of the Mars Climate Orbiter was blamed on an error converting between English units and metric units. 'When we made the announcement at the meeting, the reps for the other space agencies all gave a little cheer,' said a NASA official."
Now if only American car companies will budge that extra 17/32" and finish going metric rather than forcing me to have 2 sets of tools for one car. Then I can "Compare Prices on Physics and Engineering" here at /.
That's Metrification.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
The metric system is the tool of the devil! My spaceship gets forty rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it!
A metric moon? Not if this president has anything to say about it!
The loss of the Mars Climate Orbiter was blamed on an error converting between English units and metric units.
And to think when we were learning the metric system in school, the teacher told us it didn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out.
I guess he was wrong.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
NASA's story on this here.
I was under the impression that most scientific agencies used metric as a standard (Guess US educational system failed me there). My father is a builder and I grew up seeing how contractors can be so loose with measurements. It amazes me that NASA got this far using a very inaccurate system (at times) for such precise operations.
Metric is a very easy system to deal with and has been adopted over a large portion of the world. Technically Canada has been metric for over 20 years. Tho things like construction has remained Imperial as we are next to the US. If not for the Us Canada would be completely metric, but since the Us is right next door, we end up in the metric camp with one foot still over in the Imperial side o things. But I don't see the Us converting to metric any time soon, but the scientific community moving to metric to do its work instead of continually converting would be a great leap in the right direction.
Give 'em an inch, and they take 160,934 cm...
when the first McD's is built on the moon, I have to order a "Royal With Cheese" ?
I used to be with IT..now IT seems strange and scary to me.
... is that in the UK we've been using the metric system for at least 20 years!
Its about bloody time!
I imagine this will assist the U.S. is its conversion to the metric system, something it has been trying to do for many years now.
I guess it's very hard when everything you have is already in inches, though. 1.2361 cm bolts aren't exactly widespread!
"The loss of the Mars Climate Orbiter was blamed on an error converting between English units and metric units."
As I recall, the conflict came into play partly because NASA was using metric. The federal government is about the only customer of the US aerospace industry that insists on using metric for everything (civilian air traffic control, even in other countries, measures altitude in feet instead of meters).
So this announcement that NASA will keep on doing what they've been doing for decades really doesn't change things one way or another. The real question will be whether the contractors NASA deals with will be careful about avoiding future embarassment (and I'm not so sure, since the blame in the public view rests solely with NASA).
...they're going right through it?
I believe the correct terminology is the "imperial" system. And of course, the British haven't had an empire for far longer than 20 years.
I'm American and I wonder why people stick to the damn standard system so much. When doing carpentry work, I can't really measure something that is, say, 17 7/32, and tell you what 1/2 or 1/3 or 1/4 of that is, off the top of my head. OTOH, dividing centimeters by anything is pretty easy.
Now I find out Nasa hasn't been with metric since the beginning? Holy shit, this is engineering, it is supposed to be metric! I wouldn't dream of using standard (though I have to convert to it sometimes for the end product for others).
I have a bad feeling about this. Has this whole metric thing been thoroughly tested?
DecafJedi
my weblog: apropos of something
The year 10,000? (Oh, sorry, that should be 5,280.)
I'm confused - are they only going to use the Metric system on the Moon?
or is it more like: "Dude, did you see that?! NASA totally went Metric on the Moon's ass!"
Insisting on "correct" English is like saying that there is only one, definitive recipe for chili.
When I was taking chemistry and physics classes in highschool (late 80s/early 90s) the teachers were typically teaching us everything in metric units. So I, for one, welcomed our centi-overlords.
It always seemed weird to me that kids were being taught the metric system (at least science oriented HS and college people) for a couple of decades now, yet step out on the street and everything's "miles this" or "feet that."
Sounds like NASA has finally learned from its mistakes and they are being more transparent.
I imagine this will assist the U.S. is its conversion to the metric system, something it has been trying to do for many years now.
Yeah, they started with the 2-liter bottles of soda about 20 years ago, so it looks like they're working their way down the list.
I wonder what comes next, after beverage containers, and interplanetary spacecraft.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
"The metric system is the tool of the devil! My car gets forty rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I likes it!"
Who keeps the metric system down? We do! We do!
- Sincerely, you!ess!A! you!ess!A! ...
www.tribalnetworks.org - helping tribal people around the world to own their own means of high-tech communications
The German engineers that NASA used to start the American space program and which worked on into the Apollo program always did design everything in metric because that's how they were taught. Their calculations were then converted to Imperial for the engineers who actually put together the equipment. I guess there were a lot of "conversion errors" then too.
A bizarre polyglot, but not as bad as their cereal boxes, n'est-ce pas?
.. but when is the rest of the USA going to follow suit?
According to wikipedia, As of 2005 only three countries, the United States, Liberia, and Myanmar (Burma) have not converted to metric yet. Canada officially converted in 1970, but both systems get used on a day-to-day basis. Most tape measures, rulers, etc have both systems. Most older people still use imperial for most things, and younger generations seem to be mixed.
It's actually interesting that a lot of people here (Canada) use mixed units. Personally, I usually use feet if I'm estimating a distance (it's just a very convienient size - the closest metric equivalent is a decimeter, just doesn't quite cut it), and pounds and feet/inches for human weight/height. We still order a pound of wings and a pint of beer (I think you get beat up if you ask for 568mL of beer in a bar). Most other things are metric: road signs are km/h, the weather report is in celcius. Most stores sell things by the kilogram, meter, or liter/milliliter. I'm not sure what they teach kids in school now, but my generation (mid 20's) seems to be decently fluent in both systems (I remember learning how to add inches as part of learning fractions).
Speak before you think
Except for beer which comes in pint glasses, milk which comes in pint bottles, cars which measure their efficiency in miles/gallon and travel at speeds measured in mph, road signs which give distances in miles, shoe and clothing sizes based on inches AND people who measure their weight in stones (!) and pounds the UK is all metric, correct.
Welcome to the 18th century!
Not quite. Americans' "English units" actually differ from Imperial units for volume, so the 2 systems are not exactly the same thing. The measures of length and weight are the same, except that very few Americans will have any idea what a Brit means if they say something weighs "12 stone".
Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
This is a necessary, but difficult transition. Yes, difficult. Maybe it's pretty easy for the programmers, but for the mechanical guys out there (like myself), this introduces a huge relearning phase. Say, for example, I need some sheet metal to function as a structural piece. I can be pretty confident that my initial guess will be pretty close to the final thickness value if specified in imperial units. I also know what's typically readily available from suppliers (eg: 1/4" is far more common than 15/64"). Not only must I do a conversion from my ingrained inch units into "foreign" metric, but I must also look up which sizes are common.
With time, I would be just as good with metric as with imperial units. And I want to change to metric for its obvious advantages. It's just that my design confidence and productivity would falter through the transition. I'm quite sure I'm not alone on this.
IWARS.
People, in general, disappoint me. Politicians even more so.
I should preface this post with the fact that I'm in the US. When I took physics and chemistry in college we barely discussed English units. There was one class period that we talked a little about conversion from English to metric units (I don't believe we even did the opposite), and that was about it. It was just assumed that we knew metric very well already. If I graduated and went to work for NASA and had to use English measures, I think I would have to almost relearn some of the physics--it would be awkward for me to work with the non-SI units, and even more awkward to have to learn new constants (I learned the constants in metric units). So I assumed that NASA had moved away from English units long ago since it hasn't been taught in so long.
Saddamm Hussein is building weapons of mass destruction there.
Whats the freezing point for water? 0 C ....
Whats the boiling point for water? 100 C
How many meters is 1 km? 1000
1 cm X 1 cm X 1 cm of water weighs 1 gm
Try doing this in imperial system. Metric system is not just for scientific community but useful and easier to use on daily basis.
These NASA rebels must be stopped. The moon was claimed in the name of the United States by Neal Armstrong, we can't allow them to fruit it up by going all metric on its ass the next time they land there. We should nuke all of NASA's bases from orbit. Some one see about coordinating that with our national space agency.
Ah, so you're admitting that America embraced and extended our measurements as well as our language? It's no wonder Microsoft ended up the way it did ;-)
"That's 1 mm step for man, 1 km leap for mankind"
mod me funny
It secretly amuses me when Americans (one of only three backwards countries that haven't converted) argue about keeping the "imperial" system. All of your current units of measurement have been defined relative to the metric system for the past 50 years or so. From the wiki: "One inch international measure is exactly 25.4 millimeters, while one inch U.S. survey measure is defined so that 39.37 inches is exactly 1 meter". "The pound avoirdupois, which forms the basis of the U.S. customary system of mass, is defined as exactly 453.59237 grams".
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Somehow I doubt that the first moon landing teams felt that metric was important. Obviously, they made it (and back). Instead of trying to figure out ways to make things less divisible by three, they should focus on the actual logistics of getting there and back safely.
Of course, the most of the Slashdot crowd think that the metric system is some sort of gift from God. All I know is the bar where I order pints serves them at a proper temperature and you get a little more than the rated 20 UK fluid ounces. Should they switch to the metric system? Will that improve the beer? Will it make the Thames Welsh Bitter taste better? How about Coniston's, or Fuller's, or Paulaner Salvator?
All of my tractors parts are standard measurements. Will changing them to metric make the tractor last longer than the 40 years it already has? Of course, this will be unpopular here, but who cares what other space agencies think? Are they as successful as NASA? Have they broken more new ground? Do they care what we think about their use of the metric system, despite it's weaknesses? Don't think so.
The brains of a chicken, coupled with the claws of two eagles, may well hatch the eggs of our destruction.
I've lived in Britain for 6 years now, and I still can't remember how much a stone is.
The president that GWB emulates is reagan. Interestingly, it was reagan who stopped this country from going to the metric system. Nixon put on the path, and Cater signed it for the whole nation to convert to it in early 81. This was just another one of reagan's screw-ups with long term implications. Heres to hoping that Bush will not follow the reagan legacy on this one. As it is, he has followed it 100%.
Exhibit #1 for why Wikipedia is not to be trusted - they continue to tell half the story. (On this and many other topics, they prefer the simple and popular explanation over completeness and accuracy. [1])
MCO was lost not because of a metric conversion error - but because an increasing divergence between the planned and actual performance was ignored. The official report mentions this - but glosses over its importance. MCO was lost because NASA attempted to fly the mission on the cheap, because of this testing and analysis during the cruise phase was cut from the budget. Some analysis was done on the side by a few engineers - and their calls for a formal analysis went unheeded until too late.
[1] And before the Wikipedia cheerleaders chime in, yes - I have tried to fix many articles to correct this problem. Without exception the corrections were either reverted out or edited into meaninglessness. On Wikipedia the win goes to the editor with time on his hands or who can cite a lightweight popular article as the source of his 'facts'.
It was actually mandated back in 1975 that the US needs to convert to the metric system, check out http://www.pueblo.gsa.gov/cic_text/misc/usmetric/m etric.htm
Quote:
Congress passed the Metric Conversion Act of 1975 "to coordinate and plan the increasing use of the metric system in the United States."
but it all fell apart since there where no deadline and all based onm voluntary conversion.
Rocket nerds in the audiance will probably be familiar with the "Estes Alpha," a simple beginner's kit.
.8 pounds. After the change to metric, these became A5-4 and B4-2 motors, with average thrust given in newtons.
There have actually been many versions, with and without plastic nose cone and fins. No die-hard collectors' set is complete without a "metric" Alpha, briefly produced in the 70s for educational purposes.
Now the instructions have both English and metric measurements . . . where measuring is required at all.
* * *
One model rocket measurement has been metric for going on four decades; the average thrust and total impulse figures for motors. Before 1968 or so, you'd save your paper route money for "A.8-4" or "B.8-2" motors, with an average thrust of
Mmmmm, newtons.
I'd say a large chunk of construction workers/companies in Canada didn't switch to metric simply because what they are using works for them and they don't want to learn something new when they have something that already works. And I say that because my father owns a construction company and still uses the old system. It has nothing to do with the US. In fact I'd wager that most Canadians don't give a rats ass what the US is doing.
Read my short stories - You won't regret it.
From Wikipedia:
p ng
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Metric_system.
It would be embarassing to have the mission fail simply because of a failure to convert between an assload and a metric assload.
Note that you don't see any movements to "bring back the imperial system" elswhere in the world, because metric *works*.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Funny but when I read car and motorcycle magazines from the UK they list fuel economy in miles per imperial gallon... And when I was in England a lot of people ordered pints.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
14 pounds
FGD 135
President Reagan, in an effort to show he was cutting taxe(which he actually raised) cut the funding to convert everything to metric.
There was a time when American cars had both Metric and english and some roads had metric and english signs(very few). we would be done with the conversion 10 years ago.
More reagan legacy.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Exactly why I propose we just split the difference.
:)
1 yard = 100 Centiyards = 1000 Miliyards
1 pound = 1000 milipounds
you get the idea
you should hear my ideas on how we should change currency
"Personal ownership is a hallmark of conservative capitalism. And I don't believe I am entitled to anything that I did n
The real question is; Does Size matter more in Metric?
The title is (big surprise) misleading. NASA will require contractors to use metric units for all documentation they supply NASA with.
But the Death Star would almost certainly use Imperial units, would it not?
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
Making the press release is easy... actually doing the conversion is going to be difficult.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
The bigger irony is that they're not even proper "english" units! The fl. oz. is slightly bigger, there are fewer fl. oz. in a pint, the ton is lighter, and have you ever heard Americans measuring their weight in stones? Perhaps they were looking for somebody else to blame for the twisted unit system, and chose the name of the country they rejected in 18th century!
English Units? Imperial. The English use Metric now, in case you hadn't realised.
-- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
The Imperial system has some terribly convenient reasons that it sticks around... The Metric system is theoretically better, and its decimal based approach is useful for mathematics, although in a computer age (base 2), the imperial system is actually more "computer-friendly," as our system of halves and doubles actually makes more computer sense. As you said, it all depends what you are doing.
.4m over a continuous range.
For liquids, they all suck. Pints, Cups, Quarts, and Gallons all give you some reasonable amounts, but are useless for converting. However, if you look at recipes, it may call for 3/4 of a cup (not 6 oz), and if you double, it's easy, 1.5 cups.
For short distances, feet is extremely useful. Most things that you eyeball are between 0 and 10 feet, which gives you 11 values without resulting to a decimal, which confuses people. Metric gives you values 0-3 for the same area. There isn't a huge advantage to miles compared with kilometers, but the conversion is kind of irrelevant. If I'm measuring something for working around the house, I don't need to know the fractions of miles, if I am measuring a long distance, who cares about feet?
Similarly, temperatures are more useful for most people in imperial. For example, when looking at the weather, a really cold, freezing day is in the -20s, down in Florida, we don't get cold, but we get hot days in the upper 90s (areas of Texas get low triple digits, and heat waves can hit the 120s), this gives us a range of temperatures of 140 degrees. The same Celsius range is -30 C - 50 C, a useful range of 80, so for gauging temperatures, the Imperial system is easier for the weather. In addition, if I want to say something is in the low 80s (80 F - 84 F), I get 27 C - 29 C, so upper 20s does the same thing, but something like upper 80s or lower 90s collides in the metric system in the low 30s.
The fact is, the "beauty" of metric is the large number of modifiers that let you convert easily, but we don't use it, in Imperial we use inches, feet and miles, in metric you use centimeters, meters, and kilometers. The conversion factor is largely irrelevant for most non-engineering/scientific fields.
The pros to metric are the ability to easily convert down to smaller units. Converting from centimeters to millimeters is trivial, which is important when doling out medicine if you need precision, but not so important when I'm measuring holes for putting something in the wall. The imperial system is more useful for most people in their day-to-day lives, because it is based upon fractions (intuitive) instead of decimals (precise but not intuitive). If you get below an eighth of an inch for precision, you're probably doing something that requires precision that metric gives you.
I can eyeball a person and easily describe their height... the range of heights in normal conversations of adults is 5'0" - 6'4", 1.52m - 1.93m. The fact is for describing heights, the discrete inches (17 here) component is more useful than the
People that work in precision like metric. People that don't see know reason to switch. The scientific community grabbed metric because it solved a problem that they had. There was no compelling reason for people to switch, which is why it took government coercion to switch people in Europe. In the US, our government hasn't historically had the power to do something similar (coerce grocery stores to change, schools, etc.) so America hasn't switched.
It seems that most Americans that want to switch base it on a "the Europeans are superior" inferiority complex that many Americans strangely have, or their field switched because it is useful for them, and want everyone to switch for their convenience. Things like construction are stuck because Americans have 8 foot tall ceilings (normal) or 10 or 12 for larger ones, so sheet rock needs to come in 8 ft sheets. The 2x4 is such a useful component coming in 8 ft, 10ft, and 12ft lengths. Switch construction to metric would be useless
But if they were only going to do it half-assed (0.196850394-assed for metric folks),
I've always heard people talking about "a metric buttload" or "a metric assload" of this, that or the other thing. I never knew how much they were talking about, and I've been too embarassed to ask. Thank you for clearing up the conversion factor between a metric and imperial ass load!
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Just make sure you put enough fuel http://www.jimloy.com/math/metric.htm in before you send 'er up!
Whats the boiling point for water? 100 C
How many meters is 1 km? 1000
1 cm X 1 cm X 1 cm of water weighs 1 gm
Whats the freezing point for water? 32 F
Whats the boiling point for water? 212 F
How many feet is 1 mile? 5280
1 cubic inch of water weighs 0.036127 pounds or 0.578032 ounces
"Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex. I could pinch them."
Marvin the Martian
But I thought they were already using metric on space missions...
OH you mean ON PURPOSE this time!
If you read the article "The agency has decided to use metric units for all operations on the lunar surface, according to a statement released today." So this only applies for operations on the lunar surface. The system they will use on earth or in transit is not specified. Most likely it will be a mixture to ease the transition:
On earth they'll measure fuel in fluid ounces and inch-ounces of thrust. In orbit they'll measure thrust in rod-kilograms and fuel in inch-m^2. Finally on the moon they'll measure thrust in nm-megagrams and fuel in grams.
In Canada, milk comes in bags.
The fact that the US is non-metric means significantly increased costs for businesses and a barrier to trade. Considering the push in the US to globalise trade (and the realities of a global economy) it makes the most sense from an economic perspective to have the whole world on a single standard - and the rest of the world (as well as the scientific community) has clearly voted on what the standard should be. Furthermore, NASA's foibles show the obvious downside and potential expense of holding on to an outdated system.
There is a concept called Zero Point Thinking, which basically says "Knowing what I know now, if I had to start over which way would I do it?".
When you have the answer to that you should head in that direction as quickly as possible since much of your efforts in your current direction will be wasted when you do finally switch.
Given that a switch to metric is going to be painful no matter when we do it, but we know we need to, switch now! Get it over with and stop wasting time (and lost rockets due to conversion errors).
Enough already, make the change and don't look back.
Lose Weight and Feel Great with Isagenix
It also fell apart because they focused all the time, effort and resources on
teaching the public how to do conversions, instead of actually switching.
I work for a big semiconductor manufacturer. We made the switch over 20 years ago.
One memo, signed by all the VPs, made it happen. Never looked back.
They are listed in metric and MPG if you looked properly.
Likewise when ordering a "pint", you are actually ordering 568 ml of beer in a glass, just like when you order a "packet" of cigarettes you are ordering 20 cigarettes in a box - its a name.
How will they know when they are 1/3 the way there?
Done.
What is it with Americans that they call a system of units English, when said system of units has never actually been used in England! Do the English talk about their weight in pounds, do they hell, they talk in stones. I weigh 10st 12, and not 152lb. The US gallon is completely different in volume to that of the Imperial gallon used in the U.K., 3.8litres to 4.5litres. The list goes on but they are not English units, by any stretch of the imagination and the English talk about British Imperial units any way. so stop calling them something they are not.
Because they are French words.
You know what they say:
You give 'em an inch, and they take a kilometer!
Metric is good for all the obvious reasons -- SI units haver fewer weird things going on, conversions are easier, interoperable tools and fittings, etc etc. For all things like discussing distances, velocities, thrust levels, trajectory simulations, and more, I'm completely in favor of metric everywhere.
The one place I don't like this is when it comes to fittings, fasteners, plumbing, etc. Partly it's that metric nuts, bolts, and fittings are harder to find. You can't buy metric pipe fittings around here. Sure, you can order them, but that takes longer and costs more. The cost isn't a big issue on most things, but turnaround time is -- if you find a problem, it's really nice to be able to order a different part and have it the next day, rather than waiting a few days for something from Europe to clear customs and arrive. On some things, though, it actually makes a big difference. A lot of things like large pressure regulators, specialty valves, and more are even harder to find with metric fittings on them -- specifically, they become custom parts, with associated cost increases and weeks of lead time, which is frequently unacceptable.
And before anyone says you can buy metric parts in the US -- sure, you can, as long as they're "normal." It's the specialty parts that are hard. For example, McMaster-Carr stocks 3798 different socket cap screws in English sizes, but only 1610 in metric. If you need a weird metric screw, you may very well be out of luck.
The other major thing is subcontracts -- if I hire a consultant or send a part out to be machined, the machinist needs to have metric tools. Again, most machinists have a basic set of metric tools, but not an entire shop's worth. If the consultant or machinist has to start buying new tooling, your costs and the delivery time start going up.
I'll say it again -- having to buy parts from out of the country is not just a minor nuisance; it has a direct impact on how quickly you can revise a design and do the next test, which directly translates into how long it takes to complete the project.
I'm in favor of working toward compatibility, but it's not nearly as obvious an answer as it looks when it comes to tooling, since the installed base of English tooling and suppliers is *so* *huge* while metric is really only supported because of a few foreign-made parts.
You know its time to change to the metric system when you can read definitions on imperial units from wikipedia like this:
"Because the furlong was "one plough's furrow long" and a furrow was the length a plough team was to be driven without resting, the length of the furlong and the acre vary regionally, nominally due to differing soil types. In England the acre was 4,840 square yards, but in Scotland it was 6,150 square yards and in Ireland 7,840 square yards."
If we keep the imperial system i guess its important to ask what kind of soil the distance is supposed to be? Is it English soil when traveling to the moon? Is the ox well fed? Is it an experienced plough team leading the expedition? Maybe its raining that day and the soil becomes softer?
Come to think of it why should we ever abandon the imperial system!?!
This is a viral signature. You are now infected!
My space probes get forty rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I likes it!!!
Psst... I think you mean 10/6.
The most of those pints and pounds are metric pints and pounds.
Here in Europe a lot of people had to adapt to convert betwen different units both ways when we (not all Europeans but still a lot of them) switched to EURO (€) instead of having each country use its own currency. Sure it takes time (already 4 or 5 years and running) but it's not that difficult, especially when you don't have a choice in the first place :-)
What is so different with units of measure ?
Votez ecolo : Chiez dans l'urne !
You use the imperial metric system, everyone else in the world uses the standard metric sytem.
I come from Canada and we have yet to fully convert to the metric system; the Mulroney government decided that funding the metric conversion initiative begun by the previous Liberal government was a waste of money and they stopped pushing the issue... but I digress.
Apparently the attempted conversion was disliked by a number of people. My favorite story was about the some of the old people. Somehow they got it into their heads that gasoline sold by the litre was inferior, quality wise, that if the same gasoline was sold by the (imperial) gallon. Yes, these poor individuals went around the country cautioning the masses against putting this 'litre of gasoline' in their cars!
I can't believe it.
OK, here's the corrected 60 factors:
2=30,3=20,4=15,5=12,6=10
- pounds for weight
- inches for weight and balance/C of G calculations
- litres for fuel and fuel consumption rate (convert to pounds for W&B/CoG calcs)
- celsius for temperature
- feet for altitude
- knots (nautical miles (nm) per hour) for speed
- nm for distance
- km or metres for visibility
and so on...So, when the equipment is used 'en route' to the Moon, the contractors can use whathever system they want? But when it is used on the Moon, it is metrics only?
Seems to me the reverse strategy would have more chance of success!
Yeah, right, so that would make it 1000 days in a year? And PI==10.0, I guess. The problem with imperial unit apologists is that they make such unreasonable arguments to try to justify an unreasonable system.
Now, let's get this straight, write it down carefully: the International System unit of time is the second. Minutes, hours, days, weeks, and months are ***NOT*** metric units
We have such weird units of time partly because neither the lunar month nor the solar day are exact divisors of the year and partly because of an old tradition on dividing the day. But, no matter how hours and minutes are counted, these are not part of the International System. You may buy eggs and beer cans by the dozen, but a kilogram is still a thousand grams.
(mind your yoda speech, please)
Dollarpounds and Pennycents?
Actually, it's pretty simple. In NASA units, to convert one inch to centimeters, multiply by $254 million.
unless your are weighing fish, then it's 12 pounds.
Apparently not only has parent never seen Office Space, a whole lot of /.ers never have either. Shame on the lot of you.
I've grown up using Metric, since New Zealand's been standardised on it since well before I was born. I use it all the time, and I love it. So many different units of measurement go between each other in logical ways, many of which aren't noticed by most, right down to things like standard pencil widths being designed to match standard paper sizes. There are definitely problems with using it for day-to-day use, though, which I think most people just put up with. (The metre is often too big, the centimetre isn't big enough, and so on. Blocks of 10 cm would make a lot of sense, and I'm a bit surprised they don't get used.)
What imperial really has going for it, though, and one of the reasons it's so convenient, is that the units make it easier to divide things up for day-to-day tasks. In metric, it's easy to divide by 10, and often by 5 and 2, but outside of that the decimal places start getting long and often end up recurring. Dividing things into threes, fours and sixes really doesn't work if you also want twos and fives.
This is more to do with base 10 than with metric. I've often wondered if metric would be better long term if everyone counted in base 12, instead, and if the relationships between metric units were based on multiples of 12 instead of 10. For day to day use, simpler fractions translate to decimals (or whatever decimals are called in base 12) more nicely with base 12 than base 10. eg.
1/1 in base 10 is 1.0, in base 12 is 1.0.
1/2 in base 10 is 0.5, in base 12 is 0.6.
1/3 in base 10 is 0.333333..., in base 12 is 0.4.
1/4 in base 10 is 0.25, in base 12 is 0.3.
1/5 in base 10 is 0.2, in base 12 is 0.24.
1/6 in base 10 is 0.166666.... in base 12 is 0.2.
Base 12 makes the first 6 fractions easy to write as a decimal, whereas base 10 becomes a real problem. This probably wouldn't be practical because it's a huge learning curve for everyone, but it'd be quite interesting all the same.
Without even redefining the second, everyone's computer is already using milliseconds from
Current time is:
1,168,383,485 (Tue Jan 9 16:58:05 CST 2007 )
If you drop insignificant values (either a way to precise, or a way to high), you could tell DAY time as:
83.4k (23:10/11:10PM)
The metric system might be cutting-edge for 18th-century France, but we should leapfrog other countries and start using scaled Planck units.
Wark! Pieces of ten! Pieces of ten!
wow, at this rate you may be driving on the right side of the road in this century !
No one has actually answered this legitimate question.
"PC LOAD LETTER" ==> (P)rint (C)artridge, (Load Letter) Sized Paper now!"
"PC LOAD LETTER" ==> (P)rint (C)artridge, (Load Letter) Sized Paper now!"
"PC LOAD LETTER" ==> (P)rint (C)artridge, (Load Letter) Sized Paper now!"
"PC LOAD LETTER" ==> (P)rint (C)artridge, (Load Letter) Sized Paper now!"
"PC LOAD LETTER" ==> (P)rint (C)artridge, (Load Letter) Sized Paper now!"
There's only 14 characters on the display, what should it say? "Put In Paper?" Where? The obvious place, of course. Stupid wording, but once you know what it means, it's obvious.
I RTFM.
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!
In pints.
Note however that these are not pints as you know them. Not the pitiful 473ml servings that pass for pints in the colonies. Oh no. One proper pint is 568ml.
This may be why we've never quite gone for the metric system here. We'd end up being served beer in 500ml glasses and that simply won't do. That extra 68ml is important, even if in most pubs it just accounts for the head...
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
FGD 135
Okay, one can dedect/feel temperatures at around 5 degrees Farenheit, 3 degrees Celsius. While I can't really feel the difference between 80 and 81, a temperature in the upper 70s (76-79), low 80s (80-84), upper 80s, etc., we do things in 5 degree increments, you're doing it in 3 degree increments.
Verbally, I find using the upper/lower + the tens digit gives me a good range to describe temperatures that I can feel. The 1 degree different is only meaninful for getting the high/lows off the news or records, where we have a higher resolution for describing things without resulting in fractions.
Thats why I had no problem using Celsius/Kelvin in the Chem lab, and Farenheit to describe the weather. Obviously, people are more comfortable with what they are familiar with, but I think dismissing Farenheit as "useless" ignores some of its convenient aspects in day-to-day life.
"temperatures are more useful for most people in imperial"
:-)
... and don't even get me started on money, pffh! 4 farthings to a penny to 12 to the shilling to 20 to the pound and throw in crowns and guineas for good measure... I loved decimal money!
Nope, socially constructed, all total rubbish (with all due respect). I'm in the UK and we use a right mix up so I'd say it's just what you grow up with and get used to. I haven't the faintest idea what old people (and Americans) are going on about when they say the weather is in the 50s or the 90s or the 40s but I've got a good idea what clothes to wear if it's 5, or 15, or -1. Meanwhile I feel comfortable with miles and yet metres, grin! because I've grown up in a country which uses a right mix -folk generally talk in miles for long distances rather than km's even though we're metric, and on smaller day to day things folks my age and younger (I'm 40) have grown up being taught metric. But I can switch to imperial inches/yards if I have to, can do pounds and ounces and even remember that a US gallon is different from one of our gallons!
Never got area though, I can't look at a field and tell you how many acres OR hectares it is!!
I think it's all just what you've been taught and had ten years at school plus some at college being forced to use, completely socially constructed, neither is more convenient for estimating. My shout as someone who was taught as the change was happening in the education system so got a bit of both is that as a kid knowing everything was 10x10x10x10... was a damn sight easier to remember (and multiply) than 12x3x1760
Imperial Units evolved from things natural to people. When I need to guess a distance, I use the span of my hand, ~ 2/3s a foot. I can walk something off, my foot is pretty close to a foot, etc.
The ergonomic arguement is that because Imperial Units evolved from things that people used, and Metric was developed in a lab, the imperial system works more naturally for people, all things being equal.
With regards to height, you think in 1.5m - 2.0 meters. Assuming you estimate to 5 centmeters (because people round to 5 and 10), you seem to have 11 increments, but if we notch out 1.5 (people under 5' tall) and 1.95 and 2.0 (people over 6'4) as common adult heights, we have 8 increments for height. In imperial, we have 17.
Metric is correct academically, but the ergonomic aspect is part of why metric has never been voluntarily adopted in "normal" society, just areas where precision are needed. I think you'll find in time that tools will move to be more metric, not really a need for imperial there, but that's a long transition.
Hell, when measuring something, if I need more precision than a quarter inch, I usually flip the tape measure over and use milimeters. Both can stay, and live and let live.
Alex
I'm glad NASA is finally getting on board, but the transition to metric will take a while for me. I'm fine with km / Celsius / etc (heck! I lived in Canada for a few years), and I could even get used to height and weight in metric, but.
But.
A4 paper is just wrong.
I'm sure, if the good ol' USA goes metric, we'll end up using 21.59 by 27.94 paper (that's 8 and half by 11 using cm instead of in). It's just like Canada and their Coke cans of 355 ml. Why 355 ml? Check your US Coke can: it's 12 fluid ounces...
Q: So how are you going to implement this change to the metric system?
NASA: We will do it inch by inch.
Life is wet, then you dry.
I have to disagree with you, I live in a metric country so I'm not accustomed with the imperial system. I did try to use the advantage of using parts of my body as a measuring rule, and I really gotten nowhere. There really is no precise match, and I couldn't even find the right part to measure inches (no part of my fingers seem to measure 2,54cm). If I tried to make any precise work (inch/centimetre range) doing what you say I would end up doing a really crappy job.
The only way I managed to use a body part for measuring is my height, and it is not really precise. And the resulting "ruler" is metric, since I know my height in centimetres.
Come on, quit lying to yourselves. When you need to do some work with a reasonable amount of precision you use a ruler, like everybody else (only yours in in inches and mine is in cm).
GPG 0x1B479C78
Actually a couple states started down that road and found out that replacing all the mile markers and placing all kilometer markers on the roads would cost the entire state's budget for a year. Needless to say it was never started.
Okay, everybody always says that Liberia and Myanmar haven't converted, but what is there their real status? Why haven't they converted? Is it used in practice without official blessing? What do they recognize officially in its place? English? Traditional units?
I wish Americans would stop calling them "English" units. Not only are they no longer generally used in England (with the odd exception like pints of beer and miles) but the even when they were used they were different from the American system. For example there are 20 fluid ounces in an Imperial pint vs. 16 fluid ounces in a US pint....so it is a very good thing than NASA is no longer using them for international missions since there isn't even an Imperial standard that anyone can agree on!
"Err...Houston we may have a problem, when you told us to burn 10 pints of fuel was that Imperial pints or US pints?"
I can easily divide an inch into halves down to 64ths with a good tape (even a cheap tape measure has 16ths, and I can eyeball the 32nds), but try to do that with a centimeter
Personally this is one part of the imperial system I hate. All the dumb markings on the tape and I have to figure out which are 1/4s 1/8ths or 1/16ths. As to your precision argument, 1 inch equals 25.4 millimeters. So a millimeter is between a 1/16 and a 1/32nd of an inch.
AccountKiller
Lets all raise a pint (err...) 473mL of beer!
NASA Will Go Metric On the Moon
Is that anything like going medieval on the Moon? 0_o
"I said...does the Moon look like a bitch to you?!?!?"
1 is the square root of all evil.
No - the Death Star is a space vehicle, so it would use the metric system. Defense would be impaired however, when they try to fire ground-supplied cal.50 ammo from a 12.5mm machine gun... SCNR, Ulli
Simple things should be simple, complex things should be possible.
Let's see.... Wow! My penis is over 15 cm long! I suddenly feel incredibly well endowed! Go metric!
Welcome to the 19th Century, NASA!
Well they already do something like this: they have "mili-inches" which they call "MILS". I sometimes see them on chip package mechanical drawings. This is ridiculously confusing: how do you say "MILS" so that it sounds different from how you say "mm"? (No, we don't say "milimeters", we say "mils".) And, once again, although they insist on calling these "ENGLISH" units, they absolutely aren't the units that used to be used in England. My father has an old pre-metric micrometer that belonged to my grandfather (yes, my father who is now retired used metric all of his working life - this thing was an antique curiosity) and it calls these units "thous" i.e. "thousandths of an inch".
Slashdot should control nasa and all space exploration...............
B/C while we're busy jerking off, I suspect the Chinese Communists are steadily building capabilities.
So... When you get to the moon, as contract/slave labor, you'll be eating chinese food.
Enjoy!
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
Actually, AFAIK the black market measuring system for drugs is still a mixed system too. Pounds, ounces, grams, kilos, all of these can be heard in the back alleys of America. In fact, I think the drug using population is probably better equipped for a switch to metric than just about any other significantly sized group. Not that I advocate drug use, of course.
When Canada switched from miles to kilometers about 20 years ago, they replaced all speed limits on the roads from 30 mph to 50 km/h and such. My father is kind of a speeder on the roads, and he told me that he escaped many tickets by telling the police officer:
"I though those were MILES per hour, not KILOMETERS! I was driving less than 50 mph, sir!"
He did it often, until they figured out his trick. Ah, good family values!
What you don't seem to understand is that people really are used to thinking in metric and don't find them convoluted at all using them in daily life. Most of the world does this without any trouble and they never think of it twice. In fact, one of the requirements when the metric units were first defined, was that they operate at the human scale
In answer to your argument about height: that's a really subjective one because it's much easier to estimate the height of somebody who is almost your height -- within half an inch, or a centimeter, than it is to estimate accurately the height of somebody much shorter or taller: could you quickly tell the difference between somebody who is 5' and and somebody who is 5'2"? (assuming you're taller than that).
There are three very non-intuitive and non-ergonomic things about the imperial system to people used to the metric system: one is the non-base 10 aspect of it. How much is 1/8" + 3/16"? or is a 20 oz + a cup more or less than a quart? To somebody not used to counting in base 12 or 16 that's does not come quickly, because there are no other situations where one needs fractions like that. Money is counted in decimal, and so is everything else.
Another issue is the multitude of names for seemingly arbitrary subdivisions: 1 yard = 3 feet = 3*12 inches, but is a pound 12 or 16 ounces, and how many cups in a quart? How many feet are in a mile? And you know what? People in the US don't even know these things. Go ask when you're in a supermarket next time how many ounces there are in a pound: they won't know.
The third issue is of course the lack of consistency: how many gallons is a cubic foot? That's seriously un-ergonomic.
When you start to loose bone mass and are no longer 6 feet, you'll still probably be 1.8m, or 180cm. 180cm works well as a "good male height" because it's the same number as degrees for a half-circle. At least, that's the mnemonic I use for people who quote their height in cm or m.
FWIW, I think temperatures will be the last unit we start using. Fahrenheit is just so natural and ingrained--100 is close to body temp, zero is very cold, not just freezing, etc. There just isn't enough subtlety in the Celcius scale, it seems.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
So, when you say "mils" do you mean millimeters or milliliters? Just asking. Despite being in the US, I work for a biotech company, and the scientists work in SI units like good little girls and boys, but the terms are used interchangably, and with some confusion on occasion - the vaunted ease of length to volume conversion sometimes happens inappropriately.
.250-20 everywhere?).
.001". Having two words for something isn't a crime, or a problem. One word for two things... bad.
I'm a mechanical engineer in my third startup, and despite wanting to run a "pure" shop, too many parts are only availible conveniently in one form, or the other, and some are mixed - despite their Japanese or EU manufacture (Is the tripod screw on cameras really UNC
Incidently, why use microns instead of micrometers? Been curious about that, too.
Mil's or thou's are used interchangably for measurement in a shop. Like pounds to quid or whatever. Nothing to get confused by - it's alway written as a decimal inch -
I am studying at a reknowned European university who, bizarrely, have the default paper size on their printers set to "US Letter". This means that we can't just print stuff. Every time (Yes, EVERY time) you want to print something you have to go into the print menu and page setup options and change it to A4.
EVERYGODAMNEDFREAKINTIME!!!!!!!
Not that I'm bitter about it.
Travelling forward in time at a rate of 1 second per second.
why would they use only 2 pints of fuel?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
A couple of months back, a friend of mine told me a story about the apollo moon shots. Either a programmer or an engineer was working on some data for a particular problem involving distances. The number seemed off to him so he called his supervisor over and asked why the number seemed so strange. The supervisor told him that they were measuring distances in earth radii because you would be unlikely to accidentaly use the number in the wrong place and it also made people more cautious with their calculations.
What is the deal with Americans calling "Imperial units" "English units"?
:-)
Is the word "Imperial" unsuitable for use in a Democracy
By the way, has anyone noticed that in Foxmarks, you can choose to display your temperature units as "standard" or "metric"?
Actually, most of the differences between the two systems stem from the fact that the british changed the definitions of several of their units _after_ we had declared our independence. Back in 1776 they used the units which we use today.
yes, we've modified units as well since that time, but nearly all of the changes were the tiny ones involved in making them based on SI units (such as changing the definition of the inch such that 1 in == 2.54 cm)
-- Tim Buchheim
Look at this:
T hought/dp/1842930958
http://www.amazon.com/Civilization-One-World-Not-
I've just finished this book, it deals with the (supposedly very ancient) origin of the two systems, and both are geodesic, that is to say, both are derived from the measure of the polar circumference of the planet.
Cheers,
D.
--- There is no spoon
All number should be in Hex.
The ironic thing is that the English were the ones using the metric units.
I stand corrected!
However, a pound of feathers weighs more than a pound of gold, because feathers are measured using the avoirdupois system (1 pound = about 453.59 g) while gold uses Troy (1 pound = about 373.24 g).
Hold on a minute--I always thought that a pound was a pound was a pound, and that a "Troy ounce" was different from a "normal ounce" (1/12 of a pound vs 1/16 of a pound). Now, becaus of you and Wikipaedia I now know that not only are the ounces different AND the number of ounces in each pound are Different, but the size of each pound is different too!
Even more perverse--a Troy Oz is HEAVIER than a normal ox, but a Troy pound is LIGHTER than a normal pound!
It's no wonder y'all down there in the US crash your space probes into planets.
It's not only the English that drive on the left...
m l
http://www.pubquizhelp.34sp.com/misc/leftdrive.ht
My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
Distance to the shops in miles, distance to the sun in kilometers
;-) AND windows in inches
I measure my weight in stones and pounds, but I cook in grams.
Size of my wang in feet (ok, ok inches) size of my windows in cm.
Canada is a mix'n'match too but not the same as in the UK. Our close proximity to the US and more-recent official conversion to metric than many other countires has made us one confused lot:
* we measure distances to places in units of time (there is a Tim's five minutes away from nearly everywhere in Canada, It is 30 minutes to my office, I live three hours from the US border)
* we measure outdoor temperatures in humidex (a dimensionless number invented in Canada) on hot summer days, Celcius on mild days, wind chiill factor on cold winter days, and number of seconds it takes for exposed flash to freeze solid when in Winnipeg or Edmonton.
* we measure our wangs (ok, ok, in feet
Of course, if we had a decent base two measurement system, we wouldn't need to worry about converting between binary and that obsolete decimal stuff.
--YMMV (your [nautical] mileage may vary).
As a note, it's never actually written "mils" - I think the grandparent poster was just writing it that way to give an idea of pronunciation. For writing, we'd stick to "mm" and "ml" (or occasionally "mms" and "mls" informally, but I personally avoid that)
Incidently, why use microns instead of micrometers? Personally, I never use "microns", only "micrometres"... but I do feel I'm in the minority doing that.
As another note, pay attention to the spelling - "re", not "er". A "meter" is a device for measuring something, whereas a "metre" is a distance. "Micrometer" is a tool used in mechanical engineering, "micrometre" is a very small distance - and the pronunciation of these two words are quite different (roughly "mi-cro-me-tre" vs "mi-crom-e-ter").
My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
[b]quote[/b] : I usually use feet if I'm estimating a distance (it's just a very convienient size - the closest metric equivalent is a decimeter, just doesn't quite cut it)
Firstly the real equivalent is not the decimeter it is the metter. Why ? because for 3 feet you have one meter. You usually do not say somebody is 17 decimeter tall, you say they are 1 meter 70.
Now imagine I am trying to compare somebody with 5 feet 10 inch, with somebody 6 feet 1 inch. You have to THINK how many inch there is in a foot first. Whereas if I say one was 1m75 and one was 1m85.... You do not have to think duie to the simple 1/100 division. You could argue that this is a question of habits, but then imagine I tell you the following : "the distance measured between point A and B was five time 5 feet 10 inch, 6 times 4 feet 9 inch" you have to do conversion feet/inch. at the same time if I say "5 times 1m35 and 4 times 1m70" then this is just direct addition and division you can simply do. There is no metter / mm conversion because 1000mm=1m. You do not need to have an intern 12 inch=1 feet (or whatever the conversion is, I do not really care).
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Great. A step towards the future.
Just one thing about the article:
They are not "English" units. The correct term is "Imperial" units. It's a Roman system (the word mile comes from the Latin mille passus, meaning 1000 paces) adapted and spread worldwide by the British empire.
If you need to refer to American variations on the Imperial system (e.g. the different gallon), then the term is "U.S. customary units".
Now I realize why so many Americans wants to keep the silly 1024 prefix units for computer figures. You're so used to all kind of funky units, so it's a small step for you to remember and understand what units are used for what figures, even if they are called the same...
...etc.
http://www.google.com/search?q=fat+grams
No sig today...
In New Zealand we're way beyond Metric, with everything being now measured in Hobbits.
I wonder what NASA will do with the wheels for the next Moon buggy.
As you may or may not know, rims are measured in imperial, tyres in metric.
>"I'm not sure why Americans feel the need to stick to imperial"
Because the alternative is French.
Am I right?
No sig today...
no more imperial entanglements
What the hell? I have no idea what you're trying to convey there. I never want to say something's "in the low 80s" because I don't use the Fahrenheit scale of temperature measurement. I can just say that it's about 40 or 41 degrees outside (because that's what it is) and be done with it. You're only saying it's "more useful for most people" because you've grown up with it and have known nothing else your whole life. I'm pretty good at 'eyeballing' the temperature to within two degrees during summer, and five or so degrees during winter (because the human body responds to temperature differences logarithmically), but I'd never be able to tell you what the temperature is in fahrenheit.
Because I've never needed to, and hopefully, never will.
even when using metric the builders are also likely to psudeoimperialise it: The guy doing the sawing will know what the guy doing the measuring means when he says "that's a GOOD 63 inches", provided they've worked together for a good few years. Saying, "that's 1604mm" probably wont actually make that much difference. I've witnessed the construction of a dry wall in this manner myself and have to say that (remember in england no building is vertical or square) they made a very efficient job of it, sans millimetric precision, just by sheer teamwork and experience.
If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
When common folk start seeing gas sold for 58cents, they will GO WOW!!!
Even though its per liter and not per gallon.
It will still FEEL cheaper.
On a slightly related note, it will make calculating drinks fun, hmm is 98cents/1.5lt cheaper than 1.20 for 2ltr ?
I really find it funny to see supermarket specials which sell 2ltr coke for $1.78 and 1.5ltr for $2.20
Is that a big brother "dumbass test?"
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
"NASA is reporting that they've found the likely cause for last week's loss of the Mars Climate Orbiter. It seems one of the engineering teams was using English units of measurement while another team was using Metric units. Getting this straight is rather important when designing navigation sytems for interplanetary spacecraft, one would think."
l
http://slashdot.org/science/99/09/30/1437217.shtm
Btw, I tried using slashdot search, but its utterly useless and crap and doesnt go back past 12months, google does a fine job though.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
Car tires are sized with three numbers. One is the width, in millimeters. The second is the aspect ratio (height over width) and the third is the rim diameter, in inches. It's been that way for decades. BTW, motorcycle tires are all metric, IIRC.
The subject who is truly loyal to the Chief Magistrate will neither advise nor submit to arbitrary measures (Junius)
This seems so obvious, I just can't see how it wasn't thought of 50 years ago. How many tools do they have to take with them? At $11,000 per kilogram, you would think they would prefer 3 wrenches to 30. Oh wait, it's Nasa, so 3 Servomechanical Torsion Facilitators instead of 30.
People who think they know everything really piss off those of us that actually do.
I'm British too, but the distance to the Sun is one of those things I automatically remember in miles (93million, give or take) before performing the 8/5 multiplication to km. Planetary distances fall into the fun category, its only when we get to Light Years that I somehow switch to metric, based on the speed of light being 300,000 km/sec although even here I still think of the Imperial 186,000 miles/sec equivalent.
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
The only reason we don't use l/km (litre per kilometre) because the numbers are far below zero and would make results like : 0.085 (my gaz consumption on moterways running over the limites, oups ...) !
... ok, I know this is huge, but Prius is way too expensive for me (what are the non japanese car maker doing in their labs, ey ?).
...
But multiplying this by 100, and you get 8.5 l/100km which is better to remember (usualy people would round this saying I "consume" 9 litre per 100 kilometer with my wrek
AFAIK, gas kilometrage is the only mesure that is commoly using such an hundred trick
Another funny things, here in europe people are used to talk about computer screens in inches (maybe simply because it is written on the box so), but they are used to talk about TV screens in cm ! I would preffer to see people use cm as well in IT, because on some screens the roundings make a 1cm difference (where inches roundings does not make it different).
I came home from school and told my mum there was this replacement for yards called the metre but there were two sorts, one a bit bigger than a yard and one a bit smaller. My mum thought this sounded odd so enquired at the school. Seems I'd taken rather it rather too literally that a metre was 'more or less' a yard.
Moral: Mixing and matching is a world of pain. Good work NASA for finally getting with the program.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_beer#Small_beer
Lightweight (hic)
Genesis 1:32 And God typed
Very interesting idea, and I would like to applaud you for that
Blaming "English" units, almost makes it sound like it wasn't an American cock-up. The unit are imperial, English people (myself included) also use metric. Thank you.
No, really !
I was born and educated in the UK but after 15 years living in other countries "colour" looks wrong to me - too French or something. American spelling is more logical.
I even like "meter" more than "metre"...
No sig today...
I know the scientists and many engineers at NASA use metric all the time, and that's what we learned in college, too (except thermodynamics). I think the big contractors (Lockheed, Boeing) still use imperial, and manned spaceflight uses imperial due to cultural inertia. It was actually Lockheed's non-conversion of NASA's metric values that led to the loss of that Mars probe.
I look at this article and it pretty much sums up why the US society and schools are falling behind the rest of the world. We should be using the metric not just for science but for all facets of life. We should start sending emails to everyone in Congress for a mandatory change. With enough emails, they will listen. Especially if they can't work because they are flooded with them.
What is the rationale given in the USA for not using metric?
Its the same reason we don't all speak Esperanto.
Think about it. Esperanto was supposed to be for language what the metric system was for measurement; international, easier to learn and just all around better.
Like Esperanto the metric system may actually be a marginal improvement over what it was designed to replace BUT it isn't a big enough improvement to justify the effort for the average person to forget everything they know and start tabula rasa with a new system.
[Begin new train of thought]
The best metric(pun intended) of how much a populace has accepted a system of measure is how accurately the average person can extemporaneously estimate. For example the average American could tell you that a kilometer is about 2/3 of a mile but ask them to estimate how far away some distant landmark on the horizon is and they would immediately resort to English measures. Thats because (going back to my language analogy); I don't merely speak English, my thoughts are in English: I don't merely measure in English Units, I think in English Units.
Imagine for instance if we imposed a metric-like system on time measurements. After all 24 hours in a day is a horribly unround number. Maybe we should divide a day into 100 metric hours. Then we could mystify people by saying cool things like "I'll be back in 2 deca-hours" or "Hang on, I'll be there in a centi-hour!". It may sound absurd but you better believe if someone did invent such a system you would have people out there touting it as easier, more efficient and (*groan*) more "scientific".
[Begin new train of thought]
That being said; the biggest popularizer of the metric system in the US is probably Coca-Cola. The average person doesn't have a clue how heavy a kilogram feels but they know exactly what 2 liters looks like. Its a bottle of Coke. If the metric system ever catches on here amongst the rabble it will be via the Coca-Cola model not by State fiat as it has in some other places.
The imperial system is logical and actually much easier to use than metric. It needs a few brain cells but when mastered. Hey it's easy. I have used the metric system for years and found it contrived and awkward. Recently I have started using imperial units and there is a lot of history and logic behind it. OK NASA goes metirc. The French have won, Now repeat after me (hands in the air. I surrender, I surender, I surrender. Feeling French yet (dont worry it will come)). What's more accurate 1/32 of an inch or 1mm? What divides into 3, 4 and 6 better 12 or 10? What can you use the human body to make most measurements by metric or imperial? Never mind.
There are two main metric systems used in science: SI (International System in French)/mks (meters-kilograms-seconds) and cgs (centimeters-grams-seconds) plus a handful of other non-SI metric units that are in wide use. In the US, SI is mainly taught in University science classes, although sometimes the other units are also mentioned or used. Converting between cgs and SI usually isn't hard, but it isn't consistent (and so may be hard to remember). For instance:
1 newton is 100,000 dyne (units of force).
1 weber is 100,000,000 maxwell (units of magnetic flux).
1 tesla is 10,000 gauss (units of magnetic flux density).
I think the SI system is more common nowadays, although the cgs system is older and in many cases more convenient. Some fields still use cgs and if you're going to read old papers you need to be familiar with it.
Then you have other odd-ball units that are often used because they are more convenient than the standard SI unit:
1 bar is 100,000 pascals (units of pressure--used because 1 bar is very close to 1 atmosphere).
The torr (milimeter mercury) is another metric units of pressure. The atmosphere is also arguably metric (1 atmosphere = 760 torr = 101,325 pascal).
273.15 kelvin is 0 degrees Celsius (units of temperature--they share the same interval).
The angstrom is 0.1 nanometers (units of length--used because atoms are on the angstrom scale).
The calorie (food calories are 1000 normal calories) is 4.184 joules (depending on the basis for the calorie) (units of energy). The calorie is the amount of energy required to raise one gram of water one degree Celsius where the joule is 1 newton*meter. The cgs unit is the erg (10,000,000 joules) and is 1 dyne*centimeter.
The calorie and the torr are the only really weird metric units. Calories are deprecated (because there are several different versions depending on the temperature of the water it's based on and it doesn't convert nicely), but lots of chemists still use them. Torr (often called milometers mercury) are probably not too common, but you do run across them (it was easy to measure before digital barometers became ubiquitous).
One of my personal frustrations is a chemistry program I use at work where you input an energy in kiojoules/mole and the output is in calories/mole. This makes it nontrivial to do iterations (i.e., you need a calculator or something similar).
So you see, metric isn't as simple as you may think when you get to non-everday situations.
It was very cool when I was a kid in school and we were learning the metric system, and the ability to convert distances to volumes, and with water, weight. These are all cool aspects of metric. They make metric the ONLY system for science, or areas of steady precision.
However, most people are not scientists. Scientists have no trouble working in metric by day, and watching a football (American) game at night on a 100 yard field.
The convenient advantages of Imperial for day to day activities combined with status quo is the reason that most of America doesn't use metric. A switch to metric would be inconvenient for the transitional generations (see UK), and give up some of the convenience of Imperial. Fields that want decimal precision and convertability between domains have switched to metric.
You are right, they are the "neat" aspects of metric that are convenient, calculating the amount of water for the pool, no question, however, in the real world, I stick the hose in, turn it on, then come back when it is done.
However, what do I do more often:
need to divide a foot in half, thirds, or quarters (6 inches, 4 inches, and 3 inches), or calculate the water of the pool.
Feet and yards happen to be extremely convenient measuring sizes for many day-to-day activities. Miles are less so, and I'd have no objection to an effort being made to convert from miles to kilometers, because kilometers are more useful for estimation... When I know something is 120 miles away, that's only interesting because averaging 60 miles per hour, it's 2 hours away. Change that to 200 kilometers and 100 kph, and it's easier math.
However, the foot is an extremely convenient and natural distance. The yard is less so, but it's an infrequently used measurement. However, for a football game, the yard is pretty useful simply because it divides in 3 easily. People intuitively understand what a third of a yard is (a foot), and halves are always easy, so when it's a goal line defense, and the ball is on the 1 yard line, you see if they advance the ball "half a yard" or "one foot" or "to the one foot line" which is 2 feet in and 1 foot from the goal line.
Things in Imperial are generally designed around multiples of 2 or 3, which is convenient for day to day activities. Metric is designed around multiples of 10, which divides easily into 2 and 5... Well, if I am building a table, I need to divide by 4, guaging distances, I am dividing by 2 or 3...
I agree that the conversion is useful and the scientific fields require it, but for most of us muddling through our lives, we do conversion so infrequently it's not worth giving up our convenient ability to divide by 2, 3, and 4 easily.
The math is trivial and integer based. When you realize that it's all computerized, one more multiplication doesn't do much. It's more likely that the heads of NASA are physicists or retired military (the US military uses metric, I believe) which are more comfortable with metric. While the new launch vehicles are shuttle-based, they are new and it's probably seen as a chance to move to something the top-dogs prefer. The engineers actually designing the modules probably would rather keep the old system just because they have a better frame of reference for it, although like I said, the math is trivial.
Actually, Standard American is the proper name. The Imperial gallon is different than the US gallon (as well as the other liquid measures). Also, the English used the long ton and we used the short ton in the US. Imperial and English are synonyms as adjectives as far as units of measurement go.
Then estimate to 2.5 then, or 2 or 1, whatever the hell you want. What's the problem? The main argument for Imperial that I've seen in this thread is that Americans are scared of numbers.
Some examples where it help...
.3m, or 30 cm.
:)
My wife insists that pictures are hung 2/3 up the wall, says its the most pleasing to the eye (golden ratio or something)...
Well, my walls are the quite common 8 feet walls, so 1/3 down is 8/3 of a foot, or 2 2/3, so I grab my tape measure, go down to 2'8", and away I go. If you have 10 foot walls, it's 10/3, or 3 1/3 foor, so 3'4" and away we go.
Traditionally, floor tile was 12" (generally 11 7/8th with a 1/8" grout line), those 18" and 24" is becoming popular in high end design. Wall tile (bathrooms, kitchen backsplashes) is 4", a third of a foot. Bathroom "cove tiles" the floor boards come in 4" and 6" (1/3 and 1/2 a foot) options.
A standard doorframe is 30", or 2.5'. Our countertops are 2', our wall cabinets 1', and sometimes you get larger devices, Microvents are 16" (1 1/3 ft) deep, so you may need to get cabinets in that measurement.
Are there metric equivalents, sure. However, the 1/3 point is a useful ratio.
Metric measurements easily divide by 2 and 5. Our Imperial distances, in the fractions of a foot we use routinely, are divisable by 2, 3, and 4 (and 6, but that's less important) which is convenient for these middle realms. Basically 4" is a common use in American homes, because it is a third of a foot, not because it is just over 10 cm. A third of a meter is 1.1 feet, and is similarly useful, or a foot is around
Yes, you have similar things, but the divide by 3 and divide by 4 gives us some very common and easy to use measurements. For small distances, measured in inches, the centimeter is too small, and the 5 cm at 2 inches is alright, but 10 cm at around 4 inches is okay, but you don't have anything convenient around the 3 inch point (7.5 cm just doesn't roll off the toungue).
Metric IS superior for many things... they just aren't things that most people do regularly. Yes, water boiling at 100C makes more sense than 212F, but guess what, when I boil water, I don't care about the temperature, just did I boil water and can I throw the pasta in...
I guess the main thing that I prefer Imperial for is the foot, which is a damned useful measurement. For volumes, mL/L is fine, wouldn't affect my life much either way. I think that Farenheit is more useful for defining temperatures because when weather is concerned, its more granular, but the foot is so damned useful.
Also, with 12" tile, I can easily estimate distances in most houses, count the tiles, and that's pretty cool.
It means you're wrong. Not always, but usually, including this case.
I'm not going to debate the merits of the standard metric system vs. the various and sundry obsolete ones, that's been done quite well before either of us were born. I'm just going to point and laugh at you.
You know, this really misses the whole problem with the Imperial system -- it was not that the units had weird conversions, because no one has ever actually given the slightest worry to that. It's that if you ask "what is a pound?", there's no concrete answer. The pound was a hideously imprecise unit. So was the yard. That's why there are so many different versions of the foot, of the yard, of the ounce, of the gallon, of the ton. Every national government, every local government, every industrial association, every club, and every scientific society had it's own standards for the units. And they didn't match up very well. This made industry, commerce, science, and technology extremely annoying. People would beat children to death just to relieve the stress of dealing with the thousands of incompatible standards that comprised the imperial system. The point of the SI system was to establish really solid, singular standards for the units, and avoid the proliferation of ambiguous units and standards. The kilogram, the metre, the second, they were all defined in just one way. There were just one set of primary standards. You could ensure that your own standard matched the primaries, and be as precise as your time, money, and technology allowed. You knew that your standard would match other people's. That's a powerful tool if you deal in very precise measurements. A VERY powerful tool. Ironically, SI's success has reinvigorated the Imperial system -- all of those units have retroactively been given rock-solid definitions, based on SI units. There's no longer any uncertainty about how long an inch is: it's EXACTLY 0.0254 metres, which in turn is precisely defined by the speed of light in a vacuum and the timing oscillations of the cesium atom in atomic clocks. The inch is now every bit as exact as any other SI unit (except the kilogram, which has lagged behind the ultra-exact definitions of the rest of SI system). Imperial is ultimately a dying system, but SI has definitely given Imperial enough scientific vigor to last for a little while yet.
Yup. If I name units, I say "American" units personally,and if someone is like WTF are you calling them that, I comment the English use metric, and the old English gallons etc. are not the same as the ones we use in the states either.
Incidentally,I think this effectively "infates" some MPG ratings I've read online.. I used to look at some European car co sites for cars not availbe in the US, and Australian somewhat too. Some listed l/100km *and* miles per gallon.. the MPG ratings always seemed quite high. I realized later, Australians probably use something close to English gallon, and it's ridiculously different from a US gallon:
1 US gallon = 0.832673844 Imperial gallons &
1 Imperial gallon = 1.20095042 US gallons
To show this difference metrically,
A car that gets US 30MPG uses 7.8l/100km
A car that gets US 36MPG uses 6.5l/100km..
But imperial gallons are bigger, so imp. 36MPG is 7.8l/100km.
And yet they vote for a government run by "The Decider", which spies on people and tries to tell people how to live their lives. See homosexuality, abortion, or religion for examples of just how much modern Americans LOVE to have their government tell people how to live their lives. Alright, to be fair, it's just a few million rednecks in the middle of the country that like to have their personal lives micromanaged by the feds. But it's still an amazingly high number given that in most western nations, basically EVERYONE rejects the idea that the government should have a say in how you fuck or which fairy tales you believe or what non-sentient parasites you have expunged from your body.
"They are listed in metric and MPG if you looked properly."
No they are not in Bike.
And when you order a pint you get a pint.
Your right is just a name. A name for a unit of measure just like meter and liter are must names.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.