blike Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 The other day I was measuring with a ruler and I wrongly assumed that inches were divided into tenths. I've spent four years in science class and the metric system is pretty much how I think these days. Nonetheless, it took me about 2 minutes to figure out what the heck was going on with the ruler. Finally I realized that it was divided into 8ths instead of 10ths. Then I had to convert all the stupid decimals from calcluations into 8ths. RIDICULOUS I SAY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodhound Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 yes indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 agreed.... world wide metric system but still use miles because who knows what a kilometer looks like other than a thousand meters?!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdurg Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 I always find it kind of funny how over here in the USA, our country originated because we wanted separation from England. Yet, our system of measurements are all based on 'Old English' measurements defined by the King of England. So while England has smartly used the metric system, we're still using a system of measurements designed by the very people who our country didn't really like back in the beginning. lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 Blasphemy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
folder Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 For non-scientific measurements, I like the old system. Mabye it's just because I grew up with it, and am familiar with it. Quarts, Pints, Cups, Tablespoons, and Teaspoons are convienient for cooking, the mile is nice for distances, weight in pounds, and Fahrenheit degrees are nice. I would really have a hard time adjusting to the metric system for those kinds of things. Scientific measurements are a different thing, and the metric system is very nice for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 For non-scientific measurements, I like the old system. Mabye it's just because I grew up with it, and am familiar with it. Quarts, Pints, Cups, Tablespoons, and Teaspoons are convienient for cooking, the mile is nice for distances, weight in pounds, and Fahrenheit degrees are nice. I would really have a hard time adjusting to the metric system for those kinds of things. Scientific measurements are a different thing, and the metric system is very nice for them. no, farenheit is a bad system of measuring temperature, celsius is much better. Waters boiling point is 100°c (but 69°c at the top of mount Everest), water freezes at 0°c (but when its salty its more like -20°c). In farenheit its 212°, 32°, and -4 ???Pointlessly complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tetrahedrite Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 I believe that the US is one of only two countries that still officially uses the imperial system (the other is Libya or similar). If the US would convert to metric it would make life easier for everyone. It wouldn't be popular, but in two generations I suspect the old system would all but be forgotten. Not to mention it would be easier to teach because it is all in base 10 and nearly all of the simple units are related (mostly by water). My mother and fathers' generation converted when they were in school and they haven't had any trouble adjusting to metric. I suspect that another reason the US doesn't want to change is that it wouldn't like anything invented by the French! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodhound Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 a lot of things were invented by french!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Tycho?] Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 I believe that the US is one of only two countries that still officially uses the imperial system (the other is Libya or similar). If the US would convert to metric it would make life easier for everyone. It wouldn't be popular' date=' but in two generations I suspect the old system would all but be forgotten. Not to mention it would be easier to teach because it is all in base 10 and nearly all of the simple units are related (mostly by water). My mother and fathers' generation converted when they were in school and they haven't had any trouble adjusting to metric. I suspect that another reason the US doesn't want to change is that it wouldn't like anything invented by the French! [/quote'] All other countries had to go through the change. I live in Canada and my parents still measure things in imperial, and most kids are sorta half and half, some things they use metric, other imperial. Inches, feet and miles are popular (height is always measured this way) but nobody uses yards, its always meters, and km is often as not used instead of miles. Gallon or litre depends on what you're talking about, fuel its gallon, drink its litre, anything else and it can be either one. Metric is always used in temperature among kids. Weight is almost always pounds, especially for weight of a person. So of course it takes time. In fact I'm pretty bad at measuring distances and weights, instead of learning both just to use in my head I kinda learned neither, but now am consciously using metric. Metric is what I will teach my kids, and so in a few decades it should be pretty purely metric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coquina Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 I have a machine shop - all my machines (except the 2 computer operated ones which cost $70,000 a piece) were built to work in English dimensions. All the shop tools - micrometers, calipers, etc., measure in English dimensions. Conservatively, it would cost me at least $200,000 to convert. Meanwhile, there will be a long period of time when parts need to be replaced that were made by conventional measurements. When it comes to basic measurements, my machinists can manually convert lengths and diameters from one system to the other. The real problem comes when you try to switch from conventional to metric threads. If they are small diameters you can buy metric taps and dies so, while it is an expense, it isn't an enormous one. However, if you have to chase a thread on a lathe, a "lead screw" is a part of the lathe that runs from one end to the other - and the matching part is in the carriage. Changing from one to the other would involve a week's worth of work, so you sure couldn't switch back and forth. I am only telling you about my industry, which I know. There must be hundreds of others that would also be adversely affected. Back in the 70's, the US was going to change, but they soon realized that many businesses absolutely couldn't afford it. Blike - scales (Not rulers) are available that are divided into 10ths, and subdivided into 100ths. I mentally convert between fractions and decimals all the time. I have most of the common dimensions memorized, but we have conversion charts all over the shop - one just has to look up. We work in 1000ths on an inch - not at all unusual to see a tolerance of +/-.0001, In other words, if a dimension is given that says 1.000" +/-.0001, that means that it can measure between .999 and 1.001, if it doesn't fall in that range, it's dead. Since a single hair of your head measures approximately .003, in the example given above, if we were off by the breadth of a hair, the part would be ruined. We have all kinds of extremely expensive measuring devices and gage blocks that give us the ability to achieve that measurement. Another practical problem is that the conversion between inch and metric does not divide evenly. Suppose you are given a drawing that tells you to place 10 holes 75mm apart. Ok 1 milimeter = .039370 of an inch, so 75mm = 2.952750 inches. The closest you can move the table on the mill is in increments of .001, so you round off the decimal to 2.953, and move that distance every time. However - if you were moving in metric you would have moved a total of 750mm or 29.5275", but if you move 2.953 ten times, the distance of each hole from the origin gets progressively worse, your last hole is placed at 29.530 and is .0025 out of location. When you are working in close tolerances, it is better to stick with the measurement system the machine was designed for. Engineers can write out anything on paper. My delightful job is to decipher the drawings and turn them into usable parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tetrahedrite Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 Its fine to keep the machines/ threads etc you have now, just call them by their metric measurements and eventually everything else will follow. Temperatures, weights, energy, long distances etc can easily be converted without adversely affecting the profits of the companies. In the long run it'll be worth it - just look at every other country! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tetrahedrite Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 ']Inches, feet and miles[/b'] are popular (height is always measured this way) You guys must be massive over there!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coquina Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 Its fine to keep the machines/ threads etc you have now, just call them by their metric measurements and eventually everything else will follow. Temperatures, weights, energy, long distances etc can easily be converted without adversely affecting the profits of the companies. In the long run it'll be worth it - just look at every other country! There is no way to convert a metric thread to a conventional thread especially if you are trying to turn one on a lathe. The lead screw is only manufactured for a conventional thread. If I turn a M5.0624 (making up a number here) nobody will have a nut that fits it. I wish you would come and see my shop so I could show you these things instead of trying to write them. Machines will do that for which they were manufactured - they can do no more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 no, farenheit is a bad system of measuring temperature, celsius is much better. Waters boiling point is 100°c (but 69°c at the top of mount Everest), water freezes at 0°c (but when its salty its more like -20°c). In farenheit its 212°, 32°, and -4 ???Pointlessly complicated. I don't see how the latter numbers are much more complicated than the former. Frankly, all systems of temperature measuring suck compared to Kelvin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilded Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 "Frankly, all systems of temperature measuring suck compared to Kelvin." I have to agree, though it's easier to say "it's 3 degrees out" than "it's 276 degrees out". "If I turn a M5.0624 (making up a number here) nobody will have a nut that fits it." Yeah, that would drive them nuts! Ahahaha... I'm tired. And who took my meds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coquina Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 One thing some inventors used to do was to make totally non-standard or "bastard" fasteners for their products - It made them much harder to pirate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 Didn't Kenedy promise we'd switch to metric by 1969? What happened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alt_f13 Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 Didn't Kenedy promise we'd switch to metric by 1969? What happened? Um... he died!? [edit=post] Frankly, all systems of temperature measuring suck compared to Kelvin. Kelvin sucks too. We need a temperature system not based on the percent of water freezy boilingness. Celcius was stupid to begin with... Kelvin is just an elaboration of a poor system. DAMNIT! Too bad I won't live to see the day we discover the FIRST NON-ARBITRARY NUMBERING SYSTEM!!!1qw [/edit] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted December 25, 2004 Share Posted December 25, 2004 Um... he died!? Well yeah. But, aren't presidently programs supposed to be carried on after their terms end, or they die. Usually VPs have the same agenda. Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alt_f13 Posted December 25, 2004 Share Posted December 25, 2004 Well yeah. But, aren't presidently programs supposed to be carried on after their terms end, or they die. Usually VPs have the same agenda. Oh well. Yah, I'm not so sure the rest of the crowd in the US would have gone along with it. I still meet crazies up here in the Great White North who think metric is just some other language. Those crazies, they make me laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 Conservatively, it would cost me at least $200,000 to convert. if we were to switch(which i think is a REALLY GOOD idea), you wouldn't have to convert(even if you did, it would be a one time conversion, because everyone would then use the same system). just get metric when you buy new ones. until then do the conversions before you set the machines. DAMNIT! Too bad I won't live to see the day we discover the FIRST NON-ARBITRARY NUMBERING SYSTEM!!!1qw i hope that is sarcasm. how can any numbering system not be arbitrary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ophiolite Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 you wouldn't have to convert(even if you did, it would be a one time conversion, because everyone would then use the same system). just get metric when you buy new ones. until then do the conversions before you set the machines. Go back. Read post 11 by Coquina again. Do you now understand? Yes? Want to revise your input? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VazScep Posted December 30, 2004 Share Posted December 30, 2004 Didn't Kenedy promise we'd switch to metric by 1969? What happened?Uh...the Stone Cutters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilded Posted December 30, 2004 Share Posted December 30, 2004 "Uh...the Stone Cutters?" You got that right. http://www.netowne.com/conspiracy/konformist/wedo.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now