> Meters per second (m/s) is the SI unit for velocity and the unit recommended by the World Meteorological Organization for reporting wind speeds
> Since 2010 the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) also recommends meters per second for reporting wind speed when approaching runways
Kind of interesting, as well, to consider this when talking about lat/lon. Do those attempt to be SI?
Time for SI is still seconds.
Which isn't base-10, yet is SI. So depends on if you accept adopted SI, or want to jump on the base-10 SI clock/time bandwagon.
And lat/lon is based on angles, not distance, with lon coming from time (delta time between solar noon in two locations).
But the SI unit(less) for angles is radians.
So... no, but it depends on how you interpret multiple SI inconsistencies.
I recall that astronomical units are also not SI.
Mentioning computers is just a cheap shot, I admit. Still, is valid.
Cooking is an odd one. The old units that were largely defined in thirds are quite useful. Weight is, of course, more reliable for baking, but you can go very far at home quantities with cups and spoons.
To be fair, I'm a large believer that the units are arbitrary and whatever you learned will be good. Such that if you learned SI, it had advantages off the bat. But I am in less agreement that they have an intrinsic advantage.
So an airplane traveling due north at 120 knots would cover 2 degrees of latitude per hour.
Most of the US Customary and British Imperial units actually have similar logical definitions or derivations, but they aren't regularly taught anymore.
So, knots persist because lat lon persists. Home cooks persist with imperial in some places because nobody cares to reprint all recipes and measuring devices. Astrological units because at that scale... Nothing scales. And computers, because binary won. (Curious to consider if ternary had been the winner...)
I confess I am actually personally moved by some of the intuitive arguments for older measurements. Usually very physical based and very in tune with numbers actually used in an industry. It is odd to think of a sixteenth inch wrench, but it is just the natural result of dividing by two, four times, after all. (That is, you have a measuring rod, put a midpoint on there. Four times. Now, do the same for millimeters?). (granted, in the age of computers, any measurement is much easier to do at the machining level.)
>Usually very physical based
Land records in the US are all feet, acres, furlongs, arpents, sections, and townships.
That's not changing.
And they all divide easily from townships of 36-square miles to 10-acre quarter-quarter-quarter-sections to 66x660ft-acres.
66 ft is a gunter's (surveyors) chain = 100 links
10 chains = 660ft = 1 furlong = 1/8 mile
It's a brilliantly thought out system, but most people promoting SI won't take the time to see the benefits.
Personally, I find it much easier to make blunders with SI, because a decimal shift one place over isn't always an obvious mistake.
For example, aviation deals heavily in flight levels (multiples of 100 ft). If flight levels are a first-class concept in your program, then you're already using non-SI units below the presentation layer. At this point you've established that some altitudes in your program are expressed in feet, and it might be a better idea to use feet for altitudes everywhere rather than introducing a lot of unit conversions. Or it might not be.