It's time for the US to use the metric system
vox.com
vox.com
0 and below - Freezing. Wear a warm jacket and closed toe shoes or boots.
1 - 10 - Cold. Wear an overcoat (a light one if you are used to colder weather)
10-15 - Early spring time. Long sleeves are probably in order, maybe even a sweater.
15-20 - Late spring. Wear short sleeves.
20+ - Warm to hot. Wear short sleeves. If it gets to be 24+ shorts are appropriate.
I am deliberately not giving conversions to Fahrenheit here because I think that's how you just go back to using it. Try to internalize the metric system here.
The second challenge is to switch your clocks/watches to the 24 hour mode. Not strictly metric system related, but you will not have to worry about AM vs PM again.
For the advanced users: switch your car to show your speed in km/h instead of m/h.
For the super-advanced users: try to figure out how many liters per 100 km does your car consume :).
Edit: if you cook (and you really should), use a scale set to grams instead of measuring cups for any recipes you are making. Almost all foods list both oz's and grams on them. You will get much more accurate measurements this way and will learn to gauge what 150 grams of cheese looks like, etc.
But I spent all that effort learning what temperature water boils at in Fahrenheit. Who the hell is going to remember what that temperature is in Celsius??
What makes no sense is your hyperbolic rejection of metric.
With the cooking one (assuming you meant recipes from books); all the cookbooks I've seen have nothing in metric so I have to do another step of converting before I can measure properly.
The only problem I have with taking up your challenge is...why? I'd be the only one of the people I know and I would have to convert everything for them when I communicate.
If everything tomorrow and beyond was in metric, I am guessing a lot of people wouldn't replace their old items with the new one (displaying metric) they would just find a quick way to convert from their current way.
I get people telling me measurements in inches sometimes here in the UK and I always tell the to measure it again in centimeters.
It's just easier and more accurate.
There's a maximum temperature but it's really stupidly hot, where the particles are accelerated to nearly light speed because of thermal energy.
The temperature of the sun would be 0.00000000000000002° in your crazy system.
0 through 100 is really just a part-time thing at best.
In °C the same thing plays out as somewhere between -40°C and 40°C where at the bottom of the scale it's really cold and at the top it's really hot.
Plus it follows the simple rule of "negative numbers mean ice outside" which is important from so many perspectives. That makes a lot more intuitive sense than "numbers under 32".
No, Kelvin starts at 0K [0] :)
Regarding other measurements, I agree that metric should be used, because it just makes sense. Millimeters are about as granular as 1/16 inches, so that would eliminate the need to work with fractions in most cases.
Fahrenheit actually makes sense if you consider it from a weather perspective. The only way to use the Fahrenheit scale is to look at it as percentage of body temperature. Now, I know that the body temperature isn't 100 but 98.4. If you keep that part aside for a minute, it's very easy to explain the Fahrenheit scale. 50 degrees is 50% of your body temperature. 32 degrees is 32% of your body temperature. 100 degrees means that weather is equal to your body temperature. That means things like if the weather is hot or cold is just percent of body temperature. Also, 0 degrees is the temperature at which brine freezes. So, no matter how much salt you add, ice will not melt.
Historically, when the Fahrenheit scale was invented, body temperature was supposed to be at 100. It was later realized that the body temperature is slightly less but no correction to the scale was made.
Every other scale makes no sense to me. I convert pounds to kgs, miles to kms, gallons to litres etc.. all the time just to get a sense of measure. But for the weather, Fahrenheit is really good.
It's interesting to note that all of the examples the article gives are caused by metrication - which forces conversions - rather than by problems using the customary units.
I don't see the point of a half-assed metrication, where everything remains the same size but is measured in centimeters. (Such that lumber is sold in lengths of 243.82 cm rather than 8 feet.) The US is already half-assed metric in a lot of places, with both customary and metric units printed on packaging when appropriate.
I guess the question is - what are the benefits of metrication that justify the massive expense required to convert?
It's interesting that you pick that example. In many cases, the "measurements" for lumber don't actually correspond to the true dimensions of the product purchased. For example, a "2x4" has dimensions of 1 1⁄2 inches x 3 1⁄2 inches[0], rather than 2 inches by 4 inches. So, at least for the example you give, it's not clear to me that converting to metric is a bad idea, since the specifications are already somewhat nonsensical. Granted, a "2x4" does have a standard size.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumber#North_American_softwood...
Edit: Since I can't reply because of HN's helpful 'You're submitting too fast' notice, I will reply here. You can still buy rough sawn for working on existing structures and for aesthetics when exposed.
When you measure them - they're exactly 4 x 8 feet as if they were for Americans.
It's also why you find a lot of 10mm 13mm and 19mm bolts that suspiciously also fit 7/16 1/2 3/4 inch sockets.
But agreed on the half-assed metrification. I'm from Canada. I still buy pop and beer in 355ml cans, 591ml coke bottles, 600ml pepsi bottles, and 2L big bottles. My wood is still sized in inches (or nominal inches).
(I fully support SI though. In theory, I no longer need to memorize a whole set of conversion constants. In practice, I live in Canada, so I still need them).
It's not like "I need 42 liters of beer for my guests, how many cans is that" is going to be a common thought process.
There are lots of downsides, it's interesting you give a construction example; in the UK we have houses built from imperial bricks. Metric bricks aren't the same size, but a conveniently round number in millimetres. A house I'm buying was built in imperial bricks and someone with not quite enough sense has filled in some old doorways with metric bricks.
The costs of maintaining different systems aren't large but accumulate indefinitely, the cost to switch is finite.
> The costs of maintaining different systems aren't large but accumulate indefinitely, the cost to switch is finite.
That only makes sense if there's no discount rate, nothing else that could be done with the money we'd spend to switch. I suspect there are a lot of things that could be done that would yield higher rewards.
For new stuff you could probably cheat and just base it on 40cm, which would be fine and perfectly acceptable, but for the old stuff which is still out there over the 8 feet, I'm already off by more than an inch which is enough to not hit the stud. Most framing isn't great, but still the error is additive and fractions are hard enough to work with that I'd want to avoid it.
I think the transition for lots of things really has an additional cost. Is that speed limit sign metric or imperial? Sometimes its obvious, other times not, and there are thousands and thousands of different governments responsible for them.
Sure, we all know that lots of areas in the US already use the metric system. I have personally used metric in the biomedical & consumer electronic industries, but had to use imperial in the defense industry. Generally the more advanced or international the industry the more metric it is. (That's why construction may simply never switch).
What people generally don't realize is that other countries are still using the imperial system because the US drives the market. Lots of imperial system parts are made in Mexico, China, etc to feed into US supply chains. Complete wild ass guess, but I bet more imperial system bolts are made in China than in the US.
It's not like there is a ban on making non-metric parts in the 'metric countries'. They'll do it, and often times non-metric parts are cheaper even coming from metric countries because of the volumes.
It really seems like an industry by industry fight, and by and large it is a ratchet turning in only one direction. Even the defense industry is started to use metric for some parts. I think 50 years from now it will be a moot point.
the first politic to even hint at that will have the ugliest political death in us history.
because america fuck yeah.
There are places like on product labels where both units should be mandatory. Hopefully in a few generations people will gradually switch over.
I think of beer in pints, wine in ml, driving distance in miles, walking distance in km, height in feet and inches, but weight in kg. Lengths are in m/cm/mm as are weights and volumes for cooking. Mountains in Scotland in feet and mountains in the Alps in metres...
Oddly, my teenage son uses m/cm for height and stones/pounds for weight...
I agree. But for science and engineering (where metric is really useful), I believe that everything is metric here now.
The measures for which we still use Imperial units are ones that generally are just directly and subjectively compared by humans, rather than any real engineering work.
Another way of making my claim is that nobody really has to input Imperial measures into a calculator any more, or make any conversions [involving non-metric units] for engineering purposes.
I suppose there are some exceptions (eg. BMI), but these calculations are generally isolated and have no wider unit-incompatibility impact.
It is, but it can be done in just one generation. The generation that is raised metric finds it even harder to think in imperial measurements, since the imperial measuring system is significantly more complex. Source: I grew up in a fully metric country.
I just looked it up, apparently the conversion to metric happened around the time that I was born. I had no idea, I thought that it was a decade or two before that.
i.e. if the USA had tried a bit harder in 1975, they would be done now.
Also, the UK is not "fully metric". If it was, there would not be road signs showing numbers in miles and miles per hour. You can't stop people from buying beer by the 568ml, but if the UK was serious about metric, official communications and education would be all in metric.
But after more than a decade I still find myself converting back to the old currency in my head from time to time. Only to remind myself that inflation has made that exercise pointless. The older generation has trouble with it, though.
It can be done; it just takes the determination to just do it.
Yes, it's difficult to make people think about it. At the same time, sometimes the units "don't matter" (like speed limits, 50 is 50 in the speedometer, just make sure you're not looking at the mph scale)
I want to slap somebody when I hear about "pounds" or "feet/sq ft", or even worse, Fahrenheit (since this is a non-linear transform)
At least everything in the supermarket is marked per pound and kilo
huh?
I would think this would be called linear, but that mean something more specific?
For example, yards to meters is a linear transform. 3 yards converted to meters + 2 yards converted to meters = 5 yards converted to meters. This is not true of temperature. Adding 32F to 32F gives 64F, which is not the same as adding 0C to 0C.
1. F(c1 + c2) = F(c1) + F(c2)
2. F(k*c1) = k*F(c1)
F(c) = 9/5 * c + 32
F(c1 + c2) = 9/5 * (c1 + c2) + 32
F(c1) + F(c2) = (9/5 * c1 + 32) + (9/5 * c2 + 32) = 9/5 * (c1 + c2) + 64
F(k*c1) = 9/5 * (k*c1) + 32
k*F(c1) = k * (9/5 * c1 + 32) = 9/5 * (k*c1) + k*32
Because it's harder to calculate mentally
One can approximate 2lb to 1kg roughly, 1mi ~ 1.6km, but for Fahrenheit this is harder
One solution is to establish a set point ( 70F = 21.1C, approximate to 20C ) then work in differences, since 1.8deltaF = 1deltaC so, 2dF ~ 1dC (or 10dF ~ 5dC)
Hence, 90F is approximately 30C (exact value, 32.2C)
Unfortunately, my brain won't fully switch over because everything else in my life is 12-hour time. Having both means I can't help but stick to the old way. When my computer clock says 17, I know people will start leaving the office. But, when it says 19, I don't think of supper. Supper is when my kitchen clock says 7.
Having a short adjustment period would be good, but at some point you just have to commit. Generations is too long in my opinion.
In Australia we use 12 hour am/pm almost all the time, even on official documents. We've been metric since the early 70's. I still have to pause and convert when I see a time greater than 12 (or, sadly, less than 1.)
It seems much more a cultural thing, that one.
Now if we could only stop anybody using m/d/y date formats...
We did fine! Even my grandma got accustomed quickly. Of course one could argue that is precisely because of the importance of a currency that we adapted so quickly...
The resistance seems to be largely: (a) older people who doubt their own ability to adjust (b) right-wingers who are convinced it's a socialist conspiracy or somesuch (these are people who think international cooperation is taking sovereignty from the US, or something like that - they're a bit incoherent) and (c) politicians perceive it as unpopular and risky to advocate (presumably because of a and b) or just not a vote-getter.
I've occasionally tried to promote SI by using units in casual contexts, but it's perceived as pretentious or obnoxious. The situation is better online as I participate only in fora like this where US obtuseness is not necessarily expected. It is hard to even find products like thermometers and measuring cups (for cooking) with all-SI.
A bank officer recently heard the following explanation for a farmer's financial trouble:
It all started back in 1966 when they changed from pounds to dollars. My bloody overdraft doubled.
Then they brought in kilograms instead of pounds, my bloody wool clip dropped by half.
Then they changed rain to millimetres and we haven't had an inch of rain since.
They bring in celsius and it never gets over 40 degrees. No wonder my bloody wheat won't grow.
Then they change acres to hectares and I end up with half the bloody land I had.
By this time I'd had it and decided to sell out. I just get the place in the agent's hands when they changed from miles to kilometres. Now I'm too bloody far out of town for anyone to buy the bloody place.
We currently divide the day based on time a system of time developed by the Babylonians roughly 4,000 years ago. Because the Babylonians had a math system that was base-60, it was rational for them to divide the day into sections that fit easily into a base-60 system. Ideally, they would have been consistent and gone with 60/60/60, but for some reason they went with 24/60/60. We have 24 hours, then 60 minutes, then 60 seconds. There are 86,400 seconds in the day, which may have made sense to them, but it makes no sense to us, in the modern world, since nowadays the whole world uses base-10 math. If we wanted to modernize the time system, we would switch to a base-10 system: 10/10/10/10. That would mean our smallest unit of measure would be a 100,000th of day, which would certainly be easier to work with, and reason about, than the crazy 86,400ths we have to deal with. 86,400ths are an artifact from the dawn of civilization, and should be gotten rid of.
Will we ever have a clean and rational 10/10/10/10 system for dividing up the day? Probably not. From the Babylonians we get the 24 hour day, the 7 day week, and the crazy idea that a circle should be divided by 360 degrees. All of these ideas are so deeply embedded in our culture it would be extremely hard to change them. Clean and rational systems do not always win out.
I keep hoping that the USA will switch to the metric system. On that front, I still have some hope. On other fronts, such as a rational system for dividing the day, I have no real hope at all.
Said every country, ever, that switched to metric successfully.
What the soi-disant pro-metric faction really wants is to stamp out the English system from the culture. Why can't they tolerate people measuring themselves, their recipes, their temperatures, and their vehicle speeds in their preferred units?
http://www.metric.org.uk/myths/imperial#imperial-was-invente...
I think there has already been significant discussion here about what the advantages (and disadvantages) are.
The US rarely uses metric in it's popular culture. Weather reports are in Fahrenheit, movies almost always use miles and pounds. By any measure of cultural output that you export that I've seen (and Australia is a huge consumer of your popular culture) you do not use metric.
I've heard the argument that the US already uses the metric system before by people who are resistant to the US using the metric system. It always sounds disingenuous.
But I may be wrong. I have not walked one point six one kilometres in your shoes.
I have lived in Taiwan for six years of my adult life (two three-year stays) and I have become used to thinking metric about overland distances in kilometers or my own height in centimeters or temperatures in Celsius degrees. But over there too, customary units survive long after official metrification, although some of those (like the unit of weight 斤, usually translated into English as "catty") have been conformed to the metric system by being defined in metric units (so that now a catty is half a kilogram). This process may go on for a long time in the United States.
[1] http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/usmetric.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/204
http://www.nist.gov/pml/wmd/metric/upload/1136a.pdf
[2] http://www.ebsinstitute.com/OtherActivities/EBS.qs2df2.html
http://chronicle.augusta.com/life/life-style/2013-04-04/metr...
Recently I noticed the medical profession has come on board with cm/kilos for measurement which is pretty surprising since hearing inches/pounds is still fairly common.
Having grown up in the 70s and 80s I still find I float between the two fairly easily but I sure did find Scotland confusing last time I visited - as a metric country they sure do a lot of things non-metricy.
Given that all official road signs for distances and speed limits in Britain are still in miles, I can't accept that it is a metric country.
There are a few exceptions in more human measurements - beer is measured in pints, burgers and steaks in ounces, distances on roads in miles and personal dimensions in feet and inches, barleycorns and stones.
Yes. It's a waste of children's time (and there is a massive market failure in education, so laws are the only way to make changes).
I guess, there are still people out there, which recalculate into Francs or Marks, or whatsoever -- but I think most Europeans have adapted.
So, when "old Europe" can change -- why not "modern USA"?
The conversion factor between mechanical values in the SI system is 1.
Example:
E = F * delta_x
= m_1 * a * delta_x
= 0.5 * m_2 * v^2
Energy = 1 J
= 1 kg * m^2/s^2
= 1 N * 1 m // Force: 1 Newton applied for 1 meter distance
= 1 kg * 1 m/s^2 * 1 m // Acceleration: 1 kg accelerated at 1 m/s for a distance of 1 m
= 0.5 * 2 kg * (1 m/s)^2 // Velocity: 2 kg accelerated from stand still to 1 m/s velocity
Not sure I disagree. Sure the sorting by numbers is of interest to the HN crowd but has little value to anyone outside of IT.
In most cases I'm most interested in the "day" part so its convenient if thats first (which it is in 90% of the world).
The week dates are even more awesome, really: I use them whenever I can.
* From an economic standpoint, the US is a big enough market that it is profitable to make things in weird US units, you have 350M people to sell to, most of whom are pretty well off by world standards. It makes sense to make a line catering to them. If businesses can start making a true or good economic argument it will happen more.
* Tooling that exists in standard units seems to be a bit of a red herring: I dislike having to own wrenches in both standard and metric units - a transition to one set would actually be nice. At a larger scale, i.e. manufacturing, it would make sense to start replacing things with metric on regular maintenance cycles. With very long cycle things just having a label change.
* Paper would be a nightmare for a while - A4 and 8.5x11 are just dissimilar enough for it to be weird, and paper has a very long lifetime, dual storage systems are a pain.
* A lot of very low level infrastructure has built in assumptions about standard measure that would take a long time to convert, and some would never convert. For example, a lot of cities put roads so that $X blocks is a mile. The midwest from the air looks like a quilt - thats because all the fields are partitioned by roads which are (generally speaking) a mile apart. Land ownership for rural areas is by the fraction of a section, and by acres - it's built in to how everything is laid out. These aren't impediments but it does create a weirdness. I navigate the backroads and a lot of parts of cities by knowing how far it is and just counting how far over and how far up i need to go subconsciously, and it is an issue.
* Now is a better time than ever for doing this in terms of accessibility to the public. Everyone has a smartphone - apps to do conversion in lots of intuitive ways can ease people's discomfort.
* Car, motorcycle and other mechanical equipment manufacturers should be the people to start the transition. They can all agree to just stop using standard things for the 20XX line of equipment. Or be legislated to do so. Similarly gas stations can be required to change on $DATE, and car manufacturers can just send everyone stickers to put near the gas-hole of cars to say "your tank is $X litres". I think this would help tons. No dual labeling, just bam - it's in litres now.
* Housing things are another weird infrastructure thing: they last for a very long time. Codes are all in inches -- doors must be 36" wide, switches must be placed at 48" and so on. The sudden appearance of a second width and height for new stuff would be bizarre, or building it at 91.44 and 121.92 cm respectively would also be annoying.
I still think it's a good idea, but some thought needs to go into these weird cases that are surprisingly common before a transition would be acceptable. But like I said - everyone carries a computer or two these days, so there is probably a lot of work that could be done to simplify the transition via good apps.
The reason: I don't think, that this fact is essential to the A series. It is neat, yes, but when do you have A0 paper in your bureau? (When you are not in the printing-business).
The thing with cutting in half is more essential to it, than that it is based on square meter. Also, even when it is an square meter, the sides are something "odd" because the ratio is fixed.
At some level you could say that the U.S. measurements are "based on metric" since almost all of them are defined in terms of metric units. You just have to apply the proper factor (which is a decimal, but a terminating one --- unlike the sqrt(2) business).
Also, the word "metric" has a very precise meaning: that of being part of the internationally agreed system of decimal measurements. The thing you've mentioned don't fit that definition, and US customary units are simply defined in _terms_ of metric units, but are not metric units themselves.
I do understand it. It's exactly the same reasoning as being able to divide liquid measures in half.
> By that standard, the U.S. liquid measures could also be described as "metric"
The ratio has nothing to do with metric. The base sizing of the A0 page is, on the other hand, defined as having an area of 1m² in that regard, DIN/ISO paper sizes are _based_ on metric. However, _never_ did I state that they _were_ metric.
So no, by the standard that I gave, you _couldn't_ say that US customary measurements for liquid measures could also be described as "metric".
Go back and read my original comment. The first sentence was this:
> They're not part of the metric system, simply based on it.
Here I was making reference to A0 sheets being defined as having an area of 1m², thus the sheet sizes are _derived_ from metric, not _part_ of the metric system.
The next sentence was a _completely_ independent statement about the utility of the page ratio used in ISO/DIN paper sizes:
> The 1:sqrt(2) ratio used is extremely convenient as it scales up and down nicely, and the other series are such that an Ax sheet fits nicely into a Cx envelope, and a Cx sheet fits nicely into a Bx envelope.
I can't fathom how you somehow got from an innocuous pair of statements about paper sizes to powers of two in US customary measurements for liquids somehow being "metric".
The official definition of the inch is 2.54 cm (exactly).
An inch isn't a nice round number of cm, but neither is an A(whatever) piece of paper (other than A0). A4 is 21.0 cm × 29.7 cm. for instance.
"The next sentence was a _completely_ independent statement about the utility of the page ratio used in ISO/DIN paper sizes"
And I pointed out that the exact same argument applies to U.S. liquid measures. They're easy to divide or multiply by two.
Your comparison to liquid measurements misses the point. It's irrelevant. Your statement that the US units are defined in terms of US units is irrelevant.
What is relevant is the preservation of the width:height ratio between pages sizes in the ISO/DIN paper size series.
Which is very similar to the "magic property" that you get when you have measuring units that are powers of two rather than factors of ten. So, no, I"m not "missing the point" at all.
That you think this is "irrelevant" indicates to me that you haven't done a lot of cooking.
The 1:sqrt(2) ratio has to do with subdivision. An A0 sheet subdivides into two A1 sheets, which subdivides into two A2 sheets, and so on. 1:sqrt(2) width/height ratio used in ISO pages sizes allows this, which makes dealing with paper significantly easier when it comes to slicing up pages, folding, packing, &c.
It's not like the US is going to be using weird-arse inches, furlongs, horses and stones forever.
Not something to be proud of.
Perhaps I'm not being zealous enough with my "hey lets be careful about this as we do it" type statement?
You don't need to be careful. Just look at everyone else who jumped in without injury and jump yourself.
I don't think you'll get rid of that second set of sockets/wrenches for decades. There are going to be just too many instances where there is an old connector, nut, bolt, etc. that needs to be worked with. I think of it as having two sets of wrenches or am buying two sets of wrenches anyway. The metric and imperial sockets come in one set and share the ratchets.
I can't see cooking or property measurements making the transition within my grandchildren's lifetimes. In most countries that have metricized, property remains a very stubborn holdout.
Commercial products could convert much quicker, it's mostly a label change during the next minor packaging refresh, followed by the next major packaging refresh adjusting the size to make the unit look better. (1lb -> 453.592g -> 450g)
Paper might take decades, companies have significant investments into handling standard paper sizes, from production to clipboards to file rooms. Going paperless is probably more likely. My local mechanic is now almost entirely paperless for example, but the final bill is still printed out on 8.5x11 paper and a copy filed away.
I agree that manufactured goods should just set a date and switch on the next model year. Eventually the older imperial items will just rust away, with a few examples kept alive by very dedicated hobbyists.
But some niche craftsman fields will probably never switch. Printers still use points and picas despite trying to metricize for a long while. You end up with incredibly awkward metric units for these things when you try to convert, and lots of the handiness of customary units (easy fractional divisibility) comes into play.
This is wikipedia in portuguese for arroba through Google Translator (good enough to understand, just consider "arrogance" = Arroba): https://translate.google.com.br/translate?sl=pt&tl=en&js=y&p...
Basically is a mass unit (in Brazil and Portugal), originated at the imperial system (with an arabic name ar-arub meaning "the fourth part") of 25 pounds. The times changed, but it is still used in our metricized society for livestock weight. But adapted to a rounded number in kilos, nowadays 1 Arroba = 1 kilogram.
Was there some other history to make this significant of a change?
I think you mean "I dislike having US customary and standard metric units".
When it comes down to it, everybody else in the world managed to buckle down and just switch to standard metric units and ISO/DIN paper sizes. There is nothing special about the US that makes it any more of an imposition for them to switch over. Many of the issues you've outlines are the same as ones that countries like the UK, Canada, and Ireland have had to deal with when switching over to metric everywhere, and we somehow managed it!
In some sense, the metric system was a blessing, as it was foreign to all countries. Countries would never have switched to, say, the German standard of measurements (counterpoint: they did just that for paper sizes)
And the UK started metrification in 1965 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_of_British_transpor...), but has not completely switched to metric yet; it still uses miles for road signs. Because of that, I wouldn't say the UK managed the switch.
The world had zillions of them, and yet the world (minus some strong-headed minds) switched to it. Centuries ago.
What is special about the US is that there is still some commercial value in converting from standard metric units to this specific US system.
The UK should probably bite the bullet as far as roadsigns and speed limits go. It's about time, really.
It is metric, is just uses an older name.
The survey system is a bigger thing to deal with, but it isn't something people confront day to day either. I've seen deeds using geographic coordinates to describe plots, so there is also a relatively straightforward path to not dealing with it.
Additionally, I don't think that changing tooling should be a priority. Even in the countries that use metric system, we use nuts and screws measured in inches. They are usually called 1/4, 1/2 and so on ignoring the "inch" part. Also, in Venezuela, letter is the standard paper used, not A4.
I think a good solution would be for the US to use metric to measure most of the things people and industries interact with (distance, velocity, weight, volume), but you can keep the old measures when convenient.
We don't come across them quite as much in the Antipodes. :-)
About tooling, yeah that's bad. But everybody has 2 sets of tools all over the world, because both US and rest of the world are big markets. A transition won't change a thing, the only thing that changes is that a few decades from now, everybody will stop needing one of those sets.
Paper is also already a nightmare. All equipment supports both ISO and US standard, and is more expensive because of that.
Constuction aparell is always weird. Your 36" doors are certainly not exactly 36" wide, as metric 90cm doors are not exactly 90cm wide. At least here (at Brazil, thus metric) there are several different sets of sizes to choose from, because some people want bigger doors and windows, other people want smaller ones.
I think you overestimate the costs at the US, and underestimate the benefits.
Do they? I'm not a big DIY guy but I own a toolbox and I didn't even realize until now that a different set of tools may exist.
EDIT: I am not arguing it's not true, I am honestly asking
But usually in a home setting you "can" find one size that fits (somewhat) the other
So that would be 914.4mm and 1219.2mm respectively (or 1.2192m I guess).
The wisdom of this was explained to me by my builder father that metres and millimetres are orders of magnitude far enough apart that you can usually figure out which is which without too much difficulty in a specification even if they are not annotated properly. Centimetres fall close enough to inbetween that it can be confusing. Plus only using two standard units of measure (one for small stuff, another for large) is less potential confusion then using three.
---
In Australia we started metrication in 1971[1] with 1974 being the effective tipping point when all road signs were changed.
Being born in the early 70's, I have a rough understanding of imperial measurement units. I can roughly understand if something is a few inches or a few feet, but can never remember how many inches in a foot, and have no concept of relation between feet and miles. Miles I understand as a bit over 1.5kms. The only length measurements we tend to still give in imperial is a person's height in feet and inches. The concept that over six foot is tall, and under five is getting to be short (for men at least) has such utility that it's stuck. Official documents will use metric though, usually centimetres.
Weight is similar. Kilograms rule, except when talking about the weight of newborns which will still often be given in pounds and ounces informally. But give me anything else in pounds and I have no idea (very frustrating when that happens in movies.)
Similarly Celsius rules. I know 100°F is a hot day, but wont boil an egg, and 0°F is colder than a mother-in-law's kiss, but those are rough approximations, and anything between those two I have to convert.
Gallons is a foreign language.
However all the colloquialisms such as giving an inch and taking a mile are still common.
And yet somehow despite all this, the world continued to spin.
1980's: It's time for the US to use the metric system
1990's: It's time for the US to use the metric system
2000's: It's time for the US to use the metric system
2010's: OK, seriously guys, it's time for the US to use the metric system, this is getting ridiculous
How on earth can we make the British driving on the "right" side of the street.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-_and_left-hand_traffic#Ju...
Lists 76 jurisdictions and includes Japan, Pakistan, India, Australia and a host of other large countries.
The article is right, though; metric measures are easier to work with. I will vote in favor of changing.
I understand there's a road in Arizona that is still signed in metric.
I think the EU gave up enforcing it.
edit: sorry, by most people I mean people I know who grew up before metric was introduced.
And what measurements are still signed / represented in some way in imperial measurements in the UK? Road signs, speedometers and beer at a bar in a pub. Everything else is presented in metric and everybody I know uses metric for everything else.
Milk is still sold multiples of pints, with the litre value listed.
Laptop screens are measured in inches.
For example:
- I struggle to visualise feet or inches, we always used metric units at school so metres and cms are what I understand - kilograms for weight is much more natural to me than stones or ounces (really, I have no idea how much an ounce is, although I kind of know a pound is a small bag of sugar-ish) - miles are probably the only imperial unit I'd use, but even still, I find km much easier to reason about, perhaps because I have lived in Europe in the past. - oh, and the trusty pint of course!
In my mind, miles for roads is really the only standout left. I don't think of pint as a measure, but the name of a particular type of glass.
Outside of that I've just never found a practical use for the imperial system. It's bad enough trying to translate things to american and back, let alone trying to keep track of a US gallon being 4/5ths of an imperial gallon ..
(Of course, had we switched to 500ml glasses, leaving ale in 568ml bottles, we'd be stuffed. A point to bear in mind if contemplating a piecemeal transition.)
Which means we don't have a good working model in our heads of what a kg feels like or how warm a 30 degC day is...that sort of thing. I think most Americans have a pretty good feel for what a liter is since lots of drinks sell in that volume (and it's almost the same as a quart). But I think it'll be a cold day in hell before we cook in metric...customary units are pretty handy with home-style cooking since they line up pretty well with the size of stuff that's already in your kitchen (a cup, a teaspoon) and all our measuring and cooking equipment is in imperial. Actually, converting imperial measurements is a rotten mess, but using them in practice is pretty convenient. The sizes of most things just sort of intuitively makes sense on a human labor sort of scale (a pound of food turns out to be a nice filling meal, you can estimate inches with your thumb and feet with your forearm, 0 degF is colder than frozen water and just at the edge of tolerable, while 100 degF is just at the edge of tolerable on the other end of the scale even if water it nowhere near boiling, a pint is a good size for a beer, a yard is about a man's reach, an acre is about the size of a field a person can work in a day, etc.) -- there's some sense to them.
The military uses metric for most things however (due to constant international collaboration) and you'll find military people have a better grasp of the feel for most metric units, especially distance.
It's a bit like in England though where metric is taught, but people still colloquially refer to people in stones or distance in miles and beer in pints. Actually lots of countries still use their customary measurements [1] in certain niches, Koreans still use the pyeong 평 [2] when dealing with real estate for example.
I've been fortunate enough to travel quite a bit to metric using countries and have developed enough sense to quickly convert in my head. I know what a good room temperature is (22-24 degC), but I have no idea if I should bring a jacket when the weather is 15 deg C or not and the difference of 30 - 40 deg C always catches me by surprise. I have good feel for ml, cl and liters (lots of wine drinking), an okay one for kph, meters and km (driving and walking most places).
But g and kg continue to stupify me since I can't seem to find a useful frame of reference for those measures. I just end up mentally doubling all kg to pounds where it makes sense. I mean, what common thing weighs a kg? Everything at 1 kg just seems to be too heavy and to make use of it you end up sectioning it into grams, the liter is the same, too much liquid for anything useful, except I can usually split 1000 ml of wine with my wife over a long relaxing dinner and that's my reference point. And I guess that's the problem, I end up using fractions in decimal countries like I'd use them in the U.S. (most imperial units have handy fractions: 1/3, 1/4, 1/2, 1/12, but metric countries work better with decimals.
1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customary_units_of_measure#His...
n. (not taught in schools)
Example: LED TV, 98 cm (39 Zoll), Full HD, 100 Hz, DVB-T2/-C/-S2, Piano-schwarz
actually 1kg is 1000 cm3 of water (1 cm3 for a gram). The idea behind that was purely scientific, not pragmatic.
I'm back from a mall so... 1 l of water is 1 kg. 1 l of wine too, for any practical purpose. Water is usually sold in 1 l bottles or 500 ml in restaurants and automatic machines. Pasta is usually sold in 500 g or 1k g boxes. Milk, sugar, flour and salt too. Oil and vinegar are usually 1 l. Butter is usually 250 g or even 125 g for smaller doses. Sure not many items seem to weight more than 1 kg but weight your clothes, you'll be surprised how heavy winter clothes are :-)
Basically everything is priced either by the kg or by the liter (vegetables, cheese, meat, beverages, toothpaste, etc). It's required by law so we are able to compare different products of the same kind and different weight and get the better deal, quality aside. Obviously the label has a bigger figure for the price of the item than for the price by the kg.
As you see, whatever the units are they a convenient for everyday use because all the economic and legal system is consistent with them. A transition in a country as large as the USA would be bumpy. I'd like to see it happen before I die but I won't bet anything on it, not until they are surpassed by some other country as the leader of the world. After that there might be some real economic incentive to a switch.
A 1x1x1 cm cube of water at 20°C weighs 1 gram and has a volume of 1mL.
Temperature, weight, and volume are interlinked this way.
I'm not arguing against metric in general, I'm arguing that the temperature part of it is just kind of thrown in there because they were both used in France.
I think anyone, given a choice, would pick a simple, round number like 20 over something wacky like 68.
I'd argue there are exceptionally few political systems on the planet that deal with such well.
<grin>
Now -40 K., I'd like to see that!
Irish are catholic not because religion is actually something positive, but because it's a contrast with the British church, and part of their cultural identity.
The US is not a special snowflake: The entire rest of the world managed to switch just fine.
They can switch if they want. But it's the only place in the world they actively try not to.
Hmmm, I think you'll find that Catholicism is older than the Church of England (not that this relates to the metric system in any way). The English changed from being Catholic to Church of England during Henry VIII's reign. The Irish largely remained Catholic.
This was at least a century (the dating is not precise) before Saint Patrick converted Ireland to Christianism, and specially, many centuries before the creation of Church of England.
I don't see what part of my observation about 21 century Ireland made you think that I presupposed the Church of England was older. That part of history is even on TV (The Tudors).