/diy/ - Do It Yourself

>>2593908
They did in 1975.
Unfortunately, they should have first worked on their literacy and education rates.

The excuse was it would be too costly to change the road signs, but then that mars rover did a faceplant and that excuse went out the window.

In canada, which is lawfully metric, advertise everything by the pound in grocery stores because it looks cheaper to the functionally illiterate.

>>2593921
>too costly to change the road signs, but then that mars rover did a faceplant
I fail to see the connection

The rest of the world should adopt the standard system as standard.

>>2593908
you are now aware that they did, but did not make it mandatory for citizens, and you are also aware that even in countries that did a long time ago there are still people that use old measuring systems, like stones

This is a top quality post thanks jannies.

>>2593935
>like stones
Stones are great

>>2593921
Haha

>In Canada!

Your basically a third world country who's only export is their giant gaping liberal pussies. I would jump into oncoming traffic before taking a Canadian's advice on any topic besides how to be a beta bitch.

I absolutely love the imperial system of measurement. Metric is for cucks. The fact that it makes you metri-faggots seethe is just the icing on top...

>>2593908
There are two systems, and one of them made it to the moon.

I don't understand why imperial needs to change denominator number so much. like if the smallest denominator is 64, just use that one for all measurements. You get used to weird imperial shit eventually, but it's just retarded

>>2593939
Keith Richards is overrated

>>2594782
> third world
So? Where do you think your toilet paper comes from, and your indirect cuban imports?
>>2594825
> moon
The system didn’t make it to the moon. It’s just that the task was even harder, so kudos! Of course everyone became fat and stupid after that and couldn't go back now. They must look at the lander plans like an ape looks up at a plane and wonders ow it can fly without flapping it’s wings.

>>2594826
Even the name "imperial" is outdated. The Brits dont even have an empire anymore.

>>2594826
>like if the smallest denominator is 64, just use that one for all measurements

lol moron. nothing would be improved if my 1/2" wrench said 32/64. jeez, I'm not defending it but goddamn why make it worse.

>>2594830
>Keith Richards is overrated

to each his own, but if you think Midnight Rambler or some of his other awesome creations suck then whatever. I never get tired of the live version where some guy yells out "GODDAMN" during a lull.

A system so precise and perfect that its base unit has been continously redefined since the 18th century

> originally defined in 1793 as one ten-millionth of the distance from the equator to the North Pole along a great circle, so the Earth's circumference is approximately 40000 km.

Le perfect and natural!

>In 1799, the metre was redefined in terms of a prototype metre bar.

No really, we mean it this time...ze bar, she is natural too!

>The actual bar used was changed in 1889.

No really, we mean it this time...

>In 1960, the metre was redefined in terms of a certain number of wavelengths of a certain emission line of krypton-86.

Ooh, le natural again plus we *really* mean it this time...

>The current definition was adopted in 1983

Even more perfect! Also, we mean it this time, for realz.

> modified slightly in 2002 to clarify that the metre is a measure of proper length.

I guess with all those revisions and redefinitions and different bars, people needed a reminder.

>From 1983 until 2019, the metre was formally defined as the length of the path travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299792458 of a second.

Ooooh, le so much perfect it is now "formally defined"! Also goes without saying we *really* mean it this time, baby, don't be like that...

>After the 2019 redefinition of the SI base units, this definition was rephrased to include the definition of a second in terms of the caesium frequency ΔνCs

"Rephrased" = even these faggots ate too ashamed to admit that they changed their perfect and natural definition yet again.

>>2593908
I know that picture!

>>2593934
How is an inch legally defined in Americlapistan brah?

>>2595090
it's probably faster to see what is bigger and what is snaller for people who don't normally use fractional systems like shartperial due to it having a common denominator that turns the sozings into more of a "this is x units of 64th inches" rather than "oh yeah, 15/32 is slightly less than half so just under 1/2 intsch

>>2594825
kek
gotta love how Mr. Werner von Braun and his xolleagues helped out by going on GAP year to the US too.
And just look at his frens at home:
one
two
three
four
five
six
seven
eight
NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN

>>2595103
the idea is that there's now a length measurement that can be independently arived at and is dependent only on natural constants (lightspeed)
being dependent on physical artifacts like a meter bar or a metal weight was the bane of standardization and consistency for a long time
they managed it some time ago with Kg too finally by using nearly perfect spheres of silicon

you're trolling though, right?

>>2593908
>The US should adopt the metric system as standard.
they did.
all US customary units are officially defined by the equivilant metric measurement.

>>2593908
but we do use the metric system. we also use other systems depending on what works best in a given situation. but yuropoors are too retarded to know that.

>>2595130
So since an inch is also defined by those same units, isn't that great?

>>2595103
what a stupid system. imagine if someone based their system on a stupid system like that.
defining a unit by something stupid as a cm multiplied by 2,54 that would be totally crazy haha

>>2594825
hate to break it to you but nasa was using metric already back then

>>2594825
And none*

>>2595090
It's far easier to know if 32/64 is smaller than 48/64
>LOL YOU DUMB
You stupid american chimp, you get used to these sizes in a week, you aren't a 150IQ genius for learning fractions.

I use imperial system at my design job.
It's fine.

>>2595239
Lol you're poor and all the people in your country wish they had high paying American jobs

>>2593908
Ok. Now what?

>>2594825
One of them built ancient Rome, and It wasn't metric.

>>2595125
one third of a penile length

>>2595059
>Where do you think your toilet paper comes from, and your indirect cuban imports
The third world, youre not doing yourself any favors.

>>2595125
The day that the speed of light in a vacuum is a relevant reference point for anyone in their daily lives, is the day ill use the metric system.

Building materials
Metric: " bring a one point two two meter by two point four four meter sheet!"
Imperial: " bring a four by eight sheet"

Metric materials are manufactured to IMPERIAL measurements! Base 10 is inferior plain and simple, the Roman's knew this.

>>2595731
so how is an inch legally defined? you're not answering the question

>>2595732
do you know what "mile" means, retard? presumably not

>>2595125
one kings knuckle

>>2595837
"Best character on DS9"
Ezpz

>>2595837
Is this a serious question? 5280 feet, or eight furlongs of 660 feet. Not sure i can help you any further.

>>2594825
>one of them made it to the moon.
That would be metric.

>>2595837
>do you know what "mile" means,
About 1.6 km.

>>2595125
1/12th of a foot

The US has already adopted the metric system.
I've seen US mechanics, machinists, woodworkers, makers etc on youtube hundreds of times.
They always deal with both in parallel. They don't work in an "imperial" bubble.

They know roughly what the metric measurements are.
They have measuring tools for both.
They buy stuff that has metric fasteners or buy metric stock on occasion.
They have metric spanners.
They calculate and plan in both alternatingly.

"Adopting" metric is not the issue.
Banning imperial is.

Nobody in europe deals with imperial nearly as much as americans are apparently forced to deal with metric, which makes sense if you consider that all of europe, japan, russia, china etc use metric. It's simply forced upon them by the world.
Meanwhile the US doesn't really export all that much, so we're mostly safe from imperial shit in the EU for example.
Except maybe some hydraulic fitting or that one weirdo who bought a harley, inches don't concern us much.

>>2595942
the question went over your head
you're a dumbass but you still can have a happy life. just try to avoid to embarrass yourself in the future

>>2596001
>Nobody in europe deals with imperial nearly as much as americans are apparently forced to deal with metric, which makes sense if you consider that all of europe, japan, russia, china etc use metric.
the entire world minus the US, myanmar, and liberia, uses metric
really makes you think

>>2596001
they just do that so retards in the comments don't keep asking what that is in metric. in real life if you have to make something with metric dimensions you just groan and hit the units button on your cad program.

>>2595836
Youre the retard asking a question you know the answer to.
If you have a point, just fucking say it. Nobody is going to play your games.

>>2596001
>imperial
It's US Customary, you retard.

>>2596026
ok i'm retarded. you presumably are not, so you can answer what the legal definition of an inch is.
hopefully it's not some cucked shit that's defined by some retarded metric unit because that would make no sense

>>2596050
No, retard, i cannot give you something that doesnt exist.

>>2596055
an inch doesn't exist? i only want to know the definition of an inch
not that difficult of a question

>>2596005
Who cares what everyone else does? It doesn't matter
>oh no, my satellite
not my problem

>>2596071
>if it has no legal definition it doesnt exist
Interesting

>>2596072
sure, the US exists in its own vacuum because the year is still 1900

>>2596073
but it has a definition? for some reason no one wants to post it.
weird

>>2596074

>>2596077
Yes it has a definition, you never fucking asked for it you drooling retard.

>During the reign of King Edward II, in the early 14th century, the inch was defined as “three grains of barley, dry and round, placed end to end lengthwise.” At various times the inch has also been defined as the combined lengths of 12 poppyseeds.

>>2596074
>I do this thing, so you have to do it too!
No

>>2596081
>was
can you give me the current day definition of an inch? thanks in advance

>>2596098
So if an inch is defined by metric and metric is defined by whatever wiggles of an electronic beam in an attosecond or whatever.

Isn't the inch also using the same definition so it's just as good in that way?

>>2596098
Federal Register Notice 59-5442 (June 30, 1959), which states the definition of a standard inch: The value for the inch, derived from the value of the Yard effective July 1, 1959, is exactly equivalent to 25.4 mm

>>2596108
I am waiting for him to say ''gotcha!!1!!!1''

>>2596108
>>2596109
gotcha!!1!!!1

>>2596098
>the current day definition
Thats not how it works...
An inch is 12 poppyseeds. 12 poppyseeds is 25.4 mm

Inches arent defined by millimeters

Each can be expressed as the other, they are parallel units defined by different standards

One is defined by 12 poppy seeds

One is defined by the speed of light in a vacuum

I will now wait for you to tell me how metric is so much more practical lmao

>>2596110
Kek nope
>a specific definition of the relationship between meters and feet.
Its a document codifying unit conversion, NOT codifying the definition of the given unit.

Get fucked lmao
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2007/03/05/07-990/publication-of-north-american-datum-of-1983-state-plane-coordinates-in-feet-in-wyoming

>>2595675
You live surrounded by niggers

>>2596236
Lmao even

>>2596242
They'll get around to you soon.

>>2596242
>Stock image

>>2596001
>Except maybe some hydraulic fitting or that one weirdo who bought a harley, inches don't concern us much
Except for displays for some reason. If you buy a TV, monitor, or cell phone in Europe, its going to be measured in inches. I have a 55 inch TV. I don't really know the value of an inch, but the TV is pretty large.

>>2593908
US should've adopted metric during the revolution as a fuck you to the bongs.
But since the US didn't adopt it then we should keep the freedom units.
The units should be officially renamed freedom units.
>makes poor's seethe
>makes people who can't into 4th grade math seethe
>it's a tourist attraction
>forces the rest of the world to say shit like "19mm pipe", "oh it's just a bit over 25mm"
>makes globohomo cope, seethe, and dilate

>>2596267
Husqvarna went retard mode. I was comparing displacements and they put it in cubic inches. I have never heard a fellow burger discuss chainsaw engine displacements in inches but Husky does it. The US almost exclusively uses cubic centimeter for that. The absolute state. Euros should go full metric, including marketing to the US, before they whine about us not using it.

>>2596358
Yeah, we just didn’t tell them what “cee cees” are and they think its a disco era thing and are cool with it.

>>2596292
>>makes people who can't into 4th grade math seethe
This is the biggest one for me.
I will never get tired of seeing europeans shit their pants trying to process fractions

>>2596443
>trying to process fractions
>trying
Is this a real thing? They don't do fractions?

>>2596460
No, have you ever argued with a euro about standard? Their biggest "reasons to switch" is that they think fractions are too hard.

>>2596242
To be fair those cattle ARE black. I call my black cattle niggers all the time, and give some of them negro names.

>>2596463
>No, have you ever argued with a euro about standard?
Not really beyond telling them that they are mistaken - that I use metric frequently. Oftentimes they sperg out and call me a liar, as if I had contradicted the foundation of their religion. Then I just move on.

>>2596443
fractions are indeed a lot more convenient. this is why the scientific community worldwide uses US customary units and not metric

>>2596111
>>2596113
why do you lie?
>Standards for the exact length of an inch have varied in the past, but since the adoption of the international yard during the 1950s and 1960s the inch has been based on the metric system and defined as exactly 25.4 mm.

>>2596358
if you add 231 cubic inches you get exactly one gallon.
it just werks

>1 international inch is equal to:
>10,000 'tenths'[a]
>1,000 thou[b] or mil[c]
>100 points[d] or gries[e]
>72 PostScript points[f]
>10,[g][e] 12,[h] or 40[i] lines
>6 computer picas[j]
>3 barleycorns[k]
>25.4 millimetres exactly (1 millimetre ≈ 0.03937008 inches)
>0.999998 US Survey inches
>1/3 or 0.333 palms
>1/4 or 0.25 hands[l]
>1/12 or 0.08333 feet
>1/36 or 0.02777 yards

even if the government wants to define standard units with metric conversions they still have their original use as practical measurements. if you're building a patio and want to know how many yards of cement to buy you can still just pace it off. when yurocucks estimate distances using "a large step" as a meter they're basically just measuring yards and converting to meters.

>>2596574
>yurocucks
do you know how many countries outside Europe have adapted the metric system?

>>2596574
because a yard and meter are significantly different in size. are you actually retarded?
one is defined by the other btw, guess in what direction

>>2596577
Sure but money of them give a shit a out what America is doing

>>2596544
>The international yard and pound are two units of measurement that were the subject of an agreement among representatives of six nations signed on 1 July 1959: the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. The agreement defined the yard as exactly 0.9144 meters and the avoirdupois pound as exactly 0.45359237 kilograms.[1]

>>2596580
so how many countries outside of europe have adapted the metric system?
metric is stupid so naming all the countries that have followed the french with their idiocy should be easy enough

>>2596540
The product failed because A&W had shit food

>>2596586
this is what is usually called cope
fractions are so great everyone switched to decimals minus a few shitholes but surely it's one big communist glownigger conspiray to undermine the americlap way of life and freedom

>>2596579
it's like a 10% difference. the fact of the matter is that when metrictards are trying to estimate distance they aren't guessing how many wavelengths or light fractions of a second it is, they are using human measurements like steps or spans, which is where standard measurements came from.

>>2596594
>guessing how many wavelengths or light fractions of a second it is
i always wonder why americans think this is an argument when your entire system is based on "wavelengths or light fractions of a second" times an arbitrary factor.
be consistent and revert back to using barleycorns, thank you.

>>2596584
no one is aswering the question :(

>>2596584
anyone? it shouldn't be a long list. only continental yurpoors use metric

>NOOOOOOOOOO you can't do this 1000 cubes???? one fucking kilo of water???? 231 is way more convenient

>the US gallon (US gal), defined as 3.785411784 L,[1] (231 cubic inches) which is used in the US and some Latin American and Caribbean countries
if you want to know how big a gallon is exactly the only thing you have to do is cube the number 2.54 and mulitply it by 231

>>2596619
You know what I don't need? 1ml of water. You know what's nice? I need to drink of gallon of water a day. You know how many quarts are in a gallon? 4.

>>2596598
>when your entire system is based on
Being defined as something is not the same as being based on something. That "arbitrary factor" was made specifically what it is to give the same size units as before, which were based on other things.

>>2596631
one ml of water is one cubic cm and weights one gram
one cubic dm is one liter and weight one kilo
one cubic meter is 1000l and weights one ton
but this makes no sense. in your next post you'll convince my of the merits of US customary units by posting more convenient conversion factors

>>2596632
but why are US customary units based on the metric system? sounds cucked to me.
why do you want to have your units defined by an inferior system it makes no sense

>>2596635
The point is I am never ever fucking converting shit like that because I'm not am industrial chemist. I'm buying a beer or cooking some pasta, or planning how much water to bring on a camping trip.

If I was an industrial chemist I'm writing all my shit out in excel and doing it that way anyway, I'm not converting units in my head except maybe kg to g.

>>2596635
btw i regularly post in the homebrewing general and to know the gravity of a liquid i measure/calculate the density and then convert it to gravity by multiplying the number by 1 (one)
water having a density of 1 is communism though. better napalm some children again to halt the spread of this marxist bullshit

>>2596641
>I'm not converting units in my head except maybe kg to g.
must require a lot of effort. you have my respect

>>2596638
Because Nixon was the king of the cucks and he cucked us out before the Cia ended him

>>2596635
These are not useful conversions. And neither the g or meter is defined by the weight of water or distsbce to paris anymore. They're all atomic and electromagnetic measurements that are rounded up and picked to slot into the old measurements. It's still conventional, just most of your conventional units suck.

>>2596641
also can you post the numbers of how to convert dimensions to volumes and weight of water with the superior US customary system?
i have a feeling a lot of posters ITT are avoiding certain questions. i have to repeat myself and i unironically don't like to do that
>why are all the american units defined by metric
still haven't seen a rational explanation for that one

>>2596647
ok, the conversion factors of 1 and 1000 are useless. you probably have a better suggestion so lets hear it
>akhtually a liter of water isn't one kilo it's 0,99999...
fuck, guess i'll start using gallons and pounds now

>>2595201
The standard system does not depend on the metrics system to exist you fucktard. That's like saying English is based off of pig latin

>>2596638
>but why are US customary units based on the metric system?
The Metric system was defined by physical constants first, so rather than re-do that work, US customary units were just pegged to Metric. Ultimately they're both defined by the same physical constants and different conversion factors. The difference is the scale and relationships of the units themselves.

>>2596650
>you probably have a better suggestion so lets hear it
A combination of factors of 2, 3, and 5, like the various customary systems in use around the world over the last several millennia. Because an exponential relationship between unit size that can still be divided evenly multiple ways is a useful thing to have.

>>2596660
>The international yard and pound are two units of measurement that were the subject of an agreement among representatives of six nations signed on 1 July 1959: the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. The agreement defined the yard as exactly 0.9144 meters and the avoirdupois pound as exactly 0.45359237 kilograms.[1]
what is it like to live in an alternative reality? i thought most schizos were contained to /pol/ but apparently not

>>2596667
The yard and pound were in use as units before 1959, anon.

>>2596666
so how do you divide an inch into three equal parts? how do you divide a gallon in three equal parts? how do you divide a pound into three equal parts?
the answer to these are probably trivial which is why US customary has spread around the globe instead of the stupidity of making everything divisable by 10
fuck the french, the world was a better place when every country had their own feet, but no, even an english feet and an american feet are the same now. fucking globhomo
british gallon is different though, luckily. because we all know the UK actually uses the legit imperial system and not some cheap knockoff

>>2596669
but why did (((they))) thought it was a good idea to redefine them by kilos and meters?

>>2596666
fugg didn't see the digits
checked

>>2596670
>so how do you divide an inch into three equal parts?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barleycorn_(unit)

>how do you divide a gallon in three equal parts?
77 cubic inches.

>how do you divide a pound into three equal parts?
4 ounces if in Troy units, Avoirdupois pounds were not made to divide evenly into thirds as the grain the system was designed for rarely saw such a task.

>which is why US customary has spread around the globe instead of the stupidity of making everything divisable by 10
Before Metric was forced on most of the globe via government mandate, customary systems (based on such combinations of smaller numbers rather than 10) were in use everywhere.

>>2596682
it all makes sense. why isn't the inch defined by the barleycorn anymore?
it would make everyday life a lot more convenient. and the thou is also pretty stupid, why work with a thousanth of an inch when you can work with a 1024th of an inch.
someone really needs to educate american machinists.
also 77 cubic inches i guess it just works. 77 is obviously 7*11 so dividing this by 12 is trivial

>>2596690
>why isn't the inch defined by the barleycorn anymore?
Because barleycorn size is too variable for the precision required in modern technology. And so physical constants were measured rather precisely and a conversion factor was applied to give a unit size equal to what had been in use before, but which could be referenced more precisely.

>why work with a thousanth of an inch when you can work with a 1024th of an inch
Because fractions are more convenient when they are small, and large decimal expressions are more convenient when large numbers of significant figures are needed.

>77 is obviously 7*11 so dividing this by 12 is trivial
Volume measurements are mostly scaled by powers of 2. 2^2 quarts per gallon, 2 pints per quart, 2 cups per pint, 2^3 ounces per cup, 2 tablespoons per ounce. The thirds comes in the next division, which is 3 teaspoons per tablespoon. So a gallon is 786 teaspoons, which is evenly divisible into thirds as 256 teaspoons. This happens to equal 77 cubic inches.

>>2596691
The calorie is not a Metric unit, anon. It's a derived unit invented to make thermodynamic calculations easier. It is precisely analogous to the British Thermal Unit (BTU) which is used for heating calculations in the US.

>>2596693
Excuse me, a gallon is 768 teaspoons.

>>2593931
The cost of the Mars Rover mission was probably equal to or a substantial portion of replacing the road signs

>>2596693
>Because barleycorn size is too variable for the precision required in modern technology. And so physical constants were measured rather precisely and a conversion factor was applied to give a unit size equal to what had been in use before, but which could be referenced more precisely.
this doesn't explain why measuring a third of an inch is not easy. we all know convenient fractions are the backbone of imperial apparently so why is an inch 2,54cm and not 3 barleycorns.
an actual barleycorn might be a bit variable but so are feet but that doesn't appear to be an issue
what is 77 divided by 12? everything should be divisible by 2,3,4,6 etc but not 10. so this is an easy question.
a lot of questions ITT that keep remain unanswered. still waiting on a list of the few countries outisde yuropooristant that made the mistake of switching to metric.
they probably communist as well and should be invaded

>>2596696
oof
you can't even into your own system. nice self own

>>2596699
>this doesn't explain why measuring a third of an inch is not easy.
It is. See pic.

>so why is an inch 2,54cm and not 3 barleycorns
It's both.

>but that doesn't appear to be an issue
Because both units, despite being based on naturally variable things, have been precisely defined based on physical constants.

>what is 77 divided by 12?
77/12, obviously. That particular conversion is not something that comes up in practical use, so the system was not scaled with that in mind. Actually-common conversions, like partitioning a gallon into units suited for drinking, or measuring ingredients for a recipe, use nicer conversions.

>>2596700
Because transposing keystrokes can't happen when typing Metric units?

as someone who constantly builds stuff and is canadian, I'd lose my damn mind if I had to use CM for everything. Is it like people don't know the secret of how useful imperial is? Metric is good for science but man there's nothing beautiful about architecture concieved for metric.
By splitting the lower fraction you can build as you go and maybe that's part of the creative process?
I pay my bills in metric but I paint in feet.

why does it matter how many cubic inches of water a gallon is? you don't store water in cubes and you don't sell liquid by weight.

>>2596111
You measure your dicks in poppy seeds lmao fuckin hicks
>I will now wait for you to tell me how metric is so much more practical lmao
The advantage is that you don't measure shit using seeds. What are you, a bird?
Also, seeds aren't identical or perfectly round, which means that your measurement varies a fuckton.

>>2596544
>>2596583
Nothing you posted contradicts what i said

>>2596803
>thinking hick is an insult in the year of our lord 2023

>>2596803
If you need a precise measurement in US Customary, you use measuring tools, same as in Metric. If you want a rough estimate in US Customary but don't have measurement tools handy, you can use a step for yards, a foot for feet, or a thumbwidth or the length of a finger segment for inches. In Metric, you can estimate using a step for meters, and...?

>>2595103
>system is refined as measuring tools get better
The fact that you even see that as a problem just shows how retarded people defending imperial system are.

>>2596844
I seem to recall some criticism of the definitional basis of US Customary. In that context, it's appropriate to point out Metric definitional complexity.

>>2593908
if the metric system is so great then why do metric countries still use inch drives on socket wrenches? the things that make the things you will never see a metric sized drive socket wrench

>>2596838
>and...?
And a foot for feet, or a thumbwidth or the length of a finger segment for inches. And then just convert to metric.

>>2596915
>And then just convert to metric.

Metric is an uninspiring system of weights and measures. It lacks a connection to anything real or tangible and is essentially soulless.

Who cares if something "works better" if the people who use it aren't inspired to use it? I've never heard someone get excited about metric.

>>2593921
>In canada, which is lawfully metric, advertise everything by the pound in grocery stores because it looks cheaper to the functionally illiterate.
This isn't true at all. We use pounds too for various things, but every product is listed in kg and most grocery stores even have the cost per kg on the price labels.

>>2593908
>The US should adopt the metric system as standard.
US Customary is defined in terms of SI. For example, the inch is defined to be exactly 25.4 mm.

>>2596856
You'll also never see terresrltrial navigational tools and maps in actual use that are designed around base ten...even though metric was allegedly based on a dimeninal measurement of the Earth, the mapping of latitude and longitude are still done based on divisons of a circle having 360°, and that system is also present in the practical day to day measurement of time based loosely on sub-units of a 360° rotation of the Earth.

If metric was so easy and practical and based on the nature of Earth's dimensions, a base ten system for measuring time and angles/compass points would have been the first and easiest measures to be developed, and would be the preferred choice.

Instead, days, hours, minutes, degrees, arcminutes and arcseconds are all deemed "Units officially accepted for use with the SI" because everyone uses and understands them and what metric equivalents exist require unwieldy and complex calculations that aren't worth the effort for 99.9999% of the time you need to measure angles outside of a laboratory.

"Accepted units" my ass, metric users NEED base 12 timekeeping, longitude/latitude and angles to function.

>>2596981
>I've never heard someone get excited about metric.
you've heard someone get excited about imperial measurements?

>>2596995
I am excited about imperial measurements. Fractional units and base-12 allow for easy division into halves, thirds, and quarters. Sure it's a bitch to learn but you only have to learn it once.

>>2596995
I think it's kind of interesting how, with Fahrenheit's original temperature scale, you can reconstruct a degree-accurate thermometer with ice water, your own body heat, and a string that can be folded in half.

>>2597004
That was the point.

>>2596981
>. It lacks a connection to anything real or tangible

Idiot. EVERY FUCKING THING in the metric system is tied to something real, much more so than the size of some king's stupid foot. You can't get more real than density of water, boiling point, freezing point, absolute zero, atomic vibration frequency, you name it. Just because you can't see it or verify it in your mom's basement doesn't make it any less real.

>>2597005
Right. Which I think is interesting.

>Just because you can't see it or verify it in your mom's basement doesn't make it any less real.
If you can't experience something in your life, it very much does make it less "real" (existing or occurring as fact; actual rather than imaginary, ideal, or fictitious). So, for example, you can't practically reconstruct the meter yourself based on 1/40,000,000 of Earth's polar circumference, or measure the distance light travels over a certain number of atomic state transitions. But you can measure and average the foot length of several adult men and get something pretty close to a "foot".

>>2597007
For you and me, the size of the kings foot is more real that the speed of light

Metric was literally made by a 14yo smart ass thinking he was a genius basing all these abitrary measurments on "something more real"

>>2596996
> Fractional units and base-12 allow for easy division into halves
except when it doesn't. and then you get hilarious shit like>>2596693 >>2596696 where anon doesn't even know how many teaspoons there are in a gallon
btw the amount of yards in a mile is also a convenient digit that is divisible by 12. but it isn't. use your imagination in this free for all that is the mental gymnastics of defending medieval english stupidity
still waiting on the list of countries outside of euope that have switched to metric
the list of countries that have switched to US customary also shouldn't require a lot of effort

>>2597041
why did the US switch to decimal currency? it doesn't make sense. you want to know what the third of a dollar is but you can't.
a third of a pound is 80 pence

>>2597041
you really are kean on the size of the foot of your former masters
how big was his pp

>>2597210
You sound like an angry bot. No one cares about your diatribe.

>>2596001
>Meanwhile the US doesn't really export all that much
kekked

>>2597214
You seem keen on this size of other mens penises... No wonder you like the metric system...

>>2597225
just put your head in the sand and avoid questions you don't want to answer, this is how you win a discussion

>>2597227
tbf they export a lot of wars for israel. they even tip the doctor right after birth. strap them down and amputate parts of their genitals that will cure masturbation

>>2597227
you have no clue why that is.
its because the USD is a scam currency backed by nothing. slowly they suck in all the physical goods while sending out nothing. they can then hyper inflate the USD and make a new currency while all the rubes that took the USD for their goods get worthless paper. think about it tardo

>>2597240
America exports diplomacy.

Hey. That's a nice country you got there. Would be a shame if we had to bring you some freedom.

>>2597248
America doesnt export enough democracy. Trump was mediating relations between north and south korea, when we should have been teaming up with SK to steamroll the hermit kingdom into the 21st century.

>>2597229
tbf i use metric but prefer to measure dicks in inches

>>2597392
Whats the matter, .1778 doesnt sound inpreasive enough for you?

>>2597396
6x5 is ideal
fat enough to feel it, short enough to get down to the balls

>>2597397
>tfw six and three quarters by five and a quarter
I wouldnt mind another 8th on the wrap around but green grass and what not

>>2597004
You can't do the same shit with Celsius?

>>2595103
My brother in Christ, I'm at a loss of words. You didn't put an inkling of thought into what you're commenting on, did you?

>>2597404
You can easily construct 64 even divisions between two points. Go on and try it with 100.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straightedge_and_compass_construction
A string is right out, of course. good luck folding it in fifths.

>>2596671
Because it was easier

Understand anon, the ONLY thing metric has going for it is that its easier to use.
And thats only a positive if your a slop brained european whose one goose step away from deep throating government cock

>>2597421
I've never done any research on any of this but logic dictates that if there's such a big push to turn everything metric then there's got to be a valid reason

>>2597429
Do you remember when there was a big push to prevent people from gathering in large groups in order to prevent the spread of an airborne pandemic disease, with the single exception of protests against police brutality, which was pushed bigly? Doctors and politicians made announcements about it on the news.

>>2597432
Sarcastic faggot listen, these two events are not even on the same plane of existence: one is another step in the plan to destroy the middle class and turn the population into goycattle, the other is changing some measurement shit.
If (((they))) had to gain a lot from the change to metric then it would have happened already a long time ago

>>2597434
>another step
So it's not the first.

>>2597437
...what does that have to do with anything

>>2597441
Consider that customary systems of measurement are built for easy estimation of quantities commonly encountered in daily life, and that people in places that use customary systems of measurement need to know multiple systems of units suited to different tasks, with conversions often involving mental fractions. A machinist in the US probably has drill bits in four different measurement systems for various tasks, and knows which to use for what. In contrast, the decimal relationship cripples skill building with fractions, and the large jumps in scale leave large gaps in estimation where people just don't bother. Practical and cognitive tools are built around a single general system that's not optimized for particular tasks. What do you suppose the net result of that is?

>>2593931
also because engineers failed to make a simple conversion from English units to metric, an embarrassing lapse that sent the $125 million craft fatally crashing into the Martian surface...

>>2597479
It's just some bullshit nasa spun to hide their incompetence at mission planning. No one in the US does space calculations with imperial. The part was never sending the wrong data, if it was it wouldn't have been anywhere near mads. they just made it up because they forgot to do the correction burn.

>>2597434
>one is a governing body forcing a plan on you
>one is a governing body forcing a plan on you
Totally differebt lol

>>2597558
>he doesn't know 16 fl. oz. of water equals 1 lb.

>>2597558
Bar isn't an SI unit; they use pascal or kilopascal when specifying tire inflation pressure.
But go ahead and suck your own dick while you pretend that a Bar is defined as the atmospheric pressure on Earth rather than a certain number of megadynes per square centimeter.

>>2597499
Right now you're using the metric system? No?
Then I guess you're not being forced

>>2597558
The left really can't meme!

imagine it's the year 1000 and you're the king of some country and you want people to build walls around their villages to protect them from invaders. you tell one village to make the wall as tall as 12 feet end to end. you tell another village to make it 1/2500000 the distance from the equator to the north pole. which one is going to end up with a wall closer to the height you wanted?

>>2597558
>oh no, my tire is at 1.85773 bar!
Do euros really?

>>2597578
Its funny because i am, so yes i am being forced.

>>2595112
Oh hey I made that gif

>>2597769
No, you chose to use it

>>2597783
Nope, i was forced to use it by threat of imprisonment.

metric fags use way to many sig figs for common measurements
>yeah bro I'm 1.8456 m tall
>yeah man its 16.56 degrees outside

>>2597782
It'a a really great gif fren

>>2594825
This

Also pic related needs to be updated. Spoiler… we’re still undefeated

>>2597578
>Then I guess you're not being forced
>he says in a world where Metric was adopted at government mandate

>>2597816
proof?

>>2597978
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_units_of_measurement_directives

>>2597979
Nigger do you really expect me to read
>all that shit
-by You

>>2593908
no

>>2597985
>maladaptive selective iconoclast realizes that he was the idiot all along
Based

>>2593908
What are you talking about? Did you want to help out with this job I'm on today?

If you work hard I'll let you put it on your crappy youtube channel.

>>2598237
What the hell is this all about? Why are you dragging Andrew into this shitty thread?

>>2597421
do you know that like metric, fahrenheit is defined by the freezing and boiling of fresh water at sea level?
by definition the freezing point of water is 32° and the boiling point is 212 with 180 degrees in between so this argument is completely baseless

>>2597560
>16 ounces of water equals 15.3 ( ~ 15 1/4 ) US fluid ounces. (*) or more precisely 15.337782696563 US fluid ounces
literally 5 seconds in google
americans don't even know their own system

>>2597683
the foot is defined as the distance the speed of light travels in on second, divided by 1/299.792.458, times 0.025 times 12
go explain that one to your medieval society which you appear to be stuck in

>>2598313
A foot is 1/16 the length an object falls in one second on thr earth

>>2598332
this is what i get when i look at the wikipedia page of the international foot. of course different from the british foot untill 1959
>The international yard and pound agreement of July 1959 defined the length of the international yard in the United States and countries of the Commonwealth of Nations as exactly 0.9144 meters. Consequently, since a foot is one third of a yard, the international foot is defined to be equal to exactly 0.3048 meters. This was 2 ppm shorter than the previous U.S. definition and 1.7 ppm longer than the previous British definition.[22]

>>2596001
>be mexican
>need 2 set of drill bits
>need to be extra careful with pvc
Here in Mexico we have to adapt to imperial and metric since most of our construction materials are in imperial, but we use the metric system.
So, in one proyect the width can be in inches and the lenght in centimeters.

>>2597434
>Sarcastic
If only.

>these two events are not even on the same plane of existence
Both are reified into existence using book learned retarded materialists simply talking about them. None of this shit actually matters, you're not going to point to a "foot" or "meter" in reality.

>the other is changing some measurement shit.
If the retarded populace can barely cook for themselves now, imagine the chaos when they start using metric for measuring butter, eggs and milk. Imagine the sheer amount of time that is going to go out the window just to quantify making a fucking load of bread. They're going to waste more effort carrying decimals than kneading and you can't even eat decimals. Ever see a Japanese person do excessively excruciating work on geomancing (name a product) that could have been made in 1/10th the time if they had simply used modern methods and tools? Imagine that but even more pointless because the numbers...the "tools" are complex for no reason rather than for cultural preservation reasons.

>If (((they))) had to gain a lot from the change to metric then it would have happened already a long time ago
They don't gain or lose anything. It's a distraction to invest your time into a psychosis instead of investing it in yourself. It's like this anon elaborates >>2597446. Just look at what common core did to zoomers. I'm sure as soon as you all start accepting it, the decision will be made by some groupthink to play conductor and change the tune of the orchestra and make you all waste your time once more.

>>2598308
>he doesn't know what fl. oz. means.

>>2598385
https://coolconversion.com/cooking-weight-volume/16~ounce~of~water~to~oz

>>2598376
refer to >>2597981

>>2598402
I'm sorry to hear that, try this out.

>>2593908
They should, all of us are ready for it but it won't happen.

>>2598308
>16 ounces of water = 15.337 US fluid ounces
...okay? The anon said 16 fluid ounces of water = 1 pound

You look very silly right now, anon

>>2598407
No, all of us are not

>>2598431
>>2598399

>>2598431
pîc unrelated?
https://www.ninjaunits.com/converters/water-weight/pounds/pounds-us-fluid-ounces/
have another one since it appears you're confused by ounces and fluid ounces
>How many pounds are in a US fluid ounce of water?
>1 lb wt. = 15.34 fl-oz

>>2595675
you live in a country where morons get well paying jobs. your arrogance is showing

>>2598463
He never said we arent morons.
Typical rerarded cope.

>>2598290
I was talking about the original "Fahrenheit" temperature scale as formulated by Fahrenheit himself. The change to the scale you describe happened after his death. The scale he devised had pure water freezing at 32 degrees and normal human body temperature at 96 degrees, with 64 degrees between them.

>>2594825
hate to break it to you, but they used at least as much metric as they did imperial even in the '60s
https://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/A11_MissionReport.pdf

>>2597957
sorry, but metric won;
https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/PUBS_LIB/FedRegister/FRdoc59-5442.pdf
all your units are based on metric equivalents and nothing else

>>2598597
You.didntndonanything except post from your mother's basement. Why are you.proud of this? It's not like you were involved in the decision.

>>2598618
i'm not sure what makes you think i'm personally proud of this or had any say in it, though i do think it's weird you're so proud of using imperial units, when they aren't an american invention either

>>2598621
How disingenuous

>>2598552
the original fahrenheit of course being different from the current day fahrenheit
>The scale he devised had pure water freezing at 32 degrees
no, it was the freezing point of some brine solution at 0° because that is "really cold". "really cold" of course being a good point for a measurement system because that is not subjective as fuck.
the most accurate description of the fahrenheit is propably also based on celcius but cba to look it up, i'm getting tired of educating americans on their own system
>>2598436
fyi an imperial gallon (the actual imperial gallon, not the american gallon. they are significantly different because of reasons) is indeed 10 pounds in weight, but that was ironically decided to be that way after a kilo was a cubic dm of water

>>2595837
since this is such a high iq discussion with the amerimutts i guess i have to answer my own question yet again
"mile" literally means 1000 (thousand). they would count 1000 paces during a march and then would make a marking.
i don't know what the latin word for "1760" is but what i do know mile isn't it.

>>2598859
> mile
I think you mean what we use here in the UK: “millard” from back when france conquered britain.

>>2598867
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Roman_mile
>An ancient Roman unit of itinerant distance of 1000 paces (mille passus, hence also "mile" from Latin mille, "1000"). Indirectly standardized to 5000 Roman feet by Agrippa in 29 BC. In modern times, Agrippa's Imperial Roman mile is empirically estimated to have been around 1481 meters (1620 yards, 4860 English feet, 0.92 English miles); compared with a modern mile, which is 5280 feet.

>>2595732
Base 10 is inferior plain and simple, the Roman's knew this.

>>2598894
>The modern English word mile derives from Middle English myle and Old English mīl, which was cognate with all other Germanic terms for miles. These derived from the nominal ellipsis form of mīlle passus 'mile' or mīlia passuum 'miles', the Roman mile of one thousand paces.[1]
the romans were high iq so didn't base their unit or numbering system around the numer 10 so a mile indeed doesn't mean 1000 and with their numbering system they didn't use shit like X, D, C, M, which surely aren't a multiple of 10
the ignorance across the pond knowns no ends

>>2596584
>>2596608
this question also remains unanswered
anyone, please?

>>2595837
>>2598859
Samefag, fuck off.

>>2598597
>are based on
No...
You can convert a meter to feet, doesnt mean metric is based on imperial.
The reason they use metric in official capacities is because its defined by physical constants. We can just as easily redefine imperial to be based on physichal constants. This way is just easier, because as everyone knows the only reason metric exists is because people are lazy.
Now unless youre going to act like metric owns physical constants, go ahead and fuck off.

>>2598941
solid refutation

>>2598947
so metric is based on physical constants, and burger units are defined by metric.
btw it's not the imperial system. unless you can explain how big of a volume an imerpial gallon is without embarrasing yourself

>>2598960
i make a lot of typos because i'm drunk
i try to write in english without mistakes

>>2598899
it has been 5 days, still no one?
i really want to know :((((

i am shitfaced, but it the rational kind of way at this moment
thank you /hbg/

>>2594825
Shitholes will seethe.

>>2598960
>and burger units are defined by metric.
NO
HOLY SHIT LEARN TO FUCKING READ

burger units are DESCRIBED in OFFICIAL CAPACITY using metric.
Both metric and burgers units are DEFINED bt physical constants.

>>2598977
the US was seething when NASA crashed a mars orbiter with no survivors
it wasn"t even their mistake, lockheed provided the software for course corrections when the satelite was in the shadow of some planet or moon but the brainlets thought providing the software in feet and inches was a good idea
good way to waste tax money. also a good demonstration that maybe having standardised units is not a bad idea

>>2598979
metric is directly defined by physical constants
burger units are not. they are directly defined by cuckold metric units
>yeah but if you think about it the inch is defined by the speed of light as well
glad that i'm not the only one making retard spelling mistakes though, i'm no the only drunk retard entertaining the crowd

>>2598979
No, they're defined by metric, as described. If they were defined by physical properties, they would have stated those physical properties
>but it's the same thing
if a metric unit were to be revised, so to would the US system, because of it's correlation to metric, rather than the current physical properties, this is what makes it a metric-based system

>>2597768
decimals, an american's worst enemy. i'm sure you'd much prefer to measure 79/894ths of an inch instead, right?

>>2599005
yet you will never see a metric drive socket wrench.

>>2598984
>they are directly defined by cuckold metric units
Which are defined by physical constants..
You know the measurement you use for those constants? Yeah you can use that to determine imperial units too. Its literall changing one number...

METRIC DOES NOT OWN CONSTANTS

>>2598985
>If they were defined by physical properties, they would have stated those physical properties
Ah yes, they would have done the more strenuous choice. Yes yes indeed, the government would never half ass something because its easier. You people are clowns. You have butt fucked yourself into a corner, stay there and rot.

>>2599005
Lmao this is just what we say about you and fractions, but with the words swapped out. But it doesnt work because we use decimals too. A drill index would drive you insane lol.

>>2599027
in the end, its an endless shitflinging contest with no real end. all that actually matters is if its useful to you, and if you can get consistent results. itd be nice to have a universal system, but universal systems tend to never be universal.

>>2599030
Based anon, now go be in paradise and leave us to fling shit at each other

>>2599025
Yes, they took the easy way and redefined their units to be based on metric, so it would always be simple to convert between the two
why would they copy what metric was based on, which could lead to divergence from metric in the future, when they can just base it on metric directly and ensure it will always be compatible?

>>2599053
>which could lead to divergence from metric in the future

>>2598854
>the original fahrenheit of course being different from the current day fahrenheit
Well, yes. Different zero points and degree interval.

>no, it was the freezing point of some brine solution at 0°
You're conflating purpose with implementation. Fahrenheit fiddled around with brine solutions to get a specific one to serve as a reference that gave a zero point such that water froze at 32 and human body temperature was 96. Because that was what he wanted for the utility in constructing a thermometer. And as for why those particular numerical values for those temperatures, those were chosen such that 0 would represent a really cold day and 100 would represent a really hot day in a temperate continental climate. Therefore, the range 0-100 would cover most weather most people in his society would be interested in describing.

>>2599065
Explain

>>2599175
the International prototype meter is shrinking by 0.0003% each decade due to radiation

>>2596443
American here. I hate trying to do math every time I want to know what the next biggest socket size is. 11/16? 7/64? 3/8?

Maybe if I did work with them constantly I’d memorize it, but I’m 40 and I still have to think through it every time.

Or object is 10 3/4 inches wide, and need to add 7/16 to each side. I’ll take mm any fucking day

>>2599199
>Or object is 10 3/4 inches wide, and need to add 7/16 to each side. I’ll take mm any fucking day
>can't add 12/16 and 7/16 together to get 19/16 or 1 3/16
Smooth brain.

>>2599205
I guess so, you numbers don’t make any sense to me. How does 10 3/4 inches = 12/16?

Also you needed to add 7/16 to both side.

>>2599212
10 6/8 plus 7/8 equals 10 13/8 or 11 5/8.

>>2593931
Speed limit signs on the Mars approach are all in km/s.

>>2599218
what the kek

>>2599220
dishonest argument is dishonest

>>2599220
funnily enough, the post-Revolutionary France did propose a decimal clock, to go alongside decimal units of weight, measure, etc.

https://svalbard.watch/pages/about_decimal_time.html

It didnt catch on and was abandoned in 1795.

>>2599199
Go the fuck to europe then you witless traitor

>>2599178
This just helps my point, maybe you didn't understand me

>>2599218
If there was actually mismatched units we wouldn't have almost hit it or just barely missed or slammed into it. We wouldn't be anywhere near it, like at all. It would be all fucked up. You're not 5x wrong in your thrust reporting and just missing by a couple miles in space. You're going to the oort cloud or the sun.

Nasal is just dumb and they think Americans are dumb for using imperial, so they blamed imperial even though there's no way that was the issue.

>>2599219
Its a myth, they missed the burn and somehow the idea that it was a unit conflict came about and they ran with it to cover there ass.

Seriously think about it.
On one screen youve got the current speed of the craft in mph, on the other youve got the speed it needs to get to in kms. At the speeds that craft is going, there is no reality in which you do not immediately realize theres a problem with one of these two numbers.

>>2599243
>Nasal is just dumb and they think Americans are dumb for using imperial, so they blamed imperial even though there's no way that was the issue.
US Customary, not Imperial.

>>2599233
Yeah they had metric time, it was dumb.
Nothing good has come from the french revolution

>>2599283
>Nothing good has come from the french revolution

>>2593908
>>2595112
>>2597782

Somebody should actually try and record how it behaves in reality,

>>2599303
>chain initially spins around without moving the ball
>as the chain twists, it loses slop between links
>if it binds, the low output torque of the grinder stalls the motor, with the ball jumping around a little before wedging against the floor or other object
>if it doesn't bind, the chain flops around irregularly and violently until the extreme vibration damages something, possibly that weld
One way or another it probably comes to a stop in under a second.

>>2593908
It did. There are many standards. You're stupid. KYS.

>>2599221
Dishonest how? Its a good idea.
>>2599283
In the early 2000s, Swatch internet time was mildly popular. I had a little KDE widget displaying the time in beats. The current time is @818.73

>>2599319
Unix time or bust.

>>2599283
why would it be dumb? converting kWh to joules would be trivial, like converting cubic dm to liter
would it really that bad if 140 minutes would be 1,4 hours instead of 2 hours and 20 minutes? it becomes worse when seconds and days become involved. in physics if time is involved the first thing you do is convert everything to seconds and use seconds only. similar you how you make designs with freedom units by sticking to the same decimal inch or foot, unless you really hate yourself.
have fun with your flow rates btw using gallons and feet/sec

>>2599073
>The Fahrenheit scale (/ˈfærənˌhaJt, ˈfɑːr-/) is a temperature scale based on one proposed in 1724 by the physicist Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit (1686–1736).[1] It uses the degree Fahrenheit (symbol: °F) as the unit. Several accounts of how he originally defined his scale exist, but the original paper suggests the lower defining point, 0 °F, was established as the freezing temperature of a solution of brine made from a mixture of water, ice, and ammonium chloride (a salt).[2][3] The other limit established was his best estimate of the average human body temperature, originally set at 90 °F, then 96 °F (about 2.6 °F less than the modern value due to a later redefinition of the scale).[2]
it just werks. why would someone ever think 0-100 makes more sense when 0-90 works a lot better. don't you know that 90 is a convenient number to keep dividing in half?
and the only thing you need for calibration is a brine solution (the concentration is not specified in the article so good luck) and a very cold day. and the human body temperature, which is 90°F. wait no it's 96°F nvm, it's 98.6°F, because water boils at 212°

>>2599479
forgot to mention you get a lot more funny stuff when using horsepower instead of kilowatt. the first thing you do is convert the horsepower if you want to do any meaningful calculations

>>2599487
how do you convert joules/s to watt? how do you convert ft⋅lbf/s to horsepower?

>>2599479
Latitude,longitude, arc minutes and arc seconds and real seconds and minutes knots and nautical miles are all related and very useful when navigating

>>2599499
these are latitudes, not times. but i still completely fail to see how 60 is more convenient than 100 other than muh divisions. btw how many nautical miles are there in a regular mile?
and there are 86400 seconds in a day. so if my power output is 1000W in one day i have generated 86,4MJ. this stupid factor of 3600 pops up all the goddamn time
the only time you use hours and minutes is when you convert the end result to explain to the crowd how long something takes
yes i do believe metric time would have been for the better, but it gets ridiculed and only brought up to point out inconsistencies with metric countries (read: freedom hating non-american countries)

>>2599506
Because the earth spins almost exactly 360 degrees in a day. And one minute is one nautical mile. one knot is one NM per hour. So if you're going to say, fly around the equator in 24 hours, you need to average 900 knots.

>>2593934
Real, this

>>2599510
So in decimal time that's 1443 km/h or 1670 km/h in normal time.

Knots and 360 degrees is superior for navigation.

>>2599510
>almost exactly
almost
the earth is also almost a perfect sphere
almost
but how many miles are there in a nautical mile

>>2599513
what makes 360 degrees superior to something like 100/400/1000 degrees? it's 5000 year old babylonial garbage
why are nautical miles better than kms? still using a map with compass and not a gps?
is the aircraft going to crash if you display the altitude with meters instead of feet?
how many yards are there in a nautical mile anyway, surely it's a number divisable by 12 like with the regular mile

>>2599515
>it's all arbitrary
>therefore everything currently in use should be changed at great expense to this different arbitrary system

>>2599517
ok man, just don't answer anything, convincing rhetoric
but yes i do prefer the arbitrary garbage that is a multiple of 10. because the numeral system i am using is also base 10, don't know about what numbers you're using. (all numeral systems are base "10" but i hope you understand what i mean)
btw 1m/s equals 3,6km/h and i don't like it. but now that you're here to save the day, how do you convert joules/s to watt? how do you convert ft⋅lbf/s to horsepower? how do you convert kWh to joules?
which conversion is the most convenient in your eyes?

>>2599515
>how many miles in a nautical mile
How many oranges are in a banana?

These are irrelevant questions. I'm flying a boat or piloting an aircraft. Why would I convert to km or miles? That's dumb as fuck. Convert to decimal NM if you want but fuck off with your smooth brained questions.

It doesn't matter how many degrees you make the planet. If you use KM OR decimal seconds you make navigating harder and your numbers suck.

Everyone uses NM and knots. Almost everyone uses feet for altitude too. USSR didn't though.

As I said in the beginning NM, seconds, minutes, and degrees are all the same unit system and they make the most sense for what they do, and no one wants to change except you because ypu got ass burgers about the number 10.

>>2599527
you still aren't answering anything. but i guess you're right that if i get out of my car and step on a boat, kilometers should be abandoned
but why the fixation on navigating, i was clearly talking about metric time and why minutes and hours aren't ideal. and sort of hinting your unit system is all like that which is why everyone abandoned that shit long ago
you never wonder how long a nautical mile is in regular miles? if you don't even know or don't want to answer this when what's the point
>How many oranges are in a banana?
yeah sure i guess feet in a mile are apples and oranges as well. and i guess the answer to the question to the amount of feet in a nautical mile is "fuck you retard"

>>2599303
>>2599312
The grinder weighs too much and spins too fast, the center of rotation would be somewhere in the middle of the chain so its inherently unstable.

If you turned it on and dropped it from a plane, it would be a wicked frisby.

>>2599534
The answer to the question IS nobody cares, you autistic prick holy shit.
Nobody has ever asked that question in real life.
The ONLY benefit of metric is that it makes academics lives easier, something that arguably isnt even a benefit.

>>2599534
Because the earth is a certain shape and spins at a certain rate. You can't divide this into any decimal unit of length and time that gives you a nice round number like 900.

Yes the answer to all your questions are unironically fuck you retard. They are retarded because no one ever makes these conversions.

If you're having some dumb internet debate you can ask Google and pretend you knew all along but that's dumb.

I really hope everyone ITT is shitposting. Caring about units this much is deranged.

>>2599527
What the fuck are you talking about. International commercial shipping uses km/h. And all the navigational software uses lattitude and longitude degrees.

Have you ever even been on a boat larger than a fishing trawler?

>>2593908
Why? Do you lack the mental fortitude to understand both?

>>2599557
I thought I was talking airplanes from context

O Google your shit and the boat I clicked on from this UK website is talking about Knots so I dunno what you're talking about.

>>2599524
>the numeral system i am using is also base 10, don't know about what numbers you're using. (all numeral systems are base "10" but i hope you understand what i mean)
I use base 2, base 10, base 16, base 60, and others as appropriate.

>how do you convert joules/s to watt?
1:1

>how do you convert ft⋅lbf/s to horsepower?
550:1

>how do you convert kWh to joules?
3,600,000:1

Joules/second to Watts is a definition, not a conversion. The two actual conversions there both involve two significant figures, with the horsepower conversion being easier to do mentally.

>>2599535
It's that the ball and chain weigh too much and are too unbalanced, not that the grinder weights too much. And the problem isn't instability (it would be dynamically stable if it managed to get up to speed), it's that it's not made to take the dynamic forces that would involve, and it would shake itself apart.

>>2599625
>and it would shake itself apart
No it wouldnt, the oscilation would be too slow. It will never get up to speed because of the inherent instability. Unless ofcourse it was airborn.

>>2599626
>Unless ofcourse it was airborn.
And if it did, it would shake itself apart. Did you miss the "if it managed to get up to speed" bit there?

>>2599628
If it was airborne, it would get up to speed and rotate around a point somewhere near the middle of the chain. There woukd be no chaking to tear the grinder apart.

>>2599634
>There woukd be no chaking to tear the grinder apart.
Suppose that the ball/chain weighs 2 pounds, and is 18" long. The grinder spins at 11,000RPM.

A 2 pound weight spinning at a radius of 18" at 11,000 RPM experiences a radial acceleration of over 60,000Gs, producing over 60 tons of dynamic load on the grinder's main bearings. The grinder's components are not made to handle that.

>>2599638
The grinder wouldnt be able to reach 11,000 rpm you dingus. The little motor couldnt push that load to 11,000 rpm.

>>2599752
>Did you miss the "if it managed to get up to speed" bit there?

>>2595836
1/12 of one foot

>>2599538
>the earth is a certain shape
yes it is, and a perfect sphere it is not
>do you want to know how long a nautical mile actually is?
>you fucking autistic retard, you don't
i mean not that i expect much of an american but this is a new low

>>2599973
>On July 1, 1959, a new definition took effect as a result of an agreement with the nations of the Commonwealth of Nations. The yard was reduced to exactly 0.9144 m, making the inch equal to exactly 0.0254 m, a compromise which was longer than the previous United Kingdom value, but equal to that which was current in Canada. It remains currently the official unit of length in the United States.

>>2599217
Yeah would have been easier to just add the cm together.

>>2599241
I love America. I think Black Lives Matter. The military likes km and mm just fine. We just have a lot of yokels here is all. And since most of them barely get out of high school, I think it’s miraculous they can do any kind of fractions.

>>2599563
>I thought I was talking airplanes from context
so an aircraft travels at certain knots and uses feet for elevation but wanting to know how many feet there are in a nautical mile you're an austistic retard
mixing up knots, feet/sec miles/hour i really feel sorry for aircraft designers. what unit do they use for a gps? does it automatically switch from miles to nautical miles once you enter a body of water?
what if someone used something silly like a meter and meter/second and stuck to it
a knot is 1.68780986 feet per second, apparently. took me a long time to google but trivial questions like "how many yards are there in a nautical mile" for some reason no ones gives a proper reply
or the long list of how many countries that have switched to US customary units that remains an open question

>>2599623
550 is easier than 3.6 because it is?
3600 seconds in an hour is something you don't encounter on a regular basis but the number 550 is?
go ask your mom and dad how many foot-pounds/second there are in a horsepower
>inb4 the no ones cares "argument" again
tell your engineers that. i don't even know if someone is mad enough to unironically use these units during car and engine design.
or with electrical engines, 1V.1A=1W. what is the US customary unit for volts and amps anyway.

>>2600068

>>2600079
i'm not upset, i'm disappointed

>>2600081
Want to try again in proper English?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7x-RGfd0Yk

>>2600062
>>2600062
Yes. No one ever ever gives a shit how many feet are in a NM. That conversion is never made.

No one cares a out miles/hour or km/h either. Feet/miles/km never come up on the GPS or maps.

Ft/sec does actually matter but that's vertical speed. It's actually very nice they're a completely separate unit because you're not going to confuse someone else by saying I'm going 3m/sec and they have to worry and think if they're talking about vertical or horizontal speed.

GPS is always in degrees and minutes. One minute is exactly one nautical mile. All the maps are scaled so that's true. If you can fly about 120knots and you want to fly from 38n to 39n that's about half an hour of flying because 38 to 39 is 1 degree, and one degree is 60 minutes is 60 NM. One knot is one nm/h.

>>2600126
guess i finally got an elaborate answer
>Ft/sec does actually matter but that's vertical speed
but do you honestly believe the unit for a vehicle's speed should depend on the vehicle, but maybe not entirely depending on what you're measuring (the same thing, distance, but in another direction), instead of using the same unit for everything?
do they use mph in windtunnel tests or knots? how many nautical miles is the length of a typical runway? what is the speed of sound in knots? "no one cares" i guess
>No one cares a out miles/hour or km/h either.
i care about kmh. if someone asks how fast the plane is going and you answer with knots you probably are going to get stared at with confusion, but i don't really like kmh for anything serious. for my calculations i avoid all units that aren't a mutiple of 10 of the base units like the plague, so i stick to m/s and not km/h because there is a factor of 3.6 involded. a N of drag for an object that travels at a speed of 1m/s requires 1W of power to overcome. kWh i'm not too fond of for the same reason, i tend to stick to joules and seconds and completely avoid minutes/hours, but i guess it can't be avoided so multiplying with 60 and 3600 happens more often than i want to admit.
converting physical dimension sticking to meters and meters/s to liters and flow rates is kind of trivial as well. but please no liter/hour
but since you're finally answering things can you give me the list of countries that made the switch to US customary?

>>2600133
oh yes i have the habbit of skipping the factors of 10 as well but i got some strange looks using meters for stress calculations instead of mm but in my eyes it's more consistent to do it that way
N/mm is a MP

>>2600136
to know this you have to know that 1 pascal is 1N/m^2 and that 0.001m=1mm. so you mutiply by a million and you get a mega prefix
how do you do something similar with pounds, ounces, gallons of water, feet and inches, or fractions of an inch?

>>2600139
since i'm blogging at this point and the thread is over the bump limit anyway, i haven't used anything other than meters and seconds in all of my code
now that i look at it pi/180 pops up everywhere too. fuck the number 60 and 360 you babylon retards

>>2600144
1N.1m/s=1W
1NM.1rad/s=1W
1V.1A=1W
starting to see a pattern?

>>2600139
>how do you do something similar with pounds
Structural engineering contexts commonly use "kips" meaning "thousand PSI". The general practice is to use units suited to the particular task at hand. For example, you might use gallons in the design of a house's plumbing system, but designing a flood control system may use acre-feet instead.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acre-foot

>>2599757
Did you miss the "it wouldnt get up to speed" bit there?
If we're gonna talk about impossible scenarios, then the grinder will be blessed by god when wielded by a worthy warrior of the lord and will defy the """laws""" of physics(the devil) to maintain its integrity at 11,000 rpm

>>2600057
Those "yokels" are the americans. Thugs and boot lickers need to leave.

>>2600156
Which is why this >>2599638 was given as a reply to this >>2599634. There was an actual conversation, you see.

>>2600159
I saw, and proceeded to not care.

>>2600160
You cared enough to reply in a thread past the bump limit and off the first page, apparently.

>>2600162
My good sir, this is a fortune 400 thread, i can care enough to spend less than 60s responding to you, while also not caring enough to take it seriously.

>>2600133
The speed of sound is measured in mach because it has so many variables it is always just mach.

No do not use the same unit for everything. You're dumb. Use the right unit for what you're measuring. Are you pissed at the electrical engineers that use C. You sound like your schizo posting.

Okay. Fine. Runway length is measured in ft or meters but again this is nice because you're not confusing it with anything else going on.

>>2593908
no

>>2600188
I always loved this image because it outs the creator as a literal invalid.
>arbitrary scale at which water freezes

>>2600191
>a literal invalid
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/invalid

>>2600346
Yes, they are literally too sick to speak form coherent sentences.

>>2600178
i know what the speed of sound and light is in m/s but asking how many feet there are in a nautical miles i am met with passive aggression
>inb4 they aren't constant
a nautical mile isn't constant either it depends on your location
imagine you're in a glide but if you ask your copilot what the descend rate is in fps at the current speed of x knots and angle, he's going to tell you "are you autistic? fuck of retard".
it's painfully obvious by now you never faced anything beyond highschool stuff. go ahead and use knots when designing the propulsion system for your airplane and see what happens
>No do not use the same unit for everything.
i am going to use the same unit for everything. so i can avoid trivial and easy mistakes. maybe you should try it
>You're dumb.
yes i am, and lockheed was smart for using different units for the software than nasa. arbitrary conversions smart.
btw you can actually find nasa's code for the moon missions online so you can educate me even further about the merits of US customary. i am not using the word imperial because how many standard gallons are there in an imperial gallon? another trivial question that might cause confusion and butthurt
comment too long

>>2600753
why did the US change to a decimal currency? they used to have a similar system to the former british currency but for some bizarre reason they both abandoned that.
>Most countries have decimalised their currencies, converting them from non-decimal sub-units to a decimal system, with one basic currency unit and sub-units that are to a power of 10, most commonly 100, and exceptionally 1000; and sometimes at the same time changing the name of the currency or the conversion rate to the new currency. Today, only two countries have non-decimal currencies: Mauritania, where 1 ouguiya = 5 khoums, and Madagascar, where 1 ariary = 5 iraimbilanja.[1]
what the fuck is this nonsense. you can't even divide a euro or a dollar or even a yen in three equal parts. it sounds awfully familiar to communist units, where only the US, liberia, and myanmar are left with the rational system.

>>2600753
unaswered questions are the red line of this thread so i googled it and an imperial gallon apparently is roughly equal to 1.2 burger gallons.
>>No do not use the same unit for everything.
yeah, one liter being a cubic dm everywhere, no you can't do that. instead their gallon is 1.2 times the size of your gallon, which of course is 231 cubic inches and 700 and then something teaspoons. their gallon being 10 pounds of water, and your gallon being 8 pounds and a bit of water, making a fluid ounce of water somewhat close to an ounce, but not exactly. very smart, very streamlined
still waiting on the short list of countries outside europe that made the mistake of switching to metric

>>2600150
>The acre-foot is a non-SI unit of volume equal to about 1,233 m3 commonly used in the United States in reference to large-scale water resources, such as reservoirs, aqueducts, canals, sewer flow capacity, irrigation water,[1] and river flows.
>An acre-foot equals approximately an eight-lane swimming pool, 82 ft (25 m) long, 52 ft (16 m) wide and 9.8 ft (3 m) deep.
approximately, that word again
think i'm going to stick with liters and cubic meters. "yeah my acre piece of land that is that size because thats what i can roughly farm with a pair of oxens in a day, this week it got an inch of rainfall so this is how many gallons/barrels it received. "
in my example i made the trivial conversion of a newton of force on a square millimeter to megapascal. so if you have a 16th of an inch with a kip of force then what is the pressure?
presumably you were talking about pounds of force and not a pound, the two of course being quite different

>>2600778
already mentioned i turned this thread in my own blog but in all my code i don't use liters but cubic meters
you declare your variables and you stick with it. and you don't throw in avoidable conversion factors that aren't physical constants
also fuck python where using "1" and "1.0" mean different things. discount matlab but it's free
java isn't that great either but at least you know what an integer and a double are because you explicitely said so. i suck at coding, thanks for asking

>>2600789
wait it's not programming here it's scripting to get an answer, different things
but yes my actual coding skills are garbage

>>2600778
>so if you have a 16th of an inch with a kip of force then what is the pressure?
A 16th of an inch is a linear measurement, and as such does not represent an area over which pressure is applied. Supposing you meant 1/16 of a square inch, that would be 16,000 PSI. Supposing you meant 1/16" square, that would be 256,000 PSI. This really isn't difficult.

>>2600791
yes i was talking about squares, didn't felt the need to correct myself because the mistake was obvious. a 16th of an inch, squared.
i'm guessing it won't be a more convenient number than a million
i can do it with µm as well but that unit usually only shows up with tolerances. but if you don't like it you can always convert to the next unit. or do everything in meters, and squared meter, and cubic meters. but yeah the guy at the toolbench probably doesn't want to deal with a lot of zeros or exponents but the calcs, fuck you. contrary to popular belief consistency isn't that bad

>>2600791
didn't properly read lol.
256,000 PSI, i indeed dare to say 1000000 is easier to work with.

>>2600778
>Since an acre is defined as a chain by a furlong (i.e. 66 ft × 660 ft or 20.12 m × 201.17 m), an acre-foot is 43,560 cubic feet (1,233.5 m3).
>There are two definitions of an acre-foot (differing by about 0.0006%), depending on whether the "foot" used is an "international foot" or a "U.S. survey foot".
>1 acre-foot= 43,560 cubic feet = 75,271,680 cu in
good to know

>>2600753
>you know mach in m/s
That's weird because it changes with altitude and pressure. Like an airplane might experience while flying.

>ask copilot about descent rate
He'd probably just look at his set of the gauge and tell you what the gauge says. Its a totally reasonable question.

>>2600812
See this is you being dumb again. The reservoir has been surveyed and they know the square acreage of it at various depths, so you just look at the footage and look at a table in the office and that's that many acre feet. Because you know what the acreage of your reservoir is. So it's an acre-foot.

>>2600811
The same force over the same area is 1,765,000,000 pascals, not a million. Whether numbers work out nicely depends both on the measurement system chosen and the actual quantities involved. It's trivial to pick numbers that work nicely in either system.

>>2600820
>He'd probably just look at his set of the gauge and tell you what the gauge says. Its a totally reasonable question.
what if the gauge malfunctions? actually not that difficult to achieve if you're flying through vulcanic ash along with the gliding scenario. then you go for a sea landing instead of going for the nearest airport because feet/s to knots is too much to ask. maybe it's in a manual, who knows. the copilot is of course completely calm and won't make mistakes that could have been avoided because consistency le bad

>>2600823
so you do actually believe that a unit that is defined by a chain by a furlong by a foot that equals 75,271,680 cubic inch is a good idea
lol. lmao even
yeah it really is obvious you better stick to your workbench

>>2600825
i was talking about how many pascal there is in a N/mm^2. and why it is easier than wondering how many PSI there is in a square fraction of an inch instead. i guess i really have to spell it out for you.
US customary completely falls appart when multiple units come together. even something as simple as a volume.
do your thing with 75,271,680 cubic inches in an acre-foot but i'm doing things with 1000 liters in a cubic meter

>>2600844
So you know the chain is what the surveyors used for centuries, right? So yeah, of course we'd want to me
asure using our tools.

>>2600844
If the gauge is malfunctioning that bad then you can trust any other gauges you have, so yes the answer is once again, fuck you

>>2600845
>So you know the chain is what the surveyors used for centuries, right?
yeah well, i copy pasted the wikipedia page so i do know indeed for the moment that a chain is 66 feet and a furlong is 1/8th of a mile or 10 chains so 660 feet. and you multiply with a foot to get the volume of 75,271,680 cubic inches
where i live they use are and hectare for survying, which is 10 or 100 meter squared.
they also used our own version of feet and miles a while ago untill the mid 19th century but that doesn't exactly prevent me nowadays from using meter

>>2600848
btw a cm of rainfall equals a liter/m^2.
how many gallons per square feet are there in an inch of rainfall?

>>2600849
fugg, millimeters instead of cm, big fuck up
i should elaborate, a square meter is 1000mm squared, and 1000*1000*1=10000000, and there just happened to be 1l in 1 million cubic mm. or 1l in 1000 cubic cm, because a liter is a 10cm sized cube. even me could work it out in a somewhat toxicated state.
but 231 cubic inch in a gallon works just as well i guess

>>2600849
About 1/12 of a acre foot

>>2600854
btw this they teach to 10 year olds. we had little blocks that were a cubic cm and the 10cm block was a liter.
then the teacher brought up a metal wire frame of a cubic meter and explained that there fit exactly 1000 of the big cubes
how many little kids in the US know how many fluid ounces there are in a cubic feet or yard? or could easily derive it if given the question?

>>2600857
how did you arrive at this number? and is this a trivial question for 5th graders to figure it out themselves?
also
>about.
"about", "approximately", "roughly". isn't that great

>>2600862
If you have an acre and an inch of rain falls that's 1/12 of an acre foot

>>2600844
>i was talking about how many pascal there is in a N/mm^2. and why it is easier than wondering how many PSI there is in a square fraction of an inch instead.
A36 steel yields at 36ksi. What is that in pascals?

>>2600861
>btw this they teach to 10 year olds
And you still messed up the conversion. Maybe they should have spent more time teaching fractions.

>>2600874
and then i corrected myself without resorting to google or an online converter because it is literally kiddie stuff by design, and i immediately admitted my mistake. and my excuse for fucking up is heavy drinking but still worked it out because it's all multiples of 10
to the interested reader i suggest calculating how much liters you got for a mm of rainfall on a hectare surface as well
but yeah, go ahead and go to a US primary school and ask the kids or your little cousin how many pints per square foot or yard you get for a inch of rainfall
or even better, use a fraction of an inch. because 1/32th is a more realistic number in most places

>>2600872
>A36 steel yields at 36ksi. What is that in pascals?
presumably that number is specified by the manufacturer, units like MPa and GPa aren't exactly uncommon, but i fail to see how this is an argument in any way for what i was trying to say

>>2600893
>how many pints per square foot or yard you get for a inch of rainfall
This isn't a question that comes up in real life. Ever. Rainfall volume over large areas is, for which the acre-foot unit is used.

>presumably that number is specified by the manufacture
It's an alloy specification published by ASTM International, and the most common kind of structural steel used in North America. Engineering things made using it involves stress calculations. If Metric is so superior in all cases, what is that stress in pascals? But to Metric. Suppose I have a steel rod with a tensile yield stress of 1 gigapascal, and I want to figure out the load it can carry with a design stress of .7 yield stress. It's 1cm in diameter. Give your answer in kilograms, since that's what the load to be carried is quantified in.