Fahrenheit vs. Celsius vs. Kelvin - eviltoast
  • KillAllPoorPeople@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Can humans survive 100 degree heat? Yes so it doesn’t represent 100%

    I have no idea what this means.

    150 for 3rd degree burns (almost instant), does Fahrenheit go off base 150? Also no

    What about cold? Well -40 requires a lot of layers, so then +40 should be pretty hot for humans right? Nope, because it’s not related to humans at all

    Why do these matter? What percentage of humans live where it’s regularly -40 degrees? Why does the scale need to be perfect in your opinion? And how is Celsius better?

    • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I have no idea what this means.

      Humans can survive 100 F so it’s not a scale of 0-100, which you would expect for a system based on humans

      Why does the scale need to be perfect in your opinion?

      The person I responded to said it was based off humans, I was arguing that it wasn’t because no patterns exist in relation to humans

      And how is Celsius better?

      Well the person claimed it’s based on the temperature of water at sea level with 0 being freezing and 100 being boiling. This would be the 0-100% for water

      • Gestrid@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Technically, water can still go higher than 100°C, same as humans can go higher than 100°F. Water turns into steam. If the temperature continues to rise, the steam would theoretically enter a plasma state. Then, you could say the water has “died” as the atoms and molecules lose their electrons.

      • KillAllPoorPeople@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Humans can survive 100 F so it’s not a scale of 0-100, which you would expect for a system based on humans

        No one said it’s a scale limited from 0 to 100 on the basis of survivability. That’s something you just made up on the spot to push some weird narrative.

        The person I responded to said it was based off humans, I was arguing that it wasn’t because no patterns exist in relation to humans

        I again have no idea what you’re saying. The patterns of 0 being low and 100 being high isn’t a pattern related to humans? That’s obviously not true. We use 0 as the bottom and 100 for the top on a lot of other things.

        Well the person claimed it’s based on the temperature of water at sea level with 0 being freezing and 100 being boiling. This would be the 0-100% for water

        Why are you limiting 0 and 100 as cut offs?