Imperial units people, Do you sometimes get confused about time units as well? - eviltoast

Hi, I think in metric units, so almost everything is some form of a power of 10, like a kilogram is a 1000 grams, etc.

Sometimes I will think of an hour and half as 150 minutes before remembering that it is 90 minutes.

Does something similar happen to imperial units users? Because as far as I understand you don’t have obvious patterns that would cause you to make these mistakes, right?

  • mindlight@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    But that’s the exact problem. The human body adjusts.

    One person in Norway might tell you that 59°F is t-shirt weather while another person living in India might say that you’d better bring an extra jacket. One person in Egypt might tell you that 91°F is okeyish while elderly people in Denmark is dying of heatstroke.

    People in metric countries have no problem comprehending that -17°C is a cold fucking day and that 37°C is a heat record in most countries.

    • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      That same logic applies to temperatures in C also.

      I’m not saying anything beyond the 1-100 scale makes a lot of sense (kinda why metric uses a base 10 system too….) and that’s the primary reason why.

      You’ve never been asked the question “on a scale of -17 to 37 how are you feeling” today and that’s because that scale doesn’t make a lot of sense for perception. That’s the only thing I am saying, 1-100 does make sense in that regard.

      I’m STILL not advocating for it imperial over metric.

      • mindlight@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I still don’t get “There’s some things imperial is just better at…We as people can perceive imperial temperatures a lot better than metric.”

        I can remember -17.8°C and 37°C just as good as Americans can remember 32°F and 212°F. So in that sense there’s no difference, just different scales.

        However, Fahrenheit based 0°F on the lowest outdoor temperature he could measure in Gdansk (Poland) during the winter of 1708/1709. He then based 100°F on his own body temperature.

        Even if you were able to perceive human body temperature without a thermometer, there’s no way you in any way can relate to the winter of 1708/1709.

        At this point using Fahrenheit is just a principle and nothing else.

        • azulavoir@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          if you think of Fahrenheit as roughly corresponding to the approximate percentage of your skin you’d like exposed it works out

        • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Let me go ahead and distance myself from that statement.

          I didn’t make it.

          I’m saying that standard units were created the way they were for a reason and if you stop and remove the idea of the metric system as something to compare it to (which will make standard look bad always) you can see there is some logic and reasoning to it and often it’s because the measures are easily to comprehend.

          That doesn’t make it better, it made it work in a time when standardization was rare. Metric is clearly the better system for measuring EVERYTHING but the standard units were what they were for a reason.

          That said personally having used both metric and standard for my whole life and now largely use metric for everything where measuring matters, I find myself converting temperature specifically back into Fahrenheit. Everything else I convert the other way. Just an anecdote.