# The Metric System



## V-te (Sep 7, 2009)

Well, I have once again, been re-introduced to the metric system in chemistry class, and for some strange reason, I hate it more than ever! I understand the formulas and conversions, but I have a problem applying them. I just completely hate this system. 

I thought about what would happen if the United States would suddenly decide to switch;it would cause mass chaos! (In My opinion) Now, I understand there are many Cubers, who use this system, what is your opinion of the US system?

And what do you think of the metric system, to those who don't use it?


----------



## Edmund (Sep 7, 2009)

Here is a problem from my science book, "When our country (U.S.) switches to the metric system how will your life change?" My answer was I don't care what my country does because I myself will not switch to the metric system. It's such a gay system and I like how our system is one of the many things that makes the U.S. unique.


----------



## beingforitself (Sep 7, 2009)

V-te said:


> Well, I have once again, been re-introduced to the metric system in chemistry class, and for some strange reason, I hate it more than ever! I understand the formulas and conversions, but I have a problem applying them. I just completely hate this system.





Edmund said:


> I don't care what my country does because I myself will not switch to the metric system. It's such a gay system and I like how our system is one of the many things that makes the U.S. unique.




I hope that y'all are being ironic.


----------



## V-te (Sep 7, 2009)

Lol, no I hate it with a passion.


----------



## Pichu97 (Sep 7, 2009)

V-te said:


> Well, I have once again, been re-introduced to the metric system in chemistry class, and for some strange reason, I hate it more than ever! I understand the formulas and conversions, but I have a problem applying them. I just completely hate this system.
> 
> I thought about what would happen if the United States would suddenly decide to switch;it would cause mass chaos! (In My opinion) Now, I understand there are many Cubers, who use this system, what is your opinion of the US system?
> 
> And what do you think of the metric system, to those who don't use it?



I actually like the metric system. Why do you hate it so much?:confused:


----------



## Roux-er (Sep 7, 2009)

OK........ 

I've used both systems and I personally think that the Metric System is a HECK of a lot easier.


----------



## gpt_kibutz (Sep 7, 2009)

hey come on, the metric system is far easier, all is done in powers of 10. I really hate how there's 12 foot in yard (i really don't know, so don't correcto me if i'm wrogn); and then 2.47 yards in a mile, or something like that. You've gotta keep in mind a lot of conversions in the other system.


----------



## Namegoeswhere (Sep 7, 2009)

The metric system is the more easy system, the fact that you hate it is because you do not use it and refuse to. Saying that it makes America unique is the same as saying America is just stubborn. Beeing unique does not make it good.
The differant systems have caused plenty of accidents to happen, 1 universal system would be best.

read this:
http://www.metric4us.com/why.html
Even though that side is a bit overly positive about metric, the general statements provided are true.

How can you hate the metric system? everything works in 10^x, it is as easy as it gets, and compare it to..
1 foot = 12 inch
1 yard = 3 feet
1 mile = 5280 feet or 1760 yard

Sound like freaking harry potter

Now compare it to:
1 cm is 1/100 meter (therefore, centimeter)
1 km = 1000 meter, (hence, kilometer)
1 dl = 1/10 litre, (hence deci)
deci, cent and kilo are terms everyone knows. (% > percent, per 100th, decade = 10 years , etc)

Metric is best, end of topic.


----------



## V-te (Sep 7, 2009)

In my opinion, everything is just bigger numbers. 

I have a better idea of how hot it is when someone tells me it is 100F than 38C.
I have a better idea of how big something is when they tell me it's 3in than 7.62 cm.

I have a better idea of 100 yard football field than a 91.44 meter field.

12in= 1ft
3ft=1yd
1760yd= 1 mile
5280=1 mile
That is fun! way easier to remember than moving zeros.


----------



## beingforitself (Sep 7, 2009)

V-te said:


> In my opinion, everything is just bigger numbers.
> 
> I have a better idea of how hot it is when someone tells me it is 100F than 38C.
> I have a better idea of how big something is when they tell me it's 3in than 7.62 cm.
> ...



Irony established.


----------



## Namegoeswhere (Sep 7, 2009)

You only add 0's in the metric system, it can NOT be easier.
the fact that you have a better idea about dimensions is because you are used to something, which has absolutely *no* relevance to which is best.
Claiming it is fun to remember seemingly random numbers also doe not prove a point, especially if you actually try to do maths with both systems.

Metric is both easier and more logical, fact. What you are used to is completely irrelevant in deciding which is best.
Also in calculation it is preferred to use Kelvin in the metric system. Perhaps not for the weather broadcast, but it is much better when using it in formula's


----------



## V-te (Sep 7, 2009)

I lived in a metric country for 7 years, and I found it hard to get used to it, once I came to the US, I found it much easier to learn this system, than the one in my home country.


----------



## Namegoeswhere (Sep 7, 2009)

age 0-6 are not really the years in which you learn those kinds of things..


----------



## V-te (Sep 7, 2009)

True, but I do remember going to the store and ordering a kilo of tortillas.


----------



## ErikJ (Sep 8, 2009)

the english system is so dumb. 5280 feet in one mile, why? 
a while ago I was thinking about a metric time system. what's so magical about the number 60? 60 seconds per minute, 60 minutes per hour.


----------



## masterofthebass (Sep 8, 2009)

luisgepeto said:


> hey come on, the metric system is far easier, all is done in powers of 10. I really hate how there's 12 foot in yard (i really don't know, so don't correcto me if i'm wrogn); and then 2.47 yards in a mile, or something like that. You've gotta keep in mind a lot of conversions in the other system.



you should really look things up before replying. 2.47 yards = 0.00140340909 miles according to google. 


It all about what you are used to. if you get used to knowing what the conversion for ft->in is then you get used to it. Learning a new system is 
going to be more challenging than using what you are used to. 

V-te: the reason why a football field is 100 yards is because its American. Soccer fields are measured in metric units.


----------



## qqwref (Sep 8, 2009)

I don't like the metric system for everyday use and my reason is precisely the units of 10 thing: it's really all the same unit. I don't get the feeling that I can think of things in terms of meters OR centimeters, etc., but instead that there's only one allowed unit and everything is essentially expressed in scientific notation. For really big things it's not useful to say "this is 10^6 meters tall" because I can't get a sense of exactly how big a million meters is, and for really small things it's also not useful to say "this is 10^-9 meters wide" because I have no clue how big a billionth of a meter is. You could say my problem is just that I'm just not used to it and I don't have a feel for metric units (and that's true - it's always tricky to change systems) but I do think that the powers of 10 thing encourages you to think in terms of the base units and that that makes it tough to understand how big things are. On the other hand for imperial I know how much an inch or a foot is but also how much a mile is (separately) and so it doesn't matter that a mile has 63360 inches except for conversions (where chances are I'd be multiplying numbers and I'd probably need a calculator anyway). You could use miles for big stuff and inches/feet for small stuff and it would work out no matter what the conversion factor was.

I also really hate the kilogram and the second. Kilogram is supposed to be the "base unit" and yet it has a prefix? We don't say kilokilogram and microkilogram. And for seconds, nobody honestly uses kiloseconds to measure time. Even in Europe they use hours and days. If the whole point of the metric system is to be totally consistent and use powers of 10 all over the place then there shouldn't be any silly exceptions.

So my personal opinion is that the imperial system is better for day-to-day stuff (the units are a bit more applicable for day-to-day stuff IMO), but metric is more appropriate for science (since in any scientific application you're just dealing with numbers and it doesn't matter if you have a good understanding of how big 3.4 * 10^26 kg is). It's still not perfect, though.


PS: The problem with using a metric-type time system in everyday life is that you really need the units of day and year to be able to construct a meaningful calendar, and they aren't related in any obvious way. Except for that, though, you're free to divide it up... One way would be to say there are 100000 seconds in a day, and then have 100 seconds be a minute, 100 minutes be an hour, and 10 hours per day. (There are 86400 seconds in a day normally, so this is somewhat close.)


----------



## JBCM627 (Sep 8, 2009)

The English system is pretty bad... and even though it isn't standard in the US, in any real science, nobody is going to bother with the English system. Everything is in SI units (modern metric system), unless the subject is specialized enough to mandate some of its own field-specific units. SI units in large part have immutable physical definitions which actually make sense; they aren't just based on the length of some rod in a glass case. And the great part is, because of this, English ones are based on SI ones


----------



## Daniel Wu (Sep 8, 2009)

ErikJ said:


> the english system is so dumb. 5280 feet in one mile, why?
> a while ago I was thinking about a metric time system. what's so magical about the number 60? 60 seconds per minute, 60 minutes per hour.



http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=experts-time-division-days-hours-minutes

And I agree. 5280? Wow.


----------



## jdouglasusn (Sep 8, 2009)

I think it would be easier just to learn both. It really don't make THAT much of a difference. It's math. Math is math is math. 
Japan will say it's 30 centimeters, I'll say it's 12 inches. Either way, it's the same damn length, no matter how you look at it or measure it. I'll come up with my own stupid system. Oh wait, it's still the same length as the other two systems. 
One is not "better" than the other one. It's just what you're used to. I use both at my job, neither of which is flat out "better".


----------



## qqwref (Sep 8, 2009)

JBCM627 said:


> SI units in large part have immutable physical definitions which actually make sense; they aren't just based on the length of some rod in a glass case.



Let's look at the base 7:
- The metre is the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299792458 of a second. (Kinda makes sense, but not really. It's an arbitrary number and I think they were just trying to make a definition that didn't change the meter much.)
- The kilogram is the unit of mass; it is equal to the mass of the international prototype of the kilogram. (OK, this IS just the mass of some thing in a box.)
- The second is the duration of 9192631770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom. (I'm in college and I don't even understand what this means (let alone know how to measure it). And where the hell did that number come from?!)
- The ampere is that constant current which, if maintained in two straight parallel conductors of infinite length, of negligible circular cross-section, and placed 1 metre apart in vacuum, would produce between these conductors a force equal to 2 * 10^-7 newton per metre of length. (Please tell me where I can get "straight parallel conductors of infinite length" with "negligible circular cross-section". Also an infinitely large vacuum. Also, why 2 * 10^-7 N? That's arbitrary, isn't it?)
- The kelvin, unit of thermodynamic temperature, is the fraction 1/273.16 of the thermodynamic temperature of the triple point of water. (Another magic number, and again this is pretty much just an effort to define a unit that's almost exactly the same size as the old one.)
- The mole is the amount of substance of a system which contains as many elementary entities as there are atoms in 0.012 kilogram of carbon 12. (OK, sure, why not.)
- The candela is the luminous intensity, in a given direction, of a source that emits monochromatic radiation of frequency 540 * 10^12 hertz and that has a radiant intensity in that direction of 1/683 watt per steradian. (WHAT?)

Conclusion: these units are no less arbitrary than the imperial ones.


----------



## JBCM627 (Sep 8, 2009)

qqwref said:


> JBCM627 said:
> 
> 
> > SI units in large part have immutable physical definitions which actually make sense; they aren't just based on the length of some rod in a glass case.
> ...



Yeah, in large part they are designed to be as close as possible to former metric units. Thank you for making my point though - most of these definitions are based on physical phenomena that won't vary. So they are somewhat arbitrary, but only to a point. So in addition:

The meter was initially defined as 1/10E6 the distance from the north pole to equator.

The gram/cm/ml were nicely defined so that 1cm^3 = 1ml = 1g of water at 0 degrees Celsius.

The second happens to be a nice dividend of the synodic day... keeping in mind that 60 is divisible by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,... it seemed like a good number to those Babylonians. Why the number was chosen to correspond to 9,192,631,770 Hz, I'm not really sure, but presumably there is a reason they chose Cs (ease of measurement?), which is where that number comes from. Should you care to learn about hyperfine splitting, you can probably sit in on a quantum course, since you are in college.

The Amp is intuitively defined in terms of coloumbs/s, coulombs being the charge of 1 mol of electrons. You can get your wires and space from a basic physics problem.

Kelvin was defined so 0 degrees would be at absolute 0, and be in keeping with degrees Celsius.

And ok I'll give you that the Mole sucks. Does the English system do better though? 

The candela was chosen to be the intensity of green light since humans are naturally most sensitive to it. The definition comes from watts/sr, watts being a unit derived from seconds, meters, and kg.


The point of all this is internal consistency. Does the English system have any nice conversions like 1 foot^3 = 1 gallon? No, because it sucks.


----------



## Cride5 (Sep 8, 2009)

qqwref said:


> For really big things it's not useful to say "this is 10^6 meters tall" because I can't get a sense of exactly how big a million meters is, and for really small things it's also not useful to say "this is 10^-9 meters wide" because I have no clue how big a billionth of a meter is. You could say my problem is just that I'm just not used to it and I don't have a feel for metric units (and that's true - it's always tricky to change systems) but I do think that the powers of 10 thing encourages you to think in terms of the base units and that that makes it tough to understand how big things are. On the other hand for imperial I know how much an inch or a foot is but also how much a mile is (separately) and so it doesn't matter that a mile has 63360 inches except for conversions (where chances are I'd be multiplying numbers and I'd probably need a calculator anyway). You could use miles for big stuff and inches/feet for small stuff and it would work out no matter what the conversion factor was.


Generally, folk who use the metric system don't express things as 10^6 meters etc. They make use of the prefixes: Kilo, Mega, Giga, Peta etc - I'm sure we're all familiar with these  In the other direction we use the prefixes: Milli, Micro, Nano, Pico etc.

When expressing large distance I'll never use meters. I use *kilo*meters. Conceptually I have a 'feel' for how far a kilometer is without having to relate it to the size of a meter. Similarly, a I know a millimeter is about the width of a pencil tip, again without having to relate it to the size of a meter.



qqwref said:


> I also really hate the kilogram and the second. Kilogram is supposed to be the "base unit" and yet it has a prefix? We don't say kilokilogram and microkilogram. And for seconds, nobody honestly uses kiloseconds to measure time. Even in Europe they use hours and days. If the whole point of the metric system is to be totally consistent and use powers of 10 all over the place then there shouldn't be any silly exceptions.


_gram_ is the base unit of mass. Not kilogram. The prefix milli and micro is used with grams. For larger masses tonne is used (10^6 grams, or 1000kg). Kilotonne and Megatonne are added to express larger masses. Again, someone familiar with these measures will conceptualise each new prefix seperately. For example, a kilogram is the weight of a bag of sugar, a tonne is about the weight of a light car etc.

Despite its 'official' use of the metric system, UK is really still in the middle of converting from imperial to metric. I've seen a lot of opposition to it, mainly because of resistance to change and lack of familiarity with the new system. The older generation insist that metric is best, in the same way that folk may insist that their type A is better than an Edison, even when they've never laid hands on one (an example, not my opinion). I'm personally very familiar with both systems. I've used metric in education and research and the imperial system in employment with businesses who haven't switched yet.

My view is that metric is a much better standard for working with as its simpler and reduces the chances for arithmetic and rounding errors, both in a practical and scientific context.


----------



## krazedkat (Sep 8, 2009)

V-te said:


> Well, I have once again, been re-introduced to the metric system in chemistry class, and for some strange reason, I hate it more than ever! I understand the formulas and conversions, but I have a problem applying them. I just completely hate this system.
> 
> I thought about what would happen if the United States would suddenly decide to switch;it would cause mass chaos! (In My opinion) Now, I understand there are many Cubers, who use this system, what is your opinion of the US system?
> 
> And what do you think of the metric system, to those who don't use it?




The "US system" is the IMPERIAL SYSTEM. Metric is used by every country but 4 or 5, I think. Those being USA, India, some african country and 1 or 2 more. The Metric system makes more sense since everything is by a multiple of 10. Metric system kicks ass. I still use imperial for height and weight though its just easier that way... Pounds>Kilograms, Ft>centimetre, metre<yard


----------



## lilkdub503 (Sep 8, 2009)

I'm an American, born and raised. First, this is not the "English" system to whoever said that, as the English use a hybrid, though mostly the right system (SI). Also, 12 in is closer to 30.5 cm. We use a screwy Imperial system. In everyday situations, SI is much better. How far to corner store? .512 km or .318 mi? Convert that to a larger unit. I don't need Google for an exact distance. 512 m, more than one time around the track at a high school. What is .318 mi? 1,679.04 ft. That sir, is crappy. I prefer the SI units, because I can just move a decimal over, and there is no memorizing whatsoever. If you are in Chemistry, it becomes more useful, because for volume or mass, ml and grams are nice units. Saying SI is gay is so idiotic and sounds like a narrow-minded American. SI WIN.


----------



## V-te (Sep 8, 2009)

No, it's just my preference, I think that Us is better, I don't mind memorizing.


----------



## Nukoca (Sep 8, 2009)

'Cmon people. Why would you rather memorize this than move a little dot?


----------



## krazedkat (Sep 8, 2009)

lilkdub503 said:


> I'm an American, born and raised. First, this is not the "English" system to whoever said that, as the English use a hybrid, though mostly the right system (SI). Also, 12 in is closer to 30.5 cm. We use a screwy Imperial system. In everyday situations, SI is much better. How far to corner store? .512 km or .318 mi? Convert that to a larger unit. I don't need Google for an exact distance. 512 m, more than one time around the track at a high school. What is .318 mi? 1,679.04 ft. That sir, is crappy. I prefer the SI units, because I can just move a decimal over, and there is no memorizing whatsoever. If you are in Chemistry, it becomes more useful, because for volume or mass, ml and grams are nice units. Saying SI is gay is so idiotic and sounds like a narrow-minded American. SI WIN.


SI is just like metric, basically. Metric works great. 12in=1ft? NO! 1cm=10mm? YES!


----------



## DavidWoner (Sep 8, 2009)

Actually 12 inches _does_ equal 1 foot.

In all seriousness SI does make a lot more sense. There are a few situations where Imperial is better, but generally SI works best.


----------



## Nukoca (Sep 8, 2009)

DavidWoner said:


> Actually 12 inches _does_ equal 1 foot.



He shoots! He scores! The crowd goes wild!



DavidWoner said:


> There are a few situations where Imperial is better


When would it be more appropriate than the Metric System?


----------



## Ethan Rosen (Sep 8, 2009)

krazedkat said:


> SI is just like metric, basically. Metric works great. 12in=1ft? NO! 1cm=10mm? YES!



Well that's some infallible logic right there.


For me, I don't really care because I'm able to use both of them. Since I live in the US, naturally I use our system most of the time, but when I need to I'm easily able to (approximately) convert to metric. Just know that it's about 3 feet to a meter, 1 quart to a liter, 2.5 centimeters to an inch, 1.5 km to a mile, and you're good.


----------



## krazedkat (Sep 8, 2009)

DavidWoner said:


> Actually 12 inches _does_ equal 1 foot.
> 
> In all seriousness SI does make a lot more sense. There are a few situations where Imperial is better, but generally SI works best.



:fp

I know that! I was just giving a metaphor that imperial wasn't for me but metric was :|...


Edit: I find imperial better for height/weight purposes. Dunno why.. :|... My dad is able to easily convert between the two systems. I should remember those conversions. Thanks Ethan.


----------



## JTW2007 (Sep 8, 2009)

I love metric. I'm not used to it, but I like it.


----------



## Rikane (Sep 8, 2009)

Funny how SI is metric and when doing the trades you use imperial.


----------



## qqwref (Sep 8, 2009)

JBCM627: So the metric units are based on measurable universal constants. So what? It's not like they are constants that I can actually measure. I'd much rather have definitions that are defined in ways that we can get a handle on. Knowing that a second is some random number of wavelengths of a very specific light is completely arbitrary, and the fact that it is defined in an unchangeable way doesn't help at all with that. It's still an arbitrary number and I don't honestly see the difference between being told "there are 12 inches in a foot" and being told "a meter is the distance traveled by light in 1/299792458 of a second". In my eyes the metric system is no less arbitrary than the imperial system.




Cride5 said:


> _gram_ is the base unit of mass. Not kilogram.


You wish. From physics.nist.gov: SI base units. Kilogram is the base unit. Derived units are derived from the kilogram, NOT the gram (for instance 1 N = 1 m kg s^-2). However the gram gets the prefixes.



Cride5 said:


> The prefix milli and micro is used with grams. For larger masses tonne is used (10^6 grams, or 1000kg). Kilotonne and Megatonne are added to express larger masses.


Tonne is not an SI unit, and thus not a part of the SI metric system at all. The same is true for the liter (although both are "accepted for use with the SI" which I take to mean that even hardcore metric users realize that sometimes it's best to let people stick with the units they are used to). If you love metric so much, why don't you use it?


----------



## Kian (Sep 8, 2009)

Edmund said:


> Here is a problem from my science book, "When our country (U.S.) switches to the metric system how will your life change?" My answer was I don't care what my country does because I myself will not switch to the metric system. It's such a gay system and I like how our system is one of the many things that makes the U.S. unique.



If God intended for us to use the metric system, Jesus would have had 10 disciples. Fact.


----------



## elcarc (Sep 8, 2009)

almost all countries except U.S. use SI. although i do like US system for everyday things, metric is better for science and calculations and stuff like that because its more exact


----------



## hr.mohr (Sep 8, 2009)

krazedkat said:


> The "US system" is the IMPERIAL SYSTEM. Metric is used by every country but 4 or 5, I think. Those being USA, India, some african country and 1 or 2 more.



Only 3 countries has the Imperial System as their official system. USA, Burma and Liberia. Some other countries like England uses both systems on road signs and such.


----------



## DcF1337 (Sep 8, 2009)

elcarc said:


> almost all countries except U.S. use SI. although i do like US system for everyday things, metric is better for science and calculations and stuff like that because its more exact



Precisely. You know, just because you're more used to something doesn't mean it's better. What about learning both (and using the more appropriate one in different situations) and stop condemning the system you like less?


----------



## V-te (Sep 8, 2009)

Kian said:


> Edmund said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a problem from my science book, "When our country (U.S.) switches to the metric system how will your life change?" My answer was I don't care what my country does because I myself will not switch to the metric system. It's such a gay system and I like how our system is one of the many things that makes the U.S. unique.
> ...



Amen to that!


----------



## trying-to-speedcube... (Sep 8, 2009)

Kian said:


> Edmund said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a problem from my science book, "When our country (U.S.) switches to the metric system how will your life change?" My answer was I don't care what my country does because I myself will not switch to the metric system. It's such a gay system and I like how our system is one of the many things that makes the U.S. unique.
> ...


Oh, I think that means he also intended for us to count in base 12...


----------



## V-te (Sep 8, 2009)

I actually like counting in base 2.


----------



## trying-to-speedcube... (Sep 8, 2009)

Yeah, me too.

But that's kinda irrelevant, isn't it?


----------



## V-te (Sep 8, 2009)

Yup. 

See I have this problem,

Convert 1 g to Tons
_____________1g_____________ 2.2 lb_____________ 1 ton 
So I did 1g * ----- = 0.001 kg * ---- = 2.2*10^-3 lb * ----- = 1.1*10^-6? 
__________1000kg____________1kg_______________2000lb


Hmmm... Idk if that is right....


----------



## Jason (Sep 8, 2009)

The metric system is way better because it is CONSISTENT, as in for example; ONE Joule is equal to ONE newton times ONE metre.
Imperial measurements doesn't allow you to do that!!!!!!!!
(ie, one calorie isn't one dyne times one foot, or whatever)


----------



## Rikane (Sep 8, 2009)

I thought most of us established that neither of these are better, rather it's whatever you're used to (as masterofthebass suggested). Obviously I can use the metric system better, but I see nothing wrong with the imperial system either. Also,


jdouglasusn said:


> I think it would be easier just to learn both. It really don't make THAT much of a difference. It's math. Math is math is math.
> Japan will say it's 30 centimeters, I'll say it's 12 inches. Either way, it's the same damn length, no matter how you look at it or measure it. I'll come up with my own stupid system. Oh wait, it's still the same length as the other two systems.
> One is not "better" than the other one. It's just what you're used to. I use both at my job, neither of which is flat out "better".



Should really be my post. So, agreed with that.


----------



## Escher (Sep 8, 2009)

Sheesh, you guys should just read this:

http://xkcd.com/526/


----------



## V-te (Sep 8, 2009)

10 Millipedes= 1 centipede


----------



## LNZ (Sep 8, 2009)

As I live in Australia, I was only taught the metric system. I started school in 1975. When you get used to it, metrics is vastly superior. And easier to use and understand.

And confusion between metric and imperial lead to the loss of the US Mars Climate Orbiter in 1999. By confusing metric and imperial units, the orbiter went in too deep into the Martian atmosphere and burnt up during the orbital insertion manouever.

One reason for the US to go metric.


----------



## Novriil (Sep 8, 2009)

Everybody you who hate meters and stuff...

HEY! WTF is wrong with you?? Do you really want to make you'reself to work harder? In e.g. math, physics, chemistry, geography and so on.. All the time you have to do some 2,2 equals 5231028370273123 What is the point of memorizing some huge amount of numbers.. it's insane.. why would anybody want to remember that (something was it I don't remember) 2.2 yards or something is 5280 miles or so on (just for example I know it's wrong.. very wrong) just make 1meter = 10 dm So hard? You're dealing with like 4 zeros for most. at least I'm in 9th grade and Only in physics I sometimes while doing exercises need to deal with some 1000 stuff... never more. I mean only 4 digits. It's a lot easier and You americans who hate it are just being stubborn because some-old-guy-with-no-children-who-is-so-pissed-that-he-was-bullied-in-school decided to make some idiotic system to pay back on the bullies kids. And everybody who say our system sucks they are just jealous or completely morons.


----------



## Nukoca (Sep 8, 2009)

Here's a really good description:



Metric 4 US said:


> Let's compare the metric system with the English system in these three points to show why the metric system is better:
> 
> *One unit of measurement for each physical quantity*
> 
> ...



Read the rest here.


----------



## mazei (Sep 8, 2009)

Or you can just use Petrus.
I mean both.


----------



## shelley (Sep 8, 2009)

Edmund said:


> Here is a problem from my science book, "When our country (U.S.) switches to the metric system how will your life change?" My answer was I don't care what my country does because I myself will not switch to the metric system. It's such a gay system and I like how our system is one of the many things that makes the U.S. unique.



Try doing actual science (the kind that requires calculations, not speculating about how your life will be "different") and you'll be singing praises of the metric system soon enough.

I was raised in the US, so I'm more familiar with Imperial units for day to day life. However, I recognize that this is because I'm used to them. If I grew up using the metric system it would work just as well. For doing any kind of math/science calculation though, metric system wins hands down.

How many cubic inches are in a cup? :confused:
According to Google, the conversion is 14.4375 cubic inches in a cup. Memorize THAT, *****es.


----------



## mazei (Sep 8, 2009)

shelley said:


> Edmund said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a problem from my science book, "When our country (U.S.) switches to the metric system how will your life change?" My answer was I don't care what my country does because I myself will not switch to the metric system. It's such a gay system and I like how our system is one of the many things that makes the U.S. unique.
> ...



The simple point is that you will surely be used to the system you grew up with. I can get a good idea when someone says 5km is compared to 3.125miles and when someone says 1.6km compared to 1mile. But as for height, I'm much more used to having feet and inches compared to meters. As for short distances(just a couple of inches or cm) I can do with both. For everyday use, anything can be fine.

But in science is where metric really shines since it is basically the SI unit(the point I'm trying the point out is that it is standard through out the world thus making communication easy).


----------



## shelley (Sep 8, 2009)

V-te said:


> 12in= 1ft
> 3ft=1yd
> 1760yd= 1 mile
> 5280=1 mile
> That is fun! way easier to remember than moving zeros.



That's all well and good, but can you give me Planck's constant in foot-pound-seconds? How about the Newtonian Gravitational Constant in gallons per pound per second squared? Is memorizing all those conversion factors (or memorizing different values for physical constants for different sets of units) really a practical, "fun" way to go about things?


----------



## jms_gears1 (Sep 8, 2009)

so heres my thoughts on this, most americans hate it not because its harder, but because we grew up learning the crap english system. in all honesty the english system should just go away and everyone should switch to metric because when you learn it youll never want to go back... but as for now i hate the metric system...


----------



## nitrocan (Sep 8, 2009)

shelley said:


> V-te said:
> 
> 
> > 12in= 1ft
> ...



I don't get who is doing the sarcasm in here.


----------



## Nukoca (Sep 8, 2009)

shelley said:


> How many cubic inches are in a cup? :confused:
> According to Google, the conversion is 14.4375 cubic inches in a cup. Memorize THAT, *****es.


http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHMZ_en___US341&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=cubic+inches+in+cups



jms_gears1 said:


> so heres my thoughts on this, most americans hate it not because its harder, but because we grew up learning the crap english system.


I am (STILL growing up) in the US, and I had to memorize all the basic conversions in the Emperial system way back in elementary school. And I hated it. Now I'm in High School, and in everything I use units for, the SI system is the only one of any use to me.

You don't have to grow up with a particular system to like it. As soon as I learned about SI, I fell in love with it.

The US is stupid not to use the Metric System. What annoys me the most is that we almost did, too, and now I'm stuck with all my sodas in liters and milk and water in gallons.

*I guess one of the big reasons the US doesn't switch at this point is because of all the money it will cost to change all those road signs over the years...

Linky
Linky


----------



## beingforitself (Sep 8, 2009)

qqwref said:


> If you love metric so much, why don't you use it?



I live in the United States and I use the metric system in casual conversation.


----------



## Jason (Sep 8, 2009)

Metric units are not only great because of the prefixes used within a given dimension, which means you only have to shift zeros around (and not have to use crazy conversions between cups and fluid ouces).
Metric units are especially great because they are CONSISTENT across different dimensions!!
I've said it already but I don't know if people cottoned-on
For example
ONE Joule is equal to ONE newton times ONE metre.
or
ONE newton= ONE kilo times ONE metre per ONE second per ONE second
Imperial measurements doesn't allow you to do that!!!!!!!!
(ie, ONE calorie isn't ONE dyne times ONE foot, or whatever)"

Sorry for repeating myself, but it seems to me to be a crucial point


----------



## shelley (Sep 8, 2009)




----------



## JBCM627 (Sep 8, 2009)

qqwref said:


> [long blurb] In my eyes the metric system is no less arbitrary than the imperial system.


Good job missing my point. Let me rephrase:


shelley said:


> How many cubic inches are in a cup?






Escher said:


> Sheesh, you guys should just read this:
> http://xkcd.com/526/


Wow, you mean you can actually use metric for everyday things?


----------



## Sin-H (Sep 8, 2009)

V-te said:


> I have a better idea of how hot it is when someone tells me it is 100F than 38C.
> I have a better idea of how big something is when they tell me it's 3in than 7.62 cm.


that's just an issue of habits. You can get used to anything.
I am used to the metric system and therefore I would prefer it ^^ but the SI decided to go for it, so you have to be able to work with it anyway.

The thing I dislike the most is the Fahrenheit-System (because conversion to Celsius/Kelvin doesn't work just by multiplying or dividing with one factor)

so we should just accept that US and UK guys have different ways to measure things in everyday life...

but if anyone ever does science, then he'll learn to love the metric system =) 
I am totally of shelley's opinion.


----------



## beingforitself (Sep 8, 2009)

http://www.metricmartyrs.co.uk/

THE REVOLUTION COMETH.


----------



## qqwref (Sep 8, 2009)

jms_gears1 said:


> when you learn it youll never want to go back...


Don't think I don't know the metric system. Actually, I probably know it a bit better than some of you guys... it's not like I don't have a pretty reasonable idea of how much a kg or cm or km or ml is. I just don't think it's always appropriate for everyday tasks.



Jason said:


> (ie, ONE calorie isn't ONE dyne times ONE foot, or whatever)"
> 
> Sorry for repeating myself, but it seems to me to be a crucial point



You seem to be confusing "imperial units" with "everything that isn't metric".
Calorie isn't even an imperial unit. It's defined as the amount of heat required to raise "one kilogram of water by one degree Celsius".
The dyne is a cgs unit [that's a metric-like system which is based around the centimeter, gram, and second] which means it actually IS internally consistent within its own system of units. It's defined as "the force required to accelerate a mass of one gram at a rate of one centimeter per second squared".

There actually are some such correspondances with imperial units. For instance an acre (the most common unit of area) was defined as 1 furlong * 1 chain, where the chain was an old surveying measurement defined as 1/10 of a furlong. But note that imperial units basically only make provisions for length, area, volume, mass, and temperature. There were many attempts to make units for measuring other types of quantities, and it's not fair to compare units of one type with units of another type. However, there certainly are consistent units: for instance "miles per hour" (typical US measurement of speed) and "pounds per square inch" (typical US measurement of pressure). Similarly barometric pressure is often measured in inches of mercury.


----------



## *LukeMayn* (Sep 9, 2009)

I think metric is more simple. But I guess that's cos I've used it all of my life.


----------



## Jason (Sep 9, 2009)

qqwref said:


> There actually are *some* such correspondances with imperial units.



Some are better than none, but is no way as good as something that is completely consistent


----------

