On December 2 I talked about how bad the metric system is. My Friend the Battery Man has, as usual, cogent things to say:
I also object to the length scales for everyday use. The meter is good enough,
essentially interchangeable with the yard, and I have gotten used to centimeters for
small items. But the metric system has no common unit for things in the 6-18 inch
range. In principle one could use the decimeter, though even that�s too small, but in
real life NOBODY USES THE DECIMETER. I don�t understand why. I do smirk to myself at
the fact that the people who are loudest in their support of imposing one universal
measurement system are exactly the same people who otherwise gush about "diversity" and
"multiculturalism" and who complain about globalization and cultural homogenization and
the Americanization of the world and so on. Apparently worldwide uniformity is good if
and only if it is European in origin.
One nice advantage of the 12-inch foot is that twelve is easily divisible by two, three,
four and six. For this same reason it would really be nice if our entire numerical
system were base 12 rather than base 10. Kind of a big change to make at this late date,
of course. But maybe the EU can impose this by fiat.
On the question of the metric system: you are absolutely right that Celsius is
inconvenient for discussing outdoor temperatures because the normal range of
temperatures is represented by too narrow a range of numbers (-10 to +40, realistically)
.
Calpundit's original post
attracted some good comments. The problem with the comment feature is that most comments
are junk (though not as bad on this topic as on most). Since it isn't my Comments
section, however, I can cream-skim. I'll play editor and only pass along the best
comments.
Quiddity said:
And anyway, most of us seem to use either milli-, centi-, or kilo- as prefixes. I
have yet to read texts containing: decimeter (about 4 inches) or hectogram (about 1/4
pound) or dekaliter (about 10 quarts). So what we end up with are 2 or 3 familiar sizes,
and we put two-digit numeric values ahead of them, e.g. 60 centimeters [6 syllables]
(instead of 2 feet [2 syllables]).
INITIAL VALUES: First, consider lengths. The meter was determined for strictly ideological reasons.
As a result, there are no lengths that are human scaled. The centimeter is not as useful
as the inch (hand scale) or foot (body scale). Next, examine standards of weight. Sorry,
but the gram is just too lightweight for my taste. And liquid measurements suffer from
the same problem. I'll take a cup of sugar over 225 milliliters any day.
If you like polysyllables, the metric system is for you. Consider the large number of
one syllable words the English system has: inch, foot, yard, mile, ounce, pound, ton,
(fluid) ounce, cup, pint, quart. But metric insists on appending a prefix to the base
element; kilo-meter, centi-gram, deka-liter. Somehow this is supposed to be rational.
One is taught to know the prefixes, which then can be appended to one of several bases
(meter, gram, liter, watt, ampere, hertz, ...). That's why the names of metric
measurements are so long. Do people really parse the words to reassure themselves that a
kilometer is 1000 meters? Of course not. To burden the terminology with a naming
convention that helps 5th graders understand the relationships is absurd.
There are a number of good points here. Notably, Quiddity points out that the metric
system has names that are too long, and there are not enough names. It is useful to have
two cups be a pint and two pints a quart and four quarts a gallon. Waiting until you
reach a multiple of ten is too long, when you have frequent use for quantities in
between.
Quiddity also has his own proposal:
WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE: Steal the terminology from the English system, use multiples of 10 (or 2's or 5's),
and have the base elements be human scaled. Tweak some relationships (like 1 pint = 2.5
cups). And keep those single-syllable names! A proposal: Element WEIGHT VOLUME AREA
Dividing something by ten is handy only if you're working with numbers on paper or the
like. That is, only when you're using the numbers as abstractions. No wonder it
appealled to bureaucrats and others who don't like getting their hands dirty. Just move
the decimal point.
But in the physical world, the material realm which we actually inhabit, it can't be
done. Ever tried to divide something by ten? I mean flour, gasoline, dope, whatever?
But try dividing it by 16. Simple. Basically, all you need is to know is if two
quantities are equal. If you can do that, you can divide by 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, etc.
To divide by ten, first you have to divide by five, and that's impossible. The best you
can do is eyeball it.
It's no coincidence that the only measurement based on dividing by five that's ever
caught on was the fifth: a way to short-change people too desperate or already liquored
up to notice that they weren't getting a full quart.
DLake said:
How defined
Size compared to present day English units
LENGTH
inch
1.1 English inch
1.1 inch
foot
10 inches
.916 foot
yard
3
feet
.916 yard
rod
100 feet
1.8 rods
furlong
1000 feet
.720
furlong
mile
5000 feet
1.042 mile
ounce
weight of cubic "metric" inch of water
.769 avoir.ounce
pound
10 ounces
.480 pound
invent word for this unit
1000 pounds
480 pounds
ton
5000 pounds
1.202 ton
ounce
cubic inch
.738 oz
cup
10 ounces
.960 cup
pint
2 1/2 cups (25 oz)
1.20 pint
quart
2 pints (50 oz)
1.20 quart
gallon
2 quarts (100 oz)
1.20
gallon
barrel
50 gallons
1.935 (31 gal barrel)
1.428 (42 gal barrel)
cord
1000 cubic
feet
.769 cord
acre
40,000 sq. feet (200x200)
.771 acre
invent word for this unit
1 square furlong
7.8 hectare
sq. mile
25 million sq. feet
1.085 sq. mile
The real problem with metric is that base-10 thing.
What's supposed to be a strength is actually a weakness.
Dlake's point is excellent, and one I ought to know well from drawing graphs in
economics and having to figure out where 1,2,3,4, and 5 should go. (5 is half of ten, so
it is easy enough.)
Menshevik said:
In colloquial German it is also very common to say a "kilo" for a kilogramme and a
kilometre per hour is these days very often pronounced "kmh" (ka-emm-ha). Posted by:
That is one solution to the problem of long names that Quiddidity talked about. We can
replace "Centimeter" with "Cent", and so forth.
[ permalink, http://php.indiana.edu/~erasmuse/w/03.12.09c.htm ]
To return to Eric Rasmusen's weblog, click http://php.indiana.edu/~erasmuse/w/0.rasmusen.htm.