Ask HN: Why it is hard for US to move to metric system?
The fact that it is almost impossible to move to the metric system in US is strange. It is even stranger because of the big influence of immigration (every other part of the world use metric system) so I wonder why it is that hard?
189 comments
Purely political. There were plans in place in the 70s and 80s. A particular political party politicised it as some sort of government overreach/UN/NWO meddling. And once they had the votes they voted to strip any mention of metric in federal usage. States followed shortly.
I learned both metric and imperial measurements in elementary, middle, and high school. From what I understand they only use metric in science classes now.
It didn’t make sense to me at the time. But the. I saw what happened to Core Curriculum, CRT, and US history. And it all makes a lot more sense.
I learned both metric and imperial measurements in elementary, middle, and high school. From what I understand they only use metric in science classes now.
It didn’t make sense to me at the time. But the. I saw what happened to Core Curriculum, CRT, and US history. And it all makes a lot more sense.
It's not "purely political" in any meaningful sense. It's just hard to transition something 330 million people use on a daily basis and the benefit is close to negligible. It's certainly among the least of any American's problems. Yeah, we have to have a set of metric sockets and a set of imperial sockets, but life goes on. Why doesn't the entire world standardize on language? That would provide far more benefit than standardizing on trivially-convertible units of measurement.
> It's just hard to transition something 330 million people use on a daily basis and the benefit is close to negligible
I agree that it's hard, but not the benefit is negligible. The cost of not switching is paid every time an american company needs to work with a company from elsewhere in the world.
I agree that it's hard, but not the benefit is negligible. The cost of not switching is paid every time an american company needs to work with a company from elsewhere in the world.
I will forever hold it against Boeing for using imperial in their engineering drawings, when almost every other aerospace company in the world uses metric. I cannot tell you how many hundreds of man hours I've seen spent by engineers and technicians, remaking designs and rebuilding prototypes to the correct dimensions. We once had something shipped to us on a pallet instead of the expected box, because the factory built a wiring harness to inches not centimeters.
This seems like a negligible cost. In my experience, both companies stick to a common system of measurement (almost always metric) and go on with life as normal. It’s not like both companies maintain distinct engineering plans for their native measurement system and have to manually sync updates from each side, and almost any American company that regularly deals with International suppliers is already using metric domestically (e.g., anything in the automotive, construction, agriculture, forestry, etc equipment industries as well as anything in the electronics space, the energy industries, and so on).
Also, I feel like the linear nature (and being base 10) makes metric system easier to learn and have an intuition about. Although, another comment here said they find the metric system unintuitive for medium (which I assume are everyday) values. So, maybe I'm just biased on that belief
The imperial system (or any adhoc system developed over the centuries) corresponds to the scales of human body and condition. Le Corbusier attempted a synthesis of a rational (mathematical) system that scaled appropriately. He used the Golden Ratio as the scaling mechanism. The very fact of that attempt carries an implicit critique of using the metric system for human centric design.
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51hAE7WuQZL._AC_SY1000_....
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51hAE7WuQZL._AC_SY1000_....
100% political and nothing to do with the trillions of dollars required to transition what was at the time half the world's industrial base.
And for what? The imperial system is defined exactly in metric already as 254mm == 1 inch and has been de facto for 100 years.
And for what? The imperial system is defined exactly in metric already as 254mm == 1 inch and has been de facto for 100 years.
That inch is one order of magnitude off. It is actually 25.4mm == 1in
I mean the UK still does roads/cars in MPH rather than KPH. Lots of people will still give their (body)weight/ask for (body)weight in stone and height in feet and inches, although I think that's slowly changing to KG and CM.
It's a strange one though, isn't it? I was watching an exercise/nutrition video on YouTube earlier and the presenter was saying "to work out how much protein a day you need, multiple your bodyweight in lbs by X and that will give you the protein number in grams." It seemed so bizarre to combine the systems.
Edit: Just to add - in the UK we're taught entirely in metric in school, the bits mentioned above are just hangups / how it's done.
It's a strange one though, isn't it? I was watching an exercise/nutrition video on YouTube earlier and the presenter was saying "to work out how much protein a day you need, multiple your bodyweight in lbs by X and that will give you the protein number in grams." It seemed so bizarre to combine the systems.
Edit: Just to add - in the UK we're taught entirely in metric in school, the bits mentioned above are just hangups / how it's done.
In Australia, we're taught metric exclusively, and use KPH over MPH. But it is common to report your height height in feet and inches, and less commonly, bodyweight in stone.
Similar in NZ, but there are still imperial measurements in places, e.g. PSI for tyres, or inches when talking about TV dimensions, DPI for screen resolutions, a quarter acre section for a house. You might hear people talk about a "pound" of butter when it's actually 500g, or ask the mileage of a car, but expect the response in km.
Bodyweight in stone would be _very_ uncommon I think. Still occasionally hear baby weights reported in pounds, but that's usually only by the grandparents.
6 feet and over is tall, 5 feet and under is short is such a handy rule of thumb, which I think is its longevity for height - although any official form will ask for metric (centimetres usually).
6 feet and over is tall, 5 feet and under is short is such a handy rule of thumb, which I think is its longevity for height - although any official form will ask for metric (centimetres usually).
Well that attitude allowed the UK to convert whilst keeping people largely on side. It shows it's possible.
You also use "stone" and "furlong" in certain contexts and drive on the left side of the road. I think it's awesome and makes the UK unique in some regards. It's what culture and customs are all about.
Yeah, I mentioned stone! My loose experience is that a good percentage of people who do something relating to fitness end up talking about their bodyweight in kilos (the scales in the gym are usually in kg, for instance). But most people when talking about bodyweight would say "I'm X stone X."
In the 40+ years I've lived here I've only ever heard furlong used in the context of horse racing and the actor that played John Conner in Terminator 2...
Re the driving - about 35% of the world are on the left!
In the 40+ years I've lived here I've only ever heard furlong used in the context of horse racing and the actor that played John Conner in Terminator 2...
Re the driving - about 35% of the world are on the left!
I agree, now reintroduce the archaic old currency system to replace the metric pound division you have now. That would really add a certain quirky touch to your financial institutions, foreign trade and tourists will surely love it!
There is more than one way to lead your country back into the late neolithic, just go on.
There is more than one way to lead your country back into the late neolithic, just go on.
Driving on the left is not unique. About one third of the world does that.
About 1/3 of the countries drive on the left but if you look at population, it is a lot less than 1/3 and likely less than 1/4.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-_and_right-hand_traffic
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-_and_right-hand_traffic
The civilized world drives on the right so as to not enable road rage for right handed swordsmen.
Canada is very much like this too. Can't really escape the US influence, so you see things like apples from Washington state in $ per pound.
Not too big a deal once you get a few basic conversions down.
Not too big a deal once you get a few basic conversions down.
take a look on how tires are measured, https://www.bridgestoneamericas.com/en/company/safety/choosi... , it's like a xkcd joke
I'd really love a reason for why they went with aspect ratio versus just sidewall height in inches. To me it just seems like more pain to try and understand the size of a tire, but I do imagine there was some good reason why it was measured that way.
The reasoning I've always understood is that the width of the tire is the primary thing that determines how it fits onto the wheel (assuming it's the correct diameter), and that different tires due to different tread block designs have subtly different heights, but in a way that is negligible, so aspect ratio allows you to have a standardized understanding of height without being so exact as to be confusing. E.g. a consumer knows that they need either a 245/40 or a 255/40 for their 9" wide wheel, and that in either case their speedometer would be correct (which is based on total height), but brand A and brand B at 245/40 have a .3" difference in height.
It does make things difficult for folks that slam their cars though when they don't want to rub, because there's less margin for error so they really need to measure the height of the tire.
It does make things difficult for folks that slam their cars though when they don't want to rub, because there's less margin for error so they really need to measure the height of the tire.
Having grown up in a country into adulthood that used metric and then moving to the US there are certain things that are nice about the US system.
In particular a foot is an extremely intuitive unit of measure. It covers a number of use cases better than meters or centimeters.
I also prefer Fahrenheit now that I'm used to it. Fahrenheit has a nicer range for the temperatures we live our lives at, whereas Celsius compresses that range so much.
Unintuitive US units: Miles - I still have a very hard time with how far this is, km was much nicer.
In particular a foot is an extremely intuitive unit of measure. It covers a number of use cases better than meters or centimeters.
I also prefer Fahrenheit now that I'm used to it. Fahrenheit has a nicer range for the temperatures we live our lives at, whereas Celsius compresses that range so much.
Unintuitive US units: Miles - I still have a very hard time with how far this is, km was much nicer.
A good metric I once heard was:
Fahrenheit is what humans feel
Celsius is what water feels
Kelvin is what atoms feel
Also, for converting between km and miles, using the Fibonacci sequence is a 'good enough' estimator.
5 miles is ~8 km, 21 miles is ~34 km. 13 km is ~8 miles, 55 km is ~34 miles.
Drop or add decimals to get to numbers not in the sequence. If you want to know what 6 km, use 5.5km and you see that its a bit over 3.4 miles.
Fahrenheit is what humans feel
Celsius is what water feels
Kelvin is what atoms feel
Also, for converting between km and miles, using the Fibonacci sequence is a 'good enough' estimator.
5 miles is ~8 km, 21 miles is ~34 km. 13 km is ~8 miles, 55 km is ~34 miles.
Drop or add decimals to get to numbers not in the sequence. If you want to know what 6 km, use 5.5km and you see that its a bit over 3.4 miles.
That makes no sense. Kelvin and Celsius are the same, just with a different 0.
I know exactly what a temperature of 0°C, 10°C, 20°C or 30°C will feel like, and I’m pretty sure I’m human.
I know exactly what a temperature of 0°C, 10°C, 20°C or 30°C will feel like, and I’m pretty sure I’m human.
I think that the idea is "what it feels like in a scale of 0 to 100".
So, in Celsius, water are "very cold" (=freezing) at 0 degrees but "very hot" (=boiling) at 100 degrees. Same with Fahrenheit: 0 is extremely cold while 100 is very hot.
I get the logic but I am too used to Celsius at this point, just like you.
So, in Celsius, water are "very cold" (=freezing) at 0 degrees but "very hot" (=boiling) at 100 degrees. Same with Fahrenheit: 0 is extremely cold while 100 is very hot.
I get the logic but I am too used to Celsius at this point, just like you.
> I also prefer Fahrenheit now that I'm used to it. Fahrenheit has a nicer range for the temperatures we live our lives at, whereas Celsius compresses that range so much.
What I don't understand is why Celsius even exists.
For length, area, volume, and mass replacing the old units makes a lot of sense to move to a power of 10 relation between the base units for those things and the smaller and larger units derived from those, and to name those derived units by prefixing the base unit, and to use the same prefixes across different kinds of units.
So with metric we just need to learn one basic unit (meter, meter^2, meter^3, gram), one set of prefixes (milli, micro, centi, kilo, etc) and then we are all set. Compare to English where the ratios between consecutive names units for a given kind of unit vary, and knowing them for one kind doesn't help with other kinds (e.g., knowing inch x 12 = foot, foot x 3 = yard, yard x 1760 = mile does not tell you anything about how many ounces are in a gallon).
Although one might argue that the multipliers in English units tending to be of the form 2^n 3^m makes a lot of problems easier than the 10^n multipliers of metric, there are also cases where the 10^n multipliers makes things easier, and metric using the same prefixes across different types of units is definitely a win for usability.
For temperature though we generally don't use smaller or larger units, so we don't have a question of what kinds of multiplier to use for bigger or smaller temperature units.
All it appears that Celsius does is make the degree bigger, and change the origin. (When first proposed it also changed the direction...0 C was the boiling point of water and 100 C was the freezing, but not long after Celsius revised his system so increasing numbers corresponded to hotter like most other systems).
Some say the argument for Celsius over the older and already widely used Fahrenheit is that basing the scale on the freezing and boiling points of water was easier to reliably reasonably reproduce than the reference points of Fahrenheit.
But that argument really doesn't fly. If the problem was the reproducibility and reliability of the reference points the obvious solution would be to change the definition of Fahrenheit so that 32 F is the freezing point of water and 212 F is the boiling point of water. That would fix the definitional problem just as well as Celsius did without requiring new thermometers.
What I don't understand is why Celsius even exists.
For length, area, volume, and mass replacing the old units makes a lot of sense to move to a power of 10 relation between the base units for those things and the smaller and larger units derived from those, and to name those derived units by prefixing the base unit, and to use the same prefixes across different kinds of units.
So with metric we just need to learn one basic unit (meter, meter^2, meter^3, gram), one set of prefixes (milli, micro, centi, kilo, etc) and then we are all set. Compare to English where the ratios between consecutive names units for a given kind of unit vary, and knowing them for one kind doesn't help with other kinds (e.g., knowing inch x 12 = foot, foot x 3 = yard, yard x 1760 = mile does not tell you anything about how many ounces are in a gallon).
Although one might argue that the multipliers in English units tending to be of the form 2^n 3^m makes a lot of problems easier than the 10^n multipliers of metric, there are also cases where the 10^n multipliers makes things easier, and metric using the same prefixes across different types of units is definitely a win for usability.
For temperature though we generally don't use smaller or larger units, so we don't have a question of what kinds of multiplier to use for bigger or smaller temperature units.
All it appears that Celsius does is make the degree bigger, and change the origin. (When first proposed it also changed the direction...0 C was the boiling point of water and 100 C was the freezing, but not long after Celsius revised his system so increasing numbers corresponded to hotter like most other systems).
Some say the argument for Celsius over the older and already widely used Fahrenheit is that basing the scale on the freezing and boiling points of water was easier to reliably reasonably reproduce than the reference points of Fahrenheit.
But that argument really doesn't fly. If the problem was the reproducibility and reliability of the reference points the obvious solution would be to change the definition of Fahrenheit so that 32 F is the freezing point of water and 212 F is the boiling point of water. That would fix the definitional problem just as well as Celsius did without requiring new thermometers.
While temperature of boiling water has mostly academic meaning for everyday life, freezing point is much more important. I would say the most important temperature point for us humans. That point affects driving, walking, taking care of pipes, outside plimbing, plants, etc. Everything else doesn’t have to be that precise, 20C or 25C doesn’t make much difference. But whether it’s +2C or -2C could have huge impact.
Because of that it makes sense that it’s zero instead of some magical number that you have to compare in your head. I’ll take zero as a win for Celsius.
Because of that it makes sense that it’s zero instead of some magical number that you have to compare in your head. I’ll take zero as a win for Celsius.
I mean, not really? We usually measure air temperature but ground and water are much slower to change and are usually not the equal to the air temperature. I think Fahrenheit still wins here: There might be ice on the road when the air is as warm as 40f during a passing winter warm front. There is definitely ice on the road at 0f. That’s a useful 40 degree range of increasing levels of caution.
> In particular a foot is an extremely intuitive unit of measure.
The other nice thing about feet is that there are 12 inches in one, which is evenly divisible by 2, 3, 4, and 6, while decimal metric units are only evenly divisible by 2 and 5. If only metric had been based on dozenal instead of decimal.
The other nice thing about feet is that there are 12 inches in one, which is evenly divisible by 2, 3, 4, and 6, while decimal metric units are only evenly divisible by 2 and 5. If only metric had been based on dozenal instead of decimal.
As a European I only get mildly upset when reading US recipes. "1 cup of flour" Just the fact that it's a measure of volume [0] instead of weight is already stupid imo. I pretty much stopped reading recipes where there are no metric units (weight!) provided, preferably in grams.
0, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cup_(unit)
0, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cup_(unit)
Isn't the gram a unit of mass, not weight?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gram
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gram
You are correct.
At the same time, the way we measure mass is by measuring weight and having the balance approximate a conversion. I imagine most balances use sea level gravity for that but I can't be bothered to do research. :D
At the same time, the way we measure mass is by measuring weight and having the balance approximate a conversion. I imagine most balances use sea level gravity for that but I can't be bothered to do research. :D
Makes no difference if cooking on earth though
1. Inertia. It is difficult to switch measurement in people's heads. For example, I grew up in metric environment, but I did not drive car. So for me, local sizes are in meters, but car speed, distances are in miles :-). Home temperature is in Celsius, but grill or oven are in Farenheits. :-)
2. Cost. There is a direct cost (like remarking everything), and indirect -- all the chaos and errors because of mixing up units. To foot the bill is hard sell in Congress.
3. Peer pressure: because of size of economy, US can request whatever it wants from partners. UK had to move to metric when joined EU.
That said, I am very supportive of metric. We are paying price for the imperial units. Every car shop has two set of wrenches. (BTW, it is metal, production -- read climate impact. May be not big, but still impact we could avoid.) All the software must show controls for units. We need to train professionals (like doctors) to live in two worlds. And the list is endless. [Did I mention translation bugs? For example, outside temperature translation is 9/5 Celsius + 32, but difference between outside and inside is 9/5 Celsius. :-( -- real bug I caught in critical industrial control system. ]
I am not sure where does US stands today. For example, I think metrics is teached in school. Most food is dual marked. So, maybe, it is not rejection, but rather slow move?
2. Cost. There is a direct cost (like remarking everything), and indirect -- all the chaos and errors because of mixing up units. To foot the bill is hard sell in Congress.
3. Peer pressure: because of size of economy, US can request whatever it wants from partners. UK had to move to metric when joined EU.
That said, I am very supportive of metric. We are paying price for the imperial units. Every car shop has two set of wrenches. (BTW, it is metal, production -- read climate impact. May be not big, but still impact we could avoid.) All the software must show controls for units. We need to train professionals (like doctors) to live in two worlds. And the list is endless. [Did I mention translation bugs? For example, outside temperature translation is 9/5 Celsius + 32, but difference between outside and inside is 9/5 Celsius. :-( -- real bug I caught in critical industrial control system. ]
I am not sure where does US stands today. For example, I think metrics is teached in school. Most food is dual marked. So, maybe, it is not rejection, but rather slow move?
> 2. Cost. There is a direct cost (like remarking everything), and indirect -- all the chaos and errors because of mixing up units. To foot the bill is hard sell in Congress.
Maybe for things like road signs where a lot of travel and labor would be required to change everything. But for most commercial products, you don't have to change everything all at once or make some kind of big retooling effort. Company would just have to pick a day, and from there on, instead of printing "16 fl. oz." just start printing "473 ml" on the package.
Maybe for things like road signs where a lot of travel and labor would be required to change everything. But for most commercial products, you don't have to change everything all at once or make some kind of big retooling effort. Company would just have to pick a day, and from there on, instead of printing "16 fl. oz." just start printing "473 ml" on the package.
A lot of products already have both printed on the package.
The US uses metric for some things, so it's partly transitioned.
Feels like something that's only going to go in one direction, even if not quickly in some cases.
Feels like something that's only going to go in one direction, even if not quickly in some cases.
Judging by your popular media, you only use metric in science fiction shows where the distances between spaceships is so big the number is effectively meaningless.
Longing for the day you start using kilograms instead of points for weight in your movies and tv shows. I always have to pause and grab my phone to convert.
Longing for the day you start using kilograms instead of points for weight in your movies and tv shows. I always have to pause and grab my phone to convert.
The hardest part is remembering that a kg is about twice as heavy as a lb so kgs are about half. This is accurate give or take about 10%.
2.2 lbs per kg. Multiply by 2 and add 10%.
eg. 5 kg x 2 = 10 + 10% (1) = ~11 lbs.
0.45 kgs per lb. Divide by 2 and subtract 10%.
eg. 11 lbs / 2 = 5.5 - 10% (0.55) = ~5 kg.
2.2 lbs per kg. Multiply by 2 and add 10%.
eg. 5 kg x 2 = 10 + 10% (1) = ~11 lbs.
0.45 kgs per lb. Divide by 2 and subtract 10%.
eg. 11 lbs / 2 = 5.5 - 10% (0.55) = ~5 kg.
The US does use metric system (you can easily go and buy 2 liter bottle of Coke). What you probably mean, why the metric system is not mandated as the only one acceptable for basically everything? Why indeed.
No, I think the question is why the metric system isn't used by default for most purposes -- like road signs.
I suspect that road signs don't use metric in the US and the UK for safety reasons. Especially speed signs.
Someone who's used to thinking in miles per hour suddenly seeing a sign in km/h will likely speed up to approximately 150% of the legal limit.
Someone who's used to thinking in miles per hour suddenly seeing a sign in km/h will likely speed up to approximately 150% of the legal limit.
Canada had both numbers. The kph was on top and larger. The mph was below and smaller, obviously. Now the mph has been removed for quite some time.
Judging by your popular media, you only use metric in science fiction shows where the distances between spaceships is so big the number is effectively meaningless.
Occasionally hear grams for small amounts.
That's it.
Occasionally hear grams for small amounts.
That's it.
We tried it in the 70's. Signage everywhere (well, almost everywhere) used to have both kilometer and mile distances. Speedometers had both dials. Thermometers had two scales. Etc. etc.
Then... it just never completely took. Then those changes went away.
Part of it was political, surely (Carter spearheaded the metric change; Reagan coming in was super conservative), but I think you underestimate just how hard it is to get 50 halfway-independent states and millions of people to all agree on an entirely new system of measurement (not just of distance, but of volume, temperature etc.) when in millions of people's brains, the number 72 means "comfortable" (in Fahrenheit) and 100 means "hot!" (again, in Fahrenheit... you can't say "temps are in the triple digits!" in Celsius and have it mean anything other than that you're boiling), a tall man is "over 6 feet tall!", the average weight of an adult is 180 pounds, ovens get heated to 375 to bake something usually, shoe sizes (in inches), belt lengths (in inches), heck my baby's perfect bathwater temperature is exactly "100 degrees" (F, measured via infrared thermometer), going "100MPH" is VERY fast, 0 degrees F is VERY cold (-17C), etc. etc.
It's still used in some spaces like science, but in places like tooling it's both... I have 2 sets of EVERY TOOL (well, every tool with a fixed size at least, like sockets and allen-head wrenches), the metric version and the imperial version, it's maddening- basically the worst of all options is to get stuck in the middle, and that's precisely what happened with tooling.
Lastly, the digital tooling to automatically or easily convert is getting more common (a certain Reddit bot comes to mind which automatically converts any Imperial measurements cited in comments to metric), heck a browser plugin could probably do it for you
Then... it just never completely took. Then those changes went away.
Part of it was political, surely (Carter spearheaded the metric change; Reagan coming in was super conservative), but I think you underestimate just how hard it is to get 50 halfway-independent states and millions of people to all agree on an entirely new system of measurement (not just of distance, but of volume, temperature etc.) when in millions of people's brains, the number 72 means "comfortable" (in Fahrenheit) and 100 means "hot!" (again, in Fahrenheit... you can't say "temps are in the triple digits!" in Celsius and have it mean anything other than that you're boiling), a tall man is "over 6 feet tall!", the average weight of an adult is 180 pounds, ovens get heated to 375 to bake something usually, shoe sizes (in inches), belt lengths (in inches), heck my baby's perfect bathwater temperature is exactly "100 degrees" (F, measured via infrared thermometer), going "100MPH" is VERY fast, 0 degrees F is VERY cold (-17C), etc. etc.
It's still used in some spaces like science, but in places like tooling it's both... I have 2 sets of EVERY TOOL (well, every tool with a fixed size at least, like sockets and allen-head wrenches), the metric version and the imperial version, it's maddening- basically the worst of all options is to get stuck in the middle, and that's precisely what happened with tooling.
Lastly, the digital tooling to automatically or easily convert is getting more common (a certain Reddit bot comes to mind which automatically converts any Imperial measurements cited in comments to metric), heck a browser plugin could probably do it for you
> just how hard it is
Why is this always seen as harder for US states than European contries? At least all the states speak the same language and federal laws whereas EU has to work with however many languages and a more complex system of laws.
Why is this always seen as harder for US states than European contries? At least all the states speak the same language and federal laws whereas EU has to work with however many languages and a more complex system of laws.
Because its not 1800 anymore. Back when a lot of those European countries officially switched to metric the industrial revolution had only just begun. A huge chunk of the population was illiterate. Loads of people didn't deal with precise measurements in their day to day lives. Now days, everyone deals with measures almost daily and just about everyone is literate.
And not every European country uses metric everywhere. Ask someone in the UK what their weight is, and if they don't tell you to buzz off they'll quite probably give you an answer in stone.
And not every European country uses metric everywhere. Ask someone in the UK what their weight is, and if they don't tell you to buzz off they'll quite probably give you an answer in stone.
Then you really don't want to hear about Sweden which in 1967 switched from driving in the left side of the road to the right side of the road.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagen_H
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagen_H
> Because its not 1800 anymore
I don't think that's it - the Commonwealth countries only really started in the mid 20th century. Yes, the conversion isn't complete or stalled, but it has at least partially occurred.
I don't think that's it - the Commonwealth countries only really started in the mid 20th century. Yes, the conversion isn't complete or stalled, but it has at least partially occurred.
> the Commonwealth countries
Mostly non-European countries
> only really started in the mid 20th century. Yes, the conversion isn't complete or stalled
So once again, after the 1800s migrating to purely metric units everywhere became quite a challenge.
One could argue the switch to metric at least partially occurred in the US. My Nutrition Facts label here has grams and Calories. The medicine in my medicine cabinet is in grams and milliliters. My car has a 3L engine in it. I buy bottled beverages in 2L bottles. Over half the tools in my tool chest have measurements in millimeters, with most of the bolts and screws on my vehicles in millimeters. My backpack water bladder is 2L in size. My car's speedo does list the speed in km/h as well as mph. I use metric seconds, hertz, watts, amps, volts, etc.
Mostly non-European countries
> only really started in the mid 20th century. Yes, the conversion isn't complete or stalled
So once again, after the 1800s migrating to purely metric units everywhere became quite a challenge.
One could argue the switch to metric at least partially occurred in the US. My Nutrition Facts label here has grams and Calories. The medicine in my medicine cabinet is in grams and milliliters. My car has a 3L engine in it. I buy bottled beverages in 2L bottles. Over half the tools in my tool chest have measurements in millimeters, with most of the bolts and screws on my vehicles in millimeters. My backpack water bladder is 2L in size. My car's speedo does list the speed in km/h as well as mph. I use metric seconds, hertz, watts, amps, volts, etc.
Imperial units of electricity has never existed in the first place. And time is really traditional units, adopted by the metric system. Megaseconds could have been a good measure to be honest.
The imperial system has a great UX and is as precise as metric so there's no real incentive to change. For science metric makes a lot of sense of course and we use it there (mainly!) and we use it for trade, but for day-to-day use among people, why change? It's very intuitive in terms of unit sizes being very much at human scale. Even when doing woodworking/carpentry, the imperial system is really nice being based on 12 in many aspects. The foot/inch system is great for day to day use. The centimeter is too small and the meter too large, for example.
I also think it's nice that different countries do things differently. It gives you identity and makes the world a more diverse and interesting place. I love that the UK has measurements like "stone" when describing a person's weight and that they use miles per hour for driving and kilograms for buying food and drive on the left side of the road.
I also think it's nice that different countries do things differently. It gives you identity and makes the world a more diverse and interesting place. I love that the UK has measurements like "stone" when describing a person's weight and that they use miles per hour for driving and kilograms for buying food and drive on the left side of the road.
A difficulty that I find is that metric as commonly used is more awkward for estimating.
For example, I find that metric distance as commonly used doesn't have a good equivalent to feet for working with medium lengths. By "as commonly used" I mean that, while I could theoretically use decameters, in practice average people seem to only use millimeters, centimeters, meters, and kilometers. That makes it difficult for me to estimate medium lengths in metric. For example, it's awkward to describe someone as 1.83 meters or 183 centimeters tall. It is much easier to describe them as 6 feet 2 inches.
To a somewhat lesser degree, the same seems to be true for volume. In practice people only seem to use milliliters and liters. That leaves me with no good equivalent to cups or gallons.
For example, I find that metric distance as commonly used doesn't have a good equivalent to feet for working with medium lengths. By "as commonly used" I mean that, while I could theoretically use decameters, in practice average people seem to only use millimeters, centimeters, meters, and kilometers. That makes it difficult for me to estimate medium lengths in metric. For example, it's awkward to describe someone as 1.83 meters or 183 centimeters tall. It is much easier to describe them as 6 feet 2 inches.
To a somewhat lesser degree, the same seems to be true for volume. In practice people only seem to use milliliters and liters. That leaves me with no good equivalent to cups or gallons.
> For example, it's awkward to describe someone as 1.83 meters or 183 centimeters tall. It is much easier to describe them as 6 feet 2 inches.
Lol, funny how I'm the exact opposite. When someone says their height in meters I have a pretty good idea of their height, where as for feet, I always have to do maths in my head first. Same for volumes
I wonder if it's just a matter of better familiarity with one system over the other
Lol, funny how I'm the exact opposite. When someone says their height in meters I have a pretty good idea of their height, where as for feet, I always have to do maths in my head first. Same for volumes
I wonder if it's just a matter of better familiarity with one system over the other
> It is much easier to describe them as 6 feet 2 inches.
That's purely subjective.
I'm from Europe and even though I'm a bit familiar with imperial units, I almost always need to use Google to convert feet and inches to metric.
And no one is going to convince me that fractional stuff like 3/16 inches is easier than 4.7mm.
That's purely subjective.
I'm from Europe and even though I'm a bit familiar with imperial units, I almost always need to use Google to convert feet and inches to metric.
And no one is going to convince me that fractional stuff like 3/16 inches is easier than 4.7mm.
How do you deal with 1" resolution for person's height? It seems too huge a difference. 2.5cm higher is maybe not that important once you're not teenager any more, but it is still quite visible.
Also, deciliter is used a lot for volume, especially for drinks. Everyone in Serbia knows that 0.5dl of rakija (brandy) is the way to go and when bar serves 0.3dl they don't respect traditional values :)
Also, 2dl is standard cup size and that's intuitive size when we have to estimate deciliter or two for cooking etc.
Also, deciliter is used a lot for volume, especially for drinks. Everyone in Serbia knows that 0.5dl of rakija (brandy) is the way to go and when bar serves 0.3dl they don't respect traditional values :)
Also, 2dl is standard cup size and that's intuitive size when we have to estimate deciliter or two for cooking etc.
No one, except tailors and very insecure men, cares about anyone's height to within an inch.
It's what you're used to. Cups and gallons are confusing to me!
In some of my Dutch cook book, there are mentions of cups. But mostly as a relative unit; add one cup of X, two cups of Y.
For absolute amounts, the metrics system just makes more sense, as it nearly combines the different quantities without weird conversion constants.
Note that in medical or scientific environments, centiliters are actually used.
But then again, we still use milimiter-mercury as a unit in medicine too ;) [0]
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimetre_of_mercury
In some of my Dutch cook book, there are mentions of cups. But mostly as a relative unit; add one cup of X, two cups of Y.
For absolute amounts, the metrics system just makes more sense, as it nearly combines the different quantities without weird conversion constants.
Note that in medical or scientific environments, centiliters are actually used.
But then again, we still use milimiter-mercury as a unit in medicine too ;) [0]
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimetre_of_mercury
> while I could theoretically use decameters, in practice average people seem to only use
Everyone uses decimeters where I'm from, it isn't strange at all and everyone understands it. People use mm, cm, dm, m or km depending on what fits best, that gives you a much more fine grained set of lengths to talk about and it is trivial to convert between them so people don't have to think about it.
Maybe countries that doesn't use metric in everyday life just teaches you cm and m, but there is no reason to just stay with those. The confusion is maybe that we don't mix units, you don't say "1 meter 8 decimeters and 3 centimeters", you just use one, and in those since the accuracy is in centimetetrs you just use centimeters, or meters straight. But if you talk about a distance of around 30 centimeters people just say 3 decimeters, and since everyone has worked a lot with those before they take their mental decimeter times 3 and they know the length.
Everyone uses decimeters where I'm from, it isn't strange at all and everyone understands it. People use mm, cm, dm, m or km depending on what fits best, that gives you a much more fine grained set of lengths to talk about and it is trivial to convert between them so people don't have to think about it.
Maybe countries that doesn't use metric in everyday life just teaches you cm and m, but there is no reason to just stay with those. The confusion is maybe that we don't mix units, you don't say "1 meter 8 decimeters and 3 centimeters", you just use one, and in those since the accuracy is in centimetetrs you just use centimeters, or meters straight. But if you talk about a distance of around 30 centimeters people just say 3 decimeters, and since everyone has worked a lot with those before they take their mental decimeter times 3 and they know the length.
You could say 1 meter and 83 centimeters, or if you prefer, 1 meter, 8 decimeters and 3 centimeters.
If you really want to complain about metric, complain that it is base 10 instead of base 12. Twelve is evenly divisible by 2, 3, 4 and 6 making dividing into fifths, quarters, thirds or halves easier, while decimal is only divisible by 2 and 5, which base twelve already does and more and more difficult to divide into quarters and thirds. This is why clocks have 12 hours per half day instead of 10.
If you really want to complain about metric, complain that it is base 10 instead of base 12. Twelve is evenly divisible by 2, 3, 4 and 6 making dividing into fifths, quarters, thirds or halves easier, while decimal is only divisible by 2 and 5, which base twelve already does and more and more difficult to divide into quarters and thirds. This is why clocks have 12 hours per half day instead of 10.
At least metric recipes are actually reproducible, not like the tablespoons and cups compounding rounding errors and estimates of the imperial “system”.
The imperial system is yet a third system, formerly used in the British Empire and a few other countries. There are important differences between it and the U.S. customary system.
For instance, the imperial gallon is about 4.5 liters, while the U.S. gallon is only about 3.78 liters.
The imperial system used to be much worse... there were separate gallons for wine, ale, grain, etc. About the only vestige of this is in barrels, where a barrel of beer is not the same size as a barrel of oil.
There's also an avoirdupois system, which is similar, but once again, not identical, with the imperial and U.S. systems, and the troy system used for precious metals and things of that nature.
For instance, the imperial gallon is about 4.5 liters, while the U.S. gallon is only about 3.78 liters.
The imperial system used to be much worse... there were separate gallons for wine, ale, grain, etc. About the only vestige of this is in barrels, where a barrel of beer is not the same size as a barrel of oil.
There's also an avoirdupois system, which is similar, but once again, not identical, with the imperial and U.S. systems, and the troy system used for precious metals and things of that nature.
Why would you want to describe somebody as 183 centimeters tall? Even if there is a good reason, it is not a problem at all. It is very easy to understand you mean 1.83 meters. Same way you don't tell the height of a person in inches alone, you normally don't tell it in centimeters.
I grew up with metric and I 100% agree that metric is missing a foot sized unit of measurement.
Also the meter, mm, and km are cool, but the cm is just the wrong size. Too small.
Also the meter, mm, and km are cool, but the cm is just the wrong size. Too small.
The vast majority of organizations in the US already use the metric system in places where the metric system makes sense. Basically everyone who wants to use it is already using it.
For everything else, what's the point in the government mandating it? There's no political desire for it because society in general doesn't care, and society doesn't care because the costs outweigh the benefits. There's no practical advantage to the average person to learn their height in meters instead of inches and feet, or to have to start shopping for hectograms of food when ounces work just fine.
For everything else, what's the point in the government mandating it? There's no political desire for it because society in general doesn't care, and society doesn't care because the costs outweigh the benefits. There's no practical advantage to the average person to learn their height in meters instead of inches and feet, or to have to start shopping for hectograms of food when ounces work just fine.
In 1821, Secretary of State and the future president, John Quincy Adams released a report on weights and measures to congress. He had labored over the report obsessively for more than 3 years as he was absolutely fascinated by the metric system.
Adams expected the report to catch fire and result in the adoption of the metric system. In actuality, it was a dud, and congress did nothing about it. His wife however noted in her diary “Thank God we hear no more of Weights and Measures.”
Society not caring about this issue is nearly as old as the country itself. But I can imagine John Quincy Adams, if alive today, would probably be just the type of person posting an “Ask HN” question on the US adoption of the metric system.
Adams expected the report to catch fire and result in the adoption of the metric system. In actuality, it was a dud, and congress did nothing about it. His wife however noted in her diary “Thank God we hear no more of Weights and Measures.”
Society not caring about this issue is nearly as old as the country itself. But I can imagine John Quincy Adams, if alive today, would probably be just the type of person posting an “Ask HN” question on the US adoption of the metric system.
Never seen a hectogram in Europe, everything less than a kilogram is labelled in grams.
Combined with the concerns of another commenter who scratched his head about having to give his body length as 183cm, I come to the conclusion American brains overflow after 99.
Combined with the concerns of another commenter who scratched his head about having to give his body length as 183cm, I come to the conclusion American brains overflow after 99.
In Italy we use "etto" (100g) a lot, especially with groceries/deli.
I'm not sure it's hard, is there evidence? Personally I don't think there's any valuable benefit, certainly not worth all the resulting disruption, and wouldn't advocate for it for that reason.
One anecdote in regards to the potential benefits:
I've gotten into wood working the last few years and I've found that I'm significantly less likely to make a measurement mistake when I use metric. It seems like nearly all my measurement mistakes are when I did something in imperial.
So why don't I use metric all the time? Because materials are usually sold in imperial units.
I've gotten into wood working the last few years and I've found that I'm significantly less likely to make a measurement mistake when I use metric. It seems like nearly all my measurement mistakes are when I did something in imperial.
So why don't I use metric all the time? Because materials are usually sold in imperial units.
I love metric but the binary logarithmic inches subunits are fantastic for imperial with wood:
Suppose you have a 30 cm piece and you need to evenly space 5 3.5 cm-wide wood planks on the 30cm piece. The decimal calculation will take you to a resolution you likely can't measure confidently (0.25 mm)
Suppose you have a 30 cm piece and you need to evenly space 5 3.5 cm-wide wood planks on the 30cm piece. The decimal calculation will take you to a resolution you likely can't measure confidently (0.25 mm)
One obvious problem: if a US factory has a surplus of drain pipes they cannot export them. US pipes are 1.5 inch = 38.1 mm whereas EU use 40 mm pipes.
So US companies cannot export surplus and will need new tooling when they want to export. That makes it much more difficult to expand into international markets.
So US companies cannot export surplus and will need new tooling when they want to export. That makes it much more difficult to expand into international markets.
You could just as easily say that the EU will have trouble exporting their surplus drainage pipes.
It makes somewhat more sense to say that 3 countries have trouble exporting to the other 192 than the other way around.
No, rest of world is much more likely to use metric than imperial units.
E.g. Japan use metric: https://www.kubota-chemix.co.jp/dcms_media/other/20161226_en...
E.g. Japan use metric: https://www.kubota-chemix.co.jp/dcms_media/other/20161226_en...
No, because the other regions of the world also use metric. America is an outlier.
Even more, several aviation reports use both. METARs use feet for cloud altitude and meters for visibility.
METARs more commonly use statute miles for visibility (indicated by SM), not meters. But they do use things like Celsius for temperatures, and air pressure in hectopascals instead of inHg.
Not answering the OP but instead sharing what I am having to do to accommodate others while learning a thing or two through that accommodation. Some here may recall the significant NASA failure where imperial and metric were mixed leading to a costly outcome(1) and that is what I want to avoid. While I am not launching rockets I do require extremely accurate calculations for my objectives. As an American, born and raised, the U.S. way is baked into everything that I do; however now that I am engineering a global hardware based solution that sees neither race, nationality, or creed all my engineering calculations are presented in metric in the final “pitch”. As an American I have done all my "internal thinking" using what I know but to reach a broader market for my potential global audience my documentation carries the reader, should they be Imperial based, through the metric conversions for those with the mathematical interest. My past experiences have guided me to spend the time now for this activity as a function of explicit documentation presenting the engineering and this is time very well spent since explicit written calculations with variables and constants clearly labeled leave much 'less' room for error when assumptions are eliminated, regardless of your unit of weights and measure.
(1)https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17350-nasa-criticised...
(1)https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17350-nasa-criticised...
As the joke goes, there are two types of countries: Those that use the metric system, and those that have been to the moon.
All joking aside, the metric system is widely used in the US for guns and drugs.
All joking aside, the metric system is widely used in the US for guns and drugs.
Why guns? I understand drugs since it's such small scales (does the Imperial system even have a good way of expressing those?)
Edit: I know you joked, but now I wonder if NASA used metric or imperial system back then
Edit: I know you joked, but now I wonder if NASA used metric or imperial system back then
The switch to Metric in the US was made easier by a personal decision of Carl Johansson... (backed up by wikipedia)[1]
In the early 20th century, the U.S. inch was effectively defined as 25.4000508 mm (with a reference temperature of 68 °F (20 °C)) and the U.K. inch at 25.399977 mm (with a reference temperature of 62 °F (17 °C)). When Johansson started manufacturing gauge blocks in inch sizes in 1912, Johansson's compromise was to manufacture gauge blocks with a nominal size of 25.4mm, with a reference temperature of 20 °C (68 °F), accurate to within a few parts per million of both official definitions. Because Johansson's blocks were so popular, his blocks became the de facto standard for manufacturers internationally, with other manufacturers of gauge blocks following Johansson's definition by producing blocks designed to be equivalent to his.
Actually USA is using the metric system.
They just apply their weird conversions on top of the metric system, but fundamentally they use the definitions of the International System of Units.
E.g. Pound is legally exactly 0.45359237 kilograms where kilogram is defined by setting the Planck constant h exactly to 6.62607015×10^−34 J⋅s (J = kg⋅m2⋅s^−2), given the definitions of the metre and the second.
Previously kilogram was a block of metal stored in France. But the copies of kilogram were diverging and there was no way of knowing where the changes were coming from. So now the kilogram is defined with regard to the physical properties of the universe as opposed to specific object.
E.g. a meter is exactly the distance traveled by light in a vacuum in 1/299792458 seconds. Where second is exactly 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.
They just apply their weird conversions on top of the metric system, but fundamentally they use the definitions of the International System of Units.
E.g. Pound is legally exactly 0.45359237 kilograms where kilogram is defined by setting the Planck constant h exactly to 6.62607015×10^−34 J⋅s (J = kg⋅m2⋅s^−2), given the definitions of the metre and the second.
Previously kilogram was a block of metal stored in France. But the copies of kilogram were diverging and there was no way of knowing where the changes were coming from. So now the kilogram is defined with regard to the physical properties of the universe as opposed to specific object.
E.g. a meter is exactly the distance traveled by light in a vacuum in 1/299792458 seconds. Where second is exactly 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 grew up in the US. I only learned the metric system. There was never any point at which we used the customary units.
You use celsius? You must have gone to a specialized school then.
Public school in Alabama. Never once used Fahrenheit for anything. Most stuff actually done in Kelvin, although as I am sure you know there is little difference.
What happens when you check the weather or ask anyone else the temperature or check your thermostat?
Are you saying that you never used Fahrenheit for schoolwork? Or for anything?
Are you saying that you never used Fahrenheit for schoolwork? Or for anything?
Never used Fahrenheit in school for anything. I mean you could in theory if you wanted when asked on an exam "what is the boiling point of water?" write something other than "100 C". I'm not aware of anyone that did.
We certainly never adjusted the thermostat in school, if that is what you are asking.
If someone asked me to read the thermostat at home for example, I just told them the numbers on it. It's not like "72 F" is radically different from "72 years old".
We certainly never adjusted the thermostat in school, if that is what you are asking.
If someone asked me to read the thermostat at home for example, I just told them the numbers on it. It's not like "72 F" is radically different from "72 years old".
What I fail to believe is that you don't have an intuition for 72 F or 30 F, etc.
What I can believe, but would be nonetheless very surprised by, is that you have better intuition for 28 C, 25 C than you do for the equivalent Fahrenheit units if you were raised in the US.
What I can believe, but would be nonetheless very surprised by, is that you have better intuition for 28 C, 25 C than you do for the equivalent Fahrenheit units if you were raised in the US.
You're still missing the point. I know 82 F is hotter than 72 F. I know 108 F can give you heat stroke or dehydration depending other conditions. I was never taught that, but I did pick it up.
I have no idea how to apply customary units for any real purpose other than "100 F is really hot". If you tell me you need to raise the temperature of a vessel that is 10 foot tall and 4 foot in diameter containing a solution of sodium hydroxide by 40 F I have no idea where to start. How many cubic feet are in a gallon? How many tonnes (of energy...) does it take to raise one gallon of water by 1 F?
I have no idea how to apply customary units for any real purpose other than "100 F is really hot". If you tell me you need to raise the temperature of a vessel that is 10 foot tall and 4 foot in diameter containing a solution of sodium hydroxide by 40 F I have no idea where to start. How many cubic feet are in a gallon? How many tonnes (of energy...) does it take to raise one gallon of water by 1 F?
Yes, obviously, to your second bit -- nobody would try to do those calculations in imperial/customary units.
But most of my usage of units is more of the form "Oh it's 60 degrees out today? Better put on a sweater!" than how "to raise the temperature of a vessel that is 10 foot tall and 4 foot in diameter containing a solution of sodium hydroxide by 40 F."
I, along with most replies, took you to be meaning that for the former usage you would use celsius, which surprised me. Nothing is surprising about the fact that for calculation of this sort you use metric.
But most of my usage of units is more of the form "Oh it's 60 degrees out today? Better put on a sweater!" than how "to raise the temperature of a vessel that is 10 foot tall and 4 foot in diameter containing a solution of sodium hydroxide by 40 F."
I, along with most replies, took you to be meaning that for the former usage you would use celsius, which surprised me. Nothing is surprising about the fact that for calculation of this sort you use metric.
To be honest it sounds like your schooling set you up for failure for living in the US. Are your speed limit signs not in MPH? Do you not buy your milk in gallons and commonly weigh things in pounds? What volume measuring spoons do you have?
This is not an argument against the metric system; I just cannot imagine foregoing imperial unit education and not having constant conversion pains in adulthood.
This is not an argument against the metric system; I just cannot imagine foregoing imperial unit education and not having constant conversion pains in adulthood.
You're confusing learning the system and using the unit.
Anyone can use MPH on the road. If it's 60, you go 60. That is using the unit. It's not like the vehicles here sometimes display fathoms per fortnight. I still have no idea how much distance a mile is.
Anyone can go buy a gallon of milk. It's one gallon. There are no stores randomly offering to sell you a cubic yard of milk.
On the other hand, I know how many meters are in a kilometer, how many mm in a meter, etc. How to convert from cubic meters into liters, etc. That is a result of having learned the system.
Anyone can use MPH on the road. If it's 60, you go 60. That is using the unit. It's not like the vehicles here sometimes display fathoms per fortnight. I still have no idea how much distance a mile is.
Anyone can go buy a gallon of milk. It's one gallon. There are no stores randomly offering to sell you a cubic yard of milk.
On the other hand, I know how many meters are in a kilometer, how many mm in a meter, etc. How to convert from cubic meters into liters, etc. That is a result of having learned the system.
> I still have no idea how much distance a mile is.
By "know how much distance", you mean "able to decompose it into smaller subunit"? This is different from what I mean when I say knowing a distance.
You seriously were raised in the US and use celsius?
By "know how much distance", you mean "able to decompose it into smaller subunit"? This is different from what I mean when I say knowing a distance.
You seriously were raised in the US and use celsius?
I don't have a perception for how long a mile is nor any knowledge that would decompose it into a smaller subunit. It was not taught or discussed at any point in public school.
There was exactly one question I recall on a class exam about converting to Fahrenheit from Celsius. It's some formula with a constant & an offset to account for the differing scale and the freezing point. I've long since forgotten it.
There was exactly one question I recall on a class exam about converting to Fahrenheit from Celsius. It's some formula with a constant & an offset to account for the differing scale and the freezing point. I've long since forgotten it.
Not sure why people are giving you such a hard time about this. My experience matches yours; born and raised in the US but I’m hopeless at talking about the weather in Fahrenheit, estimating hiked distances in miles, or converting tablespoons and quarts.
My public school education prioritized metric and it’s trivial to choose units in maps, weather apps, etc.
My public school education prioritized metric and it’s trivial to choose units in maps, weather apps, etc.
I'm not confusing them, I'm saying that your schooling failed you as someone who would in all likelihood spend the rest of their life in a society that predominantly uses the imperial system.
I am having a hard time believing that a public school had this curriculum.
I am having a hard time believing that a public school had this curriculum.
I can imagine a family not using imperial, but I can't picture anywhere in the 50 states that uses metric for day to day stuff like drivers licenses and road signs. Are you in one of the territories maybe? What do the road signs look like there? What is printed on your driver's license for your height and weight?
wait, what? Where??
Alabama. I had one instructor in a school who informed that while he would accept US units on an exam he said that "he always graded those last, was very tired by that point and not at all forgiving"
There's a few reasons for this.
First, the 10-based units of the metric system isn't in fact its biggest utility--it's the fact that everyone agrees on the size of the meter, as opposed to the traditional foot, where every country had its own slightly different length of a foot. With those other customary units pretty thoroughly dead, there's little confusion as to the size of a foot.
Second, as a few people have noted, customary units actually tend to be somewhat more convenient to use than a strict metric system. Note that the metric system comes up with 1 liter = (1/10 m)^3 or 1 hectare = (100 m)^2 to try to synthesize useful volume or area units from regular length. In many regards, Fahrenheit is really a more comfortable measure of ambient air temperature than Celsius is. The metric system's fastidiousness in 10-based increments is more useful if you're doing tasks like measuring the area of an irregularly-shaped plot of land, or scientific calculations, but is less useful for more pedestrian tasks like measuring out how much flour you need for the cake you're baking.
Third, it takes a very long time (at least a generation) for people to get used to new units. You see this in the UK, where imperial units are still used for lots of things despite official metrication. Residual use of customary units for things like cookbooks or tool dimensions will take a very, very long time to root out.
Finally, there are lots of things that depend on the precise units that are hard to move. The US actually has two definitions of length, the international foot (which has 1 in = 2.54 cm exactly), and the survey foot (which has 39.37 in = 1m exactly). It's been trying to phase out the survey foot for decades, and that's still in progress because quite literally the coordinate planes that are used in several states for plotting land in the US are based on the survey foot. Even small differences in units there can lead to inaccuracies of several feet in determining the bounds of your plot of land.
First, the 10-based units of the metric system isn't in fact its biggest utility--it's the fact that everyone agrees on the size of the meter, as opposed to the traditional foot, where every country had its own slightly different length of a foot. With those other customary units pretty thoroughly dead, there's little confusion as to the size of a foot.
Second, as a few people have noted, customary units actually tend to be somewhat more convenient to use than a strict metric system. Note that the metric system comes up with 1 liter = (1/10 m)^3 or 1 hectare = (100 m)^2 to try to synthesize useful volume or area units from regular length. In many regards, Fahrenheit is really a more comfortable measure of ambient air temperature than Celsius is. The metric system's fastidiousness in 10-based increments is more useful if you're doing tasks like measuring the area of an irregularly-shaped plot of land, or scientific calculations, but is less useful for more pedestrian tasks like measuring out how much flour you need for the cake you're baking.
Third, it takes a very long time (at least a generation) for people to get used to new units. You see this in the UK, where imperial units are still used for lots of things despite official metrication. Residual use of customary units for things like cookbooks or tool dimensions will take a very, very long time to root out.
Finally, there are lots of things that depend on the precise units that are hard to move. The US actually has two definitions of length, the international foot (which has 1 in = 2.54 cm exactly), and the survey foot (which has 39.37 in = 1m exactly). It's been trying to phase out the survey foot for decades, and that's still in progress because quite literally the coordinate planes that are used in several states for plotting land in the US are based on the survey foot. Even small differences in units there can lead to inaccuracies of several feet in determining the bounds of your plot of land.
I think people very much miss your first point. The powers-of-tens thing just isn't as common an operation as people seem to imagine. Scientists work in scientific notation directly on the base unit. There's no need to convert to megamoles or hectoliters or anything else. If you're stitching together fourteen 2-cm pieces of cloth, the total length is 28 cm, and nobody cares if it's also 280 mm and .28 m.
It's not that people never do these things. It's just that people talk about the English system as if converting from feet to miles is an onerous daily operation. If you're working in feet, you stay in feet.
I'd say that the more useful conversions in the metric system are when you're converting between different unit types, which aren't ten-based but are defined in convenient terms: a kilogram of water takes up 1 liter; a milliliter is 1 cm on a side. These are not-uncommon operations, and the factor-of-ten doesn't really matter.
People talk about the prefixes because they're easy to understand, and that's great. But prefix switching just isn't as important as it sounds.
It's not that people never do these things. It's just that people talk about the English system as if converting from feet to miles is an onerous daily operation. If you're working in feet, you stay in feet.
I'd say that the more useful conversions in the metric system are when you're converting between different unit types, which aren't ten-based but are defined in convenient terms: a kilogram of water takes up 1 liter; a milliliter is 1 cm on a side. These are not-uncommon operations, and the factor-of-ten doesn't really matter.
People talk about the prefixes because they're easy to understand, and that's great. But prefix switching just isn't as important as it sounds.
we don't want to: 12 is more divisible than 10
I prefer Fahrenheit too.
I don't care that 0°C is freezing for water, and 100°C is boiling for water. I am not water, I am a human. I would rather have a system that is human-centric, even if it is "arbitrary". 0°F is about as cold as you can go outside comfortably with a decent coat, and if it's 100°F, that's about the limit of what humans can tolerate too. If it's 100°C outside, you're dead, it's useless to daily experience, and to me, daily experience is far more important.
I don't care that 0°C is freezing for water, and 100°C is boiling for water. I am not water, I am a human. I would rather have a system that is human-centric, even if it is "arbitrary". 0°F is about as cold as you can go outside comfortably with a decent coat, and if it's 100°F, that's about the limit of what humans can tolerate too. If it's 100°C outside, you're dead, it's useless to daily experience, and to me, daily experience is far more important.
> I don't care that 0°C is freezing for water, and 100°C is boiling for water.
The best part is that isn't even true at different elevations. It makes no sense as a reference point for many people that live at higher elevations. What a weird thing to base a system of measurement on since it isn't constant.
The best part is that isn't even true at different elevations. It makes no sense as a reference point for many people that live at higher elevations. What a weird thing to base a system of measurement on since it isn't constant.
The Kelvin scale will absolutely blow your mind. And reading up on standard conditions.
It's what we should use.
Also, something I didn't know for a long time. There are exactly 180 degrees F between freezing and boiling by design. Half a circle. That's pretty cool!
I find knowing water freezes at 0C helpful as that's about when roads become icy. Also, I live near sea level.
This. The U.S. measurement systems work pretty well! And, we use metric where metric works well. The U.S. systems are sized to daily life and are based on 12 or powers of 2, which you could argue are more fundamental bases of measurement than 10. I never hear people argue for a 10 hour day.
Metric system sucks for day2day measuring.
I have no difficulty estimating sizes and weights in kilometers, meters and centimeters, in tons, kilograms or grams, or in assessing the weather in celsius.
F > C.
Only down to -40
What I mean is that it's calibrated for humans, at least dumb ones like me.
0F, it's cold and the wind chill makes it miserable. 0C? That's 32F, which is technically freezing but I can still work on my cars outside in that weather.
100F, sweaty, hot, chugging water if you're outside. 100C? GG, you're dead.
0F, it's cold and the wind chill makes it miserable. 0C? That's 32F, which is technically freezing but I can still work on my cars outside in that weather.
100F, sweaty, hot, chugging water if you're outside. 100C? GG, you're dead.
Honestly, that's just a matter of what you're used to. All my life I used Celsius, and even the dumbest of the dumb around me would always have a pretty good idea about how hot or cold a day was based on the temperature.
US standard may be worse, but the USA is the leader of the free world and is not about give up the choice to use other systems and bases like duodecimal and bow to some arbitrary tyrannical French system imposed by a despot that declares decimal to be the end all be all.
Nit: For those saying the US uses Imperial units. It doesn't.
The US uses something called US Customary Units:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_customary_units
Both US Customary & Imperial derived from British units but they have always had large differences. There was an effort to reconcile the two but it was an abandoned when Europe decided to adopt the metric system.
Still differences remain:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_imperial_and...
The US uses something called US Customary Units:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_customary_units
Both US Customary & Imperial derived from British units but they have always had large differences. There was an effort to reconcile the two but it was an abandoned when Europe decided to adopt the metric system.
Still differences remain:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_imperial_and...
Driving the Alaska Highway there are a bunch of markers for historical things along the road like bridges & lookouts. The majority of the Alaska Highway is actually in Canada, and so all the signs are now in Kilometers and they say things like "Historical marker 1550km (old mile marker 965)".
I was standing at one taking a look and an older couple came over and loudly exclaimed "It's a damn sacrilege to the memory of those young men who built the road they would go and change it like that."
They were adamant changing it to kilometers was unacceptable, because old reasons.
I was standing at one taking a look and an older couple came over and loudly exclaimed "It's a damn sacrilege to the memory of those young men who built the road they would go and change it like that."
They were adamant changing it to kilometers was unacceptable, because old reasons.
Sounds like the people objecting to the introduction of time zones due to speed of rail transport, saying that "they are defiling God's time!", as if it was God that invented it, and not humans that decided that Noon was conveniently the point where the sun was highest in the sky and crossed the meridian.
The US is moving toward the metric system, slowly. Federal efforts may have largely stalled during the Reagan admin (though things like requiring metric labeling on products still eventually made it through), but there's nothing stopping individual states from requiring metric in more places, e.g. road signs. As for why no state has bothered to do so yet, it's likely because there's currently a thousand more pressing issues to expend political capital on first, many of which are existential crises in a way that metrication is not.
Adam Ragusea has an excellent video on this topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OeoBbjwEFg
Momentum is the most powerful force known to mankind.
"That's how we've always done it" drives so much of what humans do it's not even funny. Speaking for my own countrymen, we still mint the penny, write checks, wear ties, shake hands, use imperial, speak English, work 40 hours a week, have 2 political parties, tip waitstaff, etc. not because they are objectively the best solutions, but because that's how we've always done it.
"That's how we've always done it" drives so much of what humans do it's not even funny. Speaking for my own countrymen, we still mint the penny, write checks, wear ties, shake hands, use imperial, speak English, work 40 hours a week, have 2 political parties, tip waitstaff, etc. not because they are objectively the best solutions, but because that's how we've always done it.
Is there somewhere in the U.S. that doesn't use metric?
2L bottles of soda, 2.4L engines, 100m races, 5K runs, 2cc injections, 20 kilo drug busts, 11mm wrenches, M5 screws
2L bottles of soda, 2.4L engines, 100m races, 5K runs, 2cc injections, 20 kilo drug busts, 11mm wrenches, M5 screws
It would take work and there's no pressing reason to do it.
I can imagine what it would be like if you told me you went on a 5 mile hike with your 6'6" friend on a 63 degree day. If that was 8km, 2m, and 17 degrees I have much less intuitive sense of what happened. And I don't see much advantage to switching - it doesn't matter which units you use so long as you're consistent within the domain of use.
What's the downside?
I can imagine what it would be like if you told me you went on a 5 mile hike with your 6'6" friend on a 63 degree day. If that was 8km, 2m, and 17 degrees I have much less intuitive sense of what happened. And I don't see much advantage to switching - it doesn't matter which units you use so long as you're consistent within the domain of use.
What's the downside?
I figured it was a cheap form of protectionism. While it makes it harder for exporters it also makes it harder for importers. It helps maintain a separate local tooling and consumable pipeline which helps with war fighting, it probably also makes money for donors. I think the sheer scale of Chinas exports can and has easily overcome that hurdle so the protectionist aspect is now much less relevant.
Please rewrite this post, but in every 10th word, you should swap the letters e and i. Tomorrow rewrite this post, but instead make it every 9th and 10th word.
Ivintually thes well bi feni and iviryoni well undirstand that i and e ari swappid. But thiri well bi a bet of temi to git adjustid wheli that happins.
Ivintually thes well bi feni and iviryoni well undirstand that i and e ari swappid. But thiri well bi a bet of temi to git adjustid wheli that happins.
The US is huge, both geographically and with regards to population. Where would the political will for such a change come from? There is not much domestic desire to do so, and I am guessing few of the immigrants are chomping at the bit to institute the metric system in light of other, more pressing concerns.
... we have better things to spend trillions of dollars on than change a metric based system with another?
Honestly, HN will moan about how much work and how dangerous the stupidest clock or UTC change is but keep proposing to change every unit used by a quarter of the world's economy. Blows my mind.
Honestly, HN will moan about how much work and how dangerous the stupidest clock or UTC change is but keep proposing to change every unit used by a quarter of the world's economy. Blows my mind.
It's hard for any culture to do anything that is deeply ingrained into its habits. Think of all the things that would have to change everywhere, in everything, when something as basic as a unit system changes.
I was going to write what you just wrote, so I agree.
However, I also think to some extent the US is changing, it's just happening very slowly.
I think a lot of commerce and travel is part of it. If you buy something designed and produced overseas, and you have to get parts for it, it will be in metric. Lots of imports are in metric, if you travel you deal with metric, and so forth and so on. I've been to US hospitals that only keep charts and communicate in metric as a matter of policy, etc.
The only remaining things in the US that are hard for me to intuitively deal with are speed when driving and temperature, and temperature I'm starting to kind of fuzzily intuit.
However, I also think to some extent the US is changing, it's just happening very slowly.
I think a lot of commerce and travel is part of it. If you buy something designed and produced overseas, and you have to get parts for it, it will be in metric. Lots of imports are in metric, if you travel you deal with metric, and so forth and so on. I've been to US hospitals that only keep charts and communicate in metric as a matter of policy, etc.
The only remaining things in the US that are hard for me to intuitively deal with are speed when driving and temperature, and temperature I'm starting to kind of fuzzily intuit.
Temperature should be easy. Don't try to convert it. Just know that it's based around people instead of water. Anything out of the bounds 0-100 is extreme and to be avoided. Maybe it's just so intuitive having grown up with it, but it just seems to make perfect sense that the numbers are based around how you feel in relation to heat.
The idea that things are "out of bounds" for "people" up to 100 C is a little strange. Try stepping outside when it's only half that temperature outside, or even just one-third.
It's much simpler than that, and has nothing to do with people; it's the range between freezing water and boiling water, and that's it.
It's much simpler than that, and has nothing to do with people; it's the range between freezing water and boiling water, and that's it.
I think when they said "Anything out of the bounds 0-100 is extreme and to be avoided" they meant in regard to Farenheit.
While true, the fact that all but 3 other nations managed to do it (though not with 100% transition - I still think of my height in feet and weight in lbs) means that "it's hard" isn't the only reason.
And yet, metric system is not 100% used even in metric countries. TVs, monitors, speaker sizes, car rims and tyres, plumbing pipes, guitar scale length, etc are stuck in inches and used like that in the whole world.
If 24" monitor sounds ok and you have no idea how big 61cm display is then it's safe to say we're also creatures of habbit and it's nothing specific to US.
If 24" monitor sounds ok and you have no idea how big 61cm display is then it's safe to say we're also creatures of habbit and it's nothing specific to US.
I acknowledged that the conversion wasn't complete, but it has gone much much further than the United States nearly everywhere else in the world, so there's something specific about the United States that's preventing it from making even progressing.
As seamless language translation becomes ever more integrated into our communications, it will matter less and less what languages, much less measurement system people use.
Reading all the reasoning, both for and against, reminds me that ever since I heard about confirmation bias I see it everywhere. :-)
It's not hard. We just don't care.
The US is very conservative and broad swathes of the population hate "European" ideas.
And in many situations, I'd agree with those swathes. But when it comes to metric vs. imperial, I'd have to agree that metric is more cohesive and sleek.
Once screen producers start advertising their products in metric, the change will come.
Because the benefits of switching seem relatively limited for the cost.
The issue with switching to metric in the US is that there isn't much practical benefit that would offset the downsides. Technically, the US switched to metric a long time ago. No one uses it in their day-to-day life. The US is economically big enough that it can easily sustain using its own standards.
Since there is no practical benefit, most people don't care and aren't going to go to the effort. A vast amount of non-metric physical tooling already exists -- replacing it would be extremely expensive. For things like engineering, it doesn't matter because the units have to follow the values anyway; there are many common unit systems in engineering that are neither metric nor US imperial, and working across unit systems is something you always have to do anyway.
tl;dr: low ROI and high cost to switch
Since there is no practical benefit, most people don't care and aren't going to go to the effort. A vast amount of non-metric physical tooling already exists -- replacing it would be extremely expensive. For things like engineering, it doesn't matter because the units have to follow the values anyway; there are many common unit systems in engineering that are neither metric nor US imperial, and working across unit systems is something you always have to do anyway.
tl;dr: low ROI and high cost to switch
Tribalism and identity politics.
This Johnny Harris youtube video does a decent job describing this. It would take at least a generation before the US population really got used to using metric places.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRnuY1Vao0o
The timestamp where he's directly talking to what I mean:
https://youtu.be/nRnuY1Vao0o?t=1192
In it, he mentions the main reason why he doesn't use the metric system: he can't. Inches and feet and miles and ounces and pounds are so deeply ingrained in his mind. Even when he tries to relate to metric, its always in relation to imperial units, because to him its not about 30 centimeters its about a foot. Its not about a kilogram, its about two pounds. He can do the conversions in his head usually, but actually visualizing how far 5km is means converting it to miles which he can conceptualize.
Its like learning another language. Sometimes people are really great about just remapping their brain, but many people just end up internally translating things instead of actually deeply adopting the language. And if they're going to just be constantly translating it, it'll just be uncomfortable for them, and they won't want to do it. Because to a certain extent, what's the harm in my speedometer being primarily miles per hour? What's the harm in having a sign say "Rest Stop 5mi" instead of "Rest Stop 8km"?
I'm pretty similar to Johnny here. I can easily visualize ~300mi on a map. 300km? I know it is a good bit shorter than 300mi, but just at a quick off the top of my head I wouldn't quite know how far that really is. I'd be just doing the conversions in my head which takes me a second to think "ok, so divide by 1.6ish, so that's a little over 180 miles..." which I'd then use to conceptualize how far that is.
Changing to metric isn't just changing all the highway signs. Sure, that could be done in just a few years if we wanted to. Its changing how everyone actually thinks, how everyone is actually wired. That's what holds up the US from actually adopting metric.
But in the end, I still do use some metric. This drink I'm drinking has its nutrition label in grams/milligrams/Calories. My child got 1mL of iron supplements and vitamins this morning. It will be a long series of small steps before people get used to the change. Just swapping all the road signs overnight isn't going to lead to very happy people.
Back when most of Europe adopted metric, 40% of the population were illiterate. Tons of people didn't really deal with a lot of weights and measures in their daily lives. We live a very different world today than when metric was adopted in most of the world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRnuY1Vao0o
The timestamp where he's directly talking to what I mean:
https://youtu.be/nRnuY1Vao0o?t=1192
In it, he mentions the main reason why he doesn't use the metric system: he can't. Inches and feet and miles and ounces and pounds are so deeply ingrained in his mind. Even when he tries to relate to metric, its always in relation to imperial units, because to him its not about 30 centimeters its about a foot. Its not about a kilogram, its about two pounds. He can do the conversions in his head usually, but actually visualizing how far 5km is means converting it to miles which he can conceptualize.
Its like learning another language. Sometimes people are really great about just remapping their brain, but many people just end up internally translating things instead of actually deeply adopting the language. And if they're going to just be constantly translating it, it'll just be uncomfortable for them, and they won't want to do it. Because to a certain extent, what's the harm in my speedometer being primarily miles per hour? What's the harm in having a sign say "Rest Stop 5mi" instead of "Rest Stop 8km"?
I'm pretty similar to Johnny here. I can easily visualize ~300mi on a map. 300km? I know it is a good bit shorter than 300mi, but just at a quick off the top of my head I wouldn't quite know how far that really is. I'd be just doing the conversions in my head which takes me a second to think "ok, so divide by 1.6ish, so that's a little over 180 miles..." which I'd then use to conceptualize how far that is.
Changing to metric isn't just changing all the highway signs. Sure, that could be done in just a few years if we wanted to. Its changing how everyone actually thinks, how everyone is actually wired. That's what holds up the US from actually adopting metric.
But in the end, I still do use some metric. This drink I'm drinking has its nutrition label in grams/milligrams/Calories. My child got 1mL of iron supplements and vitamins this morning. It will be a long series of small steps before people get used to the change. Just swapping all the road signs overnight isn't going to lead to very happy people.
Back when most of Europe adopted metric, 40% of the population were illiterate. Tons of people didn't really deal with a lot of weights and measures in their daily lives. We live a very different world today than when metric was adopted in most of the world.
lots of sunk costs. No real interest.
It's political. A significant portion of Americans, mostly conservatives, are unable to accept that anything not invented in the US could be superior to what they are accustomed to.
There was a push toward adopting the metric system under Carter but since then the right wingers have been largely in control of the political discourse.
There was a push toward adopting the metric system under Carter but since then the right wingers have been largely in control of the political discourse.
You are evidently getting downvoted out of ignorance.
In 1975, congress passed the Metric conversion act, and created the US Metric Board for planning, coordination, and public education.
This was disbanded under Reagan, particularly due to White House Advisor Lyn Nofziger's efforts [0]. The killing came from the conservative side, straight up.
And yes I was in HS then, and was very enthusiastic about the conversion, and the opposition was generally driven by conservative xenophobic sentiments (and frankly, laziness to learn a new system). I literally heard people say they "didn't want no damn foreign system here", nevermind their ignorance that "standard" wasn't invented in the US either.
The fact is that the same xenophobia, laziness, and willful ignorance is being exploited today to drive RW voting blocks. Metric is now so far off their anti-scale as to be invisible, but if another push comes, I can guarantee that the RW media will be all over the same anti-foreign-stuff on metric.
What's worse, I use both systems nearly every day in my work, and metric is WAAAY easier.
Example: Quickly subtract 5/8" of an inch from from 1' 5 25/32" or subtract 16mm from 452mm - which is easier? Or add 3 tablespoons to 3/4 of a cup vs 44 ml added to 177 ml.. Hell, just the notation in the "standard" system is insane, nevermind the origins (3 barleycorns to the inch or the length of the current king's foot...).
Yes, I get that doing conversions is a pain, but once you get used to the switch (maybe just spend a couple weeks in any other country) it is way easier. Opposition is really either political or an unwillingness to think about it.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_the_United_Stat...
In 1975, congress passed the Metric conversion act, and created the US Metric Board for planning, coordination, and public education.
This was disbanded under Reagan, particularly due to White House Advisor Lyn Nofziger's efforts [0]. The killing came from the conservative side, straight up.
And yes I was in HS then, and was very enthusiastic about the conversion, and the opposition was generally driven by conservative xenophobic sentiments (and frankly, laziness to learn a new system). I literally heard people say they "didn't want no damn foreign system here", nevermind their ignorance that "standard" wasn't invented in the US either.
The fact is that the same xenophobia, laziness, and willful ignorance is being exploited today to drive RW voting blocks. Metric is now so far off their anti-scale as to be invisible, but if another push comes, I can guarantee that the RW media will be all over the same anti-foreign-stuff on metric.
What's worse, I use both systems nearly every day in my work, and metric is WAAAY easier.
Example: Quickly subtract 5/8" of an inch from from 1' 5 25/32" or subtract 16mm from 452mm - which is easier? Or add 3 tablespoons to 3/4 of a cup vs 44 ml added to 177 ml.. Hell, just the notation in the "standard" system is insane, nevermind the origins (3 barleycorns to the inch or the length of the current king's foot...).
Yes, I get that doing conversions is a pain, but once you get used to the switch (maybe just spend a couple weeks in any other country) it is way easier. Opposition is really either political or an unwillingness to think about it.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_the_United_Stat...
How's the metric system superior? For science, sure.
But I find day2day use of measurements in inch/ft, e.g. in home renovation and architecture, way way easier than metric system.
I think it's the other way around. The adoption of the metric system was an ideological program from a very specific time. An enlightenment belief in a supreme rational order of things, military science transferred into the real world.
Metric system is cool, but it's not "better". Personally, I think it's worse and awkward for many use cases.
But I find day2day use of measurements in inch/ft, e.g. in home renovation and architecture, way way easier than metric system.
I think it's the other way around. The adoption of the metric system was an ideological program from a very specific time. An enlightenment belief in a supreme rational order of things, military science transferred into the real world.
Metric system is cool, but it's not "better". Personally, I think it's worse and awkward for many use cases.
Nonsense.
You have obviously never seriously used both systems. I use both everyday, and the Inch+ is still more familiar.
BUT metric is VASTLY superior and easier
Examples: Quickly subtract 5/8" of an inch from from 1' 5 25/32" or subtract 16mm from 452mm - which is easier?
Quickly add 3 tablespoons to 3/4 of a cup vs 44 ml added to 177 ml..
Hell, just measure something. That stock board is 8 feet 3/8 of an inch long and needs to be cut to 7'6" (or is it 78"). vs 2.448m cut to 1.98m, and even those would be more round numbers working with metric lumber & building.
Sorry, but the only reason you think it is awkward is that you don't use it regularly.
You have obviously never seriously used both systems. I use both everyday, and the Inch+ is still more familiar.
BUT metric is VASTLY superior and easier
Examples: Quickly subtract 5/8" of an inch from from 1' 5 25/32" or subtract 16mm from 452mm - which is easier?
Quickly add 3 tablespoons to 3/4 of a cup vs 44 ml added to 177 ml..
Hell, just measure something. That stock board is 8 feet 3/8 of an inch long and needs to be cut to 7'6" (or is it 78"). vs 2.448m cut to 1.98m, and even those would be more round numbers working with metric lumber & building.
Sorry, but the only reason you think it is awkward is that you don't use it regularly.
How much does 12.34 gallons of water weight?
My point exactly. You constantly have to deal with those stupid fractions and decimals in metric system all the time.
Also - weight and volume relations have mostly scientific relevance. Not joe schmoe putting up out some drywall, or proportion door and window sizes.
It's not that you can't use metric system. It's just worse for a lot of day2day.
Also - weight and volume relations have mostly scientific relevance. Not joe schmoe putting up out some drywall, or proportion door and window sizes.
It's not that you can't use metric system. It's just worse for a lot of day2day.
NO, in metric, I've never dealt with fractions.
It is ALL DECIMAL, which is the point.
It is in the "English" system that you have to deal with the fractions: the board is 8 feet 1 and 23/32 inches long. Now how long will it be when you cut off 5 3/8 inches from that?
If you can't more quickly subtract 137mm from 2482mm, you are either extremely unusual or insincere.
It is ALL DECIMAL, which is the point.
It is in the "English" system that you have to deal with the fractions: the board is 8 feet 1 and 23/32 inches long. Now how long will it be when you cut off 5 3/8 inches from that?
If you can't more quickly subtract 137mm from 2482mm, you are either extremely unusual or insincere.
Exactly. Another example:
How many feet is 74 inches? How many meters is 1234cm?
(How long did it take for you to do that math in each case?)
How many feet is 74 inches? How many meters is 1234cm?
(How long did it take for you to do that math in each case?)
6ft 2inch.
So easy. So clean.
1234cm is the dumbest measurement ever. Once you find yourself working with those, you are either a scientist or you have adapted to the machine rather than have the machine adapt to you.
So easy. So clean.
1234cm is the dumbest measurement ever. Once you find yourself working with those, you are either a scientist or you have adapted to the machine rather than have the machine adapt to you.
You didn't actually do the test.
It would still take you longer in your head to come up with 6ft 2inches (which is the wrong answer, btw, the right answer is 6.167 ft.), than it would to come up with 1.234 meters.
> Once you find yourself working with those, you are either a scientist or you have adapted to the machine rather than have the machine adapt to you.
This is a super weird comment for a programming-centric forum.
It would still take you longer in your head to come up with 6ft 2inches (which is the wrong answer, btw, the right answer is 6.167 ft.), than it would to come up with 1.234 meters.
> Once you find yourself working with those, you are either a scientist or you have adapted to the machine rather than have the machine adapt to you.
This is a super weird comment for a programming-centric forum.
Why is inch/ft easier than cm/m? As long as we use base 10, it seems trivial that units that are based on it are easier to deal with. Don't you hate it when unit prices for the same type of product, say coffee, are sometimes printed in dollar per pound, other times in cents per oz? Multiplying by 16 in your head isn't exactly trivial. Then with cooking there is teaspoon, tablespoon, ounce, cup, quart, gallon... The fact that there are 12 inches in a foot, but 16 oz in a pound is just madness.
It's better because of network effects. More than 90 percent of the world uses it. They benefit from a consistent lexicon when communicating about measurements.
Nobody will ever convince anyone else that a centimeter is better or worse than an inch. Or a pound vs. a kilogram. It's a ridiculous discussion to have.
When the primary benefit of a choice is consistency, the outliers will always be able to argue that their system works for themselves. Which, unfortunately, misses the point.
Nobody will ever convince anyone else that a centimeter is better or worse than an inch. Or a pound vs. a kilogram. It's a ridiculous discussion to have.
When the primary benefit of a choice is consistency, the outliers will always be able to argue that their system works for themselves. Which, unfortunately, misses the point.
> the outliers will always be able to argue that their system
Isn't that exactly the point. Why must people to adapt to the system, rather than have the system adapt to the people?
Metric system is a technocratic system. It has technocratic benefits. I value that a lot less than people, who, oh what a coincidence!, are already on the metric system.
Isn't that exactly the point. Why must people to adapt to the system, rather than have the system adapt to the people?
Metric system is a technocratic system. It has technocratic benefits. I value that a lot less than people, who, oh what a coincidence!, are already on the metric system.
> But I find day2day use of measurements in inch/ft, e.g. in home renovation and architecture, way way easier than metric system.
I’m gonna make an educated guess that you grew up using imperial units. There’s nothing more “natural” to imperial units. An inch is as arbitrary as a centimeter and a foot as arbitrary as a meter. You can eyeball them all equally accurately, but the imperials are gonna kick your ass when you’re converting.
I’m gonna make an educated guess that you grew up using imperial units. There’s nothing more “natural” to imperial units. An inch is as arbitrary as a centimeter and a foot as arbitrary as a meter. You can eyeball them all equally accurately, but the imperials are gonna kick your ass when you’re converting.
How is measuring something in 3 1/16" better than 8mm? Conversely, how is that not worse?
You can measure from 1nm to 1Em using a simple decimal scale, while with imperial you have to handle conversion from twip to inches to foot to yard to mile to league, all using different scales.
You can measure from 1nm to 1Em using a simple decimal scale, while with imperial you have to handle conversion from twip to inches to foot to yard to mile to league, all using different scales.
Er, they are aware that the inch, foot etc were not invented in the US right?
Many americans seem unaware of many things that happened before 1776. How many americans even know that the constitution wasn't made until many years later, how many even know the articles of confederation exist, or the politics of 1600s colonies? Many americans seem to think the declaration of independence is legally binding.
We are an incredibly stupid country, because many of us actively devalue education, or otherwise denigrate people who learn. The requirements for teaching and education varies wildly state to state, including many states that basically have NO requirements for teachers, and we have actual, real, paper textbooks purchased by southern school systems that teach slavery as "not that bad"
We are an incredibly stupid country, because many of us actively devalue education, or otherwise denigrate people who learn. The requirements for teaching and education varies wildly state to state, including many states that basically have NO requirements for teachers, and we have actual, real, paper textbooks purchased by southern school systems that teach slavery as "not that bad"
The US mile is different from the UK mile and US gallons are sufficiently different from UK gallons. Yes, our measurement system is almost entirely homegrown at this point.
The UK had multiple incompatible measures with the same name. The 'imperial' measures were the result of a standardisation of these measures.
The US gallon is the same as the now-defunct English 'wine gallon'. The US mile was similarly the same as the UK statute mile, until it was indirectly redefined in terms of the metric metre in 1893. So at least the two examples given are not homegrown.
The US gallon is the same as the now-defunct English 'wine gallon'. The US mile was similarly the same as the UK statute mile, until it was indirectly redefined in terms of the metric metre in 1893. So at least the two examples given are not homegrown.
I wish the pub down the street served UK pints :(
"It's always been that way" is similar to "it was invented here" in that regard. Besides, the imperial units had local versions and some still do. There are AFAIK no US inches and yards, but US gallons and US pints.
You might be surprised at how many Americans think that Jesus spoke English.
Source: am American.
Source: am American.
If Jesus exists, he probably can speak English. I'm sure that's not one of his limitations.
Trusting us Americans to know history? Not a chance.
[deleted]
I think it is a tough sell that there would actually be real value out of changing a bunch of road signage and recipe books to metric, and being a stickler about telling people to weigh themselves in kgs instead of lbs for their weight loss programs, etc. It's basically purely aesthetics. I don't think it is politically conservative to say that there's no actual productivity or social gain from expending time and energy 'moving' to these things in everyday contexts.
In scenarios where metric is actually needed or appropriate nobody has any trouble using metric. Every kid has learned it in school for decades.
In scenarios where metric is actually needed or appropriate nobody has any trouble using metric. Every kid has learned it in school for decades.
We lost the Mars Climate Orbiter in 1999 because Lockheed Martin supplied a part that output results in pound-seconds and then that number was fed in to a NASA part that interpreted it as Newton-seconds.[1] Having US engineers speak a different language than all of the other engineers in the world imposes real, non-negligible costs for data checking and risks of failure for any project that might interact with non-US-centered expectations.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter#Cause_of_...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter#Cause_of_...
I see that as an organizational issue within that company and its project management rather than a political issue. US engineers certainly all know how to use and speak metric. I actually promise you that you won't be able find one who doesn't.
> In scenarios where metric is actually needed or appropriate nobody has any trouble using metric
This is the key point. What people asking this question often miss is that the US is actually a dual system country. Metric is quite common anywhere it is valuable to use! So the places it isn't used are mostly the places it isn't so useful, or at least where the transition cost is very high.
This is the key point. What people asking this question often miss is that the US is actually a dual system country. Metric is quite common anywhere it is valuable to use! So the places it isn't used are mostly the places it isn't so useful, or at least where the transition cost is very high.
It really doesn't seem political as you present it, along party lines. No one wants to incur the cost of switching, which would be increased errors and material waste. The politicans who change it will be associated with the one time increase in errors and confusion. The benefits are reaped slowly over time (in the form of fewer conversions), so no one can really claim all the credit at once.
It's also not political insofar as whether we use metric or imperial de facto depends on the decisions of many thousands of manufacturers and suppliers, not the government. Are they going to outlaw all the imperial measuring tapes, or institute a buy back program?
It's also not political insofar as whether we use metric or imperial de facto depends on the decisions of many thousands of manufacturers and suppliers, not the government. Are they going to outlaw all the imperial measuring tapes, or institute a buy back program?
Right leaning folks tend to have nationalistic (or at least Anglo-centric) talking points when it comes to the switch. Just in the conversations I've had, people feel like they'd be losing some piece of American culture if we switched. It's a thing.
How can this be strange? I am saying this as a European.
It’s simply customs. And the system works. Why change?
It’s similar like asking why European football clubs wouldn’t want to change to the draft system of the US leagues.
European soccer is commercialized to a degree which is unthinkable for Americans, who are commonly regarded as the bigger capitalists…
It’s simply customs. And the system works. Why change?
It’s similar like asking why European football clubs wouldn’t want to change to the draft system of the US leagues.
European soccer is commercialized to a degree which is unthinkable for Americans, who are commonly regarded as the bigger capitalists…
The better question to ask is what is the benefit? For everyday usage by regular people, it's not clear to me that metric is superior if you didn't grow up with one or the other, hence the lack of push for a change.
In fact, I've seen the argument made that feet, inches, miles, cups, teaspoon, Fahrenheit, etc are superior to meters, centimeters, km, mL, Celsius, etc for everyday use. As I've seen it presented, this argument contends that centimeters are too small, while meters are too large for many common things you want to measure, such as the height of a person. Likewise cups and teaspoons are actual objects that you could visualize and get a general sense of the amount without even knowing the actual measurement. Same kind of thing for Celsius: the most common usage of temperature measurement for the average person is air temperature. For the set of air temperatures commonly experienced on Earth, Fahrenheit provides more precision.
In fact, I've seen the argument made that feet, inches, miles, cups, teaspoon, Fahrenheit, etc are superior to meters, centimeters, km, mL, Celsius, etc for everyday use. As I've seen it presented, this argument contends that centimeters are too small, while meters are too large for many common things you want to measure, such as the height of a person. Likewise cups and teaspoons are actual objects that you could visualize and get a general sense of the amount without even knowing the actual measurement. Same kind of thing for Celsius: the most common usage of temperature measurement for the average person is air temperature. For the set of air temperatures commonly experienced on Earth, Fahrenheit provides more precision.
Although downvoted, this is the right response. Its not harder for the US to move to metric than it was for any other large country. The change hasn't happened because there isn't utility in using metric, and a lot of cost.
Of course, there are clear examples when metric is both easy an intuitive. In everyday usage there are many cases where Imperial is beneficial (cooking -- metric is poor for individual servings, height and weight metric is inefficient as the modal height starts with the same digit, temperature requires more digits).
Of course, there are clear examples when metric is both easy an intuitive. In everyday usage there are many cases where Imperial is beneficial (cooking -- metric is poor for individual servings, height and weight metric is inefficient as the modal height starts with the same digit, temperature requires more digits).