Best temperature scale?

[streetfighter 2]

True, but in daily use it is used as a weight measure. Probably most people are not aware that weight is that weight = mass * 9.81 (using metrics here, and basing the formula on the wikipedia page on gravity combined with the little bit (mass and gravity related) I remember from secondary school, so there may be errors in the calculation given).

Here on Earth, weight and mass are intechangable. Mass only becomes relevant when you leave Earth. For most people, the difference means nothing.

I'm not trying to fork the conversation guys.

I was attempting to support my argument that scientific rigor demands certain conventions, whereas social reality makes such effort irrelevant. For instance it's common (I'm guessing ) for young physics students to make this mistake:

[1] M = 643(lb)
[2] A = 32.2(ft/s^2)
[3] F = MA = 643(lb) * 32.2(ft/s^2) = 20,704.6(lb) = 9,391.4(kg)
[4] Therefore the force exerted is 9,391(kg).

Obviously kilograms aren't a force, but the problem is that (lb) is being used as both a weight and a mass in line [3]. Adding to the confusion is that if you consider the quantity defined as (M) to be a standard earth pound (lb) then the resulting force in line [3] is in a unit called a poundal . . . All this mucking about becomes immensely confusing which is why we have SI units.

The whole point of this is just to say that the difference between Celsius and Fahrenheit is superficial and immensely arbitrary but we often use Celsius/Kelvin for convenience in scientific calculations. (In other words: there is no "best" temperature scale and this topic is not science.)

 

[The_Ish]

Its a bit like arguing between miles and kilometres, isnt it? I grew up in a Celsius environment, so its Celsius, along with kilometres. I the world to migrate to Celsius and miles just like we migrated away from vacuum tubes (in my humble opinion).

I'm not being biased.


1mm X 10 = 1 cm X 10 = 1 dm X 10 = 1m etc..

As for imperial..
You got 12 inches on 1 foot, 3ft on one yard and 1760 yards per mile..
HOW DOES IT MAKE SENSE?!

A little joke if i may, hope i don't step on anybody's toes..
Does it make sense that joke where "all Americans are stupid".

No, i disagree. In fact, i firmly believe those who actually understand the imperial system goes to a fancy college and work at NASA, where as those who don't go to community college and work at McDonald's ^^

Thank you, thank you my mic time is up!

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Obviously kilograms aren't a force, but the problem is that (lb) is being used as both a weight and a mass in line [3]. Adding to the confusion is that if you consider the quantity defined as (M) to be a standard earth pound (lb) then the resulting force in line [3] is in a unit called a poundal . . . All this mucking about becomes immensely confusing which is why we have SI units.

Uh, your math just sucks (improper units/conversions), no offense. When you multiply pounds by feet per second squared, you don't get pounds, you get poundals. Poundals is the imperial equivilent of newtons (both are measures of force).

F=ma
F = 643 lb * 32.2 ft/s²
F = 20,704.6 pdl

1 pdl = 1 (lb*ft)/s²

20,704.6 pdl = 0.138254954376 N / 1 pdl = 2862.5135283733296 N

Kilograms has nothing to do with this unless the units are converted to metric before multiplying.

Weight is synonymous with mass on Earth. The difference only becomes relevant when the pull of gravity is not equal to that of Earth's.

1mm X 10 = 1 cm X 10 = 1 dm X 10 = 1m etc..

As for imperial..
You got 12 inches on 1 foot, 3ft on one yard and 1760 yards per mile..
HOW DOES IT MAKE SENSE?!

They...make...equal...sense...

The only difference is convinence and that is relative to the circumstances.

 

[streetfighter 2]

Uh, your math just sucks (improper units/conversions), no offense. When you multiply pounds by feet per second squared, you don't get pounds, you get poundals. Poundals is the imperial equivilent of newtons (both are measures of force).

F=ma
F = 643 lb * 32.2 ft/s²
F = 20,704.6 pdl

1 pdl = 1 (lb*ft)/s²

20,704.6 pdl = 0.138254954376 N / 1 pdl = 2862.5135283733296 N

Kilograms has nothing to do with this unless the units are converted to metric before multiplying.

Weight is synonymous with mass on Earth. The difference only becomes relevant when the pull of gravity is not equal to that of Earth's.



They...make...equal...sense...

You have failed in seeing that I was showing an example of a bad physics mistake. Thus illustrating the importance of using SI units in calculations . . . Please learn to read next time.

Since my ICs were never properly declared then the example's variables are up for grabs essentially.

When I'm using the imperial system I use slugs for mass and then I get a pound as a force. But I could have used lbs for the entire thing if I corrected line [3] to use, F = m·a/g.

That "mistake" is made no matter the system of units used. SI, metric, imperial, sticks 'n stones doesn't matter. Units must always be preserved if they are given.

Yes, this is clearly why all scientific math is done in a mixture of both imperial and metric. No problem has ever arisen from that conflict.

Seriously, you hate SI now too? You hated HDMI in the last thread and crapped there. What did I do to make you so upset at me?

It sounds like you're intentionally taking my writing out of context to troll me. You have succeeded (again).

Hell, you even restated what I wrote...

When you multiply pounds by feet per second squared, you don't get pounds, you get poundals. Poundals is the imperial equivilent of newtons (both are measures of force).

Adding to the confusion is that if you consider the quantity defined as (M) to be a standard earth pound (lb) then the resulting force in line [3] is in a unit called a poundal

In the English system there are both poundals and pound-force. Either is fine provided you are consistent.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

That "mistake" is made no matter the system of units used. SI, metric, imperial, sticks 'n stones doesn't matter. Units must always be preserved if they are given.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Yes, this is clearly why all scientific math is done in a mixture of both imperial and metric. No problem has ever arisen from that conflict.

If you know what you're doing, they'll always yield the same answer within the margin of error of rounding due to the conversions.

Seriously, you hate SI now too?

Did I say I did? As I stated many times in this thread, I use what's best for the situation. I can't say I've ever had much use for liter, meter, nor gram but Celsius is sometimes useful (like computer temps).

 

[streetfighter 2]

If you know what you're doing, they'll always yield the same answer within the margin of error of rounding due to the conversions.

http://articles.cnn.com/1999-09-30/...iter-spacecraft-team-metric-system?_s=PM:TECH

No one knows what they're doing all of the time. We're human and we make mistakes so it's best to be consistent and use units of force and mass that are distinct in name. Also if you'd like your paper to be reviewed by your colleague in Turkey then you better use SI because he/she is gonna look at the imperial units and say, "ne cehennem" ("what the hell").

When you're doing several pages of calculations with a huge sheet of parameters it pays you to convert all of them into one system, probably SI, so you can reduce the probability of POE.

I can't say I've ever had much use for liter, meter, nor gram but Celsius is sometimes useful (like computer temps).

Well that makes one of us. Now I understand why this topic makes you so feisty. Should I say that I already mentioned this . . .

scientific rigor demands certain conventions, whereas social reality makes such effort irrelevant

 

[FordGT90Concept]

So, Lockheed screwed up on units. I don't see how that is relevant. You can screw up just as bad by using millimeter when it is supposed to be in centimeters. Again, it doesn't matter as long as it is done right. They're different means of describing the same thing. It's like calling a "1," "one."

 

[streetfighter 2]

So, Lockheed screwed up on units. I don't see how that is relevant. You can screw up just as bad by using millimeter when it is supposed to be in centimeters. Again, it doesn't matter as long as it is done right. They're different means of describing the same thing. It's like calling a "1," "one."

Yes well clearly you have proved irrefutably that an international standard system of units is pointless, doesn't avoid confusion, and all the people who use it are just stupid.

Congratulations Ford.

I'm going to use rods and hogshead for measuring my bushels and stones from now on. Then submit a paper to a journal for review that uses those insane measures just to see how many friends it earns me. You're the man Ford!

I'll say it again:

scientific rigor demands certain conventions, whereas social reality makes such effort irrelevant

You're not in any scientific discipline, so the units don't matter to you. They don't matter to most people either; that's the whole point.
More aptly stated:

The temperature scale doesn't matter, unless you're doing scientific calculations, in which case Celsius or Kelvin are preferred due to international standards (SI).

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Lockheed Martin is the company that brought you the SR-71, F-117, and F-22. It is likely all those aircraft were created using English measurements. All three of them were thee most advanced aircraft for their day and no one, anywhere, on Earth could rival them. Do the units used matter as long as they accurately describe what they are measuring? No. End of conversation.

 

[streetfighter 2]

Lockheed Martin is the company that brought you the SR-71, F-117, and F-22. It is likely all those aircraft were created using English measurements. All three of them were thee most advanced aircraft for their day and no one, anywhere, on Earth could rival them.

Though all of those planes are engineering achievements they were never meant to provide research results to the scientific community. Why were scientific papers written in Latin? It's the same idea.

Also I disagree with your qualifier, "it's likely".

EDIT: After looking it appears they may have used United States customary units which clearly define a pound as a mass which avoids the confusion of pound-force vs pound-mass. The example I gave did not state such a system of units and therefore was open to interpretation (which is why I made that example).

Do the units used matter as long as they accurately describe what they are measuring? No. End of conversation.

I never indicated otherwise. I said . . . for the umpteenth time . . .

The temperature scale doesn't matter, unless you're doing scientific calculations, in which case Celsius or Kelvin are preferred due to international standards (SI).

scientific rigor demands certain conventions, whereas social reality makes such effort irrelevant

You are not conversing or even having a rational debate, you're simply arguing about nothing . . .