this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
554 points (98.8% liked)

xkcd

8768 readers
155 users here now

A community for a webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

In my new scale, °X, 0 is Earths' record lowest surface temperature, 50 is the global average, and 100 is the record highest, with a linear scale between each point and adjustment every year as needed.

https://explainxkcd.com/3001/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] thepreciousboar@lemm.ee 26 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Technically they arr arbitrary yes, but sometimes some arbitrary makes more sense than others. Why is fahrenheit 0 at -32°C? Accordinfmg to wikipedia he chose 0°F as the melting point of water and ammonium chloride (what percentage of solution?) and the highest was initially "the average of the hottest temperature of a healthy man". Do you see why this feels more arbitrady then " the melting and boiling point of water at 101.300 Pa"? Not only these points are constant and measurable, but water is such ubiqutous in human life that it feels at least less arbitrary as a reference point.

Historically, it was ok. Now it just doesn't make much sense, sincd we tried (and mostly succeded) to standardize measurements units for centuries (and make them all base 10)

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I don’t really use the Fahrenheit scale for anything, but when I bump into it, I prefer to think of those values as: 0°F is a cold winter and 100°F is a hot summer weather. Makes sense for the human experience, which makes it a very practical unit. The original definition was more technical than that, but it was also severely limited by the technology at the time, so it had some flaws.

You also have to look at these units in the proper historical context. Measurements were a complete mess, so having at least something that sort of makes some sense and is somewhat repeatable, is a clear improvement. Both, Fahrenheit and Celcius scales totally addressed those concerns, and that makes them both good enough. Absolute zero and plank temperature weren’t even known back then, so what can you expect.

When it comes to using these units in serious scientific and engineering applications, you run into problems, but the kelvin scale addresses those pretty well. It’s not exactly elegant, but at least it’s functional. Because of historical baggage, we’re pretty much stuck with these units, but it could be worse.

[–] thepreciousboar@lemm.ee 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I agree, historically they make sense, but times have evolved and I honestlt believe certain things should belong to the past, just like we abandoned 12 base monetary and measurement systems, except for a single place on earth that just ignores what everyone else does and goes their own way.

In a global world, we should unite things instead of dividing for ideological/political reasons. Still, my own is an ideological reason why the imperial system should disappear, but there are pratical issues it causes, espeically when used internationally in industrial and scientific fields, which is very common.

[–] helloworld55@lemm.ee 4 points 2 weeks ago

I mean the imperial system has it's niche uses too. Fractional measurements are helpful if you're doing multiple of something and you don't want to calculate. What if you have 16 boards and you need to lay them out across 19 feet, what's the width for each board and gap? Well its 19/16 or 1-3/16. And you could say your tolerance is ±1/16. Versus a decimal system, you need to hit 1.1875, with a ±0.0625 tolerance. Yeah no, imperial is better in that case.

Bur imperial does have it's pains, especially once you start working with anything that isn't a multiple of 2. Just wanted to point out it does have some uses.

[–] slouching_employer@lemmy.one 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I think a large portion of it is that governments/institutions/whatever don’t want to pay the large amount of money it would take to replace all signage/software/etc.

The classic “high short term costs for long term benefits” vs. “no (direct monetary) short term costs for ‘future me’ problems”.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago

I think it’s about time we switched to using seconds as the universal time unit. I really hate the messy base 60 conversions we inherited from the Babylonians. Also, month is such a broken unit, and it just makes many calculations unnecessarily complicated.

[–] pressanykeynow@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

0°F is a cold winter and 100°F is a hot summer

Makes sense for some specific location. But in general sense 0°F is not cold and 100°F is not hot.

[–] joel_feila@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

For me 0 F would be civilization ending cold that i have been only seen once.

[–] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

0 is an extremely cold winter. Like you're going to die very quickly if you're outside without extreme weather gear.

Where I'm at, mid east coast, we only have a few days each winter get below 20, which is already hellishly cold.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 weeks ago

0 is an extremely cold winter

Lol

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

In the Middle East, the winters are brutally cold and the locals suffer. Tourists from colder regions come there to enjoy their winter vacation in December or January, because it’s paradoxically quite warm. They only pack their normal spring clothes because it isn’t really that cold in their opinion. You know, a thin coat, maybe a thin summer beanie. You’ll probably be ok without any mittens. Also, you can wear normal shoes which is nice.

Extreme weather gear is considered just normal winter clothes in some parts of the world.