Metric vs. Imperial!

[Duke87 1,070]

Also, just to point out: kilograms is not a measure of weight, it is a measure of mass. Weight (which is really just the force pulling you down due to gravity) is measured, like all other forces, in Newtons.

As such, a 200 lb man would properly express his weight in metric as 890 N, not 91 kg. That's his mass. The two are not the same thing. Your weight would change if you went to the moon, or to any other extraterrestrial body. Your mass would not. The common "conversion factor" of 1 kg=2.2 lb only works on Earth, where g=9.8 m/s². Same goes for any scale which gives a readout in grams or kilograms. It's dependent on the acceleration due to gravity being constant. If it gives a readout in Newtons, however, then it's valid no matter where you take it.

[yoshikoroyimara 5]

Its not really difficult, but would be so much easier if every country used the same system.quote>

Heck yeah! Even though I'm American...I would sure have to say that what you said was correct. The metric system is actually more dominant...unfortunately, America is just too stubborn to adopt it...the last time we tried it failed mainly because it the change was too abruptly. If the change to the metric system was slow, starting with the current young generation (meaning I would say third graders) it might work within half a century. Young students could be taught both, until the imperial units are obsolete...

...imagine that! No more human errors caused by wrong labels of the metric or imperial system...people won't get confused (especially people learning English) between a foot vs. foot, yard vs. yard...or the "lbs." for "pounds"...

...I mean...we already converted the track field and I think pools...so why not everything...make the change slow and gradual...and it should work out well

...just curious...how did we get "lbs."

[hym 358]

Young students could be taught both, until the imperial units are obsolete...quote>

I don't know about you, but I was taught both, along with millions others. I don't see it having changed much so far, since most favor the current system.

[hamsterTK 93]

Im sure most if not all people in the US were taught in school how the metric system works, ie 1000 meters to a kilometer, etc. its not complicated hence why it's used in the first place.

As I said earlier I think it's about what people are used to

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: hamsterTK Im sure most if not all people in the US were taught in school how the metric system works, ie 1000 meters to a kilometer, etc. its not complicated hence why it's used in the first place. quote>

Well, we were taught about it, but we were not taught to use it. I remember the discussion basically concluding with "...and that's how the metric system works. We don't use it all that much in this country, but it's still good to know." The teacher even went on about how the metric system was so much easier and made so much more sense, but that we nevertheless haven't changed to it.

So long as you only expect that kids know about it and don't expect they use it, the transition will never happen. I was expected to know what a meter was, but it was perfectly acceptable for me to say that something was X feet long. In fact, it was expected. It I was to say something was X/3.28 meters long, I'd get looked at funny- if not by the teacher by the other kids. Bringing about a transition would require reversing that.

In the end, though, there's really know harm in using US customary units, so long as you're aware of what the metric units are and what the conversion factors are.

....trouble is, a lot of people in this country can't be bothered to do math because they're stupid, because it's uncool and boring, or some combination of the two. You get "10 kilometers? Uhhh.... how many miles is that?" out of people, as if dividing by 1.609 is really that complicated. Even arithmetic scares people. Pitiful.

[Jasoncw 11,949]

I don't know about you Duke, but at my school we were taught and used the metric system in all science classes through all of school. Off the top of my head, science class is the only class that deals with a lot of measurements too.

[toxicpiano 125]

Originally posted by: Jasoncw I don't know about you Duke, but at my school we were taught and used the metric system in all science classes through all of school. Off the top of my head, science class is the only class that deals with a lot of measurements too.quote>

What about maths

[Jasoncw 11,949]

We never used measurements in math, just unitless numbers.

Some of the story problems would have situations involving measurements, and they used either depending on the book I think.

[Rymac91 15]

In word problems, they would use measurements and for finding the area or perimeter of a incredibly messed up room(how often are you going to measure a room with 4 walls, no right angles and all unequal to each other?)...the irony is that they want the imperial answer in decimals...if you give a answer with fractions, they usually give your partial credit because it's not the "calculator" answer.

I don't think converting will be that hard in 10 years considering how many things are double labeled as it is. And most things have to be double labeled. I think if we are to ever actually going to switch, the first thing to do is to completely double label everything, including signs, tempetures, etc. Then slowly switch things over, such as temperatures. Then switch something else, such as measurements and weights...then make metric the standard, when you get to that point you can slowly eliminate the other measurements.

As for cars, well...

Cars with digital readouts can already switch back and forth, the civic and the prius both can do this by pushing a button on the dashboard.

As for other cars, I've haven't seen any cars without double labeling on the dashboard with the exception of some really old cars.

One question is, how would fuel economy be done in the united states if metric? Most countries use L/100km...but we use MPG, it'd make logical sence for us to use km/L

a car that gets 48MPG gets 4.9L/100km or 20km/L.

[belfastuniguy 18]

One question is, how would fuel economy be done in the united states if metric?quote>

Like the UK you use Miles for distance. It is highly unlikely the UK will change given the cost involved in changing every single road sign across the United Kingdom. Same would go for the United States.

[jj88 24]

Yeah also no one in the UK says that they are going x number of kilometres to somewhere. And most people don't say what they (or know) what they weigh in kilograms

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Jasoncw I don't know about you Duke, but at my school we were taught and used the metric system in all science classes through all of school. Off the top of my head, science class is the only class that deals with a lot of measurements too.quote>

That particular experience I mentioned was from elementary school. You don;t deal with numbers and measurements in elementary school science.... and yes, come high school, metric was the only system we used in science classes. But by the time you're old enough to be in high school, you're also too old to easily be able to think in terms of a new system you're just then being taught to use. You need to make 5 year olds start using meters instead of feet, not 15 year olds.

The fun part is that now in college with engineering, it's got a lot of science to it, but we use US customary units a lot. In fact, in some areas we use them exclusively. For instance, in Steel Design- because the AISC Steel Construction Manual, the actual book people use in design offices and that we're using, doesn't exist in metric.

'Twas a bit of a shocker in freshman physics to hear this exchange:

Professor: Anyone know what the acceleration due to gravity is?

Some student: 9.8, right?

Professor: In metric, yes. Or in English* units it's 32.2 feet per second squared.

"Wait, people actually do this stuff in US Customary units?"

And yes, they do.

*his word. I would have said "US customary", since that's more technically correct.

[yoshikoroyimara 5]

Jasoncw...

how about driving tests? of course it is used in science...people should learn the approximate conversion between mph to kph

[krbe 193]

Though it's easy to say that it's 1.6, it's even easier just to learn the appropriate speeds, and standarise them. In European countries there are generally three speed limits, with different caps again depending on the condition. Say it's 50 (almost all countries) for urban areas, 80 on the highway and 130 on the motorway: Then you need to know that you'll drive 30 everywhere there are a lot of houses, 50 on the open road and 80 on the motorway. Then all you have to do is to add or subtract 6 or 12 mph to every limt which is off 10 or 20 kmh (for example if you hit a curvy road with a 70 kmh limit, you know that you'll have to drive 42-43 mph).

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: yoshikoroyimara Jasoncw...

how about driving tests? of course it is used in science...people should learn the approximate conversion between mph to kphquote>

1.609 kilometers to the mile, 0.621 miles to the kilometer. I had those memorized when I was like 10 years old.... Then again, I'm weird like that. The vast majority of people couldn't tell you those numbers off the top of their head.

Of course, given that the proper SI unit is meters per second, I daresay it should be more useful to know that 1 mph=0.447 m/s and 1 m/s=2.237 mph... but countries that use metric do it wrong and have this "kilometers per hour" crap going. Oy.

Worth noting: Since 1 inch is exactly 2.54 centimeters, 1 mile is exactly 1.609344 meters. The inverse factor is a repeating decimal, but it's more precisely about 0.621371192237333969617434184332 miles in a kilometer. And, similarly, 1 mph is exactly 0.44704 m/s, with the inverse being approximately 2.2369362920544022906227630637079  mph in 1 m/s. Three decimal places is more than enough accuracy for everyday conversions, though, so don't concern yourself with those.

[krbe 193]

We use km/h because it a) looks nicer with 60 inside a red ring than 16 2/3, and b) it was used long before it was called "SI". Also, it's easier picturing how far 60 kilometre is, both when judging your own speed and how far you're going to go. A bit like thoe who still cling on to the mile: Easy to picture.