White House: Use Metric If You Want, We Don't Care 1145
Earlier this year we discussed a petition on the White House's 'We The People' site asking the administration to adopt the metric system as the standard system of measurement in the U.S. Today, the administration issued a disappointing response. Simply put: they're not going to do anything about it. They frame their response as a matter of preserving a citizen's choice to adopt whatever measurement system he wants. Quoting Patrick D. Gallagher of the National Institute of Standards and Technology:
"... contrary to what many people may think, the U.S. uses the metric system now to define all basic units used in commerce and trade. At the same time, if the metric system and U.S. customary system are languages of measurement, then the United States is truly a bilingual nation. ... Ultimately, the use of metric in this country is a choice and we would encourage Americans to continue to make the best choice for themselves and for the purpose at hand and to continue to learn how to move seamlessly between both systems. In our voluntary system, it is the consumers who have the power to make this choice. So if you like, "speak" metric at home by setting your digital scales to kilograms and your thermometers to Celsius. Cook in metric with liters and grams and set your GPS to kilometers. ... So choose to live your life in metric if you want, and thank you for signing on."
Start here (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Start here (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Start here (Score:5, Insightful)
As I recall, it was required nation-wide during the late 70s. Then Reagan happened.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Insightful)
Reagan said it was a waste of money, so the government spent a lot of money to take the signs down again.
Re: metrication is nobody's business (Score:4, Insightful)
Mandating for industry would be an economic boon, since we'd be on the same standardized system as the entire world, and outer space. Keeping an isolationist perspective is damaging.
Re:Start here (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Start here (Score:5, Funny)
All you have to do is make the speed limit either 55mph or 100km/h (driver's choice...)
Pretty soon you'll have most of America swearing they were driving at 100km/h.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Insightful)
"55 MPH" seems fine to me. I don't have a problem with adding KPH readings to the signs, but if they want to claim that they are truly "bilingual" with measurements, then having both MPH and KPH would make the most sense...
Re:Start here (Score:5, Informative)
When Canada was switching to metric, dual signage was common. The km/h value was shown first, and the mph was shown in a smaller (but still quite readable) font below it. Usage of "km/h" or "mph" was explicit, to ensure there was no ambiguity.
This transition period lasted for quite some time, and after a while, the signs were ultimately replaced with speed limits listing strictly in km/h (and often the "km/h" was no longer present as well).
Re:Start here (Score:5, Informative)
You introduce a new system in a way that it doesn't upset the older generation while giving the younger generation a chance to get used to it. Then you wait for the older generation to die off. Then you abandon the old system. So introduce signage in both metric and English. Wait a generation or two until the bulk of the population is used to both systems. Then you phase out the English system.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Informative)
They didn't wait a generation.... the conversion started in Canada, in earnest, in about 1971, and was completed over the course of about 10 years.
Oddly enough, about 5 years after the decade-long process of Canada's conversion to Metric was completed, our then-prime minister ended up abolishing the regulations that really enabled the conversion to happen in the first place. Switching back, since it was not actually legislated any more, was simply too inconvenient, and Canada remained on the metric system ever since.
Re:Start here (Score:4, Interesting)
Unfortunately, in America, those without digital dashboards have the k/ph text in a much smaller font and on a much smaller scale making precision nearly impossible or, at best, difficult. Mandating the reverse would be a good idea but the number of old cars on the road means that's still a problem. It isn't an insurmountable problem but a problem nonetheless. I still, of course, support a complete switch to metric and (oddly enough, I am usually very opposed to any additional legislation with few exceptions, this being one of them) wouldn't mind it being federally mandated.
A part of me thinks it should be mandated just so I can hear the various sides howl like banshees at each other. Did I mention that I'm easily amused? My countrymen are straight up retarded for the most part and, unfortunately, that is bipartisan.
Anyhow, I think the simplest means of advocating the metric unit of measurement is this:
Using just your head, what is 16.2% of a meter?
Using just your head, what is 16.2% of a yard?
Simpler means fewer chances to have errors. As an American I can say, with complete certainty, that we need simplicity here.
Re:English? (Score:5, Informative)
The second worst thing about non-metric systems is that the measure for a pound, a gallon, a foot, etc is not actually standardized between countries. Calling the US measurements "english" is a bit wrong, as an imperial gallon and a US gallon are two different amounts.
The worst thing obviously being insane conversions between different units of distance, volume, weight, etc.
We count/do maths in base 10. We have 10 digits. Our measurement system should reflect that. The rest of the world, and the scientific community get it.
Re:Start here (Score:4, Informative)
"55 MPH" seems fine to me. I don't have a problem with adding KPH readings to the signs, but if they want to claim that they are truly "bilingual" with measurements, then having both MPH and KPH would make the most sense...
They did that in Florida. People kept stealing the signs.
Then they raised the speed limit and dropped the metric numbers.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Funny)
They did that in Florida. People kept stealing the signs.
You might be a redneck if, your unit conversion chart is made of empty food boxes and stolen street signs...
Re:Start here (Score:5, Funny)
That's funny. Also, don't forget drugs. Drugs have been teaching our kids the metric scale for quite some time.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Funny)
meters per second or nothing! :P
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, it should be in km/s, as h isn't SI.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Funny)
it should be in km/s
I can see the speed limit signs now: 1.94E-3 km/s.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Informative)
Kilometer means 1000 meters. Milli-, nano-, kilo-, terra- are ways to conveniently denote powers of ten. It's a system of prefixes, and yes, it is defined in the metric system.
Si is a system of units. Abbreviation from SystÃme international des unités (I may be missing an 'e' or an accent, somewhere)
The two are systems, both are quite French, but their origins are about a century apart, if I am not mistaken.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Funny)
Don't worry, so is Slashcode.
Re: (Score:3)
It depends on how strict you are being: "Most of mankind has used the day and its non-decimal subdivisions as a basis of time ... The catalogued units are minute, hour, day..." [wikipedia.org].
So, GGP made a point, GP tried to get pedantic, you upped his pedantry, and now I've upped yours. We are approaching the asymptotic limit of pedantry.
Re:Start here (Score:4, Funny)
I'd suggest just base36-formatting the epoch (unix) time. It's about mnbzcn when I'm writing this.
Re:Start here (Score:4, Insightful)
Time is just made-up numbers on a made-up scale. Use GMT if you want. The rest of the world won't, because I like lunch at noon and dinner in the afternoon, not lunch at 7am and dinner at noon.
So if you like to eat lunch at noon, I take it you eat it at 1 PM when DST is in effect?
Re:Start here (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Try to convert 100km/h to mph while the cop is just behind you, and the driving instructor next you, and you have to make the decision in a few seconds, meaning calculation from one system to another, and taking care of the passing by cars, and the good looking chicken crossing the street, and the singing birds, and...and....
Every car I've owned in the past 10 years has had both km/h and mph markings on the speedometer - though they've all been german and/or Japanese cars.
Do some cars only show mph?
Anyone that runs 10K races will be able to do the conversion quite easily, 10 km=6.2 mi so 100km/hr = 62mph
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Start here (Score:4, Insightful)
As parent said, lots of different speed limits. Also in rural areas there are road signs like
"Last gas for 75 miles"
"Next rest area 43 miles"
"Road work begins in 33 miles. Trucks and cars with trailers must use alternate route 10 miles ahead. No gas stations on alternate route for 76 miles"
These are particularly meaningful in parts of Eastern Oregon, Idaho, Montana, etc, where there is nothing between gas stations and rest areas but sage brush, a few jack rabbits, and even fewer coyotes.
I heard tell of a billboard in the Mojave Desert that has an arrow pointing at the dirt under it and reads "Last shade for 150 miles." But that might be just crazy California talk.
We used to have those. (Score:4, Insightful)
Be we decided that provinciality was a smaller sacrifice than the cost of the paint.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Informative)
They did that once, ISTR the mileage (kilometerage?) sign on I-15 between Blackfoot and Pocatello, Idaho being in both Miles and Kilometers in about '75-'77ish (I was a bit young at the time), but since it was during the Carter administration, of course it HAD to be undone because fuck Democrats. I can't remember exactly when I-15 signs were changed over to strictly miles, but I think it was the late eighties. So until we get over this two-party backbiting festival in DC, it does us no good to even try to do good things.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Insightful)
I really don't think measurements are a political party thing. There's no major religious argument in favor of it (keword: major) akin to say evolution vs creationism, and there's no party line that we have to use X system. It's just that average joe's prefer things a certain way.
Ever since I was in the Army, I've always written my dates as 12-FEB-09, and sometimes when I do so, somebody gives me shit because I don't use the same date format that "everybody else" uses, and it is never a conservative or liberal thing. I could see maybe if I wrote 12/02/09, which would easily be interpreted as either december 9th or february 12th, but I like that date format for the same reason that the Army uses it as standard: There is no ambiguity. No matter what day of the month it is, the date/month is obvious, but people still complain to me about it anyways.
Likewise, I could see why they'd complain even more about measurements. It's hard to mentally picture units that you aren't used to thinking in without doing a manual conversion.
And FFS I'm sick of this constant political divisiveness just for the sake of political divisiveness. Stop pointing fingers at the "other side" just because something doesn't go your way. If you stop to look for a second, you'll often find that members of the "other side" agree with you on more things than you realize.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Insightful)
Ever since I was in the Army, I've always written my dates as 12-FEB-09, and sometimes when I do so, somebody gives me shit because I don't use the same date format that "everybody else" uses, and it is never a conservative or liberal thing. I could see maybe if I wrote 12/02/09, which would easily be interpreted as either december 9th or february 12th, but I like that date format for the same reason that the Army uses it as standard: There is no ambiguity
So is that 12th Feb 2009, or 9th Feb 2012?
Re: (Score:3)
And don't forget bank thermometers
Re: Start here (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not that the US system is hard to use, it's that you're the last outliers (among major developed countries at least) not to switch. It's for the sake of consistency rather than anything else. No more having to program two separate measurement systems into every bit of software. No more wondering WTF 'letter' size paper is anymore when your printer demands it for some reason (i.e. someone in the US has emailed you a document that wants to print on that size paper). Etc.
It'd be no different if everyone ELSE used the US system, and the US were the only people using metric - it would make sense to change. It's not about which system is better, it's about being consistent.
If there were several major countries not using metric yet, then I don't think there'd be the same 'annoyance' with the Americans. But you guys are literally the ... last ... ones. Cmon! :)
DIN A4 is meaningful (Score:5, Insightful)
That's incorrect: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iso-paper.html [cam.ac.uk] (read it; it's very informative!)
:-)
1 A0 sheet of paper has an area of 1 m^2, so if it is "normal" paper of 80 g / m^2 then the A0 sheet weighs 80g and the 8 A3 sheets you can cut from that without any paper loss weigh 10 g each, and each of the 16 "standard" A4 sheets you can cut from it again, without any paper loss weighs 5 g.
It's so perfect that probably aliens use the same ratio 1 : sqrt(2) on their paper
Re:Start here (Score:5, Interesting)
Every time a state starts printing metric speed limits, it inevitably ends up rounding the limit DOWN.
I remember one failed experiment where FDOT (Florida) tried to be cute and put up signs declaring "44kph" to be the metric equivalent of 30mph (it's only 27mph). The signs were SO hated, most of them got vandalized beyond recognition within a month, and pretty much ALL of them had the "44" spray painted, X'ed (with black markers), or shot out (with BBs, paintball pellets, or real honest-to-god bullets) by the time FDOT took them down and replaced them with 30mph signs. FDOT later admitted that it was a mistake.
If you want the public to accept metric speed limits, roll them out with a big public campaign that emphasizes that the limits are being RAISED everywhere by up to 5mph. Instantly, metric speed limits will become popular and cool among drivers. Declare 115kph (71.45mph) to be the equivalent of 70mph, and drivers will like them. Round it up to 120kph (74.56mph), and drivers will LOVE them. Try pulling another FDOT stunt by putting up signs saying "70mph/111kph", and they'll get vandalized beyond recognition within days.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Informative)
When you see 1 1/4 cups, or 55 mph, or 3 1/2 miles to the exit - there's a good chance that the measurement is inexact or unnecessary. Nobody actually paced out exactly 18,480 feet and placed the "3.5 mile" sign at exactly that spot. They placed the sign and filled in the best available number in the most convenient unit.
As someone who's done roadway surveying... yeah, um, that's a horribly ignorant statement. Maybe you live in CA or something, where that approach seems acceptable, but throughout most of the US, there is consistency in things like: distance between a stop sign and an intersection, roadway mile markers (some places it's a quarter mile, some places it's a mile, etc.). Believe it or not, a roadway where the speed limit is 55mph WILL be surveyed its full distance to within an inch of accuracy for elevation, the roadway bedding, incline, and curve - there's a lot of math that goes into it, and it's all thoroughly planned out.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Interesting)
That would be the last place to start, as it would cost a fortune to replace all of the highway signs. Not only that, but also all of the mile markers, for which most states have every 1/10 of a mile. Moreover, contrary to what some people have implied, the numbers are generally not painted on, they're fabricated from other materials and overlaid. And for what? So we can convert the length of our commute into a multiple of our height, or something else of the sort? Yes, it's absolutely absurd that there are 12 inches in a foot, 3 feet in a yard, and I-don't-even-know-how-many yards in a mile (and yes, I've heard of Google/Wikipedia; but I just don't care). The truth is, I never need to convert inches into miles. You measure human-scale things in feet and inches, travelling distances in miles.
On the other hand, you know where we should start: volumetric measurements. I have frequently had a recipe that takes some number of teaspoons of a liquid, while having measuring cups measured in (naturally) cups, and nutritional information in ounces. Oh, and keep in mind that most tea spoons are significantly larger than a teaspoon. And then there's tablespoons, pints, quarts, gallons, barrels, and who knows what else. This is a lot harder to keep straight, and unlike miles to inches, sometimes you actually need to convert between these.
Add into the mix the problem that pints differ from place to place (either 16 or 20 oz), and "ounce" is both a volumetric measure and a weight measure. Obviously, if you have something that's clearly a solid or a liquid, it's clear which is which. But what about, say, frozen yogurt. When the self-serve froyo place sells by the ounce, and posts calories by the ounce, it would only be reasonable to think that these are the same ounces. It would also be wrong.
Moreover, in the case of volumetric measures, not only do you have a real problem, but an easier solution: most of the containers that hold liquids are disposable anyways, and constantly manufactured (i.e. food). All that would need to be done is to make containers that are metric-sized, and printed with metric labels, rather than Imperial. In fact, we're closer to that already. By law, all wine and distilled alcohol must be sold in one of several metric sizes (for distilled, it is 375 mL, 750 mL, 1L, 1.75 L, if I recall correctly). Soda is frequently sold in 2 L bottles.
Do that, let people see that metric actually saves time and hassle, and then go about changing other measurements. Weight would probably be the easiest to transition next, followed by lengths for things other than highway signs. (No one will care that they can't easily convert meters into miles, just as they don't care that they can't convert feet into miles). But please don't try to start with highway signs. Or bother with highway signs at all, for that matter. They are the death of metricfication in the US, and insistence on them is only counterproductive to the rest of your goals.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Interesting)
Moreover, in the case of volumetric measures, not only do you have a real problem, but an easier solution: most of the containers that hold liquids are disposable anyways, and constantly manufactured (i.e. food). All that would need to be done is to make containers that are metric-sized, and printed with metric labels, rather than Imperial.
FWIW, this became a legal requirement in the UK 20+(?) years ago when we joined the EU and we have just about assimilated metric measures of volume and weight when it comes to consumables.
Also noteworthy, the building industry also works in metric these days, although there are many builders who still think in ft/in a lot of the materials are sold in metric sizes, i.e the width of a standard sheet of plaster board (sheet rock) dictates how you space your studs.
However, street signs are still in MPH and most people still measure their body weight in Stones and their height in Feet and Inches.
It takes a while but the ability to trade with neighbouring countries makes it worth it...
Re:Start here (Score:4, Interesting)
Almost a decade ago, I was in a trip to the USA. I was very surprised to see Liter used for car engine sizes (here they usually use cubic centimeters, which are exactly 1/1000, so not a real problem).
I remember strolling through a supermarket, and looking at the soda bottles, which were bigger than the 1.5L bottles common here. I picked one up to see what size it was. I guess most readers know the answer - it was 2 liters. I remember wondering how come Americans are willing to use a metric unit.
So I asked a vendor. His answer was "This isn't a metric unit. It's liter".
So I asked him how much was a liter, and his answer was something along the lines of "33.8 ounces" (without blinking of stopping to think about it).
Which, of course, got me my answer. The reason Americans are using a metric unit is because they don't know it's metric.
The problem with your proposal is that, if implemented that way, means just adding another unit to the mix, without exposing people to the main advantage that the metric system has to offer. That does not bode well for a "migration path".
You should add to that the fact that volume realization is hard. I'll give a couple of examples. First, bear in mind that the two units people are, more or less, familiar with are a milliliter (1 cubic centimeter = 1/1000 of a liter) and a liter.
The first was when a company I worked for ordered a certain amount of boxes for their product. We were trying to figure out whether we have where to store them. I made the calculation, based on box size, and figured the entire bunch would require a little less than 2 cubic meters (around 1.8). We sort of made a hand gesture estimate and figured it was not that much. Boy, were we wrong. We ended up using up every spare cabinet and space in the office. Lesson learned: a cubic meter is a lot.
The happened just yesterday. I was telling my wife we will have to remove some soil from our garden to make space for extra flooring. She said "we'll be giving that to friends, right?". I told her it was about 500 liters of soil. I then made a quick mental calculation. We'll need about 12 squared meter of flooring, and the base is about half a meter deep. 6000 liters. Assuming soil is half as dense than water (it was while driving, so I couldn't look it up), you get 3 tons of soil. My instinct was off by a factor of 10, and her instinct was off by a factor of 1000.
This doesn't mean this is useless. Can you make this same calculation, off the top of your head, using imperial units? Metric does simplify things quite considerably. It's just that, specifically for volumes, that is a hard problem to solve.
Shachar
Re: (Score:3)
No need for units (Score:5, Funny)
Given that relativity is well established, those signs should be unitless. Instead of 55 mph, just have them say 0.000000082.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Insightful)
Take your awkward, unnatural metric system back to europe where it belongs
I agree this is nothing the USA can afford to do right now. After all, you need that money to fight the drug war and build more aircraft carriers.
However, while the metric system is many things, 'awkward and unnatural' isn't one of them. You look up 'awkward' in the dictionary and there's the Imperial system. 5280 feet in a mile? 16 ounces in a pound? Water freezes at 32 degrees?
What the hell? It's like if my toddler invented a system of weights and measures.
Re: Start here (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to mention that the imperial system is also from europe :)
Re:Start here (Score:5, Interesting)
So, we ended up with a foot being, well, the length of a foot. A mile ("mille passus") being 1000 paces, etc. The needs were to measure small units (foot), or large distances (mile), so the conversion wasn't often needed (who builds a mile long building, or steps toe-to-heal across Europe?)
Then you get a pound being equivalent to so many grains of wheat (or a different number of grains of barley), etc.
It made sense at the time, and worked well enough.
BTW, 16 oz in a lb is from binary powers, easily divisible. The history of temperature units is interesting and convoluted, but 32 for freezing is based on binary divisions (64 units) between that and human body temperature (96). 0 was ice+salt. So again, it was an attempt at units which could be duplicated independently.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Insightful)
Except nobody's feet are exactly 1 foot. Nor is anyone's 1000 paces exactly 1 mile. If those were truly universal measurements, you'd have some point. As they're not, you don't. And in the long term we'd save money by being on the same system as literally every other country in the world by removing the possibility of tooling mistakes, idiocies like NASA Orbiter problem, and additional cost to companies trying to sell in the US of having to have both measurements in their workflows and computer systems.
Re:Start here (Score:4, Insightful)
Fahrenheit is quite useful when you are thinking in terms of human comfort and safety.
Really? Maybe it's because I grew up with only the metric system, but I have absolutely no feeling for fahrenheit. I know that 20 Celsius is a nice summer day, 15 is cool, and -30 is about as cold as it gets where I live. I wouldn't have a clue what "80" or "60" or "20" means in Fahrenheit.
It's all a matter of what you're used to. The US is one of the most conservative and reactionary societies on earth, so I expect it'll still be using Imperial units 50 years from now and probably still retain the penny when you need ten thousand of them to buy a loaf of bread.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Insightful)
A square mile is a "section", which is 640 acres. Now 640 acres...
Canada managed to cope just fine. I used to live in a rural area where the road network was pretty much a grid, divided into square miles. Converting things to metric didn't bring about the end of the world. People still talk about acreage since the historic size of the plots were even acres - I lived on a 5 acre plot which as you noted were quite common, and since the intersections are a mile apart we'll still use miles when giving directions. And there is no reason to eradicate that.
But the speed limit is 90km/h, farmers know how much property they have in hectares, and the measurements for all the properties in meters is available for legal property descriptions.
OK fine, by all means define the foot in terms of metric; but remove it from all records and from the culture? No. Just. No.
I don't think we need to actively eradicate it. But if we stop using it officially, it will gradually fade into the background. I doubt anyone in rural manitoba is ever going to completely stop using miles given the physical layout of the rural road network. But that's fine.
Aside from that, the Metric system is no less arbitrary than our customary units. The only reason 10 matters is because we have 10 digits on our hands. An alien race might not.
That is the opposite of arbitrary. Yes, we surely use base 10 due to the number of digits on our hands, but metric was designed to fit into base 10. That was not an arbitrary decision. We are not an alien race. Base 10 is natural for us; not arbitrary.
Otherwise, all the metric arguments just boil down to "my arbitrary system is better than yours".
The precise length of a meter is arbitrary; and we both use the same somewhat arbitrary unit of time (seconds) but pretty much everything else derives from that in a natural and logical way. Volume, mass, energy, speed, temperature, force. English units are not linked the same way. There is no defined relationship betwen a gallon and a foot the way there is between a meter and a liter. Or between a pound and a foot the way there is between a kilogram and a meter. A 4 liter jug of milk has a mass of 4 kilograms (for all practical purposes). To equate the arbitrariness of metric and imperial is just delusional.
but Celcius? Fuggedaboutit. Each decade of the Fahrenheit scale has a readily associated "feel" that Celcius can't match.
I've got no issues whatsoever with celsius. Instead of 10 degree feels, its more increments of 5. Its what you grow up with.
They're both arbitrary systems, so it's really just one person's preferance vs. another.
Metric is far less internally arbitrary, and pretty much all the rest of world uses it. Personal preference in my opinion seems to come down to what you grew up with; so raising the next generation in metric will take care of that. There's no real reason for -you- to change though.
Re:Start here (Score:5, Informative)
Here in metric-using Australia, I'm 178 cm, spoken "one seventy-eight". Barely any longer to say than the approximate equivalent "five eleven". Noone says "one point blah blah metres" - height is in centimetres (specifically to avoid using decimal points and/or mixing units).
Also, as a Celsius-user, I think of each 5-degree increment as a "different sort of clothing" marker (or at least a "different type of weather feel"). Centered on 20 C (comfortable room temperature), which is no more difficult than thinking about departure from comfortable room temperature in F (i.e. ~70 F).
Re:Start here (Score:5, Insightful)
The SI has officially been""the preferred system of weights and measures for United States trade and commerce" since 1975, so it's well past time to make that mean something.
No sympathy for innumerates who find it difficult, because it is in fact much simpler.
It is a broken system (Score:5, Insightful)
It would a frivolous waste of money we dont have to fix something thats not broken.
Ah but it is broken. For a start there is no agreed upon standard for several of the units e.g. fluid ounce for which the Imperial unit is not the same as the US unit which is then further compounded by the fact that there are 20 fluid ounces in a UK pint and only 16 in a US pint. As such it is a completely broken unit system you not only have to memorize an insane number of relationships between units you even have to remember whose imperial-based unit scheme you are using.
However, what makes it s truly broken unit system is that it uses the unit pound for both mass and weight. Yes there have been "hacks" of the system to bring them inline with physical reality so you have the "avoirdupois pound" meaning a mass and the "pound" meaning force. However this means that the units are not clear: when you say "pound" do you mean force or mass? If you need to tweak your unit system to make it consistent with physics that's not really a good sign is it?
If that's still not enough to convince you that there is a problem then consider that there are only three countries in the world still using the old imperial-based system: Liberia, Burma and the USA. There are not many things that practically the entire planet agree upon but apparent metric units is one of them and it is not without good reason!
Re: (Score:3)
It would a frivolous waste of money we dont have to fix something thats not broken.
However, what makes it s truly broken unit system is that it uses the unit pound for both mass and weight. Yes there have been "hacks" of the system to bring them inline with physical reality so you have the "avoirdupois pound" meaning a mass and the "pound" meaning force. However this means that the units are not clear: when you say "pound" do you mean force or mass? If you need to tweak your unit system to make it consistent with physics that's not really a good sign is it?
Scientists already use the Metric system, and few people who live on earth and are not scientists need to make a distinction between weight and mass.
Re: (Score:3)
Just a big waste of taxpayer money for something purely cosmetic. It would a frivolous waste of money we dont have to fix something thats not broken. I already pay too many taxes as it is. We need to stop spending on frivolous crap like this. It would confuse the hell out of everyone and there are no real reasons or benefits, just nonsense excuses. I actually find the english system to be perfectly fine and useable on road signs. No need to fix something thats not broken. Take your awkward, unnatural metric system back to europe where it belongs. i like the mile and foot just fine and I actually prefer this on our signs.
Why is the metric system not natural? It makes for nice even numbers on road signs, instead of the common 35mph and 55mph, you have 50km/hr and 100km/hr.
I grew up in the USA and can switch seamlessly among metric and american units of length and volume, but I still need to mentally convert units of weight (well, ok, mass, I don't regularly use Newtons) and temperature in my head. My wife didn't move to the USA until she was in her late 20's, so she needs to convert measurements to the metric system to unde
Re:Start here (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh, and if you were to dig out your ruler and measure out two survey markers that are supposed to be ten miles apart, you'd find them to be 633601+1/4 inches apart, instead of the 633600 inches you'd expect, because again, the imperial system is broken. Survey miles are different than real miles.
The metric system is the tool of the devil! (Score:5, Funny)
The metric system is the tool of the devil! My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it.
----
The Simpsons, Abraham Simpson
Re:The metric system is the tool of the devil! (Score:5, Funny)
Mod Parent +5 funny! Anyway as of the last time I was in my auto I was getting 532,224 rods per hogshead which is low compared to 544320. Of course I've been driving where the speed limit ranges from 27,200 furlongs per fortnight to 107,520 furlongs per fortnight. However when the school zone lights are flashing it is a piddly ass 40320 furlongs per fortnight even in a 107,520 furlongs per fortnight zone.
WTF is the administration supposed to do? (Score:5, Insightful)
The petition site isn't a method for legislative fiat. If you want the metric system adopted talk to your Congress person. The president can't force adoption of the metric system. Jesus, people, the president can't even enter bills into Congress and you want him to just pass the fucking law personally? You have representatives for that.
Makes perfect sense to me (Score:4, Insightful)
The country doesn't have a national language, despite the fact that the majority speak English... so why do we think the Federal government could just mandate metric? Hell, even if they tried, a bunch of angry southern congressman would probably cry 'states rights'. Thanks Obama.
The cooking channel, the car dealers, gas stations and everyone reading this response could start speaking metric tomorrow if they wanted too... about the only thing that would seem awkward on the green highway mile markers and speed limit signs... and we already largely ignore those...
If you think you care so much about metric, why can't you tell me how many liters per 100 km your car takes? Its *your* car... no one is stopping you.
Re:Makes perfect sense to me (Score:4, Insightful)
Agreed. Why is this response considered so "disappointing"?
Re: (Score:3)
They didn't like the response. They wanted a progressive answer and got a conservative one. I'm a little shocked myself.
Re: (Score:3)
Here's the math [typepad.com] that explains why you are wrong. When it comes to compatibility issues, like standards, it is easy for a laissez-faire system to get stuck on a local maxima. It is one of the primary reasons that a well regulated market can be a closer approximation of the theoretical ideal free market than can laissez-faire. This sort of problem is exactly why people institute governments.
Re:Makes perfect sense to me (Score:4, Interesting)
Why bother to convert though? The natural way to "speak a language" such as metric is to use it as your first language; not convert between the two.
Most car manufacturers publish fuel consumption figures in metric and imperial, so the natural way would be to know what your litres per 100 would be, and what this actually means in reality.
We have a weird situation here in the UK. All fuel is sold by the litre - but no one knows what litres per 100km means or how the cost of a litre of gas will affect them. We all refer to MPG and we know that a gallon is about 4.5x the cost of a litre (yes, our gallons have more litres than yours).
Re:Makes perfect sense to me (Score:4, Informative)
Where L/100km makes an infinite amount of sense is when comparing the fuel efficiency of different vehicles. What is better, upgrading a 35mpg car to 42mpg, or upgrading a 15mpg SUV to one that gets 20mpg? If we look at this in L/100km, it becomes pretty damned easy. The 35mpg car gets 6.72L/100km. Upgrading it to a car that gets 42mpg will mean you're now burning 5.6L/100km, saving approximately 1.1L for every 100km you travel. Conversely, the 15mpg SUV gets 15.68L/100km, while its 20mpg replacement burns 11.76L/100km, a savings of 3.92L for every 100km. So even in the first case, despite increasing your mileage by 7mpg, you're only saving 1.1L, while in the second case you're only increasing your milage by 5mpg, but saving 3.92L.
The fundamental reality here is that for most people, the only time they ever look at the fuel efficiency figures is when they're shopping for a new vehicle. Specifying the fuel usage in L/100km (or hell, Gallons/100mi) provides a much more accurate and useful comparison. The easy solution to your problem is to just publish a number for range. I know that my Jetta gets 725km per tank in city driving, and ~1000 or so in highway driving.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree that we should have L/100km (or gallons/100 miles) as well as km/L or MPG. However...
Where L/100km makes an infinite amount of sense is when comparing the fuel efficiency of different vehicles. What is better, upgrading a 35mpg car to 42mpg, or upgrading a 15mpg SUV to one that gets 20mpg?
No -- in this case, you're not "comparing the fuel efficiency of different vehicles." You're comparing the net gain by two different upgrades to two different vehicles.
In other words, there are at least FOUR vehicles involved in this comparison. I always hear this exact example trotted out whenever someone starts arguing for L/100km or gal/100mi, but I honestly wonder how common this particular problem is.
Le
Re: (Score:3)
What is better, upgrading a 35mpg car to 42mpg, or upgrading a 15mpg SUV to one that gets 20mpg?
Why do you care? Either you have a 35mpg vehicle or you have a 15mpg vehicle.
It seems to me that the main reason to want to use something like L/100km is so that you can boast to your friends about how much greater your car upgrade was compared to their car upgrade. Get yourself some self-esteem and you wont suggest that the rest of the world has to conform to your chosen system so that you can belittle them.
L/Km and MPG are BOTH stupid. And redundant. (Score:3)
(Distance in one unit) cubed over (distance in a completely different unit)? Come on, do the simple unit analysis and just give fuel efficiency in square meters.
Re: (Score:3)
If a car has double the efficiency, then the l/Km gets *halved*. Maybe we'd better just stick with mpg.
Makes sense (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Insightful)
Ah yes, the Earl of Sandwich was truly one of the great Americans, wasn't he?
Really Already Metric (Score:4, Informative)
The Omnibus Foreign Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 amended the Metric Conversion Act of 1975 and stated the metric system was "the Preferred system of weights and measures for United States trade and commerce". Also said the federal government has a responsibility to assist industry and especially small business, as it voluntarily converts to the metric system .
Metric system is of course taught in U.S. schools, even since the early 70s (yes, I was there)
Re: (Score:3)
Which has absolutely no practical meaning as far as I can determine, unless you can cite some actual concrete consequences of this declaration.
Which, once again, means what? Are there grants? Is the US offering any kind of money to anybody to hel
no free choice for gov't info like speed limits (Score:5, Informative)
I agree that no laws should be passed that force e.g. a supermarket to use specific weights or measures. If people are annoyed by the choice of a supermarket they can bring their business elsewhere.
However, the "free choice" argument does not work for monopoly players, especially the government itself. The last time I was in the US, miles were used in the interstate system to indicate both distances/exit numbers and maximum speeds. You can't choose to pick the other road that goes the same place but uses metric, because there is no real competition in the road network.
I don't know whether other official communication of the state(s) uses metric or not, I could imagine many laws and forms that refer to land area, volumes of water, weight (e.g. of cars) that could use either non-metric or metric. They can't hide behind a "free choice" argument there, and a real "bimetric" system requires the government to provide information, like speed limits, in both systems, just like a blingual government publishes laws etc. in two languages.
Re:no free choice for gov't info like speed limits (Score:5, Insightful)
The White House has the right idea. (Score:5, Funny)
Good (Score:4, Insightful)
I think that this is a perfectly adequate solution.
I'm a scientist and use metric for everything at work, but I can drive in miles and get groceries by the pound, too. It's really not that hard to effectively use both systems, and given time we can slowly move to using metric all of the time if we want. The most effective change happens so slowly that you can't pinpoint when exactly it happened. Since there's no urgency here, it will be fine if it takes another generation or so to fully transition.
Look at the progress we've made since the seventies. Today, anyone in science, engineering, medicine, the military, and many other fields are already proficient with both systems. There's no rush, so why not let it happen organically?
Relating the conceivable to the perceivable (Score:3)
The point of a system of measurement is to relate dimensions which are not directly perceivable to those which are. Thus, while you can't "see" a mile, you know that it's 5280 feet, the "foot" being related to some portion of the body (or some particular person's body). Likewise the inch, the yard, the fathom, etc. Using metric, while perhaps more "scientifically" determined, replaces one non-human, non-perceivable value with another. Instead of an imperceptible distance being some large multiple of an average person's foot size, it becomes some multiple of wavelengths of light, another imperceptible value.
Re: (Score:3)
This doesn't fly for me. There is no human equivalent of an inch or mile or gallon or acre anymore than a kilometer or centimeter or liter or gram. The foot is about the only human thing about the imperial system, and that is not enough to matter all that much.
I was taught both systems in school and use both. Interestingly, I prefer cm/mm over inches and feet over meters; have no preference with gallons/qts vs. liters; prefer ml over fluid ounces, prefer grams over ounces but pounds over kg. How is THAT
US and the Metric System (Score:5, Informative)
The US is converting gradually to the metric system, and NIST towards that for decades. The definitions of official US units in metric terms was one of those steps.
A lot of things sold in the US are sold in metric containers, for example 2L soft drink containers, many food packages and so on.
The US has also been signatory to every metric measurement treaty.
The petition is really rather silly. Changing the measurement system of a nation is a long and slow process. Even the French had to put it aside for a while (Napolean discontinued the process for a while).
The real shame is the US didn't start this process sooner. Thomas Jefferson actually advocated a decimal system of measures well before the French adopted the metric system but Congress (setting an alarming precedent) failed to act on the proposal. Later Jefferson was successful in getting the US to use a decimal currency, which was the first of it's type in the world.
Is it in contemplation with the House of Representatives to arrange our measures and weights [the same as the coinage] in a decimal ratio? The facility which this would introduce into the vulgar arithmetic would, unquestionably, be soon and sensibly felt by the whole mass of the people, who would thereby be enabled to compute for themselves whatever they should have occasion to buy, to sell, or to measure, which the present complicated and difficult ratios place beyond their computation for the most part
--Thomas Jefferson
US not ready for globalization (Score:3, Interesting)
I am european mechanical engineer who worked and lived on 3 continents. The metric system is way superior than the imperial system in many ways but the most important is that it is used everywhere and it is a consistent system*. A lot of companies here in the US have switched to metric (at least for this reason), but soon when asian industrial power will swamp the US market with metric product and parts (in the same way that IKEA did) a lot people in this forum will be lost and realize that a dual system is completly stupid.
* if your not convince ask yourself why in a imperial system electrical power unit is Watt and but heat power it is in Btu/h....
Already is, but not official (and forced) (Score:3)
Kind of like official language of the USA. There isn't one. Just like customary units, there are customary languages.
Metrification is already happening. Executive order http://www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/otm_x/otm_x_1.html [osha.gov]. The Federal government has a preference, but it is only that.
The CIA World factbook has a snarky "At this time, only three countries - Burma, Liberia, and the US - have not adopted the International System of Units (SI, or metric system) as their official system of weights and measures. Although use of the metric system has been sanctioned by law in the US since 1866, it has been slow in displacing the American adaptation of the British Imperial System known as the US Customary System. The US is the only industrialized nation that does not mainly use the metric system in its commercial and standards activities, but there is increasing acceptance in science, medicine, government, and many sectors of industry."
Don't worry though, moving 300 million takes a hell of a long time - measured in generations. If you go to the store you will see lots of metric rounded numbers (drinks in 500 mls). Dates on the immigration forms have moved to ISO DD-MM-YYYY. Give it another 50 years, globalisation will take care of it.
costly and difficult to convert machine tools (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a machine shop in my garage, which includes a large mill and a lathe. Both have lead screws set to work in thousands of an inch, so one revolution of a handle is a certain subset of inches (.05) with individual tick marks at .001. It is essentially baked into the hardware, and you have to replace the feed wheel dials and lead screws to change it, among other things.
I purchase metal stock that comes in US units as well (1/2" bar stock for example) which corresponds to stock needed for drawings that give all their dimensions in inches. There is a cascading chain of things, all of which need to change.
You will not see me switching my shop to metric in my lifetime most likely.
Converting a large industrial economy over to metric has a lot of hidden costs that make it very difficult to do, because all valves, pipes, fittings, metal stock, screws etc. offerings have to be changed, and imperial parts need to be offered for many decades to come to service older equipment.
The idea itself is a good one as ultimately metric is a more scientifically advanced and clear set of standards than imperial. It's nice to work in a consistently matched base-10 for all scales.
In the case of smaller economies, it is easier to support the change due to much smaller scale and very small industrial base. New Zealand as a country switched over to metric in a single day, after much preparation.
Although the US auto industry has largely gone over to metric, I do not think that the rest of the US is currently in a position to swallow that pill easily. I believe that no matter how much ideologically it makes sense, that it is still political dynamite.
It would be nice if everyone taking up this topic had machine shop and fabrication experience so they would understand just how much it impacts the pipeline from raw stock to finished product. Politicians tend to think in abstracts and statistics and do not always consider all of the consequences. Most of the rest of the population is so far removed from it that they A. don't understand the entirety of the impact and B. as others have said would not benefit significantly from the change.
-PH
What's all the whining about, just get it done. (Score:5, Informative)
I lived in Canada before, during and after the transition.
Over 30 years later we're all wondering why you're all still whining like little bitches. We'd tell you but you might decide to invade our socialist paradise.
Re:The Spin was Awesome! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The Spin was Awesome! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No, no, you're not trolling at all. You carry the 'white man's burden' with total aplomb and grace.
Re:The Spin was Awesome! (Score:5, Insightful)
I see your problem you think the president of the USA is actually a useful position. The president of the USA is actually the least powerful, least effective job in the USA.
The president doesn't make laws congress does, the president doesn't decide which laws are fair or balanced the judicial system does. The president doesn't even decide details of policy only vague generalities.
The president( i don't care which ones you like they all fall into this) can't make decisions. he can only choose between choices others make for him. he has three basic tools Force(military or civilian), Legal(lawyers), or Diplomatic(Negotations, etc) However he can't use force for anything but quick attacks or else congress must intervene. He can use legal but lawyers aren't useful for much. Diplomatic only works when the other party actually is willing to change.(that's why you can't negotiate with palenstine/isreal or the tea party, neither side can look at things from anyone else's view)
There is a reason why Presidents go into office looking healthy and come out Physically healthy but looking like they went through a meet grinder. Because they get all the blame, very little of the credit, and can actually change very little.
The president controls the price of oil about as much I do. The president controls the budget of the country about as much I do.
If your curious look up what the president is actually allowed to do in most cases all he can do is advise someone else to look into the problem and report back. Take the IRS scandal. I would be willing to bet the president knew about it a while ago. however he couldn't actually change the policies or punish people because congress ultimately controls those positions.
This true of every president they can at best suggest. whether or not they get listened to is another story.
Re:first (Score:5, Funny)
first
That must be a imperial first, not a metric first.
Re:both are bastardized. (Score:5, Insightful)
Frankly, decimal is kind of a cruddy system. It was a bad call in the first place to use base 10. Yeah, it's good for counting on your fingers, but it's only cleanly divisible by 1, 2, 5 and 10. Base 12 would have been a much better choice, it's cleanly divisible by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12.
I say we ditch metric, imperial and the decimal system as well.
Re:both are bastardized. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:English system is fine (Score:5, Insightful)
I actually think the English system is better for daily use, the measurement units seem more natural to me than the metric ones.
O_o
Natural for what? The only advantage the English system has is that lots of lazy-brained people are accustomed to it.
Re: (Score:3)
No, zero Celsius is "too damn cold", zero Fahrenheit is HOLY SHIT HOW CAN A HUMAN BEING LIVE HERE.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most companies already label their products with both systems which is just fine.
Sure. I don't have a problem with seeing both units. But why not mandate metric be on there? The benefits are clear. What is the harm?
As for roadsigns, the cost would be far too great, and it wouldnt be worth it for what is basically a cosmetic change, and I think would actually make things worse,
It doesn't have to happen overnight. Start with the major highways, and do both units. Gradually filter it down to the other stuff,
Re:Missing the Point? (Score:5, Interesting)
The discrepancy between calculated and measured position, resulting in the discrepancy between desired and actual orbit insertion altitude, had been noticed earlier by at least two navigators, whose concerns were dismissed. A meeting of trajectory software engineers, trajectory software operators (navigators), propulsion engineers, and managers, was convened to consider the possibility of executing Trajectory Correction Maneuver-5, which was in the schedule. Attendees of the meeting recall an agreement to conduct TCM-5, but it was ultimately not done.
But "We mixed up feet and meters! Whoopsie!" while embarrassing, is not quite so embarrassing as "We canceled the scheduled maneuver that would have saved the ship, even though we knew something was very wrong." Plus, it was an easy headline for the media. There were a legion of problems with the Mars Climate Orbiter that had nothing to do with unit systems. NASA was just in full-on derp mode at that time. Likewise, the Mars Polar Lander [wikipedia.org], which did not have a similar unit-conversion error, also crashed a few months later.
Re:Sure beats jail time... (Score:4, Informative)
The EU single market mandates that you must be able to buy and sell in metric, which is logical since you can't really have a common market without common units. You can also use whatever other units you like and as such many places use imperial units in preference to metric units, reverting to them only when necessary.
Road signs are still mph, horse races are still miles and furlongs and beer is sold by the pint so I think we're happily confused on matters of units this side of the pond.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, technically, when the old system of weights and measures ewnt out, you HAD to convert. Because otherwise it meant you were possibly ripping off people using an uncalibrated scale.
If you look at your gas pump or grocery pricing scale, you'll find a calibration sticker on them that tel
Re: (Score:3)
You drank a whole 2 liter bottle of Coke? You fat bastard.
It's below zero - We might get snow.
It's 200K to Seattle? We'll, we're averaging 100 kph so we'll be there in a couple of hours.
2x4 (Score:5, Insightful)
Which, incidentally, don't seem use American Customary units of length for those dimensions, but whacky industry units where 1" (board measure other than length) is approximately equal to 7/8" (US customary).
Re:What were you expecting? (Score:4, Insightful)
Did you expect that the White House administration was going to somehow force businesses and residents of the US to start using metric?
Why not? With three exceptions, EVERY country in the world did it at some point.