How to get the metric system reinvented

John Prigent wrote:You may be right, Randomiser, but I can't tell you what my IQ is - no-one has ever told me my score when I've taken a test, they just laugh and shrug their shoulders. The nearest I had to an actual employer's comment on a test was 'you're not supposed to be able to finish it that quickly' (I turned that job down, it was an obvious Ponzi scheme).

But I still say that something is wrong when a shop assistant can't calculate a 10% discount on £110,or has to use a calculator to work out 5 weeks' newspaper bill at £6.60 a week. Both are actual examples, and both were decimal.

Cheers

John

1) QED

2) I agree entirely, but let's not get into the failings of the education system, or we'll be here all week!

Randomiser wrote:

John Prigent wrote:You may be right, Randomiser, but I can't tell you what my IQ is - no-one has ever told me my score when I've taken a test, they just laugh and shrug their shoulders. The nearest I had to an actual employer's comment on a test was 'you're not supposed to be able to finish it that quickly' (I turned that job down, it was an obvious Ponzi scheme).

But I still say that something is wrong when a shop assistant can't calculate a 10% discount on £110,or has to use a calculator to work out 5 weeks' newspaper bill at £6.60 a week. Both are actual examples, and both were decimal.

Cheers

John

1) QED

2) I agree entirely, but let's not get into the failings of the education system, or we'll be here all week!

I wonder if that's a matter of can't do that in their heads, or do not realize that they can before going for the calculator. It's a problem in education either way, but a different one: arithmetic skill in the one case, quick analysis of a problem and the habit of starting with it in the other. I don't recall that latter ever being a specific topic for my education, but goodness knows it's critical.

Joat42 wrote:

thinkstoomuch wrote:If metric system was really necessary to promote science how did The US ever lead the world in anything. Or at least since 1950 or there abouts.

Because of WWII, has nothing to do with metric or imperial systems.

Odd you should mention the 50s. That is when the US military (largely) and science (largely) went metric. Certainly everything I did in my chem degree in the late 60s was metric.

Some engineering has stuck with customary units (even "slugs" for Heaven's sake), but engineering is not science. And don't forget the Mars probe lost because some engineers used customary units. Mariners have stuck with knots and nautical miles, but these have a real basis as well (1 nm ~= 1 minute along any meridian), unlike customary units. All automobiles including all fasteners on them are now metric. The list goes on.

While I don't disagree about the wrongness, I fear that your neo-Luddism is barking up quite the wrong tree: the switch to decimal currency is completely irrelevant. The ability to perform the tasks below _was_ entirely current in countries that had been using decimals for 2 centuries - 45 years ago. And disappeared no more nor less quickly in those places than among peoples who made the mind-destroying conversion only after being frog-marched into the modern era.

[quote="John Prigent"
< snip >

But I still say that something is wrong when a shop assistant can't calculate a 10% discount on £110,or has to use a calculator to work out 5 weeks' newspaper bill at £6.60 a week. Both are actual examples, and both were decimal.

Cheers

John

[/quote]

Randomiser wrote:

John Prigent wrote:4.62 (imperial). Though I admit that I had to find out first what the conversion factor is - no I didn't cheat and use the converter. Why, can't you do such a simple sum? If you can't, my point is proved. One of my colleagues back in the 80s used to challenge me to do such figuring in my head while he used his shiny new electronic calculator. I always won, giving him answers to 5 or 6 decimal places while he was still entering the figures - because I was used to pencil-less calculations of greater complexity.
Cheers
John

Dear John, I seem to remember we have been through all this stuff on mental arithmetic some time ago. I don't doubt for a moment that all you say about your mental arithmetic skills is true, but you seem a bit less on the ball about the Normal Distribution Curve and how far off to the right of it your kind of ability lies. I was brought up on imperial measurements and lsd ('old money', that is), my first degree was honours maths and physics and my IQ was 130+ in those days (i.e. 2 sd above the mean) and I couldn't easily do the 5 or 6 decimal point mental calculations you are speaking about, even then. Neither could my classmates. Just because you can do these things doesn't mean they are a viable option for most of the population, even most of the population with higher education.

Like John, I can easily make such calculations as fast as most people can punch numbers into a calculator. What I can't do is remember the appropriate conversion factors for all of the dozens of different unit conversions (cubic inches to ounces was a good example). Maybe I could if I needed to do so on a daily basis, but why should it be necessary?

As an example of how easy the metric system is, in a discussion of climate change the other day, I looked up the area of the earth's oceans in square kilometers (~361 million), multiplied that by 10,000 and got the metric tons of ice (~3.6 trillion) that needs to melt from the world's glaciers and ice caps to raise the sea level by 1cm. Trying to do the same calculations with square miles, inches and short tons would be much more complicated.

Btw, jgnfld has a good point about U.S. scientists. They have been using the metric system almost exclusively for a very long time.

RunsInShadows wrote:I have at least two reasons for switching to the metric system.

1.) easy math, based on the base 10 number system.
2.) units are(or soon will be) defined by concepts rather than by physical objects. See the link below for further explanation.

http://youtu.be/ZMByI4s-D-Y

For (2), the original definitions of the metric system were based on physical objects, and the concepts were defined to match the existing reference object, or else the speed of light would by a nice round 300000000 m/s. (Or rather, the meter would be the distance light travels in 1/300000000th of a second.)

For (1), this works for any radix, not just 10. Altering the radix to 12 would allow even division into thirds, and altering it to 8 would probably give great advantages when electronic computers are introduced.

I believe the ancient Babylonians used a radix of 60, which allowed division by 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, but made for a rather clunky multiplication table. This is the basis of the degrees-minutes-seconds system of angular measurement.

On the other hand, RFC probably had enough to keep track of with the altered names, without throwing an altered numbering system on top of it.

jgnfld wrote:
...SNIP...

All automobiles including all fasteners on them are now metric. The list goes on.

The annoying part is when you go to replace your brake pads, and the caliper bolts one one side are SAE Allen bolts, and on the other side they are Metric Torx bolts

cadastral

The problem with the Babylonian numerical system was they didn't have a zero. Also it is hard to tell exactly what they did with some of their numbers because they don't come out right when we try to convert them. See Babylonian kings and their life spans.

looksbeforeheleaps is correct about the usefulness of the metric system for converting between units. The problem isn't that the English system doesn't have the capability to do all the required calculations. It is that the different units and the conversions between them seem to have been developed by a sleep deprived schizophrenic on meth. Plus the insanity of slugs, pounds force and pound mass. That particular unmentionable sex act twists my mind into a Gordian knot every time I have to calculate gravitational force in English units. Newtons and kilograms are so much easier.

On the subject of automatic use of calculators I must object. If I am given regular arithmetic to do that I cannot do in my head, then I will start to go for the calculator immediately. However, when the occasional problem comes in that can be solve in my head, I still go for the calculator because in order to solve it in my head I must first consider if I could do it in my head or do it faster in my head. Which adds an extra step and takes more time than just punching the numbers into the calculator. That said mathematics education in the United States is terrible, at least judging by the number of people cannot do basic algebra.

looksbeforeheleaps , I think your numbers may be wrong.

361 km^2 * 10,000 m^2/km^2 * .01 m * 1,000 kg/m^3 / 1,000 kg/ton = 36,100 tons

Since the 361 km^2 is in millions you get 36.1 billion tons. Not trillion, you forgot that 1 cm is .01 m, your calculation comes out right for raising the sea level one meter.



If you wanted to do a more in-depth analysis you need to consider the expansion of the water as it warms. Offsetting that you would also need to consider the expansion of the surface area of the ocean as it rises. But that probably goes farther than you wanted to do with your approximation.

Keith_w wrote:I would very much like to know exactly how Imperial measure is related to the human body! I have neither 12 fingers nor 12 toes for counting on. Nor are fluid and solid ounces the same measure, and for that matter the United States doesn't even use imperial measure - a gallon in the US is only 5/6 of a gallon in the UK, and let us not speak of pecks, bushels or stones!

The Inch = the length of the thumb to the first joint
The Hand = The width of the palm
The Foot = Self explanatory
The Yard = from the extended finger tips to the nose

Add the Cubit = From the finger tips to the elbow
The Fathom = from the extended finger tips to the opposite finger tips.

Not very precise but they refer to YOU

As for the replacement of £-s-d. in the UK by decimal Currency, this was a con-trick and a contributory factor in the hyper inflation that we suffered at the time.

("Prices will not increase" - my 3d. bus fare went up overnight to 5p. (x4))

Ask any European what happened when the €uro was foisted on them by the Franco-German Mafia