We really will use *anything* but the metric system. Football fields, elephants, you name it, as long as it isn’t metric…
Alan G. Humphreysays
The writers for SNL forgot the $0.001 in gasoline pricing that even new stations cling to as if it had been etched on that lost third stone tablet. Are several electric price signs with extra digits and the electricity to display them that cheap that they cannot save money in the long term? Or have they found that Usians won’t visit those stations as often because of perceived anti-‘Murcanism? A nearby gas station built only a couple of years ago has that extra digit on all their signs, and must also have them on each pump, yet they always show their price as three to five cents less than the next nearest station. You would think that reducing that discount by one cent and having more efficient displays would have been more profitable.
As I often told my students, over 95% of the world uses metric. The USA is just under 5% of the global population. We are by ourselves. And, most importantly for them, science and technology is pretty much metric these days. People don’t think about it, but units like volts and amps are metric units. US customary units are bad enough (128 ounces to the gallon, really?), but we make it worse by not using decimals for partial quantities. Quick, I have to cut this board into 3 equal length pieces. It’s 5 feet 4 and 7/8 inches long. Ridiculous. Only morons and the innumerate would cling to such a system. And they do.
I realize that many Americans are afraid of the conversions between US customary units and metric, but the thing is, once we convert, no one but historians will need to convert again since everything will be metric (excepting repairs to legacy systems).
Whenever anyone talks about America being a world leader and which offers the best promise for tomorrow, I always say, “Really? We can’t even convert to metric.”
John Moralessays
Video unavailable
The uploader has not made this video available in your country
Exceptional stuff!
John Moralessays
jimf, interesting example, where one need not use any units at all.
Or, more mathily: It’s 5 feet 4 and 7/8 inches long, so it’s ((5×12×8)+(4×8)+7) eighths of an inch long, so 519 eighths of an inch in total, and thus one third of that is 173 eighths of an inch, and (173 ÷ 8) is 21 and a bit, and (173 mod 8) is 5, so the answer is 21 inches and 5/8ths of an inch, or 1 foot and nine inches and 5/8ths of an inch. Not conceptually complicated.
So, if one is to work with the primitive legacy system the USA still partially uses, one has to be more numerate than with the metric system. The opposite of being innumerate, actually.
Yes John, I could do (and have done many times) those sorts of computations in my head (and not using the lengthy method you did). I’m a retired engineering professor so It’s not difficult for me but I’d wager that a majority of US adults could not. The reason is because they are functionally innumerate. These are folks who need an app in order to figure out a 15% tip at the lunch counter. The very thought of conversions along with the entire “kilo, milli, micro” stuff is mind bending to them. Even though, ultimately, it would be easier for them, the whole thing scares them. Why make it even harder for them by adding on the business with fractions? That’s the ridiculous part.
Along with my normal engineering courses, I also taught a science elective for non-science majors. For some students, their difficulty with even basic concepts was eye opening.
John Moralessays
jimf, interestingly, I was around when Australia was in the process of metricating — 1973-1974 when big changes were made. I remember one could get stick-on overlays for speedometers, that sort of thing.
So, in classes (first year of secondary school for me) we were kinda taught both systems in tandem, and the contrast was pretty evident to every student, best as I could tell.
Still, we were taught the whole thing but focused on the simplified version we now use; when I had my primary schooling in Spain we actually did everything for convenience, so would use all the prefixes including deci/deca and centi/hecto. This simplified version kinda kills the utility of choosing whatever units suit, so 6 decilitres instead of 600 millilitres, for example, or 4 hectometres instead of 400 metres.
Tsk. In that sense, we’re only halfway to proper metrication.
Nonethelesss, I don’t reckon your population is genuinely dumber than ours, so it’s not like it’s not doable, other than a lack of any combo of enthusiasm, desire, political will, usefulness.
BTW, were I personally to have to undertake that thirding task, I’d probably just take a length of string and rough out what I think a third of the length using the Mk1 eyeball method, then pinch the string at that point measuring from one side and apply it twice more. If I’m short of the length after that, I’d lengthen the pinch point, else shorten it if I’m long, else I’d have got lucky right away.
I reckon by the 3rd iteration, it would be close enough.
I mean, why measure lengths and do computations needlessly? 😉
Katydidsays
I was in elementary school in the USA the month they introduced the metric system in the public schools, but because of public outcry, they quickly dropped it completely and it was never again discussed. That was around the time there were gas shortages and the national speed limit was reduced to 55 mph. The evening news around that time was full of the public having tantrums over all these things.
AFAICT, the bit use of the metric system in the USA is solely for the sale of various brands of soda. I believe every major brand sells in 2-litre bottles. Why? I have no idea.
billseymoursays
John Morales @8 and the string method: yes, analog computers are take a long time to set up but get the answer almost immediately. 😎
John, why bother with string? I would get the answer in a few seconds in my head and just use my tape measure to lay out the cuts. Tape measure is right next to the cutting tools in my shop. That would be the fastest way for me, but your mileage may vary.
The “analog” method does remind me of a story, though. I do not know if it’s true but I was told this by one of my professors. One day, Thomas Edison asked one of his mathematicians to determine the volume enclosed by one of his light bulbs. The employee started to trace the bulb with the goal of fitting a curve to it and then applying a little integral calculus to get the volume. Edison, being impatient, grabbed the bulb from him, filled it with water, and then poured the water into a graduated cylinder. It’s the kind of story that engineering students find entertaining.
When I was in grade school, there was a lot of talk about the USA converting to metric. There was similar talk in Canada at that time (they were still using the Imperial system, so their gallons were not the same size as our gallons). Unfortunately for us, USA businesses started whining about the change over so the government did not place a strict timetable on the conversion. In contrast, Canada did. End result, Canada is now using metric but here in the USA we have a mess. Milk, paint and some other products are sold by the gallon or quart while soda is sold by the liter. Distances are measured in miles, unless you’re doing a road race, in which case it’s in km. Temperatures are almost always in Fahrenheit, a word most of us can’t spell. Weights are generally in pounds, abbreviated as “lb.” which most people don’t know why but accept anyway. And in my shop, I have two complete sets of sockets for my wrenches, one metric, and one SAE (actually three sets, considering that there are 1/4″, 3/8″, and 1/2″ drives). What’s that? The 1/2″ socket is a little loose on what appears to be a 1/2″ nut? Hmm, must be a 12 mm…
How I hate it.
steve oberskisays
Don’t get me started on MM/DD/YYYY (or even worse MM//DD/YY) versus YYYY/MM/DD for dates.
Both MM/DD/YYYY and MM/DD/YY are ambiguous for many dates and neither of them sort.
rblackadarsays
It might shock many Americans to hear that we are already metric! The inch, pound, etc. are all defined by law according to their metric equivalents. That’s why an inch is exactly 2.54cm. For the pound you need quite a few more figures to get it exact, but in the end it’s the same principle.
@14, steve oberski
Agree completely. As a halfway measure, I tend to write dates in the form 21-Dec-2023.
@15 rblackadar
Yes, and I am a proponent of “soft metric” equivalences for the construction trades (at least where it’s feasible). Anyone who has ever done framing work in the USA knows that the standard is 16″ on center. Why not shift to 40 cm (or 0.4 m)? It’s nearly the same, so load calculations won’t need to be changed. (And don’t get me started on pipes.)
John Moralessays
40 cm (or 0.4 m) or 4 dm
🙂
Minimising the number of significant digits by changing units, oh my!
Pierce R. Butlersays
Some years ago, I indulged in an argument with a certain Scotsperson active in this network, and thought it worth noting we had perspectives around 3,000 miles apart.
Except I decided it would look less provincial to render that as 5,000 kilometers, so I did. Then I wrestled for a while with the urge to say 5 megameters, but realized practically nobody in the world expresses longer (terrestrial) distances that way.
We really will use *anything* but the metric system. Football fields, elephants, you name it, as long as it isn’t metric…
The writers for SNL forgot the $0.001 in gasoline pricing that even new stations cling to as if it had been etched on that lost third stone tablet. Are several electric price signs with extra digits and the electricity to display them that cheap that they cannot save money in the long term? Or have they found that Usians won’t visit those stations as often because of perceived anti-‘Murcanism? A nearby gas station built only a couple of years ago has that extra digit on all their signs, and must also have them on each pump, yet they always show their price as three to five cents less than the next nearest station. You would think that reducing that discount by one cent and having more efficient displays would have been more profitable.
As I often told my students, over 95% of the world uses metric. The USA is just under 5% of the global population. We are by ourselves. And, most importantly for them, science and technology is pretty much metric these days. People don’t think about it, but units like volts and amps are metric units. US customary units are bad enough (128 ounces to the gallon, really?), but we make it worse by not using decimals for partial quantities. Quick, I have to cut this board into 3 equal length pieces. It’s 5 feet 4 and 7/8 inches long. Ridiculous. Only morons and the innumerate would cling to such a system. And they do.
I realize that many Americans are afraid of the conversions between US customary units and metric, but the thing is, once we convert, no one but historians will need to convert again since everything will be metric (excepting repairs to legacy systems).
Whenever anyone talks about America being a world leader and which offers the best promise for tomorrow, I always say, “Really? We can’t even convert to metric.”
Exceptional stuff!
jimf, interesting example, where one need not use any units at all.
(https://www.mathopenref.com/constdividesegment.html)
Or, more mathily: It’s 5 feet 4 and 7/8 inches long, so it’s ((5×12×8)+(4×8)+7) eighths of an inch long, so 519 eighths of an inch in total, and thus one third of that is 173 eighths of an inch, and (173 ÷ 8) is 21 and a bit, and (173 mod 8) is 5, so the answer is 21 inches and 5/8ths of an inch, or 1 foot and nine inches and 5/8ths of an inch. Not conceptually complicated.
So, if one is to work with the primitive legacy system the USA still partially uses, one has to be more numerate than with the metric system. The opposite of being innumerate, actually.
Yes John, I could do (and have done many times) those sorts of computations in my head (and not using the lengthy method you did). I’m a retired engineering professor so It’s not difficult for me but I’d wager that a majority of US adults could not. The reason is because they are functionally innumerate. These are folks who need an app in order to figure out a 15% tip at the lunch counter. The very thought of conversions along with the entire “kilo, milli, micro” stuff is mind bending to them. Even though, ultimately, it would be easier for them, the whole thing scares them. Why make it even harder for them by adding on the business with fractions? That’s the ridiculous part.
Along with my normal engineering courses, I also taught a science elective for non-science majors. For some students, their difficulty with even basic concepts was eye opening.
jimf, interestingly, I was around when Australia was in the process of metricating — 1973-1974 when big changes were made. I remember one could get stick-on overlays for speedometers, that sort of thing.
So, in classes (first year of secondary school for me) we were kinda taught both systems in tandem, and the contrast was pretty evident to every student, best as I could tell.
Still, we were taught the whole thing but focused on the simplified version we now use; when I had my primary schooling in Spain we actually did everything for convenience, so would use all the prefixes including deci/deca and centi/hecto. This simplified version kinda kills the utility of choosing whatever units suit, so 6 decilitres instead of 600 millilitres, for example, or 4 hectometres instead of 400 metres.
Tsk. In that sense, we’re only halfway to proper metrication.
Nonethelesss, I don’t reckon your population is genuinely dumber than ours, so it’s not like it’s not doable, other than a lack of any combo of enthusiasm, desire, political will, usefulness.
(Oblique ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Feeling_of_Power )
—
BTW, were I personally to have to undertake that thirding task, I’d probably just take a length of string and rough out what I think a third of the length using the Mk1 eyeball method, then pinch the string at that point measuring from one side and apply it twice more. If I’m short of the length after that, I’d lengthen the pinch point, else shorten it if I’m long, else I’d have got lucky right away.
I reckon by the 3rd iteration, it would be close enough.
I mean, why measure lengths and do computations needlessly? 😉
I was in elementary school in the USA the month they introduced the metric system in the public schools, but because of public outcry, they quickly dropped it completely and it was never again discussed. That was around the time there were gas shortages and the national speed limit was reduced to 55 mph. The evening news around that time was full of the public having tantrums over all these things.
AFAICT, the bit use of the metric system in the USA is solely for the sale of various brands of soda. I believe every major brand sells in 2-litre bottles. Why? I have no idea.
John Morales @8 and the string method: yes, analog computers are take a long time to set up but get the answer almost immediately. 😎
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghetti_sort
and no accounting for kerf…
[Written like a carpenter, lochaber 🙂 ]
John, why bother with string? I would get the answer in a few seconds in my head and just use my tape measure to lay out the cuts. Tape measure is right next to the cutting tools in my shop. That would be the fastest way for me, but your mileage may vary.
The “analog” method does remind me of a story, though. I do not know if it’s true but I was told this by one of my professors. One day, Thomas Edison asked one of his mathematicians to determine the volume enclosed by one of his light bulbs. The employee started to trace the bulb with the goal of fitting a curve to it and then applying a little integral calculus to get the volume. Edison, being impatient, grabbed the bulb from him, filled it with water, and then poured the water into a graduated cylinder. It’s the kind of story that engineering students find entertaining.
When I was in grade school, there was a lot of talk about the USA converting to metric. There was similar talk in Canada at that time (they were still using the Imperial system, so their gallons were not the same size as our gallons). Unfortunately for us, USA businesses started whining about the change over so the government did not place a strict timetable on the conversion. In contrast, Canada did. End result, Canada is now using metric but here in the USA we have a mess. Milk, paint and some other products are sold by the gallon or quart while soda is sold by the liter. Distances are measured in miles, unless you’re doing a road race, in which case it’s in km. Temperatures are almost always in Fahrenheit, a word most of us can’t spell. Weights are generally in pounds, abbreviated as “lb.” which most people don’t know why but accept anyway. And in my shop, I have two complete sets of sockets for my wrenches, one metric, and one SAE (actually three sets, considering that there are 1/4″, 3/8″, and 1/2″ drives). What’s that? The 1/2″ socket is a little loose on what appears to be a 1/2″ nut? Hmm, must be a 12 mm…
How I hate it.
Don’t get me started on MM/DD/YYYY (or even worse MM//DD/YY) versus YYYY/MM/DD for dates.
Both MM/DD/YYYY and MM/DD/YY are ambiguous for many dates and neither of them sort.
It might shock many Americans to hear that we are already metric! The inch, pound, etc. are all defined by law according to their metric equivalents. That’s why an inch is exactly 2.54cm. For the pound you need quite a few more figures to get it exact, but in the end it’s the same principle.
@14, steve oberski
Agree completely. As a halfway measure, I tend to write dates in the form 21-Dec-2023.
@15 rblackadar
Yes, and I am a proponent of “soft metric” equivalences for the construction trades (at least where it’s feasible). Anyone who has ever done framing work in the USA knows that the standard is 16″ on center. Why not shift to 40 cm (or 0.4 m)? It’s nearly the same, so load calculations won’t need to be changed. (And don’t get me started on pipes.)
40 cm (or 0.4 m) or 4 dm
🙂
Minimising the number of significant digits by changing units, oh my!
Some years ago, I indulged in an argument with a certain Scotsperson active in this network, and thought it worth noting we had perspectives around 3,000 miles apart.
Except I decided it would look less provincial to render that as 5,000 kilometers, so I did. Then I wrestled for a while with the urge to say 5 megameters, but realized practically nobody in the world expresses longer (terrestrial) distances that way.
Why not?
[OT — or is it?]
Pierce R. Butler @18
Parce que mon ami, tu n’es pas français.
Alan G. Humphreys @ # 20 -- Zut alors!