When you use Celsius from birth 41C does make you say FORTY ONE DEGREES?!!!
Yeah, but it hits different. Smaller number is smaller.
That’s why I use Kelvin. THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN DEGREES?!!
Degrees? While using Kelvin?? OP is a phony!
I’d excuse it as part of the joke
Should use Rankine with that logic. It comes out to 566.
Why not Centikelvin?
THIRTY ONE THOUSAND AND FIVE HUNDRED CENTIKELVIN??!!!Who is kelvin and why the fuck are his numbers so large
100%
It’s just Americans having American perspectives promoted as world views.
It’s about crossing into triple digits, a new order of magnitude, it feels heavy.
But it’s also underwhelming when your usual reference for over 100 is, “WHAT IT’S HOT ENOUGH TO BOIL WATER OUTSIDE!?”
… for you.
It doesn’t really though for people who doesn’t use fahrenheit.
brother, that’s what a world view is lmao, do you not understand this concept?
Most of us don’t really go anywhere outside of the US, the entire continental US is the literal equivalent of the collective EU. What do you want me to say? I literally don’t need to leave to US to experience something geographically unique.
I think they’ve meant world’s view, not worldview
im pretty sure the world’s view would be that we’re parasites destroying the well balanced nature of the ecology of the earth, but that’s just me.
geographically unique
Geographically perhaps. But the cultural and historical unique is something you are going to miss out on by staying inside your own home country for your entire life. You think your US regional differences are the same as the differences between two countries, but anyone who has experienced different countries will tell you in an instant that that is not so.
i mean culturally in terms of outside of the continental US sure. There’s plenty of interesting and unique culture within the US if you just go looking for it. Though a lot of it is going to be somewhat westernized in essence. If you want more eastern culture, obviously you’re going to have to go farther east, but i feel like that’s a given.
On the other hand, if it was 107°C outside, the outrage would be so much more justified.
But much less vocal.
You know, because we’d all be dead.
No, he’s right. The “one hundred” part really does add certain powers, Austin Powers
It’s that extra “one” of incredulity.
40 degrees, that’s just too hot.
41? You’ve got to be fucking kidding me.
In Australia we go with “Farkin hot”
By that metric, kelvin would be even better though.
by that metric
Americans cannot understand any metric
2 liter bottle.
Checkmate, athiests.
Also we have electric, water and gas meters smh
This is why I say ‘metre’ for the measure and ‘meter’ for the measurement device
And Demeter for the harvest
9mm
We’re more familiar with 5.56x45mm thanks to all our school shootings thank you very much.
In the same way a US ton and a metric ton is like 10% different, a 556 bullet is actually 5.7 mm across.
Because the minor diameter of the barrel is 5.56 mm and the major diameter is 5.69 mm. If the bullet were smaller than that then the propellant would blow past it. They didn’t make a 'murican millimetre like they did with the imperial system.
28 grams to an ounce
In point of fact Americans have gotten impressive results out of far more complicated metrics than metric. It’s not a matter of understanding, it’s a matter of pride. And of not having to buy all new tools.
You miss out on screaming that it’s negative anything though.
-40F = -40C
Kelvin doesn’t have a negative.
The best system would have 0 at a mild, comfortable temperature, and go up or down by 100 degrees per one degrees Fahrenheit.
But mild and comfortable is different for different people who are acclimated to different weather.
We need a defined ‘mild’ temperature. i vote for 70F/21C.
It’s a bit chilly for the warm weathered folks and a bit warm for the cold weathered folks. Seems reasonable but I’m open to suggestions.As a cold weathered folk, I can confirm that 70 is my upper limit for nice temperature
I’d adjust it to 68/20 just so it lines up with whole numbers in both systems. And on second thought, make it 90 per degree Fahrenheit so any whole F or C value can convert to a whole number.
it needs to be a range, you can’t really just have a single point, something like 50f to 70f would be good. Some people like a little below, some people like a little above, the 60s are generally pretty comfy all around though.
We also need to consider clothing as well. Which i do in this case.
0 for freezing because water falls from the fucking sky.
You can absolutely yell about that. And when Fahrenheit flips to negative, you’re ready to express some big feelings about how fucking cold it is.
And Rankine would be even better than Kelvin in terms of “big number go brrr.” Water boils at 671 R.
Of course, Rankine is the most obnoxious unit I’ve ever had to deal with, but those numbers sure are big!
You mean it’s THREE HUNDRED AND FOURTEEN FUCKING DEGREES OUTSIDE?!
OK, but with Rankine, if it’s 101 out, you can go Five Hundred and SIXTY degrees??!
Please raise this temperature by 1.4x10^-23 Joules - statements of the utterly deranged
Joules are energy. You need thermal capacity to turn them into temperature.
“Kelvin” sounds a lot like “communism” you pinko
For proof that this thread is just people justifying what they know as better somehow, look no further than Canada.
We do cooking temps in Fahrenheit, weather in Celsius. Human weights in pounds, but never pounds and oz. Food weights in grams, cooking weights in pounds and oz. Liquid volume in millilitres and litres, but cooking in cups, teaspoons and tablespoons. Speed & distance in kilometres, heights in feet and inches.
Try and give this any consistency and people will look at you like you’re fucked. The next town is 100km over, I’m 5ft 10in, a can of soda is 355ml, it’s 21c out and I have the oven roasting something at 400f. Tell me it’s 68f out and I will fight you.
People like what they are used to, and will bend over backwards to justify it. This becomes blatantly obvious when you use a random mix of units like we do, because you realize that all that matters is mental scale.
If Fahrenheit is “how people feel” then why are feet useful measurements of height when 90% of people are between 4ft and 6ft? They aren’t. You just know the scale in your head, so when someone says they’re 7ft tall you say “dang that’s tall”. That’s it.
This makes a lot of sense, and why I’d never survive in Canada.
If Fahrenheit is “how people feel” then why are feet useful measurements of height when 90% of people are between 4ft and 6ft?
Those are two different things. Hope this helps.
It doesn’t help at all, it’s being intentionally obtuse. You know what I mean, it’s unhelpful to pretend otherwise and pick a fight over it.
If an argument is being made for one thing, Fahrenheit, it’s not relevant to bring up a different thing. Why is feet a useful measurement? Maybe it’s not, we’re talking about temperature.
Yeah like the metric system has good arguments for why it’s measurements and weights are better, mainly conversion being easier, but for temperature there really isn’t an argument. I would make an argument for Fahrenheit as it gives more precision without having to use decimals which at least in America isn’t a thing for temperature. But those are pretty minor things and I do tend to agree it comes down to what you grew up with.
without having to use decimals
This fear of decimals is a strictly American thing. Celsius achieves more precision with decimals than fahrenheit without decimals. And this American fear of decimals is pretty funny, considering you will happily do advanced fractions as soon as you are doing length measurements.
I don’t mind decimals at all, it’s more that I don’t trust companies to actually deal with supporting decimals when making the switch. Plus the last time I discussed this on Lemmy someone was saying that decimals aren’t even universally used and it might depend on what you get whether you get that precision or not. Either way like the main point of my post was anyways these are minor arguments and at the end of the day there isn’t really a reason to use Celsius vs Fahrenheit.
Can you feel the difference between 23.5° and 24? I can’t. You don’t often need precision to tenths.
In Australia most weather providers give you whole degrees, the bureau of meteorology gives you to one decimal in reports and whole degrees in forecasts
My coffee and beer boilers can hit high precision temperatures to variously 0.1° or 0.5° precision. The beer boiler gives 3 digits - hundredths below 10°, tenths below 100°, whole numbers 100° and over
You can choose the precision of thermometers you wish to buy for yourself
I have seen fahrenheit thermometers which are hard to read to better precision than 5 degrees
1cm3 of water weights 1 gr and needs 1 calorie to rise 1ºC.
But calories are now obsolete and the unit is Joules.
i still don’t see how this is intentionally obtuse, feet are a mid point between inches and yards, it just makes sense to break down things over a certain amount to a much more palatable scale. Everyone knows roughly what 1 ft is, and everyone knows roughly what 1 inch is. Paired together you can get a pretty rough and accurate guesstimate of height. I feel like it’s also pretty expected for it to be within the range of 4-6 ft. Most people don’t really measure feet outside of that range, unless you’re doing construction.
humans are a comparatively arbitrary height so i feel like you’re just complaining about the height of humans being weirdly arbitrary? Out of all the systems you could use for height, ft and in is pretty well tuned to the human nature, you’re not gonna do much better.
As a Canadian idk why your using us an an example, we are wrong to do so and we blame Americans for giving us this bad habit.
I just see it positively and choose to believe you’re in the process of transitioning to enlightenment (metric). ;)
Outdoor temperature in °C, unless you’re talking about an outdoor pool then it’s often enough °F :-)
I think part of the reasons it’s so mixed might just be due to how many Amero-centric devices and parts are common between the two countries.
Y’all can take your shitty Phillips screws though. Roberts is by far superior ;-)
Imagine weighing people as big rocks, though.
Until the UK changes that, us Americans and Canadians can rest assured that nothing we are doing is quite that ridiculous.
then why are feet useful measurements of height when 90% of people are between 4ft and 6ft? They aren’t. You just know the scale in your head, so when someone says they’re 7ft tall you say “dang that’s tall”. That’s it.
to be clear, we use feet and inches, and there is historical precedent for breaking things down once they get past a certain grouping, we only have 10 fingers after all. To me the difference between 200cm and 220 is literally fuck all. You ask me the difference between 4 ft and 6ft and i can pretty quickly tell you.
I find it weird that when measuring height in metric, people using cm exclusively, i’ve noticed this a lot actually, people will use cm or mm in places where it arguably doesn’t make any sense. I could see the justification for doing math maybe, but like, that defeats the whole point of it being metric no?
Shouldn’t you be using meters and cm for height specifically? Since most people are a good bit over one meter i feel like it would make sense to do it that way. But then again that’s just kind of a shit bucket worth of options you have, ideally you would use decimeters, but nobody uses those things for some reason.
Most of Europe just uses metres for people’s height. 1.67m, like that. I have no mental picture of that, so it doesn’t work for me. But they don’t seem to have any trouble, further evidence that it’s all just what you know.
hm, that’s weird, i’ve seen this first hand in a handful of cases, guess i just get the weird ones. Granted i still see it holding true in things like construction, where i guess it makes more sense, but it seems weirdly arbitrary to me.
I find it weird that when measuring height in metric, people using cm exclusively, i’ve noticed this a lot actually, people will use cm or mm in places where it arguably doesn’t make any sense. I could see the justification for doing math maybe, but like, that defeats the whole point of it being metric no?
Why is that defeating the whole point of being metric? If you know someone is 183 cm tall, you also know that they are 1.83 m tall. If its easier to say the length in cm, you do. No need for “one meter and eighty-three centimeters” or “one point eighty-three meters”, just “a hundred and eighty-three centimeters”. Often you just skip saying the “centimeters” part as well, because most people can see that you’re not the size of a skyscraper without getting a ruler out.
yeah idk, i guess it’s just weird to me, because here in the us if you measured someones height in inches alone, you would be chased out of a room. We strictly use feet and inches, and then yards if referring to a more “broad” range. So you can very safely assume something is in feet and inches if its just two numbers stuck together.
I feel like i could very easily get confused with metric if i’m not running a consistent rule for default units. Seems like an easy way to get a random x10 error in there to me.
As you pointed out previously, nobody uses decimeters, so x10 errors are not that common.
i’m just gonna say that the joke here is that it was a 10x error. But that’s retroactive, so.
To me the difference between 200cm and 220 is literally fuck all. You ask me the difference between 4 ft and 6ft and i can pretty quickly tell you.
To you. But you are aware that this is not the case for people (almost the rest of the world) who are using metric, right?
To you. But you are aware that this is not the case for people (almost the rest of the world) who are using metric, right?
i mean i would assume so. But i have no direct reference to what 200cm is other than it’s somewhere about 6ft or 2 yards. something like 6’ 5" i think. I would need to know the height of like 50 other people to be able to make a relative distinction there.
Tell me it’s 68f out and I will fight you.
Note to self: High heat levels make Canadians cranky.
The only good thing about Fahrenheit is that 69 degrees (20.5 C) is a nice temperature.
And you can bake things at 420
You could bake something at 420 Celsius too, assuming your okay with charcoal as the end product
Or Pizza!
ok you actually convinced me, Fahrenheit is better (except I can’t spell it properly without autocorrect)
I can’t spell it properly without autocorrect
This is genuinely the most inconvenient thing about Fahrenheit
you can also bake things at 420C if you’re not a coward about this (like proper thin pizza) (maybe it’s a bit too high but you get the idea)
Well… If it’s only for a few seconds…
You can make the temperature dial of an oven have matching degrees of rotation and degrees Celcius.
Turn the dial to point straight down to bake at 180°
Turn it 3/4 of the way to cook a pizza at 270°
a 69°C cup coffee on winter is nice
A cup of lukewarm coffee please.
Edit: my wrong, I thought it was 69°F !
All my excuses
According to James Hoffmann, the ideal temperature to enjoy coffee is between 50°C and 60°C, he may know a thing or two about coffee, and you may think the coffee you drink is hotter that it really is.
By that logic, Americans should use km/h instead of mph. Going 0-100 is much better than 0-60. For the same reason you keep telling us why Fahrenheit is so much more intuitive.
Actually, it’s the other way around. 100 degrees F weather is really hot. Driving 100 MPH is really fast.
In metric we have 40 degrees C weather is really hot, and driving…uhhh… (gets out a calculator)… 160 km/h is really fast.
Uhh and 100 ° C is also really hot.
Plus, 100 km/h is also pretty fast.
100°C is where you shouldn’t touch it anymore and 100 to 120 km/h is the speed limit about everywhere except germany.
You can go 100 mph
You can also go 107 Celsius, for a while.
You guys have a lot of Max 100 zones?
Because in km/h, we got lots of those
Also you calculate acceleration using 0-100 mph?
I didn’t say it was legal.
I think the highest speed limit I have seen in America is 85mph, which is around 135km/h. Typical highway speed limits though are 65mph, but everyone goes 5-10 over (105-120km/h).
The nice thing about mph is the whole mile a minute at 60mph. Makes it easy to mentally estimate time of arrival.
I mean… 100km/h is 100 km in one hour, it’s still useful to estimate a far arrival.
And 120 kph is 2 km per minute.
but everyone goes 5-10 over
Do police not arrest people for this?
Arrest no, ticket maybe. Depends on lots of things, like the road and expected speed, is it a neighborhood, school, or empty highway. how the officer is feeling. surrounding traffic speed. Also I think the ticket doubles or goes up in price 10+ mph over the limit.
Lol no, you have to be going something like double the speed limit most places to get arrested
You might get a ticket, but almost any judge will throw the ticket out if they write you up for going 5-10 over. Some places will write the ticket anyways in the hopes of making some extra revenue, but generally speaking it’s not a ticket that is worth writing because it’s so easy to get tossed out.
Some places are sticklers about the speed limit, and other minor offenses. If you’re local, you tend to know where they are, either from word-of-mouth or local news. Most places won’t ticket for going 5 mph over because a lot of judges will just throw the ticket out, especially if you come with a receipt saying you had your speedometer calibrated. In seemingly more and more places, 10 mph over is the norm. Some of that’s due to shrinking police forces. Pretty much everywhere, 20+ mph over is considered reckless driving.
What part of the country are you from? IME that’s far from universal. I have gotten pulled for 20+ over in multiple states and it’s often just a warning, if I do get ticketed it’s just a ticket and that’s the end of it:
When I had first gotten my license in CA I got pulled over while doing 105-110 in a 65 mph zone. The cop wrote it up for 99 mph, which was a simple speeding ticket without the option for traffic school. I went to court and the judge knocked it down to a <$200 ticket with traffic school so I didn’t get any points on my record.
85 mph in a 65 is normal in a ton of states, they’d be they’d be writing up people for reckless driving in every other traffic stop if 20 over were the threshold.
Just because they don’t ticket you for it, doesn’t mean it isn’t legally considered reckless. Cops often exercise a bit of discretion when deciding which ticket, if any, to write up. Some people just get out of tickets. I’ve never been that lucky, and I’ve never really driven particularly fast. A quick search suggests reckless is considered 15-over in CA, but I can’t find the specific statute.
To answer your question, I’ve lived all up and down the east coast and TX.
Do police not arrest people for this?
Depends on the city. Some cities are notorious for using speed traps to increase revenue.
From Texas to Ohio, municipalities are using law enforcement to counteract declining tax bases through the aggressive enforcement of fineable offenses such as speeding. A 2019 report estimated that nearly 600 jurisdictions nationwide generate at least 10% of their general fund revenue through fines and forfeitures.
Other municipalities have enacted their own policing-for-profit programs. In Brookside, Alabama, the town of about 1,200 residents saw its revenue increase more than 640% in only two years, according to AL.com, after police began an aggressive traffic stop and ticket-writing campaign. Fines and forfeitures made up almost half of the town’s budget.
Highest I have driven on is 130km/h, but it has no speed enforcement.
I think the more common measurement is 0-60 mph, so maybe thats closer to 1-100 in kilometers per hour.
That’s my point.
deleted by creator
100mph is like, actually kinda spooky though. 100 kmh isn’t spooky. Also 60mph ties nicely into the seconds/minutes/hours time dichotomy, which is fun.
TWO HUNDRED AND SEVETY THREE KELVIN I’M FREEZING
Once again… the classic argument of: “Well, I grew up using this system, and I’m used to the system. I have built an internal intuition for how hot and cold the temperature is. I am used to >100 being hot! 40 is not hot!”
Well then. I grew up using celcius and… “IT’S FOURTY FUCKING ONE DEGREES OUTSIDE?” sounds just as hot.
41°C sounds terrifying to me
Sounds like a great time to propose my system of temperature: Super Celsius. I’ll connect it to the freezing and boiling points of water just like Celsius, but while freezing remains at 0, boiling is now 1000. Get ready for a nice mild day of 250.
Kilocelsius
CentiCelsius I think (10 cm in 1 m). kilo would go the other way. love this idea though
I believe it’s DeciCelsius. I don’t know in what system 1 meter contains only 10 centimeters heh, thought it’s 100.
Haha, i knew kilo was wrong but someone would figure it out. Not sure how i confused myself that badly
Centi = 1e-2, deci = 1e-1
Regards,
Non-American
Milicelsius = 0.001ºC
Kilocelsius = 1000ºC
I’m kilosweating
we could use the freezing and boiling points of humans, for a change
Finally, change I can believe in
but is that dead or (at least recently) alive humans? for dead humans that’s about the same as just straight up water isn’t it?
Lets ditch base10 entirely and use 0(freezing)-216(boiling). that means 0-1000 in base6.
it’s not about what makes more sense: what makes more sense is what you use everyday and is natural to you. 40+ C is freaking hot because when you experience it, it’s freaking hot. It’s about what the entire rest of the world is using as a standard.
Strange, because it is bullshit.
Fahrenheit isn’t how people feel, otherwise 50° would be perfect temperature.
You Americans are just used to thinking in Fahrenheit, that is why you think it is how humans feel. As a European, I “feel” in Celsius.
Rating inflation. If someone called you a 5 or 6 out of 10, you’d feel bad. 7/10 is the bottom of acceptability, just like 72° is room temperature.
Removed by mod
riddle me this then mr european man (i assume for the context of shitposting)
would you feel ok with getting half of everything you did being completely wrong, or would you feel ok with only three of those 10 things being completely wrong.
half is formidable, like you tried, probably. 7/10 is on the way to being good at it though.
Removed by mod
it’s a question surrounding human bias on the subject of correctness. Most people would argue that 7/10 is “ok or good” where as most people would argue that 5/10 is “not the worst, but not good”
we’re not fundamentally biased to the midpoint of something, we’re fundamentally biased to the perceived average of something.
Fahrenheit literally meant to base the scale with 100 being human body temp.
It was later rescaled by Cavendish to put the freezing point of water at exactly 32 and boiling point at exactly 212, giving a nicely-divisible 180-degree separation between freezing and boiling. That shift is why body temperature is 98.6.
I like this version better than “he had a fever when he measured 100 degrees” so I will choose to believe it without further research.
I hope you are correct.
The Report of the Committee Appointed by the Royal Society to Consider of the Best Method of Adjusting the Fixed Points of Thermometers; And of the Precautions Necessary to Be Used in Making Experiments with Those Instruments
Seems fancy and legit, I see no reason to actually read it and confirm the info.
Welcome to peer review!
Horse* body temp
I’m pretty sure that wasn’t actually Fahrenheit’s intention, more a happy accident. Also if your body temp is 100°F then you’re running a mild/moderate fever.
The scale was adjusted later to make freezing and boiling points land on exact numbers with an easily-divisible 180-dregrees between them (180 is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 20, 36, 45, 60, and 90).
https://archive.org/details/paper-doi-10_1098_rstl_1777_0038
I don’t usually run, but when I do, I run a mild/moderate fever.
I heard circular thermometers were how it was done then so he lined up 180° with 180°.
It literally was not.
I cited and linked my source from the 18th century when it was redefined. What’s yours?
otherwise 50° would be perfect temperature.
I love it when it’s 50ish out and sunny. You don’t get all sweaty, plus you can wear cozy socks and sweaters or just go out in short sleeves and both are perfectly fine. The bugs all start going into hiding at that temperature but the grass and leaves are still green
50F is the perfect temperature.
That’s 10°C for those who want to judge you. And you’re wrong, the perfect temperature is 17°C. Not too cold, not too hot.
The correct rebuttal is that 69 degrees is ideal ambient temperature.
50 degrees is a damn good temperature. I won’t stand here and let you besmirch 50 degrees.
Its not the “perfect” temperature but what temp in celcius is “perfect”? What a ridiculously proposition that there’s a perfect temperature.
20 is perfect.
that’s pretty comfortable, but between 50 and 70f which is about 10 and 20 c is the “comfortable range”
As is typically responded to this ‘response’: there are a large number of people-many European-who would unironically say that 50°F (10°C) is, in fact, the ideal temperature.
They’re wrong, of course, but they exist.
But you’re also assuming that the exact middle of the range is where the ideal sweet spot should be. That’s wrong. People generally can better handle larger temperature deviations that are colder than their ideal than hotter deviations.
The difference is that humans emit their own heat. Combined with our funny tendency to wear insulative clothing that can asymptotically approach zero net heat exchange with the atmosphere, acceptable temperatures skew wildly towards and beyond freezing.
Meanwhile, without some kind of acting cooling mechanism, any temp even slightly above fever temp is inevitably fatal. You can only take off so many layers. What are you going to do, take off your skin? Sweating helps us humans a lot, but evaporative cooling can only do so much to reverse the heat gradient.
50 F is excellent… with a light jacket or a blanket. Not so much if you’re naked.
Fahrenheit isn’t how people feel, otherwise 50° would be perfect temperature.
it is though? It’s like perfectly comfortable because you can dress up just enough to where you’re actually wearing a decent bit of clothing, but you can also dress down to a pretty light set of clothing as well.
This is also ignoring that this is both, arbitrary, and also completely subjective to the person.
The human body might end up liking 70f more than 50f, purely because it’s 96f inside the body, so something lower to allow heat transfer, but not low enough to be physically uncomfortable would be more expected.
Actually, here’s a good question, why do you land on the 50f point? Are you expecting the middle to be the most optimal point of perfection? Or is this just a metric brain thing?
Why would you pick 50 for the perfect temp? Genuinely curious why land on that number.
Because 0° is the minimum a body is supposed to endure according to the tweet, and 100° is the maximum a body should endure.
So the ideal temperature should be right in the middle.
But it isn’t, so Fahrenheit isn’t “how people feel”.
Why should the ideal temperature be right in the middle of the range?
It’s no surprise that the maximum end of the range is right around the body temperature, as it’s difficult for the body to keep itself cool once the environment is around or warmer than the body temperature. Sure, we can sweat, but that uses up a lot of water and people generally find that getting all sweaty to not be pleasant. Run out of water or raise the temperature too much and it gets dangerous pretty quickly.
On the other hand, if the environment is a lot cooler than the body temperature, then it is difficult for the body to keep warm. I’m sure for our distant ancestors who lived in what is now Africa, their minimum temperature was much higher, possibly putting the ideal temperature right around the middle of their range. Luckily for us, we have clothing and can put on more clothing to stay warm, which is how we can now make the minimum so low. But while we can use clothing to lower our minimum, we really don’t have anything different to raise our maximum vs. our ancestors - we’re both limited by how well we can cool ourselves by sweating. So for that reason it doesn’t really surprise me that our ideal temperature is towards the upper end of what we consider the minimum and maximum temperatures.
Because it is in the middle of that “0 is really really cold, 100 is really really hot” “human feeling” fahrenheit scale you guys keep going on about.
This is the first time I’ve heard about a “human feeling” scale so sure, 50 must be perfect.
What annoys me about that phrasing, is that “how water feels” is quite relevant to how humans feel.
The obvious example is that if it’s below 0°C, it starts freezing, which causes slippery sidewalks, snow, dry air, all that stuff.
But just in general having a feeling how much water will evaporate and later precipitate at certain temperatures, and even stuff like how hot beverages and cooking temperatures are, it’s all still relevant for humans…Humans are mostly water. If water boils, then humans will mostly boil too.
The obvious example is that if it’s below 0°C, it starts freezing, which causes slippery sidewalks, snow, dry air, all that stuff. But just in general having a feeling how much water will evaporate and later precipitate at certain temperatures, and even stuff like how hot beverages and cooking temperatures are, it’s all still relevant for humans…
that’s an interesting idea, BUT, the boiling point for water also exists under f as well, it’s just 212 f, which if you want to round for convenience, is 200f. 100f is just about half the boiling point of water.
I guess you celsius folks might be more water pilled than the average US citizen, but it’s not like it’s impossible.
In Celcius water boils at exactly 100°C, and you don’t have to round, and 50°C is exactly half the boiling point of water.
Yes, Celsius users are waterpilled: the whole system is based on the temperature at which water freezes and evaporates at 1 atm pressure.
(You’re just fucking with us right? Like Celsius is has a coarser base unit, and the range applicable to human temperatures are not such pretty numbers, but you can’t be seriously thinking Fahrenheit makes more sense for when we talk about water?)
In Celcius water boils at exactly 100°C, and you don’t have to round, and 50°C is exactly half the boiling point of water.
unless you’re doing literal chemistry, the specific boiling point of the water doesn’t matter, especially for any subjective referential experiences you might have, such as, going outside.
(You’re just fucking with us right? Like Celsius is has a coarser base unit, and the range applicable to human temperatures are not such pretty numbers, but you can’t be seriously thinking Fahrenheit makes more sense for when we talk about water?)
i’m not saying it’s better, i’m just saying you’re having a failure of imagination to conceptualize the usage of the fahrenheit system if you so pleased to use it in such a specific manner, which almost nobody here does. You could still do it though.
Cooking is basically water based chemistry, so it makes a lot of sense to use Celsius.
idk man, there’s a lot of temperatures in cooking that are like, kind of close? Not that close, but like, kind of close. Even then, the one case where i consider it genuinely mattering is boiling water which like, you can just kinda know.
100F is just about half
Your scale in water terms starts at 32. 100 is nowhere near halfway between 32 and 212
the celsius scale literally covers 55% of the range of the fahrenheit scale. I’d say “about half” is perfectly reasonable.
granted, it skews since you’re starting on the low end. The figure is more like 122f right in the middle, which is, not great, but i wasn’t going to calculate the half boiling point as i’ve literally never seen it be relevant anywhere lol.
Celcius degrees are quite a bit larger than Fahrenheit degrees. 0 to 100C is much larger than 0 to 100F so I don’t get what you mean by Celcius covering about half of Fahrenheit. In any case neither scale runs out of numbers high or low
my main point was that accuracy matters a lot less with fahrenheit, because it’s so much broader. a range of about 10 degrees fahrenheit is the average subjectively experienced “change” in temperature, at least on the higher end, where there’s more difference between the individual numbers. On the cold side there’s a lot less variance as it meets at about -40 in both systems.
In any case neither scale runs out of numbers high or low
this is very true though, hard to run out of numbers when you can just make more up, although there is an ultimate limit in either direction, due to what temperature actually measures. That’s a physics thing though.
The words you are looking for are that Fahrenheit is more precise. But it’s not as there are an infinity of numbers between any two integers.
My thermometer at work which I use for health and safety stuff reports temperature to two decimal places. Had we wanted more precision we could have gone with twenty decimal places. In too big or too small metric units we use multipliers - metres are too small for long distances so we use kilometres (thousands of metres), metres are too big for construction so we use millimetres (thousandths of metres)
Where Celcius degrees are too big, people (scientists, since whole degrees or a single decimal is enough for everyone else) use milikelvins
Fahrenheit is literally a German dude making a scale from, “scheiße its chilly outside” to “oh mein gott, its hot out!”
Yeah. But Celsius refers to inside room temperatures. 0°C = yay, ice skating! 100°C = yay, sauna!
Temperature doesn’t care about your feelings.
Oh, how rude.
Their friend is a dumbass though.
EDIT: replied to wrong comment
In Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves, the number of thieves wasn’t really necessarily 40. The number was likely just chosen because 40 was an exaggerated number, much like when we’d say “I’ve told you a hundred million times”. So 40 as a shorthand for “a huge amount” seems fitting in celcius.
Forty-one sounds insanely hot as an outside temperature if that’s the standard you’re used to. And that’s the thing that the Fahrentards refuse to wrap their head around.
Fahrenheit is better because 69 is a nice temperature
Celsius is better because 69 is very hot
Yes but we all know you will never experience that 69 (and I think you know it too)
What? Never been in a sauna? Do it, it’s really nice!
Meh… Give it another couple of decades.
Ah America, bigger is always a better isn’t it?
