Thinking about it… Isn’t that exactly what the Celsius scale does just with reliable definitions about what “cold” and “HOT” mean?
Shower water with 38°C is hot, a bowl of rice at 38°C/100F is decidedly not “HOT”. So the perceived convenience of the Fahrenheit scale is not applicable to everything, is it? How is it convenient then?
This is really interesting and I think there is a lot of support for the body temperature point. I was curious about whether the method of deriving 0F is insensitive to pressure changes and I can’t find any evidence of that. But I don’t know enough about chemistry or physics myself. Do you know, or have any details on where you learned this?
It is convenient because they are used to it. That is all there is to it, and peace be to that.
It only becomes silly when they begin to claim that F is better for “human temperature”, because again it all comes down to what you are used to and celsius is just as convenient if you are used to that.
Thinking about it… Isn’t that exactly what the Celsius scale does just with reliable definitions about what “cold” and “HOT” mean?
Shower water with 38°C is hot, a bowl of rice at 38°C/100F is decidedly not “HOT”. So the perceived convenience of the Fahrenheit scale is not applicable to everything, is it? How is it convenient then?
Removed by mod
This is really interesting and I think there is a lot of support for the body temperature point. I was curious about whether the method of deriving 0F is insensitive to pressure changes and I can’t find any evidence of that. But I don’t know enough about chemistry or physics myself. Do you know, or have any details on where you learned this?
Removed by mod
It is convenient because they are used to it. That is all there is to it, and peace be to that.
It only becomes silly when they begin to claim that F is better for “human temperature”, because again it all comes down to what you are used to and celsius is just as convenient if you are used to that.