Ordering an “imperial pint” sounds awesome, even a bit better then a “ma�?” (hope you can read the letter).
As to the Stone, I’m still unconvinced. At present, I’m weighing 13,5 stones, which sounds like some dialogue from a Borat movie.
In Kgs, 100 (220,5 lbs) is pretty big which is a better benchmark the “usual” 200 lbs (90,7 KG).
Nay to the stone and yay to the imperial pint in my book.
Metric all the way. Being the son of a physisist, I support a system that combines so many units:
Makkun
metric system is better. the english system is fucking retarded. none of it adds up right. plus they have silly-ass measurements like “a barrel of flour”
ive lived in America my whole life and still dont know the liquid measurements and im sure ill memeorize the metric ones before i ever do.
only thing i dislike about metric system is how far off it is from english, like cm’s and inches are so far off…who wants to use 9,000 cms when they could say 3 inches.
For lengths i use the “its about yay big thar”(holding hands about a 2 feet apart) method.
During my Strength of Materials class my professor did a demonstration of why imperial is better than metric, try calculating torque with Newton-centimeters or inch-pounds and the metric soon gets out of hand with absurdly large numbers.
The ability to divide, by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12 make the imperial better than the metric that is only divisible by 2, 5, and 10, as well.
This makes me chuckle and reminds me of how a computer science teacher of me honestly tried to hit on a young, hot french teacher on probation by blathering about how much more logical and consistent the binary system is and why we all should use it.
And how my chinese neighbour told me with a straight face how his language and writ is much easier to learn, while at the same time trying to find some word in a big ass chinese-german dictionary for over five minutes!
I definitely prefer SI over Imperial.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
pookie wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
pookie wrote:
okaz wrote:
I got some cake mix yesterday, it said to add 60 cubic centimeters of milk o.O
Japan uses the metric system, but occasionally you’ll see something odd like that.
Since a milliliter is a cubic centimeter, isn’t that just a roundabout way of saying 60ml?
Hmmmmm…not 600ml?
Or have I missed some internet irony/sarcasm ?
So you can teach an old dog…
thanks.[/quote]
The proof is in the pud, err, cake. Mixed in 60 ml and it came out just right. I did have to google it first though.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
So I’m bored and will likely have to work all night in front of the computer.
As you know, there are different ways to describe how tall someone is, how much he weighs etc.
Most of these systems have a long history (feet), others are somewhat younger (metre).
Now I think some are better then others.
What do you think? If you’d be in charge and could unify or impose a new “metric” system, how would it look like?
Inches and feet suck. Metres and centimetres all the way. I’m 5’6’’ 1/2 is way more complicated and unprecise then 170 cm.
Is 1 000 000 000 a Billion or Milliard? Short scale all the way!
Lbs vs KG. A tie. Both are OK, while pounds are a bit more precise, I feel that KGs are better suited for describing human weight.
Loser: Stone
Celsius vs Fahrenheit; again, a tie. Fahrenheit are good for everyday use (0=freezing, 100= very hot) , and Celsius are better if things get more scientific, even when it’s just about boiling water.
Any more ideas?
The English system is better. Kilos makes it sound as if you’re dealing dope. I want to dealift 600, not 272 kilos or whatever. Let the science guys and dope dealers have the metric system, and we’ll have 600 lbs and 200 mph.
You realize this is a weak argument?
“I want to deadlift 300 KGs, not 661 lbs!”
It’s all the same. It’s just an arbitrary assignment of value. I don’t care either way. Imperial is funny though, because it weeds out the idiots who are 30 some years old and still can’t figure out that 16oz are in a pound at the store.
Living in the US, everything is US customary, but being in engineering introduces a lot of metric/SI measurement. I definitely prefer using SI, its just so much easier, but it would be nearly impossible to switch over from US customary, at least in any sort of “short” timeframe.
[quote]LiveFromThe781 wrote:
only thing i dislike about metric system is how far off it is from english, like cm’s and inches are so far off…who wants to use 9,000 cms when they could say 3 inches.[/quote]
9,000cm is more like 150 yards.
That’s a far cry from three inches.
If you said “nine-thousand centimeters” people would like at you like you’re retarded. It’d be “ninety meters”.
Three inches is more like ten centimeters.
It’s really not that far off at all.
– ElbowStrike
[quote]cpete wrote:
During my Strength of Materials class my professor did a demonstration of why imperial is better than metric, try calculating torque with Newton-centimeters or inch-pounds and the metric soon gets out of hand with absurdly large numbers.[/quote]
That’s why the standard measure of torque in SI is Newton-meters.
100N x 0.5m = 50 Nm = Practical
100N x 50cm = 5,000 N-cm = Retarded
Calculating torque in Newton-centimeters makes about as much sense as calculating it in 1/16"-ounces.
Looks like that prof was deliberately misrepresenting SI to make himself feel better about operating in Imperial.
– ElbowStrike
English system sucks and needs to be banned from ever being used again except for teaching how stupid it was in history class. Metric system all the say, it’s so much easier and makes so much more sense.
not even reading this thread but just wanted to say that i measure everything by my dick.
yes i use the tiniest increments possible 
Imperial, but I am comfortable with either.
All my measureing tools are in decimals though (mics, calipers, gauge blocks etc…).