# Metric Sucks! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 3, 2003, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559 "2003-02-03T19:05:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2003, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/121 "2003-06-21T20:29:29Z")
\ No. Should I have? \ ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2003, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/122 "2003-06-21T20:53:38Z")
Since the old Imperial system was based on the convention of everyday observation, we throw it out. Everyone says metric is easier because it’s based on the decimal system, but the decimal system is itself a convention, so we throw that out too. The only reason we use decimals at all is that some caveman decided that it was a pretty convenient number, mostly when he ran out of fingers. _Pfft._ Cavemen? We can do better. I give you: dodectrics! The base 12 metric system! All we have to is completely change the numerical system of the past fifty thousand years and base it on something that makes logical sense and isn’t dependent upon habit. Think of it! Everybody will be equally discombobulated! Numbers can be easily converted into sixths, fourths, thirds, halves! (But not fifths. Damn.) We don’t even have to change the clocks! Eggs will still come in convenient containers! Hot dogs and buns will finally come in matching packages! Geometry can remain largely unchanged! The calendar can still have 12 months! Not all is perfect, though. Cricket teams will need another player. Tennis will be played to 36. Whiskey will have to come in smaller containers. You’ll still run out of cream cheese before you get to the end of the bag of bagels. And no matter what happens, NASA will still find a way to crash its landers into the side of Mars. Still, I think we’re onto something here. 🙂 FISH ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2003, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/123 "2003-06-21T21:36:27Z")
tracer: An Engineer’s Scale or Engineer’s Rule is a niftly little thing I got to use back in Drafting class in the 1970s. The rule has a scale with the foot divided into tenths of a foot and a scale with inches divided into tenths of an inch. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2003, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/124 "2003-06-21T21:58:20Z")
Tenths of an inch I could kinda-sorta-barely understand (since 1/10 inch equals 100 mils), but tenths of a **foot**? Why?! Oh, and **Fish** : If we’re going to do that, I’d suggest we switch to base 2 or some other base (like base 16) that’s easily convertible to binary. Binary seems to be more logical than other numeric bases – plus, it’s a hell of a lot more convenient for representing fractional quantities like 1/4 inch, 5/8 inch, 9/32 inch, etc… ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2003, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/125 "2003-06-21T22:38:26Z")
**tracer** : But then you’d only get 1 egg in each package. Seriously, the arguments for base 12 were that it easily divides by 2, 3, 4 and 6. I might suggest base 60 if it weren’t so unwieldy, because it’s divisible into many more useful… uh, divisions. Regarding inches in tenths, I used them as an engraver, working on a computer-controlled engraving table. Why was it done that way? No idea. It would have been smarter to base the letter height from point sizes: 12 point, etc. No matter what number base we use, though, there’s going to be a point where it’s easier to express stuff in fractions than in decimals. So I say screw it, let’s have a base 17 system. It’ll keep the Grand Masters of the Illuminati off our backs. FISH ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2003, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/126 "2003-06-21T22:43:35Z")
tracer: tenths of a foot so that you could make something on the 1:10 scale, I’d imagine. ---
**Author:** ![occ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8c91f0/32.png) [@occ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/occ)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/127 "2003-06-22T20:18:07Z")
IMO, the main irritation is when there are competing systems in one area of measurement. A good example is automotive tools – every kit you buy, if you want it to be comprehensive, has to have both metric and English wrenches. Thus, you’ve got two almost identical sets of wrenches that you’re forced to buy, but not so identical that you’d want to use English on a metric bolt, or vice-versa. Competing standards = lame. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/128 "2003-06-22T22:25:50Z")
I knew I would be taken to task for this again when I saw the two metric threads in GD. Time to delurk, I s’pose. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by flonks \* > …wondering when erislover will finally get the point he seems to ignore (willingly?) but now I am at the end and it seems that **erislover** still did not address the following questions alread posted a long time ago by Curious Canuck: It is not willingly ignoring any point but taking a simple observation: the world goes on much as it has. There are many possible explanations for this, but none of them are likely to be “most people use the metric system.” The questions: _If you had to lay out markers along a highway every 4 inches for 600 miles, how many markers is that?_ If I had to do something like this, I would calculate it on paper or on a calculator. _Conversely if you had to lay out marjers along a highway every 10 centimeters for 1000 kilometers, how many markers is that?_ If I had to do something like this, I would calculate it on paper or on a calculator. I don’t know if everyone paid attention in school or not. When I went to school we basically used the metric system for everything. For our physics, chemistry, hell even our calculus class stuck mainly to metric story problems (mainly). What I noticed was that it is possible more people might be able to convert between centimeters and kilometers in their head, given enough practice. What I didn’t notice, and have yet to, are the myriad daily tasks that involve such things. What I also noticed was that, even at that, many people had a hard time understanding conversions. True, it is just as simple as moving decimal places (in single-dimesion measurements). False, this is “easy” to do. I never had a problem, but I was dumbfounded by the number of people who did have a problem with it. When I later studied electronics, again I was dumbfounded by the number of people who couldn’t switch between milliamperes and nanoamperes, or quickly determine resistor values from the color-coding. Is this merely a function of not being “used” to the metric system? I think my answer to this question, and the significance I place on it, has already been mentioned. **tracer** > [@](#): > > You have two bookcases [and wish to make a story problem out of them]… I do not see what sort of advantage the metric system will give me here. If the question is, “Can you calculate this in your head, erl?” the answer is “yes”. If the question is, “Don’t you see why we should all move to metric so we can all address these issues in a more efficient manner?” the answer is “not really”. I know. I’m a pain. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2003, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/129 "2003-06-22T23:48:54Z")
> [@](#): > > Conversely if you had to lay out marjers along a highway every 10 centimeters for 1000 kilometers, how many markers is that? Wait, you mean a megameter? Isn’t that the “easier” way to say it? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/130 "2003-06-23T04:43:36Z")
Most posts so far seem obsessed with length measurements and intuition. However, you can’t really appreciate the beauty of the [SI system](http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/) until you start working some physics problems. The traditional system of units used by U.S. engineers is known as the U.S. Customary System (USCS). Unfortunately, in the USCS system of units, both force units and mass units are referred to as pounds. As the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES), puts it in this [handbook (PDF format)](http://www.ncees.org/exams/study_materials/fe_handbook/fe_handbook_units.pdf): > [@](#): > > In the USCS system of units, both force and mass are called pounds. Therefore, one must distinguish the pound-force (lbf) from the pound-mass (lbm). The pound-force is that force which accelerates one pound-mass at 32.174 ft/s[sup]2[/sup]. Thus, 1 lbf = 32.174 lbm-ft/s[sup]2[/sup]. The expression 32.174 lbm-ft/(lbf-s[sup]2[/sup]) is designated as _g[sub]c[/sub]_ and is used to resolve expressions involving both mass and force expressed as pounds. > > For instance, in writing Newton’s second law, the equation would be written as _F = ma/g[sub]c[/sub]_, where _F_ is in lbf, _m_ in lbm, and _a_ is in ft/s[sup]2[/sup]. Similar expressions exist for other quantities. Kinetic Energy: _KE = mv[sup]2[/sup]/2g[sub]c[/sub]_, with _KE_ in (ft-lbf); Potential Energy: _PE = mgh/g[sub]c[/sub]_, with _PE_ in (ft-lbf); Fluid Pressure: _p = rho_gh/g[sub]c[/sub]\*, with _p_ in (lbf/ft[sup]2[/sup])… In all these examples, _g[sub]c[/sub]_ should be regarded as a unit conversion factor. It is frequently not written explicitly in engineering equations. However, its use is required to produce a consistent set of units. > > Note that the conversion factor _g[sub]c[/sub]_ [lbm-ft/(lbf-s[sup]2[/sup])] should not be confused with the local acceleration of gravity _g_, which has different units (m/s[sup]2[/sup]) and may be either its standard value (9.807 m/s[sup]2[/sup]) or some other local value. > > If the problem is presented in USCS units, it may be necessary to use the constant g[sub]c[/sub] in the equation to have a consistent set of units. Needless to say, I loathe working complex problems in the USCS system. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/131 "2003-06-23T05:02:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by js\_africanus \* > **I never really had strong feelings about the metric system until I read an essay by the brilliant (and beautiful) Joan Pontius called Metric Land. Now available at Metric Sucks.** BTW, looking at the following excerpt below from her essay, I’d say that Ms. Pontius has more problems with reality than the metric system: > [@](#): > > …So then we had a new thermometer, in degrees Celsius. Then hot air balloons were getting popular and Boyle and Charles were playing around and trying to figure out how temperature affects volume and pressure of gases. But there was one hitch, that is, they wanted to be able to divide by the temperature of the gas. This was a problem whenever the temperature was zero. So eventually a number was found that could be added to the measured temperature so that all their equations would work out nicely, and this new temperature was called Kelvin. > > Then a bunch of intellectuals came around once more, and decide that these gas laws, instead of being a TOOL, used to DESCRIBE the properties of gas, that these laws were some kind of ultimate truth. And then they decided that since the equations won’t work at zero Kelvin, that nothing can possible exist at that temperature! > > And now that’s what they teach us in physics class! I HATE that! If the fields of science and history even overlapped a little bit, we MIGHT be able to move in a direction we refer to as “progress”, but the way it is now is completely ridiculous… :rolleyes: What complete and utter ignorance of science _and_ history. :wally ---
**Author:** ![flonks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3ab097/32.png) [@flonks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flonks)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/132 "2003-06-23T07:02:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by erislover \* > \*\*_If you had to lay out markers along a highway every 4 inches for 600 miles, how many markers is that?_ > > If I had to do something like this, I would calculate it on paper or on a calculator. > > _Conversely if you had to lay out marjers along a highway every 10 centimeters for 1000 kilometers, how many markers is that?_ > > If I had to do something like this, I would calculate it on paper or on a calculator.\*\* That is **exactly** the point!!! For the first problem you really need a calculator. For the second problem, the you don’t. 1000/10 = 100, easy. But you can’t just divide the 600 by 4, you do have to convert first. ---
**Author:** ![dylan\_73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecccb3/32.png) [@dylan\_73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dylan_73)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 10:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/133 "2003-06-23T10:34:02Z")
Ouch, **flonks** , you really would have made that point much better if you’d checked the units… ---
**Author:** ![flonks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3ab097/32.png) [@flonks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flonks)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/134 "2003-06-23T11:37:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by dylan\_73 \* > \*\*Ouch, **flonks** , you really would have made that point much better if you’d checked the units… \*\* :smack: mea culpa :smack: OK, we can actually exploit that: we have different units of the SI system but let’s see how easy the conversation is: 1,000km/10cm =1,000,000m/0.1m= 10000000. The beauty of the decimal coma. Try that with miles and inches 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/135 "2003-06-23T14:08:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by flonks \* > That is **exactly** the point!!! That I would not rely on mental feats to make important calculations is the point? > [@](#): > > For the first problem you really need a calculator. For the second problem, the you don’t. 1000/10 = 100, easy. OK. It is so simple I see people mess it up every day. Yep. ---
**Author:** ![flonks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3ab097/32.png) [@flonks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flonks)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/136 "2003-06-23T14:12:47Z")
I waited for that … But you still did not respond to the original question and as long as you don’t you lack an argument. So please tell me: > [@](#): > > **If you had to lay out markers along a highway every 4 inches for 600 miles, how many markers is that?** and show me that it is as easy as for km and cm! ---
**Author:** ![WILLASS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/54ee81/32.png) [@WILLASS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WILLASS)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/137 "2003-06-23T14:23:25Z")
What countries use the metric system in porn magazines? I dont know why but slipping 8 inches of throbbing love meat into her aching honeypot sounds a lot more erotic than easing 20.32cm of pulsing schlong into her bearded clam… ---
**Author:** ![flonks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3ab097/32.png) [@flonks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flonks)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/138 "2003-06-23T14:28:10Z")
Errrr … in the metric countries we measure the “Schlong”, as call it, in centimeters. And it sounds BIGGER 🙂 As about your definition of what is erotic, well, that is debatable 😃 ---
**Author:** ![flonks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3ab097/32.png) [@flonks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flonks)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/139 "2003-06-23T14:35:26Z")
Computer screens are measured in inches in metric countries, so I do not know how many cms a 15" TFT panel is… On the other hand, TV screens are in centimeters. Water pipes are measured in inches and half-inches, for a reason I don’t know. Aviation is, of course, all feet and nautical miles, but only if the plane has an engine. The altimeters in sail planes are in meters. Don’t ask me why. I never saw pounds, yards, ounces and the other more “exotic” units in a purely metric country. Btw, in german a tape measure is called “Rollmeter”, which seems to be reasonable since it measures meters. That’s only the rollable version, however. If it comes in the form of a foldable bar, then it is called “Zollstab” = “inch bar”, even though it measures centimeters, not inches. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2003, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559/140 "2003-06-23T14:59:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by flonks \* > But you still did not respond to the original question and as long as you don’t you lack an argument. Yes, because I won’t do a simple math problem I lack an argument. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/metric-sucks/152559.md?page=8)