The argument that finally convinced me that it would be a HUGE pain to switch over, at least fully (and I’m a chemist who doesn’t know most of “our” system to save my life) is that so much of the US is layed out on nice mile-based/acre-based grids (at least in Michigan). Switch to metric, the grids become nonsense.
Also, when I’m driving and see that I have 100 miles left to go, I know I have about 100 minutes left in my trip. That argument is becoming less and less useful as the speed limits move up above 60, though
Fractions are easier in pounds and, especially, feet. Half a foot? Six inches. A third? Four inches. A quarter? Three inches.
I had been wondering how well the conversion was going in Britain so I’m glad that this thread exists to confirm my observation: Okay, up to a point. What made me wonder were some British TV shows, travel and cooking, where the measures are given in Imperial and there’s a metric-converting voiceover. I was wondering if these were first recorded for a US audience (didn’t seem likely) or if somebody had mostly given up and the metric was an afterthought (seemed more likely).
Well yeah, if you pick those particular fractions. But what about a fifth of a foot, huh? Or a third of a pound, or half a mile, or an eighth of a yard? Some fractions are easier in foots and pounds, and some are easier in metric. Some are not easy in any system.
I don’t think there’s “massive resistance” to the metric system in Britain. I would say most people under 40 are more comfortable with metric than imperial, which is only really used for distances, body weight/dimensions, pints of beer, and car fuel consumption (miles per gallon, but we buy petrol (gas) in litres). All recipes I’ve seen in recent years use metric measures, and I’m not at all comfortable with ounces, fluid ounces, “cups” and so on.
Nah, that would lead to confusion between force and weight again. “10N = 1 kg” sounds too much like a unit conversion when in fact it’s a formula equating two different quantities under a specific condition. I think “c=3x10[sup]8[/sup] m” would have been a better definition of the meter.
I don’t understand the argument about common terms becoming obsolete. “Mileage” will always be an English word, synonymous with “fuel economy” and measured in liter/100km (or km/liter). “Walk a mile in one’s shoes” will make sense if people will just remember (and they will) that a mile is a unit of distance. In Japan we have a saying that a journey of a thousand ri begins with one footstep. Nobody knows how many meters one ri is but we get the sense that a 1000-ri is a fairly long journey, and that’s enough to make sense of the proverb.
Also, a conversion to the metric system doesn’t necessarily mean throwing out all non-metric measures. The Japanese (and the Brits, I presume) still use tablespoons, tablespoons and cups to measure liquids. (Defined as 15ml, 5ml and 180ml respectively.) Room sizes are still measured by the number of tatami (straw mats), except those mats are standardized to 90x180cm.
By the way I’d like to thank the Americans for converting Japan to the metric system during the post-WWII occupation. One of the best things to come out of the occupation IMHO.
Another American who wants metric checking in. Complex math with Imperial measurements is HELL. And don’t even get me started on the township/range land ownership grids, which were done in acres and fractions of acres! Those things are the biggest pain in the butt for those of us working with spatial data. The Ivory Tower solution would be just to wipe the existing township/range crap and implement a nice logical metric-based system. Unfortunately, Ivory Tower solutions rarely work in the real world.
Problem is, that doesn’t make any sense, as we want our standards to be as universal as possible. Thus, a meter is the distance light travels in a vacuum in some very small fraction of a second, and seconds are defined as a number of oscillations or decays or something of some atom (Co-60?) and so on. Those are universal measurements, limited only by our ability to measure them.
The US nearly adopted the metric system 200 years ago. It’s a shame we didn’t. Now, well…hmmm…We’re a hardheaded bunch aren’t we.
The US was fresh outta Vietnam in '75 when the politicians told us we had to adopt the metric system. Considering the cold war, our stubborness and many peoples ignorant cries of it being a communist plot, it never had a chance.
We’re getting there though, slowly but surely. When me and the rest of us old timers kick off…y’all can switch the rest of it.
(BTW I still know how much a peck is.)
I see my booze is no longer sold in half gallons or a quarts.
Then again…tequila does come from Mexico.
I think the metre was by Napoleon’s order…one ten millionth of the distance from the north pole to the equator in line with Paris. The modern adaptation is a wavelength frequency taken from Krypton which was similar (but constant) to the original meter as first defined or some such…
A unit defined by the equal divisions of length from the equator to the north pole through France? Did I remember that right?
“Attention car shoppers! If you’re looking for mileage, look no further than the 2005 Maibatsu Monstrosity! Some new cars only get 7 or 8 L/100km, but the 2005 Monstrosity gets an unbeatable 21.5 L/100km!”
At least in Israel (fully metric), we use the more intuitive Km/Liter. Results sound worse than miles/gal (by a factor of 1.6/3.89, or roughly 0.4 - so 25 MPG works out to about 10 KPL)
And to answer an earlier post - yes, what English speakers call “Mileage” is called “Kilometrage”. AND a 1000 Km journey begins with a single step … etc.
The only time I’ve ever seen a metric sign in the States was about 60 miles outside Atlanta on I-75S. Weirdest thing ever, big sign out in the middle of nowhere, “ATLANTA 65 MILES / 125 KM”
Measurements may not be accurate, see store for details, some assembly required, batteries not included…
That’s not even necessary. People only need to know what the meaning of the sentence is. It would work even if people had forgotten what “mile” or “shoe” means, and don’t understand the allegory. I mentionned that in France there are still many sentence used including various old units no longer units. In some cases, most people know that said unit used to be a length or weight unit. But not always so. For instance the sentence “avoir maille a partir avec quelqu’un” (“having a “maille” to share with someone”) means you you can’t agree with someone. Originally, the maille was the smallest monetary unit, hence making its sharing impossible.
However, not only people don’t know that a “maille” was a monetary unit, but even the word “partir” has lost its lost its original meaning “to share” in modern french. So, the sentence, taken litterally, makes absolutely no sense to nobody. However, the whole sentence is still used, and people do understand that it means that you can’t agree with someone. The same would most likely happen if people have forgotten that a mile was used to measure distance, and that a “shoe” was something you put on your feet. They would still get the meaning of “walking a mile in someone’s shoes”. Common sayings are very resilient. They live their own life, independantly from the words used.
Of course it’s not true only for units. Another french saying is “c’est l’hopital qui se moque de la charite” which has the same meaning that “it’s the pot calling the kettle black”. I’m sure plenty of french people wouldn’t know what the word “charite” refers to. And similarily, I’ve seen on this board people wondering about the kettle/pot/black thing, though this would have been obvious for everybody in past times when people were cooking on a fireplace, with kitchenware made of a metal which would blaken over time. It’s no longer true. Some people don’t get the reference. The sentence is still understood, though.
Yes…except that it wasn’t Napoleon’s order, but the republic’s order during the revolution. The task of defining the new units was only finished under Napoleon’s reign, however (measuring the distance you’re refering too with some accuracy was a lenghty process, in particular).
Napoleon, by the way, immediatly decided to give to the new units the names of the former units people were accustomed to. So, a kilogram was called the french equivalent of “pound”, a kilometer the french equivalent of “mile”. Which of course confused people even more, since not only they didn’t have an intuitive grasp of what a kilo was, but they didn’t even know what you were refering to when you were saying or writing “pound”. So, they went on merily on their usual ways, using the former pounds and feets (and sometimes even the regional variants of same) and ignoring the new units. As I wrote before, only much later the metric system was made mandatory and people eventually get along with it.
I think the use of the imperial system in the USA is three meters tall and bullet-proof.
That said, living on the Canadian border (and actually paying attention to what goes on around me), kilometers (that’s ka-la’-miturs, not kilo-meters!) and degrees celcius present no major problems. The roadside stands in Ontario seem to always sell by the quart or the pound. A Japanese (metric) auto-plant in Canada (metric) that I went to once had all of their safety-related measurements in the English system (e.g., you need a safety harness if you climb above seven feet – no metric equivilent was even given).
I detest seeing kilometerage on car windshields in Mexico in L/km – it’s just not intuitive. Curiously enough they seem to say millage (mileage) to refer to gasoline consumption, though. And as popular as American football is with the middle classes, yards are no problem for the Mexicans. My wife seems to know all about inches and feet and miles, but doesn’t get Farhenheit very well.
In my local area, we’d have to rename the streets to 12.8km Road; 14.4km Road; 16km Road; and so on up to oh, 51.2km Road. I guess one adapts.
I will say that since we all drive 80mph now, I can’t easily say that at 60mph one mile equals one minute of travel time. On the other hand, in Ontario the OPP are rough, so at 100k/h it’s easy to think in 1/10th of an hour increments.
One thing to remember is that the US has standards of measurement but in the 19th century when most countries adopted the metric system, they didn’t. Every trade in every country had its own system of measurement. So in England, there was a dairyman’s pint, a brewers pint (maybe even a vintner’s pint), an oilmonger’s pint and so on. I once saw a plaque in Zurich saying that this point was 804 meters above sea level (I am making up all these numbers, but they are approximately right; this was on a hill around 400 meters above the city), or 2567 French feet or 2493 Italian or 2602 British feet. Before the British metricized, their fluid ounce was slightly different from the US’s and their pint was 20 oz, not 16. So what metricization did inside a country was to make one standard inside that country and what it did internationally was to create one standard that most countries use. Without that, I think trade would be severely handicapped. Even so, there is a price paid as auto mechanics, for example, generally have to have two sets of tools.
Even though Canada is officially metric, things like nails and screws are still sold only in US sizes, as far as I have seen. A friend of mine told me of going to a lumber yard in Oslo to ask for a 5 cm by 10 cm piece of wood, only to hear the guy call back to the warehouse for a 2 by 4. And from I have seen, fruit and things like that are still sold by the (500 gram) pound in Europe, at least in some places. So quarter-poinder would be understood, although it had better be 125 grams.
You don’t use the Imperial System in the USA. The Imperial System is the one in which there are 20 fluid ounces in a pint and 112 pounds in a hundredweight. The Imperial System was devised and adopted in the UK after the American War of Independence.
You use the US Customary System, also known as ‘English Mediaeval’.
