Friendly warning: Never come to Montana after November or before March. Make that October and April to be on the safe side.
My beef with the C system is that you have to use decimals for normal everyday usage. It just doesn’t have the same resolution as the F system.
Setting my home heat, I can feel the differences between 1 F, but 1C is a much larger range.
What makes you think us Americans can’t do the same? Obsoive:
0 = Not going outside today
20 = Brrrrr… where are the cursed car keys
<30 = Hmmm, it might snow today
>30 = Hmmm, it might rain today
50 = Better wear a jacket today
70 = Ahhh, perfect
90 = Whew, hot
>100 = Not going outside today
and look… right in between 0 and 100… ahhh, nice and round.
Also… I think most people find 72ºF to be the perfect room temperature.
I’ll also concede that Celsius makes a lot of sense. But when you use F all your life, you don’t even have to think about it. You just use those mile-marker temps, and interpolate in between.
Huh? What everyday usage are decimals necessary with celsius? (Excepting body temperature, which most people don’t have a clue about anyway)
I grew up living in a place (Los Angeles area) where the temperatures hardly ventured outside the 60F-100F range. For the last ten years, I’ve been living in a place (Tokyo) where the temperature varies from 0C-40C. Forty units for each type of measurement, yet the differences between low point and high point are extremely different. 
Well, funny thing about room temperature, it’s pretty much depends on what room you’re in 
In my house, it’s about 75 degrees Farenheight. My dad claims it’s 76, but my mom says he just doesn’t want to turn the AC on too much.
In the Farenheight system, when it gets below 32 degrees, most folks I talk to start refering to the weather in relation to “Freezing”. Thus, it’s not 22 degrees out, it’s “Ten below Freezing”. Negative numbers in the Farenheight scale are used more like exclamation points to emphasize that it’s cold.
Goodness, you must be a very precise person. I don’t think I’ve ever heard people using decimal Celsius temperatures in a day-to-day context.
Or, errrrrm, they’re used in a way which proves the usefulness of the Celsius scale? 
I think a lot of it has to do with whatever you’re accustomed to, and that it terribly easy to think that whatever you’re accustomed to is objectively the best. Personally, I find the (completely unscientific) British Informal Hybrid temperature system to be most convenient; it works like this:
-Cold things are generally expressed in Celsius; in terms of weather and handling objects, there’s a very tangible sense of ‘zero’ - water starts freezing and since weather and human bodies are quite water-centric, it’s a very perceptible datum.
-Warm things are generally expressed in Fahrenheit; so a heatwave would start ‘in the high nineties’, a fever is ‘over 100’ and so on.
-Nothing ever happens in the ambiguous middle anyway, except room temperature, which is just ‘room temperature’.
The other thing I wanted to say is that celsius as part of the metric system isn’t really like other metric units of measure like, say, grammes - for which the chief benefit is dealing with the easy multiples; it’s just a scale based on a certain range divided into 100 bits.
Spot on. ‘Metric’ gets misused as a meaning for ‘those newfangled scientific terms’. There is no single ‘metric system’. SI units are the scientific ones, the importance being their relation to one another rather than their being counted in tens. Or sixties, in the case of seconds
Seems like everone knows that absolute 0 comes in at -273[sup]0[/sup] celsius.
How many people know what absolute zero is in Fahrenheit without figuring it out? I didn’t think so.
Limited experence from a trip from the US to Canada. Weather reports stated the decimal, the hotel thermostat had 1/2 increments (30, 30.5, 31, 31.5 etc. (not use what the #'s were, jus that 1/2 was available) Perhaps it is just my view from this.
Yep.
Though both the Celsius and Fahrenheit temperature scales can be thought of as “arbitrarily defined scales,” there is an inherent difference between them: the Fahrenheit scale has almost *twice the resolution * of the Celsius scale when using the same number of significant digits.
Because of this, I would argue that the Fahrenheit scale is superior to the Celsius scale due to its better resolution when reporting the temperature to the nearest whole number. Some folks, however, argue that the extra resolution of the Fahrenheit scale is unneeded for everyday usage, and thus the Celsius scale is more compact & efficient.
My guess is these were x.0 or x.5 decimals? Probably just a rounding from the farenheit results they were provided with from a US network, probably in turn converted from celsius from the original forecasters. Note that I commented earlier about celsius suiting the level of precision of current forecasts.
It’s probably like the (very) small print in fast food places here, indicating that a quarter-pounder consists of 113g pre-cooked meat. Hmmm, wonder how they arrived at that precise figure? :dubious:
Fair enough. Weather reports here give temperatures in whole numbers. On the rare occasions that they don’t it’s because some sort of record is being noted e.g. “Today’s maximum reached 29.4, the highest July temperature since 1938…”
As for thermostats, the ones I’ve seen in hotels in Australia have been marked in whole numbers. I’m not sure about thermostats for household use. I don’t have any experience of them.
Or, better still, when extra accuracy is needed, some of us are intelligent enough that using decimal points is not a major inconvenience.
What a ridiculous argument.
If this is the criteria you’re going to use, why not switch to mm/cm instead of inches? Or grams instead of ounces? Or liters instead of gallons? Or kilometers instead of miles? Are the decimal points in all of those units driving Americans to the point of distraction?
Celsius has a certain logic to it that makes it more attractive to scientists. The benchmark numbers are related to important properties of water, which everybody needs to live and which happens to be friggin’ everywhere on this particular planet. It’s obvious you can live with either one and not have a problem, neither one is THAT poorly designed. I spent a week and a half in Europe this spring, and after a day or two I could convert from one to the other in my head without a problem.
mhendo. For human comfort purposes, air temperature has traditionally been rounded to whole numbers. I don’t know why - that’s just the way it is, and probably always will be. Given this, I like the Fahrenheit Scale, as I believe it has “just the right amount” amount of resolution.
I think the Celsius Scale is too coarse. Others disagree.
I disagree with this.
I worked for three years in a temperature metrology lab at a Department of Energy facility, and am now in the process of setting up a precision thermometry lab at my current employer. Yes, we only use the Kelvin and Celsius scales, and I am quite comfortable with them. But the Celsius Scale is not as special as you’re making it out to be. This is because the boiling and freezing points of water are no longer defining points on the International Temperature Scale. In fact, we no longer make ice baths when we need a precise reference temperature; we instead opt for the (much better) triple point of water.
Somewhere below -400F is close enough for most times. -459F if I really care. Besides, that’s what the Rankine scale is for.