idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Either way, when the radio tells me that the lows and highs are in the upper 60s, I have a 5 degree range to work in. If this was C and they were saying upper 20s, I have the equivalent of a 10 degree range. The information just isn't as valuable with a less precise system.
When you say upper 60's, you're not being precise so you've made that argument irrelevant. The weather isn't typically given out as upper 20's, it's usually stated as a specific number, such as 28. And if it ends up 27 or 29 instead, doesn't change the overall temperature much, which would be equivalent to your 5 degree range. Even if we said upper 20s, 27-29C is 81-84F. Last I checked, that's not a 10 degree shift.
Not really. There's little practical need to know exactly what the temperature is - a 5 F range is going to be exactly the same in nearly every scenario (the one exception I can think of being whether or not there's ice on the ground).
In the US, I most frequently hear temperature ranges rather than actual numbers. Which we do because it's quick, easy, and gives all the information you need. You can't
do that with celsius, which is kind of my point. You're forced to be more exact, because your system doesn't allow for the extreme shorthand and still function.
I'm much happier being able to glance at the temperature and make the barest possible note of what it is and still be appropriately dressed. I see 87 and it gets recorded as "upper 80s" and that's what I tell anyone who asks, because it's just easier and generally more accurate (since temperature changes).
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Sure, that only matters if you often find yourself only knowing a 10 digit temperature range. But that's realistically how I go through most of my life. I suppose that could be cultural, but whatever.
It is purely cultural and I really don't see the difference in accuracy between saying it's "about 25°C" or "High 70's". Nobody says it's in the high tens or in the twenties for Celsius because that would be useless.
It's not a difference in accuracy at all. That wasn't my critique. My critique is that the two statements aren't logically equivalent. You have to deliver more information for celsius to be as useful as Fahrenheit.
If I tell someone it's in the 80s, it's because I have no clue what the specific digit is. As in, it could be 82, it could be 88. But that doesn't matter too much, because the degree increment is smaller.
Telling someone it's in the 30s C is the logically equivalent statement. I'm sure it's not a common one, because it's not particularly useful.
Sure, you can say "high 30s", but you can only say that if you know information I DIDN'T know when talking about Fahrenheit. Because I can still say "high 80s" (if I had that info), and be more exact.
That's my point. Fahrenheit lets me go through life recording the barest possible amount of info and that's never a problem. In a celsius system, you can't do that, because your ones unit matters
I'm not exactly advocating the rest of the world change or anything. I don't care that much. But I'm bored and debate is more fun than work.
But this is the only American standard of measurement I think actually IS more useful than the rest of the world's. For anything scientifically rigorous, there's celsius. But my daily experience temps are all made easier by using a system of whole integers wherever possible, rather than decimals. Edited, Dec 10th 2013 2:35pm by idiggory