Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 Next »
Reply To Thread

Argh.Follow

#52 Nov 01 2011 at 3:56 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
I'd buy that excuse if you guys weren't still stuck on pounds versus kilograms.


The One and Only Poldaran wrote:

Besides, could be worse. We could still be measuring weight in stones.


Technically, it's "slugs", and it's the more correct comparison. Kilograms are a measure of mass. Pounds are a measure of force/weight. Yes, I do remember some tiny bits of physics.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#53 Nov 01 2011 at 4:04 PM Rating: Good
****
7,861 posts
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
KTurner wrote:
Ounces annoy me. 8 fluid OZ in a cup. 16 oz in a pound. Smiley: dubious


So... two cups is one pound!!

2 cups, 1 girl?
____________________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam

Sedao
#54 Nov 01 2011 at 4:04 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Whatever. You still use the less accurate inch and mile over kilometre, metre, centimetre, millimetre, which still "negates" Joph's response.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#55 Nov 01 2011 at 4:18 PM Rating: Good
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
KTurner wrote:
Ounces annoy me. 8 fluid OZ in a cup. 16 oz in a pound. Smiley: dubious


So... two cups is one pound!!
Are we talking British pounds? And cups of what? Is it a good deal?


Cups of tea, of course. And it's only a good deal if you don't consider what one GBP equals in USD.
#56 Nov 01 2011 at 4:29 PM Rating: Good
****
5,684 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Whatever. You still use the less accurate inch and mile over kilometre, metre, centimetre, millimetre, which still "negates" Joph's response.
I don't see how one measurement unit can be more accurate than another. They both can use decimals to equal the exact same thing.

Unless we're talking by the graduations on a measuring device.

Edited, Nov 1st 2011 5:29pm by Bardalicious
#57 Nov 01 2011 at 4:32 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Whatever. You still use the less accurate inch and mile over kilometre, metre, centimetre, millimetre, which still "negates" Joph's response.


Accuracy isn't the issue. Conversion to other units is. I also don't see how this negates Joph's response. His point was that a range from 0-100 representing temperatures as humans perceive them is pretty darn useful. And it's a valid point. When measuring temperature, I'm usually far more interested in whether the temperature is "hot" or "cold" to *me* rather than what percentage of the temperature needed to boil water I'm at.

And on a side note, when I convert my car to use metric and then back to english, it screws up my temperature controls by a degree or so. And I'd bury the needle on my speedometer too easily when in that mode as well. Let's face it, 180 kph just isn't that fast. Smiley: tongue
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#58 Nov 01 2011 at 5:18 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
gbaji wrote:
His point was that a range from 0-100 representing temperatures as humans perceive them is pretty darn useful. And it's a valid point. When measuring temperature, I'm usually far more interested in whether the temperature is "hot" or "cold" to *me* rather than what percentage of the temperature needed to boil water I'm at.
Newsflash! You get the same thing out of Celsius. And if you're only interested in knowing if it's hot or cold to you, you don't need 81 or 82. Low 80's is enough, in which case you don't need any extra accuracy.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#59 Nov 01 2011 at 5:19 PM Rating: Decent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Bardalicious wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Whatever. You still use the less accurate inch and mile over kilometre, metre, centimetre, millimetre, which still "negates" Joph's response.
I don't see how one measurement unit can be more accurate than another. They both can use decimals to equal the exact same thing.

Unless we're talking by the graduations on a measuring device.

Edited, Nov 1st 2011 5:29pm by Bardalicious
You don't need decimals in metric unless you're getting to a unit of measurement you can't see with your naked eye.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#60 Nov 01 2011 at 5:56 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
gbaji wrote:
His point was that a range from 0-100 representing temperatures as humans perceive them is pretty darn useful. And it's a valid point. When measuring temperature, I'm usually far more interested in whether the temperature is "hot" or "cold" to *me* rather than what percentage of the temperature needed to boil water I'm at.
Newsflash! You get the same thing out of Celsius. And if you're only interested in knowing if it's hot or cold to you, you don't need 81 or 82. Low 80's is enough, in which case you don't need any extra accuracy.


Huh? When 0 is "cold" and 100 is "hot", it's a useful and intuitive measurement. When 0 is "kinda cold" and 38 is "hot", it's less intuitive. Let's face it, any temperature near the boiling point of water is well beyond "hot" to a person.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#61 Nov 01 2011 at 6:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
I don't know why I even bothered, this is a retarded discussion.

Edited, Nov 1st 2011 9:30pm by Uglysasquatch
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#62 Nov 01 2011 at 10:12 PM Rating: Good
****
5,684 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Bardalicious wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Whatever. You still use the less accurate inch and mile over kilometre, metre, centimetre, millimetre, which still "negates" Joph's response.
I don't see how one measurement unit can be more accurate than another. They both can use decimals to equal the exact same thing.

Unless we're talking by the graduations on a measuring device.

Edited, Nov 1st 2011 5:29pm by Bardalicious
You don't need decimals in metric unless you're getting to a unit of measurement you can't see with your naked eye.
that doesn't really impact accuracy, unless you are forcing yourself to round to a whole unit.
#63 Nov 01 2011 at 10:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
KTurner wrote:
Ounces annoy me. 8 fluid OZ in a cup. 16 oz in a pound. Smiley: dubious


So... two cups is one pound!!
Are we talking British pounds? And cups of what? Is it a good deal?


I've always wondered, how hard do you have to hit somethign to be considered to be pounding it? where's the cutoff force? is it linear, or does it depend on the material and the level of deformation induced???
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
1 2 3 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 253 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (253)