Imperial/Customary vs Metric System

[Naughx]

^ In french it is spelled "mètre".

-

http://www.bipm.org/en/measurement-units/

metre, m

The metre is the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Naughx

[Water Mage]

Actually meter is just the American English version of the word.

Metre is used in the rest of the english-speaking countries.

[Shin]

Also, this is the first time I've seen anyone spell meter as "metre." Who spells it that way? England? None of the European countries I've been to did.

Quite a few languages really. Including but not limited to British English, French and Turkish. Several other languages also have variations on it where the r precedes a vowel but there are a few that use Meter. The International Bureau of Weights and Measures actually lists "metre" as the official spelling, but "meter" is accepted as an alternative American spelling.

These things are serious apparently.

[Anacybele]

Strange, I'm compelled to read "metre" as "met-tray" or "met-truh" and not "meter" because of how it's spelled. But eh.

[Naughx]

Also there are some differences between American units and British/Imperial units. (For example: uk fl oz and us fl oz)
So they had to define some of them using the metric system.

1 uk fl oz = 28.4131 ml

1 us fl oz = 29.5735 ml

Edited May 30, 2016 by Naughx

[Rezzy]

Whilst it's not really true that the UK goes for imperial any more (we only use it for milk, alcohol, and road signs - and in everyday conversation human heights and weights too) I think you've inadvertently hit the nail on the head for why the USA hasn't moved over.

The reason is simple, the USA is a dominant cultural power, so it can do what it likes. It has never had to switch to metric because people will adjust themselves into imperial measurements, just for the USA. It's also why Britain still uses a bit of imperial - it was a cultural power but now that the Empire has collapsed it's gradually subsumed into Europe, and forced to picked up a lot of the culture that goes with it - including metric measurements.

All this syllable and hard to remember BS is beating around the bush from an American centric viewpoint. When you are taught metric from a young age, just as you are taught imperial in the USA, it sticks in your mind. Not to mention that provided you know the prefixes in metric, you can generally work out about 9 different levels of a brand new unit you've found - not so in imperial, you'd have to memorise every name and every multiple of the previous that goes with it.

As others mentioned, they'll shorten it. In fact my Dad, who only works in kitchen design, says 'mil' all the time.

Referring back to my Dad, bearing in mind he was born and raised in a time before metric was the law in the UK, it can't be that hard if you need to learn it. Thing is, you don't, so you don't bother. Which is fine - not gonna bash you for it, but seriously don't say you have good memory then proceed to say you can't remember metric which is so goddamn easy if you put the effort in to remember compared to imperial. It's not even that imperial's hard, but when metric is consistent in prefixes across ALL units, and only the suffixes change (and they're fairly simple), in addition to knowing they're all various multiples of 10 or 1000, it's hard to believe that that's harder than learning 5 different multiples and names for length, then 6 different multiples and names for weight, then 5 different multiples and names for volume etc.

I agree that the Metric system is the superior system for scientific use. I've just been wondering why we hadn't made the switch, if Metric is infinitely superior. I think think the KISS rule goes a long way toward this. In my line of work, we say CC instead of milliliter, but any time you do that, there's another layer of complexity you have to remember in the naming system.

I'm a doctor and have a bachelor's in Chemistry and Biology. When I was going through school, I worked as a compounder in a pharmacy. I'm intimately familiar with the metric system, but after using it for so long, I've grown to see its flaws.

And everybody, please try to keep the discussion civil. I don't offend easy, but if you add "BS" to your statement, you may upset someone who takes the opposite end of the argument, and I'd like to keep the discussion friendly.

[Relick]

No, they ARE hard to remember. Water Mage listed only some of them. [...] That's my point. The Metric system has far too many measurements in it.

You learn two lists for metric:

Prefixes (these ones are every day usage)):

kilo- (1000)

- (1)

centi- (1/100)

milli- (1/1000)

Suffixes (once again, every day measurements):

-metre (length, area and volume)

-gram (weight)

-litre (fluid volume)

That's it. Seven terms. One of which isn't even any letters, it's just the absence of them. Here's everyday imperial measurements:

Length/area/volume - pica, inch (6 picas), foot (12 inches), yard (3 foot), mile (1760 yards)

Weight - ounces, pounds (16 ounces), stone (14 pounds)

Fluid volume - cup, pint (2 cups), gallon (8 pints)

That's 11 terms, with zero consistency between the multiples of measurements nor in the naming of the measurements. You're factually wrong to think that imperial is easier to learn, unless you consider connecting prefixes and suffixes to be a difficult task.

There are actually a bunch more that I learned of in science classes, but don't remember anymore.

Look, this is the issue. You're comparing the everyday measurements of imperial to the scientific measurements of metric, of which the latter exists vastly many more, and of which they are vastly more niche. This is simply ridiculous. Tell me honestly - do you really use Watts or Newtons or Joules or Lumens etc. almost every day? As much as you use inches? I doubt you do, so it's literally no surprise that you don't remember them. But that doesn't mean the metric system itself is hard to remember, it just means you personally struggle to remember things you don't use often.

[Relick]

I agree that the Metric system is the superior system for scientific use. I've just been wondering why we hadn't made the switch, if Metric is infinitely superior. I think think the KISS rule goes a long way toward this. In my line of work, we say CC instead of milliliter, but any time you do that, there's another layer of complexity you have to remember in the naming system.

I'm a doctor and have a bachelor's in Chemistry and Biology. When I was going through school, I worked as a compounder in a pharmacy. I'm intimately familiar with the metric system, but after using it for so long, I've grown to see its flaws.

And everybody, please try to keep the discussion civil. I don't offend easy, but if you add "BS" to your statement, you may upset someone who takes the opposite end of the argument, and I'd like to keep the discussion friendly.

From my understanding of American science, you guys do use metric. Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but it's in everyday usage, and in non-scientific fields such as architecture, that imperial is used the most, if not exclusively.

As for metric's flaws - beyond the fact that base 10 doesn't have many divisors compared to 12 or 60, what are they? Do you not think that the supposed flaws you perceive might merely be due to using metric in a country that doesn't use it, as opposed to flaws with the system itself?

If I had to guess at why the USA hasn't switched yet, I'd say it's because no-one wants to. You're all used to your imperial system and you have no pressing need to change because people will happily convert for you in order to work with the Americans. If the USA was ever not at the forefront of the world, then I think it'll end up being pressured into switching in order to boost trade and such. Once again leading back to my cultural domination argument.

Also, fine, sorry, I'll refrain from that sort of language.

[Anacybele]

The US doesn't use any measurement called stone. Stone is a British thing, if I recall right. And for everyday use, we only really use ounce, pound, pint, quart, gallon, inch, mile and foot. Yards are used only in football and sewing these days. They're all short and easy words to remember, even for little children.

We do use some of the metric system in our food labeling though, like gram and milligram. And liters for soda. Because we don't have anything that small in the imperial system.

Also, there don't seem to be any equivalents in the metric system for pint, quart, teaspoon, and tablespoon. Or cup. Cooks use the latter three all the time. Liter is usually used as the equivalent to gallon.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Anacybele

[Relick]

The US doesn't use any measurement called stone. Stone is a British thing, if I recall right. And for everyday use, we only really use ounce, pound, pint, quart, gallon, inch, mile and foot. Yards are used only in football and sewing these days. They're all short and easy words to remember, even for little children.

We do use some of the metric system in our food labeling though, like gram and milligram. Because we don't have anything that small in the imperial system.

Okay, fair enough, I wasn't aware of those differences. Both systems, however, are easy enough for a young child to learn. In Britain we basically have to learn both. Metric is more intuitive, but I'll grant you that imperial measurements are all simple and quick to say. Metric, however, is more extendable, and by making the whole system metric, it makes it easier for children to go into science rather than being required to learn an entirely new measurement system. It's a minor point, though. I don't really think it's necessary for the Americans to switch systems, other than just to follow suit with the rest of the world. But in a number of ways metric is easier and makes it easier on kids learning.

Just don't do it how we have done it in Britain and end up with having to learn both systems.

EDIT:

Also, there don't seem to be any equivalents in the metric system for pint, quart, teaspoon, and tablespoon. Or cup. Cooks use the latter three all the time. Liter is usually used as the equivalent to gallon.

Millilitres/litres and grams is used for all of them, but writing pint, teaspoon, tablespoon, cup is often useful shorthand. I didn't have a measuring cup until I was 18, though, it's rarely used in Britain. Just look at any British/European cookbook or online recipe and you'll see what I mean. Edited May 30, 2016 by Relick

[Anacybele]

lol really? You really think a little kid would find it as easy to say/remember "kilometer" and "kilogram" as they would "pound" or "foot"? I highly doubt that. They'd only remember the basic three that easily (meter, liter, gram).

Ask Rezzy, I bet her boy can say pound much better than kilogram.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Anacybele

[Relick]

lol really? You really think a little kid would find it as easy to say/remember "kilometer" and "kilogram" as they would "pound" or "foot"? I highly doubt that. They'd only remember the basic three that easily (meter, liter, gram).

Ask Rezzy, I bet her boy can say pound much better than kilogram.

Maybe American children are as dumb as you make them out to be. The children of almost every other country in the world are quite capable, however, of learning metric.

[Naughx]

Maybe American children are as dumb as you make them out to be. The children of almost every other country in the world are quite capable, however, of learning metric.

I would replace dumb by stubborn and unwilling.

[Rezzy]

Maybe American children are as dumb as you make them out to be. The children of almost every other country in the world are quite capable, however, of learning metric.

I would replace dumb by stubborn and unwilling.

I know you probably didn't mean it, but my " am not easily offended trait" only applies to slights against myself. Anything in the vicinity of an insult directed at my children will cause me to retaliate with the wrath of a thousand suns. As is, I'll forgive it this time, but I may not be able to restrain myself again.

Back to the discussion. I think mass was a measurement done right in the metric system. Although oddly, the standard unit of mass is the kilogram and not the gram, which hurts it a little bit with internal consistency. Gram is a nice short word and kilogram is only three, which is the upper limit of concise language most of the time. Grams and milligrams are great for small measurements, which is something lacking in the customary system. Of all the metric units, I'd say that mass is the most commonly used here, likely for that reason, with volume being a close second.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Rezzy

[Relick]

I know you probably didn't mean it, but my " am not easily offended trait" only applies to slights against myself. Anything in the vicinity of an insult directed at my children will cause me to retaliate with the wrath of a thousand suns. As is, I'll forgive it this time, but I may not be able to restrain myself again.

Back to the discussion. I think mass was a measurement done right in the metric system. Although oddly, the standard unit of mass is the kilogram and not the gram, which hurts it a little bit with internal consistency. Gram is a nice short word and kilogram is only three, which is the upper limit of concise language most of the time. Grams and milligrams are great for small measurements, which is something lacking in the customary system. Of all the metric units, I'd say that mass is the most commonly used here, likely for that reason, with volume being a close second.

I don't personally think that American children are dumb, I was just making explicit what Anacybele was implying. Take your beef to him for implying your kids can understand pound and foot but would struggle with kilogram and kilometre (which I think they'd be perfectly capable of, just like every other kid in the world) /me shrugs.

Even if it took children an extra couple of months to understand metric system, I still think it would be worth it for the intuitiveness and versatility that metric offers. Imperial terms are good for shorthand everyday stuff when necessary but as the primary system I think they fall short of metric.

[Anacybele]

Wow, how dare you people? In NO WAY was I calling American children dumb or implying that they were. How rude can you be?

Also, I'm a woman. It says right there under my Ryoma banner. Can't you see it?

Edited May 30, 2016 by Anacybele

[Reality]

I have to go over peer-reviewed scientific papers all the time, and I can think of no American journal that publishes papers that use imperial measurements, even when I'm looking through stuff from the 1960s and 1970s.

As for whether the "memorable" and phonetic qualities of words help, I would say yes. Obviously stuff like "whoosh" and "bang" are easier to associate just as "foot", "stone", "pound" work with length and weight respectively.

However, easy to remember ALSO applies to things that aren't as close to what the action sounds like. I've never heard a dog "woof" in my life. (Bears on the other hand...). Additionally, while I was in Germany, where the metric system is used everywhere, even the schoolchildren were able to give me directions without their speech slowing down whenever meters came up.

So I'd argue that the metric system can be made second nature if taught from a young age, even without mnemonic assistance, just as certain English words do (some even facing dissonance rather than lack of assistance). Whether something has "natural" associations isn't the end all of whether it can enter common usage.

[Anacybele]

Hey, nobody's arguing that metric isn't better for science. It IS better for science. But for everyday use, I believe imperial is better. That's that.

[Relick]

Wow, how dare you people? In NO WAY was I calling American children dumb or implying that they were. How rude can you be?

Also, I'm a woman. It says right there under my Ryoma banner. Can't you see it?

Please calm down. You explicitly said that American children would struggle with metric, despite the fact that the rest of the world doesn't. What else is that implying, other than that American children aren't as capable?

Sorry for misgendering you. I guess you stuck in my mind as more masculine than feminine xD

Edited May 30, 2016 by Relick

[eclipse]

Also, there don't seem to be any equivalents in the metric system for pint, quart, teaspoon, and tablespoon. Or cup. Cooks use the latter three all the time. Liter is usually used as the equivalent to gallon.

Instead of stuff like pint/quart/cup/etc., I usually see ingredients listed by weight, in grams. There's ups and downs to that.

Maybe American children are as dumb as you make them out to be. The children of almost every other country in the world are quite capable, however, of learning metric.

Cut it out, NOW.

Don't be an ass towards an entire country.

I know you probably didn't mean it, but my " am not easily offended trait" only applies to slights against myself. Anything in the vicinity of an insult directed at my children will cause me to retaliate with the wrath of a thousand suns. As is, I'll forgive it this time, but I may not be able to restrain myself again.

Use the Report button, and say nothing else in-topic - someone will get to it.

---

I don't care which system is used, so long as everyone agrees on it.

[Anacybele]

Yeah, but a gram is a lot smaller than a cup or pint or quart. Cups in particular, as well as teaspoons and tablespoons, are much more ideal when measuring for ingredients in your recipes.

[Jave]

South American here, and I use the Superior-in-Every-Way metric system.

Imperial system is on its way out and the sooner everyone accepts it the better.

[eclipse]

Yeah, but a gram is a lot smaller than a cup or pint or quart. Cups in particular, as well as teaspoons and tablespoons, are much more ideal when measuring for ingredients in your recipes.

Weight is a much more accurate way of measuring than cups/teaspoons/etc. Let's say you have a cup of flour. . .is it packed down? By how much? Just how level is it with the top of the measuring cup? Something like 200 grams of flour will always be 200 grams of flour, which means that packing is no longer an issue. Cooking can get away with some leeway, but baking is a lot more strict.

[Anacybele]

South American here, and I use the Superior-in-Every-Way metric system.

Imperial system is on its way out and the sooner everyone accepts it the better.

Sorry, but not everyone will accept it because I won't accept it for anything more than science and food labels.

And yes, eclipse, but saying 200 grams of flour is sillier than saying one cup of flour. If metric can come up with a better alternative, then we'll talk more here.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Anacybele

[Rezzy]

Weight is a much more accurate way of measuring than cups/teaspoons/etc. Let's say you have a cup of flour. . .is it packed down? By how much? Just how level is it with the top of the measuring cup? Something like 200 grams of flour will always be 200 grams of flour, which means that packing is no longer an issue. Cooking can get away with some leeway, but baking is a lot more strict.

Yeah, mass is generally more accurate than volume, but then you have to have a scale handy. I don't even have a scale in my kitchen, but I have lots of measuring cups. Although, that may speak more on my mediocre cooking skills. :P

There's also the fact that scales are lot tougher to clean and all sorts of debris can grime up to calibration.