Fahrenheit Is A Better Temperature Scale Than Celsius

Dekoth-E- said:
Did you read my two posts? No? then do so and come back with a reply that isn't stupid.
Click to expand...

Considering you seemed to answer your own question within your posts, I thought I should make it a bit more obvious. Those who work in scientific or engineering fields are going to have a much stronger preference towards the metric system because they use it daily and it is much more efficient. Not sure why you always find the need to attack others if they don't agree with you.
 
griffinhart said:
Your argument about having to memorize 32F vs 0C applies to your 37C too. It's easier to know that its getting pretty hot the closer you approach 100F.

In the end F and C really don't make much of a difference. It's a matter of what you are used to. Unlike the rest of the metric system, there is no easy math benefit to it. 1000 meters = 1 kilometer. That's easy. But there is no need to do that kind of conversion with temperature. No one calls 3000F (1648.8C) 1.6 KC.

C is just an easier way to remember the freezing and boiling points of water. That said, water technically boils at 99.97C at sea level and 71C at 29,000 feet.
Click to expand...
You're wrong, Celsius ties in directly with the rest of the metric system, that's the entire beauty of it.

It makes calculations of the temperature coefficient of resistance very simple, as well as the speed of sound in an ideal gas varying by temperature, the energy it takes to change the temperature of water one degree, a volume of which you can easily calculate in a three dimensional metric square were you to build a container.

Its all a system designed to work together as closely as possible, using a factor of 10, meaning you just move decimal points, rather than the completely arbitrary and unrelated imperial system which turns formulas into a nightmare. And even if you prefer calculations in Kelvin, its very simple because Kelvin is based on Celsius, merely moving the scale so that absolute zero is 0.

And its easy to think in Celsius too, as even kids learn when its 0 its freezing, when its 10 its not, when its 20 its warm, when its 30 its hot! And by law for decades now the national weather service reports in Celsius and is merely converted by third parties.

Yes a lot is based on water, but water is literally the most essential element to life on this planet, you're made of mostly water, and you interact with water on a daily basis, so its a good common element that people are very familiar with.

How much does a cubic centimeter of water weigh? One gram. What volume is that? Its one milliliter. How much energy is needed to heat that mililiter of water by 1 degree celsius? Exactly one calorie. Now do this calculation in english/imperial. :D
 
And when it comes to international trade, in this global economy, EVEN if there were no inherent advantages to the metric system by design (which obviously there are), the fact that we are the ONLY, I repeat ONLY, first world industrial nation to use the english/imperial system is a problem.

It means if I'm Samsung and I make ovens, I have to make special ovens just for the United States with temperatures in Fahrenheit. If I post recipes online, I have to make special instructions just for Americans. If I'm broadcasting global temperatures, I again have to broadcast a conversion just for the US market. If I'm designing cars or motorcycles, again I have to source speedometers especially just for Americans. If I'm an American engineering firm doing CAD work on an oil rig again I have to spend time converting measurements, and ideally am working in even numbers based on the metric system for simplicity in design (thus making the english units all oddballs). And Americans will need two sets of tools, two sets of measuring tapes, and learn two measuring systems. Using a proprietary US system not even shared by the countries we share borders with, yet alone the rest of the world is in and of itself a huge problem.
 
On Fahrenheit's original scale the lower defining point was the lowest temperature to which he could reproducibly cool brine (defining 0 degrees), while the highest was that of the average human core body temperature (defining 100 degrees). There exist several stories on the exact original definition of his scale; however, some of the specifics have been presumed lost or exaggerated with time. The scale is now usually defined by two fixed points: the temperature at which water freezes into ice is defined as 32 degrees, and the boiling point of water is defined to be 212 degrees, a 180-degree separation, as defined at sea level and standard atmospheric pressure.
 
The problem is thermometers in general you can't change them over from Celsius to Fahrenheit vice versa unless it's dual reading. Like at Walmart a shit load of refrigerated stuff comes in we temp it at 41 degrees or lower before we accept it.
 
My ir gauge has a little button f/c my aquarium thermometer 2 dollars on amazon has a little switch f or c.

if it is analog likely it has both scales printed on it like most of the ones I see...
 
Celsius is more logical (0 = freezing, 100 = boiling), but yes, Fahrenheit is much more precise.

I've only known Fahrenheit all my life since I live in the US so Celsius is horribly confusing to me, but when it comes to computers we all live by Celsius, which is odd. I can't even convert C to F or vice versa, so I really have no comparison between PC temps and everything else.
 
xIronCrossx said:
Considering you seemed to answer your own question within your posts, I thought I should make it a bit more obvious. Those who work in scientific or engineering fields are going to have a much stronger preference towards the metric system because they use it daily and it is much more efficient. Not sure why you always find the need to attack others if they don't agree with you.
Click to expand...

Wasn't an attack mate. You clearly implied that I had no experience with the two systems in your post when I clearly pointed out I use both regularly. I also mentioned already that I'm neither pro or against either and am perfectly comfortable using one or the other. My point was pointing out how absurd the arguments are from some people in this very thread who act like using one over the other is a personal affront or some kind of reflection of that person's intelligence. I'm well on board with arguments that certain careers have preference for good reason. That however had little to do with what I posted and what you implied.
 
Wierdo said:
That's how it works in engineering, you look for efficiency gains and reduce margins of error. It saves time and resources, and reduces mistakes such as the above from happening. Using something because of tradition is ok for non-scientific matters, but when real work needs done then you use the best tools for the job, and for science/industrial applications it's a no brainer for a respectable establishment in a competitive environment.

My argument is it's probably not a big deal except when the task at hand is complex and important. We might as well teach our kids proper science in case they end up having to compete with others on the world stage in the future imho.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree but it depends what engineering and where. For example, civil engineering and manufacturing engineering in the US use the imperial system because it is easier due to tools, equipment, diagrams, measurements, etc... being in imperial units. Using metric for these two engineering disciplines would be inefficient unless everything was completely changed over.

On another note, aerospace engineering also has some fields where it also a mess since the most common units the world uses in aviation are feet, knots and nautical miles.

In my job as an engineer, I prefer metric but I know quite a few engineers in the above mentioned who prefer imperial.
 
Fun said:
For me it's:

Weather - F°

Computers/Electronics - C°
Click to expand...

This is the funny thing the reality is that everyone uses things not based on any sense but based on what they are used too. We buy a gallon of milk we buy a 2 liter of pop, we don't sit around all day arguing with Pepsi and Coke asking them WTF they don't sell us a gallon of pop, although someone will sit around arguing with me about my use of the term pop.


This is why IMO we should convert everything to Celsius because within a short time period everyone will just get used to it, it will be one less thing we waste time teaching kids in school, one less thing we need to convert or remember but we will all be fine. If you said but what about Kevin, I would say fine I don't give a shit lets just everyone in the world pick one and go with it.

Due to the realities of the global economy and the influence of many scientific and engineering fields the metric system is always going to be a part of our lives in the USA, why wouldn't you or anyone else want to just make your life easier by ditching the customary system? It is only the massive might and economy of the USA that keeps this dumb system floating on the world scene. I sometimes tell people, if I was the president of the USA I would go to the world and make them a deal, you all learn to drive on the right side of the road and we will switch to metric, and we can all standardize. At any rate I expect that as large developing nations like China, India, etc.. continue to grow in economic power more and more products will simply be made in metric units, but we will probably cling to our miles on the road forever.
 
K > F any fucking day of the week. C is last though. But yea Metric system is king. I don't even bother to think in anything else. The rest of the world uses it. It makes no sense to keep using it in the states anymore.

I would be laughed out my classes if I used traditional over Metric and rightfully so. However I do enjoy "Mile" lengths versus Kilometers simply because it produces smaller figures to work with. Trying to estimate distances with Kilometers on an Astronomical scale just means more math and not in the good way.
 
TheCommander said:
I don't disagree but it depends what engineering and where. For example, civil engineering and manufacturing engineering in the US use the imperial system because it is easier due to tools, equipment, diagrams, measurements, etc... being in imperial units. Using metric for these two engineering disciplines would be inefficient unless everything was completely changed over.

On another note, aerospace engineering also has some fields where it also a mess since the most common units the world uses in aviation are feet, knots and nautical miles.

In my job as an engineer, I prefer metric but I know quite a few engineers in the above mentioned who prefer imperial.
Click to expand...

I know ONE engineer that prefers imperial...and he's very much oddball.There is no legitimate argument for using Imperial in civil or manufacturing other than "it's been like that for a while"

I'm an aerospace engineer. I deal almost exclusively in SI, but there's always the random guy that sends me something in Imperial, in which case I convert to SI before I do anything with it.
 
Rankine scale was the way to go.

F and C both suffer the same problem by not starting at absolute zero. Could you imagine measuring anything else that way?
 
What a load of absolute and utter bollocks!
I mean why would you even want to compare F and C scales!?!?
They are simply expressions of atomic activity that we in the main part use to gauge human comfort.
You either understand one, or both...............the end.
 
Btw, when is England converting to 3.7L gallons instead of 5.0L gallons ? Doesn't the rest of the world agree with us that 3.78L = 1 gallon?
 
Ducman69 said:
How much does a cubic centimeter of water weigh? One gram. What volume is that? Its one milliliter. How much energy is needed to heat that mililiter of water by 1 degree celsius? Exactly one calorie. Now do this calculation in english/imperial. :D
Click to expand...

The whole article is making an argument for everyday air temperature and how it relates to human comfort.

How many calories does it take to raise the air temperature 1° (F or C)? Who cares

What is the boiling point of water at any elevation other than sea level? hmmm, hard to say. Maybe there's a formula somewhere.

The author of the article makes two simple points. One, that Fahrenheit is more accurate by a factor of 1.8, which is unarguably true for any given number of significant digits and decimal places. Two, that Fahrenheit is better for everyday use as the extremes 0-100° F reflect temperatures that humans will likely experience at some point during any given year. The second point could be argued, but is easily conceded as at least a valid opinion.

For scientific purposes, absolutely use Celsius. It relates to the rest of the metric system in an elegant way, and is standard everywhere in the world, even in the US scientific community.

But it's not stupid to say that Americans still use Fahrenheit, and that we do because of the reasons listed in the article (also tradition and stubbornness). 0°F is very cold, possibly dangerous if you are under dressed and there's a hard wind. 100°F is very hot, and possibly dangerous if it's very humid and you are working hard. I've been in 115° weather in a Las Vegas summer. I've been in -20° weather in an Idaho winter. These are expressions of my human experience, not scientific records. Fahrenheit is fine for this.
 
Well that is a novel flamebait approach this this age old problem...

Fahrenheit gives you almost double—1.8x—the precision* of Celsius without having to delve into decimals,
Click to expand...
So the caveat on that is no decimal places *facepalm*

Thing is "Americans", I say americans as they are the ones that stubbornly stick to British measurements - thankyou by the way for continually honoring the mother land always comes back to that damn decimal point as their only stance...
"oh you only like SI because it is 10, learn to count in 16's" The power of SI isn't that it is metric and thus base-10, its that the units are all inter-related.

At the end of the day, for a given unit, its a quantisation quantity.
You are a carpenter and you are building a cupboard... metres of ft "ft are more precise" ... (again this comes back to a fear of decimal places and alot of houses are build around rounding to the nearest ft or inch) but does it matter?
You are a chef... F or C ... "F is more precise ... " again decimal places...

What do these have in common? single domain so does it really matter?
Start having to cross domains however BAM!

In the metric system 1 millilitre of water occupies one cubic centimetre, weighs one gram and requires one calorie to raise its temperature by one degree kelvin, which is one percent of the difference between its boiling point and its freezing point. An amount of hydrogen weighing the same amount has exactly one mole of atoms in it.

Whereas in the American system, the answer to 'how much energy does it take to boil a room temperature gallon of water is 'Go fuck yourself' because you cannot directly relate any of the quantities


english-length-units.png

There is not enough FACEPALM's in the universe!!!

So yes the benefits of the metric system

1) base-10, just makes life easier. WTF overcomplicate the maths, doesn't show you are smarter, just opens the scope for errors...
2) inter-related units. Do large systems involving multiple physical domains... try doing that quickly and error free without too much design margin in imperial
3) the base-units are cleanly defined.

#3 is an interesting one.
SI is the main system, foot-pound-second is the equivelent... but the base-units are actually referenced to SI because the SI units have clear definition. Equally there are two inches in america. WTF can you have two distances for the same thing *facepalm*

Robstar said:
Btw, when is England converting to 3.7L gallons instead of 5.0L gallons ? Doesn't the rest of the world agree with us that 3.78L = 1 gallon?
Click to expand...
no. There is a US gallon and an Imperial Gallon
 
d_stilgar said:
What is the boiling point of water at any elevation other than sea level? hmmm, hard to say. Maybe there's a formula somewhere.
Click to expand...
So you don't think you can make an accurate guess based on sea level boiling point? Or make a reasonable guess for other fluids using what you know about water as a baseline?
d_stilgar said:
But it's not stupid to say that Americans still use Fahrenheit, and that we do because of the reasons listed in the article (also tradition and stubbornness). 0°F is very cold, possibly dangerous if you are under dressed and there's a hard wind. 100°F is very hot, and possibly dangerous if it's very humid and you are working hard. I've been in 115° weather in a Las Vegas summer. I've been in -20° weather in an Idaho winter. These are expressions of my human experience, not scientific records. Fahrenheit is fine for this.
Click to expand...
But again, Celsius ties into an entire SYSTEM, which Fahrenheit does not, and there's no good reason to have redundant systems when the only real advantage of Fahrenheit is that people are familiar with it, when they would be quickly equally familiar with Celsius once converted, along with using a standard the same as the entire rest of the world and that works better with the rest of the metric system that also needs to be adopted ASAP.
 
Ducman69 said:
So you don't think you can make an accurate guess based on sea level boiling point? Or make a reasonable guess for other fluids using what you know about water as a baseline?

But again, Celsius ties into an entire SYSTEM, which Fahrenheit does not, and there's no good reason to have redundant systems when the only real advantage of Fahrenheit is that people are familiar with it, when they would be quickly equally familiar with Celsius once converted, along with using a standard the same as the entire rest of the world and that works better with the rest of the metric system that also needs to be adopted ASAP.
Click to expand...

You are making my point for me. Accurate guess? Well if we don't care about real accuracy, then let's use whatever system we like.

And again, nobody gives a crap about being one percent closer to boiling water when the decision you are making is whether or not to wear two coats and ski goggles or shorts and sandals.

"How hot is it outside today?"
"It's 16°C outside, which is 16% to boiling if the air were all water. Just thought you'd like to know even though that knowledge is currently meaningless since the way humans perceive temperature in air and water differs immensely since water has a much higher specific heat. Did you know that if one milliliter of that air were water that it would take . . ."
"Yeah I just want to know if I need a jacket or not."

For every day things it doesn't matter what you use, F or C. I don't care. C being a part of a system doesn't matter for every day needs. For every day needs of boiling water it doesn't matter either. Since boiling water is a constant temperature, nobody cares that it's 100°C or 212°F. Boiling is boiling. For every day purposes you'll know that if you live at a high altitude you'll need to boil things longer, regardless of whether you prefer F or C.

Again, we're not talking about what is better for science. Celsius is obviously better for science. But for every day needs there is nothing wrong with Fahrenheit, and as the article suggests, there are reasons why it might be better.
 
d_stilgar said:
You are making my point for me. Accurate guess? Well if we don't care about real accuracy, then let's use whatever system we like.

And again, nobody gives a crap about being one percent closer to boiling water when the decision you are making is whether or not to wear two coats and ski goggles or shorts and sandals.

"How hot is it outside today?"
"It's 16°C outside, which is 16% to boiling if the air were all water. Just thought you'd like to know even though that knowledge is currently meaningless since the way humans perceive temperature in air and water differs immensely since water has a much higher specific heat. Did you know that if one milliliter of that air were water that it would take . . ."
"Yeah I just want to know if I need a jacket or not."

For every day things it doesn't matter what you use, F or C. I don't care. C being a part of a system doesn't matter for every day needs. For every day needs of boiling water it doesn't matter either. Since boiling water is a constant temperature, nobody cares that it's 100°C or 212°F. Boiling is boiling. For every day purposes you'll know that if you live at a high altitude you'll need to boil things longer, regardless of whether you prefer F or C.

Again, we're not talking about what is better for science. Celsius is obviously better for science. But for every day needs there is nothing wrong with Fahrenheit, and as the article suggests, there are reasons why it might be better.
Click to expand...

WTF thinks like that when they use SI/metric units *FACEPALM* (im running out)
"How hot is it outside today?"
"its 16C"
"oh quite warm thanks"



using SI/metric doesn't mean you have to have 5 degree's covering physics,maths,engineering ...
*FACEPALM*
 
d_stilgar said:
You are making my point for me. Accurate guess? Well if we don't care about real accuracy, then let's use whatever system we like.
Click to expand...
This isn't rocket science. One provides you a common universally understood baseline to make accurate predictions from, the other does not.

If you HAVE to do calculations, the metric system is infinitely easier to work with, since you can convert between units all with a factor of 10, and each sub-division of each unit is also done by a factor of ten. Lets say I give you some wood and ask you to build a container that can hold five gallons, can you even do that off hand? How many inches are in half a mile? PITA, right?
d_stilgar said:
Again, we're not talking about what is better for science. Celsius is obviously better for science. But for every day needs there is nothing wrong with Fahrenheit, and as the article suggests, there are reasons why it might be better.
Click to expand...
OF COURSE WE ARE!

Why do you need to use two different units of measure, when you can just use one? The one that the rest of the world is using?

What ADVANTAGE is there to using BOTH Celsius and Fahrenheit, because we sure as hell can't afford to never use Celsius in our lives, but we sure as hell can get rid of Fahrenheit and the whole rest of the arbitrary imperial system.
 
Grahamkracka said:
I'm pretty sure we are the only country to lose a $700 Million space probe because someone programmed imperial units and not the SI units that were expected.
Click to expand...

We're the only country able to LAUNCH a $700 Million space probe to begin with! ENGLISH UNITS TRIUMPH AGAIN!
 
I will also say this, the original article is false about one thing, he says F gives more accuracy, and claims humans are very sensitive and this is supposed to be worth it. I disagree with that I have never seen a person raise a thermostat by 1 degree because of sensitivity, maybe to get the furnace running for 10 minutes because they are sitting near a register or want to warm up, but not because they can tell you its 71 not 70 degrees and they prefer the temperature at 71 not 70 F. Even if it mattered we could just switch thermostats to 1/2 degree increments. 1 C degree is perfectly fine units to work with for all humans I interact with. Another similar scale is decibels almost all amplifiers come with 0.5 db increments and you don't see everyone wigging out over it.
 
don't forget most thermistor controllers are actually only good for +-1degree anyway (worse for cheaper ones) AND then they have about a degree of hysteresis on activating heating :)

Try getting a PT100 or K-type right next to your thermistor and you be amaze how cheep and crap it is. so someone preaching F is better than C based upon a 1.8scaling to ensure no decimal places has placed all his faith in a $5 chinese made measuring cct

so its a placebo effect
 
naib said:
WTF thinks like that when they use SI/metric units *FACEPALM* (im running out)
"How hot is it outside today?"
"its 61F"
"oh quite warm thanks"
Click to expand...

My reply to Ducman69 is in reference to his argument that Celsius is better because it's integrated across all units (mole, liter, meter, gram). My response is that nobody cares when all you want to know is whether or not you need a jacket. See how I fixed the quote you fixed to use Fahrenheit? See how it makes no difference that there isn't a relationship from temperature to volume in Imperial units? This is no different than how people who use metric don't care about the relationship of degrees Celsius to volume. Again, my point is made for me. Ducman69 says metric is better because of that relationship. I say that for everyday tasks it doesn't matter and make a hyperbolic example of it. You reiterate my point. I am still right.

Also, 61°F / 16°C isn't quite warm. Most would say it's jacket weather.

Ducman69 said:
If you HAVE to do calculations, the metric system is infinitely easier to work with . . .

. . .

Why do you need to use two different units of measure, when you can just use one? The one that the rest of the world is using?

What ADVANTAGE is there to using BOTH Celsius and Fahrenheit, because we sure as hell can't afford to never use Celsius in our lives, but we sure as hell can get rid of Fahrenheit and the whole rest of the arbitrary imperial system.
Click to expand...

If you have to use math to know whether or not you want a jacket, you're a moron. Did you even read the linked article? It's arguing for every-day use. It's not talking about science, so no we are not "OF COURSE" talking about science. We're talking about the linked article. Also, I already conceded that for scientific purposes metric is better. I never argued the contrary.

What's the advantage of using both? Well, if you are measuring the temperature of the background radiation of the universe you might want to use Kelvin. It will give you a number with a non-arbitrary number of zeroes or decimal places. But you probably won't want to stick with Kelvin (even if you use metric daily) for figuring out whether or not you need a jacket. I'd go to Celsius. (Note that switching between Celsius and Kelvin requires that you add or subtract 273.15)

We use different units for different purposes. Kelvin is technically the SI unit, not Celsius. Celsius is nice, however, because its freezing and boiling temperatures are 0° and 100° respectively, and since it is derived from Kelvin the two are easily converted.

But Fahrenheit is also nice for every day use. So if I'm measuring the background radiation of the universe I'll stick with Kelvin and then since I live in the US I'll go home and tell my wife that it's 61°out and that she may want a light jacket when we go on a run. My advantage is that I relate to 61°F more than I do 289.26°K and I don't sound like pedantic jerk to my wife and friends.
 
d_stilgar said:
We use different units for different purposes. Kelvin is technically the SI unit, not Celsius. Celsius is nice, however, because its freezing and boiling temperatures are 0° and 100° respectively, and since it is derived from Kelvin the two are easily converted.

But Fahrenheit is also nice for every day use. So if I'm measuring the background radiation of the universe I'll stick with Kelvin and then since I live in the US I'll go home and tell my wife that it's 61°out and that she may want a light jacket when we go on a run. My advantage is that I relate to 61°F more than I do 289.26°K and I don't sound like pedantic jerk to my wife and friends.
Click to expand...
There is no problem with using Kelvin and Celsius as I already pointed out, because they are literally the same metric just using a different baseline for zero. So when you know and use Celsius, you already know and can use Kelvin when desired. Both tie into the other measurement systems and are in global adoption.

Fahrenheit isn't, and so having to learn and use another system with equipment made just for that market is just plain stupid and redundant.

Regarding OK for everyday use, so is Celsius. As was said, you can use half degrees if you want to, but for everyday use for weather purposes that's entirely moot.

There just isn't a big perceived difference between 24oC and 25oC for how you should dress. Regarding familiarity, you have to break the cycle at some point, and I assure you after using celsius for as little as six months you'll understand it just fine.
 
d_stilgar said:
My reply to Ducman69 is in reference to his argument that Celsius is better because it's integrated across all units (mole, liter, meter, gram). My response is that nobody cares when all you want to know is whether or not you need a jacket. See how I fixed the quote you fixed to use Fahrenheit? See how it makes no difference that there isn't a relationship from temperature to volume in Imperial units? This is no different than how people who use metric don't care about the relationship of degrees Celsius to volume. Again, my point is made for me. Ducman69 says metric is better because of that relationship. I say that for everyday tasks it doesn't matter and make a hyperbolic example of it. You reiterate my point. I am still right.
Click to expand...
except your response was latching onto a very powerful aspect of SI/metric which 99.999999% of people either don't know of or care about and use it to dismiss SI.



d_stilgar said:
Also, 61°F / 16°C isn't quite warm. Most would say it's jacket weather.
.
Click to expand...
sissy, 10C is t-shirt weather
 
What gets me, is all the arguments for celcius are also arguments for Kelvin. but Celcius fans complain about using Kelvin. WTF? Kelvin is just celcius only more so. And that's why celcius sucks. It's just half assed Kelvin. At least Fahrenheit is whole assed.

Miles beats kilometers because, well, less syllables.

Tools. Metric would be the best choice, but when I'm working as a mechanic I really need those sae wrenches because the folks who make hex headed fasteners aren't very good, and you often need one of the opposing standard's wrenches to fit snug onto a poorly made say, 13mm headed bolt yet a half inch wrench fits perfect. Same with old, rusty corroded parts, they lose just enough material so your wrench won't fit tight, and you have to use the opposing standard tool to get the right fit or you'll round off the fastener. Why? because no normal store sells a 12.5 mm wrench, or any of those not quite right metric bolt sizes. Having to double the number of wrenches anyway, it's easier to just keep the sae set because there is so much stuff out there for both systems.
 
Robstar said:
Map is wrong. England uses degrees C, but mph. My co-worker there and I talk constantly and that is what is in common use. AFAIK mph isn't metric.
Click to expand...

My British Physics text in the late 1980's or early 1990's said that it would have cost billions of dollars, to replace the road signs, to convert from miles to metres ( kilometres ). It was cost prohibitive.

I imagine that the States being such a large land mass, would have logistics problems too? You might end up with some portion of an American city with imperial and the rest of the city in metric? I wonder how other countries managed those kinds of transitions?
 
MrAgmoore said:
My British Physics text in the late 1980's or early 1990's said that it would have cost billions of dollars, to replace the road signs, to convert from miles to metres ( kilometres ). It was cost prohibitive.

I imagine that the States being such a large land mass, would have logistics problems too? You might end up with some portion of an American city with imperial and the rest of the city in metric? I wonder how other countries managed those kinds of transitions?
Click to expand...

I couldnt even begin to imagine a change like that in the US. It would be a fight from beginning to end, there are states especially down south that would simply refuse just because 'Merica...
 
MrAgmoore said:
My British Physics text in the late 1980's or early 1990's said that it would have cost billions of dollars, to replace the road signs, to convert from miles to metres ( kilometres ). It was cost prohibitive.
Click to expand...
A nonsensical argument, considering literally the entire rest of the world managed it just fine.

1) Speed limits change all the time, so on the next change or when the sign is due for its scheduled replacement (they fade from UV damage and the elements in general), you simply replace it with a dual KPH/MPH sign.

2) You simply use a reflective adhesive sticker over the existing sign, which is what they did here in Houston when the speed limit changes. The simple vinyl sticker, produced in huge bulk quantities, would cost very little to produce and apply to an existing sign.

Within a 15 year time span, the upgrade from mph to -> KPH/MPH -> to KPH only signs after that time would be minimally invasive and simple to implement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top